Just Foreign Policy News
March 31, 2009

Sen. Conrad Attacks Increase in Development Assistance
As President Obama was traveling to London for the G20 summit, where protecting poor countries from the global economic crisis was a key agenda item, Senator Conrad was trying to zero out President Obama’s proposed increase in development assistance.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/why-does-senator-conrad-w_b_181294.html

Help us build for a Just Foreign Policy
Your financial contributions to Just Foreign Policy help us create opportunities for Americans to advocate for a just foreign policy.
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate.html

Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) Secretary of State Clinton said the Obama administration has stopped using the phrase "war on terror," the Wall Street Journal reports. The phrase has been criticized as having inflammatory connotations in the Muslim world.

2) The Obama administration held its first high-level contact with Iran’s government, the Wall Street Journal reports. The brief meeting on the sidelines of a UN-sponsored conference on Afghanistan involved the State Department’s special representative on Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, and Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Medhi Akhundzadeh. Secretary of State Clinton said the two diplomats agreed to "stay in touch" regarding possible future meetings.

3) Turkey continues to oppose the appointment of Anders Rasmussen as head of NATO, the Financial Times reports. Turkey says Rasmussen’s role in the strife over Danish publications of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed would leave Rasmussen ill-placed to lead NATO when its biggest challenges are in the Muslim world.

4) Advocates for trade with Cuba unveiled a bill Tuesday that would lift all travel restrictions, allowing Americans to visit the now off-limits island, the Miami Herald reports. Jose Miguel Vivanco of Human Rights Watch argued that current policy "has neither weakened the Cuban government" nor improved conditions for Cuba’s political prisoners.

5) The World Bank says about 46 million more people are expected to fall into poverty this year amid the largest decline in global trade in 80 years, the New York Times reports. An additional 200,000 to 400,000 infants may die every year for the next six years because of the crisis. A UN panel has suggested that one percent of any nation’s economic stimulus package be set aside for poor countries.

Iran
6) Much of the Western media seriously misinterpreted Supreme Leader Khamenei’s response to Obama’s Nowruz message by saying that he had rebuffed, dismissed, or "brushed aside" Obama’s important overture, write Pirouz Mojtahedzadeh and Kaveh Afrasiabi in the Boston Globe. Khamenei stated Iran’s readiness to respond positively to Obama’s offer of sincere engagement, and the instant response by the leader has been widely interpreted in Iran as a sign of respect for Obama.

Afghanistan
7) Obama’s new Afghanistan strategy calls for continuing the destruction of poppy fields, a policy his top envoy Richard Holbrooke once said "may be the single most ineffective program in the history of American foreign policy," USA Today reports. Many experts say the policy is driving poor farmers into the arms of the Taliban. "In the time available we could not design an all new program but there was unanimity that there was significant flaws in the current program," Holbrooke told USA Today.

Cuba
8) OAS Secretary General Insulza said the OAS should take steps to readmit Cuba, Bloomberg reports. Insulza said the 1962 resolution that banned Cuba because of its links to communism, China and the Soviet Union no longer makes sense. "One of the countries has disappeared and the other is buying a lot of U.S. Treasuries," Insulza said. "Please, if they’re going to be excluded, let’s come up with some better criteria."

9) Obama is expected to further loosen remaining travel restrictions to Cuba for all Americans by the time he goes to the April 17-19 Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago, the Washington Post reports. Removing all sanctions requires congressional action, but a senior official said that Treasury has wide leeway to ease the licensing requirements that limit travel.

Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) U.S. Drops ‘War On Terror’ Phrase, Clinton Says
Jay Solomon, Wall Street Journal, March 31, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123845123690371231.html

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the Obama administration has stopped using "war on terror," breaking with the Bush administration’s terminology in describing the conflict with al Qaeda and militant Islam.

"The administration has stopped using the phrase, and I think that speaks for itself," Mrs. Clinton told reporters as she traveled here for a United Nations-led conference on Afghanistan.

The phrase has been criticized as having inflammatory connotations in the Muslim world. Some Democratic officials believe it is better to describe more specifically whom the U.S. is fighting, such as al Qaeda or the Taliban.

Mrs. Clinton made her remarks in response to reporters’ questions. Asked whether there was a specific policy decision on the terminology, she said: "I haven’t gotten any directive about using it or not using it. It’s just not being used."

2) High-Level U.S. and Iranian Officials Meet
Jay Solomon, Wall Street Journal, March 31, 2009, 3:00 P.M ET http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123852188758874429.html

The Hague - The Obama administration held its first high-level contact with Iran’s government here, marking what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said could become closer cooperation between Washington and Tehran on Afghanistan and other global hot spots.

The brief meeting on the sidelines of a United Nations-sponsored conference on Afghanistan involved the State Department’s special representative on Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, and Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Medhi Akhundzadeh. Mrs. Clinton called the encounter "cordial" and said the two diplomats agreed to "stay in touch" regarding possible future meetings.
…
Mrs. Clinton said she delivered a diplomatic letter to Iran’s delegation here Tuesday seeking Tehran’s assistance in gaining the return of three American citizens either missing or detained in Iran. Akhundzadeh voiced his government’s strong opposition to the growing American military presence in Afghanistan.

"Victory over terrorism can not be achieved only through militarism," Akundzadeh told the conference. "The presence of foreign forces has not improved things in the country, and it seems that an increase in the number of foreign forces will prove ineffective too."
…
Mrs. Clinton stressed the opportunity for cooperation between Washington and Tehran on fighting the drug trade and stabilizing Afghanistan. She steered clear of the U.S. dispute with Tehran over its pursuit of nuclear technologies and its support for militant groups like Hezbollah and Hamas.

"The question of border security and, in particular, the transit of narcotics is a worry the Iranians have that we share" in Afghanistan, Mrs. Clinton said at the end of the one-day conference. "We will look for ways to cooperate with them."

Akundzadeh said Tehran was open to cooperation with the U.S. and the international community on Afghan issues.

3) Turkey Holds Out Against Danish Nato Chief
James Blitz and Delphine Strauss, Financial Times, March 30 2009
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/18185316-1d5a-11de-9eb3-00144feabdc0.html

Nato heads of government will try this week to heal a rift with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, over his government’s opposition to Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Danish premier, becoming the next secretary-general of the 26-member security alliance.

Nato leaders had been hoping that Mr Rasmussen could be declared formally as the successor to Jaap de Hoop Scheffer at this weekend’s alliance summit in Strasbourg and Kehl but that may now have to be delayed.

European diplomats, however, say that while a consensus has emerged within Nato that Mr Rasmussen is frontrunner for the post, Turkey has expressed objections because of the row in 2006 over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed printed in a Danish newspaper.

Turkey complains that Mr Rasmussen refused to apologise for the cartoons, which sparked riots and attacks on Danish embassies in several Muslim states.

[Stephen Kinzer noted in his op-ed in the Guardian that Rasmussen also refused to meet with ambassadors from Muslim countries who sought to defuse the crisis - JFP.]

Turkey believes the cartoons row would leave Mr Rasmussen ill-placed to lead Nato when its biggest challenges are in the Muslim world. It would prefer a non-European Union candidate with more Atlanticist instincts, such as Peter MacKay, Canada’s defence minister, or Radoslaw Sikorski, Polish foreign minister.

4) Cuba trade proponents unveil bill to lift U.S. restrictions
Lesley Clark, Miami Herald, Tue, Mar. 31, 2009
http://www.miamiherald.com/581/story/977124.html

Saying current U.S. policy toward Cuba has failed to propel democratic changes in the communist-ruled nation, advocates for trade unveiled a bill Tuesday that would lift all travel restrictions, allowing Americans to visit the now off-limits island.

The backers, who have long pushed for increased trade with Cuba, say they believe momentum is on their side, noting that President Barack Obama campaigned on a promise to lift some travel restrictions imposed long ago in hopes of denying aid to the Castro regime.

The new bill would bar the president from regulating travel to Cuba, and its supporters said it would help bring changes to the island nation, which for 50 years has been governed by Fidel Castro and now his younger brother, Raúl.

Current U.S. policy "has done nothing to weaken the Castro regime," said the bill’s chief champion, Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. "It’s long past the time to change this ill-advised policy."
…
Dorgan was joined by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Jose Miguel Vivanco, executive director of the Americas division of Human Rights Watch, who argued that current policy "has neither weakened the Cuban government" nor improved conditions for Cuba’s political prisoners.

5) Haiti’s Woes Are Top Test for Aid Effort
Neil MacFarquhar, New York Times, March 31, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/world/americas/31haiti.html
…
A landscape of deepening woe is emerging among the world’s most destitute. About 46 million more people are expected to tumble into poverty this year amid the largest decline in global trade in 80 years, according to the World Bank. The results ripple through every index. An additional 200,000 to 400,000 infants, for example, may die every year for the next six years because of the crisis, the bank said.

Amid the turmoil, the United Nations is reminding the world’s wealthy nations, however embattled their finances, not to forget the poorest. A panel commissioned by the United Nations General Assembly suggested on Thursday that one percent of any nation’s stimulus package be set aside for poor countries, while Ban has vowed that when he joins the leaders of the Group of 20 at their economic summit meeting in London on Thursday, he will voice the concerns of the uninvited.

"There are many countries who cannot even dream of formulating their own fiscal stimulus packages," Ban said. Last week, he sent a letter to the Group of 20 members arguing that, domestic problems aside, they should give $1 trillion over the next two years to the world’s most vulnerable nations.

Iran
6) A new season in Iran relations
Pirouz Mojtahedzadeh and Kaveh L. Afrasiabi, Boston Globe, March 29, 2009
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/29/a_new_season_in_iran_relations

[Mojtahedzadeh is professor of political geography at Tarbiat Modares University in Tehran; Afrasiabi is former political science professor at Tehran University.]

Politics doesn’t often imitate the changing season, but this may be an exception. Last week, when President Obama sent a Persian new year’s greeting to Iran calling for "new beginnings" in relations between the two countries, it elicited an immediate response from Iran’s highest authority, the spiritual leader Ayatollah Khamenei, who stated Iran’s readiness to respond positively to Obama’s offer of sincere engagement.

Sure, the Iranian leader’s response was peppered with negative reactions to Obama’s video message - to both the Iranian public and its leaders - linking Iran with terrorism and nuclear proliferation. But much of the Western media seriously misinterpreted Khamenei’s response by saying that he had rebuffed, dismissed, or "brushed aside" Obama’s important overture.

On the contrary, the instant response by the leader has been widely interpreted in Iran as a sign of respect for Obama. Khamenei challenged the president to back up words with action, adding "change only in words is not enough, change must be real." This means Khamenei has taken charge of Iran’s US policy, preempting often-fractious voices in Iranian politics that could hamper evolution of a US-Iran dialogue.

As a sign of Iran’s willingness to engage in the kind of regional dialogue on Afghanistan that Obama called for on Friday, Tehran has agreed to participate in three key conferences on Afghanistan. One began last week in Moscow. It focused on Afghanistan’s instability and, above all, the burgeoning narcotics smuggling that bankrolls the Afghan insurgency and is, at the same time, a major headache for Iran, where most of the drugs are smuggled to Europe. There was a report Friday that NATO and Iran have held secret talks about Afghanistan.

There is a real convergence of interests between the United States and Iran on Afghanistan. Both oppose the Taliban and their Wahhabi Al Qaeda supporters, support the Kabul government, and fight the drug smugglers, who kill hundreds of Iran’s drug officials each year. Iran has given generous economic assistance to Kabul and has contributed to Afghanistan’s reconstruction by giving a 90 percent discount on duties for Afghan goods. Last year’s trade between the countries approached $1 billion and this figure is anticipated to grow now that Iran, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan have agreed to connect railways and ship water and electricity into Iran from Tajikistan via Afghanistan. There is already a well-built highway from Iran to Herat in western Afghanistan and plans are underway to connect the landlocked Afghanistan to the Iranian port of Chahbahar.

Given its geographical proximity and close historical, cultural, and linguistic ties with Afghanistan, Iran is well positioned to play an increasingly important role in Afghanistan’s stabilization. However, Iran’s leaders cannot forget how their post 9/11 cooperation with Washington to uproot the Taliban was rewarded by President Bush in the form of their demonization as part of an "axis of evil." So they are now adamant that their future cooperation will be part of a comprehensive and strategic context, whereby Iran is firmly included in regional stabilization strategies.

The dilemma for the United States is how to turn Iran into a partner without establishing diplomatic relations, which are currently stalemated over the nuclear standoff and conflicting views on the Arab-Israeli conflict. The irony is that by renewing the US sanctions on Iran and seeking tougher UN sanctions, the Obama administration is actually trying to isolate and weaken Iran precisely at a time when a strong Iran can be a major pillar of stability in a volatile region. This is a recipe for failure. A more prudent US policy would be to consistently pursue confidence-building steps with Iran and to focus on Iran’s nuclear transparency and improvement in its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, instead of trying to strip Iran of its much-cherished nuclear fuel cycle - which is fully monitored by the IAEA and its surveillance cameras.

A new season in US-Iran relations after 30 years of diplomatic alienation has dawned on the horizon. With the right mix of policies by both sides, the spell of hostility can be broken.

Afghanistan
7) Afghanistan’s poppies pose dilemma
Ken Dilanian, USA Today, March 30, 2009
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-03-30-poppy-fields_N.htm

President Obama’s new strategy for Afghanistan calls for continuing the destruction of poppy fields, although experts and his top envoy to the region have called the practice counterproductive.

Richard Holbrooke, the administration’s coordinator of Afghanistan policy, said this month that eradicating the opium poppy fields is "wasteful and ineffective" and has been "pushing farmers into the Taliban’s hands" because it destroys farmers’ livelihoods and leaves them with few alternatives.

"Eradication has been a disaster," said another expert, Vanda Felbab-Brown of Georgetown University. "It has really antagonized the population."

Barnett Rubin, a New York University professor and Holbrooke adviser, told Congress last year that eradication usually fuels the Taliban-led insurgency.

However, the white paper on Afghanistan released Friday by the White House says the new strategy will spend more on "crop substitution and alternative livelihood programs" while continuing the practice of "targeting those who grow the poppy."

Holbrooke said after the release of the Afghanistan strategy that "you can’t eliminate the whole eradication program. But you’ve got to put more emphasis on agricultural job creation."

The dilemma of Afghanistan’s poppy production has long bedeviled civilian and military strategists. The crop makes up 90% of the world’s opium, which is used to make heroin, and a third of the nation’s gross domestic product, according to the United Nations. Opium profits fuel the insurgency, but so does destroying the poppy crops of poor farmers, says Lt. Col. John Glaze, whose 2007 report for the Army War College argued against eradication.
…
Holbrooke criticized the Bush strategy in a column in TheWashington Post last year. "Even without aerial eradication," he wrote, "the program, which costs around $1 billion a year, may be the single most ineffective program in the history of American foreign policy. It’s not just a waste of money. It actually strengthens the Taliban and al-Qaeda."

Holbrooke repeated that view March 22 at a public forum in Brussels. "We have gotten nothing out of it - nothing," he said. "It is true that some … opium crop has been destroyed, but it hasn’t hurt the Taliban one iota. We’re often pushing farmers into the Taliban hands."

Felbab-Brown said providing wheat seeds to farmers in exchange for not growing opium won’t work. "Afghan farmers can buy wheat seeds, that’s not the problem," she said. "The problem is that they can’t make sufficient living on it or get access to credit and land. Wheat is also much less labor-intensive so it won’t be able to absorb the same amount of farmers as opium poppy can."
…
In an e-mail to USA TODAY, Holbrooke said the opium strategy was not fully formulated. "In the time available we could not design an all new program but there was unanimity that there was significant flaws in the current program," he said. "Now that the Strategic Review is done, we will turn our attention towards agriculture sector job creation and alternative livelihoods while at the same time the government has to go after the drug lords."

Cuba
8) Cuba Should Be Admitted to Local Body, Insulza Says
Joshua Goodman, Bloomberg, March 30
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=ajsmQoleQLwc

The Organization of American States should take steps to readmit Cuba, 47 years after it was banned from the group, OAS Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza said.

Insulza, in an interview in Medellin, Colombia, said the 1962 OAS resolution that banned Cuba from the Washington-based assembly because of its links to communism, China and the Soviet Union no longer makes sense.

"One of the countries has disappeared and the other is buying a lot of U.S. Treasuries," Insulza said at the Inter- American Development Bank’s annual meeting. "Please, if they’re going to be excluded, let’s come up with some better criteria."

Insulza’s comments come as U.S. President Barack Obama is preparing to travel next month to Trinidad and Tobago for the fifth Summit of the Americas, where regional leaders are expected to reiterate their call for him to end the U.S.’s trade embargo against the communist island.
…
Cuba is the only Latin American or Caribbean nation excluded from proceedings at the 35 member-nation OAS, and the U.S. is the only country in the Americas that doesn’t have full diplomatic relations with the country. El Salvador and Costa Rica reestablished ties this month with Cuba, the only country in the region that isn’t a democracy.
…
Insulza said Cuba’s readmission into the OAS should come after serious study and dialogue. Its return would likely follow its entry into other organizations such as the IDB and the Pan American Health Organization, he said.

"Cuba’s fundamental problem is the U.S. embargo, not whether or not it belongs to specific organizations like the OAS," said Insulza, adding that he didn’t expect the issue to dominate discussions at the April 17-19 Summit of the Americas.

9) Momentum Grows for Relaxing Cuba Policy
Senate Measure Would Eliminate Travel Ban
Shailagh Murray and Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, March 30, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/29/AR2009032902460.html
…
President Obama called repeatedly during the campaign last year for a "new strategy" toward Cuba, and this month he lifted severe Bush-era restrictions on travel and remittances to the island by Cuban Americans with relatives there, after the 2009 spending measure banned using taxpayer money to enforce them. The Treasury Department also said it would ease licensing requirements for trade-related travel by U.S. citizens.

Although the decision is not yet final, Obama is expected to further loosen remaining travel restrictions for all Americans by the time he goes to the April 17-19 Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago, senior administration officials said. Such restrictions were first imposed in 1961 and have been progressively tightened since then. Removing all sanctions requires congressional action, but one senior official said that Treasury has wide leeway to ease the licensing requirements that limit travel.

-
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org

Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming US foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans.

Just Foreign Policy News
March 27, 2009

Obama Narrows Afghan Goals - And Leaves Them Wide
Obama said "we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future" and that "we are not in Afghanistan to control that country or to dictate its future." At the same time he struck out against an assumed threat of a "return to Taliban rule," and insisted al Qaeda terrorists "would accompany the core Taliban leadership," which suggests U.S. goals have not changed much, and that the U.S. is still trying to control Afghanistan and dictate its future.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/obama-narrows-afghan-goal_b_180077.html

Four Questions on Afghanistan
Will the United States support political negotiations between the Afghan government and leaders of Afghanistan’s insurgencies? Is the United States prepared to discuss its long-term intentions in Afghanistan? Is the United States prepared to relax the political constraints it has previously imposed on Afghan negotiations? Is the United States prepared to address the political roots of Pakistan’s relationship with the Afghan insurgencies?
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/27-8

Help us build for a Just Foreign Policy
Your financial contributions to Just Foreign Policy help us create opportunities for Americans to advocate for a just foreign policy.
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate.html

Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) President Obama announced a new Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy that will require significantly higher levels of U.S. funding and thousands more military and civilian personnel, the Washington Post reports. The new strategy will include efforts to draw low-level Taliban fighters - but not the insurgent leadership - into reconciliation talks with the Afghan government.

2) Taliban leaders in Pakistan have closed ranks with their Afghan comrades to ready a new offensive in Afghanistan as the US prepares to send 17,000 more troops, the New York Times reports. Taliban fighters based in the border region said preparations for the anticipated influx of American troops were already being made. A number of new, younger commanders have been preparing to step up a campaign of roadside bombings and suicide attacks to greet the Americans, the fighters said.

3) Administration officials have been insisting no decision has been made to stop using the term "global war on terror" in official communications, writes Al Kamen in the Washington Post. But in a sign Kamen doubts the denial, he offers to contribute $1 to the Committee to Protect Journalists every time a senior Administration official uses the term in written Congressional testimony.

4) Iran expert Joe Cirincione says there will be no "Nixon to China" moment in improved relations with Iran, Reuters reports. There will be a series of incremental steps. [The Reuters article says opening a low-level diplomatic office in Tehran is off the table for now until Washington has established Iran’s views on such a move; recent press reports have claimed the US had concluded such an office would be a target for anti-American demonstrations. When the Bush Administration first proposed it, Iranian officials welcomed the idea, while saying they were waiting for a formal request - JFP.]

5) As it gets ready to commemorate its 50th anniversary, the IDB has come under heightened criticism from civil society groups which argue its financing often goes against sustainable development and effective measures to overcome poverty, Inter Press Service reports. Gabriel Strautman with the Brazilian Network on Multilateral Financial Institutions said IDB member countries should not fork over more money to banks "that have caused irreversible socio-environmental damages throughout their lives." Another reason to halt the flow of funds, said political scientist María José Romero at the Third World Institute in Uruguay, is "the limited effectiveness of mechanisms for civil society participation in decision-making and the lack of respect for the rights of indigenous people."

Iran
7) Iran announced Thursday that it will join the US in dispatching official delegations to two international conferences on Afghanistan, the Los Angeles Times reports. But Iranians say they’re wary of getting burned, as they say they were after cooperating with the Bush administration in 2001 and ‘02 when the U.S. overthrew the Taliban government in Afghanistan. Iran might dispatch a low-level envoy, suggesting an ambivalent response to U.S. gestures.

8) Iran and NATO have held their first talks since the Iranian revolution, AFP reports.

Iraq
9) It’s fear that keeps the peace in Baghdad, writes Hamza Hendawi for AP. Only an estimated 16 percent of the mainly Sunni families forced by Shiite militiamen and death squads to flee their homes have dared to return.

Mexico
10) The US should complement its military support for Mexico with demands to respect basic civil liberties, writes John Ackerman in the Boston Globe. Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission has received over 1,000 new complaints against the military since the beginning of the Mexican government offensive. Human Rights Watch and the UN Human Rights Commission have severely criticized the Calderón administration for the abuses by the military and police.

Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) Obama Announces Plans for More Funding for Afghan War
4,000 Additional Troops to Deploy
Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, Friday, March 27, 2009; 12:08 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/AR2009032700836.html

President Obama this morning announced a new Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy that will require significantly higher levels of U.S. funding and thousands more military and civilian personnel to reverse what he called an "increasingly perilous" situation.
…
Among the resources required, he said, are an additional 4,000 troops, beyond the 17,000 he authorized last month, that will bring total U.S. deployments to more than 60,000. U.S. military expenses for Afghan operations this year, White House aides said, will increase about 60 percent from the current toll of $2 billion a month. The newly announced forces, from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, will serve as trainers and advisers to an Afghan army expected to double to 134,000 by 2011.

Obama called on Congress to pass legislation to provide $1.5 billion a year for five years in economic assistance to Pakistan, along with a bill creating "opportunity zones" for exports. Additional development aid is also planned for Afghanistan, and Obama said he would launch a "dramatic increase," expected to number in the hundreds, of U.S. civilian officials on the ground there. The United States also plans to provide additional equipment, including transport helicopters, to the Pakistani military.
…
"In going forward," he said, "we will not blindly stay the course," but will monitor progress with a series of benchmarks and metrics imposed on Pakistan, Afghanistan and U.S. efforts. "And after years of mixed results, we will not provide a blank check. Pakistan must demonstrate its commitment to rooting out al-Qaeda and the violent extremists within its borders," Obama said.
…
"We’ll consistently assess our efforts to train Afghan security forces, and our progress in combating insurgents," Obama said. "We will measure the growth of Afghanistan’s economy, and its illicit narcotics production. And we will review whether we are using the right tools and tactics to make progress towards accomplishing our goals."

Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and sponsor, along with ranking minority member Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), of legislation authorizing increased aid to Pakistan, said today that the bill is scheduled for introduction next week. The total amount, he said, "might be a little more" than the $1.5 billion annually mentioned by Obama.

"The metrics are very clear," Kerry said. Congress and the administration, he said, will be measuring "if the Pakistanis are not openly and in ways that we can measure moving to deal with the [intelligence service], if they are not dealing with the FATA [the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region where al-Qaeda and other groups are headquartered] and engaged in a proactive effort to develop the capacity to go in there and take on some of those forces."

There will be "accountability on the expenditure of funds" and checks on whether Pakistan is moving its forces away from the eastern border with India to concentrate on the insurgent threat emanating from the west. The metrics, which are still to be worked out, will include proven Pakistani efforts on "education, civilian construction and job creation," Kerry said.
…
The administration plans to expand regional outreach to Russia, China and other countries in the region, including Iran, Obama said, and will work to forge a new "contact group for Afghanistan and Pakistan that brings together all who should have a stake in the security of the region."

A senior administration official said that initial overtures to Iran will begin at an international meeting next week in the Hague attended by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. At the conference, the administration will seek indications that Iran "wants to be a productive player" in Afghanistan, the official said.

Iran yesterday accepted an invitation to the gathering, although U.S. officials said the Iranian foreign minister is not likely to attend. The administration has not yet determined whether Clinton, or a lower-level U.S. official, would attend any talks with Iran. Special envoy Richard C. Holbrooke will also be at the conference.
…
The new strategy will also include efforts to draw low-level Taliban fighters - but not the insurgent leadership - into reconciliation talks with the Afghan government. "We’re not in the business of negotiating with Mullah Omar, and Mullah Omar doesn’t want to negotiate with us," an official said. "But we think there are fractures" in the Taliban forces, he said. The goal is to "break the momentum of the Taliban in the next fighting season" that begins this spring and begin to exploit the fractures.

The administration’s director of national intelligence, Dennis C. Blair, estimated yesterday that as many as two-thirds of the Taliban groups are motivated by local concerns and might be defeated or pacified through addressing problems such as inadequate water supplies or access to education.

2) Pakistani And Afghan Taliban Unify In Face Of U.S. Influx
Carlotta Gall, New York Times, March 27, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/world/asia/27taliban.html

After agreeing to bury their differences and unite forces, Taliban leaders based in Pakistan have closed ranks with their Afghan comrades to ready a new offensive in Afghanistan as the United States prepares to send 17,000 more troops there this year.

In interviews, several Taliban fighters based in the border region said preparations for the anticipated influx of American troops were already being made. A number of new, younger commanders have been preparing to step up a campaign of roadside bombings and suicide attacks to greet the Americans, the fighters said.

The refortified alliance was forged after the reclusive Afghan Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, sent emissaries to persuade Pakistani Taliban leaders to join forces and turn their attention to Afghanistan, Pakistani officials and Taliban members said.

The overture by Mullah Omar is an indication that with the prospect of an American buildup, the Taliban feel the need to strengthen their own forces in Afghanistan and to redirect their Pakistani allies toward blunting the new American push.

The Pakistani Taliban, an offspring of the Afghan Taliban, are led by veterans of the fighting in Afghanistan who come from the border regions. They have always supported the fight against foreign forces in Afghanistan by supplying fighters, training and logistical aid.

But in recent years the Pakistani Taliban have concentrated on battling the Pakistani government, extending a domain that has not only threatened Pakistan but has also provided an essential rear base for the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan.

At the same time, American officials told The New York Times this week that Pakistan’s military intelligence agency continued to offer money, supplies and guidance to the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan as a proxy to help shape a friendly government there once American forces leave.

The new Taliban alliance has raised concern in Afghanistan, where NATO generals warn that the conflict will worsen this year. It has also generated anxiety in Pakistan, where officials fear that a united Taliban will be more dangerous, even if focused on Afghanistan, and draw more attacks inside Pakistan from United States drone aircraft.
…
A spokesman for the Afghan Taliban, Zabiullah Mujahid, denied that the meetings ever took place or that any emissaries were sent by Mullah Omar. The Afghan Taliban routinely disavow any presence in Pakistan or connection to the Pakistani Taliban to emphasize that their movement is indigenous to Afghanistan. “We don’t like to be involved with them, as we have rejected all affiliation with Pakistani Taliban fighters,” Mujahid said. “We have sympathy for them as Muslims, but beside that, there is nothing else between us.”

Several Pakistani officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not permitted to talk to news organizations, confirmed the meetings. But they said that the overture might have been inspired by Sirajuddin Haqqani, an Afghan Taliban leader who swears allegiance to Mullah Omar but is largely independent in his operations.

Haqqani, and his father Jalaluddin Haqqani, the most powerful figures in Waziristan, are closely linked to Al Qaeda and to Pakistani intelligence, American officials say.

3) Reports Of The Long War’s Death Were Apparently Premature
Al Kamen, Washington Post, Friday, March 27, 2009; A15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/26/AR2009032603667.html

Administration officials have been insisting that no decision has been made to stop using the term "global war on terror" - or GWOT (GEE-wot) - in official communications.

An Office of Management and Budget e-mail sent to the Pentagon a few days ago said: "This Administration prefers to avoid using the term ‘Long War’ or ‘Global War on Terror’ [GWOT]. Please use ‘Overseas Contingency Operation.’ "

OMB Director Peter Orszag, asked about this in a telephone news conference on the budget Wednesday, said he’d seen our blog post on this. "I sometimes am amused by things that I read in the press," he said. (Yeah, well, he should see some of the laugh-riot stuff written by administration officials.) "I am not aware of any communication that I’ve had on that topic," he said.

OMB spokesman Kenneth Baer dismissed the e-mail as "a communication by a mid-level career civil servant" and said, "There was no official memo or guidance given out by OMB." Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell told reporters he’d "never received such a directive" and would still use GWOT "if it’s appropriate," and he noted that the OMB explained that one of its staff members "may have been a little overexuberant."
…
In any event, he said OCO was really just a "budget term" and "I don’t think there’s anything to the story."

Okay. So here’s what let’s do. For the rest of the year, anytime a senior administration official - assistant secretary or above - uses "GWOT" or "global war on terror," in the present tense, in written testimony sent to the Hill, we will contribute - personal cash here - one American dollar to the Committee to Protect Journalists. The CPJ is an organization that works to keep reporters from being gunned down or jailed in such places as Sierra Leone, Iraq, China, North Korea, Mexico, Georgia and Russia. Just send a copy of, or direct us to, the relevant page of testimony. Send e-mail to intheloop@washpost.com.

4) U.S. takes small steps in ties with Iran, Reuters, March 27, 2009
Sue Pleming, Reuters, Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:50am EDT
http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSTRE52Q2ZZ20090327

The Obama administration is taking tentative steps to turn around caustic U.S. relations with Tehran but experts expect a bumpy, unpredictable ride to reverse three decades of hostility and mistrust.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is set to join Iran at an international conference on Afghanistan in the Hague on Tuesday, following through on a promise by President Barack Obama to deal with Tehran on issues of mutual concern.

No substantive talks are planned between Clinton and the Iranian envoy at the meeting, but U.S. officials hope any encounters they have will set a positive tone as Obama adjusts the isolation policy of his predecessor, George W. Bush.

"This is not a Nixon goes to China moment," said Iran expert Joe Cirincione, referring to former President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in 1972 which broke two decades of silence between the two nations. "You will have a series of incremental steps - small pieces that put together the mosaic of a new relationship," added Cirincione, who heads the Ploughshares Fund, a grant-making foundation focused on nuclear issues.
…
Diplomats and U.S. officials, none of whom would speak on the record, said Obama was also considering a personal letter to Iran’s Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but no decision had been made yet on the content or when to send it.
…
One change in U.S. policy is likely to be a relaxation of restrictions on contacts between U.S. and Iranian diplomats. Previously "substantial" talks between U.S. diplomats and their Iranian counterparts had to be cleared first.

The hope is that such conversations will help the United States establish the best way of dealing with Iran and overcome decades of mistrust. "I think these kinds of discussions can yield information on who we should be talking to and how we should be handling a dialogue," said Jim Dobbins of the RAND Corporation.

The Bush administration was looking into opening up a low-level diplomatic office in Tehran, but diplomats and officials say this is off the table for now until Washington has established Iran’s views on such a move.

5) Half Century of Failed Development Policies - NGOs
Humberto Márquez, Inter Press Service, Mar 26
http://ipsnews.org/news.asp?idnews=46286

As it gets ready to commemorate its 50th anniversary at an assembly in Medellín, Colombia, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) has come under heightened criticism from civil society groups which argue that its financing often goes against sustainable development and effective measures to overcome poverty.

"The 50th anniversary could become a rough draft for a future death certificate," Héctor Moncayo, with the Colombia-based Latin American Institute for Alternative Legal Services (ILSA), one of the 42 organisations involved in the "IDB 50 Years Financing Inequality" campaign, told IPS.

The campaign is holding a "Peoples’ Assembly for Development Alternatives" in Medellín parallel to the 50th annual meeting of the IDB and the 24th annual meeting of its affiliate, the Inter-American Investment Corporation, to be held Mar. 27-31.

The IDB is also under fire because its portfolio lost 1.9 billion dollars in value over the last year and a half due to its investments in "toxic assets" backed by subprime mortgages - a huge obstacle to the Bank’s hopes of shoring up its solvency in the midst of a global economic crisis.

The portfolio losses gave rise, ahead of the IDB assembly, to a back and forth of letters between influential U.S. Senator Richard Lugar, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Luis Alberto Moreno, the Colombian economist who heads the IDB.

Of the IDB’s 48 member states - China is the newest member - 23 are net donors, the biggest of which is the United States. The Bank has been working hard to increase member donations in order to approve at the assembly 18 billion dollars in loans for 2009.
…
Social Watch, a Uruguay-based international watchdog taking part in the campaign said the counter-assembly would be held "to visualise the human and environmental costs of the failed ‘development’ policies of the bank, which are largely focused on the promotion of ecologically damaging mega-projects that provide few benefits for disadvantaged local populations and fail to respect the rights of indigenous communities and other traditional ethnic groups."

"Considering that the main objective since the creation of the IDB (in 1959) was to accelerate the sustainable development process, it makes sense to wonder: how can we still have alarming rates of poverty, extreme poverty and inequality after 50 years of work?" said Diego Rodríguez, an Argentine activist with Ciudadanía y Justicia Ambiental (Environmental Citizenship and Justice).
…
For his part, Gabriel Strautman with the Brazilian Network on Multilateral Financial Institutions said IDB member countries should not fork over more money to banks "that have caused irreversible socio-environmental damages throughout their lives."

Another reason to halt the flow of funds, said political scientist María José Romero at the Third World Institute in Uruguay, is "the limited effectiveness of mechanisms for civil society participation in decision-making and the lack of respect for the rights of indigenous people."

Iran
7) Iran says it will join Americans at conferences on Afghanistan
Tehran’s interests overlap with Washington’s, prompting it to join two conferences on Afghanistan. The chaos there has crossed into Iran in the form of drug dealing, human trafficking and violence.
Borzou Daragahi and Ramin Mostaghim, Los Angeles Times, March 27, 2009
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-afghanistan27-2009mar27,3,868112.story

It was an eye-popping bust: 4.5 tons of opium, hashish and other drugs seized from nine alleged smugglers last weekend in two cities near the Iranian capital.

Two days later, police in eastern Iran, near Afghanistan, stopped a pickup packed with a quarter of a ton of opium in compartments under the floorboards, according to local news reports. And cops in the border town of Zabol recently seized another quarter-ton of Afghan opium.

Whatever Iranian officials might feel about U.S. troubles in Afghanistan and Pakistan, there is a rising alarm in Tehran over the torrent of drug dealing, human trafficking and violence connected to the mayhem in the region that is washing across Iran’s eastern border.

The Islamic Republic announced Thursday that it will join the United States in dispatching official delegations to two international conferences on Afghanistan. The Obama administration has welcomed Tehran’s intended participation at one in the Netherlands.

U.S. and Iranian interests overlap in Afghanistan, perhaps more than on any other issue. The Obama administration, which has committed itself to diplomatic outreach to Tehran, has favored a greater Iranian role in efforts to stabilize Afghanistan as a way of building trust between the long-estranged U.S. and Iran and resolving disputes, especially over Iran’s nuclear program.

But Iranians say they’re wary of getting burned, as they say they were after quietly cooperating with the Bush administration in 2001 and ‘02 when the U.S. overthrew the Taliban government in Afghanistan and brought President Hamid Karzai to power. That brief flowering of diplomatic contacts ended with former President George W. Bush labeling Iran as part of an "axis of evil" along with North Korea and Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq.
…
Iran is also attending the conference on Afghanistan at The Hague next week, after staying away from such meetings. But some Iranian analysts cautioned not to read too much into Tehran’s decision; their concerns were underscored by Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi, who told The Times that the "level of participation is yet to be determined" for the Hague conference. Iran might dispatch a low-level envoy, suggesting an ambivalent response to U.S. gestures.

Iranians are wary of giving Americans a possible public-relations victory without getting anything in return. "Whenever they need us, they use our influence; but as they reach their objectives, they treat us as a major threat in the region," said a recent editorial in the conservative Siasat Rooz newspaper.

But even some Iranian hard-liners have begun to welcome the idea of cooperating with the U.S. and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in helping secure Afghanistan, calling it a victory for Iranian steadfastness.
…
Perceptions and politesse will play a significant role in determining the level of Iran’s participation at the summit. Tehran canceled on French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s Afghanistan conference in December after he said he would never shake hands with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a comment Iran decried as insulting. Not one Iranian official, not even Tehran’s ambassador to France, attended that conference.

8) Iran, NATO in First Talks in 30 Years
AFP, March 26, 2009
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ig4I5Mxykn13rOYZE0hwsI7uMSpQ

Iran and NATO have held their first talks since the Iranian revolution 30 years ago, officials at the military alliance said Thursday, in a new sign of a thaw in Tehran’s ties with the West. At allied headquarters in Brussels last week, an Iranian diplomat and a senior NATO official had an "informal contact" focused on Iran’s neighbour Afghanistan, where the alliance is battling a stiff Taliban-led insurgency.

Iraq
9) Fear keeps Baghdad divided and warring sects apart; few Sunnis dare return
Hamza Hendawi, Associated Press, March 25, 2009
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-ml-iraq-still-cleansed,0,3714187.story

The streets are calmer now. The fighting between Shiites and Sunnis has largely ceased. But this is not a sign of normalcy in the Iraqi capital. It’s fear that keeps the peace.

Only an estimated 16 percent of the mainly Sunni families forced by Shiite militiamen and death squads to flee their homes have dared to return.

It takes two sides to have a fight, and there’s really only one side left in Baghdad after violence and fear turned parts of neighborhoods into ghost towns.

Families that have gone back are sometimes met with spray-painted threats and other forms of intimidation. "Back after a break, the Mahdi Army," is a Shiite militia’s slogan - playing off the same words that Iraqi television uses as a lead-in to commercials.

The findings - based on statistics obtained by The Associated Press from U.S. and Iraqi officials as well as AP interviews in key Baghdad neighborhoods in recent weeks - are acknowledged by U.S. military commanders on the ground. And they point to a troubling prospect.

Baghdad has been much calmer since the massacres reached their peak in late 2006 and the first half of 2007. And a U.S. military spokesman said Wednesday that attacks nationwide had fallen to their lowest level since the first months of the war.

In the capital, however, the calm has been achieved in part because the city is now ethnically divided. Shiites predominate. Sunnis have largely fled.
…
"Baghdad has been turned from a mixed city, about half of its population Shiite and the other half Sunni in 2003, into a Shiite city where the Sunni population may be as little as 10 to 15 percent," said Juan Cole, a prominent U.S. expert on Iraq.

No accurate census has been taken since the bloodletting. But Cole’s estimates, backed up by AP observations and U.S. statistics, hold troubling implications for the future should Sunnis come back in greater numbers.

Mexico
10) Militaristic posturing in Mexico
John M. Ackerman, Boston Globe, March 25, 2009
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/25/militaristic_posturing_in_mexico

[Ackerman is professor at the Institute for Legal Research of the National Autonomous University of Mexico and columnist for La Jornada and Proceso.]

Hillary Clinton should take advantage of this week’s visit to Mexico to openly question the Mexican government’s failing human rights record. President Felipe Calderón has centered his anti-drug strategy almost exclusively on the use of the military. If the United States wants to support a lasting peace south of the border, it should complement its military support with demands to respect basic civil liberties.

Since taking power, Calderón has engineered armed crackdowns in 10 states and set up military checkpoints throughout the country. He has sent 40,000 troops to patrol urban centers, with almost 10,000 posted in the border city of Ciudad Juárez. Two of the highest federal police commanders are now military officers, and a dozen prosecutors and police chiefs in Mexico’s states are also members of the armed forces.

Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission has received over 1,000 new complaints against the military since the beginning of this offensive. Human Rights Watch, the United Nations Human Rights Commission, and local non-governmental organizations have severely criticized the Calderón administration for the abuses by the military and police.

Just last month, two leading indigenous human rights leaders were tortured and assassinated in the state of Guerrero by armed men who claimed to be police officers. In another recent case, two women and three children were gunned down at a checkpoint because their driver, who was rushing to attend a funeral, did not stop fast enough. The State Department’s own Human Rights Report issued in February clearly demonstrates that these cases are all too frequent.

Nevertheless, Secretary of State Clinton has yet to take a clear public position on the issue. She may fear that emphasizing human rights might interfere with the "war" against the drug cartels.

But Mexico is not at war. The drug cartels are not interested in overthrowing the government nor do they have an ideological agenda. They are indeed heavily armed. But the fight against the drug trade will not be won in the streets with superior firepower. The real struggle is behind the scenes where authorities need to purge corruption and strengthen criminal intelligence.

Since Mexico is not at war, there is no justification for the virtual state of emergency that exists in many parts of the country. Nevertheless, the Mexican government is committed to maintaining the status quo. All crimes and human rights abuses committed by soldiers are tried exclusively by military tribunals. These courts tend to excuse even the most flagrant violations. Calderón has recently pushed through a constitutional reform that allows suspects of organized crime to be held for up to 80 days before bringing charges, and then for months in preventative prison before standing trial. Another recent reform closes down freedom-of-information requests to almost all aspects of criminal investigations even after they have been completed.

-
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org

Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming US foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans.

Just Foreign Policy News
March 26, 2009

Afghanistan: The Four Questions
President Obama is due to announce his new strategy Friday. No big surprises are expected. What matters is changing the answers to four questions. Will the United States support political negotiations between the Afghan government and leaders of Afghanistan’s insurgencies? Is the United States prepared to discuss its long-term intentions in Afghanistan? Is the United States prepared to relax the political constraints it has previously imposed on Afghan negotiations? Is the United States prepared to address the political roots of Pakistan’s relationship with the Afghan insurgencies?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/afghanistan-the-four-ques_b_179630.html

Tom Hayden: Progressive Think Tank Tells Obama to Escalate
The Center for American Progress has positioned itself as a "progressive" Washington think tank. It therefore is deeply disappointing that CAP has issued a call for a ten-year war in Afghanistan, Hayden says.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/progressive-think-tank-te_b_179174.html

Help us build for a Just Foreign Policy
Your financial contributions to Just Foreign Policy help us create opportunities for Americans to advocate for a just foreign policy.
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate.html

Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) It seems utterly unbelievable that NATO is about to name as its new secretary general a figure whom millions of Muslims detest more than almost any other European, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen of Denmark, writes Stephen Kinzer in the Guardian. Rasmussen was Denmark’s leader when a Copenhagen newspaper published cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed in ways that outraged Muslims around the world. When ambassadors from 11 Muslim countries asked to meet him to discuss ways of calming the anger that was building in their homelands, he refused to receive them. Soon after Rasmussen’s refusal, the violent protests that these ambassadors had feared broke out. Scores were killed in rioting. If NATO decides that the figure most directly associated with this scandal should be its new secretary general, how can it expect to win public support in Afghanistan and Pakistan?

2) Obama is facing mounting pressure to cut defense spending so more money can be spent on social programs, The Hill reports. Liberal advocacy groups sent a letter to congressional leaders calling for steep cuts to the Joint Strike Fighter Program and other futuristic weapons, with the money saved going to schools, healthcare and other social services. The letter was signed by the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Black Leadership Forum, the Hispanic Federation, the League of Rural Voters, the National Congress of Black Women and the National Council of Negro Women.

3) Pressure on Obama to recast the failed American approach to Israel-Palestine is building from former senior officials whose counsel he respects, writes Roger Cohen in the New York Times. They call for intense American mediation in pursuit of a two-state solution and "a more pragmatic approach toward Hamas." Khaled Meshal, the political director of Hamas in Damascus, has put in writing that Hamas would remain in Palestinian national unity government that reached a referendum-endorsed peace settlement with Israel.

4) US officials say the Taliban’s campaign in southern Afghanistan is made possible in part by direct support from operatives in Pakistan’s military intelligence agency, the New York Times reports. In a sign of just how resigned Western officials are to the ties, the British government has sent several dispatches to Islamabad in recent months asking that the ISI use its strategy meetings with the Taliban to persuade its commanders to scale back violence in Afghanistan before the August presidential election there, according to one official. Pakistanis said the contacts were less threatening than American officials depicted and were part of a strategy to maintain influence in Afghanistan for the day when American forces would withdraw and leave what they fear could be a power vacuum to be filled by India. The Haqqani network, which focuses its attacks on Afghanistan, is considered a strategic asset to Pakistan, according to American and Pakistani officials. American officials say the situation has changed little since last summer, when evidence showed that ISI operatives helped plan the bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, an attack that killed 54 people.

5) Human Rights Watch said Israel’s military fired white phosphorus over crowded areas of Gaza repeatedly and indiscriminately in its three-week war, killing and injuring civilians and committing war crimes, the Guardian reports. "In Gaza, the Israeli military didn’t just use white phosphorus in open areas as a screen for its troops," said an HRW researcher. "It fired white phosphorus repeatedly over densely populated areas, even when its troops weren’t in the area and safe smoke shells were available." HRW called on the UN to launch an international commission of inquiry to investigate.

Iraq/Turkey
6) Turkish President Gul’s recognition of the Kurdistan government in northern Iraq and his talks with the autonomous region’s leader on fighting Kurdish guerrillas mark a breakthrough for regional stability, writes Paul de Bendern for Reuters. Acknowledging the existence of the Kurdistan Regional Government has been taboo among Turkish politicians. Gul became the first Turkish head of state to travel to Armenia last year. "You see, they (efforts on northern Iraq and Armenia) are all well received," Gul told Reuters, saying breaking taboos in Turkey appeared more difficult than they really were.

Bolivia
7) The UN’s human rights arm found opponents of Bolivian President Morales were responsible for some of the country’s worst human rights violations last year, AP reports. The report concludes pro-autonomy forces were behind political violence in September that killed 11 people in the state of Pando. The report criticized Morales’ administration for "irregularities" surrounding arrests that followed the violence and lack of action by authorities responsible for preventing human rights violations, but gave the government high marks for improving economic, social and cultural rights, noting Morales has helped reduce servitude-like working conditions affecting much of the country’s indigenous majority.

Mexico
8) Secretary of State Clinton offered the clearest acknowledgment yet from an Obama administration official of the role the US plays in the violent narcotics trade in Mexico, the New York Times reports. "Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade," Clinton said. "Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians." Indications Obama will push for stricter controls on the sale of assault rifles have already set off an outcry among gun-control opponents. "Politically, this is a very big hurdle in our Congress," Clinton conceded.

9) Mexico’s credit rating could be hurt by a defeat for President Calderon’s National Action Party in July congressional elections, Bloomberg reports. A March 7 poll showed Calderon’s party would take 26 percent of the lower house seats in the vote, down from its current 41 percent. The poll shows the opposition PRI will take 34 percent of lower house seats in the elections while the opposition PRD wins 13 percent.

Peru
10) President Garcia promised foreign investors Tuesday he would block leftist candidates from winning the 2011 election, Reuters reports. Garcia’s comments apparently aimed to alleviate fears in the business community about the candidacy of Ollanta Humala. Humala nearly won the 2006 election and his plan then to unravel years of "free market reforms" [sic] sent financial markets reeling. "The president can’t pick his successor, but he can prevent the next president from being somebody he doesn’t want," Garcia said.

Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) Nato disses the Muslim world
Choosing controversial Danish PM Rasmussen as Nato secretary general would threaten the mission in Afghanistan
Stephen Kinzer, The Guardian, 25 Mar 2009
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/mar/24/nato-afghanistan-rasmussen

With the Nato mission in Afghanistan faltering, American leaders are frantically looking for ways to reverse terrifying trends. They are, quite understandably, willing to try almost any idea. President Obama, while waiting for the results of what he has called a "soup-to-nuts" review of policy toward Afghanistan, has decided to send 12,000 more American soldiers there. Secretary of state Hillary Clinton recently announced that she will travel to the Netherlands later this month for "a big-tent meeting with all the parties who have a stake in Afghanistan". She will press other Nato members to increase their contributions to the Afghan mission, ask Japan for help and even deign to hear advice from arch-rival Iran.
…
That is why it seems utterly unbelievable that Nato is about to name as its new secretary general a figure whom millions of Muslims detest more than almost any other European, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen of Denmark. Rasmussen, as Nato seems to have forgotten, was Denmark’s leader when a Copenhagen newspaper published cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed in ways that outraged Muslims around the world. When ambassadors from 11 Muslim countries asked to meet him to discuss ways of calming the anger that was building in their homelands, he refused to receive them.

Soon after Rasmussen’s refusal, the violent protests that these ambassadors had feared broke out. Scores were killed in rioting. Danish embassies in several countries were attacked and burned.

Was the publication of these cartoons in Denmark an abuse of press freedom? Was it responsible? Were the cartoons racist? These questions are of the past. Nato need not worry about them. But if Nato decides that the figure most directly associated with this scandal should be its new secretary general, how can it expect to win the public support in Afghanistan and Pakistan that is crucial to the success of its vital mission?

This choice would not be simply tone-deaf. It would do more to alienate Muslims from Nato than almost any other step the alliance could take. What can Nato be thinking? Proceeding with this appointment would suggest that it has lost all contact with reality. Rasmussen’s qualifications are not the issue – what matters is the way his appointment would be perceived in the world’s most explosive region.
…
The only Muslim country in Nato, Turkey, has raised a red flag on the Rasmussen appointment, and urged that a better candidate be found. Several are waiting in the wings, including the foreign ministers of Poland and Canada. But while Turkey has the power to veto this choice, it should not have to do so. President Obama and his European allies should come to their senses and choose a Nato secretary general who will not come into office with the handicap of being hated by millions of Muslims around the world.

2) Liberals Want More Defense Spending Left Behind
Alexander Bolton, The Hill, 03/25/09
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/left-fires-back-on-budget-2009-03-25.html

President Obama is facing mounting pressure from his party’s left flank to cut defense spending so more money can be spent on social programs. A letter obtained by The Hill shows that liberal advocacy groups and lawmakers want Obama to seize a moment when Democrats control both Congress and the White House and scrap costly weapons programs they say have drained domestic coffers.
…
The groups sent the letter to congressional Democratic leaders late Wednesday calling for steep cuts to the Joint Strike Fighter Program and other futuristic weapons plagued by production delays and cost overruns, with the money saved going to schools, healthcare and other social services.

At the same time, a leading Senate liberal has questioned Obama’s proposed spending on defense while House Democrats tussle over how to publicly oppose the president’s budget plan.

"The Department of Defense has laid the welcome mat for rampant waste and excess," wrote Brent Wilkes, of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and Gary Flowers, of the Black Leadership Forum, in a letter sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) late Wednesday. "Billions of dollars are being squandered on costly, faulty defense aircraft that may be outdated before they are ever flown, money that would be better spent in classrooms, emergency rooms and veterans hospitals."

Other national liberal groups including the Hispanic Federation, the League of Rural Voters, the National Congress of Black Women and the National Council of Negro Women also signed the letter.

The letter follows criticism lobbed by Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa), a leading Senate liberal who gave the first hint of frustration over defense spending levels after emerging from a Tuesday briefing with Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.).

"I have a question as to whether we need defense spending to go up by as much as it is," Harkin told reporters after lamenting that he would not have enough money to fulfill his funding goals for health and education. Harkin chairs the Senate Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Subcommittee.
…
Liberal groups argue that eliminating the Joint Strike Fighter program could make up the difference between their health and education spending goals and Obama’s budget.

Niel Ritchie, executive director of the League of Rural Voters, said "a few hundred billion dollars is a lot of schools and a lot of healthcare." "There can’t be business as usual on appropriations, and the defense budget is one thing that has gone up and up, and that can’t happen anymore," he said.

A report published last year by the Government Accountability Office found that 95 major weapons programs exceeded their original budgets by $295 billion. The Joint Strike Fighter program could cost as much as $1 trillion over its lifetime.

The argument by groups such as LULAC, the Black Leadership Forum and the League of Rural Voters is gaining traction among liberal and black lawmakers.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said defense spending is "an area where we can make cuts and reinvest in important programs such as healthcare and education."

Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.), a member of the CBC, said: "I agree 100 percent." "Rather than planning for war, we ought to take a timeout and invest in peace," said Watson. Watson said that the CBC would unveil a budget "to ask that we decrease amounts of money going to the Pentagon and increase amounts for education and health."
…
Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Black Caucus, declined to discuss the details of the budget proposal it plans to unveil soon. During recent testimony before the House Budget Committee, Lee called for cuts to the Ballistic Missile Defense Program. She told The Hill the savings should be spent on mental healthcare and cancer research for troops.

3) The Fierce Urgency of Peace
Roger Cohen, New York Times, March 26, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/opinion/26cohen.html

Pressure on President Obama to recast the failed American approach to Israel-Palestine is building from former senior officials whose counsel he respects. Following up on a letter dated Nov. 6, 2008, that was handed to Obama late last year by Paul Volcker, now a senior economic adviser to the president, these foreign policy mandarins have concluded a "Bipartisan Statement on U.S. Middle East Peacemaking" that should become an essential template.

Deploring "seven years of absenteeism" under the Bush administration, they call for intense American mediation in pursuit of a two-state solution, "a more pragmatic approach toward Hamas," and eventual U.S. leadership of a multinational force to police transitional security between Israel and Palestine.

The 10 signatories - of both the four-page letter and the report - include Volcker himself, former national security advisers Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski, former Senator Chuck Hagel, former World Bank President James Wolfensohn, former U.S. Trade Representative Carla Hills, former Congressman Lee Hamilton and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Thomas Pickering.

My understanding is their thinking coincides in significant degree with that of both George Mitchell, Obama’s Middle East envoy, and Gen. James Jones, Obama’s national security adviser who worked on security issues with Israelis and Palestinians in the last year of the Bush administration, an often frustrating experience. This overlap gives the report particular significance.

Of Hamas, the target of Israel’s futile pounding of Gaza, the eminent Group of 10 writes that, "Shutting out the movement and isolating Gaza has only made it stronger and Fatah weaker."

They urge a fundamental change: "Shift the U.S. objective from ousting Hamas to modifying its behavior, offer it inducements that will enable its more moderate elements to prevail, and cease discouraging third parties from engaging with Hamas in ways that might clarify the movement’s view and test its behavior."

Although this falls short of my own recommendation that the United States itself - rather than European allies - engage with moderate elements of Hamas, such a shift is critical.

Without Hamas’s involvement, there can be no Middle East peace. Mahmoud Abbas, the Fatah leader and president of the Palestinian Authority, is a beleaguered figure.

The report goes further: "Cease discouraging Palestinian national reconciliation and make clear that a government that agrees to a cease-fire with Israel, accepts President Mahmoud Abbas as the chief negotiator and commits to abiding by the results of a national referendum on a future peace agreement would not be boycotted or sanctioned."

In other words, stop being hung up on prior Hamas recognition of Israel and watch what it does rather than what it says. If Hamas is part of, and remains part of, a Palestinian unity government that makes a peace deal with Israel, that’s workable.

Henry Siegman, the president of the U.S./Middle East Project, whose chairman is Scowcroft and board includes all 10 signatories, told me that he met recently with Khaled Meshal, the political director of Hamas in Damascus.

Meshal told him, and put in writing, that although Hamas would not recognize Israel, it would remain in a Palestinian national unity government that reached a referendum-endorsed peace settlement with Israel.

De facto, rather than de jure, recognition can be a basis for a constructive relationship, as Israel knows from the mutual benefits of its shah-era dealings with Iran.

Israeli governments have negotiated a two-state solution although they included religious parties that do not recognize Palestinians’ right to statehood.

"But," Siegman said, "if moderates within Hamas are to prevail, a payoff is needed for their moderation. And until the U.S. provides one, there will be no Palestinian unity government."

4) Afghan Strikes By Taliban Get Pakistan Help, U.S. Aides Say
Mark Mazzetti and Eric Schmitt, New York Times, March 26, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/world/asia/26tribal.html

The Taliban’s widening campaign in southern Afghanistan is made possible in part by direct support from operatives in Pakistan’s military intelligence agency, despite Pakistani government promises to sever ties to militant groups fighting in Afghanistan, according to American government officials.

The support consists of money, military supplies and strategic planning guidance to Taliban commanders who are gearing up to confront the international force in Afghanistan that will soon include some 17,000 American reinforcements.

Support for the Taliban, as well as other militant groups, is coordinated by operatives inside the shadowy S Wing of Pakistan’s spy service, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, the officials said. There is even evidence that ISI operatives meet regularly with Taliban commanders to discuss whether to intensify or scale back violence before the Afghan elections.

Details of the ISI’s continuing ties to militant groups were described by a half-dozen American, Pakistani and other security officials during recent interviews in Washington and the Pakistani capital, Islamabad. All requested anonymity because they were discussing classified and sensitive intelligence information.

The American officials said proof of the ties between the Taliban and Pakistani spies came from electronic surveillance and trusted informants. The Pakistani officials interviewed said that they had firsthand knowledge of the connections, though they denied that the ties were strengthening the insurgency.

American officials have complained for more than a year about the ISI’s support to groups like the Taliban. But the new details reveal that the spy agency is aiding a broader array of militant networks with more diverse types of support than was previously known - even months after Pakistani officials said that the days of the ISI’s playing a "double game" had ended.
…
In a sign of just how resigned Western officials are to the ties, the British government has sent several dispatches to Islamabad in recent months asking that the ISI use its strategy meetings with the Taliban to persuade its commanders to scale back violence in Afghanistan before the August presidential election there, according to one official.
…
But the Pakistanis offered a more nuanced portrait. They said the contacts were less threatening than the American officials depicted and were part of a strategy to maintain influence in Afghanistan for the day when American forces would withdraw and leave what they fear could be a power vacuum to be filled by India, Pakistan’s archenemy. A senior Pakistani military officer said, "In intelligence, you have to be in contact with your enemy or you are running blind."

The ISI helped create and nurture the Taliban movement in the 1990s to bring stability to a nation that had been devastated by years of civil war between rival warlords, and one Pakistani official explained that Islamabad needed to use groups like the Taliban as "proxy forces to preserve our interests."
…
Little is publicly known about the ISI’s S Wing, which officials say directs intelligence operations outside of Pakistan. American officials said that the S Wing provided direct support to three major groups carrying out attacks in Afghanistan: the Taliban based in Quetta, Pakistan, commanded by Mullah Muhammad Omar; the militant network run by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar; and a different group run by the guerrilla leader Jalaluddin Haqqani.

Dennis C. Blair, the director of national intelligence, recently told senators that the Pakistanis "draw distinctions" among different militant groups. "There are some they believe have to be hit and that we should cooperate on hitting, and there are others they think don’t constitute as much of a threat to them and that they think are best left alone," Blair said.

The Haqqani network, which focuses its attacks on Afghanistan, is considered a strategic asset to Pakistan, according to American and Pakistani officials, in contrast to the militant network run by Baitullah Mehsud, which has the goal of overthrowing Pakistan’s government.

Top American officials speak bluntly about how the situation has changed little since last summer, when evidence showed that ISI operatives helped plan the bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, an attack that killed 54 people.

5) Israel Accused of Indiscriminate Phosphorus Use in Gaza
Human Rights Watch report claims Israel committed war crimes in its use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells
Rory McCarthy, The Guardian, Wednesday 25 March 2009
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/25/israel-white-phosphorus-gaza

Israel’s military fired white phosphorus over crowded areas of Gaza repeatedly and indiscriminately in its three-week war, killing and injuring civilians and committing war crimes, Human Rights Watch said today.

In a 71-page report, the rights group said the repeated use of air-burst white phosphorus artillery shells in populated areas of Gaza was not incidental or accidental, but revealed "a pattern or policy of conduct".

It said the Israeli military used white phosphorus in a "deliberate or reckless" way. The report says:

- Israel was aware of the dangers of white phosphorus.

- It chose not to use alternative and less dangerous smoke shells.

- In one case, Israel even ignored repeated warnings from UN staff before hitting the main UN compound in Gaza with white phosphorus shells on 15 January.

"In Gaza, the Israeli military didn’t just use white phosphorus in open areas as a screen for its troops," said Fred Abrahams, a senior Human Rights Watch researcher. "It fired white phosphorus repeatedly over densely populated areas, even when its troops weren’t in the area and safe smoke shells were available. As a result, civilians needlessly suffered and died." He said senior commanders should be held to account.

Human Rights Watch called on the UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, to launch an international commission of inquiry to investigate allegations of violations of international law in the Gaza war by the Israeli military and Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist movement that controls Gaza.

Iraq
6) Turkey Breaks With Past, Seeks Ties With Iraqi Kurds
Paul de Bendern, Reuters, 25 Mar 2009 17:46:29 GMT
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LP681652.htm

Turkish President Abdullah Gul’s recognition of the Kurdistan government in northern Iraq and his talks with the autonomous region’s leader on fighting Kurdish guerrillas mark a breakthrough for regional stability. In just two days Gul has helped reduce tensions and break down barriers between the Turkish state and its ethnic Kurdish minority as well as with neighbouring Iraqi Kurds.

"The visit was a public gesture. We now expect cooperation to speed up between Turkey and northern Iraqi authorities," a senior Turkish official, who declined to be named, told Reuters. "But results won’t happen overnight."
…
Acknowledging the existence of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), which has enjoyed de facto autonomy from Baghdad since 1991, has been taboo among Turkish politicians mindful of reigniting Kurdish hopes of statehood on Turkish soil.
…
The ruling AK Party [in Turkey] has given Kurds more cultural and political rights. A Kurdish-language television station has started and the Koran can now be published in Kurdish.

Gul invited Kurdish Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani for talks in Baghdad on Tuesday, the first time a Turkish leader has formally agreed to meet an official from the KRG. "Gul’s trip and the results are proof Turkey is normalising and seeking stability in the region. It is not just lip service," said leading Turkish commentator Mehmet Ali Birand.
…
Gul became the first Turkish head of state to travel to Armenia last year. The two countries do not have any diplomatic ties, although work is under way to improve relations. "You see, they (efforts on northern Iraq and Armenia) are all well received," Gul told Reuters, saying breaking taboos in Turkey appeared more difficult than they really were.

Bolivia
7) UN report raises concerns over Bolivian violence
Associated Press, Wednesday, March 25, 2009
http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=21060617

The United Nations’ human rights arm issued a report Wednesday finding that opponents of Bolivian President Evo Morales were responsible for some of the Andean country’s worst human rights violations last year.

The 2008 report released by the U.N.’s Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights concludes that pro-autonomy forces in Bolivia’s eastern lowlands were behind political violence in September that killed 11 people in the lowlands state of Pando. Pando Gov. Leopoldo Fernandez was arrested for his alleged role in the killings.

The report, presented by U.N. official Denis Racicot, also raised concerns over political polarization in Bolivia, saying that differences between rivals has hindered efforts to bring those responsible for politically related violence to justice. "Impunity is another factor that has affected justice," the report stated.

Following the presentation of the report, Bolivian Justice Minister Celima Torrico told a press conference that Morales’ government "will take the recommendations into account."
…
The report criticizes Morales’ administration for "irregularities" surrounding the arrests that followed the violence and "the lack of necessary action among authorities responsible for preventing human rights violations." But it gave the government high marks for improving "economic, social and cultural rights," noting that Morales has helped reduce servitude-like working conditions affecting much of the country’s indigenous majority.

Mexico
8) Clinton Says U.S. Feeds Mexico Drug Trade.
Mark Landler, New York Times, March 26, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/world/americas/26mexico.html

Seeking to ease a cross-border relationship strained by drug trafficking, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrived here Wednesday and offered the clearest acknowledgment yet from an Obama administration official of the role the United States plays in the violent narcotics trade in Mexico.

"Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade," Mrs. Clinton said, using unusually blunt language. "Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians."

Mrs. Clinton’s remarks were coupled with a pledge that the administration would seek $80 million from Congress to provide Mexican authorities with three Black Hawk helicopters to help the police track drug runners.

She also came bearing a new White House initiative, announced Tuesday, to deploy 450 more law enforcement officers at the border, and crack down on the smuggling of guns and drug money into Mexico.

The diplomatic offensive, which will include visits by several other senior American officials ahead of President Obama’s visit next month, was calculated to mollify Mexican officials, who have chafed in recent years at what they regard as Mexico-bashing in Washington. It seems to have worked. Patricia Espinosa, Mexico’s foreign secretary, said the new measures were "much along the line of cooperation that we have been trying to build upon." But, she added, "there is always room for improvement in the U.S."

Indeed, some of the Obama administration’s measures are likely to run squarely into American political realities. For example, early indications that Obama will push for stricter controls on the sale of assault rifles have already set off an outcry among gun-control opponents. "Politically, this is a very big hurdle in our Congress," Mrs. Clinton conceded.

9) Calderon Looming Defeat May Hurt Mexico, Moody’s Says
Valerie Rota, Bloomberg, March 25
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=akCg5gJeTqhw

Mexico’s credit rating could be hurt by a defeat for President Felipe Calderon’s National Action Party in mid-term congressional elections, said Mauro Leos, a sovereign analyst at Moody’s Investors Service.

A loss of seats for Calderon’s party in the July elections would hamper his ability to push through legislation needed to boost tax revenue and stem a decline in oil production, Leos said. A March 7 poll by Mexico City-based Consulta Mitofsky showed Calderon’s party would take 26 percent of the lower house seats in the vote, down from its current 41 percent.
…
The Mitofsky poll shows that the opposition Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, will take 34 percent of lower house seats in the July elections while the opposition Party of the Democratic Revolution wins 13 percent. About 23 percent of those surveyed are undecided, the poll showed.

Mitofsky surveyed 1,000 people between Feb. 20-23 for the poll, which has a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.

Support for the PRI rose from a low of 25 percent in January 2008, while backing for Calderon’s party stayed between 23 and 27 percent, as deaths from drug-related violence more than doubled last year, remittances dropped and the peso sank to a record low this month.

"Until now, preliminary information indicates" a victory for the PRI, Leos said in the interview. That "would complicate things further. We wouldn’t be surprised if there were no more significant reforms the rest of the year."

Peru
10) Peru’s Garcia says will block leftist candidates
Teresa Cespedes, Reuters, 2009-03-24
http://www.forexpros.com/news/forex-news/peru%27s-garcia-says-will-block-leftist-candidates-38918

President Alan Garcia promised foreign investors on Tuesday that Peru would enjoy long-term political stability and said he would try to block leftist candidates from winning the 2011 election.

Garcia’s comments, made in an unusually candid speech to executives from Latin America, apparently aimed to alleviate fears in the business community about the candidacy of ultranationalist Ollanta Humala, an ally of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Humala nearly won the 2006 election and his plan then to unravel years of free market reforms sent financial markets reeling. "The president can’t pick his successor, but he can prevent the next president from being somebody he doesn’t want," Garcia said.

Humala, who as an army general mounted a short-lived insurrection in 2000, has long said the government depicts him as a boogeyman to hurt his political chances.

While Garcia said he will oppose leftists, he has yet to say which pro-market candidate he will support. Keiko Fujimori, the daughter of former President Alberto Fujimori, and Luis Castaneda, the mayor of Lima, are tied as poll leaders, slightly ahead of Humala.

-
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org

Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming US foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans.