SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (288287)5/17/2006 6:04:05 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573924
 
TOLD YOU SO...(*)

Iran and Turkey fire salvo over Iraq
By Sami Moubayed

DAMASCUS
- Both Turkey and Iran have been launching military raids into northern Iraq against a Kurdish paramilitary group that is based there, posing a dangerous new threat to stability both within Iraq and to the region.

The Iraq-based Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK), labeled a terrorist group by the United States, Britain and the European Union, is a paramilitary party that preaches Kurdish nationalism, especially in Turkey, where it is demanding political rights and better living standards for the country's 12 million Kurds.

Turkey recently launched a massive military operation involving more than 250,000 troops against the PKK (nearly double the number of US troops in Iraq), concentrated in the mountains along Turkey's borders with Iran and Iraq. Extensive incursions into northern Iraq have been reported, aimed at cutting off the PKK's supply lines to Turkey from its camps in northern Iraq. Turkey also claims that "the PKK has recently increased its activities and obtained weapons from Iraq".

Iran, meanwhile, has begun attacks on PKK units based in Iran, and the Iranian military has entered Iraqi territory in hot pursuit of PKK militants. This represents a different approach from recent years, when Turkey regularly accused Tehran of turning a blind eye to the PKK in Iran.

The Baghdad government has objected, claiming a violation of its sovereignty, but both countries insist that they are acting in self-defense.

The PKK wants to create a Kurdish state out of southeastern Turkey, northeastern Iraq, northeastern Syria and northwestern Iran. PKK broadcasts have claimed that 2006 would be "a year of destiny" for Kurdish nationalism. The PKK rebellion, which has hit Turkey the hardest, has led to the death of 35,000 Turks (including 5,000 soldiers) and cost the Turks billions of dollars.

The PKK's long history of violence - and the violence used in turn by the authorities - all but ceased after its leader Abdullah Ocelan was arrested in 1998, but it resumed activities in June 2004, claiming that the Turkish military was still attacking it.

In a message to Iraq, Turkey said, "They [PKK] are the infiltrators and we are protecting our border. Do not allow the terror network to use your territory. Fight against the terrorists who will only terrorize you in the future." Another communique issued by Turkey addressing the Iraqis read, "We are not considering ending our activity there [in Iraq] for as long as the PKK is also present and active in that area."

The Turks claim that up to 4,000 members of the PKK have been using Iraq to launch attacks on Turkey.

General Hilmi Ozkok, commander of the Turkish army, asked whether Turkey planned to seek US permission before further invasions of Iraq, confidently replied, "We cannot take a decision of that kind based on the US. Every country is sovereign. Every country makes its own decisions. If the conditions change, you act by the changing conditions."

To avoid a confrontation, a flurry of diplomacy has taken place in Turkey. Over the past week, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited Ankara. So did members of the US House of Representatives Foreign Relations Committee, and Ali Larijani, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council and chief negotiator on Iran's nuclear portfolio.

Most interesting of the meetings was that of Larijani, who was received with great honor in Ankara. For six hours, Larijani met with Yigit Alpogan, the secretary general of the National Security Council, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Larijani warned the Turks against PKK infiltration and the chaos prevailing in Iraq, saying, "We are very worried as a country from this region. If the string breaks, and it is heading that way currently, it will not be possible to repair it. We are telling you this plainly now. Later, do not come and complain that we didn't warn you."

He continued, "Currently, there is solidarity in your country. But if chaos breaks out, this solidarity will also fall apart. Don't be like Iraq."

The Turks, especially Erdogan, are serious in wanting to eradicate the PKK threat coming from Iraq. As much as they value their relationship with the US, they will not tolerate a Kurdish presence on their border.

The Americans, although they have helped fight the PKK in the past, nevertheless have recently been passive toward its activities in Iran and Turkey. So has the European Union. While both the US and the EU "oppose" PKK strikes on Turkey, they also oppose Turkey's militarization of the crisis.

Now Turkey has found an ally in the form of Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, who has shown the will - and the army - to support the Turks in combating the PKK.

Iran has arrested 50 PKK members, and a similar crackdown has taken place in Syria, a onetime ally and host of the PKK and currently a good friend of the Iranians.

Ahmadinejad's support for Turkey's offensive on the PKK in Iraq is naturally in Iran's own interests, but it is also aimed at acquiring a new, strong friend for Tehran in its confrontation with the international community over its nuclear program. Reportedly, Ahmadinejad even told the Turks that he would share his nuclear technology with them.

Erdogan had also met with Ahmadinejad in Baku, Azerbaijan, on May 5 on the sidelines of the ninth summit of the Economic Cooperation Organization, shortly before Larijani's visit to Tehran.

This meeting, along with the visit of a high-level Iranian official to Turkey, certainly angered the Americans. Turkish media responded by claiming that the PKK attacks on Turkey were allowed by the Americans and the two prominent Kurdish leaders in Iraq - Masoud al-Barzani, president of the Kurdish region, and the US-backed president of the country, Jalal Talabani.

While in Ankara, Larijani further upset the Americans by revealing that he had documents proving US meetings with the PKK (which it considers a terrorist organization) in Mosul and Kirkuk last month. This was at the level of military commanders, he said. Larijani asked, "If the US is fighting terrorism, why then is it meeting with the PKK?"

Talabani said that in his latest meetings with Rice and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, he had been given assurances that the Turks would not invade Iraq because the US would not let them.

A matter of timing

The PKK's escalation of attacks in both Turkey and Iran raises the question of what it is trying to achieve, especially given the chaotic situation in Iraq.

If it acted at will, without consulting senior Kurdish leaders, this would be a dangerous sign, indicating problems ahead in Iraq's relations with both Tehran and Ankara.

The same is true, though even more so, if the Kurdish leaders (Talabani included) approved the offensive - with or without US support.

Analysts point out that, encouraged by the United States, the PKK has been stirring up trouble in Iraq since 2003, and US troops in Iraq have permitted its leaders to roam freely and have access to the stockpiles of ammunition spread all over Iraq.

This situation has the potential to alienate Turkey and the US further. On March 1, 2003, the United States' relations with Ankara plummeted when the Turkish parliament vetoed a proposal to allow the Americans to use Turkish territory to open a second front against Iraq from the north.

Two years later, on March 21, 2005, Rumsfeld spoke to Fox News, bitterly complaining, "Clearly, if we had been able to get the 4th Infantry Division in from the north, in through Turkey, more of the Hussein-Ba'athist regime would have been captured or killed." He added that had Turkey been more cooperative, "the insurgency today [in Iraq] would be less".

Last year, the Turks broke their isolation with Syria when President Ahmad Nejdet Sezar visited Damascus to meet with President Bashar Assad. The Americans had loudly asked him not to make the visit, but Sezar insisted.

In February, Ankara again defied the US by receiving Khalid Meshaal, the head of the political bureau of Hamas, after the Palestinian resistance movement emerged victorious in January's elections.

Erdogan had declined an invitation from former prime minister Ariel Sharon to visit Israel in 2004, again arousing US ire, and did not meet with the then-Israeli minister of labor and trade, Ehud Olmert, who visited Turkey in July 2004.

In short, Sezar's visit to Syria, Erdogan's welcoming of Hamas and the current alliance with Ahmadinejad in effect notify the Americans that an axis will be formed against them if they continue to encourage Kurdish autonomy in Iraq, and separatist movements in Tehran and Ankara.

For their part, the Kurds have been trying to appease the Turks to avoid a head-on clash, knowing that the consequences would bring devastation to the safe and booming region of Kurdistan, crippling security and foreign investment.

Turkey was invited to attend the inauguration of the new Kurdish parliament last Sunday, but it failed to send its ambassador. Iran, however, playing the game more wisely, sent its ambassador to Arbil. The new Kurdish cabinet, headed by Nechirvan Barzani, was sworn into office in the presence of the Iranian envoy.

Other ambassadors were present, including Zalmay Khalilzad of the US and those from Britain, France and China, and there was even a representative of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.

The Kurds appointed Vadet Arslan, a Turkmen, as minister of industry in Kurdistan, and Abdul-Latif Benderoglu, another Turkmen, as minister of state. These are the highest two posts given to Turkmens in Iraq.
[...]

atimes.com

(*) tagline: Message 21792314



To: tejek who wrote (288287)5/17/2006 8:43:16 AM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1573924
 
There's a new bubble in town

Oil at $70 a barrel. Gold topping $700. Copper through the roof. Where will it end? Morgan Stanley's Stephen Roach takes a look at the commodities boom today, and flat out calls it a bubble. As evidence, he points out that in comparison to the last four periods of strong global growth, commodity prices have disproportionately skyrocketed.

Roach isn't alone in wondering whether the laws of supply and demand have gotten out of whack in commodities. But his most interesting point is rhetorical. Drawing on Robert Shiller's "Irrational Exuberance," he notes that bubbles are usually accompanied by a "new story": a compelling explanation of why current trends are likely to continue ... so get in now and buy! In this case, the "new story" that has commodity investors and traders all excited is China. China is gobbling up all the cement, oil, steel, copper and chromium the world has to offer -- and shows no signs of slowing down. So all over the world, traders are betting that commodity prices will continue to go up.

Roach demurs. China's new five-year plan, he says, indicates that China's leaders are intent on "rebalancing" the economy, and moving toward lower growth. Betting that China's next 27 years will be like the last 27 is a loser's proposition. And higher prices for commodities will also, all by themselves, result in lowered demand -- something that already appears to be happening in oil markets.

Roach's analyses veer toward the dour (although he did shock his regular readers recently by declaring that the global economy wasn't due for a horrible implosion). He appears to enjoy the contrarian path -- and predicting that China's impact on global commodity prices will not persist is a pretty sharp detour from conventional wisdom. Given how much pent-up demand for the "good life" there still is in China (and let's not forget India), it still seems possible that we are witnessing a fundamental event in global history -- the reemergence of two great civilizations, India and China, as major global economic powers.

But his point about looking askance at "new stories" is well taken, especially here at How the World Works, where we love new narratives that appear to wrap up contemporary reality in nice, neat packages. Oil prices are spiking? It must be peak oil! New Orleans gets stomped by a hurricane? Gotta be global warming. It's very, very tempting to view every zig and zag as part of the big picture, when, honesty compels us to admit, a lot of it is probably just noise.

salon.com



To: tejek who wrote (288287)5/17/2006 12:00:19 PM
From: Road Walker  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1573924
 
Bolivia unveils plan to distribute land to poor By Carlos Quiroga
Tue May 16, 10:14 PM ET


Bolivia's leftist government on Tuesday outlined its plan to redistribute idle land to poor peasants, ruling out mass expropriations and proposing instead the distribution of state-owned property.

The announcement came two weeks after President Evo Morales nationalized the country's energy industry, surprising neighboring states and foreign oil companies that had expected to be consulted before Bolivia took action.

Land reform is another pillar of Morales' policy to increase the state's role in managing natural resources, but the government sought to soothe landowners' fears of arbitrary expropriations by ruling out seizures of productive lands.

"As long as the land fulfills its economic and social function, the state will respect it. But if it doesn't fulfill that role, the state will act with the necessary force," Vice President Alvaro Garcia said.

He urged Bolivians to discuss the proposal and said rumors about expropriations or government-backed squatting stemmed from blackmail by those opposed to the "agrarian revolution."

The first step of the proposal involves distributing up to 5 million hectares (12.36 million acres) of state-owned property to indigenous groups and then identify unproductive private land for possible redistribution.

Wealthy landowners concentrated in eastern parts of Bolivia have expressed concern over the reform plans, which fit into Morales' wider agenda to champion the rights of the poor, indigenous majority from where he draws his support.

Morales, Bolivia's first Indian president, comes from a poor peasant family and rose into politics as the leader of the country's coca farmers.

DEEP DIVISIONS

While the sweeping May 1 energy nationalization has been relatively noncontroversial within Bolivia, land reform has exposed the deep divisions between its indigenous people and the richer European-descended elite.

Unease has been strongest in the eastern economic powerhouse of Santa Cruz, where fertile soils are home to vast soy plantations, cattle ranches and migrants who moved from the impoverished Andean highlands in search of a better life.

"It's important that the government avoids creating uncertainty and confrontations," said Gabriel Dabdoub, head of the powerful Santa Cruz business association CAINCO.

"We need to unify the country and the important thing is for government ministers to sit around a negotiating table in a transparent way," he told Reuters after the announcement.

Despite assurances that productive farmland will not be earmarked for redistribution, some landowners say the definitions are unclear.

"What concerns us is that the rules of the game aren't clear," said Mauricio Roca, acting president of the Eastern Agricultural Chamber, which represents landowners.

Despite previous attempts to redistribute land in South America's poorest country, a recent report by the Roman Catholic Church found a small group of wealthy businessmen owned 90 percent of the country's territory.

The rest is shared among Bolivia's 3 million indigenous peasant farmers, who form Morales' support base.

"That is the reality we have to fix," Garcia said as he detailed the reform proposals. "This will bring justice for communities and for the peasants."

Meanwhile the government is negotiating with foreign companies affected by the energy nationalization.

The president of a private Bolivian pension fund run by Zurich Financial Services of Switzerland said on Tuesday it had agreed to hand over shares in three energy companies to the Bolivian government in accordance with the May 1 decree.

(With additional reporting by Helen Popper)