Archive for June 22nd, 2008
‘Ball of fire’ if Iran attacked: IAEA chief
‘Ball of fire’ if Iran attacked: IAEA chief
DUBAI (AFP) — The UN atomic watchdog chief warned on Saturday that an attack on Iran over its controversial nuclear programme would turn the region into a fireball, as Tehran rejected any Israeli strike as “impossible.”
Mohamed ElBaradei also warned that he would not be able to continue in his role as International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director general if the Islamic republic were attacked.
His stark comments came as Iran stressed yet again that it will not negotiate with world powers over its nuclear programme if it is required to suspend its controversial uranium enrichment.
“A military strike (against Iran) would in my opinion be worse than anything else … It would transform the Middle East region into a ball of fire,” ElBaradei said in an interview with Al-Arabiya television.
A report by the New York Times on Friday cited US officials as saying a major Israeli military exercise earlier this month seemed to be a practice for any potential strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
In Athens, an official with the Greek air force’s central command confirmed the substance of the US media report, stating that it had taken part in “joint training exercises” with Israel off the Mediterranean island of Crete.
The manoeuvres, code-named “Glorious Spartan 08,” took place on May 28 and June 12, and consisted of aerial exercises and knowledge exchange, said the Greek source, who requested anonymity.
The goal was for more than 100 Israeli F-16 and F-15 fighter jets to prepare for long-range strikes and demonstrate Israel’s serious concern over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the Times reported.
ElBaradei said any attack would simply harden Iran’s position in its row with the West over its nuclear programme.
“A military strike would spark the launch of an emergency programme to make atomic weapons, with the support of all Iranians, including those living abroad,” he said.
He did not believe that there was an “imminent risk” of proliferation given the current status of Iran’s nuclear programme and made it clear he would “not have a place” as IAEA head in the event of a military strike.
The West fears that Tehran could use uranium enrichment to make an atomic bomb although Tehran insists it only wants nuclear technology for peaceful energy purposes.
ElBaradei’s comments come as Iran stressed on Saturday it will not negotiate with world powers over its nuclear programme if it is required to suspend its enrichment activities.
“Suspending uranium enrichment has no logic behind it and it is not acceptable and the continuation of negotiation will not be based on suspension,” Iranian government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham told reporters.
He responded to talk of a military strike by saying “such impudence and audacity to have an aggression against our national interest and integrity is an impossible action.”
For his part, Iran’s ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, said Tehran would “continue uranium enrichment non-stop since this activity is under the 24 hour surveillance (of IAEA cameras).
“The request to stop uranium enrichment is an old issue and does not have any legal or technical foundation,” he added.
In Jerusalem, the Israeli parliament foreign affairs and defence commission chairman Tsahi Hanegbi said Saturday that Western diplomatic efforts to halt Iran’s nuclear programme had failed.
“Next year and the year after that will be crucial. The world must must decide if it gives more time to diplomatic efforts, which currently do not seem very promising,” he told Israeli public radio.
“Western measures against Iran’s nuclear programme have failed.”
On June 6 an Israeli Deputy Prime Minister, Shaul Mofaz, warned that Iran would face attack if it pursues what he said was its nuclear weapons programme.
A week ago, European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana presented a new offer to Mottaki on ending the six-year standoff over Iran’s nuclear drive, offering economic and trade incentives. Iran is still considering the plan.
It was made on behalf of Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.
Referring to that offer, Iranian negotiator Said Jalili said Tehran was prepared to discuss it and a set of Iranian proposals to solve the problems of the world.
But he reiterated that Iran “will not accept under duress any illegal demand aiming to deprive it of its right to pursue its peaceful nuclear activities.”
google News
Economic and Geopolitical Dangers for 2008 and 2009
Economic and Geopolitical Dangers for 2008 and 2009
By: Christopher_Laird
Over the years, I have used gold market behavior to track economic and political trends. The overall effect was a good take on gold markets and on currencies, which was the intent from the beginning.
We have some rather ominous conclusions about the Summer and Fall of 2008. They are economic as well as geopolitical. The actual gold focus becomes more of a point of reference, as it reacts to events that seem to be readying to occur. In addition, we foresee some rather scary trends for the entire world, going into 09. We are not going to cover all of this in this article, but to give a basic overview.
First of all, let’s list some of these dangers and danger periods that we foresee coming.
• The US and Israel are getting ready to do something about the newly militant Iran. The nuclear debate is only one dimension of that issue. Another is the threat that Iran is becoming too big a bully to the other more moderate Mid East nations, and not just Israel.
• There is a very large unease again building in the world financial markets. Not only is the credit crisis not really improving (new estimates out now that financial institutions are looking at $1.3 trillion of losses) but world financial markets are actually way down over the last year. Many Asian markets and also many US stocks are down 30% and more. A building unease is accumulating that can only lead to another real big world financial sell off, lasting probably up to a month, before any settling comes in after a month long bout of central bank firefighting efforts.
• Rising inflation is unsettling financial markets, as it is unsettling the US and EU central banks. A serious friction has developed that the ECB is not coordinating efforts with the US Fed, as the ECB fights inflation, and the Fed focuses on preventing a total world financial meltdown. So far, these efforts are rather contrary to each other. The dissention is unsettling financial markets.
• Intolerably high energy and food prices. Disastrous floods in the US Mid West grain belts are going to lead to a world food crisis in 09. We have only seen hints of this in 08. World inflation will be seriously increased in the entire world as a result. The Chinese are particularly vulnerable to this issue.
There are more dimensions to this but well stop there.
Outcomes
The results of these economic and political pressures are likely to be:
• A significant risk (well over 50%, meaning more likely than not) of serious world stock and financial problems over the Summer. This makes a much higher risk of a real world financial and stock meltdown exceeding a 20% drop going into the Fall.
• We have an expectation that Israel is going to act as soon as this Summer, but by Jan 09 roughly, to do something significant to stem the Iranian nuclear problem. Israel has repeatedly stated publicly in the past that they will never tolerate a radical Islamic nation to achieve the nuclear bomb. We believe them.
• Friction between the US Fed and the ECB over inflation policy destabilizes the markets and make a real financial panic much more likely. It is not clear the central banks will be able to pull off another ‘Bear Stearns’ type emergency bailout fast enough if there is a new huge financial meltdown emerging. So far, those efforts have succeeded in part, but all this means is one that more bullet has been dodged. How many times can they do that?
• A likelihood of political turmoil in many nations over the food situation. For example, Argentina is in the middle of an incredible battle between farmers and the government’s policies to tax/tariff agricultural exports. The months long battle between farmers and truckers who are paralyzing their economy and a totally unrelenting government may lead to a revolution there. Other nations such as Egypt, China, and India tried to reduce budget busting food and energy subsidies but had to pull back on subsidy reductions due to widespread riots.
• China is exhibit number one in vulnerability to a food and energy shortage. There is one thing above all that China fears, that is a big viral insurrection involving the 800 million disenfranchised rural peasants. The rising food and energy prices worldwide are hammering the world’s poorest, who already spend over 50% of their $2 a day income on food. The rising food and energy prices are causing worldwide riots as of now, in many disparate places, from the richer EU region, to poor Asia, to India, to South America. 09 does not look good in this respect.
• The prospects of the world having a record grain harvest in 2008 are rapidly diminishing. Although it’s stated that China may have record harvests this year, the US, the world’s biggest grain exporter, is seeing widespread damage to its grain crops. Without the US ability to continue huge grain exports into 09, the world will face new grain export restrictions by many other grain exporters. This will lead to a real world food crisis into 09. There is no bigger factor that will lead to world destabilization than food shortages.
• The commodity markets will continue to drive prices up, and big investment funds will continue to pump billions into these markets, making prices shoot higher. There will be a big controversy over financial gains in energy and food commodities into 09.
• A new US president will likely be tested by some military related threat. That is a typical cycle, and it’s coming in 09 as well.
Some serious doubts about the EU and the Euro
The list of dangers goes on, but we also see some risk that the Euro will lose credibility if there is continued strife over EU political organization. In addition, the weaker South EU nations are in a big controversy with the stronger North (Germany) over the direction of inflation fighting. The weaker EU economies cannot tolerate a strong Euro, while Germany staunchly resists inflationary policies. We foresee some kind of break between the two factions going into 09.
A very curious story came out this week about Germans shunning non German EU Euro notes, trading out the ones from the weaker southern nation EU mints, based on the two letter mint codes on the note serial numbers. That can lead to retaliation by the other country’s people, and is a very viral thing that could spread rapidly and severely harm the credibility of the Euro.
Crash risk in Summer/Fall 08
Overall, we believe that this Summer will lead to moderate market turmoil, followed by severe market turmoil in the Fall and Winter 08 as market sentiments deteriorate. It does not help that the Royal Bank of Scotland just issued a world market crash alert this week. Nor does it help that Morgan just put out a report that there is a big risk of a financial ‘catastrophic event’ due to the ECB fighting the Fed regarding interest rates and monetary policy…
“We see striking similarities between the transatlantic tensions that built up in the early 1990s and those that are accumulating again today. The outcome of the 1992 deadlock was a major currency crisis and a recession in Europe,” said a report by Morgan Stanley’s European experts…” –Morgan
By Christopher Laird
Yanks: the terrorists you will have to fear are those in your own government, against whom you will have no protection whatsoever. SERIOUS STUFF
Yanks:
the terrorists you will have to fear are those in your own government,
against whom you will have no protection whatsoever.
SERIOUS STUFF
By Paul Craig Roberts
John Yoo stands outside the Anglo-American legal tradition. His views lead to self-incrimination wrung out of a victim by torture. He believes a President of the US can initiate war, even on false pretenses, and then use the war he starts as cover for depriving US citizens of habeas corpus protection. A US attorney general informed by Yoo’s memos even went so far as to tell the Senate Judiciary Committee that the Constitution does not provide habeas corpus protection to US citizens.
Yoo’s animosity to US civil liberties made him a logical choice for appointment to the Bush Regime’s Department of Justice (sic), but his appointment as a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, shatters that university’s liberal image.
Habeas corpus is a centuries-old British legal reform that stopped authorities from arbitrarily throwing a person into a dungeon and leaving him there forever without presenting charges in a court of law. Without this protection, there can be no liberty.
Yoo is especially adamant that “enemy combatants” have no rights to challenge the legality of their detentions by US authorities before a federal judge. Yoo would have us believe that the detainees at Guantanamo, for example, are all terrorists who were attacking Americans.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The question is whether any of the detainees are “enemy combatants.” Yoo would have it so because the President says it is so. As the President has already decided, what is the sense in presenting evidence to a judge? For Yoo, accusation by the executive branch is the determination of guilt.
But what we know about the detainees is that many are hapless individuals who were captured by war lords and sold to the Americans for the bounty that the US government offered for “terrorists.”
Some of the other detainees could be Taliban who were engaged in an Afghan civil war that had nothing whatsoever to do with the US. The Taliban were not fighting the US until the US invaded Afghanistan and began attacking the Taliban. This would make Taliban detainees prisoners of war captured by invading US troops. How POWs can be tortured, denied Geneva Convention protections, and tried by military tribunals without the US government being in violation of US and international law is inexplicable.
Suppose you were a traveling businessman grabbed by a tribe and sold to the Americans. Would you consider it just to be detained in Gitmo, undergoing whatever abuse is dished out, for 5 or 6 years of your life, or forever, without family knowing what has become of you?
Perhaps the greatest injustice was done to John Walker Lindh, an American citizen who, like Americans of a previous generation who fought in the Spanish Civil War, was fighting for the Taliban in the Afghan civil war against the Northern Alliance. Suddenly the Americans entered the Afghan civil war on the side of the Northern Alliance. Lindh was captured and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
This kind of punishment is a new form of tyranny. It is not law, and it is not justice.
Lindh had no opportunity to withdraw once the US entered on the opposite side. The only point of treating Lindh as if he were some dangerous traitor was to demonstrate that American citizens can be treated to a Kafka-type experience and have the American public accept it.
Yoo stands for the maximum amount of injustice, illegality and unconstitutionality that can be committed in the name of the national security state.
No American security was at stake in Afghanistan or in Iraq, and none is at stake in Iran today. The Bush Regime may be creating security problems for Americans in the future by fomenting hatred of Americans among Muslims.
This security problem is insignificant compared to the threat to our liberty and freedom posed by John Yoo and his Republican Federalist Society colleagues who are committed to tyranny in the name of “energy in the executive.”
Writing on the Wall Street Journal editorial page on June 17, The Supreme Court Goes to War, Yoo denounced the five Supreme Court justices who defended the US Constitution against arbitrary “energy in the executive.”
Yoo believes that the Constitution and liberty rank below “the nation’s security.” Fortunately, Yoo wrote, a fix is at hand. “The advancing age of several justices” means that President McCain can give us more judges like Roberts (no relation) and Alito who will make certain that mere civil liberties don’t get in the way of arbitrary executive power justified by national security.
In a Yoo-McCain regime, the terrorists you will have to fear are those in your own government, against whom you will have no protection whatsoever.
Paul Craig Roberts email him was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury
