24 October 2011 — Stop NATO
- 21st Century Colonial Barbarism: Gaddafi Murder Message For Entire World
- NATO’s Massacre Of Innocents In Libya
- Expert: U.S., NATO May Create New Iraq In Libya
- U.S.’s McCain Calls For Military Intervention In Syria
- Afghan War: NATO Yearly Death Toll Nears 500
- Global Military Integration: NATO Teaches Iraqi Defense Officials English
- Pentagon To Strengthen Forces In Pacific, Southeast Asia: Panetta
- U.S., Filipino Marines Stage Amphibious Assault Near Disputed Area
- Clinton’s Asian Silk Route And Nuclear War With Pakistan
- Canadian Military Build-Up Benefits U.S. Arms Merchants
21st Century Colonial Barbarism: Gaddafi Murder Message For Entire World
October 23, 2011
‘McCain losing common sense’
John McCain’s statements are making ‘less and less common sense,’ Vladimir Putin’s press-secretary Dmitry Peskov has said, commenting on the US senator’s remarks that the Russian PM may be ‘nervous’ after Gaddafi’s death.
‘We consider it is below our dignity to react to these words in any way,’ Peskov told Interfax agency on Friday. The prime minister’s press-secretary assumed that the American senator has apparently been ‘very tired.’
Earlier, the former Republican presidential candidate said in an interview with BBC that he believes that the events in Libya may make leaders of some other countries, including Putin, worried.
‘It is the Spring, not just the Arab Spring,’ McCain said.
First Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Communist Party’s Central Committee and Deputy Speaker of the State Duma Ivan Melnikov believes Gaddafi’s murder is a striking illustration of American and their NATO allies’ policy in the North-African country.
‘I think that the entire world should watch today the published photographs and video records of Gaddafi’s murder. It is not just a dead former leader of Libya. It’s the symbol of sovereignty of an independent country that was torn to pieces by Americans,’ he told journalist on Friday, as cited by Interfax. He added that the US only interest was to put their hands on vast resources of the rich country and they do not care about Libya’s future fate.
A similar thing was done in Iraq and its President Saddam Hussein, Melnikov noted.
‘Back then some still had illusions about NATO and Americans’ intentions.
Now it is clear to everyone: it’s a colonial barbarism performed on the 21st century scene,’ the legislator stated.
NATO’s Massacre Of Innocents In Libya
October 23, 2011
Massacre of innocents in Libya
Geopolitical notes from India
M D Nalapat*
-As for BBC and CNN, which used to be hysterical about the ‘loss of civilian lives caused by Kadhafi‘, these days they tiptoe in silence across the graveyard that much of Libya has become.
They seem to believe that the thousands of NATO-supplied rockets and artillery shells fired into so-called pro-Kadhafi areas have the miraculous quality of killing only military personnel…
-Why does the International Court not take suo motu action against the killings in Libya of so-called ‘pro-Kadhafi‘ elements? Because it has never been international. In effect, the Court is controlled by NATO powers, who use it to diplomatically intimidate foes while ignoring the misdemeanours of themselves and their friends.
-It should not be forgotten that it was an oil company – Unocal – that bankrolled the Taliban. In Libya as well, it is French banks and NATO oil companies that have led the charge against Muammar Kadhafi, who negotiated much fairer agreements with them than they liked.
Since the collapse of the USSR caused the Cold War to end, the NATO powers have been responsible for the death and maiming of hundreds of thousands, beginning with the many afflicted by the sanctions regime imposed on Iraq after Operation Desert Storm. These had zero effect on Saddam Hussein and his family, but caused havoc within the vulnerable sections of the Iraqi population, who had to do without medicines and other necessities of life.
Although several within the UN protested at the genocidal nature of the sanctions, the US, France, Germany and the UK refused to dilute them sufficiently to allow the vulnerable within Iraq to subsist. ‘They ought to be taught a lesson for accepting a man like Saddam Hussein as their president’, was the rationale offered to this correspondent in Washington by a Clinton administration official.
That the people of Iraq had no say in either the coming to power of Saddam Hussein or his continuance in office mattered little to this individual, who spoke approvingly of the way then Secretary of State Madeleine Albright had ‘faced down the softies in the UN bureaucracy who wanted the sanctions to be lifted’. The multitude who perished as a result of Albright, Blair and other champions of the Iraq sanctions regime will press on their conscience on the Day of Judgment.
But clearly not before. Whether it is Henry Kissinger of ‘Bomb SE Asia’ fame or Albright (who may yet be given the Nobel Peace Prize), they travel the world as champions of human rights, in yet more evidence of the fact that history is always written by the stronger side. And now they have been joined by Nicholas Sarkozy of France and David Cameron of the UK, who – along with Hillary Clinton – are responsible for the situation in Libya.
Reports from the field speak of hundreds of presumed ‘Kadhafi loyalists’ being shot or tortured, most because of tribal and other rivalries than because of the colonel. In both Sirte as well as Bani Walid, hundreds of innocent civilians have been killed by the ceaseless bombardment of both towns by the Sarkozy-appointed ‘Transitional Council’ forces.
Secretary-General of the UN Ban Ki-moon…has been silent about the way in which so-called ‘Kadhafi loyalists’ are being hunted down and killed in cities and towns across Libya. Some estimates claim that at least 9,000 have been killed in this way, while others give higher figures.
Although their UN mandate was to ‘protect civilians’, NATO forces from the start took sides in the civil war, and actively participated in the destruction of lives and property of those whom its spies denounced as ‘pro- Kadhafi‘.
More than $800 million in infrastructure has been destroyed by NATO bombing, yet there is no talk of restitution, there is talk only of French, British and US companies getting oil contracts at concessional rates.
As for BBC and CNN, which used to be hysterical about the ‘loss of civilian lives caused by Kadhafi‘, these days they tiptoe in silence across the graveyard that much of Libya has become.
They seem to believe that the thousands of NATO-supplied rockets and artillery shells fired into so-called pro-Kadhafi areas have the miraculous quality of killing only military personnel, when in fact each such projectile is putting at risk dozens of innocent civilians.
Today, Libya has become a hell, with much of the country going without sanitation, electric power or employment. However, any complaint is met by detention as a suspected ‘Kadhafi loyalist’. Interestingly, most of the anti-Kadhafi fighters are also against the NATO powers, which is why they are ensuring the concealment of large quantities of lethal weaponry supplied to them by NATO to kill the other side.
These will get used in the years ahead, against the very countries that supplied them in the first place. A few days ago, Hillary Clinton was in Libya in a bid to recover these weapons. She failed, because those she is dealing with have no control over the actual fighters, who control territory in Libya the way warlords once did in Afghanistan, and still do in some parts of that ravaged country.
As in Afghanistan, NATO has armed those who will in the future strike them.
Why does the International Court not take suo motu action against the killings in Libya of so-called ‘pro-Kadhafi‘ elements? Because it has never been international. In effect, the Court is controlled by NATO powers, who use it to diplomatically intimidate foes while ignoring the misdemeanours of themselves and their friends.
This has been facilitated by the fact that so many so-called ‘international’ institutions are headquartered within Europe. Why should a single continent (and a small one at that) have a monopoly over the numerous global institutions, including the IAEA, the WHO, the ILO, the International Court of Justice and so many others?
Such a location makes it impossible for 99% of the people of the poorer countries to access them, for Europe is a high-cost destination to which visas are only sparingly given. Had such institutions been located in poorer countries, then they would have been much more accessible to the world’s poor.
US Presidential candidates from the Republican Party are demanding that their country stop giving funds to the UN. The reality is that the UN spends more (directly and through the expenditure of its well-paid staff) in the US than it gets from that country. Hence hopefully funds will indeed be cut, thereby ensuring that the UN Headquarters move to another country, one that is more representative of the majority of the global population. A good candidate would be Mauritius, in the Indian Ocean.
Nearly two years ago, this columnist was invited to the International Interfaith Dialogue meeting in Geneva. This is an initiative of the Muslim World League, which has been tasked by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia to promote dialogue between people of different faiths. Not only was the hotel in Geneva prohibitively expensive (although the rooms were such that even ordinary hotels in India offered more amenities) but the Swiss embassy in New Delhi gave only a 10-day visa, thereby making it clear that they did not want any Third World trash (such as this columnist) lingering around in their country or in their continent.
Fortunately, the next conference is being held in a country that is more friendly to those of average income than Switzerland. As yet, countries in Asia have not retaliated for the barriers on movement of people, goods and services to Europe. Rather, Asia has become the only expanding market for high-cost (and low value) luxury goods from France, Italy and Germany. Over the coming years, Asian countries need to coordinate their trading decisions, the way the EU does, so that retaliation can take place over transparent efforts to block Asian goods from European markets, even if (and especially if) these be cheaper and better than local alternatives.
That Asian countries are beginning to understand the importance of a unified stance is becoming clear from a very healthy development, which is the discussion now taking place between India and Pakistan over trade. Both countries are natural partners of each other, and economists estimate that more than 2 million jobs can be created were trade barriers to get lifted between Delhi and Islamabad, 40% of which will be in Pakistan. In an era of economic turmoil, it is important to gain synergy wherever it can be found, and India-Pakistan is one of the last holdouts to better trade relations. This year, India is expected to sign a Free Trade Agreement with ASEAN, and soon afterwards, with the EU, once that grouping drops its insistence on a one-sided pact that gives all the pain to India and all the gain to its manufacturers. As NATO will soon find in Libya, trade is a much better way of getting geopolitical benefits than bombings and barrages.
It should not be forgotten that it was an oil company – Unocal – that bankrolled the Taliban. In Libya as well, it is French banks and NATO oil companies that have led the charge against Muammar Kadhafi, who negotiated much fairer agreements with them than they liked. The use of military power to seize assets, the way it has happened in Iraq and now Libya, will soon come back to bite the NATO oil companies. Winning a war on the battlefield is easy. Holding back the civilian population is not. And in both Libya and Iraq, the people of these two ancient civilisations will ensure that efforts at grabbing their resources by force will fail. Peace is not simply the best way, it is the only way to Prosperity through Equity.
*The writer is Vice-Chair, Manipal Advanced Research Group, UNESCO Peace Chair & Professor of Geopolitics, Manipal University, Haryana State, India.
Expert: U.S., NATO May Create New Iraq In Libya
Xinhua News Agency
October 24, 2011
Austrian expert warns of new conflicts in Libya
-The Islam expert didn’t rule out that Libya would face a similar situation as that in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein. NATO and the United States always trade at a profit, he said.
VIENNA: Austrian Islam expert Amer al-Bayati warned Sunday that the death of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi didn’t mean the situation in Libya was stable, saying new conflicts even a civil war could break out in the country.
In an interview with the Austrian Press Agency (APA), he said that Libya would not have a powerful government at least in the foreseeable future.
The current Libyan National Transitional Council was ‘founded spontaneously and without solid foundation,’ which would make the next government formation difficult due to political infighting and disagreements, said the expert.
Although a consensus would be found, the government would be weak. This would form a political vacuum and forces of foreign countries would become the strongest power in the country, he said.
He pointed out that, if foreign forces care only about ‘cake-cutting,’ the democracy-building in that country would be seriously hindered and the situation would be the same as in Iraq: sham democracy.
The Islam expert didn’t rule out that Libya would face a similar situation as that in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein. NATO and the United States always trade at a profit, he said.
He also believed that supporters of Gaddafi were still there after his death…
Another uncertainty for the development of Libya was that many weapons were still in the hands of civilians and about half of the weapons would not turned in to the government, he added.
U.S.’s McCain Calls For Military Intervention In Syria
Russian Information Agency Novosti
October 24, 2011
U.S. Senator McCain calls for military intervention in Syria
DAMASCUS: U.S. Senator John McCain proposed a military intervention to protect civilians in Syria now that NATO’s operations in Libya are almost completed.
‘Now that military operations in Libya are ending, there will be renewed focus on what practical military operations might be considered to protect civilian lives in Syria,’ McCain said addressing the World Economic Forum in Jordan on Sunday.
He said that the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ‘should not consider that it can get away with mass murder,’ adding that the late Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi ‘made that mistake and it cost him everything.’
Gaddafi was captured and killed last week by forces loyal to the new government of Libya.
McCain, who is the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, did not specify whether he meant the U.S. or NATO presence in Syria.
Afghan War: NATO Yearly Death Toll Nears 500
October 23, 2011
Insurgents kill NATO soldier in eastern Afghanistan
KABUL: A coalition service member was killed on Saturday as a result of an insurgent attack in eastern Afghanistan, the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said.
ISAF said one of its service members was killed as a result of an insurgent attack in Afghanistan’s east. As usual, the multinational force gave no other details about the incident, including the exact location.
The nationality of the service member was also not immediately disclosed by ISAF. ‘It is ISAF policy to defer casualty identification procedures to the relevant national authorities,’ a brief statement said.
Coalition casualties in Afghanistan have been rising sharply in recent years with a total coalition death toll of 709 in 2010, making it the deadliest year for international troops since the war began…
So far this year, at least 488 coalition service members have been killed in Afghanistan. Most troops are American and are killed in the country’s south, which is plagued by IED attacks on troops and civilians. The deadliest incident happened in August when a U.S. helicopter crashed in eastern Afghanistan, killing 30 U.S. troops, seven Afghan troops and an Afghan interpreter.
Pajhwok Afghan News
October 23, 2011
2 foreign troops killed in insurgent attacks
KABUL: Two International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) soldiers were killed in Afghanistan on Sunday, the alliance announced.
The servicemembers were killed in insurgent attacks in the south and east, the NATO-led forced said in brief statements.
In accordance with its policy, ISAF deferred casualty identification procedures to the relevant national authorities.
So far during the current year, 479 foreign troops, most of them Americans, have been killed in Afghanistan.
Global Military Integration: NATO Teaches Iraqi Defense Officials English
NATO Training Mission – Iraq
October 20, 2011
English Language Training Course Graduation at the Iraqi Defence University for Military Studies
-Deputy Commander of NTM-I, MG Giovanni Armentani, delivered a speech and said: ‘…The knowledge of foreign languages opens the doors to other great opportunities. I am referring for example to the possibility of realizing stable partnerships with friendly countries…’
Baghdad, Iraq: The graduation ceremony for the English Language Training – Train the Trainer course (ELT T3) took place on Thursday 20 October at the Defence University for Military Studies (DUfMS).
Thirty students from across the Iraqi Ministry of Defence, who have been successfully studying to become English Language Instructors over the past five months, received their certificates of completion from the President of DUfMS, sLTG Jasim Hussein.
The organizations represented on the course are the Defence Language Institute (DLI), the Iraq War College (IWC), both the Iraqi Air Force and the Air Force College and the Iraqi Ground Forces.
Both the US Office for Security and Cooperation in Iraq (OSC-I), which funded and ran the course, and the NATO Training Mission – Iraq (NTM-I) continue to provide mentoring support and advice for the development of the Iraqi Armed Forces ELT capability and this graduation represents a tangible result of this endeavour.
Deputy Commander of NTM-I, MG Giovanni Armentani, delivered a speech and said: ‘…The knowledge of foreign languages opens the doors to other great opportunities. I am referring for example to the possibility of realizing stable partnerships with friendly countries…What you achieved today and the dedication you will put into your future daily work to improve your skills, as English teachers, is going to make a real difference to the future shape of the Iraqi Armed Forces in the years to come.’
Another ELT T3 course is planned for the New Year and this time it will be entirely delivered by Iraqi instructors.
The NATO Training Mission in Iraq (NTM-I) was established in 2004…The aim of NTM-I is to assist in the development of Iraqi security forces training structures and institutions…
NTM-I is…a distinct training mission, under the political control of NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Its operational emphasis is on training and mentoring. The activities of the mission are coordinated with Iraqi authorities and the Office for Security and Cooperation-Iraq (OSC-I) Chief, who is also dual-hatted as the Commander of NTM-I. NATO has an enduring commitment to Iraq.
NTM-I advises and supports the Defence University for Military Studies, National Defence College, War College, and the Defence Language Institute with the other institutions in Baghdad. Other cooperation projects for NATO in Iraq are out-of-country training courses for Iraqi nationals at NATO schools as well as the Iraqi Police (Iraqi Federal Police and Oil Police) training led by Italian Carabinieri.
Currently, NTM-I is a…tactical force of NATO/PfP personnel, representing 13 member nations (as of October 2011): Albania, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Turkey, Ukraine (Partner for Peace), UK, USA.
Pentagon To Strengthen Forces In Pacific, Southeast Asia: Panetta
Stars and Stripes
October 23, 2011
U.S. to strengthen presence in the Pacific, Panetta says
By Chris Carroll
BALI, INDONESIA: Identifying himself as a son of the U.S. Pacific coast, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta promised there would be a stronger American military presence in the Pacific, and in Southeast Asia in particular, in the years to come.
Panetta, on his first trip to the Asia-Pacific region since taking office, met Sunday with Indonesian Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro to discuss growing bilateral military relations and broader issues facing Southeast Asia. Chief among those issues: China’s growing assertiveness in an area it considers its own backyard.
‘I’ve made it very clear… that the United States remains a Pacific power, that we will continue to strengthen our presence in this part of the world and that we will remain a force…in this region,’ Panetta said.
Panetta said the United States would push for free commerce and open access in the sea and in the air. The comments were seemingly aimed at China’s recent territorial claims – disputed by various Southeast Asian countries – to the South China Sea.
Panetta met late Sunday with defense ministers from 10 nations at a meeting of the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, to discuss regional issues…
‘I’ve made clear that even with the budget constraints that we are facing in the United States…that there is no question in discussions within the Pentagon and discussions with the White House that the Pacific will be a priority for the United States of America,’ he said.
Panetta was scheduled to meet early Monday with Indonesian President Susilo Bambeng Yudhoyono before flying to Japan. There, meetings with defense officials are expected to be dominated by the realignment of American military bases on Okinawa.
U.S., Filipino Marines Stage Amphibious Assault Near Disputed Area
October 23, 2011
US, Filipino marines hold drill near disputed area
By Jim Gomez
SAN ANTONIO, Philippines: More than 200 U.S. and Filipino marines staged an amphibious assault on a beach in a combat drill Sunday near a South China Sea shoal disputed by China and the Philippines.
U.S. Marine Brig. Gen. Craig Timberlake said the exercise at a sprawling Philippine naval reserve in the coastal town of San Antonio in Zambales province would allow the military allies to operate jointly in a range of scenarios…
He refused to discuss whether or not the annual drill, which has been staged for 28 years, was now being held partly to address concerns by Asian countries like the Philippines over China’s growing naval power. China has expressed unhappiness in the past over such drills near disputed South China Sea regions.
The Oct. 17-28 military maneuvers involve about 2,000 Marines and 1,000 Filipino counterparts….
Philippine officials have said the government is also looking at buying more ships, helicopters, jet trainers and air defense radars to better patrol its territorial waters and safeguard its claims over the potentially oil-rich Spratly Islands in the South China Sea which are also being claimed by China and four other countries.
Scarborough shoal, which is disputed by China and the Philippines, lies off Zambales, the venue of Sunday’s exercises. An Oct. 27 drill will involve a mock raid by about 100 U.S. and Filipino marines from an American warship to capture a hostile beachhead in western Palawan province, which faces the Spratly Islands.
Clinton’s Asian Silk Route And Nuclear War With Pakistan
October 24, 2011
Hillary’s myth of Asia silk route
-Hillary vehemently defended US sponsored the anti-Pakistan, Pak-Afghan Trade Agreement (PATA) as a harbinger of trade and prosperity for the people of Pakistan.
The fact is America is using the PATA to dictate an American version of an ‘Asian Silk Route’ linking Turkey, Afghanistan and India in the region.
-Hillary has said that America has no plans to stay in Afghanistan. It is a bluff. America will maintain its military bases in Afghanistan…
-Use of force is not an alternate to diplomacy and America’s use of its military card is reaching its end. Washington’s use of drones in Libya and other parts of the world including Pakistan is going to meet its logical end in The Hague. Hillary by defending US drone attack policy has made it easy for the International Courts to prosecute her also…
-Pakistan can be made safe within days by reducing the size of US diplomats to a single digit, seal the Pak-Afghan border, cut NATO supplies and use SCO observers on the border so that the world knows that Afghan resistance is indigenous.
-Washington has to withdraw from Afghanistan and accept its defeat in the region. It should respectfully seek Pakistan’s assistance to use the Gwadar-China Asia Silk Route to compete for its fair share in regional trade. It is a different debate if America can compete in Asia because it has lost its manufacturing edge to its corrupt bankers and failed capitalism.
If there was any doubt about Hillary’s warning about a US military attack on Pakistan, it was further clarified by Carl Levin’s (chairman, Senate Committee on Armed Services). He said that US interests would be protected at the cost of Pakistan. It settles the issue. Officially, America has made it clear that Pakistan would be attacked to save America. Thus, the clock is ticking against Islamabad to ‘do more’ or ‘return to the stone age’. It settles the issue and now it is clear that on the streets that America is willing to attack Pakistan on one pretext or the other.
Washington has increased its military presence on the Afghan side of the Pakistan border to show that it means business. There is a problem with Washington’s bullying approach. India had to accept humiliation by withdrawing its entire military might which it had amassed against Pakistan in 1986 (Operation Brasstacks). America is welcome to attack Pakistan.
It will not be the first time that it will cross Pakistan’s border in violation of international law, but what will America do if Pakistan nukes illegal forces on Pakistan soil and its supporters across the border? America is conversant with Pakistan’s policy of using nuclear forces in self-defense. The world knows that Pakistan is a responsible state and unlike imperial America it will resort to the ‘talk-talk’ option instead of resorting to tried, tested and failed ‘fight-talk’ option. But under no circumstances can America’s agenda be imposed at the cost of Pakistan’s national security and interests in the region.
The American narrative of the so-called war against terrorism (SWAT) is now twisted into a Haqqani narrative to secure America’s security and economic interests in the region. Pakistan therefore has to expose their double-speak and stand up for its interests.
If America has made up its mind, our political leadership should call Washington’s bluff to attack Pakistan to free Islamabad from its dictator-era imperialist agenda in the name of bilateral relations.
Hillary vehemently defended US sponsored the anti-Pakistan, Pak-Afghan Trade Agreement (PATA) as a harbinger of trade and prosperity for the people of Pakistan.
The fact is America is using the PATA to dictate an American version of an ‘Asian Silk Route’ linking Turkey, Afghanistan and India in the region.
Hillary’s words that the stakes are too high to leave Pakistan alone show the scale of economic and strategic advantages for the Pakistan-China shortest possible ‘Asian Silk Route’ from Gwadar to Europe via South China and Russia. Both Russia and China have already established rail links with Europe.
India is supporting America to gain access to the markets of the Central Asian Republic States (CARS). India lacks the requisite infrastructure and technology to compete with China. Delhi needs markets to support its military ambitions in the region and access to CARS is of critical importance to save India from disintegration.
Istanbul is also trying to grab a stake in the Great Game in return for its support for Israel in the Middle East and permanent European Union membership. Istanbul will be the only Muslim country that will stand with Israel and the US in the wake of a favorable UNSC decision on Palestine’s statehood based on UN Resolution legitimizing the pre-1967 borders. Since Washington and Tel Aviv don’t intend to uphold international law, Istanbul is supporting the US version of the Asian Silk Route. A careful look at the world map will show that the start of the Asian Silk Route from Pakistan to China will leave the Mediterranean Sea route redundant.
China alone will use Gwadar to import 25 percent of its energy supplies from the Middle East and it will boost Saudi Arabia’s exports. In short, it is a fight for an over $700 bn annual trade corridor which America is not ready to let go under any circumstances. Pakistan therefore needs to identify friends from opportunists. Pakistanis remember how Washington and Istanbul failed to support Pakistan during the 1971 war…In short, Hillary’s promise of a Pak-US partnership is in fact as ill-fated a consummation of the ‘black widow’ relationship. It can be averted provided Washington withdraws its plans to attack Pakistan and returns to the ‘talk-talk’ option.
America has to give clear timeline to win the confidence of regional powers. Hillary has said that America has no plans to stay in Afghanistan. It is a bluff. America will maintain its military bases in Afghanistan and it is using SWAT to re-write a new deal with Pakistan. The PPP government, weakened by corruption, a failed economy and an energy crisis is supporting Washington’s game plan. Delhi has shown that it does not support a US attack on Pakistan. In a statement it was said that Pakistan and America should return to dialogue.
India cannot afford to allow permanent a US presence in Afghanistan against the wishes of Pakistan and in the process Delhi would not like to anger regional powers demanding US withdrawal from the region as a precondition for restoring peace. China, Russia and most CARS states have demanded an end of foreign occupation of Afghanistan. Delhi cannot stand against the regional consensus and expect to gain trade and commerce corridors.
Delhi may have tickled America to play its final card of ‘gunboat’ diplomacy by threatening a sovereign state but it cannot support and stand with Washington because it could cost it its stakes in ASEAN and the SCO. Use of force is not an alternate to diplomacy and America’s use of its military card is reaching its end. Washington’s use of drones in Libya and other parts of the world including Pakistan is going to meet its logical end in The Hague. Hillary by defending US drone attack policy has made it easy for the International Court to prosecute her also. India should therefore distance itself from American polices in the region if it really wants to restore peace in the region and gain from the Pak-China Asia Silk Route.
The US and Afghanistan have lost the Great Game. The Gwadar-South China trade corridor is the only Asia Silk Route and India can only benefit if it is willing to settle the Kashmir issue so that trade corridor is further widened and both countries can benefit from it. Afghanistan can also join Pakistan as its allies not as supporter of anti-Pakistan and ant-region American policies.
American cannot maintain anti-Pakistan security setups in US embassies in Pakistan and expect to have support at the grassroots. Hillary did not deny the presence of US contractors in Pakistan. Islamabad should not succumb to US threats.
America is welcome to attack Pakistan. It will help the public to get rid of the PPP US puppet regime in elections and allow it to pursue an independent foreign policy to protect its national interests.
Pakistan can be made safe within days by reducing the size of US diplomats to a single digit, seal the Pak-Afghan border, cut NATO supplies and use SCO observers on the border so that the world knows that Afghan resistance is indigenous.
America cannot blame Pakistan for freedom fighters’ resistance against Afghan occupiers which is legitimate and recognized by UN laws. The bottom line is that America and Afghanistan have been left out of the Asian Silk Route. Washington has to withdraw from Afghanistan and accept its defeat in the region. It should respectfully seek Pakistan’s assistance to use the Gwadar-China Asia Silk Route to compete for its fair share in regional trade. It is a different debate if America can compete in Asia because it has lost its manufacturing edge to its corrupt bankers and failed capitalism.
Canadian Military Build-Up Benefits U.S. Arms Merchants
October 23, 2011
Canada Makes Big Investments In Its Defense, U.S. Industry To Benefit
Since 9/11 Canada has been one of the most supportive allies of the United States committing troops multiple times to Afghanistan. They have suffered over 150 military casualties and four civilian ones in that fighting. The Canadian government has also made efforts to modernize and equip their forces with better equipment to aid in their operations such as Boeing’s (BA) CH-47 heavy lift helicopters and Lockheed Martin’s (LMT) C-130J transport aircraft.
At the same time both the Liberal and Conservative Party government’s that have been in power since 2001 have planned to improve the nation’s basic armed forces. One of their responses to the world economic downturn since 2008 has been to spend targeted funds on selected military projects to aid the economy and counter unemployment. This has included investments in infrastructure and training capabilities. Canada has benefited from these contracts even when they award them to foreign suppliers, primarily the big U.S. defense contractors, because they have a 100% offset requirement.
This means that the foreign company must invest an amount equal to 100% of the value of the contract in the Canadian economy. This means they may hire Canadian suppliers for parts or maintenance or just do it in a completely unrelated part of the economy. For example Sikorsky Aircraft, part of United Technologies (UTX), sold helicopters to upgrade Canada Navy’s anti-submarine, search and rescue and surveillance capability. The program has seen delays and cost growth and Canada adjusted it by accepting more offsets from UTX.
In this vein the country announced two major contracts this week to continue their improvement of their military. The first is a major new armored vehicle upgrade contract that will go to General Dynamics Land Systems (GD).
GD has been building wheeled military vehicles for Canada and the U.S. for several years. This $1 billion contract will allow the current LAV III fleet of vehicles to remain in service for another 20 years by improving armor, weapons as well as survivability against the IED and mine threat. GD is an American company and the contract will help it weather cuts in the U.S. defense budget but it will also help Canada as most of the work will be done in that country and it will employ significant amounts of domestic workers.