ABC

Iran and Turkey: Towards a Patch-up?

abc — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 07:23:39 +0000

One of major bottlenecks causing dangers to Islam and its unity has been the infighting, mediocrity, insensibility displayed in relations among Muslim nations. This is also the root-cause for the terror attacks and insults being unleashed on Muslims world over. Relationships among the Arab nations are a case in point and Turkey-Iran ties would be focus of this paper.

Past

Until the 20^th century, the interaction between Iran and Turkey evolved around the historical Ottoman-Persian and Shi’i-Sunni rivalries. These two big, neighboring empires had been in latent conflict since they were rivals for the leadership of the whole Islamic world. Although Iranians were successful in agitating and sometimes mobilizing small dissident groups (mainly the Alevi) inside the Ottoman lands, the Ottomans, however, were able to overcome the problems and restrict any Shi’i expansionism. This nature of the traditional relations had changed by the end of the First World War with the establishment of a new republic in Turkey in 1923 and the Pahlavi dynasty in Iran in 1924. Turkey rejected the Ottoman legacy, abandoned any territorial and religious claims, and adopted a nationalist stance in foreign policy that excluded pan-Turkish and pan-Islamic aspirations. The main concern was to Westernize and modernize the country.

On April 22, 1926, the first “Treaty of Friendship” between Iran and Turkey, signed in Tehran. The basic principles included friendship, neutrality and nonaggression towards each other. The agreement also included possible joint actions to groups in the territories of both countries which would try to disturb peace and security or who would try to change the government of one of the countries. This policy was indirectly aimed at the internal problems both countries had with their Kurdish minorities.After the establishment of the Turkish republic, which ended the caliphates and sultanate in Turkey, there have been several Kurdish rebellions since the 1920s.

In July, 1937, a Treaty of Non-aggression is signed between Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. This treaty will be known as the Sa’adabad Pact. The purpose of this agreement was to ensure security and peace in the Near East. August 1955. Establishment of CENTO (Central Treaty Organization), a mutual security-pact between Iran, Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan and Britain. In July 1964, establishment of RCD (Regional Cooperation for Development), aimed at joint economic projects between Turkey, Iran and Pakistan.

The relations between Iran and Turkey have been generally peaceful since the establishment of the Turkish Republic, but sometimes have also been strained. A period of coldness passed after the 1979 Iranian Revolution which caused major changes in Iran and the world’s status quo. Today Iran and Turkey cooperate in a wide variety of fields that range from fighting terrorism, drug trafficking, and promoting stability in Iraq and Central Asia. Iran and Turkey also have very close trade and economic relations. Both countries are part of the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO). Turkey receives many Iranian tourists each year and economically benefits from Iranian tourism. Bilateral trade between the nations is increasing. In 2005, the trade increased to $4 billion from $1 billion in 2000.

Trade

The revolution had left about 4 million Iranian refugees spread around the world and a large number went to or through Turkey. Estimates differ outlandishly. Some put the figure as low as 250,000, others as high as 1 million.(31) A better estimate might be between 600,000 to 800,000. That huge number of Iranian people inside Turkey posed major threats to Turkish domestic stability and its relations with Iran. Iran accused Turkey of not only permitting but even assisting anti-regime activities, particularly by the Mujahedin-i Khalq Organization (MKO).

Today: Gas Flow

Turkish Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Ertugrul Apakan who on a state visit to Tehran said on 30 June that Tehran and Ankara have the potential to boost relations in political, parliamentary, economic and cultural fields and recommended frequent exchange of high-ranking delegations. In a positive tone, recently, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Alireza Sheikh-Attar has said that Iran and Turkey are determined to improve relations in all fields. Turkey welcomed the expansion of trade between the two countries and Apakan said that the Iran-Turkey Joint Economic Commission plays a vital role in this connection. Sheikh-Attar and Apakan exchanged views on the leading regional and international developments.

Turkey, a European power, imports energy resources from Arab world as well as Russia, a major oil and gas producer. The Islamic Republic of Iran normally exports 30 million cubic meters of natural gas to Turkey per day, while it imports roughly 23 million daily from Turkmenistan. Meanwhile, Russia’s Gazprom also has said it has increased its exports to Turkey to close the deficit.

Turkey in turn supplies gas to Greece. Iran turned off its gas exports to Turkey on Jan. 7 citing a domestic shortage and cold weather, triggering a domino effect as Turkey in turn shut off its exports to Greece through a newly opened pipeline. Iran says a cut in supplies from Turkmenistan has prompted Tehran to suspend its exports in order to meet demand at home amid freezing temperatures. Iran had said earlier that it would restore its gas flow to Turkey by Jan. 14, but after the deadline came and went Turkey is still buying liquefied natural gas from the spot market to meet demand at home.

Tehran and Ankara are still in talks on resuming Iranian gas flows to Turkey, Energy Minister Hilmi Guler said recently, adding that Turkey had no immediate plans to restore its gas flow to Greece. The Turkish minister said on the sidelines of a conference in Istanbul that they are still in talks with Iran and do not need to turn the gas back on to Greece, because they don’t need it now.

Issue of Kurds

The issue of Kurds has been amajor irritant in their ties. Turkey’s treatment of its citizens of Kurdish origin has been a frequent subject of international criticism. Due to the size of their community, the Kurds are viewed as a threat to Turkey’s national security. Kurds have largely resisted forcible assimilation policies of the government since 1930s. The main official strategy for assimilating the Kurds has been suppression of their language. Most Kurds have retained their native tongue, despite the governmental efforts over several decades to promote Turkish among them.

Turkey has been way of fight being waged by Jurdish freedom fighters who seek a spearate nation for themselves. Turkish government has undertaken all psoobile measures inclsing war to quell the freedom movment., but with no fruits. Now Iraqi Kurds also join them to fight for a nation for them together. Today, most Kurds in Turkey live in big cities (like Istanbul) or in Southeastern Turkey. Kurds comprised around 8.5 million out of a total population of 35 million in Turkey (24%). ( Another estimate puts Kurds somewhere between 11,400,000^[ and 15,000,000 people.

Kurdish freedom fighting armed movements such as the PKK and KADEK continue to mount actions against the Turkish state and are held responsible for approximately 35,000 casualties of civilians and troops over the past two decades. The PKK, which has bases in northern Iraq, has been fighting for self-rule in southeastern Turkey since 1984. Tens of thousands of people have died in the conflict. The main rebel camp is on Mount Qandil, which sits on the Iraqi-Iranian border. In recent months, the Turkish military has launched several air-strikes on Kurdish rebel targets in northern Iraq. Iran also has shelled northern Iraq. Tehran says rebels from PEJAK, the Party for Free Life in Kurdistan, a group fighting for Kurdish rights in Iran, also have bases on Mount Qandil.

Iran-Israel Rift

Iran’s nuclear project has further antagonized the USA-Israel combine. Tehran is defying a demand from the UN that it stop the enrichment of uranium. USA and Israel seek penal actions against Iran including a quick war. The UN Security Council approved a third round of sanctions against Iran over the issue in March 2008. Israel has carried out an exercise that appears to have been a rehearsal for an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. More than 100 Israeli fighter jets took part in manoeuvres over the eastern Mediterranean and over Greece in the first week of June, US officials said.

The Israeli exercise, it seems, was designed to send a message to Tehran that Israel has the power and will to attack if it thought Iran was close to getting a nuclear weapon. None of what has been said and done so far means an attack on Iran is coming and talk of one faded out after US intelligence reported at the end of 2007 that Iran had given up its nuclear weapons program. Mohammed ElBaradei, head of the UN’s nuclear watchdog, said an attack would put Iran on a “crash course” to building nuclear weapons.

Iran denies its nuclear program is anything other than a peaceful, but Israel sees Iran’s development of the technology as a serious threat. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert warned on 4 June that drastic measures were needed to stop Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. He said Iran must be shown there will be devastating consequences if it did develop such weapons. In 1981, Israeli jets bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak, 30km (18 miles) outside Baghdad. Israel said it believed the French-built plant was designed to make nuclear weapons that could be used against Israel.

Analysts point out that - as far as is known - Iran has not been producing weapons-grade enriched uranium at its Natanz nuclear facility, but rather low-enriched uranium, which can be used for energy generation. The US state department has criticized reported comments by a defense official that it was increasingly likely Israel would attack Iran in the coming months. The other red line the defense official identified was Iran’s purchase of Russia’s SA-20 air defense equipment. A senior defense official said Iran’s nuclear program was nearing “red lines” that would trigger an Israeli offensive and that if attacked Iran would retaliate against Israel and the US.

US Interests

The US agenda in Mideast and Europe is no more a secret issue. The United States waging a terror war in Iraq, killing thousands of Muslims there, considers the Iraqi Kurds a serious menace to its Mideast agenda and has been killing them large numbers. USA has labeled the PKK a terrorist organization and supports Turkey’s fight against the group by providing intelligence on the rebels. But it also has urged restraint on Turkey, fearing the fight could undermine efforts to calm Iraq. “The PKK is an enemy of Iraq; it’s an enemy of the United States; it’s an enemy of Turkey; it’s an enemy of the region,” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said.

USA and Israel make the world believe that Iran will form a threat for most of the regional countries and Israel in particular, and the U.S. also worries about a nuclear arms race in the region if Iran gets weapons. But the fact remains taht Israel is worried taht a powerful Iran could be an additional strength for the Arabs.

Turkey and Iran have been carrying out coordinated strikes on Kurdish rebels based in northern Iraq and the two countries have been sharing intelligence and planned more coordinated attacks in the future against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, and PEJAK, the group’s Iranian wing. America is pressuring the Turkey ’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) government, struggling with the closure case nowadays, over the Iranian nuclear standoff. Though it makes a big issue out of the Nuclear weapons allegedly being manufactured by Iran, the USA really knows and believes Iran has not reached the capacity to generate nuclear arms, yet all efforts are not for alternative energy production but for nuclear arms. Americans suggest a dual strategy against Iran: diplomacy and sanctions. They, in return, expect a change in the calculations made by the Islamic regime leadership in Iran, and to keep Iran in negotiations with the United Nations.

Turkey gets involved in the nuclear issue because natural gas deals being on top, Turkey has economic cooperation with Iran. Turkey in fact follows persuasion diplomacy toward Iran, as the Americans give due. Gregory Schulte, U.S. ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, was in Ankara April end and said: “We don’t want war” with Iran. According to Schulte, the Iranian administration uses this domestically to prove that Iran is not isolated in the international arena and that everything goes well.

Meanwhile, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said there was a plot to kill him during a trip he took to Iraq in March, Iranian state radio reports. Ahmadinejad implied that the United States and its allies were behind the alleged plot to kidnap and kill him. During the two-day visit, President Ahmadinejad cancelled a scheduled trip to the cities of Najaf and Karbala, citing security reasons. An American spokesman in Iraq said the United States was unaware of any threats to the president’s life.

For the Iranians, who viewed the United States as the “Great Satan,” the U.S.-Turkish alliance was a matter of criticism as were Ataturk’s reforms that made Turkey want to be part of the Western system of states. Ahmadinejad said the enemies are planning to dominate all countries through a long-term plan and “do not want the regional countries including Iran, Turkey, and Iraq to be powerful and live in peace.”

An Observation

The revolution changed most of the policies of Iran and all countries of the region, including Turkey, have been affected by this regime change. However, Iranian-Turkish relations during the revolutionary decade were mostly positively affected, particularly in economic terms. They continued to form the basic substructure of the bilateral relationship between these Islamic neighbors.

It seems US threat to Iran on its supposedly nuclear ambitions is more to do with the Kurds issue rather than the nuclear weapons, as ran emerging as a nuclear power wound not affect US fortunes in the region, rather that would ignite a stiff arms race in the region which cannot be avoided just like.

Turkey, a NATO member, is a close ally of the USA and Washington has been using its Turkish connection to pressurize Iran not only to give up Uranium enrichment program, but also keep itself away from Kurds movement. USA supported the Turkish bombing of Kurdish locations in Iraq which is under US occupation now.

Of late, irrespective of the US influence over Turkey, both Iran and Turkey have come to a sort of understanding that the contentious issues could be addressed through cooperation, not by continous confrontations. However, the current low economic ties do not seem to support that view quite correctly.

Independence from India:Task for Kashmir Governor

abc — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 06:21:29 +0000

Author: DR.ABDUL RUFF Colachal

After terrorizing and killing innocent Kashmiris for decades since 1947 when it tactfully annexed the neighboring Jammu Kashmir, India, amid international criticism of Indian atrocities, seems to have decided to change its course of policy in Kashmir with the appointment of a bureaucrat as its new Governor. Governors, not elected by people, but appointed by central government, play very important role, at times even by controlling the elected assembly. On 11 June, Indian government appointed N N Vohra a bureaucrat with a lot of administrative experience in various capacities as new Governor of Jammu Kashmir.

Arriving from New Delhi, N N Vohra on June 25 took over Srinagar as the new Governor of the Jammu Kashmir state. Vohra, who became the 12th Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, succeeding Lt Gen (Retd) S K Sinha who is involved in the arrangement of secret graveyards in Kashsmir, was administered oath by Chief Justice of Jammu and Kashmir High Court, Justice K S Radhakrishnan. Among others Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, former chief minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, former tourism minister Ghulam Hassan Mir, CPI (M) State Secretary M Y Tarigami, cabinet ministers, opposition National Conference President Omar Abdullah, High Court judges, legislators, Chief Secretary S S Kapur, Minister for Health and Medical Education, Mangat Ram Sharma, Minister for Higher Education, Gulchain Singh Charak, Director General of Police, Kuldeep Khoda and senior civil, police and army officers Gulam Nabi Azad is comfortable with were present.

In the morning, Azad bid adieu to the outgoing Governor, S K Sinha, whose term expired on June 4, at the airport. Sinha has criticized the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), a coalition in government that insisted on a non-military person as the new incumbent in Governor’s palace, for his bad fortunes in not getting another term.

Soon after the oath ceremony, new governor appealed to the people not to fall prey to anger and urged them to create an atmosphere of peace and harmony. New governor said he would continue to remain in touch with the people in Kashmir as he used to be as the chief interlocutor of the central government. According to him the state has reached this stage of peace after lot of sufferings. “We have to move ahead and strengthen this process. Whatever be the reason for the problem, we have to sit together and find out the solution. If there is need for amendment we will do it. What is the difficulty in holding talks? Every problem has a solution through dialogue. It is unwise to take to streets and resort to violence,” the governor said, he has been coming to Kashmir for last five years and he is happy over his appointment as the governor and wants to serve the people of the state.

Kashmir Governor

That the Congress-led UPA government in Delhi at long last decided to opt for a civilian governor after nearly two decades is being seen as a significant departure from the prescribed path, which may presage far reaching changes in policy.

Jammu Kashmir state mostly had a military personnel as JK government who is also anti-Muslim, anti-Pakistan and anti-China and obviously anti-Kashmir, because India has been keen to retain JK under its heavy control at any cost. Governor, as an agent of Indian government, controls Kashmiris, to the detriment of the freedom movement of Kashmiris, with iron hand resulting in the genocide of thousands of innocent Kashmiris over decades since its military occupation.

Jammu Kashmir’s governor enjoys special status as he, besides enjoying the special privileges as JK incumbent, derives special pleasures in regular genocide and torture of Kashmiris. He dutifully reports the “terrorism and cross-border-terrorism” in JK to Indian media and Central government, while also secretly gives exact pictures of state terrorism and number of Muslim deaths in J.K. to appease the bureaucrats and politicians in the capital. For this governor is felicitated by Indian government organizations and pro-India outfits in JK. Every military terror act is justified. Indian media dutifully support the Indian state terrorism in JK and slam the defenseless Kashmiris for protesting and reacting to state terrorism at time with arms.

N.N. Vohra has been involved in the politics of India in dealing with foreign countries and with Kashmir. As a person with a fair idea about shifting Indian policies on Kashmir should be knowing every thing about Kashmir’s existence last few years. He should be aware of facts about JK, now a Union state, the sovereign seeking Kashmiris, their torture and genocide up to the recent Discovery of secret graveyards in Kashmir. Hence, Vohra has termed Kashmir problem as “complex” and the task is tremendous. “Kashmir is a complex problem and we have to deal with the legacy of 60 years, which has been left behind, at the administrative level or otherwise,” a wire agency quoted Vohra as saying.

Speculation
There has been speculation whether the Governor should be an ex-military person, a former intelligence officer, a politician or a bureaucrat. The appointment of an ex-bureaucrat, it is felt, would be a reflection of the improving security situation in the State. He was short-listed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress President Sonia Gandhi and in consideration of international outrage on the recent discovery of secret grave-yards in Kashmir, but the final choice fell on lucky Vohra.

The PDP, a coalition ruling party in Jammu Kashmir, had demanded that a civilian person be appointed as a reflection of the improving security situation in the Valley. JK chief minister and a known pro-India leader in the state, Gulam Nabi Azad, on the other hand, was pushing for an extension for incumbent General Sinha. Vohra not only gives Raj Bhavan a civilian face but also comes with experience handling tricky security related matters. The state’s Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, a Congress party strategist, also had lobbied for another term for Gen Sinha or, if not, for the appointment of former army chief Gen S. Padmanabhan.

Who is Mr. Vohra?

N N Vohra will be the first person without army or intelligence background to occupy the gubernatorial post in the state in the past 18 years. Senior BJP leader Jagmohan was the last civilian to hold the office of governor in Jammu and Kashmir in 1990, but he is known for his anti-Kashmir and anti-Pakistan views and had full military support. Every governor so far has only got Kashmir heavily militarized and killed innocent Kashmiris regularly. He was recalled from the state in 1990 to be replaced by former RAW chief Girish Chandra Saxena, who was replaced by Gen (Retd) K V Krishna Rao in 1993. However, Saxena returned to the post in 1998 till Sinha took over in 2003. Vohra was a member of the National Security Advisory Board (1998-2001) and Chairman, National Task Force on Internal Security (2000).He was Co-Chairman of India-EU Round Table (2001).

A seasoned bureaucrat, 72-year-old Vohra is currently New Delhi’s interlocutor for talks with the Kashmiri patriots seeking their sovereignty back. In 2003, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led National Democratic Alliance had appointed the former home secretary as the interlocutor for J&K. Vohra had succeeded in persuading the Mirwaiz-led Hurriyat Conference to hold talks with then Home Minister L K Advani. He held several rounds of talks with the pro-Kashmir leaders apart from the series of talks with the pro-India and other political parties and the representatives of various social and trade organizations.

A bureaucratic magnet in New Delhi, Vohra has held several important posts related to national security including home secretary, defence secretary and principal secretary to the Prime Minister and his advice is sought by the government on Kashmir issue. N N Vohra was a member of the Indian Administrative Service from 1959 to 1994. During his bureaucratic tenure from 1954 to 1994, he served as Union Home and Defence Secretaries. He was recalled from retirement to serve as Principal Secretary to the prime minister from 1997 to 1998 and since then he has been associated with government assignments. Vohra was also the chairman of Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis from 1999 to 2001 and chairman of Military History Review Committee between 2001 and 2002. He also received the Padma Vibhushan earlier this year in recognition of his “services” to his Indian cause abroad including Kashmir and in India.

Interestingly, Manmohan Singh had rejected the proposal to appoint Vohra as the governor of Jammu and Kashmir in 2004 as India has been keen to brutally suppress the freedom movement in JK with military establishment in gubernatorial office. This time, “Dr Singh thought that the time is ripe for Vohra’s appointment,” revealed another senior bureaucrat. ” Commentators wonder if the time is now ripe for granting independence back to Kashmiris and if so, the decision would be indeed historic.

Welcome?

Kashmiris seek their sovereignty back from New Delhi and looks forward to the new governor to pursue their case sincerely and honestly. There haven conflicting views about the new incumbent. The People’s Democratic Party, part of the ruling coalition in Jammu and Kashmir has welcomed the appointment of N N Vohra as the new Governor of the state. PDP president Mehbooba Mufti said that it is a good step by the Centre. Mufti said, “We expect that things will change for the better.” The PDP had demanded that a civilian person be appointed as a reflection of the improving security situation in the Valley.

Many pro-India political outfits have welcomed the appointment. But many are cautious about their statements. The CPI (M) also hailed the decision, the State Secretary M Y Tarigami said Vohra’s appointment was the need of the hour as it would send a signal that the Kashmir issue has to be addressed politically and military solutions are not viable. “The powers in Delhi as well as in Jammu and Kashmir have to realize that the situation in the state cannot be tackled only militarily. There is a need for a political response to the issue. Both PDP and Tarigami had called for Sinha’s replacement accusing him of eroding the credibility of the constitutional office.

Of course, Indian terror has made its tangible results in Kashmir. After terror unleashed by the state by keeping a military personnel, people are expected to feel some relief at the news of a non-military governor for the JK. People seek some solace from military terrorism and any change is welcome to them. Resistance leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq has described Vohra as a reasonable person. “We have had dealings with Vohra,” Farooq said. “He came across as a reasonable person in the meetings we had with two Indian governments.” Farooq had led round table dialogue with the government of former prime minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and more directly with his successor and current prime minister, Manmohan Singh.

Meanwhile the Hurriyat leader Geelani has restated has appealed to Indian government to come forward to reach a negotiated peaceful settlement of Jammu Kashmir, keeping in view the aspirations of Kashmiris.

Indian New Agenda?

The Congress-led UAP government in Delhi, supported by the Communists from outside, decided to opt for a civilian governor after nearly two decades is being seen as a significant departure from the prescribed path, which may presage far reaching changes in policy.

Vohra’s appointment by the Centre as Governor of Jammu and Kashmir comes at a time when the Assembly election is to be held later this year. Vohra has been the Centre’s mediator since 2003 for talks with various freedom fighting groups in Jammu and Kashmir whom New Delhi and its terror mongering media in India and Jammu as “separatists and terrorists”. A seasoned and veteran bureaucrat, he has occupied a number of high posts in the government, including the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister and he could help New Delhi to have complete easy hold over Kashmir fairly easily.

The exact reason for India in choosing a non-military person could be guessed, but the hidden agenda behind getting an adviser on military affairs is not explicitly known, but many in JK believe that the appointment has set the right tone for allowing independence for Kashmir. The government has asked Vohra to hold talks with all the political parties and prepare a comprehensive report on the steps that need to be taken to improve the situation in the state. “The tasks before us are tremendous. Kashmir is a complex problem and we have to deal with the legacy of 60 years, which has been left behind, at the administrative level or otherwise,” Vohra said in an interview. Vohra has acknowledged that Kashmir was a complex problem. He is likely to assume the charge in a few days. Reports say Sinha is likely to vacate the state Raj Bhavan in a few days.
During a recent meeting with the union home minister, Shivraj Patil, Vohra is reported to have discussed the stalled talks between the government of India and the freedom fighting conglomerate, Hurriyat Conference led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq. “We are committed to carry forward the peace process initiated by the former prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee,” he said, adding discussions were going on at various levels about it and that the dates for the talks were to be fixed now.

As the chairman of Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis from 1999 to 2001 (currently this institution is located in the Old JNU campus, New Delhi) and chairman of Military History Review Committee between 2001 and 2002, Vohra has definitely helped Indian government shape its policy in Kashmir leading to heavy militarization and rampant genocide and as such he is a also responsible for the secret grave yards discovered in Kashmir recently. However, Kashmiris should patiently wait to see what the new incumbent in gubernatorial bungalow is going to do for freedom issue.

Though with the appointment of a bureaucrat not known for his pro-Kashmir approach to resolve the crisis and surrender sovereignty back to Kashmiris, India has not clearly showed its willingness to see reason and vacate Kashmir for good, it is still not a negative step, bur even could be considered to be a positive one, considering the long time Indian policies.

The new governor has refused to directly comment on the ongoing controversy regarding the transfer of forest land to Shri Amarnath Shrine Board (SASB), or the role of Raj Bhawan.

Will India Change?

This is indeed a billion dollar question. Since 1947 India has always espoused self-righteous attitude and pretended to be knowing every thing from democracy and secularism to modernity and rejected all good advice even from its best friends to let Kashmiris live peacefully by vacating Kashmir and treat Indian Muslims as a legitimate entity and not as enemy of India. India continued to militarize Jammu Kashmir and it wanted to finish off the Kashmiris stock and barrel through military means.

Gulam Nabi Azad, the present CM of JK deputed by New Delhi high command to lead the government in JK, has supervised all acts of state terrorism on innocent Kashmiris seeking sovereign back, clearly wanted to use the military power further to kill the innocent Kashmiris by seeking the central government to either to reappoint Sinha or appoint another military personnel, has lost his moral right to rule Kashmir any more, though he continued to be an elected member of JK Assembly.

Indian strategist N.N. Vohra, the new incumbent in Governor’s lodge, should ask himself a vital question: “Will I keep silent if my neighbors invade and occupy by force my own property with the help of criminals and anti-social elements with the support of law and order authorities while the judiciary being silent and media calling him and his affected people as terrorists or cross-border-terrorists. Obviously his answer will certainly be: “Never, I will kill those dirty guys!”. And he poses the same question to Indian president, premier or any other dignitary in New Delhi or Srinagar, the reply will not be entirely different.

The new Indian strategist in Srinagar should now realize how noble the cause of the patriotic Kashmiris whose sovereignty their neighbor India had stolen by force and continues to occupy Kashmir and kill innocent Kashmiris.

A Word: A free, independent Kashmir

Enough is really enough! Freedom-cum-independence is birth right of every nation, including Jammu Kashmir. India should grant, rather surrender, the Kashmiris their sovereignty. He has admitted Kashmiris have suffered a lot and India has managed to raise a huge pile of Kashmiri dead bodies. New Governor Vohra should be sincere and should avoid playing red-tapism and double-speak in dealing with Kashmiris. He must, once for all, realize that Kashmiris are entitled to sovereignty and, therefore, seek full and complete independence and freedom from occupying India to mange their own affairs peacefully, meaningfully, and fearlessly.

India must seize the opportunity of prevailing peaceful atmosphere to negotiate with freedom fighting groups and, in stead of trying to split them further as it always dies, governor must chart out modalities for transfer of power to the Kashmiris. And any fresh attempts, however, under any new disguise, from Indian government, to maintain control over Kashmir will be resisted by Kashmiris, the patriotic Kashmiris, as before. Yatra tactics will only harm any purposeful dialog with Kashmiris, even if the intention is to delay independence to them. “Terrorism” and “cross-border-terrorism” strategies won’t work for ever.

World , obviously, expects a basic shift in Indian approach to Kashmir issue with the latest move, looking like a positive one, and let Kashmiris have their sovereignty back at least now after all this genocide and destruction in that nation. Freedom-cum-independence is the birth right of Kashmiris as much as of any other nation. India must fulfill their legitimate aspirations at the earliest. Vohra should, without losing any further time, should initiate steps in that direction.

Demilitarization and force withdrawal should begin now. The Kashmiris shall still be grateful to India for so kindly granting their independence now at least. Independent Kashmir would maintain good neighborly relations with both India and Pakistan. Of course, Kashmiris can run their own affairs independently. India should let Kashsmris save the remaining lives peacefully.

Not a Drop to Drink!

abc — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:32:25 +0000



			Socially responsible investment for the people of Darfur.





			The wealth of Sudan’s capital, Khartoum, driven by oil profits, stands in stark contrast to the war-torn region of Darfur. ©Marco Di Lauro/Getty

The U.S. isn’t the only country with a troubling dependence on oil. In Sudan, the dependence on oil is literally a matter of life and death. Urge powerful businesses to answer our call for socially responsible action in Darfur.

Ninety percent of Sudan’s export income is derived from oil. Most of that money has fueled five long years of suffering in Darfur. However, the world’s most powerful investment firms, such as JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo, have the power to take action that benefits the people. Urge investment firms to seek a socially responsible solution in Darfur.

Thanks in large part to your actions, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, and a few other firms are waking up to the calls for corporate social responsibility in Sudan. But other big businesses still need convincing. Tell top U.S. investment firms that socially responsible investment in Sudan is important to you.

The most powerful investors in the world can choose to tolerate widespread murder, torture, rape, and forced displacement. Or they can help end the catastrophe in Darfur.

Support a socially responsible solution to help end the crisis in Darfur.

*From Amnesty International USA

Another Israeli-Palestinian Truce

abc — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 08:27:59 +0000

Author: DR.ABDUL RUFF Colachal

Nuclear Israel and the Islamist Palestinians (Hamas), once again, have agreed in principle on 18 June to a truce in and around the Gaza Strip, capping months of indirect talks brokered by Egypt. On 17 June Israeli officials have confirmed that Tel Aviv has approved a ceasefire to end months of bitter clashes with the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas in Gaza . Under the terms of the truce, which is set to begin on Thursday, Israel will ease its blockade on the Gaza Strip. Ceasefire begins at 0600 (0300 GMT) on 19 June and after 24 hours ceasefire begins and Israel eases crossing restrictions. An Israeli official said that talks to release an Israeli soldier held by Hamas would intensify, at the same time, Hamas, which controls Gaza , says it is confident that all militants will abide by the agreement.

Israel invaded Palestine 1947 and annexed the areas of their choice with US-UK support and occupies a lot more territories with illegal construction of settlements. Hamas, popularly elected by the Palestinians lost power because the Fatah leader and Palestinian Authority chief President Abbas, coerced by US-Israel leaders, dismissed the Ismail Haniyeh government and effected an emergency situation in Gaza by sending forces to Gaza Strip. Hamas then seized control of Gaza in June 2007, driving out forces loyal to Fatah, the political faction led by President Mahmoud Abbas. It seems Israel had expected to create two Palestinian tine states , Fatah and Hamas controlled ones respectively. But that conspiracy misfired. Since then, Israel , the Palestinian Authority and the international community have sought to isolate Hamas.

Israel wants the Palestinians to tolerate the Israeli genocide and destruction. Tel Aviv said on 18 June it accepted an Egyptian-brokered truce with Hamas Islamists ruling the Gaza Strip but voiced skepticism the ceasefire involving all Palestinian “militant” groups in the territory would hold. Amos Gilad, a senior Israeli defense official, said after returning from talks in Cairo that “an understanding” had been reached. Egypt and Hamas said a ceasefire would go into effect at 6 a.m. on 19 June. Gilad told Israeli stations that Israel was prepared to give a ceasefire a chance — while continuing preparations for possible military action should it fall apart.

Israel and Hamas did not negotiate face to face, but instead traded proposals through Egypt , a process the United States encouraged. Israel considers Hamas a terrorist organization, and Hamas does not recognize Israel ’s existence. Israeli and Palestinian officials said that under the truce, the blockade Israel imposed on the Gaza Strip after Hamas seized the territory a year ago would be eased gradually and partially. A ceasefire would aim to end frequent rocket and mortar bomb attacks on Israel from the coastal enclave and Israeli raids and air strikes in the territory.

Hamas, which has said all Gaza factions had agreed to the deal, hopes a halt to hostilities will lead to the lifting of the economically crippling blockade. A truce could also give Hamas an opportunity to upgrade weaponry and train fighters.

Truce

The United States pressed for a truce to remove an obstacle in slow-moving peace talks between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Majority of Jews want to invade Palestine and kill every Palestinian there. A major military foray into the territory, however, is not a terribly palatable option. Many in Israel believe that all avenues must be explored before such a fateful step is taken.

Details of a truce that Hamas says it worked out with Israel , halting rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza and Israeli reprisal raids: The truce envisages that all Gaza-Israel violence stops. After three days, Israel eases its blockade on Gaza , allowing more vital supplies in. A week later, Israel further eases restrictions at cargo crossings. In the final stage, talks are conducted about opening the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt and a prisoner exchange to free Cpl. Gilad Schalit, held by Hamas-affiliated groups for two years.

According to a breakdown of the deal released by Hamas , Israel will ease its restrictions on Gaza crossings with Israel on Friday morning, followed by the bigger commercial crossings next week. After two weeks, talks will start involving Israel , Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and the EU on reopening the Rafah crossing into Egypt . The decision to approve the ceasefire was made by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defence Minister Ehud Barak, following the return of a defense official from Cairo , where he held talks with Egyptian mediators.

Crossing Clearance

The truce would bring an end to Israeli provocative actions and rocket attacks from within Gaza and Israeli master to ease the humanitarian situation inside the Palestinian territory. However, there are still many obstacles to long- term peace, with both sides warning that the truce will collapse if it is violated.

The agreement would be implemented in phases, with Israel easing the year-old siege on Gaza if Hamas stops attacks, according to Egyptian and Israeli officials. Israel also may allow the opening of the Rafah crossing — between Gaza and Egypt — if there is progress on the release of captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. The deal was first reported Tuesday afternoon by Egyptian state-run media and was confirmed by Hamas officials. Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh issued a statement heralding progress toward stopping Israeli “aggression and ending the siege.”Israeli officials, some of whom would not speak for the record, said Israel ’s special envoy, Amos Gilad, had been dispatched to Cairo on Tuesday afternoon to hammer out the final details.

Officials cautioned that the Gaza cease-fire, which is expected to begin as soon as possible is likely to be tenuous. Previous attempts to cease hostilities in and around Gaza have been short-lived. But it meets the immediate political needs of both sides. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, facing calls for his resignation amid a corruption probe, has been under pressure to do something to help residents of southern Israel , who live under the constant threat of rocket fire. Hamas, meanwhile, has suffered high casualties during Israeli attacks and has been losing popularity in Gaza amid a crushing economic embargo.

Both the Israelis and the Palestinians of the Hamas have agreed to some form of truce or understanding to go into effect on Thursday. But what is it that has brought the various parties to this decision? And what are the chances of any truce holding? Israel alleges that the Hamas leadership wants a period of calm to consolidate itself and relieve the economic pressure on the Palestinian population. There is benefit too for the Egyptians, who have taken such a prominent role in working with the two sides. The government in Cairo also wants the pressure-cooker atmosphere in the Gaza Strip relaxed.

While the exact terminology to be used to describe the tacit arrangement between Israel and Hamas is unclear, the purpose of the discussions that have been underway with Egypt as intermediary, is self evident. Israel wants a halt to the rocket and mortar fire across its border from the Gaza Strip.

Hamas Position

In the United Arab Emirates , Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal said a lasting truce would be good for 1.5 million Palestinians who have suffered from the Israeli blockade. The Damascus-based leader also said any Israeli violation of the deal would not go unanswered. Meshaal said negotiations over Rafah would continue between Egypt, Hamas, Abbas’s Fatah faction and the Europeans, who had stationed monitors at the crossing. But he insisted that Shalit would not be released unless Israel freed Palestinian prisoners on a list compiled by Hamas.

Israel has allowed in humanitarian aid but has cut back on the supply of non-essential goods, such as construction materials, as well as fuel, saying Gazans could not expect to lead normal lives while Israelis were under rocket attack. Israeli officials said the reopening of the Rafah border crossing between the Gaza Strip and Egypt — Gazans’ only gateway to the outside world that does not pass through Israel — was conditioned on a deal to free a captured Israeli soldier. Israel and Gaza Strip “militants” are to enter into a truce meant to halt militant rocket fire on southern Israel and ease a crushing Israeli economic blockade on the impoverished coastal territory.

Blockade

Israel plays havoc with the lives of Palestinians through regular blockages and they know Palestinians are weak and anything could be done to them. Many Israelis are not only afraid of Hamas, but of Iran. They believe the threats uttered by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - who recently described Israel as “a rotting corpse” - are genuine, not rhetorical. The retaliatory attacks which Hamas perpetrated against Israel citizens against Israeli state terrorism were atrocious and one is totally opposed to hurting unarmed people.”

Mark Regev, a spokesman for Olmert, said that after a few days of calm, there would be a “substantial increase” in the amount of supplies that Israel allows into the Gaza Strip. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Arye Mekel said that in the first phase, imports into the territory would be set at approximately one-third of the level before the Hamas takeover. If the truce holds, that percentage will grow gradually. Mekel said, “We expect the negotiations on Gilad Shalit to resume in the near future”

An Israeli government spokesman said it wanted the ceasefire to succeed. An Israeli security source told Israel Radio that negotiations on the return of captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit were expected to resume with a few days. He said that if progress was achieved, Israel would have to reach a decision regarding the release of Palestinian prisoners. As part of the deal, Egypt has also committed to stop the smuggling of arms and weapons from its territory into Gaza , Israeli officials said.

“Obviously, if this is going to be successful, we’ll need more than words. We’ll need deeds,” said Mark Regev, spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Israel ’s interior minister and member of its security cabinet Sheetrit said he was “very skeptical” that Hamas could enforce a complete ceasefire among the militant groups. “The idea is a complete ceasefire — no fire from anyone … if there is any violation of the agreement, the government is free to return to act with full force”.

Since Hamas took exclusive control of Gaza last June, there has been a significant escalation in rocket fire from the Gaza Strip into southern Israel to defend Hamas themselves from Israeli aggression. Israel has waged a near-daily campaign of attacks against gunmen from Hamas and other “militant” groups. Many Palestinian civilians have been killed in those strikes, including dozens during a single week this spring.

Implementation

For Hamas, the ceasefire agreement is an acknowledgement that Israel ’s economic blockade of Gaza is hurting its own administration and is having a huge detrimental impact on Gaza ’s population.

The exiled Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal in Damascus said a long-term peace depends on Israel ending its occupation of the West Bank, withdrawing from settlements, ending incursions into Gaza and opening the crossing points into the strip to enable trade and aid. Though its charter defines its objective as liberating the whole of the pre-1948 territory of Palestine, Hamas also says it would accept a two-state solution based on the boundaries that were in place before the 1967 war.

Inevitable confrontation has been the order of the region since Israeli forces continue to refuse to vacate Palestinian lands being occupied by Israel. Of course there is more here than just a halt to the fighting. Hamas wants entry and exit points into the Gaza Strip opened. Israel wants the return of its captured soldier Gilad Shalit. And it also expects the Egyptians to make a real effort to halt the smuggling of weaponry into the Gaza Strip.

Some analysts fear that - truce or no truce - Israel and Hamas are on a collision course and that this is simply a necessary lull before an inevitable military confrontation. Everything now depends upon Israel and USA and on implementation. Can Hamas prevail on other more radical Palestinian groups to halt their fire into Israel? Can USA stop supplyng weapons to Israel? And will Israels top aggressions and illegal construction actiltives? if Israel sees Hamas bolstering its illegal fortifications and arsenal will it refrain from taking action by invading Palesitne with killing innocnet Palestinians?

Despite the impending truce, violence continued, with Israel killing six Palestinians in Gaza. The Israeli attacks followed days of heavy rocket fire from Gaza, and four more rockets were launched after the Israeli strikes. In Sderot, an Israeli town that borders Gaza and that has borne a large share of the rocket fire, there was relief. “We have been waiting for quiet for a long time, many believe that the agreement will bring many smiles to the faces of the people in this town.” someone said.

Anti-Arab and anti-Islamic fundamentalist Israelis, as expected, condemned the truce. Not everyone in Israel was so sanguine. “This is a great victory for Hamas and Iran, and it’s a great failure on behalf of Israel ,” said Yuval Steinitz, a leading member of the opposition Likud Party, which favors an invasion of Gaza aimed at dismantling Hamas. “This is going to be extremely costly, because when we have to act in Gaza , Hamas’s capability will be much stronger than it is today.” Arrogance is revealed in each _expression of these Israelis who think Israel is strong enough to attack any Arab nation and destroy.

Cancer of occupation’

Unlike India where not even a single Hindu talks about Indian terrorist occupation of Jammu Kashmir since 1947, there are a quite a few Jews who state that Israel has been illegally occupying Palestinian lands. At the opposite end of the Israeli political spectrum, Victoria Buch - a professor of chemistry and an anti-occupation activist - believes Israel “should negotiate with Hamas”.

A Jewish philosopher, Yeshayahu Leibovitch, who opposed holding onto Palestinian land after the 1967 war. He said the occupation was a cancer which would eventually destroy the state of Israel. About 400 Israeli families lost loved ones in a decade of Hamas suicide bomb attacks, on buses, in markets, at the Dolphinarium in Tel Aviv. Victoria Buch is adamantly opposed to such violence.

Both genuine peace seekers in Palestine and Israel look beyond Gaza truce. Many rich Israelis, however, say that there should be a pre-emptive strike against Iran. Israel and USA work on threat perceptions to invade Islamic nations inspired by a Jewish thinker, who advised: “Whoever rises up against you to kill you, you go head first and kill him.” Many perished in the Holocaust, but they had ample time to leave Europe when Hitler rose to power. Had they done that - and not chosen to listen to people who didn’t believe the menace was there - they might have survived.” He said he was not prepared to “repeat their gullibility”.

Of course many believe that “starting wars” is not the way to eradicate the threat from Iran. Quite the opposite; bellicose Israeli statements about stopping the Iranian nuclear program by whatever means are “making sure that the future of Jews in this country is in danger”.

Israel had publicly contemplated launching a wide-scale invasion of Gaza aimed at ousting Hamas. Olmert and his top aides ultimately decided against it, out of concern that the Israeli military would get bogged down in an unwinnable counterinsurgency campaign. But a senior Israeli official said on 16 June the option remains on the table. “If this breaks down, there will not be another attempt at a cease-fire. There will be a large-scale Israeli operation,” the official said. “This has to hold.”

An Observation

It seems it is too early to confess that Egypt has successfully mediated a truce between Israel and the militant and political Islamic movement Hamas. USA and Israel and their allies must give up their favorite _expressions like militants and terrorists to describe the Palestinian (and Lebanese) patriots who have been struggling to get back their lands and sovereignty and decide their own future and destiny. After all it is Israel that is directly responsible for the fate of Palestinians now.

Gong by the reports available in media, Israel is trying its hand on peace making efforts with Syria and Lebanon along slide the talks with the Hamas and Fatah. The deal demonstrated Hamas’s staying power as the ruler of Gaza and Israel’s willingness to reach accommodation with groups it has labeled terrorist organizations. In recent weeks it has intensified negotiations with Lebanon’s Hezbollah movement over a possible prisoner transfer and begun indirect peace talks with Syria.

The new truce was scheduled to begin on 19 June. Previous cease-fires in Gaza have failed. In late 2006, Israel reached a deal with the Palestinian Authority, but the truce was short-lived. This one could be, too. A high-ranking Israeli military official told a parliamentary committee Tuesday that any truce with Hamas was likely to be “temporary and fragile,” according to people familiar with his statements.

Israel could begin allowing more supplies into Gaza as early as Sunday, the 23 June. Hamas had initially lobbied for the truce to apply to both Gaza and the West Bank, but Israel balked at that idea and limited negotiations to Gaza.

Israel must henceforth stop collecting taxes form Palestine so as to use them as tool to coerce the innocent Palestinians.