Archive for the 'Iran/Iraq' Category

There has been much discussion in the media about the Nobel Peace Prize Committee’s decision to award the prize to President Obama. Here is one view, by MJ Rosenberg, Senior Fellow Media Matters Action Network, October 11, 2009.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mj-rosenberg/nobel-prize-means-no-us-o_b_316939.html

Extracts:
“Nobel Prize Means No US or Israeli Attack on Iran”

“And that pretty much means that the Iran nuclear issue is going to be resolved diplomatically. Either diplomacy will convince Iran to drop plans for a bomb — if it has such plans. Or else we will accept Iran’s right to a bomb under the same terms and restrictions as the other nuclear armed signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
President Obama was not inclined to attack Iran’s facilities or to allow Israel to do so before winning the Nobel Peace Prize. The early awarding of this prize will only strengthen him in that resolve. The “bomb Iran” option is off the table.”

See my earlier posts on Iran under the relevant categories (Iran/Iraq, Politics, Middle East)

In einem Knol habe ich darauf hingewiesen, wie gefährlich es sei, Spieltheorie auf die Lösung internationaler Konflikte anzuwenden, weil es praktisch unmöglich ist, vorrauszusagen, wie der Gegener reagieren wird und welche Konsequenzen zum Beispiel ein Angriff haben wird. Ich habe den Iran als Beispiel benutzt. Siehe hier:

http://knol.google.com/k/klaus-rohde/spieltheorie-nash-gleichgewichte-in/xk923bc3gp4/36#

Es scheint Ernst zu werden, wie ein heute im Spiegel veröffentlichter Artikel zeigt:

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,634415,00.html

Auszüge hier:

Israel forciert Pläne für Militärschlag gegen Iran

Am Ende, so die Analyse der Regierung in Jerusalem, kann nur ein Militärschlag Teheran vom Bau der Atombombe abhalten. Die Vorbereitungen dazu laufen auf Hochtouren.

Groß war daher die Hoffnung, die Jerusalem Baradeis designiertem Nachfolger entgegengebrachte. Der Japaner Yukiya Amano machte Karriere im diplomatischen Dienst und wurde schon deshalb in Israel mit Wohlwollen betrachtet, weil er kein Muslim ist und als Japaner “dem Westen” zugerechnet wird.

Umso enttäuschter zeigten sich die Israelis, als nach Amanos Wahl am Donnerstag die erste Wortmeldung des neuen IAEA-Direktors über die Agenturen lief. Auf die Frage, ob er glaube, dass Teheran an einer Atombombe baue, sagte Amano nur: “Ich sehe dafür in offiziellen IAEA-Dokumenten keinerlei Beweise.”

Netanjahu machte bereits bei seinem Amtsantritt in Washington vor eineinhalb Monaten deutlich, dass er die Politik des Dialogs von US-Präsident Barack Obama für einen Fehler hält. Es gelang ihm, Obama das Zugeständnis abzuringen, Verhandlungen würden nicht unbegrenzt ausprobiert, sondern nur “bis Ende des Jahres”. Stolz verwies Netanjahu nach dem Gespräch mit Obama auf diese “Deadline”.

Wie die in Militärfragen stets gut unterrichtete “Sunday Times” berichtet, soll es der israelischen Regierung gelungen sein, die stillschweigende Zustimmung Saudi-Arabiens zu einer Militäroperation bekommen zu haben. Demnach habe der Chef des Mossad, Meir Dagan, aus Riad das Zugeständnis erhalten, für eine solche Operation saudischen Luftraum durchfliegen zu dürfen.

Einen Militärschlag wahrscheinlicher erscheinen lässt auch die Nachricht, dass Washington kürzlich dem Verkauf von F-35-Kampfjets zugestimmt hat. Der moderne Tarnkappenbomber ist in der Lage, in feindlichen Luftraum zu fliegen, ohne vom Radar erfasst zu werden. Ein strategischer Vorteil, der umso schwerer wiegt, wenn es darum geht, Ziele an verschiedenen Orten zu bombardieren.

Warnungen westlicher Diplomaten, ein israelischer Angriff könne einen regionalen Flächenbrand auslösen, schreckt die Verantwortlichen in Jerusalem nur wenig, ebenso die Aussicht auf eine iranische Vergeltung mit Raketen. Zum einen wurde kürzlich mit Hilfe der Amerikaner in der Wüste Negev ein neues Raketenabwehrsystem stationiert. Zum anderen setzt der jüdische Staat auf Abschreckung. Jüngst schickte er - für die ganze Welt sichtbar - ein U-Boot der “Dolphin”-Klasse vom Mittelmeer durch den Suez-Kanal in das Rote Meer.

Vier der zehn Torpedorohre wurden auf Wunsch der Israelis vom deutschen Hersteller so ausgestattet, dass sie auch Raketen mit Nuklearsprengköpfen abschießen können. Für eine solche Drohung seien die Iraner empfänglich, glaubt man in Jerusalem. Schließlich würde Teheran selbst in erster Linie wegen der Abschreckung an der Bombe bauen, sagen die israelischen Militärstrategen, und nicht um sie wirklich einzusetzen.

Soll man die deutsche Firma, die die Torpedorohre zum Feuern von Atomraketen umgebaut hat, als zukünftigen Kriegsverbrecher vormerken?

Wichtig ist auch, dass der neu ernannte Direktor der IAEA, der Japaner Amano, keine Beweise für ein iranisches Atomwaffenprogramm gefunden hat, und das selbst Israel meint: “Schließlich würde Teheran selbst in erster Linie wegen der Abschreckung an der Bombe bauen, sagen die israelischen Militärstrategen, und nicht um sie wirklich einzusetzen.”

US-Präsident verweigert Israel Erlaubnis für Angriff auf Iran

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,634852,00.html
Verwirrende Signale aus der US-Regierung: Barack Obama hat seinen Stellvertreter Joe Biden öffentlich zurückgepfiffen. Washington werde einen israelischen Angriff auf Irans Atomanlagen nicht dulden, stellte der US-Präsident klar. Sein Vize hatte zuvor eine andere Linie vertreten.

I have been busy with scientific work over the last week or so, but yesterday I looked at some news items and came across these:

Rod Blagojevich, the governor of Illinois, indicted for trying to sell Obama’s Senate seat for personal gain, Bernard Madoff, the US financial guru and former Nasdaq chairman, released on bail after having been arrested earlier for decades-long fraud leading to the disappearance of nobody knows how much but estimated at around US$50 billion, US$120 billion spent for reconstruction  in Iraq without much success, and - such a small item that it is hardly worth mentioning - fraudulent loss of at least US$35 million by Dreier L.L.P.

In this context, the following excerpts from the autobiography of Alan Greenspan, the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve: “The Age of Turbulence” 2007, page 431, may be of interest. He writes: “Indeed, very few regulators of my acquaintance can give me examples of fraud and embezzlement unearthed by anyone other than a whistleblower.” …… “But in truth, there is no way for an audit committee, new or old, to uncover wrongdoing short of deploying a vast army of investigators who would smother the firm with costly oversight that would likely stifle corporate risk taking and ultimately threaten the viability of the company.”

So, risk taking should not be stifled! We are just experiencing the consequences of excessive risk taking. I wonder whether Greenspan would have written this now, after the big crash has occurred and is occurring.

I recommend to read  E.F. Schumacher’s (1973) classic : “Small is Beautiful. A Study of Economics as if People Mattered”. He traces many of our present problems (in 1973 bad enough, but much worse now, because nobody listened) to our “materialistic” philosophy of life, leading to an over-emphasis on large size and simply greed. Among other things, he suggests that personal ownership of means of production is really justified only if the owner actively participates in the production process, and should be restricted to relatively small enterprises (a few 100 people).

If you want evidence for greed and the disastrous effects, consider the present financial crisis with millions losing their jobs, and look at the  smallest fish of the few examples mentioned above, Dreier:

according to the N. Y. Times 14.12.08: “Their health insurance is in default and the firm will not be able to make its $2.6 million payroll on Monday, lawyers there say.” However, “Mr. Dreier’s lifestyle includes a waterfront home in the Hamptons, a Manhattan triplex and a place on Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica, Calif. He kept a Mercedes 500 in New York, an Aston Martin in California, and a 121-foot blue and white Heesen motor yacht with a Jacuzzi and a crew of 10 docked in Manhattan or St. Maarten. Associates said the boat, the Seascape, was the site of late-night parties at which Mr. Dreier, who is divorced, was often joined by an attractive young crowd.The law offices themselves at 499 Park Avenue were like modern art galleries. In court papers filed this week, the comptroller for the law firm reported that $30 million to $40 million of the firm’s assets had been spent on art. Among Mr. Dreier’s holdings were works by Picasso and a Warhol depiction of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis.”"

During two weeks away from Armidale, I have had time to read three very interesting books

Alan Greenspan, The Age of Turbulence, 2007 (The autobiography of the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve)

Thomas L. Friedman, The World is Flat, The Globalized World in the Twent-First Century, 2006 (an account of the causes and effects of globalization by the three times Pulitzer Prize winner)

and

Loretta Napoleoni, Rogue Economics, Capitalism’s New Reality, 2008 (an account of the effects of globalization by the author of the bestselling (in 13 languages) Terror Inc.: Tracing the Money behind Global Terrorism).

Each book is fascinating and stimulating. I shall discuss aspects of each in later posts (hopefully, if I have the time).

Today just a single quote from Greenspan page 463:

“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil”.

There you have it. After all, Greenspan has had very close contacts with the most important figures in several presidencies, including the present one. He should know.

From the Sydney Morning Herald 1.7.08 (Full text here:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/talk-heats-up-on-iran-after-claim-of-raids/2008/06/30/1214677946330.html)

Excerpt:
“Talk heats up on Iran after claim of raids.

THE United States is running a covert operation into Iran funded by $US400 million ($416 million) siphoned from other programs with authorisation from Democratic congressional leaders, according to a report in The New Yorker.
The US Congress agreed to the request from the President, George Bush, late last year to fund a large escalation of secret raids against Iran, the foreign affairs reporter Seymour Hersh wrote.
“United States Special Operations Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq, with presidential authorisation, since last year. These have included seizing members of Al Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, and the pursuit of ‘high-value targets’ in the President’s war on terror, who may be captured or killed,” Hersh wrote.
The report, which did not name any sources, was flatly denied yesterday by the American ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Mr Crocker told CNN: “US forces are not operating across the Iraqi border into Iran, in the south or anywhere else.” “

If true, is this aggression?

See earlier posts on Iran/Iraq, in particular

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2008/03/12/an-ominous-sign-admiral-fallon-resigns/

Sydney Morning Herald, June 21-22, 2008.

Some excerpts from

“The future price of oil? Pick a number.”

“The invasion of Iraq cost the world $6 trillion in higher energy prices alone”

“An oil adviser to the World Bank and the UN Industrial Development Organization…”told a British parliamentary committee last month that Iraq had offered the US a deal, three years before the war, that would have opened 10 new giant oil fields on ‘generous’ terms, in return for lifting the sanctions. “This would certainly have prevented the steep rise of the oil price”, he said. “But the US had a different idea. It planned to occupy Iraq and annex its oil.” “

In this context, in the same newspaper one or two days ago, it was reported that the US was negotiating with the Iraqi government to obtain exclusive oil exploitation rights for some large US companies, without competitive bidding.

One could add that lifting the sanctions would have saved the lives of about half a million children as well.

See previous posts on Iran/Iraq.

From BBC Online June 10, 08:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7444083.stm

“BBC uncovers lost Iraq billions

Waxman: “It may well turn out to be the largest war profiteering in history.“
A BBC investigation estimates that around $23bn (£11.75bn) may have been lost, stolen or just not properly accounted for in Iraq.
For the first time, the extent to which some private contractors have profited from the conflict and rebuilding has been researched by the BBC’s Panorama using US and Iraqi government sources.
A US gagging order is preventing discussion of the allegations.
The order applies to 70 court cases against some of the top US companies.”

“While George Bush remains in the White House, it is unlikely the gagging orders will be lifted.”

So, after all, the Iraq invasion has been a success!!! Or are there still doubters around who question the morality of the Iraq invasion? Shame on them!

From the Huffington Post 9.6.08:

McClatchy reports the U.S. is demanding 58 military bases in Iraq as part of a “status of forces” agreement that would allow American troops to remain in Iraq indefinitely:
Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed “status of forces” agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely.
_Leading members of the two ruling Shiite parties said in a series of interviews the Iraqi government rejected this proposal along with another U.S. demand that would have effectively handed over to the United States the power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq. Lawmakers said they fear this power would drag Iraq into a war between the United States and Iran.
“The points that were put forth by the Americans were more abominable than the occupation,” said Jalal al Din al Saghir, a leading lawmaker from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. “We were occupied by order of the Security Council,” he said, referring to the 2004 Resolution mandating a U.S. military occupation in Iraq at the head of an international coalition. “But now we are being asked to sign for our own occupation. That is why we have absolutely refused all that we have seen so far.”

_The proposed “status of forces” agreement could lead to an uprising in Iraq, according to a leading Iraqi cleric:…..”

Is this what it was about all along? What has Barack Obama to say about this?

See also http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2008/06/04/throw-down-a-shot-of-liquor-and-bomb-a-country/

About three weeks ago, Hillary Clinton said, when asked what she would do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons, that the USA could “totally obliterate” Iran if it was foolish enough to do this. Senator Lieberman is an influential democratic Senator and was the Vice-presidential running mate of Al Gore.

I found this in the Huffington Post (14.5.08) under: “Lieberman: Hillary’s Threat To Bomb Iran Has A Certain Appeal To It.”

The extract is taken from an interview on the rightwing “Bill Bennett’s radio show” with senator Lieberman.

“Lieberman whole-heartedly endorsed the ‘appeal’ of the hawkish caricature Bennett had created:

…..

BENNETT: Listen, I give her credit. She (Hillary Clinton) as found her three things. She’s found her voice. He is very much in the background now, it’s not this, you know, ventriloquial thing, it’s definitely her voice.

LIEBERMAN: That’s true.

BENNETT: And Joe, you know, this is my style. This is a girl who puts on her pearls, goes down, throws down a shot of liquor and bombs Iran, you know. This is lookout Mrs. Bennett, this is my kind of girl.

LIEBERMAN: Hehehe, it does have an appeal to it.”

……….

This reinforces my view about the US elections. Click here.

See also here.

Fraud in the pharmaceutic industry:

According to the Sydney Morning Herald (April 17, 08), the US pharmaceutical company Merck has been accused of having lined up doctors (who apparently were not involved in the research) to put their names on publications in academic journals. Such ghost-writing appears to be widespread and calls into question all legitimate research of the pharmaceutic industry. Merck disputes this: although acknowledging that it sometimes paid medical writers to draft reports, it says that it then handed the reports to the doctors who did the research. However, an editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association states that Merck had indeed manipulated a considerable number of publications promoting the pain drug Vioxx (which was withdrawn from the market in 2004 because it was linked to heart attacks, with Merck agreeing to pay $US 4.85 billion in compensation), and that some of the authors had contributed little to the work. It suggests that each author of publications in medical journals should report his/her specific contribution.

Fraud in the politicical information industry:

The New York Times April 20, 2008, published a comprehensive report on how the Bush administration has mislead the public. Full report here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

The Times successfully sued the Defense Department to gain access to 8,000 pages of e-mail messages, transcripts and records describing years of private briefings, trips to Iraq and Guantánamo and an extensive Pentagon talking points operation. Its report is based on these data.

Some excerpts here:

“How the Pentagon Spread Its Message”

“Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance…..”

“The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.
Those business relationships are hardly ever disclosed to the viewers, and sometimes not even to the networks themselves. But collectively, the men on the plane and several dozen other military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants. The companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller companies, all part of a vast assemblage of contractors scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business generated by the administration’s war on terror. It is a furious competition, one in which inside information and easy access to senior officials are highly prized.”

“In turn, members of this group have echoed administration talking points, sometimes even when they suspected the information was false or inflated. Some analysts acknowledge they suppressed doubts because they feared jeopardizing their access.”

“the campaign amounted to a sophisticated information operation. “This was a coherent, active policy,” he said.”

“Many analysts strongly denied that they had either been co-opted or had allowed outside business interests to affect their on-air comments, and some have used their platforms to criticize the conduct of the war. Several, like Jeffrey D. McCausland, a CBS military analyst and defense industry lobbyist, said they kept their networks informed of their outside work and recused themselves from coverage that touched on business interests.”

“Some network officials, meanwhile, acknowledged only a limited understanding of their analysts’ interactions with the administration. They said that while they were sensitive to potential conflicts of interest, they did not hold their analysts to the same ethical standards as their news employees regarding outside financial interests.”

“Again and again, records show, the administration has enlisted analysts as a rapid reaction force to rebut what it viewed as critical news coverage, some of it by the networks’ own Pentagon correspondents. For example, when news articles revealed that troops in Iraq were dying because of inadequate body armor, a senior Pentagon official wrote to his colleagues: “I think our analysts … properly armed … can push back in that arena”

“Conversely, the administration has demonstrated that there is a price for sustained criticism, many analysts said. You’ll lose all access, …”

See also

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2008/01/24/iraq-and-the-military-pr-industrial-complex/

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2008/01/09/the-military-pr-industrial-complex-past-and-present/

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2007/10/07/the-political-responsibility-of-scientists/

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2007/05/02/the-pillars-of-democracy-a-free-press/

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2008/04/07/the-pillars-of-democracy-a-free-press-continued/

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2007/03/27/iraq-war-casualties-and-iran/

Whether in science, the economy or in the media, data evaluation by people whose objectivity might be jeopardized by financial or other interests, will lead to corruption. Such corruption in politics may have catastrophic effects on the stability of the system.