Moscow is now living with the reality of renewed terrorism. It seems nearly inevitable. This conclusion is not the result of panic — it is, rather, an assessment of the chances of our own survival. So what should be done? How can we avoid the next tragedy?

It’s now quite clear that the methods our military is using during the so-called antiterrorism operation in Chechnya have been transformed into methods for reproducing terrorism. This week, Russian forces further stepped up the crackdown.

A young generation of radical Chechen fighters, reared on these Russian methods, is now fighting far more cruelly for the liberation of their land from federal forces than Aslan Maskhadov, the aging Chechen president. And only a small fraction of those radicals was destroyed by Russian special forces in the Moscow theater; the far larger part is preparing new acts of revenge against Russia that we cannot anticipate.

At the same time, the intellectual inadequacy of our special services, especially the Federal Security Service, has become obvious. Yes, our special-forces troops shoot expertly, and there is enough poison gas in the country to wipe out everyone if necessary. However, as far as the main task — the prevention of terrorist acts — is concerned, our special forces are impotent and the bold rhetoric of President Vladimir Putin about the rebirth of the mighty security service has proved a myth.

This is clear from the fact that the very cream of the special forces who managed the operation to free the hostages in the Moscow theater did not know basic information about their enemy in Chechnya. They didn’t know the answer to basic questions like these: Who is in the Chechen political-military leadership? Who is in Mr. Maskhadov’s inner circle? And most important, what should be done next?

Mr. Putin so far has only demonstrated that we are unwilling to yield to terrorists of any sort, even if it costs the lives of innocent citizens. So how are we to make peace with Chechnya now? Can we negotiate with Mr. Maskhadov? Will he have the authority to negotiate? These questions make peace talks seem impossible, but is there any other option?

There is still another important question: who will bring together these camps? The figure of a mediator, without whom it is unlikely that anything useful would result, is of central importance. And that mediator must come from outside the Kremlin. Any mediator from the federal center would not have the trust of the Chechens and, more important, there is no one in the political establishment eager to sacrifice his or her political career for the sake of contributing to a transitional settlement in Chechnya.

Of course, none of this can happen unless the Chechens are given complete assurances that field commanders they send to the negotiations will not be arrested by the Russian government.

References:
Anna Politkovskaya

The Congo Republic has the richest deposit of coltan, an energy heat source that is used to power lap tops playstations mobile phones, etc.

Corporate mining giants finance the militia that murders, rapes and mutilates the Congolese. They are paid $60.00 per month to commit atrocities and keep the people traumatised so the profiteers have free reign over the country and its mineral deposits while the people suffer and starve.

If you are Congolese you have two choices of employment the militia or the mines. Most of the adult men join the militia it is better pay this leaves the mining to the children who dig this mineral out with their bare hands. They have no tools except maybe a hammer if they are lucky. These children barely make enough money to feed the families aminimal meal.

These children are enduring incredible hardships to provide a product so rich kids can have their mobiles and playsations.

The woman are so badly hurt mentally and physically that they have no male support or protection. They are raped then horribly mutilated so that they will not have a child, its genocide!!!!

It can’t but make us all hang our heads in shame that our world has come to such an imbalance and we are unable to stop the horror.

Maybe with a collective consciousness of our consumerism, extravegances and waste we can make a difference on a global level.

Debt has crippled many developing countries. Often based on loans taken out by prior rulers and dictators (many of which various Western nations put into power to suit their interests), millions face poorer and poorer living standards as precious resources are diverted to debt repayment.

Poor countries and billions of people are being devastated under the burden of debt and trade policies of the IMF, World Bank and the WTO. Zambia in 1997, paid 40% of its total budget to service foreign debt, and only 7% for basic services such as vaccines for children. If debt had been cancelled in 1997 for twenty of the poorest countries, the money released for basic healthcare could have saved the lives of about 21 million children by the year 2000, the equivalent of 19,000 children a day. The failure by the rich countries to cancel the odious debts to the poorest countries in the world leaves the poorest countries in the world with nothing to spend on basic needs and much needed infrastructure, leaving millions in poverty and destitution.

Some Facts

- The developing world now spends $1.3 on debt repayment for every $1 it receives in grants. (Nigeria borrowed around $5 billion and has paid about $16 billion, but still owes $28 billion - That $28 billion came about because of the injustice in the foreign creditors’ interest rates.

- 7 Million children die each year as a result of the debt crisis

- In the 52 Jubilee 2000 countries, a total population of 1037 million people shoulder a debt burden of £286 billion. It is a curious fact that this is less than the total net worth of the world’s 21 richest individuals

- Every day in 1999, $128 million was transferred from the poorest countries to the richest in debt repayments. Of this, $53 million was from East Asia and the Pacific, $38 million from South Asia and $23 million from Africa

- Spread over 20 years, the cost of canceling the debts of the 52 Jubilee 2000 countries is only one penny a day for each person in the industrialized world.

- If debt had been cancelled in 1997 for twenty of the poorest countries, the money released for basic healthcare could have saved the lives of about 21 million children by the year 2000, the equivalent of 19,000 children a day.

If you are a part of the tribe that is against war in Iraq, believe me you are not alone. More and more people world over and specially in America are getting more and more frustrated with the utility of war in Iraq and the violent quagmire it has left for the world.

The very premise on which the case against Iraq was built, “that Iraq as weapons of mass destruction (WMD)”, was found to be misplaced at best, and grossly and falsely exaggerated at worst to justify the war. The claim that Saddam Hussein was a threat to Iraqi people and world at large was moreso reliable, but was this enough of a reason for the USA to go to war.

Did USA or its allies really have a case for going to war against Iraq?.. is a matter of debate and discussions. Is the world today any better and free from terrorist attacks than it was in the pre war era?.. is also open to question. Some may argue that the war has benefited the Iraqi people but that is definitely out of question when we see the present situation and fractional and violent clashes occurring on a daily basis. Thus, what benefit has really accrued to anyone in the whole process? Well the answers are often painful and complex.

War against Iraq was perpetrated on the mass hysteria that Iraq has dangerous chemical and biological weapons, which will be used against the mankind by the then brutal regime led by Saddam Hussein. That not a trace of it was found out later is now common knowledge.

It is also an established fact that the UNO and other agencies were literally bulldozed by the USA at the time of giving it sanction to attack a sovereign nation. Was Iraq worse than other rogue nations that are still thriving amidst gross human rights violations against their own people? If international issues are sorted out in this manner, nobody will care a damn for justice and fair play. Another moot point worth consideration is the abject surrender of all nations of the world to the whims and fancies and personal vendetta against the head of a state. That Saddam Hussein was brutal and merciless is not disputed. However to have the right to attack him for being so is being too arrogant and reflects hegemony tendencies. The increasing public opinion against war in Iraq reflects the anxiety of the world in the whole affair. It seems that the world was much better and safer to live in if one individual is not allowed to carry out his own personal agenda and the whole world has to suffer the consequences thereof. It is also important that the world bodies learn their lessons from war against war in Iraq and avoid one person to dictate his terms.

So what happened on the morning of September 6, 2007 ? Israel has instituted a news blackout beyond saying that Israeli soldiers demonstrated unusual courage in acting against Syria. Syria indicates that Israel violated its airspace and fired missals on ground targets. Iran has been absolutely quiet, very unusual for them. There has been no comment across the Middle East. Europe is quiet on the issue. Here is the dismissive reaction of U.S. President George Bush when asked the question in his general press conference on September 20, 2007: “ I’m not going to comment on the matter.”

If all these countries are quiet, if politicians won’t comment, if there are news restrictions on what should be a highly publicized current event, then there must be a pretty big worldwide story here. It also must be diplomatically sensitive. Here is what can be determined about the raid by Israel on Syria on the morning of September 6, 2007.

In late spring, Israeli intelligence (Mossad) received information that Syria was trying to buy a nuclear device from North Korea. Israel had a building in Syria under surveillance from a satellite sent into orbit last June. The building (about 50 miles from the Iraq border) was believed to be storing nuclear equipment. On September 3, 2007, a ship arrived from North Korea with a cargo that was marked as cement. The cargo was subsequently transferred to the building that Israel had under surveillance. This triggered a strike on September 6, 2007 by five Israeli warplanes on the building and possibly other targets in Syria.

The timing of this incident could not be worse for North Korea. The country is beginning the second phase of six-party talks on disabling their current nuclear program. After years of talks, a deal was brokered in February 2007 under which Pyongyang (capital city of North Korea) agreed to shut down its main nuclear reactor in return for fuel and aid. North Korea admitted International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, who verified the shutdown of the Yongbyon reactor in July. In the second phase, scheduled to start next week, North Korea needs to declare all of its nuclear programs and disable its nuclear facilities. North Korea is at the bargaining table because up to two million of its people have died since the mid-1990s due to acute food shortages caused by natural disasters and the economic mismanagement of the Head Of State, Kim Jong- il. The country relies on foreign aid to feed millions of its people.

The timing could not have been better for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert who has gained ten points in his favorability ratings in Israel’s latest public opinion polls. He is gaining popularity for showing strong, decisive action on the Syrian nuclear threat. He is also gaining popularity in Israel for his ongoing meetings with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas ahead of the U.S. sponsored Middle East peace conference in November.

Iran may be involved in this incident as well. Consider a report from the Nazareth-based Israeli Arab newspaper, The Assennara, which cited anonymous Israeli sources as saying that Israeli jets “bombed a Syrian-Iranian missile base in northern Syria that was financed by Iran… It appears that the base was completely destroyed.”

In recent days, Syria has begun to increase its rhetoric on Israel’s reported violation of Syrian airspace. It has warned the United Nations that the international community’s silence over the incident could have “tragic consequences.” In a letter sent to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Syria warns Israel that its “outrageous aggression” will have serious consequences. Also, consider this statement from Syrian International Atomic Energy Agency ambassador Ibrahim Othman, “ The fact that UN and IAEA decisions regarding Israel’s nuclear capability are not implemented increases the frustration of the Arab states and threatens to expand the arms race that could threaten the peace and security of the region and entire world.”

We know that Israel bombed targets in Syria on September 6, 2007. The targets appear to be military locations in Syria sponsored by North Korea and Iran. The fact that these three countries are working together, possibly on nuclear weapons, is indeed disturbing. The Syrian Head Of State, Bashar al-Assad, is now in the process of contemplating Syria’s response to the Israeli air strikes. Unfortunately, the world has not heard the last of the silent war of September 6, 2007 between Israel and Syria.

Cuban President Fidel Castro has outlasted no fewer than nine American presidents during his nearly five decade rule in Cuba. In fact, Castro has ruled Cuba for such a long period of time that more than three quarters of the Cuban people have known no other leader.

The country used to be prosperous and the world’s largest producer of sugar, but the decades of Castro’s rule have been a disaster for the Cuban economy. Today, Cuba is a poor country with an economy dependent on agriculture and tourism. It has shortages in food, fuel, clothing, and books. Fidel Castro embraced the Soviet Union as a trading partner years ago and Cuba has suffered financially since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Cubans refer to these difficult times as the “Special Period”.

For the economy to improve, new trading partners and revenue sources need to be uncovered. Tourism has been increasing in Cuba, but it is an industry held back by the Cuban government’s horrible human rights record and inherent government corruption. The United States has an embargo on Cuba that has been in place for forty four years which also limits Cuban economic growth and tourism.

In July 2006, President Castro underwent emergency intestinal surgery and has not attended any public events since. In recent days, rumors have intensified that Castro’s death is near. The death of Castro could dramatically impact the relationship between Cuba and the United States and provide more opportunity and hope for Cubans and for Cuban exiles in Florida.

Indeed, for some in the exile community in South Florida, the death of Fidel Castro may mean that Cuba and the United States will turn the clock back to the nineteen fifties and become allies once again. For others, it may mean political and economic changes that may indicate a move toward democracy on the island. For some Cubans, it may mean the chance to leave Cuba and join their relatives or friends in Miami. To others in Cuba it may mean a chance to make a brand of socialism work if the United States lifts its current embargo which limits economic advancement on the island.

However, change may not occur very quickly after Fidel Castro dies. The dictator has already turned over power to his brother Raul Castro. Also, two of Castro’s sons are gaining favorable press coverage in the Cuban media and appear to be in line at some point, for succession to the dictator’s brother.

For the United States, the death of Fidel Castro could mean a dramatic shift in its policy toward Cuba. The U.S. embargo should be lifted since it has not worked as leverage for Fidel Castro to improve human rights over the years. With Fidel Castro gone, the time is right for the United States to change policy toward its island neighbor.

With time, economic improvement and reform, Cuba can be a vibrant centerpiece of tourism in the Caribbean. The death of Fidel Castro can be the catalyst for change. A Cuba without Fidel Castro, is an opportunity for a better tomorrow for the island.

Article by James Smith