[Asharq al-Aswat] Ask anyone to name the weirdest regime in the world and you are sure to hear: North Korea. If you think harder you might find another even weirder regime: Libya.
It is one of only three out of 190 members of the United Nations, aka the Oyster Bay Chowder and Marching Society not to have a constitution. (The other two are Israel and North Korea.)
"We want to develop our own model of government," Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Qadaffy ... dictator of Libya since 1969. From 1972, when he relinquished the title of prime minister, he has been accorded the honorifics Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya or Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution. With the death of Omar Bongo of Gabon on 8 June 2009, he became the longest serving of all current non-royal national leaders. He is also the longest-serving ruler of Libya since Tripoli became an Ottoman province in 1551. When Chairman Mao was all the rage and millions of people were flashing his Little Red Book, Qadaffy came out with his own Little Green Book, which didn't do as well. Qadaffy's instability has been an inspiration to the Arab world and to Africa, which he would like to rule... told me in an interview in 1975 during the Islamic Summit in Lahore, Pakistain. "Libya will become an example for the world."
It certainly has become one of the wonders of the world, in a manner of speaking.
More than three decades later, and as the revolt spreads to virtually all parts of Libya, one might wonder how successful the colonel has been.
He has fathered a strange beast called The Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriyah, ... An Arabic neologism coined by Muammar al-Qadaffy. The word jamahiriya was derived from jumhuriya, which is the usual Arabic translation of republic. It was coined by changing the component jumhur ] public ] to its plural form, jamahir -- the masses. Thus, it is similar to the term People's Republic, only more denigrating to the actual inhabitants of the country... gaining a place in the Guinness Book of Records for the longest name of any country in history.
He has also become the first author in history to build statues of his "Green Book all over the country. Even Mao Zedong did not have the temerity to push his "Little Red Book" so hard.
One thing is certain: in many ways, the colonel has succeeded in outclassing North Korea. Libya has not become an example for the world, but it has become a warning.
North Korea has a designated head of state. Libya does not have one. The colonel is the "Supreme Guide", a personage with unclear, and thus unlimited, powers and no responsibility.
Unlike North Korea, Libya does not have a clearly defined government, although we one sees individuals going around acting as if they were ministers and governors.
In the past few days, we have seen Qadaffy, with his sons in tandem, casting themselves in "as/if" official roles, trying to quell the nationwide uprising, often with the help of mercenaries from Black Africa.
Under Qadaffy, Libya as a whole became an "as/if" society.
There, everything resembles what it is supposed to be but is not it.
In a sense, there is no Libyan state. What we have is a metaphor posing as a state which itself is a metaphor.
Qadaffy's project was the destruction of the Libyan state, and today it is clear that he has succeeded. Forty-two years later, with dead bodies strewn on the streets of Tripoli, Benghazi, Al-Bayda and Tobruk, we are back to tribal politics.
The spectacle of the 'Supreme Guide' acting as a desperado in a B movie is both comical and pathetic.
North Korea has an army that, despite its obvious shortcomings, has been tested in battle.
Many people think that Libya is ruled by the military. The truth, however, is that Libya does not have an army.
Sure, there are individuals in uniforms who take part in parades and show an array of weaponry bought from abroad. All that however belongs to the realm of make-believe. Frightened of his own army, Qadaffy has made sure that Libya's military units never have enough bullets to attempt a coup against him.
On paper, Libya's arsenal of weapons appears impressive.
Over the past four decades, the colonel has bought some 2000 fighter planes from La Belle France and the former Soviet Union. Most of those, however, are in a state of decomposition without having been used in a war. The few that could still fly are either felling to Malta or used by the colonel to bomb his own people in the streets of Tripoli.
The colonel has also bought a whole navy, again bequeathing it to rust.
For his ground forces, the colonel has bought thousands of tanks.
On paper, in our region only Saddam Hussein had more tanks. What Libya has today is a mountain of scrap metal.
The colonel spent more than $2 billion trying to snatch the Ouzou band from neighbouring Chad, but failed.
This does not mean that Libyan soldiers and officers were worse than the Chadians. Libya failed because the colonel constantly purged the army of competent officers while imposing on it the childish strategic doctrine he fantasised about.
The Libyan economy is also "as/if".
Theoretically, Libya should be one of the richest nations.
According to World Bank estimates, since he came to power in 1969, the colonel has had something like a trillion dollars to play with, for an average population of less than three million. (Over the past 42 years , Libya's population has doubled to around 6.5 million, including 1.5 million foreigners.)
And, yet, as far as income per head per capita is concerned, in 2010 Libya was ranked 83rd in the world. In 1984, Libyan income per head per annum was $8500, the same as the United Kingdom. In 2008, the figure for Libya was around $12,000 while that of the UK was just under $40,000.
Since 1984, Libya's "as/if" economy has been either shrinking or stagnating most of the time. In better years, such as 2007, growth did not exceed three per cent.
Last year, the Libyan economy shrunk by one per cent.
Visiting Malta with a Libyan friend we were shocked to see Libyans begging in the streets of Valetta.
Each month, the Italian naval police pick up dozens of Libyan clandestines trying to enter Europe in search of a better future.
For the past decade at least, unemployment in Libya has been around 30 per cent. Unemployment rate for people aged between 16 and 25 stands at 50 per cent.
The colonel fancies himself as a Renaissance man, someone who could be soldier, poet, philosopher, engineer, novelist and politician at the same time. Today, he is adding a new persona to that impressive list: an Arab version of Billy the Kid engaged in a final shootout.
Qadaffy even insisted on writing the script for a television series he had financed about a legendary Libyan rebel.
He would pay those who flattered his fantasies generously.
The late American TV news hound Pierre Salinger received $100,000 for writing a short preface to the colonel's unreadable short stories.
The Italians, who appear to be good in such things, persuaded the colonel to spend $1 billion developing a racing car that he had supposedly designed. The car was never made but some Italians left Libya richer than before.
Practising chequebook diplomacy, the colonel had two-dozen African dictators on his payroll. His ambition was to become President of the African Union, an "as/if" parody of the European Union.
During the 1970s and 1980s, the colonel emerged as the paymaster of numerous terror gangs across the globe.
Even in that he was original. When it suited him, he handed the secrets of those he had financed to their enemies. On some occasions, as was the case of Moussa Sadr, an Iranian mullah who had emerged as leader of the Lebanese Shi'ites, the beneficiaries of the colonel's largesse would disappear in Libya's ocean of sand.
In 1999, I met Saif al-Islam, Qadaffy's favourite son for an interview in London.
He told me exactly what his father had told me 24 years earlier: "We are going to write a constitution"!
Twelve years later, last Sunday night, as Tripoli had become a battle zone, the "favourite son" repeated the same promise on Libyan television.
The colonel came to power when coups d'etat were in season in the Arab world. As the past two months have shown the season has changed. Today, Libya appears out of sync with the times.
As I was writing this column, a British editor phoned to ask whether I thought Qadaffy would still be in charge next week.
I answered with a question: Was he ever in charge in the first place or was he, too, the victim of fantasies he projected into a trompe l'oeil called the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiryah?
Posted by: Fred ||
02/26/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It is one of only three out of 190 members of the United Nations, aka the Oyster Bay Chowder and Marching Society not to have a constitution. (The other two are Israel and North Korea.)
An interesting observation on the value of constitution.
#2
...of course with a 'Living Breathing' constitution, it's what ever those who have power declare it to be - as in "It all depends upon what the meaning of is is."
#3
I thought England had an "Unwritten Constitution," which really isn't any at all.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
02/26/2011 8:39 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Isn't that touching that an Arab MSM is so concerned with the absence of Constitution in Israel? (All while we learn tha Arabia Suadi has one, who woulmd have said it?
[Asharq al-Aswat] I've lost count of the times in recent years when I've heard the commonplace assertion that in the Arab world the choice is between dictatorship or rule by krazed killers. Until recently the only credible prospects for an end to Ben-Ali, Mubarak, or Qadaffy rule was a smooth handover of power to their offspring and more of the same.
The violence that engulfed Iraq in the years after the 2003 invasion prompted many to say that such states were perhaps in need of a ruthless strongman; an 'orientalist' like Bernard Lewis and an Islamist Ideologue like Sayyid Qutb could at times sound very similar in their assertion that so-called Western values like freedom, equality and democracy were alien to the Mohammedan world.
But in recent days we have seen ordinary Libyans proving everyone wrong; behaving with a bravery and clarity of purpose almost incomprehensible to us in Europe -- braving machine gun fire, murderous thugs and indiscriminate bombing from a crazed regime threatening to fight them down to the last bullet.
But what has also made the West sit up and take notice is that demonstrators in Tahrir Square, Pearl Roundabout, Tunis and Benghazi haven't been chanting "Death to America™", burning British flags or calling for the creation of an Islamic state (much as Saif al-Qadaffy would like us to believe), they have mostly peacefully been calling for freedom, citizenship, human rights ... which are not the same thing as individual rights, mind you... and reform.
Britain for many years has insistently lobbied such regimes on the need for such freedoms; respect for civil society, freedom of the media and political rights. Yet one of the distinguishing features of these revolutions is that they have come in spite of efforts from the West, spontaneous movements from ordinary people with legitimate grievances, who are suddenly finding how powerful they can be when they act together in the interests of the whole nation.
I have also heard many conspiracy theorists beginning to emerge. Surely these events couldn't have happened without the collusion of the mighty US pulling strings behind the strings -- or perhaps Israel decided that Mubarak no longer served their purposes? In truth, the US is running to catch up with events like the rest of us. In reality, it is the case that the people of North Africa and beyond are only just discovering their own strength and inner resources. This is no longer a region under the thumb of colonialism or outside domination. Suddenly it is obvious to the world that there is a Tunisian nation that will not submit to injustice and oppression, and an Egyptian nation, and....
It is inspirational talking to Tunisians and Libyans here in London, feeling that giddy sensation of freedom for the first time -- able to speak their minds without looking over one shoulder and without fearing the consequences.
For us in Britain, these decisive moves towards reform and freedoms are something we will wholeheartedly support -- comparable to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the euphoria felt by those in Eastern Europe, who for the first time could participate in saying how their countries should be run. Although it would of course be infinitely preferable to see transition happening peacefully, through political structures with sufficient flexibility to accommodate reform.
PM David Cameron -- the first major figure to visit post-revolutionary Egypt made clear that Britain would stand by Egypt and the region in their efforts towards reform, but that Egypt's transitional leadership must continue to give effect to the will of the people in a manner which brought about genuine democratic change. We will continue to hold the Tunisian and Egyptian authorities to account, but will be providing real assistance through our Arab Partnership Programme.
David Cameron in the Kuwaiti parliament asserted that freedom is sweeping across the region, at the same time making the important acknowledgement that the West was wrong in its support for undemocratic regimes; "denying people their basic rights does not preserve stability, rather the reverse".
That is why Britain has been one of the most outspoken countries in its condemnation of the Libyan regime's murder of its own citizens. Banning the media, blocking communications and lying about the real situation has fooled no-one. The whole world is watching the situation in Libya and those responsible must one way or another face justice.
We all hope that the suffering of the Libyan people does not continue and that very soon they will be enjoying the sweet taste of freedom currently sweeping through the streets of Cairo and Tunis. We salute your courage and determination and hope that your efforts bring about the freedoms and reform that you seek. We are also discussing with our partners what future steps can be taken, including sanctions such as a travel ban and an arms embargo.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/26/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
See also TOPIX > {American IslaMic Congress] OLD ORDER SHATTERED IN MIDDLE EAST.
versus
* SAME > ISRAEL'S DAYS ARE NUMBERED: IRANIAN GENERAL. Irael's + Zionism's destruction has started, Resistance is "STAR TREK" BORG-futile agz Islamic Awakening + Muslims' Movements.
D *** NG IT, ISRAEL, "YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED"!
* SAME > [FoxNews] NEXT WAVE OF AL-QAEDA COMING FROM INSIDE THE US.
#3
ordinary Libyans proving everyone wrong; behaving with a bravery and clarity of purpose almost incomprehensible to us in Europe -- braving machine gun fire, murderous thugs and indiscriminate bombing from a crazed regime threatening to fight them down to the last bullet.
No one has been proved 'wrong.' If the Euros find Libyan bravery and clarity of purpose 'incomprehensible' that is due to the lack of the same qualities in Europe, drained of them after 2 world wars and dissolution of humane values in a sea of rhetoric. Libyans attacking machine guns with bricks and forming voluntary human shields around bulldozer operators trying to punch holes in Qadaffy strongpoints are mujahideen. Who publishes this foolish stuff?
#5
And yet Barack Hussein Obama will not have a historic moment w/regard to the history being made in North Africa. Hell, he can't even bring himself to support Israel, a staunch ally for sixty years--the only free country in the Mideast. I guess he spent too much time getting an islamic education as a kid and 20 years "present" listening to hatred in Rev. Wright's anti-semitic church in Chicago.
#6
John QC - I fear the poor, bufuddled Zero is flabbergasted that these peons didn't wait for his call to rise up. He must be terribly confused!
Posted by: Bobby ||
02/26/2011 11:03 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I believe Libyans are going to need help to pull this off. O is out to lunch. China couldn't care less. Russia doesn't seem to have any interest from what I have heard. So we have a void to fill. Perfect opportunity for bad guys to offer support.
I say a void because look how many people from other countries work everything for them. This will run its course with many idealistic Libyans purged. Then if Qadaffy is removed the head of a new serpent will emerge"in the Arab world the choice is between dictatorship or rule by krazed killers". This will be done the Arab way.
#8
Because Obama believes the claptrap about America being to blame for the woes of the world, as president, he stays silent. He presents no real American policy, thinking that by making no decision at all, he will be absolved of blame, and begin a new chapter of world history where for once Americans are the good guys.
Unfortunately, he must never have learned a very basic concept--that refusing to decide is in itself a decision. His delusion that America is something to be ashamed of will have toxic consequences long into the future.
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/26/2011 17:03 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hoogo has been strangling private industry and starving his only real source of income: PDVSA. I'm hoping that his end is painful, long, and at the hands of the Venezuelan people, not in comfy Iranian exile. His apparatchiks need to suffer for their treason against the Venezuelan people as well. I'm thinkrn mobs armed with sporks AND pitchforks
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/26/2011 17:10 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I have been expecting this. I wanted him to fail and the best way for him to go would be self-inflicted. He is like O. He is a spending addict and will blame everyone but himself. His deals with China and Russia will be long term money drain holes. In say five years his new toys will be obsolete. When his people or ours can't get food then the trouble begins.
This is not merely a matter of the synchronizing of announcements. The Obama administration also behaves as if the weight of the United States in world affairs is approximately the same as that of Switzerland. We await developments. We urge caution, even restraint. We hope for the formation of an international consensus. And, just as there is something despicable about the way in which Swiss bankers change horses, so there is something contemptible about the way in which Washington has been affectingand perhaps helping to bring aboutAmerican impotence. Except that, whereas at least the Swiss have the excuse of cynicism, American policy manages to be both cynical and naive.
This is not merely a matter of the synchronizing of announcements. The Obama administration also behaves as if the weight of the United States in world affairs is approximately the same as that of Switzerland. We await developments. We urge caution, even restraint. We hope for the formation of an international consensus. And, just as there is something despicable about the way in which Swiss bankers change horses, so there is something contemptible about the way in which Washington has been affecting--and perhaps helping to bring about--American impotence. Except that, whereas at least the Swiss have the excuse of cynicism, American policy manages to be both cynical and naive.
The brilliant Mr. Hitchens goes into detail about Obama administration's handling of the recent and current excitements sweeping through the Arab world. Hitch doesn't appear to think highly of our president's intelligence or character.
#1
He's confused, I tell you! Befuddled. Astonished. This wasn't the way it was supposed to happen. He had to get control of the US first, then the rest of the world. These are unsettling developments!
Maybe he's consulting with Cheney?
Posted by: Bobby ||
02/26/2011 11:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Hitch doesn't appear to think highly of our president's intelligence or character
I think that's unanimous here in R'bug, no?
Posted by: Alan Cramer ||
02/26/2011 11:25 Comments ||
Top||
#3
According to the comments to the article the little leftoids think that Obama is doing just great!! Wouldn't want to go all Bush now. After all it's not our business that thousands are dying.
Contemptible.
Posted by: Alan Cramer ||
02/26/2011 11:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The left are against the death penalty except for trying to remove a dictator.
#5
The left are against the death penalty except for trying to remove a dictator.
Or if it is "inconvenient". As in, a fetus (especially if it is handicapped in some way), some old person who rudely refuses to die so assets can be passed on, etc.
#7
Team Obama knows that it is hard to "undo" doing something, and (I believe) they feel the collateral damage of civilian deaths is unfortunate, but hardly compeling.
0's response is typically professorial and sterile, giving the illusion of doing something while moon-walking through diplomacy.
Activity -vs- work and all that.
Posted by: Bob Glomomp3702 ||
02/26/2011 17:32 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Hitch doesn't appear to think highly of our president's intelligence or character.
I think that holds for Hitch's estimation of any recent (or near future) president. Washington might meet with his approval, though.
#9
"Hitch doesn't appear to think highly of our president's intelligence or character."
Mr. Hitchins can take a number and get in line to think that. :-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
02/26/2011 21:00 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I think that holds for Hitch's estimation of any recent (or near future) president.
He approved of President George W. Bush against his natural left wing inclination, KBK, because President Bush fought the War on Terror instead of dithering. The attacks of 9/11 got Mr. Hitchens' attention.
#11
Its simple. Obama is not a leader. He is a follower by nature (going wherever the political machine puts him), and anti-military. So the responses he gives are exactly those of the career bureaucrats/diplomats at State, which means to dither, talk, etc., but not really do anything.
A trigger-happy CIA guard, Raymond Davis, is caught up in a power struggle between the army chief and President Zardari.
In other circumstances, the characters involved in the charged piece of theatre now unfolding in Pakistan might have provoked wry smiles: a trigger-happy American diplomat and ex-soldier whose name may or may not be Raymond Davis; two small-time criminals who made the mistake of agreeing to do a little job for their country; a shadowy Florida firm which lists an abandoned storefront in Orlando as its address; and a large supporting cast of bungling spies.
But no one's laughing, because the stakes in Lahore are deadly serious. Ever since the restoration of democracy to Pakistan in 2008, the world has hoped that President Asif Ali Zardari's government will prove a durable bulwark against chaos and terror in the country. But the case of the mysterious Mr Davis could rip apart the already fraught relationship between the United States and nuclear-armed Pakistan, and threaten President Zardari, with incalculable consequences for the region and the West.
Late on the morning of January 25, a senior CIA officer stationed in Islamabad, Pakistan's capital, was scheduled to meet an informant near the busy Qurtada square in Lahore. Mr Davis, a former special forces officer hired by the CIA from a private security contractor based in Florida, was part of her security detail. He was tasked with making sure the area was safe for her arrival and positioning himself to respond if things went wrong. Sure enough, they did.
For reasons that have yet to be established, local residents Faizan Ali and his brother Fahim Ali pulled up in front of Mr Davis's car, waving weapons. Mr Davis did what he had been trained to do when men pointed guns at him: both men were dead before they could get a shot off. A second back-up vehicle, speeding to help Mr Davis, knocked over and killed a third man, Ibadur Rehman.
US officials suspect that the Ali brothers, who police say had a record of involvement in theft, had been put to work by the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, Pakistan's feared intelligence service. The ISI has long been fuming over the CIA's aggressive efforts to penetrate jihadist groups such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba -- but the CIA's Islamabad station hadn't listened. The proposition that the brothers were put up to scaring off the CIA is not implausible. Though the men were well known locally, they made no effort to conceal their identities. This suggests they were reasonably certain that the Lahore police wouldn't show up at their door. Moreover, carjackers -- which it was suggested they might have been -- typically pull up alongside their victims, not in front of them, for the good reason that they do not wish to be run over.
Given that he holds a diplomatic passport, the next steps in Mr Davis's story should have been predictable: a declaration that he was persona non grata, and a ticket on the first flight home. Instead, he was held by police and will remain in jail until the Lahore High Court hears his case next month, when the government is due to say whether it believes Mr Davis enjoys diplomatic immunity.
International law is clear: the Vienna Convention of 1961 says that diplomats "shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention". Even spies, who serve under diplomatic cover at the embassies of all nations in all countries, and often with the assent of their host states, enjoy this privilege. Pakistani officials argue that Mr Davis had not been recognised as a diplomat by Pakistan. But several British diplomats have told The Daily Telegraph that the fact that Mr Davis held a diplomatic passport and a visa allowing him to conduct official business settles the debate.
Pakistan's politicians have concerns other than legal niceties, though. Parts of the country's press have long reported the presence of legions of US spies supposedly seeking to rob Pakistan of its nuclear weapons. Reporting of the Davis case has been peppered with claims that he was photographing military installations. In fact, the contents of Mr Davis' camera have been disclosed: he was taking tourist snaps of buffalos blocking traffic, camel carts and other exotic aspects of street life -- and the supposedly secret military installations he was said to be keen to photograph can be seen in three-dimensional glory on the internet.
Farcical as the claims might be, the polemic resonates in a country where the US is widely held to be responsible for precipitating a conflict that has led to the deaths of thousands in nationwide terrorist strikes. Public outrage has swelled because of lurid accounts of civilian casualties in US drone attacks within Pakistan's borders -- even though those operations are sanctioned by the military.
The ruling People's Party is divided on how to deal with the Davis crisis. Just this week, it sacked Fauzia Wahab, its spokesperson, for asserting that the country's disrespect for international law would make it an outcast. President Asif Ali Zardari fears that acting to free Mr Davis will undermine his already tattered reputation -- and allow the opposition Muslim League, led by the former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, which rules the province of Punjab, to cast itself as a defender of national honour and pride.
Even more important are the views of the all-powerful army. Ever since he took office in November 2007, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the chief of the army staff, has slowly worked to reverse key elements of the pro-US policies pursued by his predecessor, General Pervez Musharraf. He abandoned Gen Musharraf's secret peace initiative with India, and eased pressure on jihadist groups. Late last year, at a closed-door briefing, he even asserted that the "real aim of US strategy is to denuclearise Pakistan".
Gen Kayani hopes for a deal that will give the Taliban and its affiliates a significant share of power in Afghanistan. Such a deal, he believes, will allow the army to make peace with its jihadist allies-turned-enemies, who began waging a murderous insurgency in Pakistan's north-west after the US compelled Gen Musharraf to act against terrorist safe havens in the region. The insurgency has claimed the lives of thousands of soldiers, and led to an ever-increasing spiral of terrorist violence that threatens to rip Pakistan apart.
The unfolding Davis case, some analysts argue, helps to create a climate that will allow Gen Kayani to push his case that Pakistan must extricate itself from the US war on terror -- and to limit cooperation without losing desperately needed aid. If this is Gen Kayani's objective, he is likely to find sympathetic ears among the judiciary. The eminent Pakistani commentator Ahmed Rashid recently pointed out that judges and generals seemed to be batting for the same team, noting "how rarely judges pursue cases of human-rights violations by soldiers, whereas cases that hurt the government fly into the courts".
"The bottom line," says C Christine Fair, a scholar at Georgetown University, "is that the Pakistanis do not want a strategic relationship with the US. Washington needs to get over the idea that throwing more money at Pakistan will make it see its own interests differently."
A trigger-happy CIA guard, Raymond Davis, is caught up in a power struggle between the army chief and President Zardari.
The unfolding Davis case, some analysts argue, helps to create a climate that will allow Gen Kayani to push his case that Pakistan must extricate itself from the US war on terror and to limit cooperation without losing desperately needed aid. If this is Gen Kayanis objective, he is likely to find sympathetic ears among the judiciary.
In other circumstances, the characters involved in the charged piece of theatre now unfolding in Pakistan might have provoked wry smiles: a trigger-happy American diplomat and ex-soldier whose name may or may not be Raymond Davis; two small-time criminals who made the mistake of agreeing to do a little job for their country; a shadowy Florida firm which lists an abandoned storefront in Orlando as its address; and a large supporting cast of bungling spies.
But no one's laughing, because the stakes in Lahore are deadly serious. Ever since the restoration of democracy to Pakistan in 2008, the world has hoped that President Asif Ali Zardari's government will prove a durable bulwark against chaos and terror in the country. But the case of the mysterious Mr Davis could rip apart the already fraught relationship between the United States and nuclear-armed Pakistan, and threaten President Zardari, with incalculable consequences for the region and the West.
Late on the morning of January 25, a senior CIA officer stationed in Islamabad, Pakistan's capital, was scheduled to meet an informant near the busy Qurtada square in Lahore. Mr Davis, a former special forces officer hired by the CIA from a private security contractor based in Florida, was part of her security detail. He was tasked with making sure the area was safe for her arrival and positioning himself to respond if things went wrong. Sure enough, they did.
For reasons that have yet to be established, local residents Faizan Ali and his brother Fahim Ali pulled up in front of Mr Davis's car, waving weapons. Mr Davis did what he had been trained to do when men pointed guns at him: both men were dead before they could get a shot off. A second back-up vehicle, speeding to help Mr Davis, knocked over and killed a third man, Ibadur Rehman.
US officials suspect that the Ali brothers, who police say had a record of involvement in theft, had been put to work by the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, Pakistan's feared intelligence service. The ISI has long been fuming over the CIA's aggressive efforts to penetrate jihadist groups such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba -- but the CIA's Islamabad station hadn't listened. The proposition that the brothers were put up to scaring off the CIA is not implausible. Though the men were well known locally, they made no effort to conceal their identities. This suggests they were reasonably certain that the Lahore police wouldn't show up at their door. Moreover, carjackers -- which it was suggested they might have been -- typically pull up alongside their victims, not in front of them, for the good reason that they do not wish to be run over.
Given that he holds a diplomatic passport, the next steps in Mr Davis's story should have been predictable: a declaration that he was persona non grata, and a ticket on the first flight home. Instead, he was held by police and will remain in jail until the Lahore High Court hears his case next month, when the government is due to say whether it believes Mr Davis enjoys diplomatic immunity.
International law is clear: the Vienna Convention of 1961 says that diplomats "shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention". Even spies, who serve under diplomatic cover at the embassies of all nations in all countries, and often with the assent of their host states, enjoy this privilege. Pakistani officials argue that Mr Davis had not been recognised as a diplomat by Pakistan. But several British diplomats have told The Daily Telegraph that the fact that Mr Davis held a diplomatic passport and a visa allowing him to conduct official business settles the debate.
Pakistan's politicians have concerns other than legal niceties, though. Parts of the country's press have long reported the presence of legions of US spies supposedly seeking to rob Pakistan of its nuclear weapons. Reporting of the Davis case has been peppered with claims that he was photographing military installations. In fact, the contents of Mr Davis' camera have been disclosed: he was taking tourist snaps of buffalos blocking traffic, camel carts and other exotic aspects of street life -- and the supposedly secret military installations he was said to be keen to photograph can be seen in three-dimensional glory on the internet.
Farcical as the claims might be, the polemic resonates in a country where the US is widely held to be responsible for precipitating a conflict that has led to the deaths of thousands in nationwide terrorist strikes. Public outrage has swelled because of lurid accounts of civilian casualties in US drone attacks within Pakistan's borders -- even though those operations are sanctioned by the military.
The ruling People's Party is divided on how to deal with the Davis crisis. Just this week, it sacked Fauzia Wahab, its spokesperson, for asserting that the country's disrespect for international law would make it an outcast. President Asif Ali Zardari fears that acting to free Mr Davis will undermine his already tattered reputation -- and allow the opposition Muslim League, led by the former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, which rules the province of Punjab, to cast itself as a defender of national honour and pride.
Even more important are the views of the all-powerful army. Ever since he took office in November 2007, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the chief of the army staff, has slowly worked to reverse key elements of the pro-US policies pursued by his predecessor, General Pervez Musharraf. He abandoned Gen Musharraf's secret peace initiative with India, and eased pressure on jihadist groups. Late last year, at a closed-door briefing, he even asserted that the "real aim of US strategy is to denuclearise Pakistan".
Gen Kayani hopes for a deal that will give the Taliban and its affiliates a significant share of power in Afghanistan. Such a deal, he believes, will allow the army to make peace with its jihadist allies-turned-enemies, who began waging a murderous insurgency in Pakistan's north-west after the US compelled Gen Musharraf to act against terrorist safe havens in the region. The insurgency has claimed the lives of thousands of soldiers, and led to an ever-increasing spiral of terrorist violence that threatens to rip Pakistan apart.
The unfolding Davis case, some analysts argue, helps to create a climate that will allow Gen Kayani to push his case that Pakistan must extricate itself from the US war on terror -- and to limit cooperation without losing desperately needed aid. If this is Gen Kayani's objective, he is likely to find sympathetic ears among the judiciary. The eminent Pakistani commentator Ahmed Rashid recently pointed out that judges and generals seemed to be batting for the same team, noting "how rarely judges pursue cases of human-rights violations by soldiers, whereas cases that hurt the government fly into the courts".
"The bottom line," says C Christine Fair, a scholar at Georgetown University, "is that the Pakistanis do not want a strategic relationship with the US. Washington needs to get over the idea that throwing more money at Pakistan will make it see its own interests differently."
Continued on Page 49
#1
trigger happy? The Arab-loving pussies at the Telegraph would demand be be another Daniel Pearl? Pheuck 'em
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/26/2011 14:00 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I must say that I'm getting awfully tired of Pakistain's inappropriately-high opinion of itself.
I want Mr. Davis back. He's covered by diplomatic immunity. He was about to get whacked by a couple of ISI free-lancers and instead got them. He should be on the next plane home.
But if the Paks think otherwise, then fine. We'll have to make some big adjustments in the region as a consequence of what I would do if I were President. Our efforts in Afghanistan would change (perhaps they should). Our efforts to keep peace in the region might change (perhaps they should).
But I do sincerely think that it's time for the gloves to come off in our relationship with the Paks. ISI generals? Dead. ISI major movers? Dead. Army generals who we know are double-dealing us? Dead. Politicos who are double-dealing us? Dead. As Al Gore once said, you have the CIA do stuff precisely because what you want done is against international law.
It's time to use the CIA, and Predators, etc., to send a message that Paks, Arabs and other tribal-based civilizations arrayed against us will understand.
Or as Frank G said much more succiently, pheuck 'em.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/26/2011 14:12 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Colonel Muammar Qadaffy
