Amnesty urge Eritrea to release officials

Aljazeera Africa  September 16, 2011

Rights group Amnesty International has demanded the release of 11 former Eritrean officials who have been held incommunicado since a government crackdown in 2001.

Friday’s call comes a day after the European Parliament condemned the detention of Eritrean-Swedish journalist Dawit Isaak, who was arrested as part of the same crackdown, and called for him to be given a fair
trial by an independent court.

Eritrea is routinely labelled by watchdogs as one of the world’s worst offenders against human rights, but the Horn of Africa nation rejects the allegations and often accuses rights groups of working for foreign intelligence services to undermine the government.

Vice President Mahmoud Sherifo, Foreign Minister Haile Woldetensae, military Chief-of-Staff Ogbe Abraha and eight central committee members were part of a group of 15 officials who criticised President Isaias Afewerki and asked for reform following Eritrea’s 1998-2000 war with Ethiopia.

The government subsequently arrested 11 members of the group, saying they had conspired with Ethiopia to topple Isaias.

“The Eritrean authorities must immediately and unconditionally release 11 prominent politicians, including three former cabinet ministers, who have been held incommunicado without charge for 10 years,” UK-based Amnesty International said in a statement.

“Their families must be told of their whereabouts, and they must be given access to lawyers as well as any medical treatment they need,” added Michelle Kagari, Amnesty’s Deputy Director for Africa.

‘Dire’ conditions

Amnesty, which has described the detainees as prisoners of conscience, said prisons were “notoriously dire” in the Red Sea state, with inmates subjected to soaring desert temperatures while incarcerated in underground cells and in shipping containers.

The UK-based rights group said several members of the group were already suffering from illness before their arrest.

Eritrean government officials in Asmara, the capital, were not immediately available for comment.

A former prison watchman who guarded the Embatkala and Eraeiro camps where the detainees are held, and where temperatures can soar to up to 50 Celsius, said in May last year that Mahmoud, Ogbe and four other former central committee members had died due to illness and heat exhaustion.

The guard spoke to journalists in Addis Ababa days after fleeing to neighbouring Ethiopia.

Amnesty did not confirm the deaths, and the government has so far kept a tight lid on their whereabouts.

Last week, the government charged Amnesty of plotting to incite Middle East-style popular unrest, a claim the group dismissed.

‘Inhumane circumstances’

Isaak has never faced charges but the presumption of human rights activists is that he was detained because of his criticism of the Eritrean government. He was arrested in Asmara on September 23, 2001.

The resolution passed by European politicians in a 53-0 vote said the 46 year old “has been held incommunicado and in all probability under inhumane circumstances almost permanently ever since,” and demandede be given a fair trial.

It also calls for Eritrea to be suspended from the Cotonou Agreement, a comprehensive partnership agreement between developing countries and the European Union that includes economic aid.

“Our hope is that Dawit Isaak is alive,” the parliament’s president, Jerzy Buzek, said in a speech on Wednesday.

“That he will be free. That he will rejoin his family. That we will not have to observe another anniversary as
this one.”

The parliamentarians demanded that EU representatives to be given access to Isaak to determine his health care and other needs.

Please read the original at Aljazeera here

Contractors battle against further military cuts

Defense contractors launched a broad lobbying campaign on Wednesday to drum up public support for holding the line on U.S. military spending cuts.

John Crawley Reuters Washington DC  September 14, 2011

Alarmed at the prospect of Congress dictating steep new reductions on top of more than $350 billion in cuts already in the pipeline from Pentagon streamlining, contractors based their urgent appeal on economic as well as national security grounds.

Industry lobbyists are highlighting the role of small business in aerospace production and asking the general public to contact lawmakers directly to support their position.

“Our position is: no more,” Marion Blakey, chief executive of the Aerospace Industries Association trade group, told a news conference on the stepped-up lobbying effort. “Defense has been cut to the bone. We are there already.”

Boeing Co; engine maker Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp; and other companies under the AIA umbrella are looking to create general awareness about the potential impact of extended spending reductions.

A congressional “super committee” on deficit reduction is trying to find at least $1.2 trillion in budget savings over the next decade.

The worst-case scenario coming out of the panel by year’s end — if it cannot reach agreement on additional cuts — would be an additional defense cut of up to $600 billion over the same period.

Industry calls this possibility “draconian.” Senior U.S. civilian military officials, including the nominee for the Pentagon’s No. 2 post, Defense Undersecretary Ashton Carter, told the Senate this week that cuts “over and above” the level already in the works would be devastating.

Beyond traditional lobbying that includes CEO visits to “super committee” members this week, the AIA trade group — which also represents Lockheed Martin Corp, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman and others — is launching a grass-roots strategy.

BP ‘has gained stranglehold over Iraq’ after oilfield deal is rewritten

New terms mean company will be paid even when production is disrupted, critics claim

The Guardian July 30, 2001

BP has been accused of taking a “stranglehold” on the Iraqi economy after the Baghdad government agreed to pay the British firm even when oil is not being produced by the Rumaila field, confidential documents reveal.

The original deal for operating Iraq‘s largest field – half as big as the entire North Sea – has been rewritten so that BP will be immediately compensated for civil disruption or government decisions to cut production.

This potentially could influence the policy decisions made by Iraq in relation to the Opec oil cartel, and is a major step away from the original terms of an auction deal signed in the summer of 2009, critics claim.

“Iraq’s oil auctions were portrayed as a model of transparency and a negotiating victory for the Iraqi government,” said Greg Muttitt, author of Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq. “Now we see the reality was the opposite: a backroom deal that gave BP a stranglehold on the Iraqi economy, and even influence over the decisions of Opec.”

The concerns are shared by the Platform campaign group, which has obtained copies of the original and amended contracts and on Sunday will publish them on its website.

Please read the entire story here

Eritrea: Regime And Its Relationship With Outside World

“Today Eritrea is becoming more like a private company that belongs to President Isaias Afewerki rather than a country with 5 million inhabitants. Even worse, President Isaias doesn’t seem is interested in promoting peace, stability and democracy in the country mainly to protect his grip on power for many years to come. Therefore, there is little hope for better Eritrean foreign relationships with the world and its neighbours without a radical change in direction by the regime.”

Institute for Security Studies at allAfrica.com

Addis Ababa — Tensions between the Eritrean government and Britain escalated in recent months as a result of the continued detention of four British citizens since December 2010 until their release on 12 June 2011.

 According to reports, the accused Britons were arrested after a gun battle with Eritrean coastal forces on the pirate-infested waters of the Red-Sea. Two of the four detainees, who tried to escape, were captured off the Eritrean coast and left without food and water for a day on a small island, before being taken back to the mainland to be imprisoned. It was also reported that all the prisoners were former Royal marines and worked for Protection Vessels International (PVI), a company that provides security services to vessels on the sea from piracy.

In a statement the Eritrean Ministry of Information claimed that the detainees admitted to having committed a crime. The Eritrean government also said the detainees regretted trying to escape from the port of Massawa, where there was an apparent dispute with local businessmen about payment for fuel and supplies. In addition, the statement declared that the detainees bore accountability for acts of invasion, organizing terrorism and espionage”.

In response to the Eritrean regime’s defiance to release its nationals, the British government, on 6 June 2011, restricted the Eritrean embassy in London from providing any other services to the large Eritrean community in the country, other than consular services and the issuing of visas. Prior to this restriction, the British government had given two directives to the embassy in retaliation for the imprisonment of British citizens. First, Eritrean diplomats and visiting officials were to be restricted to the London area only; and second, the UK government banned the collection of taxes from the Eritrean community in the UK by the Eritrean regime. As one of one of the detainees is an Australian citizen, the Australian government imposed similar restrictions on Eritrean diplomats based in Australia.

 These detainees were not the only foreigners in the prisons of Asmara. There are several others from many parts of the world. The Swedish-Eritrean journalist and writer, Dawit Isaak, has been held in an Eritrean prison since 2001 without trial and is considered a traitor by the Eritrean government, even though the Swedish government and other notable organizations have tried very hard to get him released.

Please read the entire analysis here

The Changing Landscape of Humanitarian Aid

The mobilization of resources to a humanitarian disaster zone is as much political as it is logistical. Recent conflicts have called into question the neutrality principle to which humanitarian actors traditionally adhere. But delivering assistance in times of crisis depends largely on gaining access to reliable resources and information – often from biased actors.

By Cynthia Schweer for ISN Insights

As the media continues to roll out scenes from Japan and Libya, the complexity of delivering humanitarian aid in times of crisis – be they natural or man-made – is abundantly clear. Each year, approximately 500 disasters kill an average of 75,000 people and affect nearly 200 million more. In 2009, the international community contributed a total of $15.1 billion to humanitarian efforts through government and private channels.

The alleviation of human suffering during humanitarian crises is largely an exercise in the efficient and rapid mobilization of material resources and human capacity. As a logistical exercise, humanitarian efforts require the synchronized delivery of human resources and both durable and perishable goods in difficult and uncertain environments. But the complexity is more than merely logistical. While resource mobilization has obvious human and economic implications, humanitarian efforts often have less evident political implications. Access to and allocation of resources and information is contingent on the cooperation of those wielding power.

Changing landscape

Prior to the 1990s, relief work was confined to a relatively small number of organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Medecins Sans Frontiers (MSF), operating according to widely held principles of humanity, neutrality and impartiality. These organizations were allowed to operate in ‘safe zones’ because of their perceived independence from political and military motivations. However, this philosophy has come under scrutiny in the last two decades, as both the scale and complexity of crises have increased, while, at the same time, the number and variety of organizations have proliferated, creating a cacophony of players and motivations.

Please read the entire publication here

 

Iraq expells 6 US congressmen

The Iraqi government has expelled six US congressmen from the country. The decision was so shocking to the US embassy in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, that only 24 hours later the US embassy declared that the congressmen had made personal statements

Press TV June 14, 2011

What raised the Iraqis’ anger was a request by these congressmen that Iraq pays a portion — and even up to a half — of the expense of the US occupation of this country. The US delegation of congressmen had also requested a visit to Camp Ashraf, whish was also opposed by Iraqi authorities.

This decision of the Iraqis was welcomed by various factions within the Middle Eastern country to a point where even Ayad Alawi’s faction, which enjoys warm ties with Saudi Arabia and the US, wasn’t able to disagree with it.

The US did not enter Iraq at the invitation of executed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein for the Americans to want to ask for compensation from the next Iraqi government.

Furthermore, US troops were never welcomed as ‘freedom forces’ by the Iraqi people.

The murders that US troops have committed in Iraqi prisons or on the streets of various Iraqi cities have not left a positive impression of the US military on Iraqi citizens. Despite the fact that the US forces ousted Saddam, Iraqi citizens never believed that these efforts were aimed at freeing them from dictatorship and not aimed at protecting US interests.

The monthly cost of maintaining US troops in Iraq was USD 4.4 billion in 2003 and USD 12 billion in 2008. So far the US has spent nearly USD 1.8 trillion in Iraq in the form of military hardware and personnel. Some analysts from within the US have even put this figure much higher than the official amount.

In September 2010, the Iraqi government agreed to pay USD 400 million in damages to the US for damages incurred during Saddam Hussein’s regime. In its 60th assembly last May, the Iraqi parliament agreed to pay this amount. The decision was met by widespread protests by the people and various political groups.

The US government has never officially asked Iraq to share the cost of the war but it tries to compensate itself by exclusively granting military and civil reconstruction projects to US companies.

Please read the entire story here

Themis: Looking at the aftermath of the HBGary Federal scandal

by Steve Ragan – Mar 22 2011, 06:10  The Tech Herald Security

In the aftermath of the HBGary Federal hack, there are still questions and concerns surrounding the actions taken by the government intelligence firms, collectively known as Team Themis, and the law firm Hunton & Williams. While examining current events, and looking back at Team Themis, it’s clear that politics can be a dirty game to play.

In February, two major stories developed in the wake of Anonymous’ attack on HBGary Federal. The common thread between them was Hunton & Williams, a large law firm with strong political connections, and Team Themis.

First there was the story The Tech Herald broke concerning WikiLeaks, where Team Themis created plans to stop WikiLeaks by targeting supporters and journalists. The second story, broken by ThinkProgress, centered on a plot to target unions and political opponents, including families, by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Team Themis consists of HBGary Federal, Palantir Technologies, and Berico Technologies. Both Berico and Palantir have distanced themselves from the plots, and denounced their implications. Aaron Barr resigned his post as CEO of HBGary Federal to focus on family and rebuilding his reputation.

However, those actions did little to placate critics, and House Democrats called for hearings on Team Themis. Earlier this month, Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Georgia 4th District), as well as 19 others, called for a Congressional investigation into the actions of Team Themis to determine if the contractors violated any federal laws.

Please read this in depth article here

Raymond Davis to be arraigned tomorrow

Pakistan Security Brief – March 15, 2011 at Critical Threats

The News reports that U.S.-contractor Raymond Davis will be arraigned on murder charges on Wednesday. Legal experts reported that the formal trial would begin in the next hearing. Former foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi also argued that the U.S. should present proof of its claims of diplomatic immunity for Raymond Davis. Qureshi stated that, “It is my stand that Davis dose not enjoy immunity and I took this stand after a briefing from senior officers of the Foreign Office.”

Pakistan insists tough stance on Raymond Davis issue

English.news.cn 2011-03-07 22:05:13

ISLAMABAD, March 7 (Xinhua) — While the United States once again called for immediate release of Raymond Davis who shot dead two Pakistanis, Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said Monday that the decision on whether Davis enjoys diplomatic immunity will be made by the court.

During a meeting with U.S. special Envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan, Marc Grossman, Gilani said that Pakistan’s stance on this issue is based on principles and there can be no negotiations on it, according to local TV channel DAWN news.

He said that the decision regarding Davis’ immunity will be made by the court and it should not affect bilateral ties between Pakistan and the U.S..

Gilani also urged the U.S. to provide the remaining amount of aid for Pakistan through the coalition support fund.

Gilani said that Pakistan wants peace in Afghanistan and suggestions for sustainable peace in the region would be welcomed.

Grossman told the prime minister that the stalled aid for Pakistan will be provided very soon. He also appealed to Gilani to release Davis.  Please read the entire story here

US Registar Yanks WikiLeaks Domain

US Registar Yanks WikiLeaks Domain

It is interesting that a country that espouses Freedom of Speech will resort to such tactics.

Now, some will say, “Well, he is releasing secret information that might cost lives”.

There is, however, doubtful support of that contention.

If there is a problem in that area, it is not Americans having access to that information who will pose threats to those who might be at risk. Obviously, it is foreigners who have access that pose that risk.

So, the rest of the world can read WikiLeaks, since it is only the US Registrar blocking the domain. Consequently, it is only Americans who are denied the information.

Is it, perhaps, more likely that the government doesn’t want US to know what they are up to?

What other websites will be disabled the same way, because the government doesn’t want criticism or exposure?

You can access WikiLeaks at either of these addresses

http://213.251.145.96/

http://46.59.1.2/

Missing on resumes of 2012 contenders: Military service

POLITICO

The resumes of the Republicans most frequently mentioned as potential presidential candidates are studded with impressive accomplishments and experience at the highest levels of government.

Yet nearly all of them are missing a tour of duty that for much of American history has been a prerequisite for the presidency: military service.

Of the 16 top GOP presidential prospects for 2012, only Rep. Ron Paul and Texas Gov. Rick Perry have ever served in the Armed Forces. Since President Barack Obama also never served in the military, the odds are that in two years Americans are likely to cast their votes in the first presidential race in nearly 70 years where neither major party nominee has ever worn the nation’s uniform.

The last time that happened was 1944, when New York Republican Gov. Thomas Dewey lost to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who had been crippled by polio.

The veteran-free presidential contest would take place as the nation debates the future of its military presence in Afghanistan-now the nation’s longest-ever war-and attempts to figure out how to limit the American presence in Iraq.

Former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.), a Medal of Honor winner who lost part of his leg in Vietnam, points out that while the scenario once might have seemed highly unusual, such a small percentage of the population now serves in the military that few voters care whether a presidential candidate has served in the military.

“I don’t see a lot of evidence that it matters to voters anymore,” Kerrey said. “We have an all-volunteer force now. . Once people didn’t have real skin in the game, they began to lose interest.”

What’s developed, he said, is a political culture that’s a lot more willing to send men and women to war-and one that’s less likely to question leaders who do.

“I think you lose what you would call the political trip wire on expeditionary efforts. Anything that requires men and women to go into harm’s way is an awful lot more difficult to do if it’s broadly shared by all households,” Kerrey said. “I promise you that it would come up at town hall meetings if every 18-year-old had to go sign up for the draft and possibly go to war.”  Read the entire story here