Jehan Perera in Colombo

The events were conflicting. Two significant events took place on Saturday last revealing the contradictions and tensions within Sri Lankan society. The first was an award giving ceremony that took place in the Presidential Secretariat. Two of Sri Lanka's most distinguished elder statesmen, Sarvodaya leader Dr A T Ariyaratne and Justice C G Weeramantry received the country's highest national award, the Sri Lankabhimanaya (Pride of Sri Lanka) from President Mahinda Rajapaksa.
   The award is conferred on those who are believed to have rendered exceptional service to the nation, and there can only be five such award recipients at any time. The citations that accompanied the award were short, but contained the core contributions of the two award winners. Dr Ariyaratne's was for peace, non-violence and social transformation, while Justice Weeramantry's was for human rights and international law.
   In the past several years, the Sarvodaya Movement has organized a large number of peace meditations, where the numbers of people attending have exceeded a hundred thousand, and sometimes approximating half a million. Dr Ariyaratne has demonstrated that the call of peace, non-violence and social transformation can attract a vast following, provided effective leadership is given. Drawing on the Buddhist tradition, the Sarvodaya leader has shown how spiritual values can be linked to popular movements for social and political change.
   After the brief investiture ceremony the President hosted the award recipients, their families and other invitees to a tea party. Together with Ministers Nimal Siripala de Silva and Prof. G L Peiris, and Defense Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, the President engaged in both personal and political discussion with those present. At the tea party, the President was able to use one of his greatest strengths, which is his plain charm, to make his points strike home, and give rise to the hope that whatever the reality is at present all would be well at the end.
   As a long time human rights activist when in the political opposition, President Rajapaksa has had relationships with many of those present that went back many decades. At that time it would have been nearly impossible to see him as presiding over a war machine as formidable and determined as the Sri Lankan military has become seeking to protect the country against the LTTE at any cost, including the mass violation of human rights.
   
   Mass arrests
   Ironically, on the day of the awards ceremony, hundreds of Tamil citizens living in Colombo were being rounded up in a swift security crackdown that was reminiscent of the attempted eviction of Tamil temporary residents of Colombo in June this year. It is likely that the two recent bombings in Colombo, both of which were suspected to be by the LTTE, in which over twenty civilians were killed and many more injured led to the latest phenomenon of mass arrests.
   Like in the case of the attempted eviction, the people who have been arrested after being questioned include women with children. The mass eviction of Tamils in June was halted when there was a public outcry and the Supreme Court intervened. The appearance of ethnic cleansing was clearly unacceptable.
   However, the government appears to have devised an alternative plan to get rid of the same category of people, this time arresting them. The violation of human rights and international law may be clear to human rights activists. But politically and practically it may be more difficult to make a case of human rights violation this time as the government will argue that the terrorist attacks of the Tamil Tigers necessitate the most stringent security measures.
   The weekend news media was filled with the photographs of the dead and injured as a result of the suspected Tamil bombings. A particularly moving photograph was that of a bandaged five year old girl lying in a hospital bed clutching a doll, but unaware that she would never see her father alive again while the doctors battled to save her mother's life.
   The violations of human rights and international law taking place today with the deliberate targeting of civilians taking place on both sides must necessarily shock the conscience of those committed to those values and indeed, those who lead the country. The positive feature in this gloomy situation is that those vested with state power chose the values of peace, non-violence, social transformation, human rights and international law in deciding on the award winners.
   On the other hand, the main problem in today's governance is that government leaders appear to believe that the exigencies of actual governance calls for actions that are at complete variance with the higher values they idealise. The main failure of the present government is that it has permitted the Tamil Tigers to set the agenda for its own conduct. The government has become dependent on making the war against the LTTE, whatever its cost, the main plank in its strategy of governance.
   
   Plus one
   When viewed as a package, the values of peace, non-violence, social transformation, human rights and international law stand in opposition to the use of force which is the main strategy that the government is adopting at the present time to deal with the LTTE. In this context, an interesting concept sketched out during the course of the informal discussions at the awards ceremony was that of "13th Amendment + 1” which was articulated by the President. This could be the beginning of a political process which could eventually overtake the military confrontation as the main determinant of the future.
   The 13th Amendment to the constitution was passed into law as a direct consequence of the Indo Lanka Peace Accord of 1987. Under that peace accord India agreed to commit peace keeping troops to disarm the Tamil militants, while Sri Lanka committed to devolving power to the regions on a significant scale. The 13th Amendment took the devolution of powers to the very limits of the unitary state, as the Supreme Court agreed that it was in conformity with the constitutional principles of a unitary state by the narrowest of margins, 5-4.
   Under President Rajapaksa, the government has taken the position that any political solution has to be within the framework of the unitary state. As explained by government representatives at various fora, the political leadership appears to believe that the present political realities in the country do not permit them to go beyond the unitary framework, which to the prevailing majority Sinhalese mind-set is synonymous with the unity of the country. The only option that the government appears to be willing to consider is to work within the framework of the 13th Amendment and endow the provincial councils with the full range of powers and resources.
   In addition, the government appears to be acknowledging the need to offer something more, while still remaining within the unitary framework. In this context the concept of "13th Amendment + 1” can only be meaningful if it also incorporates a governmental approach that is in harmony with the values of peace, non-violence, social transformation, human rights and international law recognized by the government at the national awards ceremony for Dr Ariyaratne and Justice Weeramantry.
   If the full and genuine implementation of provincial council system under the 13th Amendment had commenced two decades ago, it could have gone at least a part of the way to addressing the grievances of the Tamil people. On the other hand, the upholding of human rights must begin now and cannot wait for the future. President Rajapaksa's assurances for the future need to begin now and reflect the public commitment he had to human rights before he became President.

^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE

Jonaid Iqbal

There is a reasonable chance that the election will go through and the two mainstream parties -- Nawaz Sharif's Muslim League and Benazir Bhutto's People's party -- would not boycott but contest the general election, scheduled for January 8, 2008.
   This optimism has been generated after the meeting of two former premiers and old rivals -- Benazir Bhutto (BB) and Nawaz Sharif (NS) -- who addressed a joint news conference at Zardari (BB's husband's) house at Islamabad, on Monday night.
   The two prominent leaders held a three-hour meeting on Monday night, where Nawaz Sharif had come, for the first time ever, from his Raiwind home to persuade BB to boycott the election citing unfriendly times, deposed judges, curb on media, emergency and PCO as reasons for boycott. Raiwind is the head office of the annual Tablighi Jammat which invites people to hold fast to the tenets of Islam [similar to the annual Biswa Ijtema held at Uttara, Dhaka, the second largest congregation of Muslims after the Holy Hajj, organised by the Bangladesh Tablighi Jamaat]
   NS's own nomination paper had been rejected on Monday by the Election Commission at Lahore, but that would not demoralise him. But he cites this as an example of official hindrance, and as proof that the next election would be muddled -- on the side of the ruling party -- and that none should expect neutrality from the present lot of caretakers as many among them were Musharraf's close friends.
   BB is all for contesting the election, saying it would leave the field open to Musharraf's party (the PML-Q) and the people's movement generated in the campaign might sway President Musharraf to yield to the present lawyers, journalists and students who now want him to stand out. Some of her demands, and that President has met some of popular demands and also promised to lift emergency and the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) on the 16th of this month.
   Since the last week, President Musharraf has been saying he was working for smooth transition to democracy-- incidentally in his pronouncement he might have missed the point that behind the lines he may have been decrying the legislatures he allowed to be convened under the former Legal Framework Order, as though it was not the real thing. If one gives weight to this line of thought, then you can't blame the feeling found in some of the parties that constitute the opposition that the President, after election, would persuade a new Assembly to do a constitutional amendment again to indemnify his past actions, as he did with the previous Assembly dissolved after completing five years' term on November 16.
   However, in an interview with an American TV channel he seems to having doubts whether his action (which have gone awry since March 9 after he ousted the Chief Justice on March 3, and appointed a new Chief Justice on clamping PCO and emergency on Nov. 3) and the election would yield suitable results. "I would step down if I don't find favourable government.” he is reported to have said to the interviewer. The protest of students, lawyers and journalists continues unabated every day, together with a debate whether to boycott the election or to contest it.
   On the first point, Maulana Fazlur Rahman, whose position is that his party would contest the elections, met strong opposition from journalists and civil society members, after he said judges who had been deposed on November 3, could not be restored. .'What had been done, could not be undone,' he had said but had to endure cries of 'Shame, Shame 'from the audience.
   However, in one point he was clear: A boycott call must ensure that no one came outside his home to cast a vote.
   Here, the Maulana was pointing to March 1977, when polling booths were completely empty after the Opposition parties protested and gave a call that the election called by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1977, were rigged.

^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE

Putin asserts Moscow's foreign policy by visiting Iran

Vladimir Radyuhin in Moscow

President Vladimir Putin, when he traveled to Teheran in October, became the first Russian leader after Josef Stalin to visit Iran. If Stalin was in that country in 1943 for talks with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt at the height of the Second World War, Putin's visit came as US President George W. Bush raised the spectre of a Third World War.
   Putin's prime goal in going to Iran was to ward off the danger of war. The US has refused to rule out military action against Iran and the hawks in Washington have been calling openly for an attack on Iran. The Pentagon has made the largest military deployment in the region since the 2003 war, with half of the US Navy's warships positioned within striking distance of Iran. Bush upped the ante by putting an equation mark between a nuclearised Iran and another world war.
   "If you're interested in avoiding World War Three" it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from [having] the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon, he warned while speaking at a press conference.
   Putin, who has consistently advocated a negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear problem, wanted above all to make the military option as difficult as possible for the US. The very fact that Teheran was the venue of a five-nation Caspian Summit, which was the formal reason for Putin's trip to Iran, served to deter US warmongers. It destroyed the wall of isolation the US had been building around Iran, improved the geostrategic climate around that country, and demonstrated its neighbours' solidarity with it.
   The five Caspian nations - Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan - pledged to deny outside countries the right to use their territories for launching military action. "The parties underline that under no circumstances would they allow other nations to use their territory for waging aggression or other military action against any of the parties," a declaration adopted at the Teheran summit said.
   This pledge dashed US hopes of using Azerbaijan's territory as a staging ground for strikes against Iran, which has a common border with Azerbaijan.
   The countries also reiterated Iran's right to nuclear energy programmes, stressing that any country that is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) can "carry out research and can use nuclear energy for peaceful means without discrimination", the declaration said.
   In order to deny the US any pretext for attacking Iran, Putin needed to get Iran to cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This issue topped the agenda of his talks in Teheran. If there is a world leader well positioned to discuss this thorny subject with Iranian leaders, it is certainly Putin, given his consistent support for Iran in its standoff with the West.
   It is true that Russia voted for limited United Nations sanctions against Iran in December 2006, but then Iran is itself to blame for this. Iran gave Russia reason to think that it was misusing Russia's diplomatic support when last year it first accepted the Russian proposal to enrich uranium on Russian territory but after Russia went public with the deal it suddenly backed out. The Kremlin accused Teheran of "abusing our constructive relations and doing nothing to convince our colleagues of the consistency of Teheran's policies".
   Notwithstanding the spat and the sanctions, Russia delivered, by January 2007, 29 sophisticated Tor Ml air defence systems to Iran under a $700-million contract signed in 2005. The state-of-the-art short-range missiles, capable of tracking 48 targets and shooting down two targets simultaneously at a height of six kilometres, significantly enhanced Iran's capability to repulse air and missile attacks and gave Iran a psychological boost.
   Ahead of his trip to Teheran, Putin emphasised Russia's role as the main defender of lran in the face of Western pressure. During talks with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defence Secretary Robert Gates, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in the week leading up to his Iranian visit, Putin issued stern warnings to the West not to tighten sanctions against Iran.
   Pointing to the absence of any "objective data" to prove that Iran was seeking nuclear capability, Putin told his Western visitors to drop their "unilateral" approach and "periodic calls to use military force against Iran" as "these undermine and impede our collective effort."
   In Teheran, Putin also offered strong support to Iran on the issue of nuclear energy. "We believe that every country has the right to develop peaceful nuclear energy programmes," he said, stressing that Russia was the only country that was helping Iran develop its nuclear programme.
   At the same time Putin urged Iranian leaders to cooperate fully with the IAEA and offered Iran incentives to clear outstanding questions about its nuclear programme. Completing the construction of the Bushehr nuclear station was one of them. Russia has put on hold plans to operationalise the nuclear reactor it is building at Bushehr. citing erratic funding by Iran and problems with sourcing equipment from third countries.
   While reiterating Russia's commitment to complete and start up the Bushehr project, Putin refused to be pinned down to deadlines. "I only made promises to my mother when I was a little boy" he told Iranian journalists.
   Putin said the two sides were negotiating on revisions to the Bushehr contract to clarify legal, financial and technological matters, whereafter a decision on fuel can be made. Putin is clearly using the nuclear station issue as his leverage with Teheran in prodding it to open up its entire nuclear programme.
   The Russian President took advantage of his first-ever meeting with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to put forward what Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani described as "an important proposal on Iran's nuclear programme". This could involve Iran's participation in an international fuel services centre Russia has set up in Angarsk, Siberia, and possibly a joint fuel enrichment programme in Iran under international control.
   Putin's proposals have intensified infighting in Iran over nuclear diplomacy tactics. Four days after Putin's visit Larijani was fired from his post as Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. However, the European Union's (EU) foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said that Larijani had maintained his authority and leadership in talks with the EU in Rome on October 23-24, where he represented Iran jointly with his successor, Saeed Jalili.
   Little wonder that Putin was enraged by Washington's decision to choose this delicate moment to impose sweeping unilateral sanctions on Iran, the harshest in nearly three decades. He compared the US to "a madman running around with a razor blade in his hand".
   Given Washington's consistent record of trying to thwart any compromise with Iran, Putin wisely refused to make Russia's relations with Iran hostage to its nuclear programme. Speaking in Teheran, Putin said that the historical and cultural ties between the two countries were so strong that "we will always reach agreement on any problem that may come up, because we understand each other".
   Russia and Iran share strategic interests in Central Asia, the Caspian and the Caucasus. Putin pointed out that the two countries had jointly helped end the civil war in Tajikistan in the 1990s and were working to normalise the situation in Afghanistan. In contrast to many other Muslim nations, Iran has always treated Chechnya as Russia's internal matter and played an instrumental role in the Organisation of Islamic Conference to prevent it from openly supporting Chechen rebels. Russia and Iran both have a stake in maintaining peace and stability in Central Asia and the Caucasus and are both concerned over the growing US presence in the region.
   Russia and Iran, the world's largest and second-largest holders of natural gas reserves, both support the idea of creating a confederation of gas-producing countries on the lines of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Iran has observer status in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and is likely to be a member of an energy club that Russia is planning for the SCO.
   Putin used his visit to Teheran to strengthen bilateral ties and give them a strategic dimension. Reports said the two countries were discussing 130 economic projects together worth more than $100 billion. During Putin's visit, the sides "agreed to increase the two nations' economic and business exchanges to $200 billion within the next 10 years", the Iranian President's website said. This would mean a 100-fold jump in bilateral trade from the current level of $2 billion. Putin is reported to have told Ayatollah Khamenei that Russia was ready to "expand ties without limitations" with Iran.
   Russia is Iran's main arms and technology supplier. In the past 15 years Russia has supplied Iran with combat planes, helicopters, diesel sub-marines, tanks and air defence systems. Teheran has given Moscow a long shopping list of weapon platforms it wants to buy. Russia has agreed to supply engines for Iran's new combat planes, Azarakhsh and Shafaq, as well as for the J-10 jet fighters Iran has bought from China.
   Russia's natural gas monopoly Gazprorm, which has already invested $750 million in projects in Iran, is planning to invest $1.7billion in building an oil refinery jointly with Iran in neighbouring Armenia. The plant will process oil pumped from Tabriz in northern Iran. Iran's Deputy Oil Minister Hossein Noqrekar-Shirazi said that the two sides had discussed further projects involving refineries, pipelines and gas fields in Iran during Putin's visit. Teheran supports Cazprom's possible involvement in the construction of the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline. Both Putin and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cited energy, transportation and aerospace as promising sectors for joint Iranian-Russian investments.
   The Caspian Summit showed that Russia and Iran agreed on most regional issues. The only area of disagreement is the divisive issue of sharing the energy-rich Caspian seabed, which has dogged the five coastal states since their first summit in 1991. However, the Caspian nations reiterated their resolve to solve the problem and agreed to hold their summit meetings annually.
   Moscow and Teheran are both opposed to Western plans to build gas and oil pipelines across the Caspian bypassing Russia and Iran; both countries insisted at the Caspian Summit that such projects required the consent of all the five littoral states. Russia strongly supported Iran's initiative to set up an economic cooperation organisation of the Caspian nations and volunteered to host the first meeting of the new body in Astrakhan next year.
   Putin's visit to Teheran strengthened an emerging strategic axis between Russia, Iran and Armenia as a counterbalance in the Caucasus to NATO-aspiring Georgia and Azerbaijan. Within days of Putin's departure from Iran, Abmadinejad travelled to Armenia to bolster ties between the two countries.
   Putin welcomed Iran's signing of an agreement with Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan on the sidelines of the Caspian Summit to build a railway line along the Caspian linking Iran with Russia. It will be part of the North-South Transport Corridor, a joint project of Russia, Iran and India. The Russian Railways, the state-owned railway company of Russia, is already involved in a multinational project to build a 350-km railway between the town of Astara on Azerbaijan's border and Kazvin on Iranian territory.
   Putin's visit to Iran demonstrated Russia's new assertive foreign policy, which crystallised as the Russian economy bounced back from the crisis of the 1990s. The visit strengthened Russia's relations with Iran, raised its profile in the region and undermined the US bullying tactics towards Iran.

^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE

No interference outside ballot box, please

Fakir S. Ayazuddin in Karachi

Today Pakistan is at the centre of the world stage, with the media focused on the events as they unfold. Never in our history have we experienced such intense attention. Every columnist from Boston to Bombay is busy giving advice to us as well to the US on how to execute the moves and what not to do.
   Under normal circumstances this media attention would cost millions of dollars to achieve. We have been placed on the world map, and the awareness of our predicament is the subject of numerous talk shows in the US. Musharraf has managed to get this attention certainly not by design, but circumstances have brought this about. He has however managed to promote successfully the importance of Pakistan in the region, and in the world. It would be difficult at this point in time to replace him from his pivotal role by a prime minister under these circumstances. We must consider his value to the nation where he has played such an important part for almost a decade.
   Unfortunately, his backup of ministers was mediocre, and we did not take advantage of this media attention. There was no coordinated commercial thrust to exploit this golden opportunity to our national advantage. As our bureaucracy is conditioned to the status quo, they could not visualise these openings for the country. We actually needed young thinkers with their refreshingly modern ideas as the old-timers are not attuned to the idea of change and allow such projection. It is still not too late for us to quickly send teams of young designers and businessmen to expand upon these openings, while the images are fresh. No longer will they get blank looks upon saying they are from Pakistan and having to explain where exactly we are located. We may not have caught up with India, but at least we are on the map. We are getting almost as much space as Iraq, and at a much less human cost.
   Pakistan is at the threshold of a new beginning in Politics. The national and provincial elections are in front of the people and they will decide the fate of the parties for the next five years.
   Some of our leaders are appealing to the US to lift the emergency and restore the judges to the Supreme Court. Why must we Pakistanis invite American interference in our internal sovereign matters? Surely Pakistan is the best judge of what is good for us. While the opposition is right in making their demands through the judicial process, in the media, and on the streets-these are the inherent rights of our citizens, which they are exercising diligently (and being beaten up for) and being broadcast around the world. This freedom is new to us Pakistanis and emergency or not, this will not go away.
   With the arrival of the Sharif brothers, the Americans have finally realised that their insistence of foisting of a corrupt leadership will not work. Now there is likely to be competition between the two corrupt leaderships. The Pakistani is no longer the mindless peasant of old but is a TV educated highly savvy individual, proud of his heritage and disgusted by the antics of the political leaders.
   The election may provide surprises for many of our hopefuls, for the individual vote will be exercised very carefully and the results will show that the choice of the people has been made. However the shrill cry "Rigged” will, no doubt, reverberate throughout the land, for this is the norm here, and part of our national psyche. We will never accept a defeat-we would much rather shift the blame on unscrupulous methods used by the opponents.
   We must learn to project our views inside the ballot box. We are forever using extraneous methods, appealing to the army chief to remove the government, so why blame the chief for taking over the reign himself? We must now play by the rules, the national and provincial assemblies; and the courts are the final arbiters. There should be no more interference from anyone outside the ballot box.
   And if a foreign government does indeed make statements, then we should strongly protest it as blatant interference. We must also learn from our neighbours to keep our criticism within the house, and never go public, especially abroad over any of our issues no matter how mundane. We must establish our self respect in the house first. Let us be proud of Pakistan and of our heritage.
   Finally, let us maximise the advantages to be gained by our newly found prominence.

^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE

Fazle Rashid

All talk, empty promises
   All talk and empty promises is the heading of the just concluded Middle East peace summit in the US. The heading succinctly portrays the outcome of the deliberations. Hotel where delegates and journalists were staying in Annapolis, Maryland greeted its guests with a couplet from Walt Whitman which read 'peace is always beautiful'.
   Annapolis peace talks are over. Peace initiatives will now move to Moscow. Israel and Palestine have expressed themselves in favour of reaching a peace agreement by the end of 2008 as a gift to President Bush whose occupancy at the white House will end by Jan 20, 2009. They made similar pledges before with no results.
   Analysts on both sides may disagree on what exactly happened at Annapolis but on one thing there is near unanimity: no one outside the Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams holds out much hope that this supposedly new peace process will get any further than the old ones, Sydney Morning Herald reported.
   Annapolis declarations have further weakened the Palestinian position, said one analyst. Annapolis declaration is death sentence for the quartet because there is no role for EU, UN and Russia. United States with a 'lame duck' president will be the sole arbitrator. President Bush however has stated that he would not impose any decision.
   It will be the US and not Israel who will decide whether Palestinians have complied with their obligations or not. No US president will have courage to do anything that will annoy Israel and the Jews.
   The thorny issues at the heart of the conflict are the border of the new Palestinian state, Israeli withdrawal from occupied East Jerusalem and return of the Palestinian refugees to Israel. There are grounds for optimism in the fact that the peace summit was participated by both Saudi Arabia and Syria, a country often described as a rogue state by President Bush. Beyond that however the future looks cloudy, an analysts said.
   
   Putin wins a landslide
   Russia's main opposition party led by former world chess champion Garry Kasporov has vowed to challenge Vladimir Putin's landslide election victory in the face of widespread allegations of vote rigging, bribery and fraud.
   The White House urged Russia to investigate opposition charges that there were widespread riggings. Putin's United Russia party won 60 per cent of the votes.
   Kremlin, the corridor of power in Russia, hailed the results as a signal from Russia voters that they want Putin, who will perhaps be the next prime minister and is to wield more power than the president.
   The opposition in Russia will challenge the election results in the Supreme Court. They may also decide to boycott the parliament. The allegations of vote fraud may drive a wedge between increasingly aggressive Russia and the West, the US in particular.
   Vladimir Putin a former KGB chief is hugely popular and is credited for restoring the health of the Russian economy which was in tatters and national pride after the demise of the Soviet Union. Russia and China are two countries that talk eye to eye with US.
   
   Bali climate summit
   The United States has failed to offer any hope that it will embrace the binding targets to cut its greenhouse gas emissions on the opening day of the UN sponsored conference on climate change in Bali, Indonesia.
   The delegates to the conference are keenly aware and under intense pressure to produce an agreement that will replace the Kyoto Agreement by 2012. (Also read 'Is post-2012 climate plan in Bali wrong expectations?' by Martin Khor on page 11).The delegates are worried. The UN's apex scientific body has warned that without urgent action dangerous climate change this century will be inevitable. Realising the prospect a grim future the EU has urged nations to reduce temperature by more than two degrees.
   Popular birds like Nightingale and Woodpecker are vanishing. Climate change has been cited as the culprit. The number of these birds has dwindle to the point where they could be classified as endangered.
   
   Chavez suffers rebuff
   Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, who has earned notoriety for his acerbic tongue and abrasive language, suffered a huge political rebuff in his bid to run for the presidency with no term limit to accelerate his socialist revolution.
   In a fiercely contested referendum voters said 'No' to a raft of reforms including expropriate private property and censoring news. If the voters had agreed it would have been a copy of the Cuban constitution.
   Chavez like Putin in Russia remains popular and powerful. It was his first ballot box loss since he swept into office nine years ago. Students, civil rights groups and opposition parties all lined up against him. They accused him of pushing the constitutional reforms to set up dictatorship.
   Admired as the champion of the poor Chavez, 53, wanted to rule for life. He will have to step down in 2013.
   
   Pakistan's political woes
   Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Shariff two former prime ministers of Pakistan who were condemned for corruption and were forced to leave the country have decided to join hands and oppose machinations of Parvez Musharraf.
   Bhutto and Sharrif never in good terms have pledged to resist a 'doctored' election. The election commission has barred Nawaz Shariff from contesting the coming elections. As events turned out Benazir and Shariff are popular with huge following.
   Washington's concern over the political turmoil that is sweeping Pakistan is not so much for the country but for the safety of the nukes the country possess. The US fears that political instability in Pakistan could land the nuclear arms in the hands of the terrorists or the rogue countries. Pakistan is believed to have 50 to 150 nuclear bombs.
   The Pentagon has not really developed answer for how to deal with nuclear weapons stashed in Pakistan and high mountain regions. It is an unbelievably daunting task, a Pentagon official indicated. Direct intervention, an option reviewed by Pentagon, would worsen bilateral ties.
   Pakistan and with it Parvez Musharraf are the trusted US allies in its fight against terrorism.
   
   All about heart and AIDS
   High blood pressure and cholesterol have long been diagnosed as reasons for heart attack. Doctors now say higher level of Omega 3 in human body could considerably eliminate the chances of heart attack.
   The first heart transplant operation was conducted by Christian Bernard in South Africa 40 years ago. The patient lived for 18 days. There have been more than 55,000 heart transplant since then.
   The first case of AIDS was detected in 1982. The dreadful disease has since swept the world. More than 25,000 people have died of the disease. There are more than 60 million people worldwide most of them in South Africa and India have tested positive with HIV.
   Bangladesh has been identified as a danger zone.
   
   Recession in US
   Corporate profits are in recession in the United States. The entire US economy may not be far behind, Sydney Morning Herald said. Slower sales, higher energy cost, wage, higher labour cost are forcing companies to reduce spending and hiring.
   Companies in Europe have failed to place a single high yield bond since the credit crunch began in August. The situation is not likely to improve in the immediate future.
   Situation in China, a booming economy, is rather gloomy. There is no reason for Bangladesh to be complacent. The long term loans Bangladesh has sought from the donors will be hard to get.
   
   Oilman jailed
   Oscar Wyatt, 83, a self made Texas oil billionaire pleaded guilty of violating the UN rules in the oil for food programme in Iraq. He paid kickbacks to Saddam Hossain to win the lucrative contracts.
   Iraq was allowed to sell oil only if the profits were used to buy food and medicines. Wyatt admitted that he paid $200,000 in kickbacks through a bank account in Jordan. The witnesses described as a wash in all sides, front companies, illicit payments and international political machinations.
   So far seven individuals and two companies including Chevron have been convicted. Chevron has paid $34 million to settle criminal and civil liabilities.
   An UN enquiry team headed by Paul Volcker, former chairman of US Federal Reserve found that the programme was corrupted by as many as 2,200 in 66 countries which together paid $1.8 billion in kickbacks to win contracts.
   This was the biggest UN sponsored programme.

^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE