War

Until the philosophy which hold one race superior
And another
Inferior
Is finally
And permanently
Discredited
And abandoned –
Everywhere is war –
Me say war.

That until there no longer
First class and second class citizens of any nation
Until the colour of a man’s skin
Is of no more significance than the colour of his eyes –
Me say war.

That until the basic human rights
Are equally guaranteed to all,
Without regard to race –
Dis a war.

That until that day
The dream of lasting peace,
World citizenship
Rule of international morality
Will remain in but a fleeting illusion to be pursued,
But never attained –
Now everywhere is war – war.

And until the ignoble and unhappy regimes
that hold our brothers in Angola,
In Mozambique,
South Africa
Sub-human bondage
Have been toppled,
Utterly destroyed –
Well, everywhere is war –
Me say war.

War in the east,
War in the west,
War up north,
War down south –
War – war –
Rumours of war.
And until that day,
The African continent
Will not know peace,
We Africans will fight – we find it necessary –
And we know we shall win
As we are confident
In the victory

Of good over evil –
Good over evil, yeah!

Marley

So what the hell, exactly, are we doing rushing around the world, acting as if we were under siege from an alien race living at the Earth’s core, popping up in a new hot spot every 15 months? Why have we seen the need to remake our national character and Constitutional principles to bring democracy to Libya? The issue is not “withdrawing from the world”—a solid, reliable, credible, alliance-defending America could still stiffen the global community’s spine at key points without making every new chaotic outbreak its business, and without allowing presidents to claim the right to parachute into any war that struck their fancy.

The Republic of War
by Mike M – 1 February, 2012 – Paradigm Cure

Of all the potential Problems with our Republic that Desperately Need Solving—you know the list; Debt, Deficit, Runaway Entitlements, Runaway Inequality, Economic Crisis Hangover, Infrastructure Collapse, Energy Transition, Education, the God-awful state of popular music—very few analyses focus on the dismal reality that we have become a Push-Button Warmaking State.

The Conventional Wisdomites sigh and roll their eyes every time the likes of Andrew Bacevich give another talk about America’s global ambitions and the wrecking of Constitutional restraints in presidential war powers. Respectable foreign policy journals and magazines hardly publish such irresponsible dreck. But the fact is, we’re now “at war” hither and yon, with no end in sight; and what it means for the Nation, few care to investigate in serious ways. And the issue now is that the problem looks ready to run utterly out of control.

“It’s time to think seriously about intervening in Syria,” writes Steven Cook in a piece at the Atlantic. Which, regardless of the substance of this terrifying article, is a useful title, anyway, because you can shave off the last word, insert a blank, and get a pretty good sense of where we’re at as a nation.

“It’s time to think seriously about intervening in ______.” Shop around at your favorite magazines, op-ed pages, think tank web sites, and blogs, and I dare you to find too many troubled or troublesome states that don’t get nominated to be shoved in there. Cross off Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya; those are our most recently done deals (for now, but perhaps not forever; as Exhibit A in Recurrent Interventionism, I give you Our Good Friend Mr. Haiti). You’ll easily discover Syria, Iran, Yemen, and Somalia, for starters, as long as you are willing to take the term “intervening” in a broad sense (but then, when we start bombing people, engaging in targeted killings in their finer neighborhoods, and helicoptering teams of elite troops to wreak havoc on their society, I would tend to consider that intervention—and, more to the Constitutional and Republican point, “war”).

Other, more radical possibilities, but surely a gleam in some adventurist’s eye: Nigeria, Egypt (chaos demands a response!), Pakistan (lay off, conspiracists, it’s only a provocation); Mexico; and the list goes on. Endless lists, in fact; endless wars, all on one man’s say-so. Not to blame the current occupant, mind you, more than any other—at least for the origins of the trend, though its persistence, and indeed its perfection, is another matter. In a world of persistent war, it’s the state of our Republic. …more

No Exit in the Persian Gulf?
by Michael T. Klare and Tom Engelhardt – 01 February, 2012 – AntiWar.com

When it comes to U.S. policy toward Iran, irony is the name of the game. Where to begin? The increasingly fierce sanctions that the Obama administration is seeking to impose on that country’s oil business will undoubtedly cause further problems for its economy and further pain to ordinary Iranians. But they are likely to be splendid news for a few other countries that Washington might not be quite so eager to favor.

Take China, which already buys 22% of Iran’s oil. With its energy-ravenous economy, it is likely, in the long run, to buy more, not less Iranian oil, and — thanks to the new sanctions — at what might turn out to be bargain basement prices. Or consider Russia once the Eurozone is without Iranian oil. That giant energy producer is likely to find itself with a larger market share of European energy needs at higher prices. The Saudis, who want high oil prices to fund an expensive payoff to their people to avoid an Arab Spring, are likely to be delighted. And Iraq, with its porous border, its thriving black market in Iranian oil, and its Shi’ite government in Baghdad, will be pleased to help Iran avoid sanctions. (And thank you, America, for that invasion!)

Who may suffer, other than Iranians? In the long run, the shaky economies of Italy, Greece, and Spain, long dependent on Iranian oil, potentially raising further problems for an already roiling Eurozone. And don’t forget the U.S. economy, or your own pocketbook, if gas prices go up, or even President Obama, if his bet on oil sanctions turns out to be an economic disaster in an election year. …more

Israels seeks to fill its quiver of Arrows
by Staff Writers – Tel Aviv, Israel (UPI) – 31 January, 2012

Israel has test-fired its new Arrow-3 anti-ballistic missile system, the country’s main defense against Iran’s Shehab-3 missiles, as it drives to boost its arsenal of about 120 of the weapons amid rising tension in the Persian Gulf.

The tests, conducted at the Palmachim Air Base on the Mediterranean south of Tel Aviv, were carried out to check the propulsion system and tracking sensors and were apparently successful, the Arutz Sheva news agency reported.
…more

US Confirms Possible Release of Taliban From Gitmo
01 February, 2012 – Associated Press -by Anne Gearan and Kimberly Dozier

WASHINGTON — U.S. intelligence officials acknowledged Tuesday that the United States may release several Afghan Taliban prisoners from the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as an incentive to bring the Taliban to peace talks.

Meanwhile, Afghan officials told The Associated Press that a plan to give Afghanistan a form of legal custody over the men if they are released satisfied their earlier objection to sending the prisoners to a third country.

Director of National Intelligence Jim Clapper told Congress Tuesday that no decision had been made on whether to trade the five Taliban prisoners, now held at Guantanamo Bay as part of nascent peace talks with the Taliban. He and CIA Director David Petraeus did not dispute that the Obama administration is considering transferring the five to a third country.

U.S. officials and others had previously spoken only vaguely, and usually anonymously, about the proposal to send the prisoners to Qatar, a Persian Gulf country that has asserted a central role in framing talks that might end the 10-year war in Afghanistan. The lead U.S. negotiator trying to coax the Taliban into talks had also publicly acknowledged the possibility of a release, but said there was no final decision.

The prisoners proposed for transfer include some of the detainees brought to Guantanamo during the initial days and weeks of the U.S. invasion that toppled the Taliban government in Afghanistan in 2001. At least one has been accused in the massacre of thousands of Shiite Muslims in Afghanistan, according to U.S. and other assessments, but none is accused of directly killing Americans. …more

Torture in Libya: The ugly reality of imperialist “liberation”
1 February 2012 – wsws

Multiple reports of widespread torture in the detention centers run by the new imperialist-backed Libyan regime and NATO’s “rebels” give the lie to all those who justified last year’s war in the name of human rights and “liberation.”

It is just over 100 days since the lynch-mob murder of Libya’s former ruler Muammar Gaddafi, a grisly act that marked the culmination of the eight-month US-NATO war. At the time, President Barack Obama took to the White House Rose Garden to hail the assassination as the advent of “a new and democratic Libya.”

The evidence and testimony provided by aid groups and human rights organizations over the past week paint a very different picture. A criminal imperialist war that ended with a brutal murder has, unsurprisingly, yielded a regime of terror, torture and repression.

According to a report released by Amnesty International (AI), “torture is being carried out by officially recognized military and security entities as well as by a multitude of armed militias operating outside of any legal framework.”

The organization reported numerous cases of detainees having been tortured to death. It also reported meeting with others who bore “visible marks indicating torture in recent days and weeks.” AI continued: “Their injuries included open wounds on the head, limbs, back and other parts of the body.”

Prisoners are “suspended in contorted positions, beaten for hours with whips, cables, plastic hoses, metal chains and bars and wooden sticks, and given electric shocks with live wires and Taser-like electro-shock weapons,” according to the Amnesty report. A spokesperson for the organization described the failure of the US- and NATO-backed National Transitional Council (NTC) to conduct any investigation, much less take any action against the torture, as “horrifying.”

Amnesty’s findings were corroborated by UN human rights chief Navi Pillay, who told the Security Council recently that torture is widespread. “There’s torture, extrajudicial executions, rape of both men and women,” she said. …more

Solidarity With The Prisoners in Oakland!
31 January, 2012 – anarchistnews.org

The Workers Solidarity Alliance stands in solidarity with all of the people brutalized, kidnapped, and put in cages by the police in Oakland, California—and around the world—as more and more people defy the sanctity of private property and capital and put human life before the profit margins of the people who own and operate our world.

On January 28, 2012, people from Oakland and beyond bravely attempted to take an abandoned building to build a community center for living space, organizing infrastructure, medical facilities, and so on. It is absurd that huge buildings lay empty while families live in the streets and are denied basic access to shelter, food, and the necessities of human life. But such is the logic of capitalism.
[Since I’m in such a rush just do what the WSA tell you what to do]

Police in Oakland, acting in the interests of the owners of society, guarded this empty building by beating people, throwing flash grenades, tear-gassing, kidnapping, caging people—showing everyone that private property and the starvation and homelessness that it guarantees can only be maintained through violence. And part of changing these kinds of social relations means taking those things that have been denied to us through this violence.

More than statements, solidarity is also action. We’ll meet you in the streets with hopes of spreading rebellion into our workplaces, our communities, and our homes! Mad respect to everyone languishing in cages as a result of their bravery, standing up to police bullies and, by extension, a system that is decaying and dying in front of our eyes.

With a new world in our hearts,

Workers Solidarity Alliance
…source

Bahrain and the Arab Spring
1 February, 2012 – Socialist Worker

The small island nation of Bahrain sits in the Persian Gulf, between Saudi Arabia and Qatar. When the Tunisian and Egyptian uprising toppled U.S.-backed dictators last year, all of the region’s dictatorships trembled, including Bahrain. The winds of change inspired Bahrain’s downtrodden, and the country’s monarchy barely managed to maintain its grip on power.

Ahmed Mohammed, a Bahraini activist visiting the U.S., spoke with Zach Zill about Bahrain’s rebellion, and what the future holds.

A protester wounded during a Bahraini military assault against protesters in February 2011A protester wounded during a Bahraini military assault against protesters in February 2011

CAN YOU talk about how the movement in Bahrain unfolded last February? Why did thousands of people come out to Pearl Square in Bahrain’s capital of Manama?

THE PROTESTS had originally aimed to make the government fulfill the promises of the king. These promises were made in a referendum the king put to the people in 2001. The referendum offered us a bargain–turn Bahrain into a kingdom and the emir into a king, and in return, the dreaded state of emergency law would be ended, and a parliament with full legislative powers set up. He basically offered what the opposition had been demanding throughout the uprising of the 1990s. The referendum was widely welcomed and approved.

Then the king reneged on his promise. On February 14, 2002, the king announced a new constitution in which he concentrated power in his own hands. The parliament has virtually no legislative powers.

As the years went by, the regime plotted to permanently disempower the opposition and ensure the regime’s power in the long term. It all fell apart as their conspiracies began to leak to the public, just as WikiLeaks did with U.S. embassy cables.

Probably the most scandalous leak of all is a document that reveals a transaction between a businessman and the king’s uncle, the prime minister. The latter, who is the world’s longest-serving prime minister and a universally hated figure in Bahrain, bought a state-of-the-art financial development project called the Bahrain Financial Harbor for one dinar. That’s $2.65 for skyscrapers in the capital’s busiest district.

As all of this became public knowledge, and as it became increasingly clear that the regime had no intentions to reform the rigged political system, a lot of anger and resentment began building up. People within the opposition had been warning that this situation is not tenable, that it would explode at some point.

The departure of Tunisia’s Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in January set Bahraini activists’ imagination on fire. A Facebook group was set up to mark the 10th anniversary of the hated constitution with Bahrain’s own day of rage. There was about a month-long gap between Ben Ali’s departure and February 14. What happened during that period was even more exciting.
[Read more →]

‘I saw death’: Canadian in Bahrain says he’s hiding to escape his torturers
By Thandi Fletcher – 26 January, 2012 – Vancouver Sun

Terrified that he will be beaten to death if he is dragged back to prison, a Kuwait-born Canadian citizen says he has gone into hiding in Bahrain after losing his appeal of his conviction for breaking the country’s illegal assembly laws.

Naser Al-Raas told Postmedia News on Thursday that he is afraid he will be arrested If he shows his face in public.

“My greatest fear is being tortured again,” he said. “I experienced it once before and it was like hell. This is my fear.”

On Tuesday, Al-Raas lost his appeal against a previous conviction on charges related to participating in pro-democracy protests.

Bahrain’s Third Superior Court upheld Al-Raas’ five-year prison sentence.

A former Ottawa resident, Al-Raas was sentenced in late October last year along with 12 others for having links to the demonstrations.

Of the 13 convicted on charges of illegal assembly, rioting and incitement, Al-Raas said he was the only one not acquitted on Tuesday.

Believing his phone line is likely tapped, Al-Raas spoke with Postmedia News from an undisclosed location via Skype.

During the interview, gunfire could be heard in the distance.

“(The police) are attacking every village, every place to oppress the protesters,” said Al-Raas, occasionally coughing — something he blamed on tear gas fumes wafting into his hiding place from the street.

“When I smell it, I feel some kind of, like I want to vomit. I’m sick,” he said. “(The tear gas) makes a big cloud which covers the whole village.”

But Al-Raas said the sting of the gas was nothing compared to what he has endured over the past year in Bahrain.

His ordeal began when he was visiting his five sisters there last March, he said. Al-Raas was working as an IT specialist in Kuwait at the time.
…more

Prisoners of conscience face infectious diseases due to medical negligence
January 28th, 2012 – Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights

Women’s prison Administration-Isa Town Police Station- has refused to give vaccinations against the disease “hepatitis” to prisoners of conscience.

Prisoners of Conscience:

1-Leila Kadhim – 47 years old
2-Fatima Alnaniyon – 16 years old
3-Khadija Hubail – 17 years old
4-Zainab Dehim – 20 years old
5-Ibtisam Aziz Dehim – 35 years old
6-Munira Dehim – 39 years old
7-Huda Dehim – 40 years old
8-Zainab Salman – 40 years old
9-Aqeela Almqabi – 24 years old
10-Fatima Al-Jishi – 21 years old
11-Fadheela Almabark – 37 years old

The Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights (BYSHR) considers medical negligence as physical and psychological punishment of prisoners of conscience.

The BYSHR demanding the Bahraini authorities to provide emergency medical care to prisoners of conscience. …source

Britain silent on ‘Butcher of Bahrain’
29 June 2002 – The Guardian

The Government has been accused of stalling attempts to prosecute a British citizen accused of running a brutal regime of torture in Bahrain in order to protect the UK’s relationship with the Arab state.

Scots-born Colonel Ian Henderson, dubbed the ‘Butcher of Bahrain’, spent 30 years as head of the Bahraini secret police. During this time his men allegedly detained and tortured thousands of anti-government activists.

Their activities are said to have included the ransacking of villages, sadistic sexual abuse and using power drills to maim prisoners. On many occasions they are said to have detained children without informing their parents, only to return them months later in body bags. Between 1994 and 1998 at least seven people died as a result of torture at the hands of the Bahraini regime.

Human rights organisations have collected evidence from thousands of victims of the regime who have provided horrific accounts of the torture they suffered. Yaser al-Sayegh’s case is typical. ‘My wrists were shackled to my ankles and they suspended me upside down from a pole,’ he said. ‘They then beat me on my legs and feet and face with iron bars and rubber hoses.’

Hashem Redha, a Bahrainian pro-democracy activist who now lives in Britain, said he was attacked personally by Henderson. ‘He tortured me one time. He kicked me and shook me two times. He said, “If you like to be hit, we can hit you more than that”.’

A Carlton documentary, Blind Eye to the Butcher, to be screened on Wednesday, reveals that despite solid evidence torture took place on many occasions, a two-year investigation by Scotland Yard’s Serious Crimes Branch and questions being asked in Parliament, Henderson has never been interviewed about the allegations.

However, under international law, he would be responsible for acts of torture carried out under his command, regardless of whether he was personally involved.

A file was submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service last August but police say they are still waiting for a response.

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have repeatedly called for an investigation into the allegations but believe successive governments have been reluctant because of Britain’s close ties with the Arab state. Britain has 85 defence staff based in Bahrain and members of the country’s armed forces are invited to defence colleges in this country for training.

Since retirement, Henderson has spent much of his time living at an extensive property called Stoke Shallows on the edge of Dartmoor where his neighbours know nothing of his past. He continues to travel frequently to Bahrain where he remains an adviser.

In the programme Henderson denies allegations of torture and refused to take part in any discussion. However, he issued a statement saying there was no truth in any of the allegations.

The Home Office refused to comment on allegations of torture in Bahrain. …source

cb editor: While the Middle East has grown to “Modernity”, the Conservative Policy Structure of the US-Israeli alliance that overthrew Iran’s Mossadegh in 1953, have remained a fixture in Middle East politics since the US installed dictator Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, who left a legacy as one of the most brutal Tyrants in recent Middle East history. The current conflict and contradiction of US policy in the Middle East, is couched in a structure that wants to turn back the page to the days of the Shah, but enjoy all the benefits of a Middle East seeking to live in the Democracy that Modernity demands.

An Anti-Democracy Foreign Policy: Iran
by Jacob G. Hornberger – 31 January, 2005

When Iranians took U.S. officials hostage in the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979, Americans were mystified and angry, not being able to comprehend how Iranians could be so hateful toward U.S. officials, especially since the U.S. government had been so supportive of the shah of Iran for some 25 years. What the American people failed to realize is that the deep anger and hatred that the Iranian people had in 1979 against the U.S. government was rooted in a horrible, anti-democratic act that the U.S. government committed in 1953. That was the year the CIA secretly and surreptitiously ousted the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, a man named Mohammad Mossadegh, from power, followed by the U.S. government’s ardent support of the shah of Iran’s dictatorship for the next 25 years.

Today, very few Americans have ever heard of Mohammad Mossadegh, but that wasn’t the case in 1953. At that time, Mossadegh was one of the most famous figures in the world. Here’s the way veteran New York Times correspondent Stephen Kinzer decribes him in his book All the Shah’s Men:

In his time, Mohammad Mossadegh was a titanic figure. He shook an empire and changed the world. People everywhere knew his name. World leaders sought to influence him and later to depose him. No one was surprised when Time magazine chose him over Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, and Winston Churchill as its Man of the Year for 1951.

(Kinzer’s book, published in 2003, is an excellent account of the CIA coup; much of this article is based on his book.)

There were two major problems with Mossadegh, however, as far as both the British and American governments were concerned. First, as an ardent nationalist he was a driving force behind an Iranian attempt to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, a British company that had held a monopoly on the production and sale of Iranian oil since the early part of the 20th century. Second, fiercely independent, Mossadegh refused to do the bidding of the U.S. government, which by this time had become fearful that Mossadegh might align Iran with America’s World War II ally and post–World War II enemy, the Soviet Union.

As Kinzer puts it,

Historic as Mossadegh’s rise to power was for Iranians, it was at least as stunning for the British. They were used to manipulating Iranian prime ministers like chess pieces, and now, suddenly, they faced one who seemed to hate them….

[U.S. presidential envoy Averell] Harriman paid a call on the Shah before leaving Tehran, and during their meeting he made a discreet suggestion. Since Mossadegh was making it impossible to resolve the [Anglo-American Oil Company] crisis on a basis acceptable to the West, he said, Mossadegh might have to be removed. Harriman knew the Shah had no way of removing Mossadegh at that moment. By bringing up the subject, however, he foreshadowed American involvement in the coup two years later.

The 1953 CIA coup in Iran was named “Operation Ajax” and was engineered by a CIA agent named Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt. Capitalizing on the oil-nationalization showdown between Iran and Great Britain, which had thrown Iran into chaos and crisis, Kermit Roosevelt skillfully used a combination of bribery of Iranian military officials and CIA-engendered street protests to pull off the coup.

The first stage of the coup, however, was unsuccessful, and the shah, who had partnered with the CIA to oust Mossadegh from office, fled Tehran in fear of his life. However, in the second stage of the coup a few days later, the CIA achieved its goal, enabling the shah to return to Iran in triumph … and with a subsequent 25-year, U.S.-supported dictatorship, which included one of the world’s most terrifying and torturous secret police, the Savak.

For years, the U.S. government, including the CIA, kept what it had done in Iran secret from the American people and the world, although the Iranian people long suspected CIA involvement. U.S. officials, not surprisingly, considered the operation one of their greatest foreign-policy successes … until, that is, the enormous convulsion that rocked Iranian society with the violent ouster of the shah and the installation of a virulently anti-American Islamic regime in 1979.

It is impossible to overstate the magnitude of anger and hatred that the Iranian people had for the U.S. government in 1979, not only because their world-famous democratically elected prime minister had been ousted by the CIA but also for having had to live for the following 25 years under a brutal and torturous dictatorship, a U.S.-government-supported dictatorship that also offended many Iranians with its policies of Westernization. In fact, the reason that the Iranian students took control of the U.S. embassy after the violent ouster of the shah in 1979 was their genuine fear that the U.S. government would repeat what it had done in 1953.

Imagine, for example, that it turned out that a foreign regime had secretly and surreptitiously ousted President Kennedy from office because of his refusal to do the bidding of that foreign regime. What would have been the response of the American people toward that government?

Indeed, imagine that the CIA had ousted Kennedy to protect our “national security,” given what some in the CIA believed to be Kennedy’s “soft-on-communism” mind-set, evidenced, for example, by his refusal to provide air support at the Bay of Pigs, which resulted in the CIA’s failure to oust communist Fidel Castro from power in Cuba. What would have been the response of the American people to that?

At the time of the CIA coup, Iran was in fact in crisis and chaos. But democracy is oftentimes messy and unpredictable, and it no more guarantees freedom and economic stability than authoritarianism or totalitarianism does. (Think about the crisis and economic instability during America’s Great Depression along with Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal policies.) All democracy does is provide people with the means to bring about a peaceful transition of power. By violently injecting itself into Iran’s democratic process through its removal of their democratically elected prime minister, the U.S. government guaranteed the omnipotent dictatorship of the (unelected) shah, a dictatorship that would continue for the next 25 years, with the full support of the U.S. government. It was a convulsive event whose consequences continue to shake America and the world today.
[Read more →]

Iranian nuclear bomb a matter of political will: US spy chief
Al-Akhbar – 31 January, 2012

Iran is keeping open its option to develop a nuclear weapon, but US intelligence agencies do not know whether it will eventually decide to build one, the US intelligence chief said on Tuesday.

New US sanctions imposed over Iran’s nuclear program were likely to have a greater impact than previous ones, but were not expected to lead to the downfall of Tehran’s leadership, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in prepared testimony on the annual worldwide threat assessment for the Senate intelligence committee.

“We assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons, in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so,” Clapper said.

“We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.”

Iran is expanding its uranium enrichment capabilities, which can be used for either civil or weapons purposes, he said.

“Iran’s technical advancement, particularly in uranium enrichment, strengthens our assessment that Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity to eventually produce nuclear weapons, making the central issue its political will to do so,” Clapper said.

“These advancements contribute to our judgment that Iran is technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon, if it so chooses,” he said.

President Barack Obama signed into law December 31 sanctions on Iran’s central bank.

The new US sanctions will have a greater impact on Iran because the Central Bank of Iran handles a large volume of foreign bank transactions and receives the revenue from roughly 70 percent of Iranian oil sold by the National Iranian Oil Company, Clapper said.

“Despite this, Iran’s economic difficulties probably will not jeopardize the regime, absent a sudden and sustained fall in oil prices or a sudden domestic crisis that disrupts oil exports,” he said.

The US has been lobbying Asian countries to cut its imports of Iranian oil with little success so far.

Only Japan and South Korea have hinted at cutting oil imports from Iran, but have also sought waivers from US sanctions to continue purchasing a minimum amount.

China, Iran’s major client, rebutted US calls for it cooperate with its sanctions, while India has said it has no plans to cut Iranian oil imports at this point.

Iran has sought to “exploit the Arab Spring but has reaped limited benefits, thus far,” the testimony said. Its biggest regional concern is Syria where a change in leadership would be a major strategic loss for Tehran.

Clapper’s annual assessment also highlighted the main espionage threats to the United States, most notably China, Russia and Iran.

Russia and China are aggressive and successful in economic espionage against the United States, and “Iran’s intelligence operations against the United States, including cyber capabilities, have dramatically increased in recent years in depth and complexity.”

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ cyber warfare unit hacked into a US spy drone, the RQ-170 Sentinel, in December, forcing it to land, almost entirely intact, as it hovered over Iranian airspace.

CIA operations were also dealt a serious and embarrassing blow in Lebanon, with Iran’s powerful ally, Hezbollah, revealing details of its spies in the country last year, including the whereabouts of their meetings. …more

Unrest weighs on Bahrain economy’s recovery
By Praveen Menon – 1 February, 2012 – Reuters

MANAMA (Reuters) – Bahrain’s economy is rebounding on the back of heavy government spending and support from its neighbors, but a full recovery may be out of reach if anti-government protests continue.

A year after mostly Shi’ite demonstrators launched protests against Bahrain’s Sunni Muslim rulers, demanding an end to sectarian discrimination and more say in government, authorities are seeking to quell discontent by doling out benefits to citizens: higher salaries, housing and better infrastructure.

But the spending has had only limited success in reviving the island kingdom’s reputation as a regional banking, trading and Islamic finance hub, as unrest continues on the outskirts of the capital Manama.

“The damage to the economy is somewhat permanent,” said Michael Stephens, researcher at the Doha-based Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies.

“Bahrain has been a financial hub and has all legislations in place for businesses. However, political instability continues and this is unlikely to change anytime soon. I don’t think the government can encourage business in Manama without solving the political situation.”

Economic conditions in Bahrain have improved considerably since the first quarter of 2011, when gross domestic product shrank 1.3 percent because of street violence that temporarily closed businesses and prompted the evacuation of foreigners. GDP grew 2.2 percent quarter-on-quarter between July and September, the most recent period for which data is available.

But politics continue to overhang the economy of 1.3 million people. The Bahrain Air Show in January, the first big international event since the unrest, was marred by protesters who tried to disrupt it by burning tires and organizing rallies.

More protests are expected before the Bahrain Formula One Championship in April, which the government hopes will show a climate of normalcy. Another possible focus of opposition activity is February 14, the first anniversary of the uprising.

The latest GDP data underlined how political uncertainty is distorting the economy. The output of the oil and gas sector climbed an inflation-adjusted 3.5 percent from a year earlier in the third quarter on the back of high oil prices. But the real estate sector was down 5.6 percent, as investors stayed cautious, and the hotel and restaurant sector fell 8.7 percent, suggesting business travel and tourism continued to suffer.

“Most of the real economy was still in contraction by the third quarter of 2011,” said Nancy Fahim, a Standard Chartered economist. “While recovery is taking place, sporadic political events in 2012 are possible and would present downside risks to growth.”

The government says Bahrain continues to attract new foreign investment; in December the central bank said it had granted in-principle approvals for two Geneva-based investment houses and a foreign reinsurance company to set up offices in the country. …more

Human Rights Concerns Linger as Facebook IPO Approaches
31 January 31, 2012 – Human Rights First

Washington, DC – As Facebook prepares to launch the process for establishing its much-anticipated initial public offering (IPO) this week, Human Rights First is urging the company to make clear how it will address lingering human rights concerns to potential investors. The group is also calling on Congress to close a major loophole that permits insider trading by members of Congress – a topic that will come to the forefront as Facebook’s IPO launches.

Among the human rights concerns potential investors should consider are unanswered questions about how Facebook will approach user privacy in countries where the internet is a tool of repression rather than expression. According to Human Rights First, Facebook should explain how it would respond to government requests for user information or for censorship.

“Facebook is the industry leader in social networking. Their privacy and human rights policies will become the standard for all services. Likewise, their failure to adequately anticipate and address human rights concerns will have grave consequences,” said Human Rights First’s Meg Roggensack. “Facebook has a responsibility to future investors to answer these questions before they launch their IPO this spring.

Currently, Facebook does not explicitly lay out its strategy to protect freedom of expression and other human rights. In addition, its privacy policy varies from country to country, making it difficult for users to understand which of their personal information is private.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently reached a settlement that requires Facebook to revise its privacy policies and subject them to periodic independent review. The settlement agreement – which explicitly covers user generated registration and data posts – doesn’t clearly indicate how Facebook would handle information gathered about its users while on the site. …more

Bahrain Opposition Fears Effects of Iran-West Tensions
31 January, 2012 – Bahrain Freedom Movement

Bahraini opposition leaders Hamza al-Dairi, second left raising his fist, and Jalal Fairooz, right, holding a candle and Bahraini flag, both former opposition lawmakers from al-Wefaq society, participate in a rally in the eastern village of Sitra, January

Opposition supporters in Bahrain have expressed concern that escalating tensions between Iran and the West may further stifle their calls for democratic reform in the Persian Gulf kingdom.

Bahrain’s majority Shi’ite Muslims took to the streets nearly a year ago demanding a new government and more rights from their Sunni leaders.

The country continues to crack down on pro-democracy demonstrations and blames Shi’ite-ruled Iran for inciting the civil unrest.

Last month, King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa alleged that Syria, which is also ruled by Shi’ites, was training young Bahrainis to overthrow the ruling family.

Bahrain’s main opposition party, al-Wefaq disputes the claims.

“We would like to be isolated from the international conflicts,” said Matar Matar,a spokesperson for the group. “We are worried about those conflicts and their impact on our country.”

Western nations have agreed on sanctions targeting Iran’s lucrative oil industry, hoping they will force the country to abandon its uranium enrichment program.

Tehran insists its nuclear work is for peaceful purposes and has threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, a major route for world oil traffic, in response to the sanctions.

The United States says it will use force if necessary to keep the strategic waterway open, sparking fears of a confrontation in the Persian Gulf.

Al-Wefaq spokesman Matar says these tensions may provide an advantage for Bahraini authorities. “It is easy for the regime here to utilize this conflict and blame Iran for everything happening here in Bahrain and such tone can be accepted in the United States,” he said.

Bahrain’s opposition has criticized America and its allies for what it sees as a failure to press the Bahraini government to end its deadly assault on civilian demonstrators.

The U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain, adding to the complexity of the situation.

Theodore Karasik is director of research at the Dubai-based Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis.

“Within the U.S. foreign policy establishment there’s a split between those who believe that Iran is behind what’s ongoing in Bahrain and those that do not. Because of the U.S.’s relationship with the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council), however, public officials have to go on-record saying that this looks like an Iranian plot,” said Karasik. …more

Positive response to IAEA-Iran talks
by Al-Akhbar – 1 February 1, 2012 –

Both Iran and the UN’s atomic watchdog gave a positive response to talks held in the Islamic republic aimed at clarifying Tehran’s nuclear program, and defusing tension with the West.

Officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) visited Tehran on Saturday for talks with Iranian officials to try to advance efforts to resolve the nuclear row.

“We are committed to resolving all the outstanding issues and the Iranians certainly are committed too. But of course there is still a lot of work to be done and so we have planned another trip in the very near future,” Herman Nackaerts, deputy director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told reporters after returning from Tehran.

Asked if he was satisfied with the talks, Nackaerts, who headed the six-member IAEA mission, said “Yeah, we had a good trip.”

He described the three days of talks as “intensive discussions,” but did not elaborate on the details of the talks.

Iran earlier described the talks as “constructive” and said further meetings were planned.

“Talks between Iran and the visiting team of inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency were constructive and … the two sides agreed to continue the talks,” the semi-official Fars news agency quoted an unnamed source as saying on Tuesday.

The Fars report said the date of future talks between Iran and IAEA had been set, but did not give details.

An explosive IAEA report released in November just fell short of explicitly accusing Iran of developing nuclear weapons.

Iran slammed the report as “lousy intelligence,” but the findings gave the West ammunition to up its pressure against Tehran.

Since the report’s release, the United States and European Union have imposed their most severe sanctions on Iran yet, targeting its oil industry – the second largest OPEC exporter. …more

Bahrainis on hunger strike, official favours release
by Andrew Hammond – 31 January, 2012 – Reuters

MANAMA, Jan 31 (Reuters) – Fourteen jailed opposition figures in Bahrain have gone on hunger strike ahead of the Feb. 14 anniversary of a failed pro-democracy uprising, activists said on Tuesday, and a government official said he favoured releasing some of the men.

“They demand an end to the political crackdown. They are protesting against the unfair trial they faced and they want the release of all prisoners of conscience,” said Mohammed al-Mascati, head of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights.

Mascati and several dozen other activists gathered at the opposition Waad party building in Manama to stage their own hunger strike in sympathy with the opposition leaders, who were prominent during four weeks of protests inspired by revolts against rulers in Tunisia and Egypt.

Bahrain imposed martial law in March last year and invited in troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to help crush the month-old uprising.

The government said the island’s majority Shi’ite Muslims had coordinated the protests with Iran for sectarian reasons, an accusation the opposition denied.

The 14, who activists said began their hunger strike on Sunday, were among 21 politicians, rights activists and bloggers tried in a military court on charges including “forming a terrorist group to change the constitution and its monarchical system” and organising protests. Eight were sentenced to life imprisonment. Seven are abroad or in hiding.

Activists said the hunger strikers included rights activist Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, Al-Haq opposition party leader Hassan Mushaimaa and Ibrahim Sharif, a Sunni Muslim opposition leader.

Sharif’s wife Farida Ismail said prison authorities had removed privileges such as access to television to try to force the men to end the hunger strike in Jau prison. She said they were being force fed.

“These trials were political, they were just revenge by the government,” she said at Waad headquarters.

An interior ministry statement said the hunger strikers were being properly cared for. “While it is regrettable that this action may cause additional hardship for the detainees or put their health at risk, they do have the right to refuse food,” it said, citing general inspector Ibrahim Habib.

“All of the inmates have been provided with regular medical care that is available to them 24 hours a day.”

CONFESSIONS UNDER TORTURE

A rights commission on the unrest reported in November that detainees had been tortured. It criticised military trials and advised the authorities to have jail sentences reviewed.

The government, under outside pressure to implement the recommendations, has said a judicial panel will review some sentences. But they have not questioned the military verdict against the 21 protest leaders, who have the right to take the case to the cassation court, the highest appeal court.

A government official expressed hope some of the jailed protest leaders would be freed but said others had planned an Islamist coup.

“I am hopeful that a lot of the cases will be reviewed, but there are some cases to go through and cases have been transferred to the civilian courts,” said Sheikh Abdul-Aziz bin Mubarak al-Khalifa, a senior adviser at the Information Affairs Authority and former ambassador to London.

“I’m hopeful for not necessarily all of them, but at least some of them … There are those in prison who called for a restructuring of the country’s institutions, for a full-blown revolution and who called for an Islamic republic using non-peaceful methods,” he said.

Al-Haq and two other parties, Wafa and the Freedom Movement, formed a “Coalition for a Republic” during the protests that called for the creation of a democratic republic.

Bahrain remains in turmoil with daily clashes in Shi’ite towns and villages between protesters and riot police that have become more violent in recent weeks. The economy of Bahrain, a banking and tourism hub, has been shaken by the unrest.

The daily al-Ayyam – owned by a media adviser to the king – reported on Tuesday that contacts had begun with unnamed political forces for a new national dialogue “to bring Bahrainis together and strengthen national unity”.

Opposition politicians said no one had contacted them and the report was window-dressing ahead of the Feb. 14 anniversary.

Since the uprising, the government has strengthened parliament’s power to monitor the cabinet, but has not reacted to opposition demands for a fully empowered elected parliament able to form a government. …source