Apr 17, 2011

In Afghanistan’s south, signs of progress in three districts signal a shift

Map of Afghanistan with flag.Image via Wikipedia
By Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Saturday, April 16, 8:11 PM

SANGIN, AFGHANISTAN — Signs of change have sprouted this spring amid the lush fields and mud-brick villages of southern Afghanistan.

In Sangin, a riverine area that has been the deadliest part of the country for coalition troops, a journey between two bases that used to take eight hours because of scores of roadside bombs can now be completed in 18 minutes.

In Zhari district, a once-impenetrable insurgent redoubt on the western outskirts of Kandahar city, residents benefiting from U.S.-funded jobs recently hurled a volley of stones at Taliban henchmen who sought to threaten them.

And in Arghandab district, a fertile valley on Kandahar’s northern fringe where dozens of U.S. soldiers have been felled by homemade mines, three gray-bearded village elders made a poignant appearance at a memorial service last month for an Army staff sergeant killed by one of those devices.

Those indications of progress are among a mosaic of developments that point to a profound shift across a swath of Afghanistan that has been the focus of the American-led military campaign: For the first time since the war began nearly a decade ago, the Taliban is commencing a summer fighting season with less control and influence of territory in the south than it had the previous year.

“We start this year in a very different place from last year,” Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top coalition commander in Afghanistan, said in a recent interview.

The security improvements have been the result of intense fighting and the use of high-impact weapons systems not normally associated with the protect-the-population counterinsurgency mission.

In Sangin, Zhari and Arghandab — the three most insurgent-ridden districts in the south — the cost in American lives and limbs since the summer has been far greater than in any other part of the country. More than 40 Marines have been killed in Sangin in the past nine months, and three dozen more have lost both legs. The Army brigade responsible for Zhari and part of Arghandab has lost 63 soldiers since July.

The question of the moment for Petraeus and his subordinates is whether the gains will hold as Taliban commanders, laden with cash and munitions, stream across the desert from Pakistan, where there has been considerably less progress in denying them sanctuary.

Senior U.S. officers said they expect the insurgents to shift tactics: Instead of trying to take on American troops directly, as they did in Sangin and Zhari in the fall, the Taliban will attempt to plant more homemade explosives, recruit a new cadre of suicide bombers and assassinate Afghan government officials — as it did late last week, killing the police chief in Kandahar province. The result, according to an internal military projection, could be a far more violent summer for both Americans and Afghans.

Petraeus and other U.S. commanders say they are hopeful that Afghan civilians will feel confident enough to report Taliban activity to U.S. or Afghan troops. They also are optimistic that improvements in the quality of the Afghan army and of U.S. battlefield intelligence will provide a significant boost to counterinsurgency efforts.

For now, however, President Obama, who has pledged to begin pulling out troops in July, faces a complex and risky challenge. Within the next three months, he must decide whether the tenuous but promising changes in southern Afghanistan merit a significant reduction of forces or a more token drawdown.

That calculus also will be complicated by a deterioration of security in eastern Afghanistan. Because senior officers had long assumed the east was more secure than the south, the bulk of the surge forces were sent southward to Helmand and Kandahar provinces. Now some of those officers are hoping to shift more troops east if the improvements in the south hold.

Petraeus has not provided his withdrawal recommendation to Obama. The four-star general said the progress across southern Afghanistan remains “fragile and reversible,” although he also has made it clear to his subordinates that he thinks it can be cemented with enough time and military pressure.

Other U.S. military officials and some diplomats regard the transformation as unsustainable. They doubt Afghan government officials, police officers and soldiers will be able to take control of cleared areas by 2014, the year by which the United States and its NATO allies have pledged to cede responsibility for security to the Afghans.

“It’s great that the Taliban has been pushed out of these areas, but then what?” said a senior U.S. official involved in Afghanistan policy who was not authorized to speak on the record. “Once we leave these places, it’s hard to imagine that the Afghans will really be able to hold on to them.”

Officers across southern Afghanistan say the changes that have taken place during the fall and winter — the result of a gloves-off pummeling of insurgent strongholds, deals with tribal elders and changes in local government — have increased the chances that this shift might be different from so many earlier proclaimed successes. And even if the Taliban makes some gains, military officials maintain that the destruction of numerous insurgent bunkers, the seizure of tons of munitions and the removal of thousands of homemade bombs will put the group at an unprecedented disadvantage this summer.

Intercepted Taliban communications suggest insurgent commanders are increasingly demoralized, according to military intelligence officers. In Kandahar province, levels of Taliban activity were lower this March than a year ago, the officers said.

“We’ve changed the battlefield,” said Lt. Col. Jason Morris, commander of the 3rd Battalion of the 5th Marine Regiment. His unit took 29 fatalities during its seven-month deployment in Sangin, more than any other battalion in Afghanistan. “They’re not going to be able to fight the way they used to.”

SANGIN

The killing fields

For the Marines in 3/5’s Kilo Company, their very first patrol led them into the horrors of Sangin.

On the afternoon of Oct. 14, 1st Platoon exited its new home, a spartan outpost in a belt of farmland between the Helmand River and Route 611, the district’s main north-south road. Walking single file, scanning the shoulder-high cornfields for signs of insurgents, the platoon set out for a nearby village.

The Marines had not traveled more than 250 yards when the shooting started. First a few pops. Then a volley. And then a fusillade from not just AK-47 rifles but belt-fed machine guns as well.

Pinned down amid the corn, the platoon radioed for help. A reinforced machine-gun squad from 2nd Platoon threw on its gear and left the outpost to set up a blocking position so the Marines from 1st could withdraw. But as soon as the backup squad neared the scene, it was ambushed by a dozen insurgents.

Within minutes, the squad’s leader was shot in the leg. The only place his comrades could take cover was an adobe compound to the southwest marked on their maps as Building 3.

It was then that those Marines — and soon the rest of Kilo Company — would come to understand why Sangin had become the killing fields of the war in Afghanistan.

As the squad rushed toward the compound, one of the machine gunners stepped on a homemade mine on the southern corner. He was blown into a nearby canal.

On the north side of the building, a Marine seeking cover behind a wall was struck by a bomb planted in it. When the squad’s medic rushed over to help him, he stepped on a pressure-triggered makeshift bomb. He lost both his legs, and the Marine he sought to save died before the medevac helicopters arrived.

There were so many explosions, so close together, that others in the platoon assumed fellow Marines were firing mortar rounds at the Taliban. Only later would they understand that the sound was from their buddies stepping on mine after mine.

“It opened our eyes,” said Sgt. Joel Bailey, a machine gunner in the squad who jumped into the canal and tried unsuccessfully to save the first Marine felled by the explosions. “It was then that we realized that it was going to be a slugfest for a while.”

By the time 1st Platoon and the response squad from 2nd Platoon made it back to their outpost, they discovered another challenge. They were desperate for more ammunition, but the Taliban had dammed up nearby irrigation canals, flooding the sole dirt road leading to the outpost and rendering it impassable to armored U.S. vehicles. The Marines eventually were forced to wade through the muck on foot, hoisting the ammunition on combat stretchers, under the cover of darkness.

“This was Day One,” said Capt. Nikolai Johnson, the commander of Kilo Company.

The rest of the year would prove to be just as arduous and bloody. Johnson and his troops learned that, like Building 3, canal embankments and tree lines that seemed like natural points of defense throughout Sangin were lined with mines by the Taliban.

By the end of December, Taliban attacks had claimed the lives of eight men from Johnson’s company of about 120 Marines. Two dozen more were injured so severely that they had to be sent home, several as double or triple amputees.

But Johnson’s company refused to hunker down in its posts. Almost every day, the Marines would set out on another mission, often in the direction of buildings flying white Taliban flags, even if it meant stepping on a mine. Their goal was to get in fights and kill as many insurgents as they could.

“We developed a hunter mentality,” he said. “This was a great place to be if you’re a Marine infantryman.”

ARGHANDAB

Flattening a village

When Lt. Col. David Flynn brought his 800-strong battalion from the Army’s 101st Airborne Division to northern Arghandab in July, he expected to wage the sort of counterinsurgency mission that has become vogue in the U.S. military. He would win over the locals by building schools and clinics, providing agricultural assistance, and sipping tea in weekly shuras with village elders.

But as soon as his soldiers arrived, they faced the same reception as the Marines in Sangin. Mines fashioned from plastic jugs of homemade explosive and crude, pressure-sensitive triggers were everywhere — on dirt paths, under culverts, in the branches of pomegranate trees.

Sometimes the bomb-sniffing dogs caught them. Sometimes the soldiers spotted them. And sometimes they stepped on them. Blown-off limbs quickly became the signature injury for America’s surge troops in the south.

In the battalion’s first 100 days on the ground, it lost seven soldiers. Another 70 were wounded.

So instead of sipping tea, Flynn decided to strike back.

An initial target was the village of Tarok Kolache, a collection of about a dozen mud-brick, multi-family housing compounds surrounded by pomegranate orchards. Video from surveillance aircraft indicated that the village had been vacated, save for insurgents who were manufacturing homemade explosives in the walled-off courtyards.

“The place was completely riddled with evil,” he said.

Officers in Flynn’s battalion had the aircraft fly overhead for a few weeks to ensure there were no signs of civilians who had returned. He also consulted a local leader who confirmed that all the residents had left Tarok Kolache.

Then he requested and received permission to flatten the village.

U.S. B-1B Lancer and A-10 Warthog jets conducted repeated bombing runs. A new ground-launched artillery rocket system also pelted the enclave. All told, almost 25 tons of ordnance was dropped on Tarok Kolache.

When it was over, the village was a giant patch of dirt, save for a few mud walls that survived the onslaught.

Flynn described the bombed-out village as “a parking lot.” But he insisted he did not bomb a village. “We bombed an enemy stronghold,” he said.

His unit went on to flatten parts of three other nearby villages.

Such aggressive measures, far harder-edged than how the U.S. military has traditionally operated in Afghanistan, became a critical component of operations across the south. In Zhari, soldiers fired more than 400 high-explosive line charges — small rockets that pull a wire embedded with C4 and can clear a truck-wide path for 110 yards. Everything in the way was pulverized, including roadside bombs, crops and homes.

In Sangin, the Marines used 24 line charges to tear up a 1,600-yard stretch of road embedded with 52 bombs. In another part of the district, they used multiple charges to demolish tall compound walls that insurgent snipers employed for concealment; Marine officers have told residents that if they want to rebuild, their walls must be lower than four feet.

The Army has changed the landscape in even more unusual ways in Zhari. Soldiers have sought to block off the western side of the district by building a five-mile-long sand berm topped with razor wire. Taking a page out of the military’s Iraq playbook, they also have installed more than 10 miles of tall concrete walls along roads in the southern half of the district that cut through flat farmland. While some residents find the sight of cement walls running alongside wheat fields to be overly penal, the unsightly measures are aimed at restricting insurgents’ ability to drive back into the area with munitions-filled vehicles.

The tactics have not fueled a groundswell of anger, in large part because the destroyed compounds were largely empty and no civilians were killed. The military also has been doling out compensation, in the form of cash payments or, in the case of Tarok Kolache, a U.S.-supervised rebuilding of a village.

Flynn’s battalion established an outpost in the village and hired contractors to resurrect the structures. The local mosque, once a mud-walled edifice, has been rebuilt with brick and concrete; it features colorful minarets and a large prayer room. Laborers are working on a series of long brick buildings to replace the adobe housing compounds.

Flynn also is planning a change to the tall mud walls that Afghans typically use to mark their property. Instead of establishing a height requirement, he has purchased rolls of chain-link fencing. He is hoping to persuade the Afghans to give it a try.

Residents appear generally supportive of Flynn’s effort, in part because they are getting a construction upgrade and payments for three years of lost crops. The cost of the overall reconstruction effort in Tarok Kolache, including compensation for damaged fields and culverts, is about $1.3 million. Flynn regards it as a small price to pay to evict the Taliban and save the lives and limbs of his soldiers.

Since the village was razed, Flynn said, there has been almost no insurgent activity in the area. The presence of U.S. troops has made it an inhospitable place to reestablish bomb factories. Residents also are expressing a greater willingness to provide information about Taliban infiltration.

Flynn thinks they are motivated by a new sense of security — as well as a new deterrent in the form of Tarok Kolache’s destruction.

“People understand that if the Taliban come back again, that could happen again,” he said.

ZHARI

Getting a new leader

Nothing seemed to be breaking Col. Art Kandarian’s way in Zhari this past summer.

The Taliban had mined the dirt paths through the district’s agricultural belt, forcing his troops to scale row after row of chest-high mud mounds farmers use to grow grapes. It reminded him of the hedgerows in Normandy that so challenged the American soldiers in the weeks after D-Day.

The Afghan army battalion assigned to fight alongside his soldiers was fresh out of basic training and had no combat experience. Only one of the 500 soldiers was from Kandahar province. The rest had no local knowledge.

But perhaps the most vexing problem was the local government in Zhari. It consisted of one man, Karim Jan, the district governor. And Kandarian’s soldiers quickly learned that the official was not much of a leader.

He rarely left the district’s main town, and he had little interest in convening assemblies of village elders. He steered jobs and resources to his fellow Alizai tribesmen, and he seemed beholden to the local power broker, Haji Lala.

The Americans wanted Karim Jan out, but there was little they thought they could do about it. His presence in the district was the direct result of political deals made by President Hamid Karzai.

Then Kandarian finally got lucky. When American officials learned that Karim Jan was trying to spring two men from police custody who were implicated in the deaths of three U.S. soldiers, they pounced. The pressure led the governor of Kandahar province to move Karim Jan to another district and anoint a well-regarded Zhari resident as the new district leader.

The change in leadership, Kandarian said, has been “instrumental in Zhari’s transformation.”

The new district governor, Niaz Mohammad Sarhadi, has built a staff of two dozen municipal employees, including education and agriculture officials. He convenes regular community meetings and travels through the district. And he has been persuading Zhari residents who fled to Kandahar city to return to their homes.

The impact has been profound. On a recent Friday morning, Kandarian’s deputy, Lt. Col. Joseph Krebs, headed to a village three miles south of his base for a gathering of elders. The trip there took 15 minutes — and not a shot was fired. This past fall, soldiers would have been pelted with gunfire and rocket-propelled grenades within minutes of moving south from the base.

When he arrived at a combat outpost near the village, Krebs walked about in awe.

“Just being able to stand here is amazing,” he said. “Six months ago, if you were here, you were in a gunfight.”

At the meeting, held in an Army tent, 45 elders sat in a circle, munching on apples provided by the soldiers. Much of the session was devoted to complaints — the lack of a doctor, the poor flow of water in irrigation canals, the need for a new school.

Krebs and his fellow officers deemed the meeting a success. The fact that residents were willing to gather, even if to complain, was a major step forward.

Before the participants left, Lt. Col. Ghulam Hazrat, the Afghan army battalion commander in the area, implored them to seize the opportunity afforded by the American-led push to evict the Taliban over the past several months. He urged them to stand up to the insurgency by reporting any suspicious behavior, and he told them to take advantage of U.S.-funded day-labor programs.

Hazrat did not delve into the politics of the war playing out in Washington, but it was clear he understood the slim prospects of the U.S. military expending so much blood and treasure over another year if residents again acquiesced to the Taliban.

“This is a golden chance,” he said. “You’ll never get it again.”

SANGIN

Cutting a peace deal

Leaders of the Alikozai tribe in the upper Sangin valley had spent a year talking to Afghan government officials about a peace deal.

But the discussions never progressed beyond preliminaries. The Alikozai were scarred by a previous attempt to oppose the Taliban, in 2007, that collapsed when they failed to receive assistance from Afghan and coalition forces. The Taliban tied one Alikozai elder to the back of a pickup truck and dragged him out of the district.

There also was the problem of Alikozai involvement in large-scale opium processing in the valley. The tribe did not seem ready to give up its hand in the lucrative drug trade.

Then, in the fall, an elite Marine reconnaissance battalion pushed into the Alikozai area, about five miles north of where Kilo Company was operating. The unit’s initial mission was to secure Route 611. Opening that road through Sangin, and north to the Kajaki Dam, is a critical priority for U.S. commanders because they want to repair the dam’s hydropower generators.

But the recon Marines also served as a cudgel. They were attacked by young Alikozai fighters who had been egged on and paid off by Taliban commanders. So the Marines fought back. In October and November, the reconnaissance battalion killed about 200 Alikozai militants in the valley. The 3rd Battalion of the 5th Marine Regiment, the unit in Sangin that suffered devastating casualties, killed several hundred more insurgents to the south over the same period, many of them Alikozai as well.

“We started stacking bodies like cordwood,” said an officer in Sangin, who like other Marines asked for anonymity to speak frankly. “And they came to a point where they said, ‘Holy [expletive], there aren’t that many of us left.’ ”

On New Year’s Day, Alikozai elders agreed to a security pact with the governor of Helmand province that calls for the tribe to forsake the Taliban and rein in its young men from joining the insurgency. In exchange, the Afghan, U.S. and British governments will fund development projects in the 15-mile-long Alikozai area and the Marines will consider releasing some Alikozai detainees.

Afghan officials and U.S. diplomats hailed the deal as a sign of how the promise of reconstruction aid can lead to reintegration, but Marine officers have a different view of why the Alikozai came to the table.

“You can’t just convince them through projects and goodwill,” another Marine officer said. “You have to show up at their door with two companies of Marines and start killing people. That’s how you start convincing them.”

Since the deal was struck, violence has dropped significantly in the valley. But the real test will occur later this spring, after the vast tracts of opium-producing poppies are harvested in Sangin. Will the Alikozai remain good to their word? And will the tribe be able to fend off an expected onslaught by Taliban commanders eager to recruit young men to reclaim territory they lost to the Marines last fall?

“Do they have the will and the capacity?” said Morris, the commander of the 3/5. “It remains to be seen.”

Marines and Afghan officials now are trying to replicate the Alikozai deal with other tribes in the area. On a recent morning, Morris and the governor of Sangin, Mohammed Sharif, traveled to southern Sangin to meet with men from the Ishakzai tribe, a historically marginalized group that has been embraced by the Taliban.

Standing under camouflage netting on a dusty Marine base, the gray-bearded Sharif, a former schoolteacher, implored 50 men seated before him to renounce the insurgency.

“Dear brothers, it’s enough,” he said. “The things you have done, it’s enough. Come back to the government. If you have done bad deeds, God will forgive you.”

But none of the Ishakzai expressed any interest in reconciling. Many in the tribe continue to grow poppies on their land and fear a deal with the government would interfere with their livelihoods.

After brief speeches from the police chief and Morris, the elders got up to leave. As they departed, several thrust claims for property damage at the governor and the Marines.

“The people are still scared,” a one-legged, white-turbaned elder named Abdul Haq said as he hobbled away. “If we unite, the Taliban will come to each of our homes and kill us.”



chandrasek@washpost.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Apr 16, 2011

U.S. and Allies Seek Possible Refuge for Qaddafi



By DAVID E. SANGER and ERIC SCHMITT

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has begun seeking a country, most likely in Africa, that might be willing to provide shelter to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi if he were forced out of Libya, even as a new wave of intelligence reports suggest that no rebel leader has emerged as a credible successor to the Libyan dictator.

The intense search for a country to accept Colonel Qaddafi has been conducted quietly by the United States and its allies, even though the Libyan leader has shown defiance in recent days, parading through Tripoli’s streets and declaring that he has no intention of yielding to demands that he leave his country.

The effort is complicated by the likelihood that he would be indicted by the International Criminal Court in the Hague for the bombing of Pan Am 103 in 1988, and atrocities inside Libya.

One possibility, according to three administration officials, is to find a country that is not a signatory to the treaty that requires countries to turn over anyone under indictment for trial by the court, perhaps giving Colonel Qaddafi an incentive to abandon his stronghold in Tripoli.

The move by the United States to find a haven for Colonel Qaddafi may help explain how the White House is attempting to enforce President Obama’s declaration that the Libyan leader must leave the country but without violating Mr. Obama’s refusal to put troops on the ground.

The United Nations Security Council has authorized military strikes to protect the Libyan population, but not to oust the country’s leadership. But Mr. Obama and the leaders of Britain and France, among others, have declared that to be their goals, apart from the military campaign.

“We learned some lessons from Iraq, and one of the biggest is that Libyans have to be responsible for regime change, not us,” one senior administration official said on Saturday. “What we’re simply trying to do is find some peaceful way to organize an exit, if the opportunity arises.”

About half of the countries in Africa have not signed or ratified the Rome Statute, which requires nations to abide by commands from the international court. (The United States has also not ratified the statute, because of concerns about the potential indictment of its soldiers or intelligence agents.) Italy’s foreign minister, Franco Frattini, suggested late last month that several African countries could offer Colonel Qaddafi a haven, but he did not identify them.

As the drama over Colonel Qaddafi’s future has intensified, new details are emerging of the monthlong NATO bombing campaign, which, in the minds of many world leaders, has expanded into a campaign to press the Libyan military and Colonel Qaddafi’s aides to turn against him.

That effort has gone more slowly than some expected; after the defection of the former intelligence chief and foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, no other senior officials have broken with the man who has ruled Libya for 42 years.

Six countries — Britain, Norway, Denmark, France, Canada and Belgium — have provided more than 60 aircraft that are conducting airstrikes against Libyan targets that attack civilians. But NATO commanders say they are still struggling to come up with at least eight more warplanes to ensure the alliance can sustain a longer-term operation and relieve strain on pilots now flying repeated combat missions.

The United States, which carried out the largest share of strike missions before handing off control of the operation to NATO on April 4, has promised additional fighter-bombers and ground-attack planes if NATO requests them. While some European officials have privately complained that the United States should resume a leading role in the attack missions, American officials say they have not received any formal requests for additional aircraft.

Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to Mr. Obama, asserted that in a month’s time the coalition has accomplished three major objectives: saving the de facto rebel capital of Benghazi from becoming the site of a civilian atrocity, setting up an international command to protect civilians and clear the skies of Libyan aircraft, and providing modest amounts of humanitarian assistance.

Still, the NATO countries flying ground-attack missions operate under different degrees of caution when striking targets that could hurt civilians or damage mosques, schools or hospitals, complicating the campaign, a senior American military official said. Some pilots have refused to drop their bombs for this reason, the official said, but allied air-war planners cannot predict which pilots will be matched against particular targets.

“Without a doubt, it is frustrating working through all this to get maximum effect for our efforts and dealing with all these variants,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid upsetting coalition partners.

American officials concede that the rebel leaders have not settled on who might succeed Colonel Qaddafi if he is ousted, and some fear that tribal warfare could break out if there is no consensus figure who could bind the country together.

White House officials say that while they would have liked to see Colonel Qaddafi depart already, they believe that pressure is building.

“There are aspects of the passage of time that work against Qaddafi, if we can cut him off from weapons, material and cash,” Mr. Rhodes said. He added that “it affects the calculations of the people around him. But it will take time for the opposition group to gel.”

Earlier this month, an American envoy, Chris Stevens, was sent to Benghazi to learn more about the Transitional National Council. The group has pledged to work toward new presidential and parliamentary elections after Colonel Qaddafi’s ouster, uphold human rights, draft a national constitution and encourage the formation of political parties. Mr. Stevens is expected to stay as long as a month, security permitting, State Department officials said.

The United Nations special envoy to Libya, Abdelilah al-Khatib, a former Jordanian foreign minister, is also meeting with opposition figures, as well as with members of Colonel Qaddafi’s government to explore possible diplomatic settlement.

Perhaps the most prominent member of the government in waiting is Mahmoud Jibril, a planning expert who defected from Colonel Qaddafi’s government. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has met twice with Mr. Jibril, who American diplomats say is the group’s most polished and savvy public figure. He also spoke to several NATO, Arab and African ministers who gathered in Doha, Qatar, last Wednesday to discuss the Libya crisis.

Another leading council member is Ali Tarhouni, who was appointed finance minister of the rebels’ shadow government. Mr. Tarhouni, who teaches economics at the University of Washington, returned to Libya in February after more than 35 years in exile to advise the opposition on economic matters.

“With respect to the opposition, we are learning more all the time,” Mrs. Clinton said in Berlin on Friday. “We are pooling our information. There are a number of countries that have significant ties to members of the oppositions, who have a presence in Benghazi that enables them to collect information. Our envoy is still in Benghazi and meeting with a broad cross-section of people.”

Mrs. Clinton told NATO ministers that the coalition had acknowledged the transitional council was “a legitimate and important interlocutor for the Libyan people.” She added: “We all need to deepen our engagement with and increase our support for the opposition.”
Enhanced by Zemanta

Gaddafi presses siege of Misurata as civilians beg NATO to prevent massacre

Muammar al-Gaddafi at the 12th AU summit, Febr...Image via Wikipedia
By Simon Denyer, Saturday, April 16, 3:22 PM

TRIPOLI, LIBYALibyan government forces rained scores of rockets into residential districts of Misurata for a third consecutive day Saturday as ground troops tried to cut the city’s access to the port, its lifeline for food, water and medicine, rebel groups in the city said.

Civilians enduring a weeks-long assault that Western leaders have described as a “medieval siege” pleaded with NATO to intervene to prevent what they said was an impending massacre by forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi.

“Our lifeline is the port, and he is going for it,” said Mohammed, a city council spokesman who for security reasons uses only his first name. “If he is able to do that, then we really are in trouble.”

“If a massacre occurs in Misurata, what will be NATO’s position?” added Mohammed, who spoke via Skype. “It is now or never. Either they intervene immediately and bring in ground troops to protect the port or we will all regret this.”

NATO’s mandate under U.N. resolution 1973 is to protect Libyan civilians, a mission that appears to be going unfulfilled in Misurata. The city, which lies 131 miles east of the capital, Tripoli, is the only one in western Libya under rebel control and a major strategic prize in the conflict.

Doctors reached through Skype said five people died in Misurata on Saturday, bringing the death toll there to 36 in the past three days alone and at least 276 since the siege began in late February.

Farther east, rebels said that four days of NATO airstrikes had helped them advance toward the strategic oil town of Brega, a city that has already changed hands half a dozen times.

But in Misurata, there was no respite, with NATO citing the difficulty of identifying clear targets within the city.

The fighting intensified Thursday when forces loyal to Gaddafi shelled Misurata’s port, forcing it to close for the day and interrupting the flow of humanitarian aid and the evacuation of civilians. Five Egyptians sheltering in a refugee camp for foreign workers were among the dead that day.

On Friday, there was evidence of cluster bombs being used by the government, according to Human Rights Watch, and further shelling and heavy fighting took place on the city’s main thoroughfare, Tripoli Street, and on the main road between the port and the city.

Rebels said government troops had been seen on foot in the city center Friday, an unusual sight as most usually stay in their tanks and armored cars.

On Saturday, government forces shelled a dairy factory and bakeries in the city, rebels said.

The Libyan government has strenuously denied using cluster bombs and has blamed civilian deaths on the “armed gangs” occupying Misurata, an assertion contradicted by UNICEF and foreign aid workers.

Every day, men, women and children are admitted to the hospitals and clinics of Misurata with head, chest and leg wounds from sniper fire and shrapnel, said Morten Rostrup of Doctors Without Borders who visited the city Friday to bring in supplies and help evacuate civilians.

Local doctors told Rostrup they were managing but could easily run out of supplies if casualties keep coming in, he said, adding that many patients were being discharged too early, to make room for others.

“If the port was cut off and there was no way to get supplies in, it would create a very dire humanitarian situation,” he said, speaking by phone from Tunis, where he had just arrived.

Misurata’s port is also a conduit for guns and ammunition sent to the rebels from their stronghold in Benghazi, 500 miles to the east.

Rostrup said thousands of foreign workers were sheltering in a makeshift camp by the port hoping to be evacuated. They had plastic sheets and blankets for shelter, not enough water and were facing an epidemic of gastroenteritis, he said.

Residents of Misurata say they are grateful for the help NATO has provided, but as the shelling continues, they say they need more.

“They are shelling a factory today that makes milk and dairy products for children,” said Aiman Abushahma, a doctor, who spoke via Skype. “We are at war, under siege, and it seems like no help is coming from NATO or anybody.”

“They are firing Grad rockets,” he added, referring to Russian truck-mounted multiple rocket launchers. “Surely they are big enough to be seen by NATO and to be destroyed?”



denyers@washpost.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Ivory Coast detained strongman held in northern town under UN protection, says former minister

Map of the communes of Abidjan, Ivory Coast.Image via Wikipedia
Communes of Abidjan

By Associated Press, Saturday, April 16, 11:10 AM

ABIDJAN, Ivory Coast — Shooting erupted Saturday in a sprawling Abidjan neighborhood where fighters loyal to Ivory Coast’s arrested strongman Laurent Gbagbo have sought refuge, residents of the area said.

The shooting appeared to be between residual forces of a pro-Gbagbo militia and forces that fought to install democratically elected President Alassane Ouattara, said two residents of Yopougon suburb that includes several ghettos of shacks as well as middle-class homes. The residents spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.

Also Saturday, Gbagbo’s former foreign minister said Gbagbo is under United Nations protection in a northern town. Ivory Coast’s northern half is a Ouattara stronghold.

Alcide Djedje said Gbagbo is being held in the northern town of Korhogo with at least three ministers and several legislators. He said they are being protected by U.N. peacekeepers after an agreement was reached Thursday with Ouattara’s government. Pro-Ouattara forces arrested Gbagbo Monday after a four-month standoff sparked by Gbagbo’s refusal to cede power after losing a November poll.

Djedje was prevented from saying more to an Associated Press journalist by a member of the pro-Ouattara forces, who said Djedje was not allowed to speak to journalists.

The rest of Ivory Coast’s commercial capital has been largely calm for two days, with some people venturing out of their homes Saturday for the first time in two weeks. But Yopougon residents say they have been assailed by forces loyal to Ouattara, who on Wednesday went house to house searching for former soldiers, whom they shot and killed. On Thursday, residents said the pro-Ouattara forces were shooting into the air to frighten people into fleeing, and then pillaging their homes and shops.

Abidjan had been a city under siege as pro-Gbagbo forces took a last stand and turned heavy weapons on civilians in their fight to keep in power the man who has governed since 2000, delayed elections for five years and then refused to accept his November defeat. Thousands of people have been killed and wounded, the International Federation of the Red Cross has said.

On Saturday, residents of Adjame neighborhood burned bodies and trash in a cleanup effort.

An AP photographer saw two burning bodies and residents said there were other bodies in a huge pile of flaming trash.

“There are too many bodies to count,” one resident said, when asked how many bodies had been burned.

Some said it was the first time they were venturing out in two weeks.

Scores of women in the Treichville neighborhood came out wearing white T-shirts bearing images of Ouattara and his French wife, Dominique. They carried sachets of drinking water, boiled eggs and fried rice, which they offered to pro-Ouattara forces who had taken over the headquarters of Gbagbo’s feared Republican Guard.

“We’ve come out to show our joy. They have liberated us. Until this week, you couldn’t come within 100 meters of that building without being shot at,” said Mariam Anne-Marie Sylla, gesturing at the headquarters.

The women staged a celebratory march through the streets of the neighborhood, shouting Ouattara’s nickname and saying “he is our president and he is the solution,” to Ivory Coast’s crisis.

Pro-Ouattara fighters captured Gbagbo Monday after U.N. and French forces bombed the presidential residence where he had taken refuge in a fortified underground bunker.

Meanwhile, state radio reported that Gbagbo’s interior minister, Desire Tagro, died on Tuesday after being badly beaten by fighters who captured him Monday along with Gbagbo.

Ouattara has said that Gbagbo’s safety is assured and that he wants the former strongman tried by both national and international courts for his alleged crimes. The International Criminal Court in The Hague has said it is conducting a preliminary examination into crimes perpetrated by all sides in the conflict in this West African nation.

Friday night state television broadcast video of the capture earlier in the day of Gen. Brunot Dogbo Ble, head of the Republican Guard that stood beside Gbagbo and fought fiercely in Abidjan, the seat of government.

Saturday’s fighting broke out as officials in Ivory Coast are drawing up a list of ministers, generals and journalists to be charged with blood crimes, corruption and hate speech, the justice minister responsible for human rights told The Associated Press.

Top of the list is Charles Ble Goude, youth minister in Gbagbo’s disgraced government, who organized a violent anti-French and anti-U.N. gang that has terrorized foreigners and ordinary civilians.

On Friday, a government spokesman said Ble Goude had been arrested. But Justice Minister Jeannot Ahoussou said that was a case of mistaken identity.

Ble Goude is known as the “street general” for organizing the violent gang that terrorized Ivory Coast’s foreign population between 2004 and 2005. More recently he incited his Young Patriots, a militia-like gang of thugs, to attack foreigners as well as Ouattara’s supporters.

“We are investigating every member of the Cabinet of Mr. Gbagbo for blood crimes, money crimes, buying guns and other arms,” Ahoussou told the AP in a telephone interview.

He said he also was investigating journalists who broadcast hate speech. Gbagbo had turned the state Radio Television Ivoirienne into a propaganda organ that broadcast statements inciting violence against tribes loyal to Ouattara.

Former rebel forces that fought to install Ouattara also are accused of atrocities, including the slaughter of hundreds of civilians in western Ivory Coast, a stronghold of Gbagbo’s Bete tribe and allied Guere people.

The telephone line broke as a journalist was asking the minister whether he also would be investigating pro-Ouattara forces that perpetrated crimes. Telephone communications are poor throughout the country including in Abidjan.

State television on Friday night also broadcast an appeal by French Ambassador Jean-Marc Simon for witnesses to come forward in the April 4 kidnappings of two Frenchmen, a Malaysian and a citizen of Benin from the downtown Hotel Novotel. They were seized by pro-Gbagbo troops.

Simon asked for anyone with knowledge of their whereabouts or where they might have been taken to let him know.

___

Associated Press photographer Rebecca Blackwell contributed to this report from Abidjan.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Rebels Hijack Gadhafi's Phone Network

A Group of Expatriate Executives and Engineers Furtively Restore Telecommunications for the Libyan Opposition

By MARGARET COKER in Abu Dhabi and CHARLES LEVINSON in Benghazi, Libya



WSJ's Margaret Coker reports on efforts by telecommunications executives to restore cell phone service to rebels in eastern Libya, allowing them to communicate without interference from government personnel loyal to Col. Moammar Gadhafi.

A team led by a Libyan-American telecom executive has helped rebels hijack Col. Moammar Gadhafi's cellphone network and re-establish their own communications.

The new network, first plotted on an airplane napkin and assembled with the help of oil-rich Arab nations, is giving more than two million Libyans their first connections to each other and the outside world after Col. Gadhafi cut off their telephone and Internet service about a month ago.

That March cutoff had rebels waving flags to communicate on the battlefield. The new cellphone network, opened on April 2, has become the opposition's main tool for communicating from the front lines in the east and up the chain of command to rebel brass hundreds of miles away.

While cellphones haven't given rebel fighters the military strength to decisively drive Col. Gadhafi from power, the network has enabled rebel leaders to more easily make the calls needed to rally international backing, source weapons and strategize with their envoys abroad.

To make that possible, engineeers hived off part of the Libyana cellphone network—owned and operated by the Tripoli-based Libyan General Telecommunications Authority, which is run by Col. Gadhafi's eldest son—and rewired it to run independently of the regime's control. Government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim, asked about the rebel cellphone network, said he hadn't heard of it.

Ousama Abushagur, a 31-year-old Libyan telecom executive raised in Huntsville, Ala., masterminded the operation from his home in Abu Dhabi. Mr. Abushagur and two childhood friends working as corporate managers in Dubai and Doha started fund-raising on Feb. 17 to support the political protests that were emerging in Libya. By Feb. 23, when fighting had erupted, his team delivered the first of multiple humanitarian aid convoys to eastern Libya.

But while in Libya, they found their cellphones and Thuraya satellite phones jammed or out of commission, making planning and logistics challenging.

Security was also an issue. Col. Gadhafi had built his telecommunications infrastructure to fan out from Tripoli—routing all calls through the capital and giving him and his intelligence agents full control over phones and Internet.

Charles Levinson


On March 6, during a flight back to the United Arab Emirates after organizing a naval convoy to the embattled city of Misrata, Mr. Abushagur says he drew up a diagram on the back of a napkin for a plan to infiltrate Libyana, pirate the signal and carve out a network free of Tripoli's control.

What followed was a race against time to solve the technical, engineering and legal challenges before the nascent rebel-led governing authority was crushed under the weight of Col. Gadhafi's better-equipped forces. After a week of victories in which the rebels swept westward from Benghazi toward Col. Gadhafi's hometown of Sirte, the rebel advance stalled and reversed on March 17, when the United Nations approved a no-fly zone and government forces kicked off a fierce counterattack.

In a sign of deepening ties between Arab governments and the Benghazi-based administration, the U.A.E. and Qatar provided diplomatic support and helped buy the several million dollars of telecommunications equipment needed in Benghazi, according to members of the Libyan transitional authority and people familiar with the situation.

Meanwhile, rebel military commanders were using flags to signal with their troops, a throw-back that proved disastrous to their attempts at holding their front lines.

"We went to fight with flags: Yellow meant retreat, green meant advance," said Gen. Ahmed al-Ghatrani, a rebel commander in Benghazi. "Gadhafi forced us back to the stone age."

Renewed signal jamming also meant that rebel leaders and residents in Benghazi had little warning of the government forces' offensive across east Libya and the March 19 attempted invasion of Benghazi, which sparked panicked civilian evacuations of the city.

Mr. Abushagur watched the government advances with alarm. His secret cellphone operation had also run into steep problems.

The Chinese company Huawei Technologies Ltd., one of the original contractors for Libyana's cellular network backbone, refused to sell equipment for the rebel project, causing Mr. Abushagur and his engineer buddies to scramble to find a hybrid technical solution to match other companies' hardware with the existing Libyan network. Huawei declined to comment on its customers or work in Libya. The Libyan expats in the project asked that their corporate affiliations be kept confidential so that their political activities don't interfere with their work responsibilities.

Without Huawei, the backing from the Persian Gulf nations became essential—otherwise it is unlikely that international telecom vendors would have sold the sophisticated machinery to an unrecognized rebel government or individual businessmen, according to people familiar with the situation.

"The Emirates government and [its telecommunications company] Etisalat helped us by providing the equipment we needed to operate Libyana at full capacity," said Faisal al-Safi, a Benghazi official who oversees transportation and communications issues.

U.A.E. and Qatari officials didn't respond to requests for comment. Emirates Telecommunications Corp., known as Etisalat, declined to comment.

After 42 years under Moammar Gadhafi's rule, it's hard to imagine what Libya could look like without the dictator in power. WSJ's Neil Hickey reports from Washington on the cloudy outlook for the north African nation.

By March 21, most of the main pieces of equipment had arrived in the U.A.E. and Mr. Abushagur was ready to ship them to Benghazi with three Libyan telecom engineers, four Western engineers and a team of bodyguards.

But Col. Gadhafi's forces were still threatening to overrun the rebel capital and trying to bomb its airport. Mr. Abushagur diverted the team and their equipment to an Egyptian air base on the Libyan border. Customs bureaucracy cost them a week, though Egypt's eventual approval was another show of Arab support for rebels. Egypt's governing military council couldn't be reached for comment.

Once in Libya, the team paired with Libyana engineers and executives based in Benghazi. Together, they fused the new equipment into the existing cellphone network, creating an independent data and routing system free from Tripoli's command.

The team also captured the Tripoli-based database of phone numbers, giving them information necessary to patch existing Libyana customers and phone numbers into their new system—which they dubbed "Free Libyana." The last piece of the puzzle was securing a satellite feed through which the Free Libyana calls could be routed—a solution provided by Etisalat, according to Benghazi officials.

On April 2, Mr. Abushagur placed a test call on the system to his wife back in Abu Dhabi. "She's the one who told me to go for it in the first place," he said.

International calling from Libya is still limited to the few individuals and officials in eastern Libya who most need it. Incoming calls have to be paid for by prepaid calling cards, except for Jordan, Egypt and Qatar.

Domestic calling works throughout eastern Libya up until the Ajdabiya, the last rebel-held town in the east. An added bonus of the new network: It is free for domestic calls, at least until Free Libyana gets a billing system up and running. —Loretta Chao, Shireen El-Gazzar and Sam Dagher contributed to this article.

Write to Margaret Coker at margaret.coker@wsj.com and Charles Levinson at charles.levinson@wsj.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Apr 15, 2011

China, other developing BRICS nations seek change in global economic order

The United Colours of Farm WorkersImage by Trenchfoot via Flickr
By Keith B. Richburg, Thursday, April 14, 2:20 PM

BOAO, CHINA — With the United States and Europe still reeling from the 2008 financial crisis, five disparate developing countries led by China — large, populous, with growing economies — are using their combined clout to demand a larger voice and to upend the world’s traditional councils of power.

Brazil, Russia, India, China and newcomer South Africa, collectively known by the acronym BRICS, used their third summit meeting here on this southern Chinese resort island to call for a restructuring of the World War II-era global financial system and an eventual end to the long reign of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

The five run the gamut politically, from vibrant democracies to authoritarian regimes. Economically, they are as much competitors as partners. But what they share is a common sense of exclusion, and the idea that the main institutions of global governance — the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization and the U.N. Security Council — were formed in a different era when the countries were economically weak and the United States was the world’s dominant superpower.

“They were really the biggest countries kind of left out,” said Amar Bhattacharya, a former World Bank official who now runs the Washington-based Group of 24 forum of developing countries.

The Obama administration came to office trying to engage China to become a “responsible stakeholder” in the established global order. But China, now with the backing of the other BRICS countries in a forum that it dominates by virtue of its size, has argued that the existing order is unfair and needs reshaping.

“The governing structure of the international financial institutions should reflect the changes in the world economy, increasing the voice and representation of emerging economies and developing countries,” the group’s final statement said.

Of the United Nations, it said, “We reaffirm the need for a comprehensive reform of the U.N., including its Security Council, with a view to making it more effective, efficient and representative.” It added, “China and Russia reiterate the importance they attach to the status of India, Brazil and South Africa in international affairs, and understand and support their aspiration to play a greater role in the U.N.”

The countries called for “a broad-based international reserve currency system providing stability and certainty,” a slap at the U.S. dollar and Washington’s monetary policy, which they think has allowed the dollar to depreciate.

The statement, more strongly worded and specific than one expressing similar sentiments at the group’s 2009 summit, said these emerging-market countries should have more of a say in how the world’s financial system is run, including which currencies should be in the emergency “basket” of drawing rights managed by the IMF.

In one of the first concrete steps, the five leaders agreed to have their development banks provide credit to one another, denominated in their local currencies and not, as is typical, in U.S. dollars.

And in an attempt to find some political common ground for the disparate group, the five leaders said they were “deeply concerned” about the turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa and urged all parties to “resolve their differences through peaceful means and dialogue.”

Without specifically referring to the NATO-led airstrikes against the forces of Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi, they said, “The use of force should be avoided.”

South Africa, the smallest of the countries, became a newly minted BRICS member this year. Meeting at the summit are Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Chinese President Hu Jintao, who is the host, and South African President Jacob Zuma.

In a small irony for some, the term BRIC was coined in 2001 by a British economist for Goldman Sachs, mainly as a shorthand way to refer to the four countries that were far too large and advanced to be considered in the same league as, say, Zambia but were not quite wealthy enough to qualify for rich-world status.

The BRICS economies together are worth about $12 trillion, compared with $15 trillion for the U.S. economy. By 2020, their economies should pass that of the United States, economists say.

But the real story is their growth rates. While the United States and Europe are still shaking off the effects of the economic crisis and dealing with mounting debt, China is expected to grow by 9.5 percent a year for the next five years and India is expected to grow at more than 8 percent a year. Russia and Brazil each are expected to see growth of more than 4 percent.

With these emerging economies now seen as the engine for global growth, their leaders are demanding a greater voice on the world stage — even though they are hugely divergent countries with different political and economic systems. The five countries are just as often competing as cooperating.

Brazil and India are concerned that China’s undervalued currency is hurting their exports. And while Russia, a huge commodity exporter, is benefiting from soaring prices for oil and commodities, China, a major importer, is sharply criticizing those price rises.

“The member countries have starkly different economic interests,” said Phil Levy, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, “and are unlikely to function effectively as an economic bloc.”

This is not the first time China has challenged the existing system, which it thinks is dominated by the United States. In January, in written answers to questions from The Washington Post, Hu called the world currency system a “product of the past.” China has begun moves to boost the use of its currency, the renminbi, in trade and investment. Yet the renminbi is still not a convertible currency.

The BRICS forum gives China a new international vehicle to push its agenda. “The economic size of BRICS countries accounts for about 18 percent of world GDP,” said Jin Canrong, a professor of international studies at Beijing’s Renmin University. “But these countries are not the decision makers in the international economic system. They are only the athletes. The Western countries are the rulemakers and judges. Right now, the BRICS countries want to join the judging committee, too.”

Yao Zhizhong, a researcher with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, agreed: “Times have changed. In the past, the developed economies manipulated the world economic system. But right now, they are no longer able to dominate the world economy. With the growth of their economic size, the emerging economies want to join the decision-making process and have their voices heard in the international economic governing system.”

Hu may have found an unlikely ally from outside the BRICS format: French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who holds the chairmanship of the Group of 20 wealthy and developing nations. Sarkozy has similarly called for a change to the global monetary order and an end to the dollar as the “sole” reserve currency.


richburgk@washpost.com

Researcher Zhang Jie in Beijing contributed to this report.
Enhanced by Zemanta

In Tripoli, clandestine resistance takes peaceful and violent forms

Muammar al Gaddafi Mouammar Kadhafi Colonel Qu...Image by Abode of Chaos via Flickr
By Simon Denyer, Thursday, April 14, 10:12 PM

TRIPOLI, Libya — A man bends over, pretending to work on his car, muttering “just keep walking.” A long wait, a brief, coded phone call — and a car stops. A door swings open.

“Get in,” the man in the front tells two reporters. “If anyone stops us, just say we are going to the fish market.”

In Moammar Gaddafi’s Tripoli, under a shroud of fear and suspicion, a clandestine opposition movement is struggling to reorganize after February’s protests were brutally suppressed. As rebels in eastern Libya continue to hold territory and fight for more, resistance to the government in the capital is taking peaceful and violent forms.

“People are ready for suicide bombings,” the man, a leader of the anti-Gaddafi insurgency, later told two reporters over coffee and a cigarette in a safe house somewhere in the city.

Gaddafi, the man said, often salutes adoring crowds standing through the open roof of his car. “We can get near him,” the insurgent said.

Almost every night, the crackle of gunfire erupts around the Libyan capital. The insurgent, middle-aged and stocky, would not give his name, and his identity could not be independently verified. But he claimed responsibility for the gunfire. “Our boys,” he said, attack checkpoints at night, killing Gaddafi’s militiamen and stealing their weapons.

“There are not so many checkpoints now, because their boys got scared and they don’t want to do it anymore,” the insurgent said.

The strikes aren’t limited to checkpoints. Anti-government forces attacked bus stations in the capital this week, he said, and gas stations are next. The goal, he said, is “to make chaos in the country.” Innocent bystanders will just have to get out of the way.

Although information is difficult to corroborate in Tripoli, given stringent restrictions on reporting by foreign journalists, similar claims have been made to other reporters.

Reuters quoted Tripoli residents as saying there have been several attacks on army checkpoints and a police station in the past week.

But Gaddafi’s forces are also claiming victories: The insurgent said that many of his men had been arrested.

The opposition says 20,000 people have gone missing since protests erupted, and informants continue to try to infiltrate the opposition’s ranks.

“We have to get rid of them because they are no good,” he said. “If we don’t kill them, they are going to kill us.”

‘These are our streets’

Elsewhere in the city, a group of men is trying to keep the flame of peaceful protest alive. Last week, a dozen friends assembled in the early-morning hours in a side street in the city’s Ben Ashur district and read a defiant statement of opposition to Gaddafi.

“These are our streets, and these are our alleys,” the protest leader read. “For we vow to you, shameful and disgraceful Gaddafi, not you nor your battalions, nor your snipers, nor your mercenaries, however many they are, will terrify us anymore, and we will not back down on our revolution and uprising, no matter how great the sacrifice.”

The video, circulated by e-mail and since shown on at least two foreign TV news channels, shows a few young men, scarves wrapped around their faces, nervously looking at the camera and holding up placards.

“Friday’s protest was a start, but it isn’t the benchmark of what’s to come,” the organizer later told The Washington Post via Skype. “It was more a statement of intent, a symbol. That we are on the streets, in the open, that we are here.”

With the Internet cut and phones tapped, the protest organizer is one of a handful of dissidents with a satellite connection, something he says is probably a “hangable offense.”

Dissatisfaction with Gaddafi’s rule had been brewing for a long time, he said. But what really angered people in Tripoli was the way the protests in the east were violently suppressed in mid-February. Now, there is no going back.

“Too much blood has been shed,” the organizer said. “There have been too many inflammatory speeches. Too many people were called ‘rats’ and ‘al-Qaeda drunks.’ Too many peoples’ freedoms were suppressed, and too many had their dignity violated.”

“Believe me, if we go back to how it was, then he will kill us all. There will be silent vengeance the likes of which has never been seen.”

Denials of wrongdoing

The organizer promised more protests, in greater numbers, but the challenges are growing. Most people lack access to news reports, and the government is filling the vacuum with fear and misinformation.

Last week, undercover agents took to the streets of the restive Fashloom neighborhood, residents and activists said, waving opposition flags and chanting slogans. Anyone who joined was arrested.

Tripoli buzzed with rumors of protests again this week, but even the organizer of last week’s protest was suspicious. “I don’t know where the rumors came from,” he said. “It could be a trap.”

Government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim denied there had been any shooting between rebels and the government in Tripoli.

“We have heard of these reports. They are false,” he said. “Tripoli has been peaceful. There is no organized rebellion.”

He also denied that government agents were posing as protestors to entrap dissenters.

Despite the obstacles, the protest organizer and the insurgent have one thing in common: their hope that the Gaddafi government will crumble under the weight of its own fear and repression.

“We are just waiting for one more army commander,” the insurgent said. “If one of them turns against him, we’ll get him.”

In the meantime, he said, the time for peaceful protest has passed. “It is a waste of life anyway,” he said. “They don’t think twice. They just kill and ask questions later.”


denyers@washpost.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

US service personnel play key part in Libya campaign even as US withdraws from front-line role

Photograph of a sign showing an artist's impre...Image via Wikipedia
By Associated Press, Friday, April 15

ABOARD THE CHARLES DE GAULLEU.S. Navy Lt. Patrick Salmon is getting ready for another day at work, strapping himself into the cockpit of his strike jet and roaring off this French aircraft carrier for his daily attack mission against Moammar Gadhafi’s ground forces.

He’ll be launched into action by Kyle A. Caldwell, another U.S. Navy lieutenant who operates the flattop’s catapult systems. When Salmon is ready to set his plane back on deck, yet a third U.S. Navy lieutenant, Philip Hoblet, will be standing by in a French rescue helicopter, hovering just off the ship’s bow in case any of the returning pilots are forced to ditch into the sea.

The United States, which originally led the Libya campaign, has been steadily reducing its role over the past two weeks. On March 31, it handed over command and control of the international campaign to NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and shortly after that it ceased all attack missions over Libya — setting of a search by NATO for more planes capable of carrying out precision strikes against Gadhafi’s forces.

NATO said Friday that the U.S. still flies one-third of the Libya operation’s missions. But that refers to surveillance and refueling missions, not to attack flights over Libyan territory.

But even though the U.S. has withdrawn its forces from the front lines of the NATO campaign, a handful of Americans serving on this French navy carrier remain at the forefront of the action.

They are members of a little-known French-American naval exchange program in which U.S. officers spend time in the French navy — known as the “Marine Nationale” — and French officers spend time in the U.S. navy.

“Because French carrier pilots are trained in the United States, this helps a lot with standardization of procedures,” said Cmdr. Matthew Hogan, 44, Grass Valley, California. “We’re very comfortable operating with each other.”

Hogan, who is nine months into a two-year posting at the naval base of Toulon in the south of France, serves on the flattop as a staff officer for Rear Adm. Philippe Coindreau, commander of the French fleet conducting the airstrikes against Libya.

The carrier, known in the navy by its nickname “Le Grand Charles,” began reconnaissance flights over Libya on March 22. Attack missions followed almost immediately, and the ship has acted as the tip of the spear for NATO s aerial campaign ever since.

France currently has only a single carrier in its inventory, while the U.S. operates 11 of the floating air bases. The French therefore long ago decided it wasn’t cost-effective to organize a training program of their own for their pilots, but rely instead on U.S. Navy training.

French naval aviators and some support personnel regularly head to U.S. Navy bases in Mississippi and Florida to learn carrier operations.

The four American officers serving aboard live in or near the base in Toulon, but only Hoblet has his family with him. The others say they spend too much time at sea to make it worthwhile for their wives and children to relocate to a foreign country.

The Americans received their basic language training at a Defense Languages Institute in Monterey, California. Although they achieved fluency in French, mastering the intricacies of colloquialisms and idioms remains a challenge.

Caldwell, 38, of Colombia, SC, remembers his confusion when his workmate told him: “Ne faut pas pousser la grand mere dans les orties” — literally “don’t push your grandmother into the nettles.”

The English equivalent of the phrase is “don’t try so hard.”

“So when we’re not working, we’re mostly studying French,” he said. Working in another language on board a carrier involves the additional complication of communicating in intensely noisy conditions. Jet engines roar, cables clang across the deck, catapults thump as they heave planes aloft and lifts whine has they move planes from the hangars to the flight deck.

But the four have received high praise from French officers for their language abilities, their performance and their camaraderie.

Caldwell, who has worked on several U.S. carriers, said the similarities between the two navies outweigh the differences, and said the major distinction was the number of sorties he handles a day.

“On U.S. carriers we trap about 160 aircraft a day at sea, but here it’s just 35-40 a day,” he said. “Also, on U.S. carriers we’re able to launch and trap aircraft at the same time, but because of the shorter size here we need to close the carrier deck for each operation.”
Enhanced by Zemanta

At NATO summit, U.S. resists calls for greater engagement in Libya

Hillary Rodham Clinton, January 2007Image via Wikipedia
By William Wan and Leila Fadel, Thursday, April 14, 8:30 PM

BERLIN — At a summit of NATO nations that opened here Thursday, U.S. officials played down emerging rifts among allies and rebuffed calls from within NATO for its members to commit more forces to the military operation in Libya.

Since the United States turned over command of the airstrikes in Libya to NATO at the end of March, there has been growing criticism from some in the coalition — particularly France and Britain — that other allies need to do more to help Libya’s rebel opposition battle Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi.

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said he asked Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in a closed-door meeting Thursday whether the United States could contribute additional fighter planes to the effort but did not receive an encouraging response.

“I got the sense that the Americans will stick to their same line,” Juppe said. “That is, to maintain their current policy of intervening with forces as they are needed, depending on the situation and where the assets they have are particularly useful.”

U.S. officials have pushed back against such demands, saying that NATO has not yet asked the United States directly for additional assets and pointing out that they are already supplying many support-type planes. They also say they believe other countries will eventually come forward.

U.S. officials had hoped to use the two-day NATO summit to bridge such emerging differences in the coalition.

“Gaddafi is testing our determination,” Clinton told other foreign ministers during the summit. “As our mission continues, maintaining our resolve and unity only grows more important.”

At a Thursday morning news briefing ahead of the summit, U.S. officials insisted that NATO commanders in charge of the operation have everything they need.

“If the commanders feel they need more capability, the commanders will ask for more capability. That’s not what they are doing so far,” said a senior U.S. administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

During the Berlin meeting, however, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said commanders had indeed sought more military assets, specifically requesting equipment capable of precision attacks on ground forces.

According to Rasmussen, NATO’s supreme allied commander for Europe, Adm. James Stavridis, told foreign ministers that while NATO has the overall assets required for the mission, its military needs have changed with recent shifts in Gaddafi’s strategy.

“We had great initial success bombing his tanks, but we’re encountering problems now that Gaddafi’s moving his heavy armor closer to civilian populations,” said a Western diplomat involved in the discussions. According to that official, NATO now needs about eight more planes capable of precision bombing, such as the U.S. F-15 or F-16 or similarly equipped aircraft from other countries.

Spain and Italy have planes helping to enforce the no-fly zone, but both countries said Thursday they did not plan to step up their role to include ground strikes.

Rasmussen declined to single out the United States as the country he and NATO commanders hoped would provide the additional assets now needed, and said, “I’m confident that nations will step up to the plate.”

In Libya, meanwhile, Gaddafi chose the same day and, according to some reports, the very hour NATO ministers were meeting to ride around Tripoli in an open-top sport-utility vehicle, pumping his fist defiantly, in an act broadcast on Libyan state TV.

And 130 miles to the east, the besieged city of Misurata came under heavy rocket and artillery fire Thursday morning, according to residents and doctors there. Explosions rocked the city — the only opposition foothold left in western Libya — as Gaddafi loyalists intensified their attacks and the city’s port was closed amid the violence, port authority officials in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi said.

Misurata has been under siege for seven weeks as Gaddafi’s forces have tried to regain complete control of the remote city, but residents have held out despite sniper attacks and artillery shelling that have killed hundreds.

Benghazi port authority officials said aid organizations’ boats that had been shuttling medicine and supplies from Benghazi to Misurata, as well as evacuating the wounded, were unable to dock Thursday because of shelling.

At the port in Benghazi, ships were also being loaded with rockets and guns to resupply rebels even as news spread of Misurata’s port closing. One boat destined for Misurata was being loaded with bulletproof vests, helmets and ammunition in crates labeled in English as having come from Qatar.

Misurata’s hospitals were overflowing Thursday, with at least 13 people dead and 50 wounded in the latest attacks, said Shaymaa Najil, an Iraqi doctor volunteering with the Red Cross there.

“We don’t have enough medicine, doctors, beds or tools,” she said. “Every day is the same now. We wake up to bombing and go to sleep to bombing.”

In her speech in Berlin, Clinton spelled out the actions she deemed essential for the Libya mission, including improving coordination between NATO commanders and rebel forces — some of whom have been killed by friendly fire from NATO planes — and intensifying financial and diplomatic international pressure on Gaddafi. Planning for a post-Gaddafi Libya must also begin, she said.

U.S. officials said Clinton also met with Turkish officials on Thursday and talked about creating “an exit path” for Gaddafi to step down and leave Libya.

Turkey maintains a unique position as the only country in NATO that still has a functioning embassy in Tripoli, as well as a consulate in Benghazi.

A senior Turkish official said his government hoped to use the Berlin meeting to come up with a diplomatic solution, which would include establishing direct communication with Gaddafi, making arrangements for his exit and ensuring that the opposition council sets up a new government that represents all tribes and groups.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has maintained telephone contact with Gaddafi and his sons since before the start of the military operations, Ibrahim Kalin, Erdogan’s senior adviser, said in an interview late Wednesday. On each occasion, Erdogan “urged Gaddafi to leave peacefully,” Kalin said.

“If the Berlin meeting produces results,” Kalin said, a cease-fire could be declared within days. Although he acknowledged the difficulty of dealing directly with Gaddafi, he said the international community needs to “open a line of communication” with the Libyan leader, through Arab interlocutors or Turkey itself, to assure him he has a viable exit and convince him that he has no other option.


wanw@washpost.com

Fadel reported from Benghazi, Libya. Correspondent Simon Denyer in Tripoli and staff writer Karen DeYoung in Washington contributed to this report.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Brazilian company JBS dominates world beef industry from farm to fork

Coat of arms of BrazilImage via Wikipedia
By Juan Forero, Thursday, April 14, 4:37 PM

LINS, BRAZIL — In many ways, JBS, the company that owns the big slaughterhouse here on the edge of town, is still run like a family business.

The founder, who began by slaughtering one or two head a day in 1953, raises calves far in the countryside. Six of his children are in JBS’s management. And ranchers such as Edson Crochiquia, who is 69 but rounds up cattle on horseback near here, spare no detail to provide the company with healthy, 1,000-pound animals.

Even a decade ago, JBS was still mainly focused on selling in Brazil. But by acquiring American giants such as Swift and Pilgrim’s Pride, JBS grew from a $1 billion private company into a $40 billion behemoth that slaughters 90,000 head of cattle a day, employs 125,000 workers and exports to 150 countries.

JBS is now the world’s biggest provider of meat, its footprint felt by feedlots, packing plants and chicken processors from Argentina to Italy to the American Midwest.

In Brazil, it is not uncommon to find banks, steel mills and other companies that evolved from family businesses into global giants. But JBS stands out, using an alliance with Brazil’s development bank and an aggressive acquisition strategy to become a vital pillar of the country’s efforts to project its economic power abroad.

To Wesley Batista, JBS’s 40-year-old chief executive and the founder’s fourth child, the company is still run “a simple way,” using a management model without “a lot of layers, not a lot of fancy things, not a lot of time spent on PowerPoint presentations.”

And although family patriarch Jose Batista Sobrinho, 77, can still be found at JBS headquarters in Sao Paulo whispering advice to his sons, the company he built is anything but folksy.

High-tech plants in Australia supply the Asian market, and its 39 slaughterhouses in Brazil help feed this booming country as well as Europe. In the United States alone, it employs 75,000 workers and is projecting revenues of $28 billion this year.

“In terms of slaughtering capacity, we have 10 percent of the total worldwide capacity,” Wesley Batista said. “And in terms of the beef trade, 25 percent of the worldwide trade in beef comes from JBS.”

Brazil’s rise

No meat company in decades has come so close to dominating all facets of beef production — from feedlots and grazing lands to packing plants to distribution points.

“Today, 50 percent of the meat commercialized worldwide is transported by companies with Brazilian capital,” said Dante Sica, a Buenos Aires economist who tracks Brazilian foreign investments. “Brazil is advancing strongly.”

That has rankled some in cattle country, as far away as Montana. “We believe it is a very aggressive company that truly is attempting to dominate the protein market globally,” said Bill Bullard, chief executive of R-CALF USA in Billings, Mont., which represents 6,500 cattle producers.

In 2009, JBS dropped its purchase of Kansas City, Mo.-based National Beef after the Justice Department and several state attorneys general opened an investigation to determine whether a takeover would hurt competition. By then, JBS had already bought Swift for $1.4 billion, to be followed by cattle feedlots and a chicken processor.

Since 1980, Bullard said, the number of cattle-raising operations in the United States has fallen by 42 percent as companies such as JBS, Tyson and Cargill have expanded. “A major factor contributing to this contraction is the unbridled concentration of our meatpacking sector,” Bullard said.

JBS officials say that their arrival in the United States brings efficiency, which ultimately benefits consumers, and that the company’s purchase of companies such as the chicken processor Pilgrim’s Pride, which was in bankruptcy when it was acquired, saved jobs.

Feeding the middle class

JBS’s buying spree took place at a time when cattle operations in the United States and elsewhere were struggling. The cost of the grain cattle consume soared in recent years, while meat prices remained relatively low.

JBS secured the financial heft for its expansion by going public in Brazil in 2007, which raised $5 billion, Wesley Batista said. The company is also banking on the future; the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization projects that meat consumption will rise 20 percent in the developing world by 2018.

Batista said that an expanding middle class in Russia, China, Brazil and the Middle East, places vital to JBS’s long-term plans, will use its new purchasing power to improve its diet. “They put this money — first thing — in food,” he said.

And that means more meat — beef that begins its circuitous journey from farm to fork on ranches such as Santa Izabel.

Here, 6,500 heads of humpbacked Cebu cattle graze three days in one field before Crochiquia’s cowboys herd them to the next plot, a process designed to keep fields lush.

In less than a year and a half, he said, they are shipped to feedlots for a final few weeks of fattening. Then it is on to the processing facility in Lins, not JBS’s biggest but still so sizable that it has its own plants to generate electricity and biofuels.

The end comes on a narrow concrete corral leading to the slaughter room. In their final minutes of life, the steers must be kept from panicking, which releases adrenaline and makes meat acidic tasting, said Bassem Akl Akl, the plant manager.

Once inside, the animal is rendered unconscious by a captive bolt pistol. It is hoisted up by its hind legs. A worker then slices the carotid artery and jugular vein, and the steer bleeds to death in seconds. A processing line of workers, all in hard hats and white aprons, then skin, debone, slice, can and package the meat.

“You have to have people very well trained,” said Akl Akl, yelling to be heard above the din of conveyer belts, “because this is a very specific task. You have to cut exactly on the anatomical division.”

It all happens fast.

By the end of a typical day, at least 900 animals will have been slaughtered. The final product: rump roasts or tenderloins, corned beef or beef jerky, to be exported as far away as London.


foreroj@washpost.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Bahrain backs off on plans to close Shiite opposition parties after international criticism

Flag of the United States NavyImage via Wikipedia
By Associated Press, Thursday, April 14, 10:56 AM

MANAMA, Bahrain — Bahrain’s government appears to be pulling back from plans to dismantle main Shiite opposition parties after criticism from Washington and other allies.

The state-run Bahrain News Agency said on Friday that authorities are holding off any action until the outcome of investigations into the main Shiite political group, Wefaq, and a smaller Shiite bloc.

Bahrain’s Sunni rulers had earlier said the groups would be shut down for alleged links to the Shiite-led uprising in the strategic Gulf kingdom that hosts the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet. The U.S. State Department quickly raised concern about Bahrain’s plans to block the groups.

Wefaq has withdrawn its lawmakers from Bahrain’s parliament to protest the government’s crackdown on dissent, including a declaration of martial law.
Enhanced by Zemanta

As Bahrain stifles protest movement, U.S.’s muted objections draw criticism

Coat of arms of Bahrain.Image via Wikipedia
By Joby Warrickand Michael Birnbaum, Friday, April 15, 4:35 AM

Two months after the eruption of mass protests in Bahrain, the kingdom has largely silenced the opposition, jailing hundreds of activists in a crackdown that has left the Obama administration vulnerable to charges that it is upholding democratic values in the Middle East selectively.

Bahrain’s monarchy, since calling in Saudi troops last month to help crush the protest movement, has been quietly dismantling the country’s Shiite-led opposition. On Friday, the Sunni government announced an investigation into the activities of Bahrain’s largest political party, the Shiite-dominated al-Wefaq, which could lead to its ban.

The Obama administration has repeatedly appealed to the Bahraini government for restraint, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton this week called for a political process that “advances the rights and aspirations of all the citizens of Bahrain.” But the administration has neither recalled its ambassador to Manama nor threatened the kinds of sanctions it imposed on Libya — a striking disparity that is fueling ­anti-U.S. sentiment among Bahraini opposition groups.

“Even though the American administration’s words are all about freedom and democracy and change, in Bahrain, the reality is that they’re basically a protection for the dictatorship,” said Zainab al-Khawaja, a prominent human-rights activist who began a hunger strike after her father, husband and brother-in-law were arrested at her apartment over the weekend.

U.S. officials privately acknowledge that the administration has been understated in its criticism of Bahrain, in part to avoid further strain in relations with Saudi Arabia, a vital U.S. ally and neighbor to the tiny island kingdom. The Saudis, fearing the rise of a pro-Iranian Shiite state on its eastern frontier, urged Bahrain to deal firmly with the throng of protesters that occupied a central square and blocked access to Manama’s main business district.

A month later, however, with Bahrain’s iron first tightening further, the White House is facing awkward questions from political allies as well as foes. A perceived U.S. double standard on Middle East democracy — a problem since the Arab spring movement began three months ago — could become more acute if Washington is seen to ignore widespread abuses, according to current and former diplomats and regional experts.

“We need to worry about the human-rights situation deteriorating there,” said Joel Rubin, a former Middle East specialist for the State Department and deputy director of the National Security Network, a Democratic-leaning foreign policy think tank. “It has a real impact on perceptions of American policy in the region.”

U.S. officials defend the administration’s ad hoc approach to Middle East democracy movements as prudent, saying each country requires a unique balancing of democratic ideals and compelling security interests.

“We don’t make decisions about questions like intervention based on consistency or precedent,” Denis R. McDonough, Obama’s deputy national security adviser, said recently in explaining why U.S. policy on Libya differs from that on Bahrain. “We make them based on how we can best advance our interests in the region.”

In the case of Bahrain, the United States has key military interests. The kingdom is home to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet; it is also seen as a strategically important bulwark against Iranian power in the region. But even more vital is the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia, a critical ally in the Middle East for half a century.

Saudi Arabia and the United States have fundamentally different views of what is happening in Bahrain, why it is happening and who is responsible for it. Saudi officials deny that Bahrain has cracked down on legitimate demonstrators, insisting that action has been taken only against radicals seeking to provoke the government. A senior U.S. official held the opposite view, saying: “The crackdown is a fact.”

Administration officials accept that Bahrain is the Saudi “back yard,” a point emphasized by a member of the Saudi legislative council, Majlis al-Shura, during a visit to Washington last week. “Bahrain is our Cuba,” said the official, who spoke at a forum organized by the New America Foundation.

“We don’t believe the uprising is real,” said another shura member. Most of Bahrain’s Shiites “are happy; a small minority is causing the problem,” he said. “Maybe some are oppressed, but 1 percent is causing the trouble.”

Whatever the makeup of the protest movement, the intensity of the crackdown stunned Bahraini opposition leaders as well as many Middle East experts, who are dismayed by the dismantling of reforms that had cemented the island’s reputation as progressive and Western-friendly. Until the crackdown on March 14, many of the thousands of protesters who jammed the capital’s Pearl Square were confident that the movement sweeping the region would bring new political freedoms and economic equality for the country’s majority Shiite population.

“Only a month ago, we had a feeling of change and respect for democracy and human rights. Now we feel as though we are all in a big prison,” said Mohammed al-Maskati, president of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights. “They want to attack everyone who was involved in the protests.”

In addition to jailing activists and banning Shiite-led opposition parties, Bahraini authorities fired civil servants and even professional athletes who participated in demonstrations.

The country’s only independent newspaper was taken over last week and its editor forced to resign. And on Monday, the New York-based Human Rights Watch alleged that at least three opposition figures had died in Bahraini prisons under suspicious circumstances. While Bahraini authorities attributed the deaths to natural causes, Human Rights Watch said in a report that one of the victims’ bodies bore “signs of horrific abuse.”

Some government opponents accuse the United States of failing to put enough pressure on Bahrain and the neighboring Persian Gulf kingdoms that supported the crackdown. One prominent human rights activist described Bahraini protesters as “very, very disappointed” by the mild American response.

Clinton defended the U.S. role in a speech this week at a meeting of the U.S.-Islamic World Forum, insisting that the United States’ “core interests and values have not changed, including our commitment to promote human rights.” But Clinton cited other goals, including the defeat of terrorism and the containment of Iran, as “mutual interests.”

“We know that a one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t make sense in such a diverse region at such a fluid time,” she said.

Clinton mentioned Bahrain only briefly, hailing what she called a “decades-long friendship with Bahrain that we expect to continue long into the future.” But, referring to the recent crackdown, she added that “violence is not and cannot be the answer.”

“We have raised our concerns about the current measures directly with Bahraini officials and will continue to do so,” Clinton said.


warrickj@washpost.com


birnbaumm@washpost.com

Birnbaum reported from Berlin. Staff writer Karen DeYoung in Washington contributed to this report.
Enhanced by Zemanta

The fight for Sarawak