Israel, US Conduct Joint X-Band Radar Exercise

Xinhua, Bridging The Straits, July 24, 2009

The Israeli forces and U.S. military conducted a joint exercise this week of the X-Band radar deployed in southern Israel to check its interoperability with Israeli early-warning systems, local daily The Jerusalem Post reported Friday.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and the U.S. Military's European Command (EUCOM) carried out the drill to test the radar deployed in the Negev near the Nevatim Air Force Base, which is reportedly capable of tracking small targets from thousands of kilometers away.

The drill was conducted at EUCOM headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany, said the report, adding that a similar drill took place last week, also in Germany.

The drill was held in Germany since the X-Band radar in southern Israel is under EUCOM's command and is controlled by U.S. soldiers, according to the report.

Israel received the advanced X-Band radar last October as a farewell gift from the Bush administration to beef up its defenses in face of Iran's nuclear program and enhance ballistic missile capability.

According to a defense official involved in the drill, when operated in coordination with additional Israeli warning systems, the X-Band radar enables the IDF Home Front Command to issue an alert about an incoming missile between five and seven minutes before impact.

The total flight time of a missile from Iran to Israel would be approximately 10 minutes. In comparison, the residents of Sderot in southern Israel usually have up to 15 seconds to seek shelter from when they hear a siren and before a Qassam rocket strikes the city.

Meanwhile, the IDF and the United States are scheduled to hold a joint missile defense exercise in October.

********************
U.S. Deploys Radar, Troops To Israel
By Gayle S. Putrich, Defense News, Sept. 26, 2008

U.S. European Command (EUCOM) has deployed to Israel a high-powered X-band radar and the supporting people and equipment needed for coordinated defense against Iranian missile attack, marking the first permanent U.S. military presence on Israeli soil.

More than a dozen aircraft, including C-5s and C-17s, helped with the Sept. 21 delivery of the AN/TPY-2 Transportable Radar Surveillance/Forward Based X-band Transportable (FBX-T), its ancillary components and some 120 EUCOM personnel to Israel's Nevatim Air Base southeast of Beersheba, said sources here and in Stuttgart, Germany.

Among the U.S. personnel is at least one representative from the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), though officials said the agency had little to no say in the deployment decision. MDA involvement has been confined to providing equipment and advice on technical aspects of its deployment, one official said.

The Raytheon-built FBX-T system is the same phased-array radar that was deployed to northern Japan with the U.S. Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) in 2006. The high-powered, high-frequency, transportable X-band radar is designed to detect and track ballistic missiles soon after launch.

Its ancillary gear included cooling systems, generators, perimeter defense weaponry, logistics supplies and dozens of technicians, maintenance specialists and security forces to operate and defend the U.S. installation.

EUCOM has repeatedly deployed troops and Patriot air defense batteries for joint exercises and Iraq-related wartime contingencies, but has never before permanently deployed troops on Israeli soil.

A EUCOM spokesman declined to comment. MDA officials referred to the U.S. State Department, which did not provide comment by press time.

An Israeli military spokesman said the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) enjoys longstanding strategic cooperation with all branches of the U.S. military.

"This cooperation is varied and comes in multiple forms, and it is not our practice to discuss details of our bilateral activities," he said.

Nevertheless, in previous interviews, U.S. and Israeli officials confirmed that the X-band deployment plan was approved in July, first by Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, and his Israeli counterpart, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi; and then by. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

Shaving Minutes From Reaction Time

The radar will be linked to the U.S. Joint Tactical Ground Station (JTAGS), which receives and processes threat data transmitted by U.S. Defense Support System satellites. According to U.S. and Israeli sources, JTAGS will remain in Europe, but its essential cueing data will stream into the forward-deployed X-band radar, where it instantaneously shares information with Israel's Arrow Weapon System.

Once operational, the combined U.S. and Israeli system is expected to double or even triple the range at which Israel can detect, track and ultimately intercept Iranian missiles, according to Lt. Gen. Henry Obering, director of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency.

During a visit to Israel in early August, Obering said the X-Band radar could add precious minutes to the time in which Israel has to respond to incoming missile attacks.

"The missile threat from Iran is very real, and we must stay ahead of the threat ... that's why we're working so hard with all our allies to put the most optimized, effective, anti-missile capabilities in place," Obering said.

"In the context of Israel, if we can take the radar out here and tie it into the Arrow Weapon System, they'll be able to launch that interceptor way before they could with an autonomous system," he added.

Ilan Biton, a brigadier general in the Israel Air Force (IAF) reserves and former commander of the nation's air defense forces, could not comment on the latest developments associated with the X-band radar. However, he said that an IAF air defense brigade established during his 2003-2006 tenure has continuously demonstrated its ability to interoperate well with American forces.

"We advanced tremendously on multiple levels and have developed very impressive cooperation," Biton said at a Sept. 22 conference in Herzliya. Referring to bilateral Juniper Cobra air defense exercises and the 2003 deployment of Patriot batteries prior to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Biton noted: "At the human level, we've developed a common language and at the technical level, we've put in place the interfaces that allow our systems to speak to one another."

The end result, according to Biton, is a combined ability "to manage battles, execute debriefs and implement corrections, all in real time."

Twin Messages

As U.S. public affairs officers last week mulled whether to publicly disclose the Israel deployment, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at a U.N. General Assembly meeting in New York, continued to defend his country's nuclear enrichment and missile development program.

"Iran's [nuclear] activities are peaceful," Ahmadinejad said Sept. 23, adding that in Israel, "the Zionist regime is on a definite slope to collapse."

A U.S. government source said the X-band deployment and other bilateral alliance-bolstering activities send parallel messages: "First, we want to put Iran on notice that we're bolstering our capabilities throughout the region, and especially in Israel. But just as important, we're telling the Israelis, 'Calm down; behave. We're doing all we can to stand by your side and strengthen defenses, because at this time, we don't want you rushing into the military option.'"

But in Israel, frustration is mounting at what is roundly perceived as a lack of international resolve to halt Iran's nuclear weapons drive. At a Sept. 21 meeting of the Israeli Cabinet, an Israeli military intelligence officer reported that Iran is accelerating the pace at which it enriches uranium, and that Tehran already possesses possibly half of the fissionable material needed to produce its first nuclear warhead.

Reflecting Israeli concern about the ineffectiveness of sanctions against Tehran, Brig. Gen. Yossi Baidatz, head of Military Intelligence's research department, reported: "The international front against Iran is weak and not consolidated, and isn't putting enough pressure on the regime to stop enriching uranium."

According to selected excerpts from the briefing released by the Israeli Prime Minister's office, Baidatz warned that Iran is "galloping toward a nuclear bomb." He added, "The sanctions have very little influence and are far from bringing to bear a critical mass of pressure on Iran."

Vago Muradian contributed to this report from Washington, Barbara Opall-Rome from Tel Aviv.

Germany, 1939; America, 2009; And Perverted Science

By Sherwood Ross, June 27, 2009

It has become commonplace for Congress to ignore the public’s yearnings for peace and to support the Pentagon’s now habitual wars of aggression. Last November’s anti-war vote illustrates this disconnect between public opinion and public policy. War-weary Americans went to the polls believing they were voting for peace but President Obama has instead merely shifted the focus of military action from Iraq to Afghanistan while planning to maintain a major garrison of 50,000 troops in Iraq, hardly a “withdrawal.”

U.S. taxpayers---who already pay more for wars than the rest of the world combined---are not blood-thirsty. They didn’t want any war against Iraq to begin with and have long preferred diplomacy to conflict. In January, 2003, a CBS News/New York Times poll found 63% of Americans wanted President Bush to find a diplomatic solution to the Iraq crisis compared with just 31% who wanted to intervene militarily. This great cry for peace, not war, arose despite a shower of lies from the White House that Saddam Hussein threatened America with WMD. As for Afghanistan, a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll last February, showed 5l% of respondents opposed to the war in Afghanistan, compared to 47% in favor. Yet, President Obama is plunging ahead against the majority and mindless of the cost to a tottering domestic economy starved for good jobs, good housing, good education, good medical care, and good credit.

Contrast President Obama’s attitude with President Franklin Roosevelt’s careful reading of public opinion in the Thirties that caused him to go slow even in aiding countries threatened by Hitler. FDR never did help the embattled Loyalist government in Madrid fight the insurgent generals led by Franco and their Nazi allies. And he moved slowly coming to Britain’s aid before providing “lend lease” to London. FDR consistently acted in concert with public opinion, reading the lips of an “isolationist” public that did not want to get embroiled in a second European war in 20 years.

The actions of Presidents Bush and Obama that run contrary to public opinion are not unique to America. This disconnect between public and presidential desire recalls the opposition of what likely was a majority of the German people to Hitler in 1939, people who feared to stand up to Hitler and were led to their doom by their Nazi leaders. A joke Germans told at the time asked: “Hitler, Goebbels, and Goering were in a plane that crashed and they were all killed. Who was saved?” The answer: “Germany.”

Back in 1938, ordinary Germans feared Hitler’s aggressiveness would lead to war. Commentator William Shirer, who covered Germany for CBS, wrote in his “Berlin Diary” on Sept. 27, 1938, that when a motorized column paraded through the streets after a Hitler speech, Berliners didn’t both to watch but crowded into the subways to go home. They “refused to look on” and “the handful that did at the curb (stood) in utter silence unable to find a word of cheer for the flower of youth going off to the glorious war.”

Hitler, Shirer recalled, stood on his balcony “and there weren’t two hundred people in the street or in the great square of the Wilhelmsplatz. Hitler looked grim, then angry, and soon went inside, leaving his troops to parade by unreviewed.” Two hundred onlookers in a city of five million souls! Shirer said what he saw rekindled his faith in the German public because “They are dead set against war.” They were right to be, of course. By the time the war was over, Germany lost 5.5-million men and 1.5-million civilians.

The Pentagon recognizes Americans today do not want war, and has devised ways to circumvent the anti-war movement. There are no conscriptions as during Viet Nam. Today’s oil wars are being fought partly by contractors to hold down official military casualties. The Pentagon is also buying good will by farming out billions in biological warfare research to colleges and universities.

The challenge to Americans today is as formidable as that faced by the German people of 1939. We have a moral obligation to stop the Warfare State.

The robot planes now swooping down on Afghanistan and Pakistan are but crude harbingers of future Pentagon technology that will employ weapons of increasing sophistication directed by remote operators seated at surveillance systems like video gamesters. These operators may employ a variety of ever more lethal and/or incapacitating weapons---ranging from guided missiles to tungsten poles hurled down from space platforms at supersonic speeds to destroy victims. Moreover, the Pentagon is pouring over a trillion dollars into new research to refine its sophisticated killing systems. And what may be used on foreigners, may also be used on Americans.

Thus it has come to pass that the nation that gave the world such brilliant inventions as the electric light, airplane, phonograph, telegraph, movies, automobile assembly line, and telephone(all developed at private expense) now sags under the weight of a government war machine that pays fine scientific minds to work at the Devil’s Bench. In his famous address of June 18, 1940, Winston Churchill denouncing Hitler spoke words that sadly apply to America’s Pentagon today: “But if we fail, then the whole world…will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister…by the lights of a perverted science.”

If the American people do not stop the Pentagon war machine, like the German public before them under Hitler they will bear a heavy responsibility for the ensuing calamities caused by their inaction.


Sherwood Ross is a Miami-based public relations consultant for non-profits who formerly worked for the Chicago Daily News and wire services. To contact him or contribute to his Anti-War News Service: sherwoodr1@yahoo.com

Auschwitz survivor: "I can identify with Palestinian youth"

Adri Nieuwhof, The Electronic Intifada, June 2, 2009

Hajo Meyer, author of the book The End of Judaism, was born in Bielefeld, in Germany, in 1924. In 1939, he fled on his own at age 14 to the Netherlands to escape the Nazi regime, and was unable to attend school. A year later, when the Germans occupied the Netherlands he lived in hiding with a poorly forged ID. Meyer was captured by the Gestapo in March 1944 and deported to the Auschwitz concentration camp a week later. He is one of the last survivors of Auschwitz.

Adri Nieuwhof: What would you like to say to introduce yourself to EI's readers?

Hajo Meyer: I had to quit grammar school in Bielefeld after the Kristallnacht [the two-day pogrom against Jews in Nazi Germany], in November 1938. It was a terrible experience for an inquisitive boy and his parents. Therefore, I can fully identify with the Palestinian youth that are hampered in their education. And I can in no way identify with the criminals who make it impossible for Palestinian youth to be educated.

AN: What motivated you to write your book, The End of Judaism?

HM: In the past, the European media have written extensively about extreme right-wing politicians like Joerg Haider in Austria and Jean-Marie Le Pen in France. But when Ariel Sharon was elected [prime minister] in Israel in 2001, the media remained silent. But in the 1980s I understood the deeply fascist thinking of these politicians. With the book I wanted to distance myself from this. I was raised in Judaism with the equality of relationships among human beings as a core value. I only learned about nationalist Judaism when I heard settlers defend their harassment of Palestinians in interviews. When a publisher asked me to write about my past, I decided to write this book, in a way, to deal with my past. People of one group who dehumanize people who belong to another group can do this, because they either have learned to do so from their parents, or they have been brainwashed by their political leaders. This has happened for decades in Israel in that they manipulate the Holocaust for their political aims. In the long-run the country is destructing itself this way by inducing their Jewish citizens to become paranoid. In 2005 [then Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon illustrated this by saying in the Knesset [the Israeli parliament], we know we cannot trust anyone, we only can trust ourselves. This is the shortest possible definition of somebody who suffers from clinical paranoia. One of the major annoyances in my life is that Israel by means of trickery calls itself a Jewish state, while in fact it is Zionist. It wants the maximum territory with a minimum number of Palestinians. I have four Jewish grandparents. I am an atheist. I share the Jewish socio-cultural inheritance and I have learned about Jewish ethics. I don't wish to be represented by a Zionist state. They have no idea about the Holocaust. They use the Holocaust to implant paranoia in their children.

AN: In your book you write about the lessons you have learned from your past. Can you explain how your past influenced your perception of Israel and Palestine?

HM: I have never been a Zionist. After the war, Zionist Jews spoke about the miracle of having "our own country." As a confirmed atheist I thought, if this is a miracle by God, I wished that he had performed the smallest miracle imaginable by creating the state 15 years earlier. Then my parents would not have been dead.

I can write up an endless list of similarities between Nazi Germany and Israel. The capturing of land and property, denying people access to educational opportunities and restricting access to earn a living to destroy their hope, all with the aim to chase people away from their land. And what I personally find more appalling then dirtying one's hands by killing people, is creating circumstances where people start to kill each other. Then the distinction between victims and perpetrators becomes faint. By sowing discord in a situation where there is no unity, by enlarging the gap between people -- like Israel is doing in Gaza.

AN: In your book you write about the role of Jews in the peace movement in and outside Israel, and Israeli army refuseniks. How do you value their contribution?

HM: Of course it is positive that parts of the Jewish population of Israel try to see Palestinians as human beings and as their equals. However, it disturbs me how paper-thin the number is that protests and is truly anti-Zionist. We get worked up by what happened in Hitler's Germany. If you expressed only the slightest hint of criticism at that time, you ended up in the Dachau concentration camp. If you expressed criticism, you were dead. Jews in Israel have democratic rights. They can protest in the streets, but they don't.

AN: Can you comment on the news that Israeli ministers approved a draft law banning commemoration of the Nakba, or the dispossession of historic Palestine? The law proposes punishment of up to three years in prison.

HM: It is so racist, so dreadful. I am at a loss for words. It is an expression of what we already know. [The Israeli Nakba commemoration organization] Zochrot was founded to counteract Israeli efforts to wipe out the marks that are a reminder of Palestinian life. To forbid Palestinians to publicly commemorate the Nakba. ... they cannot act in a more Nazi-like, fascist way. Maybe it will help to awaken the world.

AN: What are your plans for the future?

HM: [Laughs] Do you know how old I am? I am almost 85 years old. I always say cynically and with self-mockery that I have a choice: either I am always tired because I want to do so much, or I am going to sit still waiting for the time to go by. Well, I plan to be tired, because I have still so much to say.

Adri Nieuwhof is consultant and human rights advocate based in Switzerland.

I am Troy Davis in Heidelberg-Germany

May 19 - This evening around 6pm more than 400 death penalty opponents of all walks of life gathered in the German city of Heidelberg to demonstrate their support for US death row inmate Troy Anthony Davis. Together they occupied the widely known "Old Bridge" in the historic centre of the town to shape a human chain, holding Troy Davis’ face in front of their own faces or above their head.

The call for action came from the German-American Institute, the locally well-known group "Freedom for Mumia Abu-Jamal“ and the student branch of Amnesty International.

The opening speech critisized the death penalty in general and drew the connection to individual cases like the one of Mumia Abu-Jamal, Kenneth Foster, and others. The speaker expressed deep concern for the serious situation of Mumia Abu-Jamal, too. He might receive a reinstation of the death sentence very soon and is in gereat danger yet again.

The focus of this action, though, was clearly on Troy Davis’ outrageous ordeal, and he was the one whose incredible situation had drawn the attention of pupils from eight school in Heidelberg, of students from many faculties, from peace activists, artists and just ordinary interested people.

The local press covered the event and will report it with big photos in the paper. The organizers as well as the attendants were very happy with what they felt was a huge success. They send their greetings to all other rallies and actions on this worldwide day of action to save Troy Davis.

--

Berlin Coaltion to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal
im HdD
Greifswalderstr.4
10405 Berlin
Germany
www.mumia-hoerbuch.de/bundnis.htm
free.mumia@gmx.net
Who is the Berlin Coaltion to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal http://mumia-hoerbuch.de/kontakt.htm

U.S. still trying to sneak 3000 tons of weapons to Israel

US suspends munitions delivery to Israel
Ship's journey delayed amid fears cargo would be used in Gaza
David Pallister, guardian.co.uk, Jan. 15, 2009

Lieutenant Colonel Patrick Ryder, a Pentagon spokesman, said that the contract for the munitions had been arranged last summer and approved in October. He said the munitions were due to be delivered to a US pre-positioning depot in Israel for US forces. But he added: "If the government of Israel requests munitions they can do so direct to the US government under the Foreign Military Sales programme."

The Pentagon has suspended the delivery of a shipload of munitions to Israel after international concern that it could be used by Israeli forces in Gaza.

The German-owned cargo vessel, Wehr Elbe, under charter by the US Military Sea­lift Command, is currently in Greek waters with its transponder tracking turned off to prevent its location being identified.

Amnesty International has written to the foreign secretary, David Miliband, asking him to make "urgent approaches to the US, German and Greek governments to prevent this, or any pending or future shipments of weaponry until it can be verified that they will not be transferred to the Israeli Defence Forces or other parties to the conflict in Gaza.

"We urge you to ensure that no EU member state will allow their ports or other facilities to be used to transit these or any other weapons to any of the parties to this conflict."

The Wehr Elbe, owned by the Hamburg company Oskar Wehr, arrived outside the Greek port of Astakos on 1 January, where it was due to transfer its 1,000 containers to another vessel for delivery to Ashdod in Israel.

But after a two week stand-off, amid local protests in Greece, it moved out into the Mediterranean two days ago and disappeared off tracking websites.

Lieutenant Colonel Patrick Ryder, a Pentagon spokesman, said that the contract for the munitions had been arranged last summer and approved in October. He said the munitions were due to be delivered to a US pre-positioning depot in Israel for US forces. But he added: "If the government of Israel requests munitions they can do so direct to the US government under the Foreign Military Sales programme."

He said the ship's journey had been delayed due to "safety concerns" about unloading the cargo at Ashdod and that other arrangements were being made by the Military Sealift Command's European office in Naples.

The letter to Miliband, from Amnesty's director, Kate Allen, calls "for a comprehensive arms embargo on Israel, Hamas and Palestinian armed groups until effective mechanisms are in place to ensure that weapons and munitions and other military equipment will not be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law".

Amnesty's Middle East and North Africa programme director, Malcolm Smart, said: "The last thing that is needed now is more weapons and munitions in the region, which is awash with arms that are being used in a manner which contravenes international law and is having a devastating effect on the civilian population in Gaza."

***************
From Amnesty International UK:

Tender documents show that these shipments contain white phosphorous, known for its potential to cause severe burns and an indiscriminate weapon when used as an airburst in densely-populated civilian areas as now alleged in Gaza. The US Department of Defense says it is now looking at other means to deliver the munitions to a US stockpile in Israel. A US-Israel agreement has allowed US munitions stockpiled in Israel to be transferred to the Israeli Defence Force in "an emergency."

http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1232045605.html

Bush to face huge anti-war demonstration in Italy

DEB RIECHMANN, AP, The Guardian, June 12, 2008

ROME (AP) - President Bush can look forward to a hearty welcome from his old friend, the charismatic Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi, and Pope Benedict XVI during his visit to Rome. That's not what he should expect in the streets, however, where anti-Bush sentiment over the war in Iraq still lingers.

Anti-war activists and thousands of other demonstrators planned to march through the streets of the Italian capital to protest Bush's visit, which was to include meetings with Berlusconi and the pope on Thursday. Commercial flights have been banned over Rome during Bush's two-day stay. Dozens of buses and trams have been rerouted. Thousands of policemen have been deployed as part of a tight security plan to monitor the protests that have waning energy.

Slovenia and Germany, the first two stops on Bush's trip, were devoid of demonstrators. That was evidence that trans-Atlantic relations, fractured over the U.S.-led invasion in Iraq, are on the mend, that European leaders have moved beyond their anger over the war. The Rome protests are evidence that the Italian public still opposes the Bush administration.

Unlike other European leaders, such as former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and former French President Jacques Chirac, Berlusconi supported Bush on Iraq from the start. The 71-year-old media mogul defied domestic opposition and dispatched about 3,000 troops to Iraq after the fall of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Those troops came home, and Berlusconi, recently elected to his third stint in power since 1994, has pledged not to send any back.

More than 2,000 Italian troops, however, are deployed as part of the NATO-led mission in Afghanistan.

Italy, along with Germany, France and Spain, have restricted their troops to less dangerous areas in northern Afghanistan. That has caused a rift because other NATO members are deployed in the more violent regions of the nation. The Italian government is reviewing the restrictions and Berlusconi's office said the premier would talk to Bush about that when they meet.

Berlusconi and Bush also were expected to discuss Italy's interest in joining with the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany that are making a diplomatic push to get Iran to give up what the West believes is an effort to develop nuclear weapons. That might seem unusual for Italy, which recently surpassed Germany as Iran's largest trading partner.

But to show Italy's strong opposition to Iran's suspected nuclear ambitions, Berlusconi and his government refused to meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was in Rome for a U.N.-sponsored food summit.

Bush will meet with the pope on Friday before departing to Paris to continue his farewell European tour. It will be Bush's third meeting with Benedict. The two last met in April at the White House in Washington.

---

Associated Press writer Alessandra Rizzo in Rome contributed to this report.

The connections: Tibet, the Dalai Lama, CIA & Nazi Germany

It was no Shangri-La
Hollywood hides Tibet's true history
Gary Wilson, Workers World, December 4, 1997

With two major Hollywood movies about Tibet this year, the Tibetan region of China is being put in an unusual spotlight.

The Tibetan people are just one of the many national minorities in China. Yet most people in the United States have heard only of the Tibetans.

In China, there are 56 national minorities. Most of the population is Han.

Tibetans are the eighth biggest nationality. In terms of numbers, Tibetans are about 4 million—or .39 percent of China’s population.

There are other nationalities in Tibet itself, besides the Tibetans: Moinbas, Lopas, Naxis, Huis, Dengs and Xiaerbas.

But only the Tibetans are stars in Hollywood. No, that’s not it. Common Tibetans aren’t the stars of Hollywood films. The focus is almost exclusively on a very small group of Tibetans—the former elite of Tibet and the person the media sometimes call the "god-king," the Dalai Lama.

Hollywood’s fictional accounts are presented as based on historical fact. That’s like saying the movie "Gone with the Wind" shows what the South was like during slavery, when really it is only a glorification of the slave masters and completely ignores life for African Americans.

The Tibet movies are very much like "Gone with the Wind." They present the view of a defeated oligarchy, and ignore the reality of those who are oppressed.

The movie "Seven Years in Tibet" not only glorifies feudal Tibet and its aristocrats; it also makes a hero of a Nazi storm trooper—Heinrich Harrer.

So what is the history of Tibet? And why is it getting so much attention now?

For 700 years a part of China

In the 13th century, Genghis Khan and the Mongolians unified China and founded the Yuan Dynasty. This included Tibet. For the next 700 years, Tibet was an administrative region in China.

The Tibetan Autonomous Region of China today includes Tibet as it was defined in 1911 at the fall of the Chinese empire, plus an area called Chamdo. During the last days of the empire, Chamdo had been part of a province called Sikang.

Today’s Tibet includes the territory of "U," where the Dalai Lama directly ruled, and the territory of Tsang, where the Panchen Lama ruled.

When the promoters of a "Greater Tibet" refer to Tibet, much more is included. They include large parts of adjacent provinces: Sichuan, Yunnan, Gansu and Quinghai. This includes the oil-rich Tsaidam Basin.

Today, about 1.8 million Tibetans live in the Tibetan Autonomous Region. There are another 2.1 million Tibetans in the neighboring four provinces.

While a greater part of the Tibetan population lives outside Tibet in these neighboring provinces, this does not make these other areas part of Tibet any more than the big Irish population in Boston makes Boston part of Ireland. There has been a centuries-long migration of Tibetans into these areas, where the Tibetans remain a minority population. Hans have also been migrating to these neighboring provinces.

However, when the promoters of "Greater Tibet" talk of Hans "penetrating Tibetan lands," they are really talking about these non-Tibetan provinces and a migration process that has occurred over centuries.

The central government was weak after the fall of the Chinese empire, and had little or no influence on domestic affairs in Tibet. But Tibet was still considered part of China.

"No nation has ever publicly accepted Tibet as an independent state," writes A. Tom Grunfeld in the history book "The Making of Modern Tibet."

Britain invades in 1903

At the turn of the century, in 1903, Britain decided that Tibet should come under its influence along with India, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan and China. At that time, Britain sent an invading force into Tibet.

Earlier British government expeditions had reported that Tibet was rich with natural resources and even said that "masses of gold were lying around in the rivers." They may have believed they had found another empire like the Incan empire in what is now Peru, where Spanish conquistadors stole a wealth of gold.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, in July 1903 Lord Curzon, viceroy of India, authorized Col. Francis Younghusband and a military escort to cross the Tibetan border to negotiate a trade treaty.

"When efforts to begin negotiations failed," the encyclopedia reports, "the British, under the command of Maj. Gen. James Macdonald, invaded the country and slaughtered some 600 Tibetans at Guru. Younghusband moved on to Chiang-tzu (Gyantze), where his second attempt to begin trade negotiations also failed. He then marched into Lhasa, the capital, with British troops and forced the conclusion of a trade treaty with the Dalai Lama, Tibet’s ruler. This action brought him a knighthood in 1904."

British journalist Alan Winnington writes in his book "Tibet" that the treaty "made Tibet as far as possible a British sphere of influence."

Even then, Britain recognized Chinese "sovereignty" in Tibet—and sent a bill for 750,000 pounds to the central Chinese government for the expenses incurred in the invasion.

Tibet then became an area of intrigue and a pawn in the competition between the imperialist powers, particularly Britain, czarist Russia and Germany. The 13th Dalai Lama, the one preceding the current Dalai Lama, worked closely with the British. And until the victory of the Chinese Revolution in 1949, the Tibetan aristocracy looked to Britain and India, even sending their children to British schools in India.

According to Winnington, "When [the 13th Dalai Lama] died in 1933, Tibet was more and more becoming a British sphere."

This is part of the reason Nazi Germany sent an expedition to Tibet in the 1930s. Its defeat in World War I had stripped Germany of its colonies. The rise of the Nazi regime was driven in part by the big German capitalists’ need to expand and gain new colonies, new "spheres of influence."

Reality vs. romanticized view of Tibet

Reports by the British and German imperialists, primarily, have created the popular image of Tibet in the West.

Books like "Lost Horizon" by James Hilton and "Seven Years in Tibet" by Heinrich Harrer promoted a romanticized view of Tibet.

Harrer’s book is the basis for the Hollywood movie starring Brad Pitt. Leaving aside for a moment the issue of Harrer’s role, what was Tibet like in the 1940s when the story takes place?

Because of its extreme isolation high up in the Himalayas, Tibet might have looked exotic to an outsider. Tibet was a region with no roads, only horse trails. The wheel was unknown. It was practically untouched by industrialization.

But Tibet was not that much different from the rest of the world. It just hadn’t caught up to the 20th century.

"The parallels between Tibet and medieval Europe are striking," writes Grunfeld in "The Making of Modern Tibet."

In the 1940s, Tibet was a feudal theocracy with a dual papacy—the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama. By all accounts, the Dalai Lama was considered supreme in political matters.

Below the Dalai Lama were the aristocratic lords—owners of the estates, most descended from the ancient kings of Tibet before the Mongol invasion. "Despite claims to the contrary, heredity and ennoblement were the only avenues for joining the nobility," Grunfeld writes.

"As in all agricultural societies, the source of power and wealth was not titles but land. Land was divided among three ruling groups: the monasteries, the lay nobility and the Lhasa government," Grunfeld says.

The Dalai Lama himself was never from a ruling family, for that would have given an individual family domination. Rarely did the Dalai Lama ever reach adulthood, with fierce disputes often leading to murder of the young ruler.

The aides to the Dalai Lama really ruled the local government. The 13th Dalai Lama was one of the few to have survived into adulthood.

The vast majority of the people of Tibet were serfs. A small part of the population, about 5 percent, was slaves to the nobility.

Women were considered inferior to men. Polyandry—where one woman was the wife of several brothers—and polygamy were common.

As in every agricultural society, religion played a big role in Tibet.

Tibetan Buddhism is a distinct branch that incorporates ancient pre-Buddhist beliefs. This makes it unique in many ways.

But the ruling oligarchy controlled religion and the interpretation of its meaning. Tibetan Buddhism was used as a means of repressing the serfs.

Much is made of the Tibetan Buddhist prohibition against killing any life form, including animals or insects. But the death penalty was imposed under Tibetan law for killing a monk.

According to Gorkar Mebon, the mayor of Lhasa in the 1950s, when the death sentence was administered "it was in the form that made no person responsible for the death: by hurling the person from a precipice or sewing him in a yak skin and throwing him in a river. Lighter sentences were of amputation of a hand, both hands, a leg or both legs, the stumps being sterilized with boiling butter." ("Tibet," Winnington)

The whip was also a common form of punishment, Mebon says. "If a person had 300 strokes of it properly applied he would almost certainly die afterwards." In this way it could be said that the government, in accordance with religious law, had directly killed no one.

After the overthrow of Tibetan feudalism, in 1959 the serfs opened an exhibition of the torture instruments used against them. The exhibition was presented as a show on the "abuse of religion" and the execution of "evil deeds under cloak of religion."

Heinrich Harrer’s hidden role

During the rule of the 14th Dalai Lama in the 1940s, Tibet was again a center of intrigue. The German Nazis hoped to expand into Asia, particularly into India, Nepal and Tibet, leaving the penetration of China to their ally, imperialist Japan.

This is how Heinrich Harrer ended up in Tibet. His book on Tibet is really a fictionalized account of his adventures.

Who Harrer is and what his role was is of interest not just because of the movie. Harrer by all accounts was a teacher of the Dalai Lama and has remained a close adviser ever since.

"It came as a bombshell five months ago when the German magazine Stern reported that, as early as 1933, Harrer had been a Nazi, a member of the ruthless SA [storm troopers] and, later, the SS [elite protective guard]," according to a report in the October 1997 issue of the magazine Men’s Journal.

Harrer had always denied he had been a Nazi. When he could no longer deny it, it was said that he had been a Nazi but he had only joined in order to further his career as a mountain climber. This claim did not hold up, since his 1933 entry would not have helped his career in Austria, where he lived. The Nazi Party was illegal in Austria and had to operate underground.

The Men’s Journal story is written by someone who had seen Harrer as a hero and reluctantly came to the conclusion, after extensive research, that Harrer was a "150-percent Nazi" and had to have been involved in some of the most brutal crimes in Austria in the 1930s. Harrer had first been recruited by Heinrich Himmler, the second most powerful person in the Third Reich.

Harrer was part of the Dalai Lama’s inner circle at the time of the Chinese Revolution in 1949. At that time the Dalai Lama was a teenager who, by his own account, knew nothing of the outside world. He was completely dependent on his advisers.

China’s liberation in 1949

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army did not go into Tibet in 1949.

The Chinese Communist Party was committed to insuring the rights of all national minorities. In fact, a Communist constitution was put forth in 1931 to show the principles that would be the basis for a socialist China.

That constitution said that "all Mongolians, Tibetans, Miao, Yao, Koreans and others living in the territory of China shall enjoy the full rights to self-determination."

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army did not enter Tibet because its ranks had few Tibetans. The policy was to first win the Tibetan population to the Communist Party and its ideals. Then political power could be won from within Tibet.

But the Chinese Communist Party was not given a chance to carry out such a slow policy. Tibet immediately became the target of not only the British imperialists but the United States imperialists as well.

There were many reasons for the interest in Tibet. One State Department expert even suggested that in the age of rocket warfare, Tibet was the ideal center for controlling all of Asia.

George Merrell, the top officer at the U.S. Embassy in India, wrote, "Tibet is in a position of inestimable strategic importance both ideologically and geographically." ("The Making of Modern Tibet," Grunfeld)

But Tibet was the focus of so much attention primarily because of the Communist revolution in China. The United States had launched a fierce war to "take back" China. At the time of the Chinese Revolution, the Tibetan oligarchy was in a panic. They sent out appeals to Britain, the United States and India for military aid.

U.S. forces in Korea march toward China

There were reports that Washington was preparing to recognize Tibet as a sovereign state. In June 1950, U.S. forces landed at Inchon in Korea and were driving up the peninsula. Gen. Douglas MacArthur was threatening to cross the Yalu River and carry the war into China.

President Harry Truman had ordered the Navy’s Seventh Fleet to encircle Taiwan and protect Chiang Kai-shek’s "jumping-off ground" for an attack against China. There was talk that French-controlled Vietnam would also be used as a base in a many-pronged invasion aimed at reversing the Chinese Revolution.

The Kwangming Daily, a Chinese newspaper, reported, "America and Britain have been making energetic efforts to keep their control of Tibet so that it may be used as a continental base for the invasion of China."

The People’s Liberation Army advanced into the Chamdo area, which was not part of Tibet at that time. In Chamdo, the PLA was confronted by the Tibetan Army, sent there by the Dalai Lama. Its commander-in-chief was Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, a descendant of Tibetan kings and a top Tibetan noble.

It was not much of a battle. Many of the Tibetan Army soldiers—serfs forced into service by the nobility—went over to the side of the PLA. The battle was quickly over.

Ngapo Ngawang Jigme expected death as the normal outcome of defeat. The PLA surprised him by treating him well and giving him long lectures on the New China’s policies toward minor nationalities, such as Tibetans. He liked what he heard.

Within a year, Ngapo Ngawang Jigme was the deputy commander-in-chief for the PLA forces in Tibet. He became a leader not only of Tibet but also the Chinese Communist Party. His account of the battle and his conversion can be found in Anna Louise Strong’s book "Tibetan Interviews."

The Communist government in China did not enter Tibet in the way an imperialist power would. No immediate changes were introduced in Tibet. Serfdom remained and would not be outlawed until 1959.

The Chinese policy was to win over the population to end serfdom.

There had been no change in the local government. The Buddhist church continued to operate as it had before. Freedom of religion was guaranteed. Reforms in Tibet were not compulsory.

Tibet was changed forever

But Tibet was changed forever.

Schools were built. Newspapers were introduced. Telephones and a postal service were begun.

Hospitals and movie theaters were built. And for the first time, highways to the outside world were built.

When the Tibetan oligarchy says the Chinese government did not respect Tibetan customs in the 1950s, this is what they are referring to.

The Chinese did violate local customs. Wages were paid to Tibetans who worked building the roads. This disrupted the custom of servitude. Paying Tibetan children to attend school also gave the serfs economic leverage against the age-old work practices as well as providing avenues for rising out of serfdom.

Some of the old aristocracy of Tibet were like Ngapo Ngawang Jigme and saw that serfdom had to be ended, but others resisted change. These are the Tibetan nobility who turned to the United States and the CIA.

In 1955 or possibly earlier—the date varies according to different sources—the CIA began to build a counter-revolutionary army in Tibet. The Dalai Lama’s older brother, Gyalo Thondup, coordinated this operation from a base in India.

Contrary to the popular image of nonviolence that has been built up around the Dalai Lama and his supporters, this CIA mercenary force was armed and murderous. It included contra-style death squads.

The Tibetan mercenaries were trained at Camp Hale in the Rocky Mountains in Colorado. They were then parachuted into Tibet by the CIA’s Civil Air Transport. According to the Pentagon Papers, there were at least 700 of these flights in the 1950s; these same Air Force C-130s were later used for CIA operations in the Vietnam War. The mercenaries were dropped in with submachine guns and ammunition, according to a detailed report in the Jan. 25, 1997, Chicago Tribune.

More details of this operation are given in "Presidents’ Secret Wars—CIA and Pentagon Covert Operations Since World War II," by John Prados. Also, "The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence," by Victor Marchetti and John D. Marks, has some information on the CIA in Tibet.

After several years of isolated attacks and assassinations, this CIA-trained squad attacked a PLA barracks in Lhasa. This is commonly portrayed in the U.S. media as a popular uprising. But a secret U.S. State Department study called this a "wild exaggeration." ("The Making of Modern Tibet," Grunfeld)

The "rebellion" was confined almost exclusively to Lhasa, the Dalai Lama’s headquarters. Residents of Tibet’s second biggest city didn’t even hear of the events until a month later.

The mercenary army apparently kidnapped the Dalai Lama at that time and took him to India. They needed the Dalai Lama to give legitimacy to the Tibetan aristocrats’ claim to be the Tibetan "government in exile."

Some contend that since the mercenary army’s leadership was in the hands of four of the Dalai Lama’s six top aides, he had been at the center of planning the armed attack.

Whatever the truth about that, the CIA and the U.S. government has remained the main force keeping alive the so-called government in exile. That is true to this day. According to ex-CIA employee Ralph McGehee, who has written many exposés of the agency, the CIA has stepped up its Tibetan contra operations in recent years, working closely with the Dalai Lama’s brother.

An internal matter

The issue of Tibetan self-determination is an internal affair for China and no one outside. The right of self-determination depends on the conditions of the time when it is raised and the international situation, which can be of enormous significance.

China is a state with a considerable number of nationalities. And if there is one aspect where the People’s Republic of China stands out for its progressive character, it is its policy with respect to national minorities.

Tibet has been a part of China for centuries. It is not a province that was purchased, like the United States did with Alaska. It is not a conquered territory a thousand miles away like Hawaii.

The kind of self-determination proposed by the "Tibetan government in exile" and the Dalai Lama would be a neocolony of imperialism and a dagger aimed at the heart of China.

There are unlimited possibilities for self-determination within the framework of the multinational state of China, or any other relationship that is mutually worked out between the Chinese government and the Tibetans in the spirit of socialist solidarity. But it is a problem that is exclusively theirs to work out.

Rioting in Belgrade; Grenades thrown in Kosovo

China 'concerned', Australia backs Kosovo split
AFP, Feb. 17, 2008

PARIS (AFP) - Australia on Monday became the lastest nation to welcome Kosovo's declaration of independence, joining the United States and several European powers, despite fierce objections from Serbia and Russia.

But China was among countries unhappy with Kosovo's breakaway from Serbia, declaring it was "deeply concerned" about the future of peace in the region.

"The unilateral approach by Kosovo may cause a series of consequences and lead to severe negative influences on the peace and stability of the Balkan region," foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said in a statement.

"China expresses deep concern about this."

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said diplomatic recognition of the new state would be offered soon.

"We've already indicated to our diplomatic representatives around the world that this (independence) would be an appropriate course of action," Rudd told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Russia angrily condemned Kosovo's announcement, and called an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council late Sunday to discuss the issue.

But it failed to get backing for its call to declare "null and void" the decision by Kosovo's Albanian majority on Sunday to break away.

Russia has been Serbia's strongest backer in opposing Kosovo's independence, which President Vladimir Putin said last week would be "idiotic and illegal."

The United States, Britain, France, Germany and Italy have all indicated that their formal recognition will come on Monday.

Those countries around the world with separatist problems however -- from Spain to Sri Lanka -- have expressed concern at Kosovo's split.

The United States and most European nations gave a cautious initial reaction to the independence declaration ahead of a crucial EU foreign ministers' meeting in Brussels on Monday.

But even as the international community called for calm, rioting broke out on the streets of Belgrade, and grenades were thrown at EU and UN buildings in the northern Kosovo town of Mitrovica late Sunday.

US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the United States "calls on all parties to exert utmost restraint and to refrain from any provocative act."

A significant minority in the 27-nation EU -- Cyprus, Greece, Romania, Slovakia and Spain -- oppose recognising Kosovo. Others like Malta and Portugal would prefer Kosovo's future be decided at the UN Security Council.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus warned that Kosovo's independence could unleash a domino affect in Europe.

"Some parties in other states could realise that they do not feel completely at ease within a big state in which they are now," he said in a television interview.

As if on cue, the breakaway Georgian regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia immediately seized on Kosovo's break, saying they would ask Russia and the UN to recognise their independence, Russia's Interfax news agency reported.

"In the near future Abkhazia will appeal to the Russian parliament and the UN Security Council with a request to recognise its independence," self-declared Abkhaz President Sergei Bagapsh was quoted as saying by Interfax.

South Ossetian President Eduard Kokoity made a similar appeal.

Some states see Kosovo as setting a dangerous precedent for other separatist movements. Cyprus is already split, with a Turkey-recognised statelet in the north. Spain has long struggled with radical Basque nationalists.

And the Sri Lankan government, which is battling separatist Tamil Tiger rebels, warned Kosovo's declaration could set an "unmanageable precedent" and was a violation of the United Nations charter.

The foreign ministry said it "could set an unmanageable precedent in the conduct of international relations, the established global order of sovereign states and could thus pose a grave threat to international peace and security."

Others are reluctant to recognise Kosovo because of their close ties to Serbia.

Slovakia said Sunday it would not recognise independence for the time being. Romania, which is traditionally close to Serbia, said its opposition was unchanged.

There is also anxiety on Kosovo's borders. Macedonia, which has a significant ethnic Albanian minority, said it was closely watching events.

Government spokesman Ivica Bocevski told AFP: "Whatever decision we are going to take, we will take care of the interests of our citizens, as well as the state and national interests of Macedonia."

Ethnic Albanians account for around 25 percent of Macedonia's two-million population. In 2001, the government and ethnic Albanian rebels waged a brief fight mostly in the northern and western parts of the country.

burs/jj/tha

Bush open to Liberia hosting U.S. military command

By Jeremy Pelofsky, Feb. 16, 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Friday the possible shift of the U.S. military command for Africa to the continent from its current home in Germany will be on the agenda as he meets with leaders of five African countries.

Bush on Friday departed for a six-day trip to Africa to highlight one of the few bright spots in his foreign policy agenda, assistance to HIV/AIDS victims and helping budding businesses. He will visit Tanzania, Ghana, Benin, Liberia and Rwanda.

But the conflicts in Darfur and Kenya will also be on the agenda, as well as lobbying from African leaders on where to locate the new Africa Command headquarters, known as Africom, whose primary mission will be to work with African militaries.

"If there is going to be a physical presence on the continent of Africa in the forms of a headquarters ... obviously we would seriously consider Liberia," Bush said in an interview with foreign media on Thursday and released on Friday.

In the interview, Bush said there was a path forward in Kenya, which has been wracked with violence after a disputed election.

"There is a way forward, which is for the parties to come together in good faith, and work out a way forward until there are new elections," he said.

Bush has asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to go to Kenya with a message that there must be a full return to democracy and she will be in Nairobi on Monday.

The U.S. attention to Africa has been growing over the last few years amid concerns that countries there could become safe havens for militants seeking to base operations and plan attacks on the United States.

"Africom is a brand new concept aimed at strengthening nations' capacities to deal with trafficking or terror, but also to help nations develop forces capable of doing the peacekeeping that unfortunately too often is needed on the continent," Bush said.

The U.S. has some 1,700 troops in Djibouti. While Liberia has offered to host Africom, regional powers like South Africa and Nigeria have been wary.

The U.S. military divides the world into regional commands. Previously, responsibility for Africa was split between European Command, Pacific Command and Central Command, which is the headquarters for the Middle East.

A year ago Bush announced the creation of Africom and has been headquartered for the time being in Stuttgart, Germany.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Friday urged Bush to speak with African leaders about helping people over poverty as well as the lack of basic sanitation of educational opportunities.

"Your visit to African states at this time will be very important and historic," Ban told reporters after meeting with Bush at the White House. "In that regard, I wish you all the best. This is very great opportunities."

It is the second trip to Africa for Bush, and the fifth for his wife, Laura. (Additional reporting by David Alexander, Editing by Jackie Frank)

Central Europe Socialists reject U.S. missile shield

By Jan Korselt, Reuters, Sept. 14, 2007

PRAGUE (Reuters) - Central European Social Democrat parties rejected on Thursday a U.S. plan to build part of its missile defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, saying it threatened to bring about a new arms race.

Top Socialists from Germany, Austria, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Slovenia said after talks in Prague that any such system must not be built unilaterally or bilaterally.

"We are concerned about the decision to deploy the system and are at one with the large majority of our populations in rejecting it," the parties said in a joint statement, which was signed among others by Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer, Germany's SPD chief Kurt Beck, and Polish Socialist leader Wojciech Olejniczak.

They called on the European Union, the NATO alliance and the NATO-Russia council to consult on missile defense.

Beck said the statement was also a message to conservative German Chancellor Angela Merkel, with whom the Socialists jointly rule.

"We agreed we are against any new arms build-up in Europe," Beck said.

Some critics of the anti-missile system have warned the plan could be torpedoed if a Democrat president is elected next year after Republican George W. Bush, but a visiting senior Democrat said her party was behind the project.

"We wanted to come today to make very clear that we are very supportive... of missile defense," Ellen Tauscher, chairwoman of the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee, said after meeting Czech Deputy Prime Minister Alexandr Vondra in Prague.

She added that she hoped negotiations with the Czechs and the Poles would be concluded soon.

The ruling Hungarian Socialists attended the central European socialists' meeting but refused to join in.

"The Hungarian Socialist Party believes that if Europe is exposed to a terrorist threat we have to defend ourselves," said Imre Szekeres, deputy party chief and the country's defense minister.

The United States is building the shield to guard against missiles that it says could be fired by countries such as North Korea and Iran, carrying chemical, biological or nuclear warheads.

It is in talks with the rightist governments in Poland -- where it wants to put 10 ground-based interceptor missiles -- and in the Czech Republic, which is meant to host a radar base.

Russia opposes the plan, saying it would upset a delicate strategic balance between major powers and threaten its own security.

The plan has also hit obstacles in the United States.

The U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee cut $85 million from a $310.4 million funding request for the fiscal year starting October 1, joining the other three congressional committees with jurisdiction over the issue to recommend cutting the plan for European sites next year.

France warning of war with Iran

BBC News, Sept. 16, 2007

French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner says the world should prepare for war over Iran's nuclear programme.

"We have to prepare for the worst, and the worst is war," Mr Kouchner said in an interview on French TV and radio.

Mr Kouchner said negotiations with Iran should continue "right to the end", but an Iranian nuclear weapon would pose "a real danger for the whole world".

Iran has consistently denied it is trying to acquire nuclear weapons but intends to carry on enriching uranium.

Mr Kouchner also said a number of large French companies had been asked not to tender for business in Iran.

EU sanctions

"We are not banning French companies from submitting. We have advised them not to. These are private companies."

"But I think that it has been heard and we are not the only ones to have done this."

He said France wanted the European Union to prepare sanctions against Iran.

"We have decided that while negotiations are continuing to prepare eventual sanctions outside the ambit of UN sanctions. Our good friends, the Germans, suggested that," he said.

Until now the Security Council of the United Nations has imposed economic sanctions on Iran, but did not allow for military action.

The United States has not ruled out a military attack against Iran to prevent it from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

US seeks to spread Africa command staff

William Maclean, the namibian, June 12, 2007

ALGIERS - The United States is planning to 'distribute' a new military command for Africa across several countries rather than have a single headquarters on the continent, a defence official said on Sunday.

Ryan Henry, Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defence for Policy, told journalists on a visit to Algeria that the command would not be designed to fight wars but would rather focus on training African security forces.

"The staff ...will not be stationed at one large headquarters, rather it will be distributed across different countries across the continent and be networked together ...It will be a distributed command," he said.

"We're in the final stages of a feasibility study (about a distributed command) but if at all possible that's the way we'd like to proceed," he told a briefing at the US embassy.

President George W Bush announced in February he had given approval for the new command, Africom, which will be based initially in Stuttgart, Germany, but later move to Africa.

Analysts have said the plan could take years to realise because potential host nations may be worried about the stigma of working with the global superpower.

While there might be some prestige and economic gain to hosting the command, any US establishment could become a terrorist target or the host government itself could attract unwanted political attention, commentators have said.

A US official who was not authorised to speak on the record said the plan to distribute the command was devised partly in response to suggestions by African nations that basing it in one country might stir jealousies among African states.

The creation of the new headquarters reflects increasing US strategic interest in Africa.

Washington is concerned that African nations with weak governments offer a haven for Islamist militants and is attracted by the continent's natural resources.

Currently, the only long-term base for US forces in Africa is Camp Lemonier in the East African nation of Djibouti.

The US military assigns responsibility for parts of the world to regional commands, such as Central Command, which handles the Middle East and Horn of Africa.

Responsibility for Africa is now split between Central Command, European Command and Pacific Command.

Under the new plan, every country in Africa would fall under Africa Command except Egypt, which would remain in Central Command's area.

The new command is intended to start up by September 2008.

Henry, at the start of an African tour that will also take him to Morocco, Libya, Egypt, Djibouti and Ethiopia, where the African Union (AU) has its headquarters, reiterated the command would not involve sending more American armed forces to Africa.

Nampa-Reuters