| The arming of Iraq should cease | James Denselow After seven years spent building up Iraq's new security forces, some are beginning to question what the US has createdWhile for many in the Middle East the sum of all fears is an Iranian-inspired nuclear arms race, this terrifying spectre should not distract from the very real scramble for conventional weapons that is already in play across the region. The visit of the Iranian president to Lebanon will refocus attention on the capabilities of Hezbollah, yet Iraq remains the most contested strategic prize with would-be allies in both Tehran and Washington engaged in a high-stakes tug of war.When it comes to influence, nothing says "be my friend" better than brand new shiny weapon systems. Indeed, despite Iraq's experience of a months-long democratic vacuum and playing host to a series of dangerously unresolved issues around the future identity of the state, western arms continue to be snapped up by the interim government in Baghdad – whose estimated oil reserves have recently increased from 115bn barrels to 143bn barrels.Following the recent record-breaking deal to sell $60.5bn worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia, the Financial Times reported at the end of last month that the Pentagon proposed to sell weapons worth $4.2bn to Iraq, including 18 F-16 fighter aircraft, Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, laser-guided bombs and reconnaissance equipment.This deal is the latest in a series that has seen Iraq purchase more than $5bn worth of US weapons since 2006, and inherit a significant amount of equipment left behind as part of the US redeployment. According to UPI, the Pentagon stated that the deal would make Iraq "a more valuable partner in an important area of the world as well as supporting Iraq's legitimate needs" regarding self-defence .While UN security council resolution 1546 theoretically continues the embargo on arms and related material against Iraq, it provides exemptions for equipment required by the government of Iraq or the multinational forces. After all, the US exit strategy from the country relied on building Iraqi security forces over 664,000 strong in order to control the country. Britain also subscribed to such a strategy; according to Foreign Office documents, some 29 military "standard individual export licences" worth £3,542,484 were issued last year.There are numerous dangers in empowering an Iraqi military in the current national and regional environment. Petraeus adviser David Kilcullen warned last year that Iraq was witnessing the "classic conditions for a military coup" – where a venal political elite divorced from the population lives inside the Green Zone, while the Iraqi military outside the zone's walls grows both more capable and closer to the people, working with them and trying to address their concerns.A Rand report into the US redeployment from Iraq recognised that "there is a risk Iraq's political and military leaders could be emboldened by the departure of US forces and their own growing strength to seize control".The record-breaking hiatus in forming a government will only have furthered Iraqis' contempt for their politicians and empowered the hand of the military.Another danger is that while empowering the Iraqi military may allow for a smoother US exit from the country and provide it with a potential card to use against Iran, it creates a very real sword of Damocles that threatens the Kurds. Historically, Baghdad has always looked to make peace with the Kurds when it is weak and attack them when it is strong, a lesson very much in the minds of Kurdish politicians today.Indeed, at the recent party conferences in Britain, there were fringe events organised by the Kurdish Regional Government's representative to the UK, Bayan Sami Abdul Rahman. While the theme was a warning to British business not to be left behind by not investing in the safe haven that is the Kurdish north, during the Q&As Rahman, along with members of the British All-Party Parliamentary Group on the Kurdistan Region in Iraq, argued passionately against weapon sales to Baghdad.The Kurds are aware that despite their support of the US over the years, Kirkuk remains out of their hands and even their energy independence is threatened. Despite an estimated 45bn barrels of oil reserves and six trillion cubic metres of gas scattered across the KRG, last month the Turkish energy minister, Taner Yildiz, affirmed that only those exports approved by Baghdad would be accepted – a serious blow to Kurdish quasi-independence.Often the fraught politics of the Middle East are caused by short-term thinking, whereby one solution creates a multitude of new problems. Until it is tied effectively to a representative and responsible government in Baghdad, the arming of Iraq's military should be put on hold.IraqMiddle EastUS militaryUS foreign policyUnited StatesIranJames Denselowguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Beginning of the end for HCR? | Michael Tomasky The ruling by Florida federal judge Roger Vinson, a Reagan appointee, upholding portions of a lawsuit against the healthcare reform bill and allowing it to proceed could spell the beginning of the end, if you ask me. From TPM:This measure -- the individual mandate -- has been the main focal point of the law's opponents for months. Years ago, the Congressional Budget Office concluded that the idea of requiring people to purchase health insurance "unprecedented." Citing that CBO conclusion, Vinson wrote that "to say that something is 'novel' and 'unprecedented' does not necessarily mean that it is 'unconstitutional' and 'improper.' There may be a first time for anything. But, at this stage of the case, the plaintiffs have most definitely stated a plausible claim with respect to this cause of action."Key to the plaintiff's argument is that the health care law does not regulate activity affecting interstate commerce. Instead it seeks to regulate economic inactivity -- i.e. by issuing a penalty on people who decide not to buy health insurance."He's bought into the idea that this is regulation of inactivity and that the Constitution requires that there be activity to be regulated," Jost says. "That's my reading of the case."But doesn't the state, or don't states, regulate various kinds of inactivity? Sure. The inaction of not buying auto insurance, for obvious and fairly parallel starters. The inaction of not filing a tax return. The inaction of not buckling your seat belt. For that matter, the inaction of not contacting authorities when you have knowledge of the commission of a crime, although I suppose that's different. But there are loads of areas where inaction is subject to penalty. Actually, whether the mandate to buy insurance is a "penalty" or a "tax" was one issue here, with Vinson clearly considering it the former.Whatever. Vinson's ruling stands in contrast to a recent ruling by a judge in Michigan who tossed another lawsuit challenging the reform. That judge was a Clinton appointee. All this is really about politics and ideology, not the law. Ezra writes:The Clinton appointee sees a constitutional tax, the Reagan appointee may or may not see something constitutional, but he definitely does not see a tax. But as has been true since the day these suits were filed, the question is not the bill's abstract constitutionality. If Democrats had appointed five Supreme Court justices whether than four, there would be no question. It is whether the five Republican appointees on the Court are interested in chipping away at it, or whether they'd prefer to avoid that confrontation with the administration and the Democrats.Who can really doubt that the Supreme Court will rule 5-4 with Vinson and plaintiffs? I know that different justices have been in different places on commerce-clause related issues, but I doubt very much that anyone in the five-member conservative majority, with I suppose the imaginable exception of Kennedy, will let himself be seen as the conservative who upheld Obamacare. So as I said, I think this could well be the beginning of the end of healthcare reform. I have no idea of the timetable.US healthcareMichael Tomaskyguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Saudi Prince Sentenced to 20 Years A British court sentenced a Saudi prince to at least 20 years in prison Wednesday for beating and strangling one of his servants at a swank British hotel. online.wsj.com |
Japan protests over Chinese boats Japan's government makes a formal protest to Beijing after two Chinese fisheries patrol boats were seen near a disputed island chain. bbc.co.uk |
Making of OfficeMax's Float in Macy's Thanksgiving Parade - Video OfficeMax Rings in the Holiday Shopping Season with Incredible Promotions Starting on Black Friday feedproxy.google.com |