The Bush administration will establish the first official United States diplomatic presence in Tehran before it leaves office, according to reports published last week. A US interests section in the Iranian capital would be the first step towards restoring full diplomatic ties severed since the 1979 hostage crisis amidst the tumult of the Islamic Revolution.
It is as though I’m back as an analyst at the CIA, trying to estimate the chances of an attack on Iran. The putative attacker, though, happens to be our own president.
Which United Nations contingent in southern Lebanon will be next? It is
a ghoulish, terrible question after the car bomb attack that killed six
Spanish soldiers of the 13,000-strong international army on Sunday
evening, but one which the officers of the UN Interim Force - Unifil -
are asking at their intelligence meetings. For the UN army from 30
countries under the command of four Nato generals - the Spanish
contributed 1,100 soldiers - is clearly going to be attacked again. The
usual expressions of determination of Western leaders who are not going
to "cut and run" - so reminiscent of the Iraq war - are not going to
change that.
Iran will continue to enrich uranium regardless of whether a
Republican or a Democrat is America's president. At the same time, the
United States will oppose any Iranian nuclear program - even a civilian
program - because this will contribute to the stability of the regime
in Tehran. As a result, nuclear tensions are likely to bedevil
US-Iranian relations for years to come.
Afghanistan has chalked up another record opium harvest according to the UN Office of Drug Control, which is good news for almost no one - least of all the wretched farmers - except the Taliban.
According to the UN, Afghanistan now produces more than 90% of all
the heroin sold illegally throughout the world. More than half of that
comes from Helmand province, where the British troops went last year to
bring security, justice and a better life for all. After more than a
year of intense fighting, usually at close quarters, local leaders are
claiming that their villages and communities have been the victims of
excessive force - in particular by bombing from the air.
Where anti-Arab prejudice and oil make the difference The contrast in western attitudes to Darfur and Congo shows how illiberal our concept of intervention really is Roger Howard The Guardian
In a remote corner of Africa, millions of civilians have been slaughtered in a conflict fuelled by an almost genocidal ferocity that has no end in sight. Victims have been targeted because of their ethnicity and entire ethnic groups destroyed - but the outside world has turned its back, doing little to save people from the wrath of the various government and rebel militias. You could be forgiven for thinking that this is a depiction of the Sudanese province of Darfur, racked by four years of bitter fighting. But it describes the Democratic Republic of Congo, which has received a fraction of the media attention devoted to Darfur.
This time around, when the Bush administration presented "intelligence" from unidentified sources about a dangerous foe in the Middle East, the American media was noticeably more skeptical. Eager to redeem themselves for the generally obsequious reporting about Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction and ties to Al Qaeda, journalists don't want to get fooled again as the administration lays the groundwork for a possible war against Iran.
The same neocon ideologues behind the Iraq war have been using the same tactics—alliances with shady exiles, dubious intelligence on W.M.D.—to push for the bombing of Iran. As President Bush ups the pressure on Tehran, is he planning to double his Middle East bet?
Craig Unger
Vanity Fair
In the weeks leading up to George W. Bush's January 10 speech on the war in Iraq, there was a brief but heady moment when it seemed that the president might finally accept the failure of his Middle East policy and try something new. Rising anti-war sentiment had swept congressional Republicans out of power.
Report suggest that ‘US defensive ring’ may be new front in war on terror.
Gabriel Ronay
Sunday Herald / Scotland
President Bush is preparing to attack Iran's nuclear facilities before the end of April and the US Air Force's new bases in Bulgaria and Romania would be used as back-up in the onslaught, according to an official report from Sofia.