Saturday roundup

The Macalester Central Asia Symposium wrapped up on Friday. It was pretty good--I saw the keynote speaker after all this theater hubbub.

The world is in some sort of upheaval right now, so here are some stories around different issues. First, here is a mugshot of someone called "Fat Tony," strongly reminiscent of the Simpsons' mafioso. Very important.

There is news that the Muslims who are managing the construction of a mosque on Jerusalem's Temple Mount site are not taking adequate steps to protect the history of the site. This concerns me since the site is one of the most critical intersections of spiritual beliefs in the world, the traditional site of the Jewish temple and Mohammed's ascension to Heaven.

Archaeologist: Waqf endangering remains of Second Temple: Mazar said the images showed large stones endowed with architectural elements unique to the Second Temple period. "[They show] beautiful grapevines," she said.

"There is no doubt that these are motifs from the Second Temple period. It is the different elements of the decoration that show this, combined with the style of the artistic work."An Israeli archaeologist has charged that Muslim authorities are excavating a disputed holy site in Jerusalem in a way that endangers the remains of the Second Temple.

An Israeli photographer took photographs that were released yesterday that show stone blocks with a unique design linked to the Second Temple, which was destroyed in 70 C.E. Hebrew University archaeologist Eilat Mazar charged that the presence of the blocks in the middle of a Muslim construction project shows that the Waqf, the Islamic Trust, is ignoring the site's importance in Jewish history.

"There is no archaeological supervision [of the work] and no plan or survey to see what the real condition of the Temple Mount is", she said. "The Temple Mount is neglected, and it's just a matter of time before it collapses," she warned.

I have heard this same dark problem from different people. It is very disturbing to imagine what would happen if there was a "temple incident," since it could possibly cause everyone to flip out and end religious tolerance as we know it.

Ariel Sharon is now proposing to rip out the Gaza Strip settlements as part of a unilateral separation, which would also theoretically involve closing some settlements in parts of the West Bank, while solidifying others. It would be positive to see Gaza without the oppressive troubles of the settlements, but Sharon has been angling to grab the West Bank all along. I have a feeling that he is merely putting this out there to divert attention from a rapidly growing bribery scandal. It seems clear that his hands are dirty in that, and this wouldn't be the first time he's made such a ruckus to save his own skin. Aluf Benn in Haaretz is covering this closely:

It is doubtful that he has changed his strategic outlook. He is apprehensive about a withdrawal to the Green Line, which enjoys strong international support, but in his opinion is dangerous for Israel. This is why he has until now shunned any significant negotiations. Now, with the pressure turned up, he is proposing a deal: "moving" isolated settlements and strengthening Israel's hold on other regions.

Sharon is prepared to pay with the evacuation of Gaza for American consent to Israel's continued control over a large part of the West Bank. That is why he instructed his national security advisor, Giora Eiland, to chart security lines that Israel could hold for years, "until there is a partner."

Sharon has been kicking around these ideas for a long time, each time under a different name. Once it was the plan for massive settlement of the West Bank (1977), another time it was "annexation as per the Allon Plan" (1988), then the "enclaves map" (1994), the long-term interim agreement (1999), the temporary Palestinian state (2001), the "fence route" (2003), and now the "disengagement with American backing" (2004). The common denominator of all of these plans is Israeli control over the "security regions" of the Jordan Rift and Western Samaria, and closing the Palestinians into enclaves in the hilly areas.

After Camp David, Sharon added settlement in the Western Negev to the map, to create an obstacle to a territorial exchange. The settlements in Gaza were intended to break up Palestinian territorial contiguity, but it seems that in Sharon's view, that role is now over.

Sharon is trying to follow in the footsteps of Menachem Begin, who conceded Sinai so that Israel could stay in the West Bank; Ehud Barak, who left Lebanon in order to perpetuate Israel's control of the Golan; and Shimon Peres, who championed "Gaza First" and a deferral of a solution in the West Bank and Jerusalem. All of them enjoyed success in the short term, but left diplomatic time bombs for their successors.

A similar problem is inherent in the Sharon plan, which leaves a vacuum on the Palestinian side and a lot of open questions. Will a "Hamastan" arise in Gaza on the ruins of the Palestinian Authority?... Will George Bush buy the Sharon proposals? Will he agree to expansion of the settlements that are not evacuated? Will he demand that Israel give up the "eastern fence"?

It's probably a good idea to look at this NY Times Mag feature about the rise of the Shiites, and what it means for Iraq's future.

Iran has entered a profound political crisis as the theocratic "Guardian" guys have banned many moderate people from running for Parliament. It's a dramatic situation, and now the Iranians are asking Iraq's leading cleric, Sistani, for help in regaining their democratic rights! Talk about crossed wires.

A little bit about the elections: In Iowa there is an electronic market where people can bet on who they think the nominee will be. Dean's chart is pretty sad-looking. It appears the market-driven system didn't give us too much advance warning of his implosion!

Weapons of Mass Destruction: still an Error 404. This post on Billmon rounds up much of the situation. But wait, a Guardian report adds details about the Office of Special Plans:

On virtually every single important claim made by the Bush administration in its case for war, there was serious dissension. Discordant views - not from individual analysts but from several intelligence agencies as a whole - were kept from the public as momentum was built for a congressional vote on the war resolution.

Precisely because of the qualms the administration encountered, it created a rogue intelligence operation, the Office of Special Plans, located within the Pentagon and under the control of neo-conservatives. The OSP roamed outside the ordinary inter-agency process, stamping its approval on stories from Iraqi exiles that the other agencies dismissed as lacking credibility, and feeding them to the president....

Never before had any senior White House official physically intruded into CIA's Langley headquarters to argue with mid-level managers and analysts about unfinished work. But twice vice president Cheney and Lewis Libby, his chief of staff, came to offer their opinions. According to Patrick Lang: "They looked disapproving, questioned the reports and left an impression of what you're supposed to do. They would say: 'you haven't looked at the evidence'. The answer would be, those reports [from Iraqi exiles] aren't valid. The analysts would be told, you should look at this again'. Finally, people gave up. You learn not to contradict them."

....senior intelligence officers were kept in the dark about the OSP. "I didn't know about its existence," said Thielman. "They were cherry picking intelligence and packaging it for Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld to take to the president. That's the kind of rogue operation that peer review is intended to prevent."

Now an Israeli MK tells us that Israel knew that Iraq had no WMD before the war. This is very important news!!!!

A prominent Israeli MP said yesterday that his country's intelligence services knew claims that Saddam Hussein was capable of swiftly launching weapons of mass destruction were wrong but withheld the information from Washington.

"It was known in Israel that the story that weapons of mass destruction could be activated in 45 minutes was an old wives' tale," Yossi Sarid, a member of the foreign affairs and defence committee which is investigating the quality of Israeli intelligence on Iraq, told the Associated Press yesterday. "Israel didn't want to spoil President Bush's scenario, and it should have," he said.

On Sunday, the former UN weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, told Y-Net, an Israeli newswire, that the Israeli intelligence services reached the conclusion years ago that Iraq no longer had weapons of mass destruction. "In the end, if the Israeli intelligence knew that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, so the CIA knew it and thus British intelligence too," he said.

Posted by HongPong at February 7, 2004 06:38 PM
Listed under News .