World beat

Oct 292012
 

Division between Afghanistan and Pakistan still contentious.

by Abubakar Siddique

Foreign diplomats visiting Kabul tread carefully when it comes to the Durand Line, knowing full well that the colonial-era border separating British India and Afghanistan is a touchy subject.

Merely affirming a long-standing policy when it comes to the contentious demarcation can be viewed by Afghans as a step too far, as the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, discovered following an interview with a private Afghan television channel this week.

"Our policy is that border is the international border," Grossman said on October 21. "I think it is time to lift everybody's vision here to a regional conception of what the region could be."

Washington considers the Durand Line — established by British India and the Kingdom of Afghanistan in 1893 — the modern-day border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

It was no secret that Washington considers the Durand Line — established by British India and the Kingdom of Afghanistan in 1893 — the modern-day border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland offered reminders of that fact during an October 23 press briefing in which she was questioned about Grossman's comment. "Our policy on this has not changed," she said. "It was correctly stated by Ambassador Grossman that we see this as the internationally recognized boundary."

But the comments have nevertheless raised hackles in Afghanistan, which has not recognized the Durand Line as its eastern border since Pakistan's partition from the British Raj in 1947.

The Afghan daily Weesa this week quoted several Afghan lawmakers describing Grossman's statement as interference in domestic Afghan affairs.

And the official reaction was curt, with the Afghan Foreign Ministry issuing a statement on October 23 saying that Kabul "rejects and considers irrelevant any statement by anyone about the legal status of this line." The status of the Durand Line, the statement added, was a matter of "historic importance for the people of Afghanistan."

'An Issue For Pashtuns, And Pashtuns Only'

The Durand Line is indeed divisive. It runs directly through traditional Pashtun lands, splitting one of the world's largest tribal societies in two. Those to the west of the line are Afghan; to the east Pakistani.

Abdul Ghafoor Liwal, the head of Kabul's Center for Regional Studies of Afghanistan, says the Durand Line is considered a top national issue in the country, but one that is up to the Pashtuns themselves to decide.

"Recognizing the legitimacy of this line is in the hands of the masses that live on either side of the border. This is also the formal position of the Afghan government," Liwal says. "This is why the Afghan government has protested against this [Grossman’s] statement."

The United States is not alone on this issue, as new US Ambassador to Afghanistan James Cunningham noted. "The United States, as many other countries, have long recognized the Durand Line as the boundary between Afghanistan and Pakistan," he told journalists in Kandahar on October 23.

But there are those in Afghanistan who would rather not be reminded of that fact. "I think talking about such [controversial] issues will have negative consequences for relations between America and the people of Afghanistan," Aryan Yoon, a member of the foreign-relations committee of the Afghan parliament, said this week. "I think it will benefit both countries if we desist from talking about such issues."

Liwal, whose government-funded think tank researches strategic and foreign-policy issues, says most Afghans still dream of a return of the much bigger and united Afghanistan that existed before the advent of European colonialism in South Asia.

Modern Afghanistan emerged from the fragmentation of the Durrani dynasty, an 18th-century Pashtun empire based in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar.

Modern Afghanistan emerged from the fragmentation of the Durrani dynasty, an 18th-century Pashtun empire based in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar. Internal rivalries and wars eventually weakened the dynasty's hold on regions that today constitute Pakistan and northern India.

The arrival of the British in northern India in the 19th century posed a major challenge to the Afghan and Turkic powers that had dominated the subcontinent for centuries. After losing a major war to the Afghans in 1842, the British eventually captured parts of Afghanistan and formally annexed them through an arbitrary treaty in 1879. Their forces occupied Kabul at the time.

The contentious 1893 treaty between Afghan King Amir Abdur Rahman and Mortimer Durand, the foreign secretary of British India, formalized the areas under the control of the two governments.

Source

Sep 232012
 

Romney's declaration "two-state" solution dead comes right from Israeli PM's party line.

by Uri Avnery

Once upon a time, President Richard Nixon wanted to appoint a certain lawyer to the US Supreme Court.

“But the man is a complete moron!” one senator exclaimed.

“So what,” answered another, “There are a great many morons in the US, and they have a right to be represented in the court as much as any other sector of society.”

Perhaps the United Morons of America have a right to elect Mitt Romney president. But for the sake of the US and Israel, I hope that this will not happen.

Continue reading »

Sep 042012
 

Disabled fighters share work, revenue, despite political differences.

 
by Frud Bezhan

KABUL — Recent Afghan history has been marked by war, much of it fought among Afghans themselves on the basis of religious, ethnic, or political rivalries.

So it should come as no surprise that even if they are all under the Afghan flag today, there are few places where onetime enemies can work together — let alone live under the same roof.

Continue reading »

Aug 222012
 

Syria's warring factions held together only by dictator.

by Uri Avnery

On A flight to London in 1961, I had a unique experience.

On the way, the plane made a stop in Athens and a group of Arabs joined us. That by itself was an experience. In those days, Israelis hardly ever met people from Arab countries.

Three young Arabs took seats in the row behind me, and I somehow managed to introduce myself and start a conversation with them. I learned that they were Syrians. I mentioned the recent breakup of the United Arab Republic, the union of Egypt and Syria under the pan-Arab leadership of Gamal Abd-al-Nasser.

Continue reading »

May 222012
 

Struggles over land rights fall under the Rio+20 radar.

by Stephen Leahy for InterPress Service

UXBRIDGE, May 10, 2012 (IPS) — Land is the missing element at next month's big UN sustainable development summit known as Rio+20, where nations of the world will meet June 20-22 with the goal of setting a new course to ensure the survival and flourishing of humanity.

However, governments are apparently unaware that a reversal of decades of land reform is underway with speculators, investment banks, pension funds and other powerful financial interests taking control of perhaps 200 million hectares of land from poor farmers in Africa, Latin America and Asia in recent years. Speculators and investors know land is the key to three necessities of life: food, water and energy. But neither land nor community land rights are on the summit agenda.

Continue reading »

May 012012
 

Liberia, Sierra Leone suffered former strongman's atrocities.

by Emira Woods

Former Liberian President Charles Taylor, who was found guilty of 11 charges by a court in the Netherlands, is a man of many firsts.  He's the first head of state to have escaped from a medium-security prison in the United States.  He was the first sitting head of state to face charges of international crimes against humanity since the Nuremberg trials.  Now, he's the first head of state since World War II to have been convicted of war crimes by an international tribunal.

Continue reading »

Apr 042012
 

Fewer deaths but peak costs from catastrophic events last year.

from Worldwatch Institute

WASHINGTON DC, April 2, 2012 — During 2011, 820 natural catastrophes were documented around the world, resulting in 27,000 deaths and $380 billion in economic losses, according to data compiled by Munich Reinsurance Company and analyzed in the Worldwatch Institute's Vital Signs series. The number of natural catastrophes was down 15 percent from 2010 but was above the annual average of 790 events between 2001 and 2010, and considerably above the annual average of 630 events between 1981 and 2010.

"The influence of La Niña from January to May and August to December was a major cause of many of the extreme weather events in 2011," said report author Petra Löw, a geographer and Munich Re consultant who focuses on natural catastrophe losses. "In 2011, 91 percent of natural disasters were weather-related."

Continue reading »