The Blair government has been defeated on the floor of Parliament over a proposal to let police hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge, with 48 Labour members joining the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in an amendment reducing the period to 28 days. It would certainly be good if Australian “conservatives” were conservative about things like habeas corpus.

And having lived by the bomb, JI bombmaker Amrozi Azahari has apparently died by it, blowing himself up to avoid capture by the Indonesian police. The Indonesians have done a great job in capturing, trying and convicting the main members of the JI terrorist network. Their one failure, not nailing “spiritual leader” Bashir on a major charge, was due, as much as anything else to the refusal of the US authorities to allow Bashir’s main lieutenant, Hambali, whose evidence could have been vital, to testify.

I haven’t found enough information on the riots in France, to make any useful comment on what’s happening, except an obvious one, that the Chirac government has made an awful mess of things.

In this context, there’s an expectation about that leftists should defend Chirac and his government, and therefore be embarrassed by his failures. The first time this expectation arose was when (thanks to poor performance and co-ordination on the left) Chirac ended up in a run-off against Le Pen for the presidency in 2002. Hence it was necessary for the left to campaign for a strong vote against Le Pen and, necessarily, for Chirac. Then in 2003, Chirac’s government led the opposition to the Iraq war at the UN, by virtue of its permanent membership of the UNSC, rather than because of its great moral standing. Still, the war had to be opposed, and Chirac therefore had to be supported.

But the argument that ‘mine enemy’s enemy is my friend’ can only go so far. Much of the reason why French Gaullists annoy US Republicans is that they have so much in common. There’s little doubt that, if Chirac had the kind of global power that Bush does, he’d abuse it in exactly the same way. Australians and New Zealanders, who’ve seen Chirac and his predecessors throwing their weight around in the South Pacific (long used as the site for French nuclear tests), are well aware of this. The same kind of heavy-handedness is evident in domestic policy and seems to have contributed to the riots.

I haven’t seen much discussion of this AP report that Ayatollah Sistani is likely to call for a withdrawal of US troops after the elections on December 15 (found via Juan Cole).

It’s unclear whether this is an accurate report of Sistani’s intentions, a trial balloon, or an attempt by some in his circle to create a fait accompli. But assuming the report is accurate, it seems clear, as Cole says, that any attempt to resist such a demand from Sistani would be futile, especially now that the Sadrists, still violently opposed to the occupation, are likely to play a large role in the new government. Nevertheless, the US, backed by current PM Jaafari is currently seeking a 12-month extension of the occupation mandate from the UN, instead of the 6-month extensions sought previously.
Read More »

More than 50 people have been killed in the latest terror attacks in Delhi. As usual in a globalised world, the victims apparently include Indians and foreign visitors, Hindus and Muslims and people of all social classes. Its premature to speculate on which particular group is responsible for this crime, but almost certainly it’s a group horrified by the prospect that peace might break out between India and Pakistan as the two countries work together to respond to the tragic earthquake in Pakistan.

Until fairly recently, it seemed as if the worst of the tragedy of Darfur was over. The Sudanese government appeared set to rein in the terrorist Janjaweed militia, the rebels seemed willing to negotiate and the international community seemed finally to be taking some action.

But in the last few months, things have gone from bad to worse and ethnic cleansing on a large scale has resumed. There are lots of reports at Passion of the Present

No-one comes out of this with much credit. It’s no surprise, of course, that the Chinese Communists have pursued their standard line of non-interference in the internal affairs of brutal dictatorships. But the position of the democracies is just as bad. The Bush Administration started out with a firm line, arguing that the actions of the Sudanese government and its proxies constituted genocide. But now it’s backed off and is actually siding with Sudan in the Security Council. In part, this is for the creditable reason that Bush wants the separate peace deal that ended the long-running civil war in southern Sudan to hold, and is therefore treating the government gingerly. But Bush is also siding with Sudan in trying to undermine the International Criminal Court.

If Bush has been bad, the Europeans have been even worse. This is a situation very like Bosnia and Kosovo, or Rwanda, the kind of thing the new EU was not going to let happen again. What’s needed here is an effective peacekeeping force. The African Union has supplied some troops but without robust rules of engagement and backup (including both military components like air and logistic support and technical expertise of various kinds) they have proved ineffectual. This is a chance for Europe to show that it can achieve more, at much lower cost, through effective peacekeeping, than can Bush’s militarism. So far, the chance is being blown.

It is a disgrace that the kind of slow-meaning ethnic cleansing we are seeing in Darfur can be allowed to continue, month after month, and year after year, without any real action being taken.

The terrible earthquake in Pakistan is reported to have killed 18000 people and a mudslide in Guatemala has killed 1400. I haven’t found notices of any relief appeals yet, but there will certainly be a great need for aid in both the short and long term. Tragedies like this are both a challenge and an opportunity to demonstrate that rhetoric about our concern for people everywhere in the world has some basis in reality. And remember that, while dramatic events like this grab the headlines, malnutrition, malaria, HIV/AIDS and so on are killing every day.

On the good news front, a UQ research team claims to have developed a 100 per cent effective vaccine against cervical cancer. Assuming this works as promised, it will save many thousands of lives in the long run. The biggest benefits will be a long time coming it appears because of the time lag between infection with human papilloma virus and the development of the disease, but it’s still a marvellous discovery.

It’s worth recording that JI leader Abu Bashir has denounced the latest Bali bombing. Of course this is stinking hypocrisy – Bashir has been up to his neck in terrorism. If he had really changed his views, he would have confessed his previous involvement and repudiated his past actions and words including his praise for bin Laden.

Still, it is significant that Bashir feels the need to make such a statement. Partly no doubt he’s trying to get out of jail as soon as possible. But it’s also an indication that he realises how little popular support he has in Indonesia. If he had a strong support base he would be defying the authorities, and seeking a triumphant release, rather than currying favour with statements like this.

Finally, although it’s unlikely that Bashir has any connection with day-to-day operations, this statement makes it more likely that the latest attack was carried out by a splinter group and that some associated with JI have realised the futility of their resort to terrorism, particularly domestic terrorism.

Most people have made up their minds already about the way the US, Australia and other Western countries should respond to terrorism, and I’ve stated my own views plenty of times, so I’ll focus on a different issue.

The latest terror attacks, although directed at foreign tourists, are first and foremost an attack on Indonesia and the Indonesian people. It seems pretty clear that Bali is a favoured target in part because the local population is largely (though by no means entirely) non-Muslim and the killers regard any of their fellow-citizens who do not share their religious beliefs as worthy of death. Their aim, along with groups like the unlamented Laskar Jihad is to promote civil war and the overthrow of democracy in Indonesia, so that they can implement their idea of an Islamic caliphate.

Fortunately their actions have been counterproductive. The Iraq war has been highly unpopular, but the great achievement of JI has been to make themselves even more unpopular. The Indonesian people have, with few exceptions, rejected terrorism and radical Islamism and the Indonesian government has responded effectively. In both the Bali and Jakarta bombings, there have been numerous arrests and convictions. It’s unfortunate that they couldn’t nail Abu Bashir for his most serious crimes, but it was better to stick to the rule of law than to make this evil man a martyr by violating it (and of course a conviction would have been much more likely if his main lieutenant, Hambali, had been handed over to the Indonesians, instead of being held by the US ).

The outcome we’ve seen is all the more impressive when we remember that only a few years ago, Indonesia was a corrupt dictatorship riddled with religious/ethnic strife in Ambon, Aceh and other places.

Whatever our differences with Indonesia, this is a time for solidarity with its governmetn and people.

Another terrorist atrocity in Bali, presumably the work of Jemaah Islamiah or one of its offshoots. As usual with JI’s attacks, the majority of victims are Indonesians, but one Australian, a 16-year-old boy, has been killed and a large number wounded. Some commentary later, perhaps, but for the moment I’ll just express my sympathy for those killed and hopes for the recovery of the injured.

Gary Bass in the NYT comments on the possibility that Saddam could be sentenced to death and executed for a 1982 massacre of about 100 villagers, without ever being brought to trial on the main array of charges against him, including killing political rivals, crushing the Shiite uprising in southern Iraq in 1991, invading Kuwait in 1990 and waging the genocidal Anfal campaign against the Kurds in 1988, including gassing Kurdish villagers at Halabja. As Bass says,

 A thorough series of war crimes trials would not only give the victims more satisfaction but also yield a documentary and testimonial record of the regime’s crimes.

But looking at this list raises a more basic question. Why hasn’t Saddam been charged with any crime more recent than 1991?[1]. In the leadup to the war, and in its aftermath, it was routinely claimed that Saddam’s regime, at the time it was overthrown was among the most brutal dictatorships in the world. Even among opponents of the war, including myself, hardly anyone doubted that the regime routinely practised murder and torture. Why then aren’t there any charges covering this period? Presumably both documents and witnesses are more readily available than for a crime committed more than twenty years ago.
Read More »