Group items tagged

The contrast is striking. Only four years ago, George W. Bush, in his second Inaugural Address, described what he called America's "considerable" influence, saying, "We will use it confidently in freedom's cause." Bush's vision of American power was combative and aggressive. He said the U.S. would "seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture." He continued, "We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom."

Obama, by contrast, is looking for collaboration. He is looking to build a collective vision, not to impose an American one.

Clinton had pressed for Iranian participation in The Hague conference, stressing the importance of finding a regional solution to the insurgency in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and western officials were encouraged that Akhundzadeh, a deputy foreign minister and former charge d'affaires in London, was sent by Tehran.

Akhundzadeh told ministers from more than 70 countries at the meeting: "Welcoming the proposals for joint co-operation offered by the countries contributing to Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic of Iran is fully prepared to participate in the projects aimed at combating drug trafficking and plans in line with developing and reconstructing Afghanistan."

He repeated Tehran's criticism of the Nato role in Afghanistan, but used relatively moderate language, saying: "The presence of foreign forces has not improved things and it seems that an increase in the number of foreign forces will prove ineffective, too."

Akhundzadeh added: "The military expenses need to be redirected to the training of the Afghan police and army and Afghanisation should lead the government building process" - an apparent nod towards the Obama administration's decision to send 4,000 more American military trainers.

Western officials expressed hopes that the west and Iran could return to the close co-operation over Afghanistan that took place in the months after the 9/11 attacks. Iranian officials even helped the US target the Taliban, but the relationship cooled after Bush's "axis of evil" speech.

"There is a meeting of minds on drugs, development issues and the [August Afghan] elections, though not on foreign troops, on which they made clear their objections."

Malloch Brown acknowledged that Iran had done some "bad things" in both Afghanistan and Iraq, supplying weaponry to insurgents that had been used against British soldiers.But he argued: "This is Iran supporting its proxies because of a lack of diplomatic partnership around Iraq and Afghanistan. If this is a rapprochement, whether it is overall rapprochement or just aimed at stabilising Afghanistan, it offers the prospect of this behaviour getting moderated and hopefully stopping."

Mr Netanyahu has said in the past that he sees no need for the Palestinians to have full separate statehood.

Analysts say the nuclear ambitions of Iran are likely to top the new cabinet's security agenda. In an apparent reference to that effect, Mr Netanyahu said the biggest threat to Israel and the world came from "the possibility of a radical regime armed with nuclear weapons". He further stressed the issue in comments given to a US magazine shortly before he was sworn in. "You don't want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs," he said , in reference to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's belief in the imminent return of a Shia Islamic messianic figure, the Mehdi.

Thousands of US soldiers pass through the Manas base every month on their way in and out of Afghanistan.

It is also home to the large tanker aircraft that are used for in-air refuelling of fighter planes on combat missions, and it serves as a key supply hub.

For Russia, on the other hand, its closure would be a diplomatic victory as it seeks to reassert its influence in former Soviet republics, analysts say.

"I think that the Russians are trying to have it both ways with respect to Afghanistan in terms of Manas," US defence secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday, on his way to Krakow to meet his Polish counterpart.

"On one hand you're making positive noises about working with us in Afghanistan and on the other hand you're working against us in terms of that airfield which is clearly important to us."

On Tuesday, the US commander for the Middle East and Central Asia, General David Petraeus, held talks in Uzbekistan, which has rail links with Afghanistan. The US has already reached deals with Russia and Kazakhstan to send non-military cargo to Afghanistan using their rail networks, but the supplies would have to go through Uzbekistan. The US used to have an air base in Uzbekistan that served troops operating in Afghanistan. But Uzbek authorities closed it in 2005 after criticism from the US and EU over a crackdown on a mass protest in the town of Andijan.

Mr Obama has pledged substantial economic assistance for Pakistan - more than $1bn annually over the next five years - but the money will depend on the army's performance against the Taleban and al-Qaeda.

The BBC's Barbara Plett in Islamabad says President Zardari has now told the two US envoys that this is not good enough.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said: "We can only work together if we respect each other and trust each other."

"Pakistan is fighting a battle of its own survival," his office quoted him as telling Mr Holbrooke.

Our correspondent says his statement revealed the frustration and resentment about the aid conditions - which reflect American distrust of the Pakistani army. The conditions strengthen Pakistani perceptions of its army as a mercenary force doing American bidding, she adds.

His statement after the meeting read: "Pakistan... needs unconditional support by the international community in the fields of education, health, training and provision of equipment for fighting terrorism."

Mr Qureshi admitted there were differences on the issue. "We did talk about drones, and let me be very frank - there is a gap. There is a gap between us and them, and I want to bridge that gap."

The bad news for Bush’s successor, Barack Obama, is that he now faces a much larger and potentially more troubling axis—an axis of upheaval. This axis has at least nine members, and quite possibly more. What unites them is not so much their wicked intentions as their instability, which the global financial crisis only makes worse every day. Unfortunately, that same crisis is making it far from easy for the United States to respond to this new “grave and growing danger.”

In at least one of the world’s regions—the greater Middle East—two of these three factors have been present for some time: Ethnic conflict has been rife there for decades, and following the difficulties and disappointments in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States already seems likely to begin winding down its quasi-imperial presence in the region. It likely still will.

no matter how low interest rates go or how high deficits rise, there will be a substantial increase in unemployment in most economies this year and a painful decline in incomes. Such economic pain nearly always has geopolitical consequences. Indeed, we can already see the first symptoms of the coming upheaval.

In the essays that follow, Jeffrey Gettleman describes Somalia’s endless anarchy, Arkady Ostrovsky analyzes Russia’s new brand of aggression, and Sam Quinones explores Mexico’s drug-war-fueled misery. These, however, are just three case studies out of a possible nine or more.

Shlomo Brom, a retired general at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, said it would be “very logical” to assume that Israel would have wanted to bomb a weapons convoy in Sudan. “It fits exactly with the pattern of how Israel operates,” he said.

Israeli military analysts said that eastern Sudan could have been a little-watched backdoor for Iranian weapons to reach Gaza.