After the debacle of a debate on the outlines of the new “reform“ treaty at the Brussels summit of 21-22 June 2007, more than a few leaders in the EU must be asking themselves: do we really need many more new member-states like this?
This is a pity for Warsaw, because even the Kaczynski twins acknowledge Poland needs an EU ready to countenance further enlargement to the east and sensible policies towards Russia. The Balkan countries are also going to have to be taken in if the region is to stay stable.
The first misconception is that Europe is fated to be perpetually stuck at the end of the second world war in 1945, facing the problem is how to arrange the affairs of the continent in such a way as to counter a resurgence of German might.
In fact the rest of Europe has moved on leaving the Kaczynskis in a time-warp. Europe is currently struggling to resolve the problems of the end of the cold war when the key issue is how to knit together a divided Europe, with its differing political traditions, economic potential and historical traumas; and, as part of that, how far to continue with incorporating the east and the southeast of the continent to construct a secure and politically and economically viable European project.
The second misconception is that the European Union has become or is becoming an instrument of domination over Europe for an increasingly self-confident Germany, a country which is ever less inclined to remember its past and, ominously, is determined to pursue its national interests. The Kaczynskis forget that the European Union is part of the post-1945 settlement which aimed at integrating Germany and thus removing the threat of domination by force once and for all.
If you assume, as the Kaczynskis do, that the EU is an instrument of German domination then it makes perfect sense to do everything in your power to weaken the organization, which is what they’re out to do. They forget though that it is the EU, largely thanks to Germany, which will be providing 60 euros billion of development aid to Poland up to 2014.
They forget that the EU is part of the solution of “Europe’s German problem“. It follows that, if you really are worried about Germany, undermining the EU only makes things worse. It also undermines the body which is best suited to face in a united way the challenge of a newly self-confident Russia. Indeed the EU removes that age-old Polish nightmare of being left alone to face simultaneously a hostile Germany and Russia.
The third misconception is the mixing of Poland’s bilateral relations towards Germany with the country’s European policy.
Thus in present-day Warsaw any look at future institutional arrangements for the EU neglects any consideration of how the organization will work as a whole0--from Lisbon to Tallinn, Dublin to Athens; instead, the exclusive focus is on how the system might affect the Polish government’s prospects of prevailing in the arm-wrestling match it now sees itself conducting with the Germans.
The fourth misconception is that the voting system in the council of ministers serves to help countries block rather than to arrive at decisions. Thus Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski, now accepted as the cannier of the twins, defended the decision to drop Poland’s proposal for a square-root-based voting system by saying that the deal arrived at Brussels made it easier for Poland to block decisions.
In fact the aim of the exercise was to streamline decision-making as the EU gets bigger, and to make sure that the big states retain a voice concomitant with their size and status.
OPENDEMOCRACY.COM

Armed police patrol Glasgow Airport in Scotland, July 02.

Last week’s events in London and Glasgow have been widely described as a baptism of fire for Britain’s new Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, a former Labour chief whip more used to disciplining MPs than fighting terrorism.
Mr. Brown was barely into his second day in office and still finalizing his Cabinet when the terrorists struck bringing back the nightmarish memories of July 7, 2005 when 52 people died in a series of suicide bombings in London.
To “7/7“, another date has now been added for Londoners to remember: June 29, 2007 when two Mercedes cars packed with explosives were found in the heart of the capital’s tourist and entertainment district, the West End.
Police suspect that the two “car bombs“ were planned to go off simultaneously, and the head of Scotland Yard’s counter-terror command Peter Clarke said “hundreds“ of people might have been killed if the bombs, primed to be set off through mobile phones, had exploded.
Barely 24 hours later, as the government and security agencies were still struggling to make sense of the “29/6“ incidents, terrorists launched an even more audacious attack--this time in Scotland. Glasgow international airport was heaving with holidaymakers when a blazing jeep, with two “Asian-looking“ occupants, was driven into the terminal building in what the police said was a “suicide bomb“ attack. Luckily, the jeep failed to break through the glass front, and a bloodbath was averted.
It is now confirmed that the London and Glasgow incidents were “linked“ raising fears that they may be part of a bigger plot. Scotland Yard has warned of “further attacks“ and the country has been placed on the highest security alert.
There have been allegations of intelligence failure after police admitted that they had no idea about an impending attack. One Sunday newspaper claimed that intelligence agencies had warned of a “possible terror plot“ to coincide with Tony Blair’s departure.
True or not, there is no escaping that police were caught napping. The London “car bombs“ were not discovered by them.
One was noticed by a passing ambulance crew; and the other found by chance after the vehicle had been towed to a car pound.
Likewise, it was sheer luck that the suicide attack on Glasgow airport failed. It was not “foiled“. There is confusion about the identity of those behind the attacks and much speculation whether they were “British-born“ or foreigners.
What remains disturbing, as a senior Scotland Yard officer said, is that there are people out there who have the “capability and the intent to carry out attacks in the U.K.“
A chilling reminder indeed of the vulnerability and of the persistence of murderous terror.
HINDU.COM

Yemeni officials were quick to condemn last Monday’s car bomb attack at a temple in Marib, in which nine people, including seven Spanish tourists, died, as the work of al-Qaeda. It also emerged that they were expecting a terrorist act, but were not sure what form it would take.
Yemen’s oil industry, tiny by global standards, but the source of two thirds of Yemen’s GDP, has been hit in the past. Last September, al-Qaeda affiliates were blamed for two attacks on Western-owned oil refineries. One refinery, at Safer, is close to Marib.
An al-Qaeda message at the time warned that these attacks were “only the first spark“ and that future operations would be “severe and bitter“.
Thirty six suspects went on trial in the capital, Sanaa, accused of membership of an organization calling itself al-Qaeda Organisation Cell in the Arabian Peninsula-Yemen.
In fact, Yemen has a long history both of militant Islamism and regional instability. Tribes, including some in the Marib area, have had an uncomfortable relationship with central government for decades.
Kidnappings of Yemenis and tourists have long been used to back up demands for better services or the release of jailed relatives. Usually hostages are released unharmed, but in 1998, four Westerners were killed during a botched rescue attempt.
Despite the country’s stunning scenery and rich cultural heritage, tourism has always been a fragile industry in Yemen. A three-year Shia rebellion in the north and occasional attacks in Sanaa have caused Western governments to issue warnings. In recent weeks, both Spain and the US have advised travelers not to visit the country.
Before 11 September 2001 attacks in Washington and New York, Yemen was regarded as a safe haven for radical Islamists. Osama bin Laden’s ancestral homeland, its long porous border with Saudi Arabia and rugged mountainous terrain attracted militants who saw it as a place where they could hide, train and organize.
In 2000, an audacious suicide attack was launched against the American warship, USS Cole, anchored off the southern port of Aden. Seventeen American sailors were killed.
After the attacks on America President Saleh joined President George Bush’s “war on terror“. The government cracked down on militants and allowed the CIA to keep a close eye on al-Qaeda movements.
This resulted, in May 2002, in the killing of a senior al-Qaeda operative, Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi, a suspect in the USS Cole bombing. His car was attacked (near Marib) by a Hellfire missile launched from an unmanned Predator drone. Later that year, a French supertanker, the Limburg, was attacked near Mukallah.
The Sanaa government’s efforts to curb the militants suffered a setback in February last year when 23 convicts, including men the US state department described as “known affiliates of al-Qaeda,“ escaped from prison.
The Marib attack is not the first time Spanish nationals have been targeted by al-Qaeda inspired militants. In 2004, 191 people were killed as a series of bombs exploded aboard commuter trains in Madrid. Final evidence in the trial of alleged perpetrators was submitted later.
And just over a week ago, a remotely-activated car bomb killed six Spanish peacekeepers on duty in southern Lebanon. The finger of suspicion is being pointed at a group thought to have links to al-Qaeda. Spain’s police federation said the country had become “a major target“ for Islamic terrorism.
BBC.CO.UK

A scene from Clint EastwoodÕs ÒLetters From Iwo JimaÓ

In recent weeks Japanese government officials have found themselves on the wrong side of history, awkwardly defending historical abuses such as forced labor, forced prostitution, forced suicides in Okinawa, outright massacres in Nanjing and other occupied cities; and going as far as to hint that the attack on Pearl Harbor was a strategic necessity and that the Tokyo war crimes tribunal was vindictive victor’s justice.
Given the rising drum beat of revisionism, it was inevitable that fault would be found with Hollywood’s latest offering on Japan’s lost war, but the meticulous research and quality production values behind Clint Eastwood’s magisterial twin films about Iwojima doesn’t make for an easy target.
Because the twin films were well-received in both America and Japan, filmed partly on location with Japanese cooperation that included personal consultation with nationalist firebrand Shintaro Ishihara, one might think that the US and Japan had come to terms on at least one historical issue, the epic battle for Iwojima. But the immense good will accrued by this thoughtful film project was unexpectedly upended with a surprise announcement from Japanese officialdom in late June.
In what may be considered a case study of the insidious way history can be altered or erased, Iwojima is not to be called Iwojima anymore, but rather Iwoto.
The Japan Geographical Survey Institute in concert with Japan’s Coast Guard changed the name of the small island with a big history, reportedly in reaction to the success of the film. Whatever the merits of the extremely narrow linguistic claim behind the name change, the effect of saying Iwojima is a misnomer is to subtly invalidate all extant American narratives on the topic, past and present.
The impressive attempt at historic verisimilitude on the part of director Clint Eastwood is thus a victim of its own success, energizing revisionists to take action when it became apparent that Hollywood was capable of taking narrative control of a rock in their territory.
For Japan to insist on a name change for Iwo Jima because Hollywood more or less got it right is a shot below the belt, a blow in a battle for narrative control of war history by linguistic means.
Insisting on a name change for pointedly political reasons is a different matter. When the Khmer Rouge announced that Cambodia hence forth would be called Kampuchea, and when the dictators of Burma insisted their nation be called Myanmar, it wasn’t so much out of concern for linguistic accuracy as a desperate attempt at total narrative control; not so much a historian’s nuanced appreciation of the past as desire for a clean slate, a new year zero.
Thus to announce to the English-speaking world that henceforth Iwojima is no longer to be known as Iwojima is a decidedly political act.
It places the rocky isle in a man-made fog, off-limits, or at least temporarily rendered indistinct and off the foreigner’s map.
Ironically, the putative name change is next to meaningless in Japan where the name of Iwojima will continue to be written as it always has been. The only change is in how it is to be read out loud.
The mischief inherent in altering the phonetic rendering of Iwojima to Iwoto is that the change is distinct enough to require a new orthography in English, causing cartographers to spill unnecessary ink, or more ominously, causing the old name of the island to sink without a trace. With a deft linguistic sleight of hand, an islet with a contested history is permanently locked in the past, veiled in willful inscrutability.
JAPANTIMES.COM

There’s a difference between following instructions on the Internet or in a book and having actual experience. Jihadists and insurgents in Iraq are gaining concrete experience, and Irish rebels became quite expert at assembling and detonating bombs.
It is possible to be reasonably sure of one thing. As long as Western countries are deeply involved in Muslim countries--and for some time after direct military involvement ends, if it ever does--such anti-American and anti-Western actions are likely. So vigilance and a kind of suspicion we might prefer not to entertain in better times will likely be part of our lives for a long time to come.
The notion that jihadists hate us because of our freedom or because of our wicked, decadent ways might carry some truth, but it is utterly inadequate as an explanation of the kind of hatred that impels such attacks, often attacks in which the perpetrators are willing to lose their own lives .
Radical Imams, al-Qaeda, and other disturbers of the peace are able to recruit disaffected young men and women because of outrage that the US and Great Britain invaded and are occupying a Muslim country.
Without that factor in play, Muslims sympathetic to jihad might still have resentments, and we might get occasional anti-Western actions, but they would almost certainly be less frequent and less lethal.
It doesn’t matter that most Americans and most Brits have no interest in running Iraq or any other country in the Middle East. It doesn’t matter if the intentions of our leaders are purely benevolent, desiring only to help those in Iraq and elsewhere to find their way into democracy and a more peaceful integration into the modern world.
As long as US and other Western troops are in Iraq and running things, it can be and will be interpreted as yet another chapter in Western colonialism and domination.
So leaving has some risks, but staying means the attacks are unlikely ever to end.

COUNTERPUNCH.
COM