30/08/06 - La Turquie à la croisée des chemins stratégiques

Turkey key to Western energy, security
By Federico Bordonaro, ISN Security Watch 28/08/06

"European observers and decision-makers are closely watching ongoing political developments in Turkey and their implications for Ankara's foreign policy. Foremost among these concerns is the appointment in late July of General Yasar Buyukanit as the new military chief of staff, not to mention upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections..."

"...Turkish and international analysts alike point out that Buyukanit's political and cultural orientation is not exactly as pro-European and pro-Western as that of his predecessor. More importantly, some fear that the new chief of staff will promote a tougher policy towards Kurdish activists and will be less likely to make concessions to the EU on the Cyprus issue.

Should Ankara's position on these two issues become more rigid, a deterioration in European-Turkish relations may occur, further complicating the already intricate matter of Turkey's integration into the EU.

An even more worrisome possibility would be a stronger anti-Western turn that could signal the beginning of Turkish rapprochement with Iran and a strengthening of Russo-Turkish relations at the expense of Ankara's traditional pro-US and pro-EU orientation..."

"...Some recent developments in northern Iraq also have fuelled the anxiety of those in the West who hold a pessimistic view of Buyukanit's appointment. In Iraqi Kurdistan, the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) - labeled a “terrorist organization” by the US, Britain and the EU - has raised the tempo of its armed operations, according to Turkish officials. As a result, last May, both Ankara and Teheran launched military operations on the border to counter the PKK's activities.

This event has caused some significant concern in Washington. Turkish military intervention in northern Iraq would disrupt the delicate regional balance and plunge the area into chaos, complicating Washington's already difficult position in Iraq. Moreover, it could further embolden Iran, the US’ main rival in the Middle East, in the event of anti-Kurdish strategic cooperation developing between Ankara and Teheran..."

"...in recent years, Russia's relationship with Turkey has featured a complex combination of political competition (mainly in Central Asia) and economic cooperation. Generally speaking, Moscow's relations with Ankara have become friendlier, and Russia has even been courting Turkey to engage in more extensive collaboration in the energy field..."


30/08/06 - Les Etats-Unis pourraient, hors ONU, réunir une coalition contre l'Iran

U.S. May Curb Iran
LATimes 26/08/06

"With increasing signs that several fellow Security Council members may stall a United States push to penalize Iran for its nuclear enrichment program, Bush administration officials have indicated that they are prepared to form an independent coalition to freeze Iranian assets and restrict trade.

The strategy, analysts say, reflects not only long-standing U.S. frustration with the Security Council's inaction on Iran, but also the current weakness of Washington's position because of its controversial role in a series of conflicts in the Middle East, most recently in Lebanon..."

"...U.S. Ambassador John R. Bolton said in an interview late this week that the United States planned to introduce a resolution imposing penalties such as a travel ban and asset freeze for key Iranian leaders soon after the Aug. 31 deadline, and seemed optimistic that China and Russia would agree to it once they saw the text. "Everybody's been on board," he said.

But in case Russia and China do not accept it, the U.S. is working a parallel diplomatic track outside the U.N., Bolton said..."


Lire également, Read also :

Iran's August 31 Nuclear Deadline Approaches
Dr. Harsh V. Pant, PINR 29/08/06


30/08/06 - Suspicions, accusations : La guerre de l'information des néocons contre la FINUL

What did you do in the war, UNIFIL?
Weekly Standard 04/09/06

"DURING THE RECENT month-long war between Hezbollah and Israel, U.N. "peacekeeping" forces made a startling contribution: They openly published daily real-time intelligence, of obvious usefulness to Hezbollah, on the location, equipment, and force structure of Israeli troops in Lebanon.

UNIFIL--the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, a nearly 2,000-man blue-helmet contingent that has been present on the Lebanon-Israel border since 1978--is officially neutral. Yet, throughout the recent war, it posted on its website for all to see precise information about the movements of Israeli Defense Forces soldiers and the nature of their weaponry and materiel, even specifying the placement of IDF safety structures within hours of their construction. New information was sometimes only 30 minutes old when it was posted, and never more than 24 hours old.

Meanwhile, UNIFIL posted not a single item of specific intelligence regarding Hezbollah forces. Statements on the order of Hezbollah "fired rockets in large numbers from various locations" and Hezbollah's rockets "were fired in significantly larger numbers from various locations" are as precise as its coverage of the other side ever got.

This war was fought on cable television and the Internet, and a lot of official information was available in real time. But the specific military intelligence UNIFIL posted could not be had from any non-U.N. source. The Israeli press--always eager to push the envelope--did not publish the details of troop movements and logistics. Neither the European press nor the rest of the world media, though hardly bastions of concern for the safety of Israeli troops, provided the IDF intelligence details that UNIFIL did. A search of Israeli government websites failed to turn up the details published to the world each day by the U.N.

Inquiries made of various Israeli military and government representatives and analysts yielded near unanimous agreement that at least some of UNIFIL's postings, in the words of one retired senior military analyst, "could have exposed Israeli soldiers to grave danger." These analysts, including a current high ranking military official, noted that the same intelligence would not have been provided by the U.N. about Israel's enemies..."


European Lebanon Force Is Cast as Shield for Iranian-Hizballah Military Buildup
Debka 25/08/06

"Whereas Israel initially conceived of a multinational force as a guarantee of its border security against terrorist attack and a boost for the Lebanese army to displace Hizballah, the European governments contributing contingents to this force have their own ideas – and interests.

Less than two weeks into the UN-brokered ceasefire, the swiftly-evolving situation in Lebanon is casting the international force in the role of protector and shield for the rapid buildup of a new, beefed up Iranian-Hizballah military deployment in Lebanon up to the Israeli border.

The force dubbed by Kofi Annan UNIFIL-2 has no operational plan to enforce the UN arms embargo which would entail stemming the heavy flow of Iranian arms shipments entering Lebanon day by day along two Syrian tracks..."


30/08/06 - Erreurs et échecs américains ont propulsé l'Iran comme puissance régionale

Iran now the key power in Iraq, says UK think-tank
The Times 23/08/06

"A series of strategic errors by the Bush Administration in its War on Terror has left Iran holding virtually all the cards in the power play of the Middle East, according to a report by Britain's most influential think-tank published today..."


Lire, Read :

IRAN, ITS NEIGHBOURS AND THE REGIONAL CRISES
Report from the Royal Institute of International Affairs at Chatham House, 23/08/06

"This major new report by Chatham House seeks to shed light on what the regional crises – the Iranian nuclear dispute, the instability of Iraq, the Israel–Hizbullah conflict and the deteriorating situation in the West Bank and Gaza – illustrate about Iran’s relations with its neighbours..."


30/08/06 - Les néocons voient maintenant le Royaume Uni comme une menace pire que l'Iran ou l'Irak !

Britain 'is now biggest security threat to US'
Telegraph 29/08/06

"Britain now presents a greater security threat to the United States than Iran or Iraq, an American magazine said yesterday.

In an article on Islamists headlined "Kashmir on the Thames", the New Republic painted Britain's Muslim communities as a breeding ground for violent extremism.

Citing recent opinion poll evidence suggesting that one in four British Muslims believed that last year's London Tube bombings were justified, the magazine said: "In the wake of this month's high-profile arrests, it can now be argued that the biggest threat to US security emanates not from Iran or Iraq or Afghanistan, but rather from Great Britain, our closest ally."

The magazine, with a circulation of 60,000-a-week, has its roots on the Democratic Left although in recent years it has backed much of President George W Bush's foreign policy. The claim is the latest in a series of hostile reassessment of Britain by Americans in the wake of the alleged plot to bring down transatlantic airliners..."


30/08/06 - La montée de l'Italie au multilatéralisme

Italy’s Peacekeeping Offer Signals Shift in Its Foreign Policy
NYT 30/08/06

"...But with Iraq still mired in violence, Mr. Prodi’s government seems to feel a certain freedom to distance itself from Washington, apparently without paying a price either with voters or the Bush administration itself. For the moment, in the glow of the early success over forming a peacekeeping force for Lebanon, Italian leaders, political experts and even American diplomats speak of a new “effective multilateralism” that Italy seems to be testing.

“Honestly, Berlusconi found himself in a different place with a stronger division of Europe and unilateralism of America,” Massimo D’Alema, the Italian foreign minister, said in an interview over the weekend. “We live in a different phase, and for this we are lucky, because today unilateralism is clearly in a crisis. It is finished.”..."


30/08/06 - Un "African Command" pour le Pentagone ?

Exclusive: The Pentagon Plans for an African Command
Time 24/08/06

"In what may be the most glaring admission that the U.S. military needs to dramatically readjust how it will fight what it calls 'the long war,' the Pentagon is expected to announce soon that it will create an entirely new military command to focus on the globe's most neglected region: Africa.

Pentagon sources say that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is close to approving plans for an African Command, which would establish a military organization to singlehandedly deal with the entire continent of Africa. It would be a sign of a significant strategic shift in Administration policy, reflecting the need to put more emphasis on proactive, preventative measures rather than maintaining a defensive posture designed for the Cold War.

The Pentagon has five geographic Unified Combatant Commands around the world and responsibility for Africa is awkwardly divided among three of those: European Command, Pacific Command and Central Command — which is also responsible for running the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Creating an African Command would be an important structural move to coordinate U.S. defense policy for the continent, as well as provide a single military organization for agencies like the State Department and the CIA to work with in the region..."


30/08/06 - Options chinoises vs transformations militaires américaines

Chinese Responses to U.S. Military Transformation and Implications for the Department of Defense
RAND 2006

"Over the past decade, Chinese military strategists have keenly observed changes in U.S. national strategy and military transformation. The acceleration of its own military modernization suggests that China is not dissuaded by U.S. military prowess but instead is driven by a range of strategic and military motivations to keep pace. This report examines the constraints, facilitators, and potential options for Chinese responses to U.S. transformation efforts, especially with respect to whether Taiwan moves toward or away from formal independence. The authors focus on four areas of counter-transformation options that China may pursue (which most likely would include all or portions of each strategy): Conventional Modernization “Plus”; Subversion, Sabotage, and Information Operations; Missile-Centric Strategies; and Chinese Network-Centric Warfare. The path China takes will depend on its key national security goals and the political and economic context within which these goals are pursued. That said, the authors offer possible U.S. counterresponses to such courses of action (e.g., planning defensive measures, augmentation of network-centric platforms) and emphasize that the ultimate “victor” of transformation will be that nation with the best combination of surprise, error control, fortune, and highly trained people..."