President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, your days are numbered...maybe.

Those of you who want change in Iran have reason to celebrate. On Wednesday, Mohammed Khatami, the reluctant candidate who once personified Iran's reform movement gave those who had been lobbying him to run reason to celebrate. "I should fulfill my promises made to people and announce my readiness to run [in the elections] despite my personal wish," Khatami said somewhat non-bindingly in a meeting with non-governmental groups according to Nahid Siamdoust in Tehran.

For those of you that don't have connections in Iran, the buzz in the political conversation in Tehran has most recently been surrounding rumors and calls from supporters for the once reformist President Khatami to run for a third term as President. Khatami, who was defeated by the hard-line Ahmadinejad in 2005, is thought by many experts as the only potential challenger to Ahmadinejad, who is up for re-election this year, that may actually have a chance at defeating him.

A victory by the reformist leader who promoted domestic liberalization and accommodation with the West on the international front would mark a profound political shift from Ahmadinejad, whose foreign policy has been based on an uncompromising defiance.

But, as exciting as this news is, here's the twist...victory is far from certain, and this may be exactly why Khatami may run. Khatami, who has stated he does not personally want to run but will for his supporters, may be attempting to appease the crowd while realizing he may never come close to winning or fully commit to defeating Ahmadinejad.

Regardless, recent polls in Tehran have shown that Khatami would defeat Ahmadinejad by a two-to-one margin. Yet many sources agree that it will be difficult to get those reformist supporters to actually show up to the polls. So, the situtation for Iranian leadership most likely will come down to the most basic of problems with civic action...will Khatami employ a "get out the vote" campaign? Cause it sure looks like the future of reform in Iran depends on whether or not Khatami supporters show up to vote on election day.

"Oh Jesus," I said out loud, "the Italians are sending more troops into Afghanistan."

Yeah, so the Guardian says.

To be frank, I'm skeptical about Italian peace keeping. In southern Iraq, for example, there were many personal reports on how the Italian military simply did not have the will to effectively engage the enemy. Former CPA officer, Rory Stewart, said in his memoir, "The Prince of the Marshes," that the Italians were next to worthless and were constantly restrained by "political orders."

So what exactly do the Italians’ want to do in Afghanistan? They already have 2,000 troops in not-so-dangerous Heart province. What are 800 more going to do? Engage Taliban fighters? Don’t think so. I see nothing in Italian politics that has suggested that they are really serious about engaging insurgents.

On the other hand, sending 800 more troops turns up the heat on Britain, France and Germany. These coalition partners have also not lived up to what they had promised. And I think that abu muqawama speaks for many of us skeptics on his blog:

"The German-led effort to train the Afghan police has been disgraceful. And if you're going to whine about not wanting to fight, fine. But when you so clearly blow off even your non-combat obligations to the coalition, it's awfully tough to justify continuing to take you seriously as a partner in security."

So not to be “that guy,” who says what everyone already knows, but the U.S. has a coalition problem. We either need to send 30,000 troops and court the Europeans into doing what they promised; or, return to the days of the light footprint strategy in Afghanistan.

Without the Europeans’ we become Soviets.

The Situation Room with Abu Guerrilla PART 2

I'm not sure why they don't market Israeli politics for reality TV. You couldn't have a team of writers create this kind of drama!

So as you know, the elections in Israel are less than a week away. The big candidates: Barak of Labor, Livni of Kadima, Netanyahu of Likud and Liberman of the Russian crazies; all are vying for power. And if you think that politics get political in the U.S. -ha- just look at these guys.

First off, the recent war in Gaza was about trying to boost the credibility of Livni and Barak. Old Netanyahu was able to stay above the fray because he was not part of Olmert’s no-so-esteemed coalition government.

Second, a deal to secure the release of abducted Israel Defense Forces soldier Gilad Shalit has gotten even more pressing. So their strategy looks: Kadima and Labor could steal a few seats if they can bring back Shalit the day before the election. Could it work?

Anyone who follows Israeli politics knows that it’s nothing to bet about. "Things" change all the time. For example, Likud was cleaning house for months, but recent polls show Likud with 30 seats and Kadima with a close 25.

So Livni, my dear, bring Shalit home and it is believed on the Casbah that you will be the first female Prime Minister of Israel that was elected by the people--perhaps even the one who makes peace.

(Note that Golda Meir was never elected by the people, rather a committee.)

The Situation Room with Abu Guerrilla

As the purple ink has mostly worn from the fingers of voting Iraqis, the results from their election are coming in. All and all, it went well. No major bombings. No major frauds. (A source told me that the Anbar mess is going to be defused soon.)

So who won?
1. Prime Minister Maliki and his Dawa coalition's hold on power.
2. Former head of state Allawi. Keep in mind that while Allawi is nominally a Shia Muslim, he is better described as a secularist and former Baathist. I think that he's as good as anyone's going to get.

Lost?
1. Those crazy Persians in Tehran who want to harden their post-modern glue on southern Iraq. Looks like a pan-Shia crescent with a Khomeini style unity isn't going to happen. Duh.
2. ISCI, or whatever they want to call themselves now. (Three name changes!!!) Turns out those southern Iraqis don't want Kurdistan autonomy after all; rather, a centralized state with security, security and even more security.

Now, looking out to the crowd, anyone calling for a backlash?
1. Voting fraud in Anbar?
2. ISCI taking arms?
3. Maliki blows it?
4. Whatever?

Who thinks Panetta will still perform renditions?

The new CIA Director Leon Panetta tried to assure the Senate Intelligence Committee that he, and the CIA for that matter, would not partake in "extraordinary renditions" like the one's that they have been performing for the last, oh I don't know, several decades.

After deflecting the complete rendition question altogether, Panetta explained that they would only send kidnapped "persons of interest" to other governments for prosecution in their legal systems...ok, whatever dude.

Soon after this statement he continued that "I think renditions where we return individuals to another country where they prosecute them under their laws, I think that is an appropriate use of rendition, Panetta said. So, in other words, it's still ok to kidnapp people and send them to entirely different countries to face incarceration in an entirely foreign legal system. Very uplifting.

I'm sure that these statement will help the over three dozen people who have been classified by the CIA as "erroneous renditions", or otherwise known as "mistaken identity" persons. Say for example Khaled Masri, the German citizen, who was wrongly mistaken for a terrorist and held for five months in a horrid detention center before being released by the CIA with a simple, "were sorry about the mistake Mr. Masri".

If you want to know more about exactly what it's like to be kidnapped by the CIA, check out this article about the "Anatomy of a US 'rendition' gone wrong". It includes such great descriptions as the introduction of tranquilizing drugs via anal insertion of a syringe device from men dressed head-to-toe in black.

Oh, and if you plan on arguing with me on the tone or premise of the article, please do yourself a favor and do not bring up the capture of Eichmann or the capture/killing of the Munich terrorists... you will be in for a real shlacking. Fair warning.

Oh come on, the PFLP-GC isn't done yet

Assuming that we are starting to build a readership here at the Casbah, I will assume that at least some of you remember the flurry of articles I posted about rockets being launched from southern Lebanon. Turns out, it was the Popular Front for the Liberation for Palestine General Command (PFLP-GC) who did the deed.

These cats at the PFLP-GC are essentially a secular nationalist band of Lebanese based Palestinians. They are armed by Syria, and as their launching of 3 katyusha rockets into Israel has affirmed, they are not fans of the Jewish state.

Word on the street is that the government in Beirut is trying to shut down these guys. The PFLP-GC has two training bases in southern Lebanon that are far away civilians. Not like I was there, but I'd bet that one of these sites was where the rockets came from last month. You think?

Another word on the street is that they really aren't going to be disarmed. Because they are a Syrian proxy, they will have the support the the Syrian bloc in Lebanon. Why you may ask? Well, I'd say that it's just in case Syria want's to strike a peace deal with the U.S.--or perhaps has other plans. If I have learned anything from following the Middle East it is that no one--and I mean no one--folds their cards early.

So in conclusion, I'm going to keep my eye on southern Lebanon. Unlike Hamas in last months battle with Israel, these dudes in Lebanon are seriously armed.

Iran's satellite launch causes an EMP concern

Those grown-ups at the Online Defense and Acquisition Journal had something interesting to say about that satellite launch in Iran the other day. If you ask me, this is just a piece of Iran's larger strategy: do anything to boost your deterrence. Take a look.

"[T]he Iranian technological success worries American and other countries national security experts because it places Iran much closer to being able to deliver a nuclear warhead against an enemy.

But there is another reason American military and national security officials are so worried: in at least two earlier ballistic missile launches, the Iranians launched in ways that “appear they were designed to optimize an EMP burst,” according to a Pentagon source with detailed knowledge of the Iranian’s efforts and of space technology.

EMP stands for electro-magnetic pulse and it is one byproduct of a nuclear blast. EMP destroys power sources, communication capabilities and would cripple or destroy the abilities of most satellites to function. A percentage of military communication and other satellites are hardened against EMP but the gravest effect would be on the ground, the space expert said. “As bad as the space part of this is, that is pretty bad, but the ground part of it is much, much worse. Effectively, whoever was subjected to an EMP burst would be shoved back to an agricultural state.” Few civilian assets such as power grids, generators, telephone systems and commercial communications satellites are hardened against EMP."

Why it's so hard to "win" in that little place they call Afghanistan

This post is dedicated to Franco, a most frequent stumbler into this crazy Casbah.

So let me restate: A brigade deployed to Afghanistan is twice as expensive to maintain as a brigade in Iraq. Resupply is the primary issue. But why may you ask? Here are two recent reasons why it is getting even harder to supply our troops with everything from food to ammo.

1. U.S. officials have recently been told by the President of Kyrgyzstan to close their valued air base in his country. I'll let you read the article, but in short: because they are facing a financial crisis and they need Russian loans/aid. Keep in mind that Putin doesn't like those Yankee bases on his front lawn.
(Could we add this to the list of unintended consequences from the Russian/Georgian War?)

2. As I alluded to in my last post, the Taliban is focused on disrupting the Pakistan-Afghan commerce route. Look at the map, there really isn't any other way... well, except Iran.

Expect the U.S. to try and do what it did after September 11 with Iran: a little under the table diplomacy to ease the tensions and fight those Sunni fundamentalists that all the kids seem to call "Taliban."

Also, isn't just incredible how Afghanistan somehow has the ability to profoundly stretch any power that has ever invaded? I'm impressed/horrified.

"How many lesbian prime ministers can the world take?"

This has nothing to do with the Middle East, but it's funny as hell--sorry Iceland.

And here is today's fun fact: A brigade deployed to Afghanistan is twice as expensive to maintain as a brigade in Iraq. Resupply, as you might have guessed, is the primary issue.

They blew the bridge? Better call those crazies in Tehran...

One thing that tickles me about the Taliban blowing up supply routes in Pakistan is that it will give the U.S. another reason to warm up to Iran. I mean look at the map, there aren't a lot of other options. Look for it.

(NOTE)
Iran just launched their first space satellite. Experts fear that this this an overture to a ballistic missile program.

(3D Animation of Iran's Space Launch)

I think those Persians get the non-nuclear deterrence award huh? geez.

Golden Triangle jealous of Afghanistan? Not at these prices...

There is a secret race going on between the "Golden Triangle" and Afghanistan that is worrying the UN, and rightly so. A recent UN report released Monday notes that a hike in opium prices in South-East Asia led to a slight increase in poppy cultivation in the Golden Triangle last year. "We have an increase in cultivation, which is worrying because it implies an intent to produce more," said Gary Lewis, the regional representative of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

Wait, what's the Golden Triangle you ask? Well, it happens to be located in an area that I specialize in...South-East Asia. The Golden Triangle consists of parts of Laos, Myanmar and Thailand and accounts for 5 per cent of the world's opium supply.

Land under poppy cultivation in this region has increased by nearly 1,000 hectares to 33,388 hectares, a trend that worried the United Nations as it has been promoting a multimillion-dollar crop-substitution programme in the Golden Triangle for more than a decade. "Opium prices are rising in the region, and that is an incentive for farmers to plant more," Lewis said.

The region was the world's largest producer of opium and heroin more than two decades ago but recently has been dwarfed by Afghanistan's output. So what, you say? Well, declining opium output in South-East Asia led to a segmentation of the world market, with addicts in the region paying three to 10 times more for opium than the going price in Afghanistan, the UN said. "We have seen an increase in prices in Myanmar from 2004 to 2008 with prices known to have doubled from 153 dollar per kilo to 300 per kilo, compared with the farm gate price of 97 dollars per kilo in Afghanistan," Leik Boonwaat from the U.N. noted.

Who cares if the addicts pay more or that the cultivation race is now in full swing? Again, the huge gap in prices fetched for heroin in South-East Asia and South Asia suggests a fragmentation of the drug market that might be exploited in the future.
"The upward trend of opium prices in South-East Asia is in sharp contrast to the falling prices on Afghanistan, the world's largest opium-producing country, suggesting that the markets of South-East Asia and south-west Asia may not be, as yet, closely linked," the UN report stated. But this may soon change if demand and prices continue moving upward, transforming the Golden Triangle into one big Axis of Evil cultivation that could rival...yep, Afghanistan. Additionally, all the opium produced in the region is done so under the control of insurgents who have signed informal ceasefires with the ruling junta.

So why does this matter for Afghanistan? Well, poppy cultivation and narcotics products in Afghanistan have begun dropping as the harvest of the menace has not shown any increase yet, a joint report of the Afghan Ministry for Counter-Narcotics and the United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (UNODC) released here Sunday said. Still new concerns of a poppy race are emerging as prices in the Golden Triangle increase. This could be the early signs of a new poppy race that cause production in Afghanistan to resume its upward trend.

Afghanistan for the last decade had topped poppy growing nations in supplying the raw material used in manufacturing heroin in the world, a huge source of income for insurgents in the seven provinces. Understanding the poppy trade and controlling it is a key factor in regaining control in Afghanistan. We must pay more attention to this trade and help Afghanistan get a handle on their addiction by stopping this opium race, or should I say marathon.

I'm freakin out man... take it easy...

B-man Obama has officially made me nervous. He has appointed two high-ranking Middle East diplomats and guess what--nether of them have ever been to the Middle East.

ABC News is confirming that super diplomat Christopher Hill will be appointed as the new ambassador to Iraq. Keep in mind that Hill has never formally studied the Middle East, nor does he even speak Arabic. (His Wikipedia says he's a seasoned tea drinker.)

The second appointment, the appointment that you've likely already heard of, is George J. Mitchell. Yes, he is the pragmatist who brokered the Good Friday agreement in Ireland, we know. But can this dude really just all of a sudden master the ways of the Semite'?

My concern with these two men is not their skill, but the fact that nobody really has time to give them a crash course in Middle Eastern culture. Like Obama, they are both very talented politicals', but the Middle East is a tortuously complex region that needs to be met with experience.

By the way, do you think were going to piss off the Koreans by taking Hill from them? (That was a joke.)

Where there's a will, there's a way

Sitting at my desk in San Diego I am: kicking my feet up, passively watching highlights from the Super Bowl, eating a chip or two and pondering the fact that I'm doing all this twenty miles from Mexico. (It's about the range one of Hezbollah's new "extended-range" katyusha rockets for all you diehards out there.) But the reason I bring this up--the real reason--is because I just read in a local paper that Israeli officials are headed to the sun drenched boulevards of San Diego for a little border training 101.

The San Ysidro border crossing is what separates San Diego from Tijuana. It is the busiest crossing in the world and is--at least in San Diego-- lined with a double fence that is over twenty feet tall. And because I cross it about 2-3 times a month to surf the uncrowned waves of Mex, I know just how easy it is to sneak things through.

In fact, everyone in San Diego knows how easy it is to sneak things through. This is why I'm baffled that the Israelis would want to hang out with some fat U.S. border guards who are agents of a failed policy.

Just last week this guy was telling me about this tunnel that came out in a construction site; the genius is that mostly Mexicans work construction jobs in southern California anyway, so what’s a few more leaving the job at the end of the day. Can you say tunnel smuggling?

I guess if there is any overall theme that I have learned from living in a border town it is that fences and so-called tight security seems to encourage a black market. In fact it's one of the few things that San Diego and Gaza have in common. So just remember you crazy Israeli border guards, where there's a will, there's a way.

Did someone say nation building???

You'll have to excuse me for this lengthy response, it truly belongs in the comments section of the last post. But the topic of nation building is too important to be left on the back alleys of the Casbah.

This whole debacle started when I suggested that the Army shouldn't be burdened with the task of nation building. In large, I said that Army has not the training or the mindset to help war-torn nations form technocratic governments. But because the U.S. lacks an institution for this task--as does the UN--politicians have handed nation building to the Army.

In my last post, "The Sons of Iraq.. I mean Afghanistan" The Rooster brought up a good point in the comments section: "In July 2004 the State Department opened the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization (S/CRS). Its official mandate is to 'help stabilize and reconstruct societies in transition from conflict or civil strife, so they can reach a sustainable path toward peace, democracy and a market economy.'” And as The Rooster so astutely noted, the S/CRS was allowed to fail.

This takes us to the “other” contemporary model for nation building. Remember Paul Bremer? He was the notoriously incompetent Bush appointee who was in charge of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Iraq. Generally speaking, one of the problems with "political nation builders" is that they often get the job because of their connections, not because of there time in the field. Bremer had never visited Iraq, nor did he speak Arabic. The list goes on...

Retired CPA officer, Rory Stewart, served as a provincial governor in southern Iraq. Stewart recalls in his book, The Prince of the Marshes, that the CPA felt like an awkward chain of command. In theory, Stewart was in charge of the politics of his province, while military mission was to "back the CPA." But has Stewart explains, if the local Iraqis and the Generals in charge chose to ignore him, there was little he could do.

So here we have two tested--yet largely thought to have failed--avenues for civilian nation building. And while I am not bold enough to profess that I have the answer to why both of these examples have faced such hardship, I can give a few reasons why it is still worth working to develop a civilian institution for nation building.

1. Many solders in the Army are not experienced in dealing with foreign cultures. They are trained to kill or do paper work. Nation building is a job that requires people who have dedicated their lives to economy and local customs.

2. This will be the century of small wars. This means that copious amounts conventional firepower will be traded for intelligence, counterinsurgency and wining the so-called hearts and minds. This cannot be done without a civilian team whose sole focus is restoring services of local government.

3. Political appointments are only as good as the people you appoint. While it's hard to rule out this strategy when no such nation building institution exists, appointing a person like Bremer can and certainly has had tremendous consequences.

4. The State Department seems like the natural home for such an institution. But it comes down to will. Right now the American public is facing the worst recession since The Recession. How many American taxpayers are really willing to fund schools in Khost Afghanistan when their own child's school is in disrepair? The U.S. must set realistic goals for what it wants to do.

5. As noted, the S/CRS failed because we let it. So the U.S. is at a crossroads: either start to invest in a civilian team of nation builders, or stop getting into situations in witch we need them. And not to alienate the military wing of the readership, but wouldn't it be a good idea to trade one of those obsolete and expensive programs... say the B52 bomber, for a team of 21 century nation builders?

Fortunately for me, these decisions are not mine to make.