Next item(drafted Oct 06),supported by varied Ottawans, is listed often as very broad issues are involved.

Christopher Spencer REASONS WHY ALL SOCIETIES ON EARTH MUST COOPERATE - IN TERMS OF BOTH THEIR WEALTH AND KNOWLEDGE - IN ORDER TO SURVIVE:-Brief paragraphs first identify some genuine and trans-species (but not simply idealistic) physical and emotional human traditions, confrontations, disasters, or prospects that raise globally-relevant threats. These are followed by a few relatively cheap and realistic, but world-wide and trans-human, policies. The challenges reflect the already serious - and often inter-related - concerns of everyone, everywhere: all human beings now face “global” threats in terms of: (a) mobile, unprecedented inter-human violence; (b) widespread, potentially global, mis-health; (c) dangers generated to the earth on which all survive.

(1) All the wealthier societies on the planet now possess grand and growing assets of both physical goods - far beyond essential human needs - and rapidly-expanding scientific/technical/economic knowledge - enough to create/improve their comfort and health. It now appears possible, and universally profitable in terms of generating the good trade and health of all, to share such quantities of global assets with all who lack them, so all groups could fully address painful and globally-destabilizing needs. Even if competition were the pure motivation of large advanced companies, they would develop globally.

(2) Yet throughout the history of human beings, and contrary to the philosophy of the world’s strongest religions, four social factors have been dominant among the whole species: human groups have been mainly small (families or villages); their members have been grossly ignorant about almost all other groups’ characteristics, strengths and problems; they have exhibited deep and general dislike and often fear towards all other groups; and, above all, have felt no sense of responsibility for them. Violence against, or at least selfishness towards, other groups has been chronic - but is suddenly not beneficial.

(3) Now, for the first time in human history, the entire planet is massively/increasingly interdependent, not simply in terms of ‘globalization’ trade, but also regarding enormous travels/transfers of humans, goods and bacteria between societies. We are also now living in unprecedented planetwide situations where basic global knowledge is both vast and expanding - often via TV/Internet/phones in even isolated villages. All human beings, however rich/poor, educated/formally ignorant, global travellers/physically fixed, are potentially aware of other groups with greater/other power or assets - and/or apparent harm or nonrelationship - in their own societies or another. Any group can feel independent/hurt/frustrated/ opinioned toward another, physically or emotionally. Nature/scale of interdependence: widely unknown.

(4) An unprecedented but expanding global fact is that ills, ranging from the mildly-harmful to the multi-fatal, can now easily be transferred via weapons, explosives, poisons, virus, serious misuse of nature. The deliberate, unknown or accidental transfer of critical action to virtually anywhere else on earth, by land, sea or air - could in future be, deliberately or otherwise, generated or passed by groups or individuals that may or may not wish to inflict some ‘pain’ on others. Victims of such action/accident can be in or from any society at all, and can hurt any type or groups of humans, animals, machines, transport, buildings, towns or key liquids/gases/foods/ medicines/power-sources etc. The effects of deliberate or accidental “spreads” or organized action range from minor diseases to mass murders.

(5) Any group will ultimately be responsible for “using” any of a variety of existing or developable actions against/in any society on earth. Hence an essential way to reduce the world-wide threat - apart from easing sharp and dangerous ill-feelings - must involve help in reducing serious/perceived pain/poverty/ (potential)disease/global misuse. It would also involve obtaining - through cooperative intelligence/law among all regimes everywhere - advance information about relevant threats -since any/all societies may somehow be threatened. But the most defensive and selfishly-beneficial means of easing global threats is for the wealthier/more informed to provide the funds/goods/skills necessary to accelerate equity - by both offering and obtaining relevant knowledge. Richer societies would no longer live safely while ignoring any others’ agonies - nor even suffer from giving assistance. Isolation is no longer an option - anywhere - for any rich and/or traditional society. We must all think, at least minimally, as global citizens.

The Economist 21 Oct 06 "Iraq: Between Staying and Going"(Edit.12); "Special Report: The Arab World: Coalitions of the Unwilling"(25-8); "Moderates and Rejectionists: The Palestinian Test Case"(28):-while the three items' emphases vary, the main problems stressed are interrelated. Editorial's own summary:"A search for new ideas should not blind Americans to the stark choice they face in Iraq". Highlights:"[They] long for a middle way. Why not split the country into Shia, Sunni and Kurdish statelets? Instead of going right now, why not set a timetable, to galvanise the warring parties to settle their differences before a free-for-all? One far-fetched idea...is said to be to withdraw 'over the horizon' and control Iraq from a neighbouring country. Another is... to be less fastidious about establishing democracy, and concentrate on smaller aim of establishing a government that works. [N]one of these...stands up to scrutiny... At end of day, the three-pronged policy US is already pursuing may very well be the best of a bad lot. Stated briefly, this consists of trying to keep the lid on the violence, build up Iraq's own security forces, and prod Iraqi politicians into making a power-sharing deal... If US willing to stay... for a few more years, success is still possible... Only honest alternative is indeed probably just to go, and let one side win... But just going would be a fantastic gamble, not only with US's global power/prestige, but also with other people's lives. Better, still, to stay". Special's own summary:"Resistance to the West, and rejection of Israel, are the pillars of a rapidly strengthening alliance in the world's most volatile region". This substantial essay offers the following introductory arguments: "Some [of Mideast's] imagined threats to the global order have been leftist and nationalist, some reactionary and religious, some radical and violent. Yet all have drawn their mobilising power from... urge to challenge the dominant perceived injustice of the day... Most reliable populist cry today remains 'resistance': [Sudan, Iraq, Hizbullah]. Clearly, although times have changed, this dynamic has not. What has changed is that the call to resist now inspires unprecedented enthusiasm, galvanizing many disparate political streams at once, secular and nationalist as well as Islamist. Religious element, boosted by the great revival that has swept Muslim societies across the globe, adds a scriptural drumbeat to the call. Lately the impulse to resist also strengthened by failing prestige of traditional countervailing forces - US, moderate governments in region, and liberal-minded minority of their citizens". These points are then well-amplified. It concludes:"[C]lear that a powerful sector of Islamist opinion is so fundamentally rejectionist that it will never change. Best the West can do may be to ensure does not push more moderates into that camp. Could start by remembering that people choose to 'resist' when they feel threatened". Palestinian item's thrust: "Pressures on Hamas build from both sides...In recent months, poor Palestinians have, not for first time, found themselves used as rope in tug-of-war between Mideast 'accomodationist' and 'rejectionist' governments. [Yet] split would truly render PA ungovernable and peace talks impossible. Greg Mortenson & David Oliver Relin Three Cups of Tea: One Man's Mission to Fight Terrorism and Build Nations... One School at a Time (New York: Viking 06):-a beautifully written (by Relin), and very popular book: (often-quoted) Mortenson's extraordinary gift of life to northernmost Pakistan and Afghanistan. As a poor but pure mountain climber in 1993 he nearly died in attempting to conquer K2, "world's deadliest peak" whose height is exceeded only by Everest. He survived through the warm hospitality of an isolated, poverty-stricken village in Karakorum, Himalaya. He found it had no school, almost no access to rest of Pakistan; so in extraordinary thanks Greg promised to return one day and build a school for their boys and girls. On return to US, he launched what gradually became"one of the most remarkable humanitarian campaigns of our time". As director of the Central Asia Institute, Greg has built 55 schools serving Pakistan and Afghanistan's poorest communities. "He provides not only hope to tens of thousands of children, but living proof that one passionately dedicated person truly can change the world". Economist 21 Oct 06"Nuclear-Weapons Proliferation: Going Critical, Defying the World"(69-70); "Sanctions: History Lessons"(70-1);"North Korea: Pinched Bellies"(52):-Nuclear item's own summary: "A big-power stand against North Korea and Iran? Or rivalry as usual?" Highlights:"North Korea and Iran, past partners in missile roguery, seem bent on testing world's anti-nuclear rules to destruction... Whether Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty(NPT) survives this combined assault depends on how big powers rise to challenge: by cooperating to press both regimes to abandon their nuclear exploits and uphold the rules, or by competing in the wider struggle for regional influence... China...has no wish to see Japan or South Korea frightened into going nuclear too, but North Korea may test credibility of US's deterrence pledge...[I]t calls new [UNSC] sanctions 'declaration of war'. Ms Rice's task: to win agreement from the neighbours on a sanctions regime 'unlike anything [North has] faced before'. Japan has banned ships...and halted trade/financial flows. But China wants to avoid economic collapse in North [which] would enable US to throw its weight about too much. [Yet] China is livid that Kim [Jong Il] brushed aside repeated warnings not to test... His nuclear antics have also upset South Korea's president,.. whose 'sunshine'policy towards North is in tatters...Traditional sanctions have their limits,..but UNSCresolution 1718 gives new backing to US-led Proliferation Security Initiative, posse of like-minded countries that share intelligence and intercept cargoes of suspected proliferators... North is dangerous, but isolated. An Iran with nuclear weapons...would be a 'game-changer'. Virulence of regime's revolutionary ardour, its role as 'central banker of terrorism' to organizations like Hamas and Hizbullah that preach and practise violence against Israel, and its ambition for dominance in the region and Islamic world, all make it imperative, from West's viewpoint, to stop Iran before it gets bomb. Sight of a nuclear-armed Shia Iran would probably encourage Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and elsewhere to want their own finger on a nuclear trigger... Sanctions are supposed to become steadily tougher if Iran carries on enriching... Helps Iran that, just as world gears up to enforce anti-nuclear rules, the rules may be changing. Spread of weapons of mass destruction is a clear threat to international peace and security. It remains to be seen whether tackling proliferation is something world's big powers are ready to put ahead of their own rivalries". Sanctions offers history of varied aims, effects and targets of past/continuing sanctions, both UN and US. Pinched covers fact: "Fresh sanctions on North Korea are not supposed to hurt its people, but may do[:] A nuclear capability may be toast of North's leaders, but blight on their poor countrymen's bellies... To feed itself, North needs 5.5m tonnes of grain/year. Cannot produce anything like this, even with bumper harvest last year... As if this not bad enough, 10 days after its offending missile tests, North suffered worst flooding in recent memory... To alleviate crisis, South said it would make flood relief an exception to its suspension of aid. But only half of promised 100,000 tonnes of grain had arrived before the nuclear test, whereupon South suspended the rest... Western powers seem unfussed by this shortage... Last year North imported over $1billion-worth of Chinese goods. New UN sanctions against it may change that... A barbed-wire fence going up along the border; China is taking no risks".Noah Feldman"Islam, Terror and the Second Nuclear Age"New York Times 29 Oct 06:-this is the leading article of the New York Times Magazine of this date, and runs to 18 pages when printed from the Internet. This time the author is identified as follows:"Noah Feldman, a contributing writer, is a law professor at New York University and adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations". Summarized extracts from the introductory section: "Today the nuclear game in [Mideast] has changed. When Arab League's SG... called for 'a Mideast free of nuclear weapons' this past May, it wasn't Israel that prompted his remarks. He was worried about Iran, whose self-declared ambition to become nuclear power has been steadily approaching realization. The anti-Israel statements of Iranian president.,. coupled with Iran's support for Hezbollah and Hamas, might lead you to think that Arab states would welcome Iran's nuclear program... But interests of Shiite non-Arab Iran do not always coincide with those of Arab leaders. A nuclear Iran... could potentially mean... a historic shift in the position of the long-subordinated Shiite minority relative to the power/prestige of the Sunni majority... Sunni Arab leaders...also seem worried that Iranians might actually use nuclear weapons if they got them. A nuclear attack on Israel would engulf the whole region. But that is not the only danger: Sunnis in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere fear that Iranians might just use a nuclear bomb against them... If Iran is going to get the bomb, its neighbours will have no choice but to keep up. North Korea, now protected by its own bomb, has threatened proliferation - and in the Mideast it would find a number of willing buyers... Given the increasing instability of the Mideast, nuclear proliferation there is more worrisome than almost anywhere else on earth. As nuclear technology spreads, terrorists will enjoy increasing odds of getting their hands on nuclear weapons... Bombing through an intermediary has its advantages: deniability is, after all, the name of the game for a government trying to avoid nuclear retaliation. [A]s more countries get the bomb, tracing the seller will become harder and harder, and the incentive to make a sale will increase". Much of item carefully discusses rationales used by/for Islamic killers of themselves, infidels, civilians, women and children”; Economist 25 Nov 06"The Future of NATO: The Test in Afghanistan"(Edit.12); "Special Report: NATO's Future: Predictions of its Death Were Premature"(24-6):-official summary of Editorial:"Thanks to some shortsighted European politicians, the world's foremost military alliance is at risk". Highlights: "[W]ith demise of Soviet communism,.. alliance has grown bigger,.. is busier than it ever was during cold war [and] faces many tricky questions about the future... NATO's leaders must find unity of purpose on one issue above all others: overcoming the weaknesses of mission in Afghanistan [where] for first time engaged in bloody ground combat. Task made even harder by two failures[:] to modernize... armies for expeditionary operations [or] to send soldiers... to dangerous regions where most needed. Although have 2.4m men under arms, NATO's European members...struggled to meet requests for extra 2,200... British and Dutch have put troops at sharp end in southern Afghanistan, heartland of Taliban[, while] Canadians...spearheaded NATO's assault on entrenched Taliban fighters. [But] too many others... are working in safer areas and refused to be deployed as NATO commander would like... It is difficult for any government to expose soldiers to danger in far-away lands; harder still to watch one's soldiers die while allies look the other way. No excuse for such half-heartedness. In Afghanistan, as distinct from Iraq, there should be no quarrel about the lawfulness of the mission. NATO is in the country under a UN mandate, operating in defence and at the behest of an elected government. The stakes are high: failure would not only bring back the Taliban and al-Qaeda, but embolden jihadists around the world. Military alliance that stretches across Atlantic will not always be able to unify around such a clear cause... NATO and EU do not need to see each other as competitors... Nor should a stronger NATO mean a weaker role for UN... May even be a case for UN one day to recruit military forces of its own, capable of intervening in conflicts under a UN mandate. [Now] NATO remains world's foremost military alliance. [Members] may no longer face one common enemy, but they face common dangers, including terrorism, Islamic radicalism, increasingly troublesome Russia, Iran nuclear ambitions and instability in Mideast. [A]ll the more reason not to fail the test in Afghanistan"; Economist 09 Dec 06“Lebanon: A Battle for the Nation’s Heart”(51-2):-official summary:“Outcome of bitter struggle in streets of capital could affect balance of power in wider region”. Highlights: “Lebanon not moving. It is stuck. Talks between faction leaders... collapsed last month. Since then, fractures between religious sects, divided political loyalties and clashing understandings of Lebanon’s own history/identity widened dangerously fast... Huge crowds gather nightly for [PM Siniora’s] downfall, even as he receives endless delegations of supportive dignitaries. [Showdown] shows no sign of ending soon. Protesters... insist vigil will not end until PM... appoints enough opposition ministers to grant them effective veto. Government... has offered bigger share of posts [but] remains adamant this must fall short of veto. Siniora said to have accepted proposal to up number of cabinet posts from 24 to 30, giving 9 or 10 to Hizbullah-led opposition, 19 to anti-Syrian coalition and couple to neutrals. Not enough said Hizbullah. Siniora’s lot [also raise issues of: tribunal to look into murder of ex-PM Hariri; replacement of pro-Syrian president.] In government’s view, demonstrations subverting democracy [with] aim not so much to achieve sectarian balance as to bring Lebanon back into orbit of Syria and Iran [and] renew ‘resistance’ against Israel. Nawaf Musawi [of] Hizbullah counters that government’s acceptance of UN troops and foreign aid is whittling away sovereignty... Opposition appears stronger[:] demonstrations of more than 1m[, with] Hizbullah [lending] formidable organizing skills [plus] menace of its unrivalled guerrilla force. Siniora not bereft[:] Western powers/Sunni Arab allies[;] strong support from anti-Syrian Christian factions [plus] near-unanimous backing from Sunni/Druze minorities... In fact, striking symmetry between sides[: e]ach accuses other of being stooge of foreign powers, of stoking sectarian rivalry and of ‘trading in blood of martyrs’... Both sides claim majority backing and both see the clash as defining moment for Lebanon - perhaps even for the wider region. Conservative Arab governments... are worried[: if] Siniora forced out,.. angry Sunni Arab fears of a new ‘Shia arc’...will grow”; Economist 16 Dec 06"Kurdistan: Can the Americans Satisfy Both Turks and Kurds?"(43-4):-official summary:"As tension rises between Turkish government and Kurds in Turkey and Iraq, Americans are in quandary". Highlights:"Iraqi Kurds enjoy extreme autonomy in what is now the only stable part of Iraq ...Turks, for their part, increasingly angered by renewal of attacks in Turkey by guerrillas of the home-grown Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) [and] have never liked idea of an autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan, seeing it as a magnet for Kurdish nationalism in the region - especially in Turkey... Growing chance Turkish army will, perhaps next spring, invade northern Iraq in effort to clobber PKK in its safe haven just inside Iraq [see full item:"Turkish Kurds in Iraq: Lonesome Rebels"(44)]. Iraqi Kurds might then feel obliged to help their ethnic kinsmen fight back. [U]nclear what US would do... Iraqi Kurds' biggest worry now is that US wobble might hasten the feared Turkish invasion... Iraq's 4-5m Kurds fear Turks' true aim would be to ruin their successful experiment in self-rule, which has been inspiring Turkey's own restive Kurds, some 14m strong... US would be loth to let the Iraqi Kurds help their PKK kinsmen fight back, since Turkey is a cherished NATO ally. [C]onfident Iraqi Kurds... now say they will no longer kill fellow Kurds [and] instead strengthening links with them... US been telling Turks to stay out of Iraq[, and Turks had hoped] US would deal with PKK[, but US] failure to do so is perhaps biggest cause of rampant anti-US feeling in Turkey. [Turkish PM warned Bush by phone] that he might be unable to restrain his hawkish generals [against PKK, whose] attacks went on despite its proclaimed ceasefire in Sep. One big reason for Turkish restraint against PKK has been repeated warnings from EU, [b]ut that restraint may weaken as EU... continues to snub Turkey... If Turkish forces do invade Iraq, US response will depend largely on scope/scale... Plainly in US interest to cut deal between Turks and Kurds, including to disarm PKK for good, in return for wider cultural/political rights for Kurds in Turkey. Conceivably, Turkey might then be persuaded to accept ...an autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan... But pessimists... say the Turks...will never tolerate Kurdish independence... If it comes to a stark choice, it is hard to say which way US would tilt".Related:"Turkey and Europe: The Blackballers' Club"(Edit.12-3);"[US] and Iraq: The War Over the War"(29);"Iraq: How Dare You[, US]"(45);"Charlemagne: Turkey and Enlargement"(53); Economist 13 Jan 07"Israel and the Jews: Diaspora Blues"(Edit.14-5); "Israel and the Jews: Second Thoughts About the Promised Land"(53-6):-Editorial's official summary:-"Jews around the world should join the debate about Israel, not just defend whatever it does". Highlights: "Early settlers came for a variety of reasons:.. to escape stifling constraints of religious dogma;.. hasten the coming of Messiah;.. as anti-Semitism grew, [gain] a safe haven; after the Holocaust, save Jewish lives. Soon another role: being a potential Israeli citizen became one of the anchor points of what it means to be a Jew. Since [its establishment,] Jews have continued debating/reshaping relationships to country. Secular Jews found Israeliness a handy substitute for religious observance. Some religious Jews revived... messianic Zionism, holding that to settle in all biblical land... is a God-given duty. To...ultra-Orthodox, state should [be] subsidising Jewish learning/maintaining piety... Meanwhile, diaspora Jews have developed an even more eclectic mix of Jewish culture and attitudes to Zionism(see 53-6),partly because... growing number neither feel comfortable with always standing up for Israel, nor... invoke Israel in defining Jewish[ness]. Yet big Jewish diaspora institutions not caught up[, but] still supporting [Israel] in times of crisis/critics. [True especially of] lobby groups in US, formed to influence foreign policy in Israel's favour... Their attitude persists [in suggesting Israel's] critics are anti-Semites[, and they] have an unholy alliance with evangelical Christian groups. This knee-jerk defensiveness of Israel does not help Jewish diaspora in keeping young Jews from leaving the faith [and] many are simply drifting away. [Also,] it locks diaspora Jews out of the fateful/often bitter debates that rage inside Israel itself[, where] interests have been diverging. [Israelis] disagree on the most basic questions: borders, who is a Jew, role of religion, status of non-Jews... Israeli Jews swim in a sea of conflicting ideas about who they should be... Helping Israel should no longer mean defending it uncritically. [D]iaspora institutions should...encourage lively debate about Israeli politics[,] allowing an Israel at peace to return to its original vocation of providing a safe and democratic haven for the world's Jews. Other items in this issue offer information on Israeli attitudes towards/from some vital Mideasterners (titles/pages plus official summaries): "Israel and Iran: How Imminent Or Real a Threat?"(43):-"Israelis vary in their views of Iranian menace"; "Obituary: Teddy Kollek"(78):-"Theodor('Teddy')Kollek, mayor of Jerusalem, died on 02 Jan 07, aged 95"; Economist 13 Jan 07"Chinese Foreign Policy: A Quintet, Anyone?" (37-8):-complements 06Jan"China: Coming Over the Horizon" item on trends in global role of a developing superpower. Official summary: "China making it clear it wants a bigger role in Mideast". Highlights:"[I]n Mideast, China is on good terms with everyone [and its] non-government seminar [of] former senior Israeli and Palestinian officials reached consensus... China should increase its influence in Mideast, and join 'Quartet'... pursuing peace efforts... To all sides, it still has much to offer. To oil-export[ers, it is] big customer/investor[; to Iran and Syria[, its] veto power at UN and shared misgivings about US make it a welcome friend. Refreshingly, China asks no questions about democracy. Israel... courts China['s] potential influence[, knowing they] share distaste for Islamic militancy [and are important military industry producers/markets]. US worries China has been hesitant to put pressure on Iran[, its] third-biggest supplier of oil, and Sudan[, where] China has invested hugely in oil. China sees advantages for itself in any diminution of US power[;] US preoccupation in Iraq strengthens China's hand in its dealings with Taiwan. In both Sudan and Iran, China has often balked at US-led initiatives in UN that could be seen as legitimising strong-arm tactics against countries deviating from international norms. China fear[ed] it might be next[, but] has recently edged closer to US position... Despite disdain for US-led invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan,.. it has not attempted to frustrate US operations[,] has pledged more than $300m for Afghan reconstruction, begun debt-[cancel] negotiations with Iraq[ and, s]ince 1990s, far more sympathetic to US concerns about weapons proliferation. China worries about its dependence on US military might for the security of its oil shipments from Mideast [(see 06 Jan)] so has little choice but to support efforts to stabilise the region. It may not agree with US tactics, but will share the same broad objective". In same issue, these three items (their titles/pages plus their official summaries) discuss China's equally-vital international financial/trade relations: "Chinese Business: Truth From Facts"(Edit.13-4):-"The best test of China's new accounting standards: a few public disasters"; "Chinese Accounting: Cultural Revolution"(63-4):-"New accounting rules have replaced the Little Red Book [by Mao] as China's guide to self-improvement. Can the state handle the truth?"; "Briefing: The Problem With Made in China"(68-70):-"China is choking on its success at attracting the world's factories. That has handed its Asian neighbours a big opportunity"; Economist 24 Feb 07"India and Pakistan: Staying on Track"(Edit.18-9); "Terrorism in India: Murder on the Friendship Express"(47-8); "Pakistan: Musharraf Shows His Hand"(48-52):-Editorial‛s official summary:"United in anger at another atrocity, India and Pakistan should speed up their peace process". Highlights: "Every few months a bombing... in India [is] killing random unfortunates. [A]ttacks usually blamed on militant groups fighting Indian rule in part of divided Kashmir [and] set back painstaking progress.,. ending rancorous, bloody feud that has scarred 60 years since independence/partition. So far, however, none has succeeded in scuppering the 3-year-old peace process.[Latest bombing, of a train, is described in "Terrorism..." which notes:"Pakistan also seen more terrorism than usual.,. probably organised by the same militants, or by their Islamist allies".] Both countries condemned the outrage [and] insisted the peace progress was intact... Both should be urged to go further [and] make a real effort to bring it to a successful conclusion [- the] fanatics have political, religious and even financial interests in keeping [them] at odds. It would be easier to identify the culprits if India and Pakistan were to share intelligence more fully. [I]t is time to move from interminable process to possible outcome. [A]s each outrage proves, present dispensation is intolerable. [T]he outlines of a settlement acceptable to both sides are emerging. It would involve ‛softer‛ border, some cooperative institutions, greater autonomy for both bits of Kashmir and a gradual withdrawal of Indian soldiers from Kashmir as violence decreases... Such might not bring an immediate/ perpetual end to bombings, but it would dispel the murk of ambiguity where terrorism thrives... pointlessly."Economist 17 Mar 07"Lexington: The American-Jewish Lobby"(38):-official summary : "These are both the best of times and the worst of times for the... lobby". Highlights: "The American Israel Public Affairs Committee(AIPAC)[has] awesome power/unnerving efficiency... Congress has more Jewish members than ever before: 30 in House; 13 in Senate. Both parties are competing...to be ‛soundest‛ on Israel. About two-thirds [in US] hold a favourable view of the place. Yet... feel a bit nervous, too. Iraq debacle has produced a fierce backlash against pro-war hawks, of which AIPAC was certainly one. Also... awkward questions about US‛s alliance with Israel [and] a growing number of people want to push against AIPAC... Some of the most determined are Arab-Americans, who been growing in numbers/influence for years - probably about 3.5m of them [and] a growing political force... But so far their performance has been unimpressive. Arab-Americans are badly split between Christians(63%) and Muslims(24%). Also been late in taking to politics. AIPAC‛s ace is idea that it represents Jewish interests in a country generally philo-Semitic. But liberal Jewish groups... persuad[ed] Congress to water down a particularly uncompromising bit of legislation... which would have prevented any US contact with Palestinian leadership... A liberal version of AIPAC... has yet to materialise[, but] most Jews are fairly left-wing... An even bigger threat to AIPAC [is that] serious people... ask hard questions about US‛s relationship with Israel. [F]ormer security adviser worries that US is seen in Mideast as ‛acting increasingly on behalf of Israel‛... The biggest challenge facing AIPAC is how to deal with this changing climate... US needs an open debate about its role in Mideast"; Economist 24 Mar 07"Briefing: Iraq: Mugged By Reality"(29-31);"The Iraq War: Collateral[US] Damage"(33-4):-"What went wrong? [M]ost popular answer of US neoconservatives who argued loudest for the war is that it was a good idea badly executed... [Some] called Bush national-security team ‛among the most incompetent‛... Others also blame Iraqis for inability to accept US gift of freedom. That excuse too convenient[;] can be no denying project was bungled from the start. Western intelligence failed to discover Saddam had destroyed all his WMD - main rationale for war. However, incompetence beyond this: war launched by divided administration [with] no settled notion of how to run Iraq after conquest. Rumsfeld... sent too few and they did nothing to prevent looters. US plans for Iraq‛s political transition were also rudimentary, to extent they existed at all... State Dept. organized a pre-invasion Future of Iraq project, but Pentagon declined to adopt its ideas. [Under-staffed, ad hoc US body] received no intelligible instructions from Washington, and baffled the liberated Iraqis [who] could not [run] state whose institutions had collapsed. [Even the replaced US ‛viceroy‛] produced big mistakes[:] disbanded the Iraqi army and put tens of thousands of resentful, jobless men on the streets[;] turfed thousands of Baath Party members out of bureaucracy, depriving many ministries of their only trained staff. In the end, political transition of sorts on advice of UN [and] 2005 year of elections... Unfortunately,.. government cannot govern[, as] Iraqis voted along ethnic lines and produced impasse... Sunnis feel locked out of new Iraq dominated by Shias[ - themselves] divided... Main reason for government‛s inability to govern, however, is that it cannot stem a tidal wave of criminal and political violence [-] Baghdad and central Iraq in multiple conflicts. Many Sunnis have taken up arms against the new Shia-dominated order[;] al-Qaeda is running jihad against US and Shias alike, provoking a torrent of revenge killings[;] in places, Shia militias also attack US soldiers. Prevalence of violence and absence of law erodes the legitimacy of the elected government and makes it almost impossible to rebuild an economy that even before the war had been prostrated by a dozen years of UN sanctions... Only when the killing declines will Iraq‛s new government be able to buttress its legitimacy, suck support away from the militias, and rebuild the economy... Iraq‛s cabinet agreed last month on how to share oil revenues between the regions. [B]ut it is uncertain whether the politicians who claim to speak for the Sunnis are close enough even in the event of a political settlement. [T]ime may show that the democratic structure US worked so hard to install can neither run Iraq nor reconcile its warring clans". All remainder of Briefing and the entire "Collateral" item discuss the relevant US national policies/effects; Economist 28 Apr 07"The United States in the Middle East: Weakness - Or a New Realism?" (51-2):-official summary:"Why US is having to adjust policies in region". Highlights:"[T]hree-quarters of Iraqis think US plays 'negative role' in their country; most want US troops to go [see "Iraq: A Row Over a Wall"(51)]. [S]trengthening perception in Mideast of [US] administration at bay. [O]pinion survey in four Muslim countries - Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, Indonesia - shows 79% of respondents believe US aims to divide and weaken Muslim world. Big majorities want US troops out of all Muslim [-] in Egypt, 91% endorse attacks on US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan ["Afghanistan: The Arrival at Last of Party Politics"(46)]. [This]reflected in government behaviour [:] exasperation with US/sense that Iraq debacle has sapped its will, [thus] stiffening resistance to US policies and emboldening others [-] Iran‛s ambitions/Sudan‛s intransigence/Arab-Israeli conflict/questioning democratic reform. [P]ressure is [more] on Bush to moderate own policies... US has rejected dealings with states/parties it considers hostile. But Bush agreed [to] talk directly to Iran [since] cannot be ignored [over] Iraq. US still chastises Syria [but]probably matter of time before... comes back from isolation... US-led boycott has failed to dislodge [Palestine regime] led by Hamas,.. prompting Saudi Arabia to [sponsor] a national-unity government that diluted Hamas's control but preserved its rejectionist stand towards Israel. US officials now re-engaged with Palestinian president [and] strongly endorsed relaunch [of Arab peace initiative]. Even US policy towards Sudan has shifted [:]deal for a far smaller [peacekeeping force in Darfur] under 'hybrid' UN-African Union command... Perhaps plainest shift is over democratic reform[:] recent political tide appears to have flowed back against [it]. Syria['s] budding reform movement floundering[, and many] have reacted passively to their government's latest crackdown. Egypt's government appears almost to relish... just to show it can fend off US scolding. Reforms in arch-autocratic Saudi Arabia have stalled completely, with no audible protest from Wshdc. Perhaps more serious... is the rumbling that can be heard in regional allies. Turkey has rarely found itself at such cross-purposes with US... Over Iraq it finds itself more in tune with Iran and Syria, due to worries about... Kurdish minority. Egypt and Jordan have close military ties to US too, but must constantly parry sniping from such exuberantly anti-US opponents as Muslim Brotherhood. Yet US military footprint in region remains huge. For Persian Gulf monarchies it is vital protector. US has close military ties to Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, UAE, and strongly beefing up military cooperation with array of countries in the Sahelian belt in their war against Islamist terrorism. Egypt, Jordan and Israel still bank on US aid, and stand as symbols that rewards of friendship with US [alone] can be [so] large. Do shifts in US policy reveal weakness, flexibility or renewed realism? Condoleezza Rice may be adopting less abrasive policies in region. 'They've come to realise that the multilateral approach can be more effective', says an Arab ambassador"; Economist 28 Apr 07"Capital Punishment: Edging Out of Fashion"(69-70):-official summary: "More and more countries have doubts about death penalty". Highlights:"[C]ruelly administered, or botched, executions are not confined to developing countries, or to lands that follow... traditional Islamic punishment... 'At least' 1,591 executions were carried out worldwide 2006, well down on 2005 but 40% higher than 2003. [N]umber of countries that carry out executions... has fallen steadily from 40 a decade ago to just 25 last year. Since 1985, 55 countries have ended the death penalty or, having already limited it to 'extraordinary' crimes,.. have now banned it outright. During the same period, only four reintroduced death penalty[:] Nepal/Philippines have since abolished it again, and in Gambia/Papua New Guinea, no executions. [In all,] 89 countries have abolished death penalty for all crimes, another ten for all but exceptional crimes, and a further 30 are abolitionist in practice. [UN] has called for complete abolition of death penalty. In Europe, where abolition is a condition of membership of both EU and 46-nation Council of Europe (Russia is member), Belarus is only country that still uses it. In Africa, only four carried out death penalty 2006, and in Americas, US is only country to have executed anybody since 2003. Only Asia and Mideast seem largely untouched by global movement away from death penalty. Even China [in 2006 death sentences may be near 8,000] might be having second thoughts [Olympics]. Six countries-China/Iran/Pakistan/Iraq/Sudan/US- accounted for 90%+ of 2006 known executions. Methods of execution vary widely [stoning/stabbing/beheading/electrocution/shooting/hanging/ lethal injection]. Injection is now the preferred method in all but one of 38 [US] states that retain death penalty... US is one of very few democracies [along with Japan/India/South Korea/Taiwan] still to have death penalty"; Economist 19 May 07"Pakistan: Time to Cut a Deal"(Edit.10):-official sum:"General Pervez Musharraf needs allies. Pakistan needs democracy. Enter Benazir Bhutto?" Highlights:"[This] key ally in fight against terrorism is facing the first large-scale popular protests since he grabbed power. [S]laughter of around 40 in Karachi 12-13 May was country‛s worst non-sectarian political violence in decades [and it] looks more unstable than ever". Analysis of a globally-relevant crisis in a state both complicated and strategically-located, offers the reasons/implications:"Briefing: Pakistan: A General State of Disarray"(23-5):-official sum:"A slaughter in Karachi/vengeful judge are signs... Musharraf is struggling to remain in power". Editorial continues:"A small war with al-Qaeda supporters along border with Afghanistan is fueling a wave of jihadist terrorism. In Islamabad, a hardline mosque staffed by armed zealots is defying government. Indeed, general's efforts to fight these forces, and his pro-US stance, are part of reason so unpopular. But a panicky clampdown not solve problems. Killing in Karachi carried out by weak [Musharraf coalition]. Many victims protested against his attempt to sack head of Supreme Court[, including] Pakistan's two mainstream parties, led by exiled former PMs, Benazir Bhutto/Nawaz Sharif. Violence was intolerable [and] unlikely to succeed[:] democracy has been rekindled... Combating militancy... requires more than hunting down militants[:] democratic institutions needed to address the defections terrorism feeds upon. [Musharraf understands this, yet] his efforts at controlled democracy have failed. [E]lections alone do not add up to 'real democracy'[, but] nor does autocrat. [E]lection is due this year which Musharraf looks determined to survive[: be] re-elected president in last days of current parliament. Common sense/constitution dictate he should instead seek election from next one[, so] legal challenges ahead. [That's]why he wants to see back of [the judge. He] can do better than this[: in aligning with US against extremism, and in efforts to make peace with India, he has shown foresight/readiness to take right risks. He needs to do the same to broaden his political support. Ms Bhutto, who leads biggest/most liberal party, thought to have offered to support his reform agenda/re-election. Price would be to escape corruption charges that hang over her, allowing return. She also demands fair election, and that general keep to constitution/shed uniform. [Deal looks least-bad option: Bhutto's demands are admirable for country. Pakistan needs genuine democracy, not imitation. [A]lso needs continuity/ stability army man able to provide... If general fears he would lose most from such cooperation, he is wrong. Without greater legitimacy, opposition will grow and his authority will diminish"; Economist 26 May 07"Lebanon: The Cauldron May Bubble Over Again"(47-8):-official sum:-"The latest outbreak of violence in northern Lebanon menaces the whole region". Highlights:-"Fighting between Lebanese army and radical Islamists entrenched in a Palestine refugee camp near Tripoli. [M]any of camp's 30,000 residents fled[, but] militants inside declared a fight to the death [-] a radical jihadist faction known as Fatah al-Islam... Though small/marginal, [it] has been linked to at least one of sporadic bomb attacks that have hit Christian areas... Violence comes at difficult time for Lebanon, shaken by devastating war with Israel last summer, [and] Western-backed government locked in stand-off against pro-Syrian coalition led by Hizbullah [demanding] veto-wielding share of cabinet. Though fighting in north pits a widely disparaged Sunni Muslim group against a national army.,. many Lebanese view clash through prism of this wider political contest. [O]fficials charge Syria is sowing such strife to regain its power-broking role [or] block [UNSC-involved] tribunal to try suspects in a string of political murders[, but] adamantly denies any link. [M]ost of Lebanon's Palestinian camps [long] controlled by Syrian military intelligence[, which] also known to have sponsored jihadist groups - against US in Iraq. Leader of Fatah al-Islam, whose ideology close to al-Qaeda's, [was ] in Syria before surfacing in Lebanon last year. [G]roup has recruited not only among Palestinian refugees [there], but also among international jihadists... When violence erupted, Palestinian factions united with Lebanon's rival parties, including Hizbullah, in rare unanimous condemnation of Fatah al-Islam as dangerous/alien force, [although] anxiety grew over danger to civilians [and] shelling looked indiscriminate... Some [refugees] claim gunmen holding the camp hostage[, while] most Lebanese solidly back their army, and government bolstered by support from Arab League/US... Whatever outcome, fighting is also reminder that Lebanon - and rest of world - should not let country's wretched Palestinian camps continue to fester as ghettos of misery/extremism which stoke up anger across region"; Economist 02 Jun 07"Palestinians in Lebanon: A History of the Hapless"(46):-official sum:"Long the unluckiest of the lot". Highlights:-"Lebanon [has] 12 Palestinian camps [-] dense warrens of breeze-block shanties. Three were flattened in the civil war [and all] residents were made refugees twice. [Two camps were laid waste; others ravaged in] attacks by everyone... Nahr al-Bared was only camp spared in those dark times; it prospered afterwards... Lebanese army siege of radical jihadist cult [there] has left at least 80 dead... One ingredient [for violence] is despair of Lebanon's 420,000 Palestinians. Not only has hope of returning to Palestine faded; living conditions have deteriorated too. The 4m or so UN-registered Palestinian refugees elsewhere in the diaspora - Jordan, Syria, Israeli-controlled territories - hardly been happy, but treatment in Lebanon notably harsh. Local laws give Lebanon's Palestinians a raw deal, reflecting fears assimilating them could upset [its] sectarian balance... Recent developments increase the poverty imposed[, and] UNRWA... stretched because of chaos in Gaza strip/West Bank. As one result, class sizes in schools UNRWA runs in Lebanon have soared. Troubles also slashed spending by...agencies that once...supported camps; foreign donors...diverted towards widespread destruction by Israeli bombing... Camps have grown more lawless[: initially were under PLO deal; then power vacuum in mid-80s, followed in 90s by Syrian military intelligence... Syrian withdrawal in 2005... left many camps with no effective administration[, so] grew more divided than ever[: split between Hamas-Fatah in Palestine,] exacerbated... by emergence of more extreme factions. [Y]ouths turned to pan-Islamist fervour. Many naturally turned to Nahr al-Bared [-] just outside Tripoli,.. a hotbed of Islamist radicals. Joined by hundreds of militants, very few of them Palestinian, the radical cult Fatah al-Islam has vowed to fight here to the death"; Economist 23 Jun 07"The Arab Predicament: Martyrs or Traitors"(Edit.15)[official sum after each title]"A choice the West must be careful not to force on the people of the Middle East";"The Palestinians: June Amazed Them"(30-2):"From now on, the Palestinians are not themselves"; "Reactions in the Region and Beyond: Emotions Not Politics"(32):"The Palestinians' chances of avoiding the worst depend partly on others"; [plus in previous issue 16 Jun 07:]"Palestine and Israel: As Bleak As It Gets"(16-8):"A civil war among Palestinians is bad for the Israelis too";"The Palestinians: War Between Brothers"(53):"The Palestinians' two main groups are on the verge of a struggle that could split the two parts of a putative Palestinian state in half":-Editorial's highlights:-"[S]cenes from Gaza have shocked Arabs far beyond Palestine... In one brutal week Hamas's swift destruction of Arafat's Fatah movement in Gaza summed up a change that is spreading across a broad swathe of Mideast. Secular nationalism... is coming to look like the weak force and radical Islam like the strong force. This poses huge danger... Western policy in danger of strengthening the wrong side by making Islamists looks like martyrs and secularists like traitors. [US President Bush's]hope is that if Gaza fails under Hamas while the West Bank prospers under Fatah, Palestinian opinion will eventually swing back behind the moderates. Can such a plan possibly work? [A]ssumption of many Muslims that a pro-US leader must in some way be a traitor to the cause extends beyond the Arab world[, while] US's allies cannot stop the martyrs from calling them traitors. US has made itself deeply unpopular in the Islamic world by invading Iraq and standing by Israel. This is bound to taint any Muslim leader who looks as if he owes his position to US military/economic power. But guilt by association is only half of reason for the growing popularity of the martyrs and the spreading idea that US's allies must be traitors. Other half is that, by comparison with traitors, martyrs look clean[:] Hamas in Palestine, Hizbullah in Lebanon and Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt/Jordan have earned reputation for both honesty and efficiency[, and often] health/social services... Martyrs have another selling point[: Hizbullah and Hamas] are still 'resisting' Israel. [I]t is not enough for Israel and US to release the economic help withheld from Palestinians when Hamas was still formally in charge[:] principal grievance [is] Israel's occupation of West Bank as well as Gaza... US must now prove moderate Arab allies, far from being traitors, can actually deliver desirable results. In case of Palestine, [Fatah must] govern cleanly and get Israel to start dismantling outposts and leaving West Bank"; Economist 23 Jun 07"A Counter-Insurgency in Trouble: Fatal Errors in Afghanistan"(Edit.17-8); "Western Forces in Afghanistan: Unfriendly Fire"(51):-Editorial's sum:"Too few soldiers and too much bombing from the air is damaging the US-led campaign". Highlights:"Afghan civilian deaths caused by Western forces as dangerous as most callous of Taliban suicide-bombs. [Operation] was never going to be easy. [According to the famous "Anonymous"Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror(Wshdc: Brassey's Inc. 04), it was initiated by Wshdc in Oct 01 without reflecting the enormous knowledge accumulated by the intense US help to Afghans when occupied by USSR in 1979-89. Chapter 2.:"An Unprepared and Ignorant Lunge to Defeat - The United States in Afghanistan"(21-58).] But allies hobbled themselves by creating two separate forces - both dominated/led by US generals - that at times work at cross-purposes. One is International Security Assistance Force(ISAF), NATO-led operation that does peacekeeping, stabilisation and, for some contingents in south, counter-insurgency against Taliban. Combined Joint Task Force 82, consists of special force/elite infantry who hunt Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders under US's Operation Enduring Freedom(OEF). Two are supposed to coordinate their activity. Both groups have killed civilians, but [worst] are responsibility of OEF[see":Unfriendly"]. ISAF commanders complain... OEF troops often operate in their areas and undermine their work. [E]verybody suffers consequences of mistakes[:] anti-Western riots have started to break out [and President Karzai] complained civilian deaths/arbitrary searches of homes had reached unacceptable level. [Yet] 'mistakes' go on. [Since] foe hides among civilians,.. no amount of care will eliminate deaths of innocents. But West must do better, or risk losing support/[worse]... Having two separate forces makes little military sense. Many NATO... do not want to be too closely associated with US aggressive tactics [while] US reluctant to place its warriors too firmly under control of wishy-washy Europeans. Neither side wholly wrong. [F]orces should be merged, but if proves impossible, should be made clear ISAF has primacy, and oversight over OEF action. More important, aim of military operations should be to protect civilian population and win its trust, not to kill as many insurgents as possible... Unity of effort requires much more than rejigging command structures; it is about managing complexity of nation-building. Problem is not just strength of Taliban, but also weakness of Afghan government, and disillusion with corruption and slow reconstruction. [Above all,] Western and Afghan forces too thinly stretched [; and r]educing Afghan deaths will require... putting more Western soldiers in harm's way"; Economist 30 Jun 07"United States Power: Still No.1"(Edit.11-2); "Briefing: US Power: The Hobbled Hegemon"(29-32):-Editorial's official sum:"Wounded, tetchy and less effective than it should be, US is still the power that counts". Briefing's official sum:"Its troubles in Iraq have much weakened it; but US is likely to remain the dominant superpower". Inevitably very selective highlights from the substantial/complex Editorial: "[F]or a growing [US] number, superpower's inability to impose its will on [Iraq] is symptomatic of a deeper malaise... Nearly six years after 11 Sep 01, nervousness about state of US's 'hard power' is growing [refs. made to Briefing, then to the huge US army weight of Iraq and Afghanistan]. Other demons are jangling US nerves [China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Europe, Arabs, Chavez]. Nor is it just a matter of geopolitics [Wall Street, borders, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, climate change, Palestinians]. A sense of waning power is not just bad for US self-esteem. It is already having dangerous consequences ['China-bashing', isolationism]. Outside US, consequences could be even graver [Islamic revolutionaries, Putin, Western alliance]. Yet US being underestimated. Friends and enemies have mistaken short-term failure of Bush admin for deeper weakness. Neither US hard nor soft power fading. Rather, not being used as well as could be. The opportunity is greater than the threat. [But] while [US] talk was loud, the stick was spindly. [I]t is hard to imagine any future US admins making such [Bush regime] howlers when it comes to regime change. Yet in one way Bush is unfairly maligned... US did not enjoy untrammelled influence abroad before he arrived [Vietnam, Iran, North Korea, France]. [Superpower's relative]strength lies as much in what it can prevent... as in what it can achieve. Even today, US's 'negative power' is considerable [Iran, North Korea, global warming, Arab-Israeli peace] - US is quite simply indispensable [since] still has the most hard power... Better diplomacy would enhance its power [- and] al-Qaeda is still small beer. [W]in the battle for hearts and minds and you do not need as much hard power to get your way. [This applies to China. US is] an undervalued market leader, in need of new management... More than any rival, US corrects itself... Bush has already rediscovered some of the charms of multilateralism; he is talking about climate change[; and] a Mideast peace initiative is possible. [E]lection offers a chance for renewal[, and US] will bounce back stronger again"; Economist 07 Jul 07"Lebanon: From Crisis To Crisis"(47-8):-official sum:"Echoes of civil war as the country slides towards political deadlock". Highlights:"War with Israel [in 2006] left 1,200 dead and thousands more homeless. [Since then, a political split] widened into a seemingly unbridgeable chasm, crippling a state struggling to manage reconstruction, $33b foreign debt, presidential election, continued series of assassinations. Meanwhile, siege of jihadist guerrillas holed up in Palestinian camp has killed more than 160 and uprooted 30,000 refugees, [plus] a roadside bomb hit UN peacekeepers, killing six. [L]ikely links between all these events[:] ruling majority... accuses Syria of having a hand in most troubles[, while] Syria's friends - Shia party-cum-militia Hizbullah - [blame] Israel/US/Sunni powers... More neutral observers agree that while Syria may indeed be fighting a covert struggle to defend its soft underbelly, unlikely to control any but a few of varied groups seeking to undermine Lebanese government... Outside meddling certainly plays a part in Lebanon's troubles. But much trouble stems from internal causes. Sectarian fragmentation that makes Lebanon the Arab world's most tolerant society also tends to generate scrappy, paranoid politics. [N]eed to resolve political crimes, reform electoral laws and contain jihadist groups are subsumed within struggles over turf and spoils... Talk in recent weeks among the opposition of setting up a parallel government of its own seems to have jolted consciences as well as sad memories [of Lebanon's 1975-90 civil war]"; Economist 14 Jul 07"Briefing: Internet Jihad: A World Wide Web of Terror"(28-30):- "[C]apability of the internet to promote terrorism is worrying intelligence agencies. Past technological innovations...have quickly been exploited by terrorists. But the information revolution is particularly useful to them. Encrypted communications, whether in e-mail or voice-over-internet audio, make it much harder for investigators to monitor their activity... More important, internet gives jihadists an ideal vehicle for propaganda, providing access to large audiences free of government censorship or media filters, while carefully preserving their anonymity. Its ability to connect disparate jihadi groups creates a sense of a global Islamic movement fighting to defend the global ummah, or community, from a common enemy. It provides a low-risk means of taking part in jihad for sympathisers across the world... Al-Qaeda now sends out regular 'news bulletins' with a masked man in a studio recounting events from the many fronts of jihad [Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Palestine]... Battlefield footage [appears] on the internet within minutes of attacks taking place[, some] with musical soundtracks. [T]he hand-held video camera has become as important a tool of insurgency as the AK-47 or the RPG rocket-launcher... Internet's decentralised structure... now gives jihadi networks tremendous resilience. Number of extremist websites increasing exponentially, from a handful in 2000 to several thousand today. Some are overtly militant, while others give jihad second place to promoting a puritanical brand of piety. [M]ost headline-grabbing material... is military manuals - giving instruction on a myriad of subjects, not least weapons/assassination/poisons/explosives. [I]nternet-based compilations... make it easier for self-starting groups around world to try their hand at terrorism. [I]n password-protected areas[,] participants can be gradually groomed... But very anonymity that internet affords jihadists can also work against them[:] police/intelligence agencies enter jihadists' without being identified... Contributors to jihadi web sites regularly told not to divulge secrets... For many who study jihadi websites, [big] danger is indoctrination... At least 60% of material...deals not with current events or with war videos, but instead ideological/ cultural questions. Jihadists... fighting less a war against West than 'a civil war for the minds of Muslim youth'... A key text is ever-expanding e-book, 'Questions and Uncertainties Concerning the Mujahideen and their Operations', which seeks to arm jihadists with responses to questions and doubts about their actions, ranging from admissibility of killing Muslims, use of weapons of mass destruction and acceptability of shaving one's beard for the sake of jihad... What is needed is a systematic campaign of counter-propaganda, not least in support of friendly Muslim governments and moderate Muslims, to try to reclaim the ground ceded to the jihadists"; Economist 21 Jul 07"Nuclear Proliferation: The Riddle of Iran"(Edit.11-2); "Special Report: Iran"(1-16 special pages):-Edit official sum:"Iran's leaders think nuclear weapon could rejuvenate their tired revolution. How can they be stopped?" Highlights:"Iran... moving relentlessly closer to where could build atomic bomb[:] has converted yellowcake into uranium hexafluoride; now spinning the gas through... centrifuges underground/ secretly. Guess is: if runs 3,000 centrifuges at high speed for a year, enough fuel for first bomb [-] next aim up to 54,000.[U]sable weapon will also take time. Experts[:] may have bomb by end of 09[; IAEA:]could build within 3-8 years. What Iran doing entirely illegal[:] signed NPT/says its aims peaceful. [D]isbelieved even by its friends. Russia and China joined UNSC passing two resolutions...applying sanctions. So what next? [Option analysed is:] Iran is attacked/enraged/ retaliates - and still ends up with a bomb anyway. [T]his would be attack from the air, aimed at disabling or destroying Iran's nuclear sites. [S]uch attack well within US capabilities... and perhaps within Israel's too. Yet would be huge gamble. Even if it delayed/stopped Iran's program, new holes in US relations with Muslim world [and] Iran almost certainly hit back[:] fire missiles at Israel, attack US forces in Iraq/Afghanistan, organise terrorist attacks in West, or choke off tankers through world's oil windpipe... Knowing that a nuclear attack on Israel or US would result in its own prompt annihilation, Iran could probably be deterred. [C]ontainment of a nuclear Iran would be less awful than a risky pre-emptive attack that would probably cause mayhem, strengthen the regime and merely delay the bomb. [Yet Iran's] mere possession might encourage it to adopt a more aggressive foreign policy[and] other countries in the region... would probably feel compelled to follow suit... But the sanctions so far are not working. [S]uggests that a third sanctions resolution, with sharper teeth, needs to be enacted without delay... Sanctions that cut off equipment for its decrepit oilfields or struck hard at the financial interests... would have immediate impact on its own assessment of the cost of its nuclear program... If at same time Iran was offered a dignified ladder to climb down - above all reconciliation with US - the troubled leadership of a tired revolution might just grab it"; Economist 21 Jul 07"Turkey's Election: Of Mullahs and Majors"(Edit.13-4); "Briefing: Turkey's Election: A Battle for the Future"(25-8):-Briefing's official sum:"The importance of this... election goes well beyond Turkey itself". Editorial's highlights:"General election is momentous not just for the country and region but for the cause of democracy in the Muslim world. It was called early by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, PM and leader of ruling Justice and Development(AK) Party... Opposition harps on AK's Islamist roots and claimed election a fight between secularism and political Islam. In reality, it [was] over the future of Turkish democracy. AK Party [won]. The government has been a success[:] stable and relatively clean. [I]t has tamed inflation, seen economic growth of around 7% a year and lured in record foreign investment [see Briefing. A]lso has modernised constitution[,] shaken up judiciary[,] nudged army towards civilian control... AK has taken tentative steps to improve treatment of minorities, especially Turkey's 14m Kurds, although fighting against guerrillas of Kurdistan Workers Party(PKK) has flared up anew... These successes were crowned by negotiations for membership of EU. [While these] have run into roadblocks on both sides, [m]ost people in AK have become more like European-style Christian Democrats[;] no longer a huge threat to secularism. [W]ould be wise for Erdogan to reach out to his opponents, above all over presidency... Turkey faces two big foreign problems. First, what to do about PKK fighters in northern Iraq. Turkey has troops in the area now but a big invasion would be disastrous. Best bet is to persuade US/political leaders of northern Iraq to disarm PKK terrorists themselves, and to keep talking to modern Kurds... Second, how to keep door to EU ajar. [G]esture towards legitimacy of Cypriot government would help. But best policy is one of patience. Turkey should quietly continue to make the reforms needed for full membership"; Economist 28 Jul 07"Islam and Democracy: The Lesson From Turkey"(Edit.13):-official sum: "Islamist parties that follow the rules should be allowed to win elections". Highlights:"Decisive victory by [AK] shows every sign so far of having been an excellent result. [It] could have been a recipe for trouble, coups, internal strife[; b]ut in fact [was] a thoroughly democratic election, not too much violence, a big turnout and a clear result [see "Elections in Turkey: The Burden of Victory"(51-2), with official sum:"The ruling AK party has won resoundingly, but it needs to act cautiously"]. [T]his seems strong rebuke by voters to the army, which had hinted at interfering in AK's choice of presidential candidate [-] most do not feel it should intervene in politics. Also rewarding government... and punishing oppositions'... incoherent/unconvincing policies. Exactly how democracy should work... Is there a lesson in Turkey for the future of democracy in wider Muslim world? Yes, but approach with care... Turkey has an exceptional history[:] autocratic rule of a moderniser pushed Islam ruthlessly to the margins; then waited better half of a century for emergence of Islamist party that looks mild and moderate enough to be trusted. [T]rouble with this approach is that things can go calamitously wrong both at squeezing-out stage [experience of Iran described]and at letting-in stage [experience of Algeria described]. Recep Tayyip Erdogan ...as PM... got the gist of what democracy really means. There is now no serious doubt that AK would surrender power if it were to be defeated at the ballot box... [R]eal and arguably stronger discipline on AK arises from the experience of democracy itself[:] continuing political success and underlying legitimacy depend on listening closely to the desires of voters, which in turn requires it to moderate its Islamist ambitions and obey the rules of the democratic game... Islamic parties [elsewhere who] declare themselves willing to abide by the rules ought to be allowed to participate fully in electoral politics"; Christopher Hitchens God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything(Toronto:McClelland & Stewart 07):-while the basic aim here is to specifically criticize the beliefs and activities of all major religions, the widely-travelled, -researched, and -admired author deeply reports on the religious origin of instability in all parts of world. From official sum:"With his unique brand of erudition and wit, [he] addresses the most urgent issue of today: the malignant force of religion in the world". Chapter titles: (1)Putting It Mildly; (2)Religion Kills; (3)A Short Digression on the Pig or, Why Heaven Hates Him; (4)A Note on Health, to Which Religion Can Be Hazardous; (5)The Metaphysical Claims of Religion Are False; (6)Arguments from Design; (7)Revelation: The Nightmare of the"Old"Testament; (8)The"New"Testament Exceeds the Evil of the"Old"One; (9) The Koran Is Borrowed from Both Jewish and Christian Myths; (10)The Tawdriness of the Miraculous and the Decline of Hell; (11)"The Lowly Stamp of Their Origin"; Religion's Corrupt Beginnings; (12)A Coda: How Religions End; (13)Does Religion Make People Behave Better?; (14)There Is No"Eastern"Solution; (15)Religion as an Original Sin; (16)Is Religion Child Abuse?; (17)An Objection Anticipated: The Last-Ditch"Case"Against Secularism; (18)A Finer Tradition: The Resistance of the Rational; (19)In Conclusion: The Need for a New Enlightenment; William Langewiesche The Atomic Bazaar: The Rise of the Nuclear Poor(New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux 07):-this useful but selective description of nuclear weapons distributions and prospects is very easy for non-specialists to read. It does not attempt to analyse in detail all likely nuclear threats of the world this century, but offers three analyses carefully. First is the way in which nuclear weapons explode and the ways in which the key materials can be obtained/ created. According to the book, "For ordinary fission bombs, there are really only two choices - either plutonium or highly enriched uranium. Plutonium is a man-made element produced by uranium reactors, from which it emerges initially mixed in with the other radioactive waste, but is separable through chemical processes... The alternative is highly enriched uranium, or HEU, containing more than 90% of the fissionable isotope, U-235"(21-2). Second subject analysed is danger of inadequately-secure Cold War assets falling into hands of terrorists: "US government reacted rapidly to a perception of chaos and opportunity in post-Soviet nuclear affairs and in 1993 launched an ambitious complex of 'cooperative' programs with all the former Soviet states to lessen the chance that nuclear weapons might end up in the wrong hands"(28). Third analysis is "the story of Abdul Qadeer Khan, the scientist at the forefront of nuclear development and trade in the Middle East, who masterminded the theft and sale of centrifuge designs that helped to build Pakistan's nuclear arsenal and who single-handedly peddled nuclear plans to North Korea, Iran and other countries potentially hostile to Western interests"(from dust-cover sum); Economist 11 Aug 07"US, Israel and the Palestinians: A Modest Ambition"(Edit.10-1):-official sum:"What George Bush should do for the Palestinians in the final phase of his presidency". Highlights:"Conditions have seldom looked less ripe for peace. Both sides' leaders are fragile and risk averse... Israelis have learned in Gaza and Lebanon that when they pull out of occupied territory without a peace deal, rockets/fighters pursue them across the border... Israel's only remaining option, apart from sitting still, is to negotiate agreement with Abbas, under which it can leave the West Bank and so make room for independent Palestine. [M]ight look easier now Hamas have been booted out[, but truth] is starkly different. Hamas... is not out of the picture [so] no peace deal without its consent. [It] remains popular not only in Gaza but also in West Bank [and] could swiftly sabotage any [opposed] peace by mounting violent attacks against Israel or [Abbas]. So long as Hamas remains excluded,.. Bush's meeting better be modest [eg] some sort of declaration of principles... For past 20 years, as Israeli settlements continued to spread in West Bank, Palestinians see negotiations as all process and no destination. By forcing Olmert to give Abbas a clear promise of what and where independent Palestine will be, US/Arab partners may be able to restore a modicum of Palestinian enthusiasm. This means writing down some detail on borders.,. refugees and Jerusalem. Since no Israeli PM [can] accept [any] refugees to homes now in Israel, Olmert will have to [offer] shared capital in Jerusalem [-] hellishly controversial in Israel but would play well with Arab states. [M]ay be gestures, too, such as evacuation of some Israeli outposts[, but] no grand bargain will be implemented against Hamas's will. Nor... a deal negotiated with Hamas on board... while it continues to reject the very principle of permanent peace with Israel. [Yet] the world should avoid temptation to punish Palestinians of Gaza economically for their leaders' obduracy" - see:"The Gaza Strip: Staying Alive"(39):-official sum:"Hamas brings some order, but little else, to embattled Gazans". Also see "Religion: Rules of the Game"(75-6): Review of Olivier Roy Secularism Confronts Islam(Columbia Univ Press 07),translated by George Holoch. "Central contention is that 'problem is not Islam but religion or, rather, the contemporary forms of the revival of religion'... New believers are often individualistic, rejecting conformity with either orthodox theology or institutionalised religion"; Nayan Chanda Bound Together: How Traders, Preachers, Adventurers, and Warriors Shaped Globalization(New Haven: Yale Univ Press 07):-this fascinating survey of the development of globalization since 6000BCE is valuable as a unique reminder - to specialists in history, politics, economics, religion, movement, technology, science, etc - of how their own knowledge relates to other specialized information, and to the present/future of the intense/expanding relations across this planet. (This aim corresponds exactly with my purpose in this information source.) Style is amusing, and novel in all areas but one's expertise, so it is delicious/constructive in all unstudied fields and hence globally constructive. Final para offers view that fits closely with that in Christopher Spencer Oct 06(op.cit.):"We benefit from all that the world has to offer, but we think only in narrow terms of protecting the land and people within our national borders - the borders that have been established only in the modern era. [All that separates us] from the rest of the world... cannot change the fact that we are bound together through the invisible filament of history. [W]e know how we have reached where we are and where we may be headed. We are in a position to know that the sum of human desires, aspirations, and fears that have woven our fates together can neither be disentangled nor reeled back. But neither are we capable of accurately gauging how this elemental mix will shape our planet's future. Still, compared to the past... we are better equipped to look over the horizon at both the dangers and the opportunities ...There is no alternative to rising above our tribal interests: over the centuries to come, our destinies will remain inextricably bound together. [W]e can attempt to nudge our rapidly integrating world toward a more harmonious course - because we are all connected"; The Economist 01 Sep 07"Mosques in the West: Islam, the American Way"(Edit.10); "The Politics of Mosque-Building: Constructing Conflict"(53-5):-Edit's official sum:"Why US fairer to Muslims than 'Eurabia'". Highlights:"[S]omething similar about [mosque-related] vignettes of inter-faith politics in the Western world. All illustrate the strong emotions, and opportunistic electoral games, surfacing many countries as Muslim minorities increasingly prosperous/confident, aspire more mosques/other communal buildings. All show way in which whipped-up fears of a 'clash of civilisations' can inflame humdrum politics of a locality. But there is a big transatlantic difference in way such disputes are handled". Major item then pressed. However both follow usual/unfair policy of comparing a large number of European states against a single North American one, pity when Canada's particular "multicultural" policy is unusually relevant to issue here discussed.] "Although US plenty of Islam-bashers ready to play on people's fears, it offers better protection to mosque builders. In particular, its constitution/legal system/political culture all generally take side of religious liberty... More important than... law ethos leans in favour of religious [who] 'new' (to their neighbours) and simply want to practise their faith in a way harms nobody... European Convention on Human Rights, and court that enforces, also protect religious freedom. But not central to European politics... Legal principles aside, there are pragmatic reasons for favouring US [and Canadian?] way. Most mosques in Western world pose no threat to non-Muslim citizens; but a few do pose such a danger, because of hatred preached in them. In such cases police generally have legal armoury need to step in and make arrests if necessary. Quashing extremism surely easier where founding/running mosques open/transparent business. .. Christians in West long complained about how hard for their brethren in Muslim lands to build churches... But they should practise what they preach". "Briefing: Capital Punishment in US: Revenge Begins To Seem Less Sweet"(20-2): much more critical of US legal/political system"; The Economist 01 Sep 07"Egypt: Bashing the Muslim Brothers"(38-44):-official sum:"Egypt‛s rulers are giving their Islamist compatriots an even worse time than usual". Highlights:"Muslim Brotherhood... now proclaims belief in freedom, democracy and rule of law... Their enthusiasm for violent jihad and constant framing of Islam as a faith threatened by vicious enemies helped spawn more radical Islamist groups... [Egypt's] president, Hosni Mubarak, recently chided Brothers for 'hiding behind religion to turn back the clock'[, and] past few months resulted in some 600 arrests... Egyptian Organisation for Human Rights, a secular-leaning lobby, details some 567 cases of police torture in past 14 years, of which 167 led to death,[and] concluded torture is practised systematically in every place of detention in every part of Egypt... [It] is one of the world's most heavily policed countries. Its 75m enjoy relative freedom from crime. But recent years have seen growing public discomfort with the force... widely seen... squashing dissent. So current campaign against Brotherhood, officially outlawed despite having won a fifth of seats in last parliamentary elections as independents, has brought the group widespread sympathy. [P]unishment has several causes. Many cite the erosion of pressure for democratic reform from US... More immediately pressing, however, [is] Brotherhood's declared intention to challenge a recently imposed constitutional ban on religiously based political parties, by issuing a full-fledged legislative platform. [Suggests] group wants to capitalise not only on Egypt's strong and growing religious conservatism but also on public anger at government's perceived indifference to the country's myriad social ills"; Economist 15 Sep 07"Pakistan: The Wrong Direction"(Edit.14); "Briefing: Pakistan: Home And Away"(31-3):-Edit's official sum:"Why US should push General Musharraf harder towards democracy". Highlights:"It seems odd to claim that [Nawaz Sharif, an appalling PM 1990-93, and 1997-99 when overthrown by Musharraf,] is crucial to Pakistan democratic future [-] nevertheless true. Sharif represents something without which democracy cannot thrive - a real political movement with popular support. By expelling him.,. Musharraf has demonstrated is not serious about restoring democracy... Whether Pakistan moves back to democracy, or is condemned to authoritarianism, is of great interest to... the rest of the world... Musharraf in some ways been impressive leader: managed to stay in power/hold politicians at bay for 8 years. Technically, he restored democracy in 02, but has rigged elections [and] ignored Supreme Court ruling that he should allow Sharif back. [G]rowing majority of Pakistanis want him out but, by persuading US that holding line against Islamist extremists[, been helped to] hang on to power. Yet its getting difficult for general. [Briefing offers major report on complex/serious human region]. Presidential election is due next months; parliamentary one by Jan 08. He may explore [state of emergency]; or may try to do a deal with Benazir Bhutto, the only other political leader, who is demanding immunity from prosecution, [right to seek] third PM term, curbing of president's powers, and establishment of a caretaker government. [S]uch a cosy arrangement... depends on its terms. [I]nsisting Musharraf take off his uniform if he wants to be president would be worth doing. But a deal that divides power, general/Bhutto, and deprives Pakistanis of determining own future, would not... A stable Pakistan is crucial to regional peace and to securing the world against terrorism. But only way to discourage Islamist extremism in Pakistan is through democracy"; Economist 15 Sep 07"Terrorism: Visions of Osama Bin Laden"(73-4):-official sum:"Al-Qaeda's leader returns and foresees victory in Iraq". Highlights:"Osama bin Laden has returned from the wilderness to cast his curse against the evildoers. US, he predicts, will fall in Iraq... Capitalism and democracy are worst forms of 'polytheism', causing war, global warming, poverty and costly mortgages. Solution to such wickedness is for US to 'embrace Islam'. Then war would end and US would be richer, because Islam... has no income taxes except 2.5% title known as zakat. Call to convert is no rhetorical flourish: Islamic jurisprudence requires that non-believers be given a chance before attacked. [I]ntelligence will search... for clues about intentions... and state of health... Bin Laden's return... was his first video appearance since 04 [and] coincides with a resurgence of his movement... Al-Qaeda and its offshoots have regrouped, replaced lost commanders and built up a stronger following around the world. [L]atest reminders of violent jihadism [were] inspired, if not directed, by al-Qaeda. Experts debate whether al-Qaeda is as dangerous, or more so, as in 01. [Many say] it has recreated a safe haven in Pakistan's lawless tribal belt, alongside its strengthened Taliban allies. [For Pakistani involvement with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda see:"Briefing: Pakistan: Home And Away"(31-3) and particularly mid-section of Brief which reports: "Poll found that 46% of Pakistanis approve of al-Qaeda's chief, against 38% for their president".] Al-Qaeda's ideology, if not the movement itself, has become more globalised [and] underlines concern about home-grown terrorism across Europe. Much of al-Qaeda's propaganda, as well as its military training manuals, are spread through a large network of jihadist websites. Muslims anywhere can become radicalised and join the fights, with little or no involvement from al-Qaeda's leaders. [S]ome converts to Islam appear to be particularly prone to extremism... Though training is much easier abroad, home-grown cells may need no direction from overseas and can act faster, making it harder to detect them... Al-Qaeda has experienced some broader setbacks, however, notably in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia, where violent jihadist campaigns have been largely squashed... Still, Iraq is stoking the cause[ and,] like Afghanistan after Soviet defeat, Iraq too will start exporting hardened terrorists". For relevant material on situation in Iraq - with official sums - see: "The Iraq War: Why They Should Stay"(13):-"For all General Petraeus's spin, Iraq is still a violent mess. That is why US should not leave yet"; "US and Iraq: The General Speaks"(37-8):-"David Petraeus says Iraq is improving and some 30,000 US troops can come home by next summer. Congress wants more"; "Iraq: How Fast Do the Iraqis Want US to Get Out?"(57):-"While US argues over how and when to bring their boys home, the Iraqis have their own equally mixed views"; Economist 29 Sep 07"Lebanon: Who's For President?"(48-9):-official sum:"Finding a new head of state may not stem the slide back towards bloody chaos". Highlights:"Lebanon's...plot is still getting thicker... On 19 Sep, car exploded in Beirut, killing MoP from ruling majority and four others [-] 11th prominent opponent of Syria to be so targeted... Not a single culprit has been caught so far. On 25 Sep, parliament, which has in effect been suspended since its speaker joined an opposition boycott of it last Dec, reconvened at last. [It] must elect new president before the term of widely disparaged/doggedly pro-Syrian incumbent expires 24 Nov. [But] too few showed up to have vote [and] speaker adjourned until end Oct... Ruling coalition, Sunni-Druze-Christian grouping, backed by West/Saudi Arabia, said may now elect president merely with simple majority. Opposition, which groups Shia Hizbullah/disgruntled Christians, backed by Syria/Iran, has declared such move illegal. 'Declaration of war' said former general Aoun, who believes his tactical alliance with Shia bolsters his own credentials for post. [S]uch talk is not taken lightly. Lebanon's internal schism mirrors the polarisation of wider region. It pits those who retain some faith in West/would seek accomodation with Israel, against who demonise US and dream of liberating Jerusalem. [For a deep issue against Israeli policy, see "Israel: The Land of Zion"(49):-extracts:"Jewish National Fund(JNF) was set up to buy land in Palestine for settling Jews there... Now fund is fuelling the tension inherent in Israel's desire to be both Jewish state and democracy... JNF owns nearly 2,600sqkm, 13% of Israel's land, and its covenant states the land can be leased only to Jews... Critics counter that at least half fund's lands... were seized by the state after their Palestinian owners fled in 48... At time when anti-Israel campaigners are seizing on chances to compare Israel with apartheid South Africa, has troubled some Jews".] Events, such as invasion of Iraq, war with Israel,..serial murders in Beirut, have fortified [Lebanese] convictions... Intensity of passions has grown, fears one diplomat, to where another assassination or big event further afield, such as military attack on Iran, could reignite civil war. [Yet] outcome not necessarily catastrophic... Amid meetings between leaders of opposing factions, talk of reaching a compromise over presidency grew louder. [No] effective president can afford to alienate Shias, who make up third of Lebanon's people. In any case, factional struggle will continue, no matter who occupies presidency. Several compromise candidates have been tabled... Most Lebanese at least agree almost anyone would be better than Lahoud"; Economist 06 Oct 07"Civil Liberties: Detention Without Trial: The Stuff of Nightmares"(70-1):-official sum:"Judges and parliamentarians are restraining the zeal of governments who want a free hand to fight terror". Highlights:"[US] Senate Judiciary Committee [discussing] to restore habeas corpus rights to Guantánamo detainees. Most have been held for nearly six years without charge, without access to a lawyer or any indication of when, if ever, they might be released... Guantánamo has become... reaction to the terror attacks of 11 Sep 01. In Britain, too, government has sought new powers to tackle Islamist terrorism. [I]n both, the doctrine of the balance of powers has passed a test... Freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention, coupled with the right to challenge it in an independent court... are among the civilised world's most sacred and ancient liberties... But these days, there is more talk of pre-emption and 'preventive detention', even in democracies. [I]s US's war on terror a real war in the legal sense? If not, then the detainees should be treated as ordinary criminal suspects. This is the path that most European countries have chosen. Even if it could be deemed a real war, it is clearly unlike an ordinary state conflict: it has neither a definable end nor even an identifiable enemy with whom to sue for peace. It could last for decades... US has also engaged in so-called 'extraordinary rendition' - the abduction of suspected terrorists to face not justice, but harsh interrogation, perhaps torture, in a third country... The new system [in Britain] seems as riddled with problems as the old, and almost as unfair... But no leader of a Western democracy has obtained a completely free hand in detaining people. US has seen a tug of war between the government and the courts, with many rounds... Many hope the Supreme Court will seize opportunity to give a view on whether [President] Bush's 'war on terror' is a real war. Congress, too, is beginning to show its teeth... In Britain, too, Parliament has baulked at some of the government's demands"; Economist 13 Oct 07"Civil Liberties: Freedom of Speech: The Tongue Twisters"(66-7):-official sum:"The difficulty of reconciling traditional freedoms of expression with the new demands of national security". Highlights:"In countries at war, freedoms of the press and of speech often restricted... Al-Qaeda's attacks of 11 Sep 01, by precipitating a 'war on terror', also raised questions - both legal and moral - about the role of the media in free societies. Several Western governments used national security as justification for limiting certain sorts of public information/public speech. Press itself has... sometimes refused to accept limits on its freedom of expression;.. sometimes has accepted them. If [accept] the lip service almost all countries pay to a free press - 160 UN members have ratified International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - then freedom of expression has had a tough time... UN for first time issued statement condemning the targeting of journalists and calling for the prosecution of their killers... To some degree, the global increase in the number of journalists being killed, kidnapped and otherwise harassed may signify that more journalists at work, and growing bolder... Attacks on media, Freedom House points out, are not only bad in themselves; they are also a sign of worse to come: other democratic institutions. In repressive countries, internet has often been greeted as a wonderful way to bypass government control... For a while, relatively immune to regulation[, but] an academic think-tank says that censorship of internet has spread from just a handful of countries five years ago to 26 nations. Some... now blocking entire internet services. It is not surprising that such countries are suppressing freedom of expression... US gives greater protection to freedom of expression than any other country... Even so, a Century Foundation [man claims,] Bush's attempts 'to intimidate/punish the media, or at least to manipulate/mislead it, represents one of most concerted assaults on [constitution]"[, and] number of documents being stamped secret or classified has almost quadrupled... For many,.. administration has tilted balance too far towards maintaining'certain information...in confidence'... In Britain, freedom of expression has been under attack... It has now gone further [than US]... At first meeting of UNGA, delegates described freedom of expression as 'the touchstone of all human rights'. In practice, that freedom has never been totally unfettered... Under European Convention on Human Rights, freedom of expression is subject to a wide range of possible restrictions, including national laws banning speech likely to incite/'stir up' hatred against people... Since 01, these sorts of restrictions expanded to apply to Muslims... Free-speech critics insisted some element of intent be involved, claiming otherwise religious works... could be deemed unlawful... Sometimes the press has decided to censor itself... Attempts to gag press in democratic countries usually fail"; Economist 27 Oct 07"Armies of the Future: Brains, Not Bullets"(Edit.15); "Briefing: Fighting Insurgents: After Smart Weapons, Smart Soldiers"(33-6):-official sums:"Western armies good at destroying things. Can they be made better at building them?";"Irregular warfare may keep Western armies busy for decades. They will have to adapt if they are to overcome the odds that history suggests they are up to". Both tell what must be modified in any effective army in order to at least control insurgents that can arise anywhere. Most information relates to the West(,as does General Sir Rupert Smith The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World op cit). The issues apply to the whole world and involve more than just military action - above all cooperation(, as argued in: Christopher Spencer REASONS WHY ALL SOCIETIES ON EARTH MUST COOPERATE - IN TERMS OF BOTH THEIR WEALTH AND KNOWLEDGE - IN ORDER TO SURVIVE op cit). Editorial highlights:"Firepower is of little use, and often counter-productive, when the enemy deliberately mingles among civilians. [West] must expect to fight protracted, enervating counter-insurgency wars that offer no clear-cut victories / risk prospect of humiliation ... Counter-insurgency... is 'armed social work'. It requires more brain than brawn, more patience than aggression. Model soldier should be... intellectual for 'the graduate level of war', preferably a linguist, with a sense of history and anthropology...Post-colonial politics, stronger concerns for human rights, the rapid dispersal of news: all these (good) things make today's conflicts even harder to win for occupiers. So it may well be better to step back and work through local allies. Few insurgencies have unseated existing governments. In 'war on terror' most important al-Qaeda suspects rounded up... by locals. Strengthening local forces is best way of salvaging Iraq and Afghanistan, and may help avoid the need for future interventions. [B]uilding 'partner capacity' may need... creating new specialist units to train allies, embed Western soldiers in local forces to improve their performance/call in air [aid], and help organise civil reconstruction [and diplomacy]. [S]hift in focus from destruction to construction... is certainly worth putting more money into manpower". "Briefing" highlights: "Modern wars are complex affairs conducted 'among the people'... The greater the accuracy of modern weapons, the louder the outcry when they kill or wound civilians... Guerrillas' main weapons: agility, surprise, support of at least some sections of the population and, above all, time. [New US manual says that] in fighting an enemy 'among the people', the central objective is not to destroy the enemy but to secure allegiance of the citizenry. All strands of a campaign - military/economic/political - must be strongly entwined ...Nationalist/pan-Islamic sentiments are much stronger than in the past. Information technology has helped jihadists spread 'single narrative' that Muslims everywhere are under attack. Internet provides a new and unassailable sanctuary from which to propagandise/organise/share tactics... A growing body of opinion... has concluded that insurrections are best fought indirectly, through local allies. [F]or local governments, fighting insurgents is a matter of survival... To build viable governments... has proved difficult enough even where the fighting has stopped and the main political forces have been cooperative (or at least acquiescent)... Although most armies have now relearnt the limits of force and importance of 'comprehensive approach', other branches of government have not [foreign policy, aid agencies. US army] needs not just more soldiers - nor even linguists, civil-affairs officers, engineers - but a fully fledged corps of advisers that will train and 'embed' themselves with allied forces around the world. Insurgencies may be the face of war for West in years ahead. [E]xtremists round the world have seen US vulnerability to the rocket-propelled grenade, AK-47 and suicide-bomber"; Economist 27 Oct 07"Afghanistan's Taliban: War Without End"(50):-official sum:"Not winning, but not losing either". Highlights:"[I]nfiltration routes from Pakistan will be blocked to the Taliban [soon by snow]. NATO commanders... feel they were on the front foot during the summer. Since Jan, almost 6,000 killed - 50% increase on 06. Included 200 NATO/more than 3,000 alleged Talibs. Insurgent violence up by 20% on 06, largely because [NATO] pushed into areas formerly held by Taliban. Nonetheless, few observers doubt Afghan insurgency has years to run[:] Taliban seem to have enough recruits[;] refuge /logistical base in Pakistan lawless tribal areas[;]enough funds -40% from drug trade... NATO's role stopgap, as $billions building Afghan security forces... 20-30% of population in south support Taliban[ -]whose fighters between 6,000-20,000. Some 6,000 Taliban reported killed since 05, with no sign [this] dented capability. [Hence]will not, by itself, end insurgency. Suicide bombings[, rare until 05,] this year more than 120. Roadside bombings also increasing. NATO claims this is sign of desperation [and] focused on attacking Taliban leadership[- some success]. Locals [say] Taliban taken severe punishment in south. [M]uch talk of prising away 'moderate Taliban' through negotiation[, but] Taliban fighters now appearing in previously placid provinces [and] NATO's nearly 35,000 not enough to take and hold all parts[- and] publicly divided. Taliban, too, fragmented. Far from monolithic Islamists they were in 01, they now span various groups with differing motivations. Alongside the diehard madrassa-trained Talibs are growing numbers of foreigners with al-Qaeda links. ['T]ier-2' fighters are drawn to fight for many reasons: unemployment; illegal opium; tribal loyalties... Many Afghans in south would support any force offering real hope of security/justice. [N]either Taliban nor Afghan government/Western backers have yet made a convincing case"; Economist 03 Nov 07"Faith and Politics: The New Wars of Religion"(Edit.15-6); "Special Report: On Religion and Public Life: In God's Name" (Unique 1-22):-Both official sums: "Faith will unsettle politics everywhere this century; it will do so least when it is separated from the state"; "Religion will play a big role in this century‛s politics. John Micklethwait asks how we should deal with it". Editorial's highlights:"[R]eligion is playing a central role. [P]eople have been slain in God's name; [religion-related] money/ volunteers have poured into regions [; and] religion has forced itself dramatically into the public square. [Brief references here; Report chapters: US, Turkey, India, Israel/Palestine, China, Iran.] How frightening (or inspiring) is this prospect? As Special Report explains, idea religion has re-emerged in public life is to some extent illusion. It never really went away... Its new power is mostly the consequence of two changes. First is failure of secular creeds. Second, although some theocracies survive in Islamic world, religion has returned to stage as much more democratic, individualistic affair... in tune with globalisation... Free up religion and ardent believers/atheists both do well... Culture wars... may become a global phenomenon; expect fierce battles about science. [R]eligious conflict today is result as much of popular will as of state sponsorship: bottom-up, driven by volunteers not conscripts, their activities blessed by rogue preachers not popes; fury mostly directed at apostates not competing civilisations... [P]oliticians...to deal with religion, two lessons - one principled, other pragmatic. Principle is that church and state best kept separate[; eg] teachers not allowed to teach children creationism as science. [Economist] disapproves of publicly financed faith schools. [R]eligion [in] public square most overtly is Islam... At its most theocratic, it forces people to follow sharia laws... Yet Islam can clearly co-exist with a modern liberal state [-] test case will be Turkey... Pragmatic lesson concerns those wars of religion... Western powers (and religious leaders) too reluctant to look for faith-driven solutions to religious conflicts... 'Interfaith dialogue'... is more realistic idea than presenting a secular peace to competing faiths... Atheists and agnostics hate the fact, but these days religion is inescapable part of politics... Unless politicians learn to take account of religious feelings and to draw a firm line between church and state, the new wars of religion may prove as intractable". All above discussed in Special Report; Economist 10 Nov 07"Martial Law in Pakistan: Time's Up, Mr Musharraf"(Edit.13); "Briefing: Pakistan: Lawyers Against the General" (31-4):-official sums:"No longer the potential solution, the general has become a big part of Pakistan's problem"; "However Pervez Musharraf tries to justify his actions, this is a dark time for his wretched country". Editorial's highlights:"General Musharraf has... seemed, despite his embarrassing lack of democratic credentials, a relatively safe pair of hands in charge of 165m-strong moderate Islamic nation [-with] nuclear weapons and prey to frightening extremist fringe. Over years, however, [he] has squandered the goodwill he enjoyed at home and abroad. [H]is alliance with US[, and] refusal to take off army uniform [or] allow unrigged elections, alienated [wide] opinion. [H]is second coup came 03 Nov when he dismantled constitutional facade,.. imposed martial law[,] locked up [hundreds and took] private TV off air. Many want him gone[ b]ut not obvious how to force his hand without endangering stability of Pakistan itself. [Musharraf] is now a central part of Pakistan's instability... In declaring 'a state of emergency', he cited two threats:.. the spread of violent extremism and the pesky interference of the judiciary in his efforts to deal with it. [Briefing is recommended here for details.] The extremist violence has spread from the lawless tribal areas where Pakistan blurs into Afghanistan to the neighbouring parts of Pakistan proper, and beyond [Islamabad, Karachi. Other threats include] involvement of Pakistan-trained terrorists in attacks in the West[, while] the radical mullahs of the border areas people the West's worst nightmares [of] a 'Talibanised', nuclear-armed Pakistan... But martial law has so clearly pitted [Musharraf] and army against the rest of the country that, rather than gain a sharper focus, he is now likely more distracted... US and Britain are loth to do anything that might jeopardise their links with Pakistan's army and its intelligence services... Logistical support for Afghan war, undermining Taliban's rear base in the tribal areas, intelligence on planned terrorist attacks in West: all demand Pakistani cooperation. For this reason,.. threat to withdraw US aid... is difficult to use. But it should be used... Musharraf has apparently promised to hold elections by mid-Feb... Pakistan can still be dragged back from the brink. Top brass of Pakistan army[ - ]their loyalty to their boss can be assumed to be finite... It must be made plain that [US] backing is dependent on restoring democracy, through a free election open to all. Otherwise, as military dictators go, so should General Musharraf"; Ömer Taspinar"The Old Turks' Revolt: When Radical Secularism Endangers Democracy"Foreign Affairs Vol.86/No.6(Nov/Dec 07):-off.sum:"The ruckus over election of a religious conservative as Turkey's president has exposed the illiberal nature of Turkish secularism - as well as the pragmatism of the country's reformed Islamists. Preserving democracy in Turkey by keeping the military out of politics will be a tall order, but the future of the Muslim world's most promising democratic experiment is at stake"; Economist 24 Nov 07"The Middle East Summit: Mr Palestine"(Edit.13-4):-off.sum:"George Bush is the only man who can bring an independent Palestine closer". [Earlier item on summit: 11 Aug 07; for update:]"Israel and Palestine: Cinderella at Annapolis"(27-9):-off.sum:"Muddled expectations and mismanaged diplomacy may mean Annapolis peace summit achieves far less than backers once hoped". Edit.highlights: "[T]wo sides have[recently] not bridged longstanding differences. [W]ould take immense courage for Abbas to modify Palestinians' mantra: a state on 1967 borders, a capital in Jerusalem and 'right' of refugees of 60 years ago to return to what is now Israel. [PM Olmert] governs in coalition with men who hate the very idea of an independent Palestine... Polls show many Israelis long to be rid of Palestine territories[, b]ut even they wonder how they can trust Abbas's Palestinian Authority to police state when already lost Gaza to Hamas and might well lose West Bank too... But Bush has it within his power to make so much more... Israelis right to say divided Palestinians in no shape right now to govern a state: Hamas has first to be bullied, bribed or cajoled into... joining the peace camp... In past, US asked Israelis and Palestinians to thrash out their differences on their own. But they can't. The gap is too wide. [A] US blueprint that commanded international support would, however, immediately transform the political dynamic. [Bush] should make it clear that when US talks of a two-state solution, it has in mind a border based on the pre-1967 line. [H]e can now tell Israel that it cannot keep more than a few percentage points - say 5% - of West Bank, and must offer Palestinians land from its own side in compensation. On refugees, right to 'return' should be exercised in new Palestine and not in pre-1967 Israel... Israel too must accept... Jerusalem... to be capital of both. [O]nly a deal along [these] lines... stands the remotest chance of bringing permanent peace"; Economist 01 Dec 07"The Annapolis Peace Summit: Much To Be Modest About"(Edit.16); "The Arab-Israeli Summit in Annapolis: Big Turnout, Small Result"(59-60):-off.sums:"George Bush sent Palestinian moderates home with little to show and less to sell";"An agreement on further peace talks, if not much else". Edit. highlights:"Israeli and Palestinian delegations at last minute approved 437 words for US president to read out, but this was the sort of declaration that makes the phase 'lowest common denominator' sound generous. It... is utterly silent on borders, Jerusalem, Israel's West Bank settlements, fate of the Palestinian refugees - all the issues that have confounded previous bouts... Hope that US president might fill the gap was confounded too [all amplified 59-60 item]. US still has pulling power: Saudi Arabia, Syria and a dozen other Arab countries turned up. [Yet Bush's] own speech was almost miraculously content-free. [S]aying out loud that the border would have to be based on that of 1967, or that the two states would have to share Jerusalem, was evidently too daring for this deadbeat White House... Talking is better than killing[, but] the start of even unpromising peace talks galvanises the spoilers from both sides[, and] the prospects of escalation are all too real. As soon as one of the many [Hamas rockets] kills a large number of Israelis, Olmert will come under intense pressure to send his army back into Gaza Strip... That could lead to war no less brutal than the one Israel fought against Hizbullah in Lebanon... But in asking Abbas to lead his exhausted/sceptical people back into the tunnel of negotiations, and neglecting to switch on a light at the end of it, Bush asking a lot of the Palestinian moderates. If they fail, he will deserve a big share of blame"; Economist 24 Nov 07"Africa: Promises, Promises"(Edit.15); "African Peacekeeping: The Doves of War"(52-4):-Editorial's off.sum:"It is time for both Africans and the rich world to walk the talk in Darfur and Somalia". Highlights:"Eastern Congo faces a humanitarian disaster; the killing in Sudan's Darfur region goes on apace; war rages between Islamist militias and Ethiopian troops in Somalia; rebels threaten the government in Chad; war may resume between Eritrea and Ethiopia and between Sudan's government and former rebels in autonomous south. [Edit. then recommends "...Doves of War", with off.sum:"Too many conflicts, too few decent armies to sort them out". It also briefs other peacekeeping: Burundi-Rwanda, Central African Republic, Cote d'Ivoire, Liberia, Sierra Leone.] UN is sending unprecedented numbers of troops to the region. It already has 17,000 in Congo and 20,000 more due to join existing 6,000-strong African Union (AU) force in Darfur - largest UN forces in the world. Another 2,000 between Eritreans-Ethiopians, plus 10,000 in south Sudan. AU also 1,600 Ugandan troops in Somalia... In Congo, UN is doing its best to hold the ring between several rival ragtag armies, but elsewhere its fine intentions have yet to bear fruit. In Darfur,.. imperative for UN is to provide both transport and attack helocopters for [to-be-]expanded force. [A] robust/mobile force is vital if peace is to be restored to a region where some 300,000 have already died and more than 2m are displaced. In Somalia,.. African countries have failed to deliver. AU promised a force of 8,000 to keep peace in Mogadishu, [b]ut so far only the Ugandans, too few to do the job, have turned up... and war threatens to engulf the capital again, perhaps infecting whole region. Africa/West seem to have lost hope and interest... Main foreign governments involved in negotiations... must not give up"; Economist 01 Dec 07"Lebanon: In Search of a Government"(60) [directly follows:"Who's for President?" 29 Sep 07]:-off.sum:"Even as the country's people get used to not having one". Highlights:"[F]inal day of President Emile Lahoud's term of office [was 23 Nov], and parliament bound to elect a successor... Failure to choose a new head of state, many said, could precipitate a slide into chaos and even a renewal of 1975-90 civil war... Tensions are still high, but fears of imminent strife appear to have dissipated. Lebanese have resumed business [and] country has muddled along without a legislature since last Nov... During this time divisions between ruling majority [Sunni/Druze/smaller Christian factions] and opponents [Shia/populist Christian groups] have solidified. Core dispute... concerns opposition demands for a bigger share in government[, but ]rendered more complex by influence of foreign powers [Iran/Syria/France/US/Saudi Arabia] ... Syria might push its Lebanese allies towards compromising over presidency in exchange for... attention to its claim on Golan Heights... Yet there are also important Lebanese internal dynamics at play... between its three largest sects... Most popular Maronite politician, Michel Aoun, has strong anti-Syrian credentials, but his volatile nature and alliance with Hizbullah alienate many Christians... [Yet] army commander-in-chief, Michel Suleiman, has gained respect for keeping his men above the political fray, and using them effectively to maintain security. Although many Lebanese would be relieved to see the low-key general as president, his election requires a change to constitution rules barring soldiers from civilian office";Economist 08 Dec 07"Iran's Bomb Program: Pressure Works('High Confidence')"(Edit.13-4) :-off.sum:"US's spies have changed their minds. But nuclear Iran remains a danger". Highlights: "In 2005 [US intelligence] said that Iran had a secret nuclear program and was determined to get a bomb. Now they say they were wrong about that. [For more on the revised analysis and US reactions, see:"Iran: Nuclear Fallout [in WSHDC]"(38):off.sum:"[US] spooks change their tune, and [US] politicians recalibrate". For also Iranian reaction:"Iran's Nuclear Program: What's Not To Celebrate?"(53-4):off.sum:"Mahmoud Ahmadinejad thinks Iran is home free".] NIE says with 'high confidence' that although Iran was indeed working on a bomb until 03, it then stopped. By middle of 07, it had probably ('moderate confidence') not started again. Unless it got fuel for a bomb from abroad, would take at least until late 09 ('moderate confidence'), but more likely between 2010 and 15 to make it at home. [I]ntelligence is... system of best guesses based on incomplete evidence[, but as] 16 agencies signed report[,] most unlikely to be a tissue of lies. [H]owever, relieved [US] doves... had better read the report again[:] final sentence says ('high confidence') that Iran has scientific/technical/industrial capacity eventually to produce nuclear weapons if chooses. ['A]t a minimum' it is keeping the option open[, t]roubling because Iran can continue to work towards a bomb without resuming secret program US now thinks stopped in 03... But creating warhead is easier part of building a bomb. Harder by far is making the fuel [which] Iran continues to do, in defiance of UNSC, at uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz. For now, Iran enriching uranium at below weapons grade[, but] to get the uranium to weapons grade it has only to run the stuff often enough through Natanz's centrifuges... The case for US pre-eption [attack] now becomes almost impossible to sell [ - ] probably a good thing. [R]eport may also make it harder for US and EU to maintain, let alone sharpen, [UN] sanctions... to make Iran stop work at Natanz... US may have to show new flexibility[:] it could offer to talk to Iran [ - which might refuse,] but that would at least make it clear which side was the spoiler"; Economist 15 Dec 07"Afghanistan and Iraq: Must They Be Wars Without End?"(Edit.13):- off.sum:"No, as recent successes show. But 'winning' will take many years, and cannot be achieved by force alone". Editorial initially raises question:"Is it possible that [the two US-led wars] are at least beginning to come good?", and draws attention to carefully relevant reports (with off.sums): "Briefing: Iraq: Can a Lull Be Turned Into a Real Peace?"(28-30):"Surge of US troops has dramatically reduced violence. But Iraq's politicians may still squander an obvious chance for reconciliation";"Briefing: Afghanistan: Policing a Whirlwind"(31-3):"As foreign troops become more efficient, government is still the problem". Highlights common to both wars:"At best, coming good will consist of a tapering off of violence, and a crab-wise movement towards a political accommodation between the governments... and the militias now fighting them... As in Iraq, so in Afghanistan: it would be both morally wrong and tactically foolish for West's politicians to exaggerate temporary gains in the vain hope of stilling the domestic clamour for withdrawal... 'Victory'... will at most mean preventing catastrophe; and even this modest aim will for years require spending Western lives and money in campaigns that will demand as much attention to the once-reviled business of nation-building as to the use of military force... As to whether either war is worth the prolonged struggle, that is question whose answer must depend on the changing costs and benefits... Democracies need the courage to withdraw from wars bringing no good, but also to persevere in just ones - even when the end is not yet in sight"; Philip H.Gordon"Can the War on Terror Be Won? How to Fight the Right War"Foreign Affairs Vol.86/No.6(Nov/Dec 07):-Senior Fellow at Brookings Institution, and author of Winning the Right War: The Path to Security for America and the World(Times Books 07), from which the essay is drawn, strongly criticizes Bush's anti-terror invasion of Iraq as having 'created more terrorists than it has eliminated'. Instead he argues:"Considering possible outcomes of the war on terror makes clear that it can indeed be won, but only with the recognition that this is a new and different kind of war. Victory will come not when foreign leaders accept certain terms but when political changes erode and ultimately undermine support for the ideology and strategy of those determined to destroy(sic) the US. It will come not when Wshdc and its allies kill or capture all terrorists or potential terrorists but when the ideology the terrorists espouse is discredited, when their tactics are seen to have failed, and when they come to find more promising paths to the dignity, respect, and opportunities they crave". The arguments then put forward to gradually change relevant views and situations abroad are similar in thrust to those very briefly implied in: Christopher Spencer REASONS WHY ALL SOCIETIES ON EARTH MUST...(op.cit); Michael Levi"Stopping Nuclear Terrorism:The Dangerous Allure of a Perfect Defence"(131-140)Foreign Affairs Vol.87/No.1(Jan/Feb 2008):-official summary: "Nuclear terrorism poses a grave threat to global security, but seeking silver bullets to counter it does not make sense. Instead of pursuing a perfect defence, US policymakers should create an integrated defensive system that takes advantage of the terrorists' weaknesses and disrupts their plots at every stage, thereby chipping away at their overal chances of success"; Economist 05 Jan 08"Global Migration: Keep the Borders Open"(Edit.8-9):-off.sum:"The backlash against immigrants in the rich world is a threat to prosperity everywhere". Highlights: "[A]round the rich world, immigration has been rising to the top of voters' lists of concerns - which, for those who believe that migration greatly benefits both recipient and donor countries, is a worry in itself".[Editorial draws top attention to"Special Report: Migration" (Unique 1-16):-the 8 sections' titles/off.sums: "Open Up"/"Despite a growing backlash, the boom in migration has been mostly good for both sending/recipient countries, says Adam Roberts". "Of Bedsheets and Bison Grass Vodka"/"Rich economies gain from high levels of migration, but the benefits are unevenly spread". "The Politics of the Gun"/"Migration has once again become a touchy political issue". "Keep Out"/ "Voters like the idea of tougher borders, but the cost is high and the benefits are limited". "Send Me a Number"/Migrants' remittances help ease poverty back home, but they are not a cure-all". "You Don't Have To Be Rich"/"Developing countries attract migrants too". "Circulate Or Integrate?"/ "A choice of migration policies". "The Long Term"/"Too much or not enough?" Other relevant items in same issue: "Briefing: Germany's Jews: Latkes and Vodka"(40-2)/ "Immigrants from former Soviet Union are transforming Jewish life in Germany". "Immigration Controls: Guarding British Soil"(47-8)/"Britain's immigration regime, long one of Europe's most liberal, is to tighten up. Will it secure the jobs of British workers - or those of MPs?"] [M]ost often migration is about young, motivated, dynamic people seeking to better themselves by hard work [and h]istory has shown [it] encourages prosperity. Tens of millions of Europeans who made it to the New World in 19th and 20th centuries improved their lot, just as... today. Many migrants return home with new skills, savings, technology and bright ideas. Remittances in 2006 were worth at least $260b - more in many countries than aid and foreign investment combined. Letting in migrants does vastly more good for the world's poor than [foreign aid]. The movement also helps the rich world... Indeed, advanced economies compete vigorously for outsiders' skills... Low-skilled are needed too, especially in farming, services and care for children and the elderly. [So w]hy the backlash? Partly because politicians prefer to pander to xenophobic fears than to explain immigration's benefits. But not all fear of foreigners is irrational. Voters have genuine concerns... To keep borders open, fears have to be acknowledged and dealt with... [I]t is not just futile but also foolish to build taller fences to keep them out. Better [to open] more routes for legal, perhaps temporary, migration... Politicians in rich countries should also be honest about, and quicker to raise spending to deal with, the strains that immigrants place on public services... The social integration of new arrivals is also crucial... Better to seek ways to isolate the extremist fringe... Above all, perspective is needed. The vast population movements of past four decades... have offered a better life for millions of migrants and enriched receiving countries both culturally and materially. But... politicians need... to deal honestly with the problems sometimes caused"; Economist 12 Jan 08"The Arabs: Between Fitna, Fawda and the Deep Blue Sea"(40-2):-"Huge differences persist among 300m-odd Arabic speakers and 22 countries of Arab League. With oil prices high, some Arab economies booming[, but gulfs are as great as any on earth.] Yet Arab world [displays] sameness of spirit. Particularly among people under 30 [vast majority/one of world's fastest growth rates,] mood is one of disgruntlement/doubt. Factors[:] failing public-education systems and resilience of social traditions often ill-suited to urban lifestyle - now Arab norm - but politics above all shapes discontent. [T]he problem of Palestine has stuck out like a troublesome nail. [Yet hope for its eventual justice] has taken a beating of late[:] if Palestinians cannot unite,.. why should other Arabs help them? And which side to support? [I]n Iraq, 2003 invasion produced all but universal Arab outrage[, b]ut the rights/wrongs have grown harder... Elsewhere, become harder to blame slaughter in Darfur region of Sudan, or stalemate between Lebanon's sects... Many still see Bush's 'war on terrorism' as crusade against Islam[, b]ut many also note al-Qaeda-style jihadism has killed more Muslims than 'infidels'. In past, Arabs looked to leaders for guidance[, but m]ost of today's leaders lack an inspirational project[, n]or is any country a natural leader. [P]ersonality-based leadership of 60s-70s has fallen out of fashion[, yet] not replaced by more institutionally-based system of rule, let alone...democracy. [O]ften adopting the outward shape of reform [lacks] substance... The marginally freer press [reflects] the impact of hard-to-block new media[, yet stratagems still] suck vitality out of politics [and] voter turnout has steadily declined. [Experts] have long blamed oil wealth... for the survival of authoritarianism [as governments] neatly absolve themselves of the need [for] heavy taxes. A less obvious source of state power is a pervasive fear of what might happen in its absence[, and] Moslems have...yet to resolve whether laws should emanate from the people or from God. [Here stress put on "Islam and Democracy: The Practice - and the Theory"(53-4):-off.sum:"Can rule by people be reconciled with sovereignty of Allah?"] [Resolution has] practical consequences. In most Arab countries, regimes hold power by virtue of tradition or through military-backed movements that claim to represent the will of the masses. Where top-down authority collapses,.. very hard for bottom-up politics to repair the damage. [N]ot surprising that people prefer the devil they know to the fitna (