Archive for Politics

16 May, 2008 | No comments

U.S. general wary of withdrawal plan

WASHINGTON (AP) The U.S. military commander in one of the more troubled areas of Iraq said Friday that embracing Sen. John Warner’s call to begin troop withdrawals before the end of the year would be “a giant step backward.”

Army Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of troops south of Baghdad, said that in such a scenario, militants pushed from his sector in recent operations would quickly return.

TOP GOP SENATOR: «www.usatoday.com»

“If coalition soldiers were to leave, having fought hard for that terrain, having denied the enemy their sanctuaries, what’d happen is the enemy would come back,” said Lynch.

“He’d start building the bombs again, he’d start attacking the locals again and he’d start exporting that violence into Baghdad and we would take a giant step backward,” Lynch told Pentagon reporters in a video conference from Iraq.

He said that recent gains resulted from the buildup of troops in Iraq and that he needs all the forces he has until Iraqis are able to step up and take over, perhaps some time next year.

Lynch was asked to respond to comments by Warner that President Bush should announce at least a small reduction in forces by Christmas.

Warner, R-Va., former chairman of the Armed Services Committee and Navy secretary during the Vietnam War, said Thursday that Bush would be sending a powerful message to Iraq’s government that the U.S. commitment there is not open-ended.

Warner says the president should get to decide when and how many troops should leave. He also did not mention any places where he thought reductions were possible in Iraq, where some regions are worse than others.

In another reaction Friday, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee also said he disagreed with Warners’s idea, but that Bush needs to move away from trying to establish democracy in Iraq and concentrate instead on security and stability.

“Establishing a democracy in the time frame that we’ve wanted to do it, over the period of three to five years, was too big of a reach,” Michigan Rep. Pete Hoekstra said.

Still, Warner’s call for troop withdrawals is likely to ratchet up pressure on Bush, who has opposed setting a date for any drawdown and contends that conditions on the ground should dictate deployments.

“I’m hopeful that this (redeployment) could lead to more emphasis on the Iraqi forces taking the major responsibility, as it relates to the internal insurgency in that country,” the Virginia Republican said.

Warner’s suggestion comes as a new intelligence assessment says Iraqis have failed to govern effectively or reach the political compromises believed necessary to tamp down sectarian violence.

Overall, the report finds that Iraq’s security will continue to “improve modestly” over the next six to 12 months, provided that coalition forces mount strong counterinsurgency operations and mentor Iraqi forces. But even then, violence levels will remain high as the country struggles to achieve national political reconciliation, and the Iraqi government led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is likely to become increasingly vulnerable because of criticism from various Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish factions.

“The strains of the security situation and absence of key leaders have stalled internal political debates, slowed national decision-making, and increased Maliki’s vulnerability” to factions that could form a rivaling coalition, the document says.

Democrats say the grim report and Warner’s conclusion bolster their position that Bush should change course and start bringing troops home this fall. Party leaders this year tried to pass legislation ordering troops home this fall, but repeatedly fell short of the 60 votes needed in the Senate to pass.

“Our military has performed their duties excellently, but the purpose of the escalation in Iraq was to create a secure environment in which political change could occur, and it is clear that the Iraqi leaders have failed to make progress,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Republican leaders countered that the intelligence assessment bolsters their position that U.S. troops should stay. The report warns that limiting the mission of U.S. forces to a support role and counterterrorist operations Д as Democrats and some Republicans suggest Д would “erode security gains achieved thus far.”

“The fact that Democratic leaders continue to push for precipitous withdrawal despite the significant progress our troops are making shows just how deeply invested they are in failure,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Democrats agree the military has made substantial gains in Iraq, but they say the progress made is useless if the Iraqi government is unable to take control.

16 May, 2008 | No comments

British Airways, Korean air fined $300 million

WASHINGTON (AP) Two major airlines were fined $300 million apiece Thursday after admitting they conspired to fix prices on international flights and agreeing to help prosecutors investigate other airlines.

British Airways PLC, Britain’s largest airline, and Korean Air Co., South Korea’s national carrier, pleaded guilty to antitrust conspiracy charges. They acknowledged colluding with rivals over cargo rates and fuel surcharges, which were added to fares in response to rising oil prices. That meant higher costs for international shippers and passengers.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates said the case “involved considerable commerce and reflected long-term and widespread conduct involving major airlines and players.”

Both saw their potential fines reduced because they cooperated with Justice Department investigators. Korean Air’s fines could have been twice as high and British Airways could have faced fines closer to $900 million, but the Justice Department and the judge credited the company with cooperating.

“Any anti-competitive behavior is to be condemned at British Airways or at other companies. It will not be tolerated and we remain vigilant in this respect,” British Airways Chief Executive Willie Walsh said in a statement released after court.

Korean Air released a statement saying it was “committed to antitrust compliance” and was taking steps to make sure the conduct was never repeated. Neither company addressed the extent of its cooperation or how widespread the practice was in the industry.

Earlier this month, authorities in London announced $246 million in fines for British Airways in a parallel trans-Atlantic investigation. Both inquiries are ongoing.

Scott D. Hammond, deputy assistant attorney general for criminal antitrust issues, said the sentences proved that “those who violate the antitrust laws and seek to deny American consumers and businesses the benefits of competition will be held accountable.”

Other companies were not named, but Virgin Atlantic has been identified in London but is not expected to face a fine there because it reported its misconduct to authorities.

As part of their plea deals, the airlines acknowledged they colluded with other unidentified companies from 2000 to 2006. The cargo rate scheme meant higher shipping costs for businesses. For passengers, the scheme meant more expensive tickets because the surcharges were wrapped into the ticket fare.

Between 2004 and 2006, fuel surcharges rose from about $10 to about $120 per ticket for a round-trip, long-haul flight on BA or Virgin.

Bates credited both British Airways and Korean Air with turning over hundreds of thousands of documents, some of which needed to be translated, and making executives available for interviews with investigators. As foreign companies, they could have challenged the probe and refused to cooperate.

The $300 million criminal fines were the second-largest antitrust sanction by the Justice Department since 1995. The largest antitrust fine, $500 million, was against vitamin giant F. Hoffman-La Roche in 1999 in a price-fixing case.

16 May, 2008 | No comments

Bush, Democrats Agree On Trade Deals

(AP)Congressional Democratic leaders announced Thursday that they had forged new trade policy guidelines with the administration that will elevate labor and environmental rights to key components in future free trade agreements.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, flanked by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab, said the agreement signaled “a giant step forward” in advancing U.S. economic interests without sacrificing American workers and the environment.

The new policy will apply immediately to pending free trade agreements with Peru and Panama. It will also become a part of trade accords with South Korea and Colombia, although lawmakers said other issues, such as violence in Colombia, must be dealt with before Congress can consider those agreements.

In a statement, President Bush said the agreement “provides a clear path for advancing” all four trade deals. He pledged, however, to continue working with lawmakers and the governments of each country to secure passage of each agreement.

“Expanding opportunities for the sale of American goods and services is crucial to continued growth and job creation here in America,” Mr. Bush said.

A majority of Democrats have opposed most bilateral free trade agreements in recent years, contending that the deals negotiated by the administration were weak in requiring trading partners to address such issues as child labor, workplace discrimination and environmental degradation.

With the Democratic takeover of Congress, the new majority made clear that no trade agreement would move forward without progress on those issues.

The new policy, said Pelosi, was “a recognition of the results of the November election.”

Schwab said the deal with the Democrats was “a historic bipartisan breakthrough” and Paulson said it was important not only to American economic prosperity but also “to the geopolitical stability of the region.”

But a half-dozen House Democrats with strong labor ties, watching the news conference from the back of the room, later expressed strong dissatisfaction with the process.

“The strongest voices for workers and the environment were not included” in the negotiations and were not informed of the deal, said Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio.

“I’m very disappointed that Speaker Pelosi held a press conference before meeting with the caucus,” said Rep. Michael Michaud, D-Maine. “In a democratic process Democrats ought to know.”

Under the new policy, free trade agreement countries would be committed to adopting and enforcing laws that abide by basic international labor standards as outlined in a 1998 International Labor Organization declaration. It would prohibit those countries from lowering their labor standards.

The labor commitments would be incorporated as part of the core free trade treaty rather than, as has been the practice, spelled out in side agreements or side letters.

Similarly, countries that reach trade agreements with the United States would have to adopt and enforce laws that are in line with seven major multilateral environmental agreements.

Peru would have to take steps to crack down on illegal logging, including mahogany.

The new policy also takes steps to make it easier for poor people in trading partner countries to get access to cheaper generic drugs.

The governments of Peru and Panama will need to take legislative or other steps to alter the trade agreements signed with the United States to incorporate the new U.S. policy. Pelosi said she had assurances from leaders of the two countries that that would not be a major problem.

In another provision, the United States would have full, non-challengeable authority to prevent foreign companies from operating U.S. ports, based on national security concerns.

It also states that Congress and the administration will develop an initiative to promote education and training, as well as portable health and pension benefits, for workers hurt by the effects of trade and technology.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., who negotiated the new trade principles, said, “We didn’t want the U.S. trade representative to be a lobbyist just for U.S. businesses.” He said she also has to be concerned with all jobs and businesses adversely affected by globalization.

Several business groups praised the new bipartisan approach to trade, with Jim Owens, chairman and CEO of Caterpillar Inc., and co-chairman of the Business Roundtable’s International Trade and Investment Task Force, saying it would pave the way for larger trade initiatives.

Those include renewal of “fast track” authority that gives the president power to negotiate trade agreements that Congress can approve or disapprove but cannot amend. That authority expires this summer and Democrats have shown little enthusiasm for renewing it.

The new policy, while not applicable to fast track or the Doha round of multinational trade talks, “lays the groundwork for a bipartisan position on trade,” said Rep. Jim McCrery of Louisiana, top Republican on the Ways and Means Committee.

16 May, 2008 | No comments

QUT students, academics stage dual protest

Around 100 people have rallied at the Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane for a ‘dual protest’.

Students and academics are angry at the proposed closure of the School of Humanities and the suspension without pay of two academics, Gary McLennan and John Hookham, for misconduct.

The pair publicly condemned a thesis called ‘Laughing at the Disabled’.

QUT lecturer Philip Castle has described the treatment of the academics as appalling.

He says the matter should have been handled internally and that a suspension is too harsh.

QUT Student Guild president Daniel Doren says the university should merge the humanities and creative industries faculties.

“A final decision will be made next month,” he said.

16 May, 2008 | No comments

Diplomats entering the blogosphere

WASHINGTON U.S. diplomats are revealing their personal sides on the new State Department blog.

In posts over the past week, contributing envoys have written about being “mesmerized by the images of brave Burmese monks and their supporters” as the Myanmar junta launched a bloody crackdown on protesters, and the heartbreak of hearing news of another bomb explosion in Beirut.

Although the blog, launched Sept. 25, has its dull aspects Д the “Dipnote” name being one Д it lives up to its promise of providing glimpses of diplomatic work and what it’s like to serve overseas.

“As a person who, prior to coming to Iraq, was not accustomed to the whistling sound of rockets overhead, or being jolted out of bed by the sound and reverberation of a car bomb exploding outside the IZ (International Zone) I have conditioned myself to take each day however it may come,” writes West Virginia native Noel Clay, a press officer at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

It’s not all about war zones, though.

“I’ve never witnessed so many impeccably dressed people in one place,” writes 25-year-old Masharika Prejean, who works in State’s public affairs office, about her visit to the United Nations General Assembly in New York in late September.

“The Europeans walk through the lobby of our home for the week, the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, in their grays and blacks. The Americans in their shiny lapel pins, power suits, and blackberries. The Africans in their colorful garbs and stylish headdresses.”

Still, State’s “official blog” can’t escape classic signs of bureaucratic swagger. An eagle crest overlooks the day’s postings, which are written in white font against an austere dark background.

And postings almost always tout details of U.S. foreign policy. Some read like official statements from the department. A series of posts by press officers who attended the United Nations General Assembly offers riveting details on diplomats’ schedules.

“First thing this morning, President Bush met with President Karzai to discuss progress in Afghanistan,” writes Kristen Silverberg, assistant secretary of Bureau International Organization Affairs, in a Sept. 27 post. “… The Security Council this afternoon issued a statement of concern about the events in Burma, which were also discussed at today’s G-8 Foreign Ministers lunch.”

Many readers have said they like the idea of the blog, although some are skeptical.

“We’ll see if this is gonna be another partisan hack job,” writes a reader named Joe in response to the welcome post by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, who came up with the idea for the blog.

Conrad from Washington was more kind: “Hi Sean, Great idea, can’t wait to see how this develops. Lots of interested people will be reading!”

Will the State Department be reading what the public says?

“Oh yeah,” said Heath Kern, director of digital media at State and editor-in-chief of the blog. “This is a pretty big deal in the State Department right now, and people are interested in what the public has to say.”

The public has had a lot to say about the blog’s “Question of the Week” posts. Last week’s question, on who should be able to possess nuclear technology, elicited more than 80 comments.

Knox in Florida responded: “I think only peaceful democratic nations with strict nuclear watch dogging should be allowed to have nuclear power.”

Jennsy in China writes: “Two choices: NO one can have it; Everyone can have it. So, if you want to forbid others have it, first, drop yours.”

Kern said that by the blog’s fourth day, the department had only filtered out four comments Д those that used profanity or weren’t written in English.

“We draw the line at profanity. But if it’s just a negative comment, absolutely (it will be posted),” Kern said.

Despite its official nature, State allows readers to share its posts on other sites, including some catering to a younger community Д such as the social networking site Facebook.

The No. 1 improvement readers have suggested is to drop the blog’s name: “The name DipNote has to go … the blogosphere can be quite cruel sometimes … you’ll be referred to as Dip and another 4 letter word,” writes SD in Washington.

« Next entries