Category: Asia and Pacific

  • Top of the Agenda: China Border Attack

    Top of the Agenda: China Border Attack

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    – China border attack in Xinjiang highlights Olympic terror threat.
    – Zawahiri rumors swirl; Pakistani Taliban denies reports.
    – Zuma hearings open in South Africa.
    – Attacks in Mogadishu break fragile calm.
    Top of the Agenda: China Border Attack

    Chinese state media report this morning that sixteen policemen have been killed in an attack on an outpost (Xinhua) in Xinjiang province in western China. Officials billed the incident, in which two assailants reportedly used grenades and knives, as a terrorist attack (BBC).

    The attack highlights unrest in Xinjiang province, where some in the large Uighur Muslim community accuse the Chinese government of imperialist governance. A new CFR.org Backgrounder gives an in-depth look at political tensions in the province.

    The incident also raises concerns about disruptions to the Beijing Olympic Games, which begin in four days. Local activist groups and Western human rights watchdogs have seized on the games to protest Chinese government positions on an array of issues, from the Tibet region to Chinese business interests with a Sudanese regime accused of rampant abuses in Darfur. The Guardian reports on a blog that Chinese officials are increasing security measures ahead of the games. The New York Times surveys the views of experts on the terrorist threat posed by various groups during the Olympics.

    Background:

    – This Backgrounder profiles the main Islamist separatist group in China’s Xinjiang region, the East Turkestan Islamic Movement.

    – This Backgrounder looks at the many issues on which activist groups have used the Olympics to apply pressure to the Chinese government.

  • KLO: “Matthew Bryza’s last report prejudices Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity”

    KLO: “Matthew Bryza’s last report prejudices Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity”

     

    [ 02 Aug 2008 15:22 ]

    Baku. Ramil Mammadli-APA. Karabakh Liberty Organization made a statement on Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, OSCE MG Co-Chair Matthew Bryza’s report on the solution to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. KLO Press Service told APA.
    “Matthew Bryza stated that liberation of regions around Nagorno Karabakh, deployment of peacekeeping forces in the region, voting on the status of Nagorno Karabakh had been discussed during the negotiations. KLO stated many times that this plan and discussions directed to give Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia forever. Bryza’s report prejudices Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity. KLO considers that Azerbaijan should refuse negotiations within the framework of OSCE MG. Moreover, U.S. Embassy in Azerbaijan should clear up absurd report”, the statement says.

  • Bryza: Karabakh residents will themselves decide whether the republic will return under Azeri control or will be independent

    Bryza: Karabakh residents will themselves decide whether the republic will return under Azeri control or will be independent

    01.08.2008 20:55 GMT+04:00

    /PanARMENIAN.Net/ Nagorno Karabakh residents will decide for themselves whether the republic will return under Azeri control or will be independent, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State and Co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group Matthew Bryza said after the meeting between the Armenian and Azeri Foreign Ministers in Moscow.

    The people of Nagorno Karabakh will express their will through a referendum, he said, Interfax reports.

  • FELLOWSHIP- 2009 Junior Faculty Development Program (JFDP)

    FELLOWSHIP- 2009 Junior Faculty Development Program (JFDP)

    Posted by: Junior Faculty Development Program <jfdp@americancouncils.org>

    The Government of the United States of America is pleased to announce the open competition for the Junior Faculty Development Program (JFDP) for the 2009 spring semester. The JFDP is a program of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs of the United States Department of State (ECA). American Councils for International Education:

    ACTR/ACCELS, an American non-profit, non-governmental organization, receives a grant from ECA to administer the JFDP, and oversee each participant’s successful completion of the program. The United States Congress annually appropriates funds to finance the JFDP, and authorizes the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs to oversee these funds.

    If you are a citizen of Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Tajikistan, or Turkmenistan, and are teaching full-time in an institution of higher education in your home country, have at least two years of university-level teaching experience, and are highly proficient in English, American Councils invites you to learn more about the program and apply.

    JFDP applications may now be downloaded as a print version or submitted online at the JFDP website. Additional information, including the 2008-2009 calendar, academic field descriptions, a list of frequently asked questions, and information about past program participants and host institutions can be found at the JFDP website:

    http:\\www.jfdp.org&Horde=4fcb6119853632a5cd4a4348e0f9d664 .

    Applications are due for applicants from Eurasia on August 29, 2008.

    Applications are due for applicants from Southeast Europe on September 5, 2008.

    Thank you very much for your help in promoting this program.

    Sincerely,

    JFDP Organizers

  • A triumph for Turkey – and its allies

    A triumph for Turkey – and its allies

    By M K Bhadrakumar

    The Israelis are expected to know something extra about their tough neighborhood that we do not know. In all probability, the two Israeli officials – Shalom Turjeman and Yoram Turbowitz – knew when they set out for Ankara on Tuesday that Turkey’s government was far from dysfunctional or was going to be in any danger of extinction within the next 24 hours.

    The two advisors to (outgoing ) Prime Minister Ehud Olmert were on a sensitive mission to hold the fourth round of peace talks with Syria under Turkish mediation. The format of the talks is such that Turkish officials shuttle between the Israeli and Syrian diplomats, who do not come face to face. The Turks seem to have done a masterly job. On Monday, Syria’s ambassador to the United States, Imad Mustafa, speaking on a public platform in Washington, said, “We [Syria and Israel] desire to recognize each other and end the state of war.”

    “Here, then, is a grand thing on offer. Let us sit together, let us make peace, let us end once and for all the state of war,” Imad added, referring to the peace talks brokered by Turkey. Clearly, Turkey’s political stability is no longer just a national issue of 80 million Turks. It is a vital issue today for the international community. And Turkey’s role in the Israel-Syria peace talks is only the tip of the iceberg. In the highly volatile Middle East situation, Turkey also facilitated contacts between US National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki. (The two adversaries visited Ankara recently.) Furthermore, Turkey has waded into the Iraq project.

    Besides, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is poised to spread to the northern shores of the Black Sea. The new cold war has arrived in Turkey. Moscow is determined not to repeat its historic mistake of driving Turkey into the NATO camp, as it did in the 1950s.

    Russian President Dmitry Medvedev is scheduling a visit to Turkey. A Moscow analyst noted, “Atomstroyexport [Russia’s nuclear power equipment and service equipment monopoly] is ready to provide Turkey with a project for the construction of a nuclear power plant [NPP] that will be less expensive and more reliable than its American counterparts. Such NPPs will help Turkey to consolidate its position in the regional energy market, especially considering Iran’s nuclear energy problems. Moscow has long been hinting to Ankara that it is best to give priority to economic expediency, especially in the energy industry.”Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.

    (Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

    Source: Asia Times, Aug 2, 2008

  • Even Armenia is Now Choosing NATO Over Russia

    Even Armenia is Now Choosing NATO Over Russia

     Paul Goble

    Vienna, July 30 – Yerevan’s announcement that it will take part in military exercises this fall under NATO’s Partnership for Peace program underscores an important and to Moscow disturbing trend: Public statements to the contrary, all former Soviet republics now prefer to cooperate with the Western alliance rather than with the Russian Federation.
    In some cases, Sobkorr.ru’s Yuri Gladysh says, they have made this choice with enthusiasm believing that it is better to have a big friend far away than a big friend next door, but in others – and that seems to be the case with Armenia – they have chosen NATO over Russia as “the lesser of two evils” (www.sobkorr.ru/news/488ED1F94EA6D.html).
    On Monday, Armenia’s defense ministry announced that NATO’s September 20-21 Partnership for Peace exercises will take place on Armenian territory and that Armenian troops will participate in them, a stinging defeat for Moscow that has long viewed Armenia as its closest ally in what many Russians call “the near abroad.”
    But Russian officials should not have been surprised. On the one hand, the Sobkorr.ru site reports, more than half of all Armenians now have a positive view of the Western alliance – some 52 percent in a recent poll – with only 35 percent having a negative and thus pleasing-to-Moscow attitude.
    And on the other, in recent months, Yerevan has been involved in exploratory conversations with Turkey despite the centrality of the events of 1915 in the life of the Armenian nation. Indeed, Gladysh says, were it not for that historical memory, “Armenian would already long ago been among those countries oriented toward close cooperation with [NATO].
    Given Armenia’s decision, the Sobkorr.ru analyst says, it is time to “honestly answer a simple question – which of the former union republics and now members of the ephemeral Commonwealth [of Independent States] is sincerely striking toward a new union ‘under the canopy of fraternal bayonets’ of a powerful Russia?”
    Most observers, Gladysh continues, include Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and Armenia as the most likely candidates for such a “new Union.” But an honest answer, he suggests, shows that “not one of the countries enumerated above is interested in any union on a political basis, especially, alas, under the aegis of Russia.”
    Kazakhstan and Kyrgystan, he says, simply don’t need it and are increasingly directing their attention to their neighbors in Southeast Asia. Belarus is better off as an independent state so that it “preserves the possibility of successfully converting into real capital its favorable geographic position.” For those three, “Russia is not a subject of interest.”
    Indeed, Gladysh suggests, Russia has “not been able to present to its neighbors” any attractive vision for their future relationship, and so they like all the other “newly independent states” are looking to the defense alliance that most Moscow officials still view as ineluctably hostile to Russia.
    Armenia, he continues, “occupies in this list a special place. Despite longstanding ties with Russia and a sense that Moscow is its protector against Turkey and Azerbaijan, “this small Caucasus republic is ‘the weak link’ in the modest ranks of [the Russian Federation’s] allies.” Yerevan’s decision shows that its “patience is ending” with Moscow’s “loud but empty declarations” and that Armenia cannot expect anything from Russia. Moreover, while Armenia does not have a land border with Russia, it does have borders in the south with “an active member of NATO.”
    Consequently, Gladysh concludes, “Armenia willy nilly is choosing the lesser of two evils.” And in this case, he says, “‘the lesser evil’ turns out to be close [and] constructive cooperation with the West” and with the West’s most important alliance – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
    “What an infuriating irony of Fate!” Gladysh says. A great deal had to be done or left undone for “Armenia to begin to turn away from its historical ally and direct its vision to its long-time opponent.” But that is what Russia has succeeded in doing, a tragedy from her point of view but quite possibly a breakthrough to a better future for Yerevan.