Just Foreign Policy News November 7, 2006 Anti-war Election Day Edition
No War with Iran: Petition More than 3400 people have signed the Just Foreign Policy/Peace Action petition through Just Foreign Policy's website. Please sign/circulate if you have yet to do so: http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/involved/iranpetition.html Just Foreign Policy News daily podcast: http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/podcasts/podcast_howto.html Summary: U.S./Top News The Bush administration's successful effort to have Congress eliminate the right of Guantánamo prisoners to challenge their detentions before federal judges is now moving toward what may be an epic battle in the courts, the New York Times reports. Lawyers for the detainees say Congress can not take away the right to bring habeas corpus lawsuits because that would violate the Constitution. The Constitution provides that Congress may suspend the right only in cases of rebellion or invasion. A Halliburton subsidiary charged the Iraqi government as much as $25,000 per month for each of as many as 1,800 fuel trucks that were to deliver gasoline to Iraq, but the trucks often spent days or weeks sitting idle on the border, says a report released by an auditing agency sponsored by the UN, the New York Times reports. As the International Criminal Court prepares to begin hearings on its first case, debate among senior U.S. military officials seems to be shifting away from staunch opposition, the Washington Post reports. Court supporters note approvingly that the court has rejected many war crimes cases against the US. The international Red Cross called Monday for the abolition of cluster bombs, saying the indiscriminate deaths they cause outweigh any military advantages. As the 2006 campaign staggered to an angry close, national security and the Iraq war dominated the debate, the Washington Post reports. Democrats said a vote for them would force change in Iraq strategy, while President Bush led the GOP charge in warning that the opposition party cannot be trusted in a time of war. Controversy over the timing of Sunday's announcement of Saddam Hussein's conviction provides a fitting finish for an election campaign that has been as much a contest between competing views of reality as between two political parties, writes Dan Froomkin for the Washington Post. Iran Iran is ready to share its missile systems with political allies and neighboring countries, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards said Sunday. Iran's ambassador to Lebanon said Iran was ready to supply air defense systems to the Lebanese military. The US wants a UN Security Council resolution on Iran to say that Tehran's nuclear ambitions pose a threat to international peace and security, Reuters reports. Russia and China, on the other hand, want to remove some of the sanctions in the European draft. Iraq The vast majority of American military deaths in Iraq are still being caused by Sunni insurgents, ABC News reports. Many in the Middle East said the court verdict against Saddam Hussein had been a foregone conclusion and questioned whether it had been fair, the New York Times reported. Amnesty International deplored the death sentence, describing the proceedings as "deeply flawed and unfair." Iraq's Interior Ministry has charged 57 employees, including high-ranking officers, with human rights crimes for their roles in the torture of hundreds of detainees jailed in a notorious Baghdad prison. Shiite officials have said such accusations are exaggerations, the Washington Post notes. But on Monday, senior Interior Ministry officials acknowledged there was clear evidence of such abuses. A high-ranking commission of Iraq's Shiite-led government said Monday it had prepared a draft law that could return tens of thousands of former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party to their government jobs. Afghanistan Many in Kandahar say their confidence in the government is falling, and some say that is helping fuel support for the Taliban, AP reports. Heavy-handed NATO tactics have deepened suspicion of foreign forces. Palestine Discriminatory laws, traditional practices and a severe shortage of emergency shelters combine to perpetuate violence against women by their family members and intimate partners in the Palestinian territories, according to a report by Human Rights Watch. Venezuela In a letter to the Washington Post, Chuck Kaufman noted that the Venezuelan presidency is significantly less powerful than the U.S. presidency. The president does not appoint the judges of the Supreme Court, who are elected by the legislature. Venezuela has a free, oppositional press, unlike many US allies. Nicaragua The electoral victory of Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, despite threats and warnings from US officials, is another example of plummeting US influence in Latin America, writes Mark Weisbrot on Huffington Post. Contents: U.S./Top News 1) Appeals Court Weighs Prisoners' Right To Fight Detention Neil A. Lewis, New York Times, November 7, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/07/washington/07habeas.html The Bush administration's successful effort to have Congress eliminate the right of Guantánamo prisoners to challenge their detentions before federal judges is now moving toward what may be an epic battle in the courts. And while lawsuits on the topic are spread across the judiciary, the principal battleground, legal experts say, is the federal appeals court in Washington. That court has been considering for three years whether the hundreds of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, have the right of habeas corpus - that is, the ability to ask a federal judge to review the reasons for their detention. But the law passed by Congress last month eliminating the habeas right supersedes almost all of the arguments that have gone before and is now the focus of the legal confrontation, government and civil liberties lawyers agree. In a ruling last June, the Supreme Court had said that an earlier measure did not eliminate habeas lawsuits that were already in the courts. However, in October, the administration used more explicit language, saying the new law retroactively blocked federal courts from entertaining habeas lawsuits by Guantánamo detainees. The three-judge appeals court panel will have to decide whether the pending lawsuits brought by the 430 or so remaining detainees at Guantánamo should be thrown out, as the Bush administration has argued, or whether the new law is unconstitutional, as civil liberties groups have contended. Whatever resolution is reached by the three appellate judges - David Sentelle and Raymond Randolph, both appointees of Republican presidents, and Judith Rogers, appointed by a Democrat - it will almost certainly end up before the Supreme Court. A decision could come from the appeals court before the end of the year. Lawyers for the detainees said in a recent brief that despite the wording of the new law, Congress could not take away the right to bring such habeas corpus lawsuits because that would violate the Constitution. Their brief notes that the Constitution provides that Congress may suspend the right only in cases of rebellion or invasion, as President Abraham Lincoln did during the Civil War. Congress may provide a substitute, but only one that is equivalent to a full-blown habeas action, the lawyers said in their brief. 2) Cost of Taking Fuel to Iraq Is Questioned in New Audit James Glanz, New York Times, November 7, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/07/world/middleeast/07contracts.html A Halliburton subsidiary charged the Iraqi government as much as $25,000 per month for each of as many as 1,800 fuel trucks that were to deliver gasoline to Iraq after the 2003 invasion, but the trucks often spent days or weeks sitting idle on the border, says a report released yesterday by an auditing agency sponsored by the UN. The agency said in a statement that the auditing firm it hired had found that some of the contract costs that had been questioned earlier seemed to be justified. But the agency said the findings raised new questions about hundreds of millions of dollars billed by the company under a $2.4 billion contract that the Army awarded on the eve of the conflict to KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary formerly known as Kellogg Brown & Root. The new audit gives the first detailed picture of how the company incurred many of those costs. The audit said the Kuwaiti government had set the price of its gasoline at $1.13 a gallon. But with the delivery charges, the effective cost of the gas was calculated to be much higher, about $8 a gallon, according to a participant in a meeting in Paris last week at which the audits were presented to the auditing agency and the Iraqi government. Questions have been raised about the contract since 2003, when it first became public that the contract had been awarded without competitive bidding. 3) A Shift in the Debate On International Court Some U.S. Officials Seem to Ease Disfavor Nora Boustany, Washington Post, Tuesday, November 7, 2006; A16 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/06/AR2006110601269.html When then-Undersecretary of State John Bolton nullified the U.S. signature on the International Criminal Court treaty one month into President Bush's first term, he declared it the happiest moment in his years of service. Bolton referred to the court as a "product of fuzzy-minded romanticism ... not just naive, but dangerous." The bipartisan concern then was that American service members deployed overseas risked exposure to a foreign tribunal. President Clinton signed the Rome Treaty on his last day in office in 2000, while registering strong reservations. Now, as the court prepares to begin public hearings on its first case, the debate among senior U.S. military officials seems to be shifting away from staunch opposition, and a fresh assessment of the court seems to be underway. The new attitude has been prompted in part by the court's record since it began operations three years ago; Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, an Argentine, has dismissed hundreds of petitions for cases against the US. The cases were turned down for lack of evidence, lack of jurisdiction, or because of the US' ability to conduct its own investigations and trials. Out of some 1,500 petitions to the chief prosecutor, almost half accused the US of war crimes. In a letter made public last year, Moreno-Ocampo's office said it was throwing out 240 such cases concerning the war in Iraq. Reviews of each claim determined that none fell within the court's jurisdiction, his letter said, because the US is not a signatory. A congressional study released in August said the ICC's chief prosecutor demonstrated "a reluctance to launch an investigation against the US" based on allegations regarding its conduct in Iraq. To Sen. Patrick Leahy, ranking member of the Appropriations foreign operations subcommittee, the verdict is already in. "The ICC has refuted its critics, who confidently and wrongly predicted that it would be politicized and manipulated by our enemies to prosecute U.S. soldiers," he said recently. Officially, the US does not support the court and has no communication with it. "U.S. policy towards the International Criminal Court has not changed," a Defense Department spokesman said Monday. "While we respect the right of other governments to join and support the ICC, we ask that governments respect the right of the US not to join the ICC." But court backers have noted what they consider quiet support for what the court is doing, particularly in the Darfur region of Sudan, in northern Uganda and in Congo. Court advocates considered it a victory that the Bush administration abstained, instead of using its veto, when the U.N. Security Council voted to refer Sudan to the court over alleged atrocities being committed by Khartoum-backed militias in the Darfur region. 4) Red Cross Urges Ban on Cluster Bombs Associated Press, November 6, 2006, Filed at 5:02 p.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Red-Cross-Cluster-Bombs.html The international Red Cross called Monday for the abolition of cluster bombs, saying the indiscriminate deaths they cause - including children attracted by their bright color and the tiny parachute sometimes attached - outweigh any military advantages. The International Committee of the Red Cross said it was stepping up its campaign against the weapons because of Israel's use of the scattershot bombs during its monthlong war with Lebanon. The US and Russia also have resisted efforts to eliminate the weapons. "The problems associated with cluster munitions are not new," said Philip Spoerri, director of international law for the ICRC, guardian of the Geneva Convention on the conduct of war. "In nearly every conflict in which they have been used, significant numbers of cluster munitions have failed to detonate as intended and have instead left a long-term and deadly legacy of contamination." Cluster bomblets are packed into artillery shells or bombs dropped from aircraft. A single container fired to destroy airfields or tanks and soldiers typically scatters some 200 to 600 of the mini-explosives over an area the size of a football field. Human rights groups have estimated that Israel dropped as many as 4 million of the bomblets in Lebanon. As much as 40 percent of the submunitions failed to explode on impact, U.N. officials have said. Those that do not explode right away may detonate later at the slightest disturbance, experts say. Children are especially vulnerable because the bomblets are often an eye-catching yellow with small parachutes attached. Spoerri said the bomblets continue to kill innocent Lebanese every week. Much of the suffering, he added, could have been avoided had more accurate weapons been chosen. No international treaties specifically forbid the use of cluster bombs. However, the Geneva Conventions outline laws protecting civilians during conflict. Because cluster bomblets often cause civilian casualties after conflicts end - much like land mines - their use has been heavily criticized by human rights groups. The Red Cross, the first major organization to call for a ban since the Israel-Hezbollah war this summer, sought an end to use of cluster bombs in cities and villages after the 1999 NATO air war against Serbia. Its call in 2000 for a moratorium on their general use has been ignored by the US in Afghanistan and Iraq. Human Rights Watch also has cited cluster bomb use by Hezbollah against targets in northern Israel, spurring fears that the weapons are becoming more easily accessible for rogue militias and terrorists. The U.N. Children's Fund has so far only called for "a freeze on the use, transfer and sale of the weapons," spokesman Michael Bociurkiw said. However, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is expected to issue a statement Tuesday to countries meeting in Geneva to discuss how to reduce the threat posed by conventional weapons. 5) Angry Campaigns End on an Angrier Note Iraq War Remains Paramount Issue as Voters Go to Polls Jim VandeHei & Dan Balz, Washington Post, Tuesday, November 7, 2006; A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/06/AR2006110601287.html As the 2006 campaign staggered to an angry close, national security and the Iraq war dominated the final-day debate of midterm elections in which national themes, not simply local choices, have framed the most competitive races. Democrats said a vote for them would force change in Iraq strategy, while President Bush led the GOP charge in warning that the opposition party cannot be trusted in a time of war. Dozens of too-close-to-call House and Senate races finished on a surly tone, as the traditional political strategy of shifting to a positive message at campaign's end gave way this year to a calculation that the best chance to tip the balance was through continued attacks over personal character and alleged corruption. But strategists on both sides said yesterday that national security broadly - and Iraq specifically - are likely to determine control of Congress today. Unlike in the 2002 and 2004 elections, when Republicans held a decisive edge on national security, polls over the past year have shown the public losing faith in the war and the GOP, and Democratic candidates nationwide were using their last TV advertising dollars on spots critical of Iraq policy. "I think, frankly, people don't believe the president anymore" when it comes to the war, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, echoing other party leaders, said in an interview. "We are telling people if they want to stay the course, vote Republican. If you want a change of direction, vote Democrat." 6) Saddam Verdict Surprise? Dan Froomkin, Washington Post, Monday, November 6, 2006; 2:32 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/11/06/BL2006110600505.html Controversy over the timing of Sunday's announcement of Saddam Hussein's conviction provides a fitting finish for an election campaign that has been as much a contest between competing views of reality as between two political parties. Did White House officials manipulate the timing of the verdict for political gain? Bush critics are skeptical, saying it fits a pattern and seems awfully convenient. The White House denies it vehemently, castigating those who would even suggest such a thing as being on drugs or crazy. The traditional media raises the issue - but leaves it unresolved. Peter Baker writes in The Washington Post: "President Bush and politicians from both parties hailed the conviction of Saddam Hussein on Sunday but disagreed on its larger meaning as campaign strategists tried to gauge the political impact just 48 hours before hard-fought midterm elections. "Democratic leaders avoided publicly accusing the Bush administration of orchestrating the verdict's timing but privately some raised questions, and liberal Internet blogs have been full of angry discussion about it. The Iraqi court originally planned to render a verdict in October but delayed it until two days before the election, prompting a defense lawyer for Hussein to write a letter accusing Bush of manipulating the proceedings for campaign purposes." Iran 7) Iran Would Share Missiles Reuters, November 7, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/07/world/middleeast/07Iran.html Iran is ready to share its missile systems with political allies and neighboring countries, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards said late Sunday after he showed off missiles. The commander, Maj. Gen. Yahya Rahim-Safavi, also told the official Arabic-language Al Alam television that the Guards had thousands of troops trained for suicide missions in case Iran was threatened. Iran's ambassador to Lebanon, Mohammad Reza Sheibani, was quoted by Iran's semiofficial Mehr News Agency on Sunday as saying Iran was ready to supply air defense systems to the Lebanese military. 8) U.S. wants U.N. measure to say Iran is threat to peace Evelyn Leopold, Reuters, Monday, November 6, 2006; 5:53 PM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/06/AR2006110600818.html In an effort to toughen a European draft resolution on Iran, the US wants the text to say that Tehran's nuclear ambitions posed a threat to international peace and security, diplomats said. U.S. Ambassador Bolton circulated among a small group a series of amendments, including stronger language on the threat posed by Iran's nuclear ambitions. Similar wording on a "threat to international peace and security" was included in an October U.N. Security Council resolution imposing sanctions on North Korea after its nuclear test. Conversely Russia, backed by China, proposed amendments Friday that would soften the sanctions and cut some of them. The U.S. proposals "are very much in the spirit of the resolution we put down," said one European diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity because the amendments have not been made public. "We certainly think they are in the ballpark of the negotiable," he said. "However, they point in the other direction from the Russian amendments." The draft resolution from Britain, France and Germany demands all countries prevent the sale and supply of equipment, technology and financing contributing to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile prograIt also would freeze the assets of people and entities involved in these programs and bar them from traveling. The rival views of the major powers indicate negotiations will be lengthy and difficult on the resolution, designed to punish Iran for not adhering to U.N demands it suspend its enrichment program. The West believes the program is a cover for bomb-making, but Iran says it is for peaceful purposes. Another U.S. proposal was to appoint an outside board of experts to report to a council sanctions committee on whether the embargoes had been implemented by member states, according to two European diplomats. Several Security Council committees now have such an outside advisory board. Germany, a key negotiator, and the five permanent council members - the US, Britain, France, Russia and China - are expected to resume negotiations later this week, possibly Tuesday or Wednesday. The draft resolution also excludes any use of force in the future by pointing to a specific provision in Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter that applies to sanctions only. Vitaly Churkin, Russia's U.N. ambassador, said his government wanted the draft to be redrawn to encourage the Iranians to return to talks on its nuclear program. Churkin also wants the resolution to exclude mention of the Bushehr nuclear plant that Russia is building in southwest Iran. The draft exempts Bushehr construction but not any nuclear fuel that may be delivered. Iraq 9) Sunni Insurgents Still Causing Most U.S. Military Deaths in Iraq Christopher Isham & Elizabeth Sprague, ABC News, November 06, 2006 3:45 PM http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/11/sunni_insurgent.html The vast majority - more than 80 percent - of American military deaths in Iraq are still being caused by Sunni insurgents, according to an ABC News analysis of data released for the month of October by the Defense Department. Of the 99 American soldiers killed in hostile action, at least 81 were killed by IED's or hostile fire in areas that are dominated by Sunni Arabs and where U.S. forces have been battling Sunni insurgents since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. 10) Mideast Expected the Verdict but Doubts Whether It's Fair Hassan M. Fattah, New York Times, November 6, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/06/world/middleeast/06arab.html As news of the verdict against Saddam Hussein and his co-defendants spread throughout the Middle East Sunday, many in the region said that the verdict had been a foregone conclusion and questioned whether it had been fair. "There was no mystery or suspense here; everyone knew what the result would be," said Daoud Kuttab, founder of Ammannet.net, an independent internet radio station in Amman. "The only reason people watched today was to see the reactions on the defendants' faces." Many analysts and others in the region who followed the trial said that what mattered was how the court had reached its judgment and that the process had seemed highly flawed. But critics and supporters of Hussein, the former dictator, said they were left with more frustration than closure. Most Arabs interviewed Sunday said they did not believe the trial was fair. They said it had seemed politicized, that the judges had not seemed to be in control of the process and that rulings about procedures had seemed contradictory. Almost everyone agreed that the verdict was unlikely to stop the violence gripping Iraq. "This is the first trial of its kind of an Arab president in contemporary history, and it could have had many implications," said Salah Amer, professor of international law at Cairo University. "They should have been anxious to make sure it adheres to international legal standards. But there is a huge question about when this sentence was issued and in what kind of conditions in Iraq." Amer and other analysts said the timing of the verdict, on a day of the week when the special tribunal does not normally hold session, and just two days before midterm elections in the US, underscored the perception that the proceedings had been politically charged. "His sentencing now is a deliberate attempt to boost the Republicans in the U.S.," said Imad Shueibi, president of the Data and Strategic Studies Center, a private research organization in Damascus. "They're expecting big losses in the upcoming elections, and they figure maybe this sentence might give an illusion of some success. But of course only the naïve will believe that." Amnesty International said it deplored Hussein's sentence, describing the proceedings as "deeply flawed and unfair." 11) 57 Iraqis Charged In Abuse At Prison Two Probes Implicate Interior Ministry Staff Sudarsan Raghavan, Washington Post, Tuesday, November 7, 2006; A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/06/AR2006110601353.html Iraq's Interior Ministry has charged 57 employees, including high-ranking officers, with human rights crimes for their roles in the torture of hundreds of detainees once jailed in a notorious eastern Baghdad prison known as Site 4, officials announced Monday. The charges marked the first time the present Iraqi government has taken criminal action against members of its own security forces for operating torture chambers inside Interior Ministry prisons, said Brig. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, a ministry spokesman. Sunni Arab detainees and human rights groups have long alleged that members of the ministry's police force, made up mostly of Shiite Muslims, took revenge on Sunni captives through beatings and other brutal methods. For months, Shiite officials have said such accusations are exaggerations, branding them attempts by Sunnis to discredit the Shiite-led government. But on Monday, senior Interior Ministry officials acknowledged there was clear evidence of such abuses, following a probe by three separate investigative committees that lasted 2 1/2 months. A U.N. human rights report reached a similar conclusion in the summer, after Iraqi and U.S. officials uncovered the torture during a visit to Site 4 in May. More than 1,400 detainees at Site 4 were held in "overcrowded, unsafe, and unhealthy conditions" and "suffered systematic physical and psychological abuse" by Interior Ministry officials, the report said. Investigators also took photos that "documented lesions resulting from torture as well as equipment used for this purpose." 12) Proposal Would Rehire Members of Hussein's Party Tens of Thousands of Sunnis Pushed Out of Government Jobs Could Benefit From Shiite Measure John Ward Anderson, Washington Post, Tuesday, November 7, 2006; A17 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/06/AR2006110601321.html A high-ranking commission of Iraq's Shiite-led government said Monday it had prepared a draft law that could return tens of thousands of former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party to their government jobs. After toppling Hussein in 2003, the interim U.S. authority that ran Iraq enacted a plan that purged Baath Party members from their government jobs, whether or not they had been accused of wrongdoing. The move threw thousands of Baathists out of work and is blamed by many for creating a vast pool of unemployed, disenfranchised Sunnis who later became eligible recruits for insurgent groups. Thousands of former Baathists have since been allowed to return to their posts after rigorous vetting, but political and security analysts say that if the government were to enact more sweeping measures, it could help soothe rampant sectarian violence and advance reconciliation between the country's Shiite Muslims and Sunni Arabs. Ali al-Lami, executive director of the Supreme National Commission for de-Baathification, said in an interview that the commission had drafted a law for parliament that would give 1.5 million former Baathists who "excommunicate" themselves from the party the option of returning to their former government jobs or drawing a pension for their past employment. Other estimates have put the number of purged Baathists in the tens of thousands; the figures could not be reconciled. Afghanistan 13) Taliban Support on Rise in Afghanistan Associated Press, November 6, 2006, Filed at 3:24 p.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Afghan-Taliban-Support.html For Ata Mohammad, who lost 19 members of his family during a fight between NATO and Taliban militants, the choices ahead are bleak. He has no particular wish to join the Taliban. He could support NATO and President Hamid Karzai's government, but feels betrayed by the violence in the Panjwayi district he lives in. His other options include becoming a refugee in Pakistan or Iran. Many in Kandahar say their confidence in the government is falling, and some say that is helping fuel support for the Taliban. "Should we join the Taliban? Should we join the government? We don't know," Mohammad said. "The Taliban, they are causing problems for us, but the government is causing problems for us too." "We can hardly feed our family bread. We are struggling for our life," he said. "And with the Taliban and the government and NATO fighting, we are victims, too." Many in southern Afghanistan had high hopes after the election of their fellow Pashtun tribesman Karzai in 2004, but two years later remain mired in poverty and lamenting a lack of security and development in the south. Heavy-handed NATO tactics, including recent airstrikes in Panjwayi that killed civilians - and hundreds of suspected militants - have only deepened suspicion of foreign forces attempting to crush a resurgent Taliban resistance five years after its hardline regime was ousted for hosting Osama bin Laden. Mohammad Eisah Khan, a former judge and a tribal elder in Kandahar with a long, white beard, rattled off the reasons support for the government is slipping. "There is no security, the people are not safe," he said. The government "is plagued by corruption. There is no education. There are very few schools. There are no good doctors in Kandahar province." The Afghan government is facing a "crisis of legitimacy" because many appointed administrators "are quite simply thugs," said Joanna Nathan, the Afghanistan analyst for the International Crisis Group think tank. Palestine 14) Violence Against Palestinian Women Is Increasing, Study Says Steven Erlanger, New York Times, November 7, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/07/world/middleeast/07palestinians.html Discriminatory laws, traditional practices and a severe shortage of emergency shelters combine to perpetuate violence against women by their family members and intimate partners in the Palestinian territories, according to a report to be issued on Tuesday by Human Rights Watch, a New York-based watchdog group. The report, "A Question of Security: Violence against Palestinian Women and Girls," is based on extensive interviews over the last year with victims, police officers, social workers and officials of the Palestinian Authority. It says that while there is "increasing recognition" by the authorities of violence against women and girls, "little action has been taken to seriously address these abuses." In fact, the report says, "there is some evidence that the level of violence is getting worse while the remedies available to the victims are being further eroded." The report concedes that there is a significant lack of comprehensive data on the scale of violence, but notes that studies and statistics compiled by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics and women's groups, in many cases with help from abroad, "record high levels of violence perpetrated by family members and intimate partners, aggravated during times of political violence." The offenses include domestic violence, rape, incest, child abuse and violent responses to so-called honor crimes, like adultery, that embarrass the clan, family or community. Laws dating from Jordanian and Egyptian administration in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, respectively do not fully protect the rights of women, the report says. It notes, for example, that the laws provide reduced penalties to men who kill or harm female relatives who are accused of adultery, allow only male relatives to file incest charges on behalf of minors and absolve from criminal prosecution rapists who agree to marry their victims and remain married for three years. Rape laws distinguish between victims who are virgins and those who are not. Husbands may divorce wives at will with verbal notification while wives must obtain a judicial divorce, and can only initiate divorce on the basis of inflicted harm. The report also notes that it is difficult for a female victim to seek redress or help with any guarantee of privacy. Those who complain to the police or the courts sometimes put themselves in more danger from an embarrassed family or clan. Police officers, lacking a sophisticated system of legal options, and clan leaders, seeking to protect the reputation of the family, "regularly 'mediate' and 'resolve' these cases, typically by returning the abused women to the 'care and protection' of her attacker, without ever referring the case to the courts or the woman to social or other services she might need," the report says. There are few women's shelters in the West Bank and none in Gaza; some women who need protection are put in women's prisons instead. The report notes that the Palestinian Authority is not a sovereign state, that the West Bank is under Israeli occupation and that the current fighting with Israel, which intensified in 2000, has only weakened the sway and reduced the resources of the Palestinian administration and the police. Still, the report urges the Palestinian Authority to change laws or enact new ones that criminalize family violence and to repeal provisions that perpetuate or condone such violence. It also urges that Palestinian officials survey the rate of violence against women, set up government-run hot lines and additional shelters, and provide guidelines and training to the police, health and social workers and the courts on how to handle crimes of abuse. The report also recommends a program of public education about the issue. Even more important, the agency urges the Palestinian Authority to pursue crimes against women and girls with "effective investigations and prosecutions." The report also urges Israel to ease travel restrictions for judges, emergency workers and social service providers and to help Palestinian victims of abuse use shelters in Israel, including those used by Arab citizens of Israel. "The problem is that no one sees this abuse as a crime," Lucy Mair, a researcher in the Middle East and North Africa Division of Human Rights Watch and a co-author of the report, said in an interview. "It's seen as a family or social problem, and some behavior is not even criminalized." The difficulties created by the current political situation, including travel restrictions and a cutoff of Western budget support and other funds to a Palestinian Authority led by Hamas, Mair noted, "has led to the deterioration of existing institutions, erodes available remedies and makes the situation worse." Venezuela 15) Hugo Chávez's Limited Power Chuck Kaufman, Letter, Washington Post, Monday, November 6, 2006; A20 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/05/AR2006110500796.html In "Chávez's Legal Weapon" [op-ed, Oct. 30], Jackson Diehl condemned Hugo Chávez, Venezuela's twice democratically elected president, as an "autocrat" and implied a Chávez hand in the murder of a prosecutor who was investigating the 2002 failed coup against Chávez. Diehl would have us believe that Chávez is in control of every facet of government. In fact, the Venezuelan presidency is significantly less powerful than the U.S. presidency. Chávez does not appoint the judges of the Supreme Court or lower courts, unlike the U.S. president. They are elected by the legislature, as are the rectors of the National Electoral Council, the branch responsible for conducting elections. Venezuela is without question a polarized nation, but it has a free, mostly anti-Chávez press. Chávez's opponent, Manuel Rosales, is running a strong campaign without harassment from the government. Chávez won the 1998 and 2000 presidential elections and the 2004 recall vote by about 60 percent to 40 percent. I recently traveled with a pre-electoral delegation to Venezuela, and most of the people we talked with predict a similar outcome on Dec. 3. Nicaragua 16) US 'Soft Power' in Latin America Continues to Plummet as Nicaraguans Elect Ortega Mark Weisbrot, Huffington Post, November 6, 2006 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-weisbrot-and-robert-naiman/us-soft-power-in-latin-_b_33439.html The apparent electoral victory of Sandinista Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, despite threats and warnings from US officials, is another example - perhaps the most extreme so far - of plummeting US influence in Latin America. The election attracted over 18,000 observers and more than 1000 journalists, because of its historic and symbolic significance. Ortega first came to power with the Sandinista revolution in 1979 against the US-backed Somoza dictatorship and was elected president in 1984. Although this is never mentioned in the press, there were over 400 observers there at the time from 40 countries, including the main organization of US Latin America scholars, the Latin American Studies Association, and they found the election to be free and fair. The Reagan Administration refused to recognize the election and continued to sponsor a terrorist war against the Sandinista government, destroying the economy of the country in the process. In Sunday's election Washington pulled out all the stops to try to defeat Ortega's re-election. Four Republican U.S. Members of Congress threatened to cut off remittances sent home by Nicaraguans living in the US, which is about the worst thing they could threaten short of an invasion, if the voters elected Ortega. The US Embassy in Managua also threatened economic sanctions on Friday. As a result of the 1980s war and a US commitment to reconstruction that was about as good as in Iraq (but without the money), Nicaragua is the second poorest country in the hemisphere and heavily dependent on US aid. - Robert Naiman Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming U.S. foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans.
