Malaysian Prime Minister's US Visit

Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak's visit to the United States this time, the second time after he took over the prime ministership, is expected to bring huge meaning to the relations between Malaysia and the United States, as well as the United States with the Islamic world.

Objective of Present Tour
It is understood that President Barack Obama will ask advice from Kuala Lumpur in an endeavor to mend the relations of the United States with Islamic countries in line with the open attitude toward the Islamic world, which he expressed during his visit to Al-Azhar University, Egypt recently.

Datuk Seri Dr Jamaludin Jarjis, Malaysian Ambassador to the United States, hinted the matter to the Malaysian media persons who were here to cover Najib's official visit to the United States starting 11 April until 16 April. The first time he visited United States in the capacity of a prime minister was in November 2009.

The prime minister arrived here at noon on 11 April. He will participate at the Nuclear Security Summit here from 12 to 13 April on Obama's invitation.

He explained: "The change is drastic...the way the United States sees Malaysia as a developed Islamic country and an example for other Islamic countries. Of course, the government will consider to 'study' the relations with the United States."

Bilateral Discussion
Jamaludin said that a development like this was evident when Malaysia -- a nonnuclear country -- was invited to attend the summit. A total of 44 world leaders were invited to attend the summit.

In fact, he explained, Najib was the only leader from Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and one of the two leaders from Asia to have a bilateral meeting with Obama.
Najib-Obama meeting will be held right before the commencement of the Nuclear Security Summit. China is the second country from Asia, which is to have a bilateral discussion with the United States.

Jamaludin explained: "Obama's invitation to the prime minister to attend the summit is an honor to Malaysia because we are not a nuclear country. And it is seen as a leap in terms of Malaysia-US bilateral ties, and also the relations between the United States and Islamic countries in general."

Obama will only have bilateral discussion with nine of the leaders attending the summit. The summit, among others, aims to focus on the matter of nuclear security in addition to ensuring that nuclear technology will not fall into the hands of terrorists.

In addition to Obama, during the luncheon on 12 April, the prime minister will also meet with US Vice President Joe Biden, Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg, and Howard Berman, chairman of the US House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Handling Threat and Security
In the context of handling threat and security, the prime minister will deliver his policy speech revolving around Malaysia's experience and achievement in handling the threat of communist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) here on 14 April.

Tun Hanif Omar, former inspector general of police, and General (retired) Tan Sri Muhammad Hashim Ali, former Armed Forces chief, are also invited by the CSIS to the event.

Jamaludin also said that the prime minister would take the opportunity to explain the framework of the New Economic Model, which was launched at the end of last month when meeting investors and businessmen here and in New York, as a step to attract investment, particularly from the United States.

Meeting With Other Personalities
Among personalities he will meet include World Bank President Robert Zoellick and the chief executive officers of Coca-Cola, Intel, Motorola, and Conoco Phillips.

As a step to enhance Malaysian tourism and culture, accompanied by his wife, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, the prime minister will launch the Festival of 1Malaysia Faces, a program organized by the Ministry of Information, Communication and Culture.

He said: "Our tourism sector does not have much promotion in the US and this is the best opportunity to promote Malaysia."

Israeli Raids on Masjid-e Aqsa Worsen Chances of Peace in Region

The entry of the Israeli Army into Masjid-e Aqsa, and beating and baton charging those saying prayers there, confirms the apprehension expressed by the Mufti-e-Azam of Egypt that Israeli was planning to demolish Masjid-e Aqsa. He said Israel might demolish the place of worship even during the current month, and replace it with its own synagogue. He has warned that in that event, the situation in the entire region would become extremely dangerous and explosive.

New Jewish Settlements
The Israeli Army stormed into the mosque, desecrated the mosque, and beat up those saying prayers after closing the mosque's doors. This makes one realize what plans Israel is contemplating. The Israeli Army action has taken place at a time when it has to face the wrath and admonition of the United States on its announcement of constructing Jewish residential settlements in occupied Gaza areas. The United States has criticized the move, and unambiguously said that the plan would be extremely damaging to the efforts of establishment of peace in the region. It said the announcement with regard to construction of new Jewish settlements even while the US Vice President Joe Biden was visiting Israel amounts to contempt of the United States.

The attitude that the United States has now adopted toward Israel is entirely different from all its earlier stands. Yet, it would be too early to presume that the United States has developed a soft corner for Palestinians, and that it is disturbed by Israeli actions. Despite it, one thing is clear that there is some slackness in the US attitude toward Israel and that it is taking the announcement made by Israel during Joe Biden's visit more as an affront to the United States than violation of Palestinians' rights.

What, after all, does the sudden entry of the Israeli Army into the mosque and thrashing of people there, indicate under these circumstances? It is as simple as that Israel, on one pretext or the other, wants to sabotage the efforts being made for establishment of peace in the Middle East, and as apprehended by the Egyptian Mufti-e Azam, Israel wants to demolish the mosque and construct its own place of worship on that site.

Rampant Violence
The sudden storming of the Israeli army into the mosque and the rampant violence indulged in has led to an outrage among Palestinians. It has also created of waves of annoyance and anger in the entire Islamic world as well. Despite the locking of the doors of the mosque and banning entry of people to say prayer there, Al Biariq Foundation, responsible for the security of the mosque, has claimed that it has succeeded in reaching the mosque along with citizens of the holy city.

The Muslim community is also angered by Israel's announcement to construct a Jewish place of worship in the vicinity of the mosque. It feels that Israel wants to deprive the Islamic community of the Masjid-e Aqsa under a conspiracy. At present, a situation has emerged in which thousands of Palestinians have left to reach the mosque to protect it. This gives rise to an apprehension that the situation may deteriorate and become extremely tense.

Disregard International Community
There is no need to comment on the place or respect Masjid-e Aqsa commands among the Muslim populace. Not only Arabs, but also Muslims living anywhere in the world support freeing of the mosque. They all have been demanding that the mosque be rescued. Yet, at a time when pressure is mounting from the United States and European community to get the Middle East issue resolved and commencement of the process of dialogue with Palestinians, the Israeli Army's entry into the mosque is evidence that the Jewish dispensation has mustered great courage to disregard the international community.

The Israeli Army action would not only have an adverse impact on the Middle East alone, but also on the entire Islamic world. The words of Egyptian Mufti-e Azam that it would grievously hurt the feeling all those who have faith in the world of God and in the international law appears to be 100 percent correct.

The prevailing situation in the Middle East has significantly indicate that the efforts being made by the United States for establishment of peace in the region are not going to bear fruit. Instead, it may further deteriorate the situation leading to tension and confrontation.

US-Israel Ties Face Worst Crisis in 35 Years

Israel's ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, has told the country's diplomats there that US-Israeli relations face their worst crisis in 35 years, despite attempts by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office to project a sense of "business as usual"" Oren was speaking to Israeli consuls general in a conference call.

Netanyahu continued to consult with the forum of seven senior cabinet ministers over a list of demands that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made in a telephone conversation Friday. Clinton harshly criticized the announcement recently of plans to expand the Ramat Shlomo neighborhood in East Jerusalem while US Vice President Joe Bidden was visiting Israel.

Restoring Confidence in Bilateral Relations
Clinton's list includes at least four steps the United States expects Netanyahu to carry out to restore confidence in bilateral relations and permit the resumption of peace talks with the Palestinians.

1. Investigate the process that led to the announcement of the Ramat Shlomo construction plans in the middle of Bidden's visit. The Americans seek an official response from Israel on whether this was a bureaucratic mistake or a deliberate act carried out for political reasons. Already on Saturday night, Netanyahu announced the convening of a committee to look into the issue.

2. Reverse the decision by the Jerusalem District Planning and Building Committee to approve construction of 1,600 new housing units in Ramat Shlomo.

3. Make a substantial gesture toward the Palestinians enabling the renewal of peace talks. The United States suggested that hundreds of Palestinian prisoners be released, that the Israel Defense Forces withdraw from additional areas of the West Bank and transfer them to Palestinian control that the siege of the Gaza Strip be eased and further roadblocks in the West Bank be removed.

4. Issue an official declaration that the talks with the Palestinians, even indirect talks, will deal with all the conflict's core issues - borders, refugees, Jerusalem, security arrangements, water and settlements.

Two advisers of the prime minister, Yitzhak Molcho and Ron Dermer, held marathon talks with senior White House officials in Washington and US Mideast envoy George Mitchell and his staff to try to calm the situation. Mitchell will return to Israel and expects to hear if Netanyahu intends to take the proposed steps. At the beginning of cabinet meeting, Netanyahu tried to convey a message that there was no crisis in relations with the United States. But he sent precisely the opposite message to Oren in Washington.

In Oren's conference call with the Israeli consuls general, he said that the current crisis was the most serious with the Americans since a confrontation between Henry Kissinger and Yitzhak Rabin in 1975 over an American demand for a partial withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula. At cabinet meeting, Netanyahu said the matter had been blown out of proportion by the media.

He added: "There was an unfortunate incident here that was innocently committed and was hurtful, and certainly should not have occurred." He said steps would be taken to prevent such cases in the future. "It is extremely important to understand that the State of Israel and the United States have common interests," he said, adding that those interests "also require us to take decisions to change the situation in the country."

Tense and Pessimistic Situation
Some noted that in previous conference calls with Oren, the ambassador took pains to make clear that relations with the United States were excellent. This time, however, Oren sounded extremely tense and pessimistic. Oren was quoted as saying that "the crisis was very serious and we are facing a very difficult period in relations (between the two countries)" Oren told the consuls to lobby congressmen, Jewish community leaders and the media to convey Israel's position. He said the message to be relayed was that Israel had no intention to cause offense to Vice President Bidden and that the matter had stemmed from actions by junior bureaucrats in the Interior Ministry and was caused by a lack of coordination between government offices. "It should be stressed that (our) relations with the United States are very important to us," Oren said.

Several of the consuls suggested waiting, but Oren hinted that his approach reflected Netanyahu's wishes. "These instructions come from the highest level in Jerusalem," he was quoted as saying, adding that the utmost must be done to calm matters. Oren told participants in the conference call of a meeting he was summoned to with Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg for a reprimand. Oren spoke of his surprise at being summoned after believing that the crisis had already ended.

Implications of Kerry-Lugar Bill on Pakistan

The of the United States against Pakistan are very dangerous. In order to understand the Kerry-Lugar Bill, it is essential to be aware of the backdrop of this story. When we became the US ally, she started making long-term agreements with India all at once, which made us cynical and the world also started saying that they will leave Pakistan alone once again. At that time, present Vice President Joe Biden said that they would not leave Pakistan alone and that unconditional nonmilitary aid will be given to Pakistan for 10 years in order to maintain a long-term relationship.

This bill was unanimously approved in July 2008, but then it was postponed. Its purpose was to give the impression that Pakistan will not be left alone. But the duration of this bill was allowed to pass and no ultimate decision was taken on it. During this time, India managed to further strengthen its ties with the United States and Pakistan was presented with the revised Kerry-Lugar Bill.

The 10-year-period was reduced to five years and then this condition was imposed that Pakistan will be presented with a certificate each year to ensure that it is complying with the conditions, which means that this aid could stop anytime as was the case with the five-year aid to Ziaul Haque during the Reagan era. When Gorbachev announced his withdrawal, the certificate condition was imposed for each year to ensure whether we are fulfilling the conditions under the Pressler Amendment or not. This aid was discontinued from the day the Soviet forces left Afghanistan. Likewise, there is a condition that says that Pakistan will not sponsor terrorism in Afghanistan and India. It appears from the language of the bill as if Pakistan should be ashamed for sponsoring terrorism in India and Afghanistan and this is all happening on the US commands. If we don't get aid, we would have to beg the United States for it, and India and Afghanistan can use a minor incident as an excuse to put an end to it.

US Objectives
As soon as the US objectives are achieved, it will stop this aid through the use of premeditated allegations. In light of the experiences of the past, they can do it. Therefore, if the objectionable conditions are not taken out from this bill, Pakistan should reject it straight away because half of $1.5 billion aid will be spent on fulfilling their conditions.

After rejecting it, the United States will definitely provide us with unconditional aid because when Ziaul Haque rejected $400 million aid, calling it peanuts, the United States agreed to pay a bigger amount. As long as we consider this war as our war, we will keep suffering.

Financial Losses to Pakistan
These days, overseas Pakistanis are sending us more money than this aid. If more attention is paid to their priorities, they will send more. For example, if they send foreign exchange in the form of dollars, they should be paid 2 rupees extra for each dollar, then see how rapidly foreign exchange reserves will go up. At the moment, overseas Pakistanis are sending $8 billion worth of foreign exchange each year. If more incentives were offered to them, they would be able to send more. The foreign exchange is sent by those poor Pakistanis who went abroad seeking employment. The rich people of this country send their money abroad. The National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) is an example of this. It is repeatedly said that if the national wealth reserved abroad is brought back to the country, the fortune of the country could change. The rich people even bring back their money through "reference," which is not beneficial for the country. In addition to the language, the conditions of this bill are also humiliating.

The US clarification is just a formality; $1.5 billion aid per year is just an excuse. Out of these $1.5 billion, $200 million will be spent on the supervision of this aid. Pakistan will only get $1.3 billion. If this amount is divided by Pakistan's population, it is just $6 per person per year, which is equal to 650 rupees per year. During the last month of September, overseas Pakistanis sent a foreign exchange of $806.12 million and until September, this amount of foreign exchange sent by the overseas Pakistan has risen to $2.332 billion. Last year, overseas Pakistanis sent $1.88 billion to Pakistan without imposing any humiliating conditions. The same Pakistanis sent $780.55 million in August. All these figures have been obtained from the State Bank.

Failure of Pakistani Diplomats
The people whose interests are not associated with Pakistan do not work for Pakistan's interests. If this was the case, what was the point of so much secrecy in the matter? This bill is our failure even without the conditions.

The agreement was made for a 10-year strategic partnership, which was reduced to five years and then conditions such as these were included in order to end it any year.

Operation in Waziristan
The government is more willing than the United States at present. I don't under stand why the government is in a hurry to start operations everywhere. The military conducted the Swat operation and gained success; the US and Indian agents were eliminated from there. The Swat operation did harm to the US and Indian interests. If the military conducts an operation in Waziristan, it should be in Pakistan's interests. It will be dangerous to send the military early into Waziristan without any preparations. Operation is not the solution to every problem. The Kerry-Lugar Bill has specifically targeted the Pakistani military. It is the greatest wish of India and Israel to make the ISI ineffective. These severe conditions have been included in this bill on their behest. If the United States makes this bill unconditional, it will face resentment from both India and Israel. India is making full use of the situation. China, on its part, has offered to supply Pakistan with the resources to deal with terrorism.

End to Atomic Weapons and Obama's Deception

Recently, US President Barack Obama announced to rid the world of atomic weapons at a meeting of the United Nations Security Council’s (UNSC) head of states. A resolution was unanimously adopted, which called for tighter controls on atomic materials to prevent them from being stolen or used for military purposes. The resolution also entailed plans to ban all vulnerable atomic weapon materials and to take effective measures to stop its smuggling, procurement or theft. This historical resolution made it compulsory for the countries transferring atomic technology to other countries to have their atomic facilities inspected by the United Nations. If they withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), they would have to return the technology.

Eliminating Atomic Weapons
Obama also said that the UNSC must play its part in implementing these plans. Thus, Iran and North Korea would have to comply with these resolutions. Japan welcomed this resolution adopted by the UNSC and reminded of its calls to eliminate the atomic weapons since the day it was attacked.
It must be remembered that the United States developed the atomic weapons and tested them on the yellow Japanese race. These weapons were used on Hiroshima on 6 August, which killed 140,000 persons; some of them died immediately and others in a few weeks time. But this did not quench the thirst for blood of the US beasts. They carried out another attack on Nagasaki, this time killing 70,000 persons.
This fact must be considered that there were no military bases or military installations in these cities. There were only citizens living in these cities. Despite this, these cities were targeted, which is a heinous crime and genocide. These attacks were carried out by the country, which calls itself a follower of Jesus Christ, but in reality believes in crusade. Since the time the United States got its hands on the atomic weapons, it started dreaming about conquering the world. But the Soviet Union came face to face with it.

Atomic Power States
The United Kingdom, China, and France also gradually became atomic powers and a balance was struck, which is still in effect. To maintain their domination of the world, they decided not to allow any sixth party to acquire atomic weapons. So in 1968, the NPT was signed, which forbids all countries, apart from these five, to produce atomic weapons.
However, every country has full freedom to use atomic technology for peaceful purposes. The sixth clause of the NPT advises nations to immediately work toward eliminating the atomic weapons from the world.
It has been 41 years since these agreements were signed, but no progress has been made in this area. On contrary, the United States and Russia have been making hydrogen bombs and others weapons of mass destruction in order to outdo each other. All powers have continued to test these destructive weapons. The United States in Nevada, Russia in Siberia, France in Maororc Atol, and China in the Gobi Desert, polluting the sea, land and air. Both the United States and Russia have 10,000 short-range, medium-range, and long-range missiles each. The United States has even started building her bases in space from where she could hit targets on the ground. Both the United States and Russia have produced small bombs that could be fired through artilleries and machine guns. The bombs the United States used in Iraq and Afghanistan had atomic particles, which harmed humans and cattle. These are all war crimes, but no action was taken against the United States or Russia by any court?

Atomic Energy for Peaceful Purposes
In contrast, the United States stops the developing countries from using atomic energy for peaceful purposes in the name of the NPT and threatens to attack them. The best example is Iran, the country that wants to use atomic energy as an alternate to petrol required by its industries. For this purpose, Iran has constructed atomic facilities, which the United States wants to destroy.
An Iranian religious scholar has announced that use of atomic weapons is forbidden in Islam so Iran would not use it under any circumstances. Despite this assurance, the United States is accusing Iran of producing atomic weapons in secret. The US efforts have led the UNSC to pass three condemnatory resolutions against Iran. The US is also trying to get more restrictions imposed on it. George W. Bush constantly threatened to attack Iran. Obama is also saying that the time is running out for Iran so she needs to immediately halt her uranium enrichment because the world cannot wait for Iran to produce atomic weapons.
However, his deputy Joe Biden has said that Israel as an independent country has the right to take action against Iran. Israel sees Iran as a potential threat to its existence and the United States would not stand in Israel's way if she decides to do something in its interest.
This clearly shows that the United States is giving a go ahead to Israel for attacking Iran. But Obama and his deputy must know that Iran is also an independent country. It also considers Israel as a threat and has the right to do whatever she thinks is right for her defense. The United States should not stand in its way, but these Westerners are two-faced. They think they have the right for everything, but do not respect the rights of others.
If Iran poses a threat to the United States and Israel, do not the United States and Israel pose a danger to Iran? Why did the United States travel for 11,000 miles to invade Iraq and Afghanistan? Why does it has its military's central command in Qatar? Why does she have a seaport in Bahrain? Does Iran have a seaport in the Mexican Gulf? Then who poses a threat to whom; Iran to the United States or the United States to Iran? The head of the United States national intelligence agency has said that Iran had halted her atomic project in 2003. Despite this claim, Admiral Mullen believed that Iran could produce an atomic bomb in three months time (25 May). He gave this statement on 24 May. It has been four months, but his claim did not come true. This shows that Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, is a liar. He said this to pave way for an attack on Iran. If the United States or Israel decides to attack Iran, it would be disastrous for the Zionist state. The United States installations in the gulf will be destroyed. The tankers taking oil to Europe, the United States, and Japan will be blocked or burnt down.

US Atomic Policy
It was due to the US atomic policy that provided Israel with the atomic technology and know-how because of which Israel has 400 atomic weapons at present. To make matters worse, it has not signed the NPT. Iran, however, has not signed the NPT, and is also complying with it. It has also allowed the IAEA to examine its atomic power agencies. Still, Israel is not held responsible, but Iran is accused of spreading the atomic weapons. It was surprising that the IAEA urged Israel in its conference in Vienna on 18 September to let the IAEA examine its atomic facility and to sign the NPT. This resolution was narrowly passed by 49 votes for and 45 votes against. The Israeli camp denounced the decision and refused to cooperate with it. Their stance was that this organization has unfairly targeted a state, which is surrounded by hostile neighbors who threaten its survival. Obama's ambassador Glyn Davis went a step further and publicly rejected this resolution, calling it redundant. He associated it with political bias, which does not take into account the atomic complexities of Middle East.

Assessment
Someone should ask Obama why he is targeting Iran and Pakistan. Can't he see Israel's 400 atomic weapons? The resolution states that countries at the time of transferring the atomic technology must make it obvious to other countries that the UN can inspect their atomic facilities. In this case, why did the United States exempt India's atomic facilities from being inspected in the atomic technology accord?
It is easier for the United States to give advice to others, but it cannot implement it itself. For instance, the United States has not yet signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) that advocates a test ban, but says that a ban should be imposed on fissile material. In reality, the big powers want to protect their reserves of destructive weapons. They also want to stop other nations from producing them in order to maintain their domination. The atomic weapons could not be eradicated like this.