Causes of Growing Global Terrorism

The United States has never wanted peace in the world. Every country of the world is compelled to obey the United States out of fear. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the United States got the title of "sole superpower." International community should make the United States understand that elimination of terrorism is necessary but regretfully Americans do not want to end the causes of terrorism?
Post World War Scenario
The United States appears to be standing behind every war since the World War. More than 2 million Koreans were killed in the Korean war from 1949 to 1953. When the Vietnam war was fought in the next decade, more than 4.1 million Vietnamese were killed from 1959 to 1975. These include the citizens of North Vietnam, South Vietnam, and Cambodia. The confrontation was still on when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in December 1979 and 1.3 million Afghans were killed. Then, the flames of Gulf war engulfed the entire region. Thousands of Iraqi children died a helpless death. Thousands of people craved for medicines in hospitals and severe food shortage emerged. The world was still recovering from this shock when the United States landed its troops in Afghanistan. The United States invaded the resource-rich country to hunt Osama Bin Laden. Later, Iraq was also ruined and the United States claimed that Iraq had chemical weapons.
Similarly, Kashmir issue remains unresolved until today in spite of having been recognized at international level. Many other devastations of this nature hit the world over the past eight decades but most of them were related to natural calamities. If matters are closely observed, it would appear that the United States is behind all these devastations and wars in one way or another. The United States launches wars under one pretext or the other and then devastation becomes the fate of the country where it enters. The United States is, at present, the largest arms supplying country. The United States sold weapons worth $800 million in 2007, whereas its own defense budget is over $700 million.
US intellectual Noam Chomsky has been drawing the world attention to this since long. According to him, the United States is assuming the role of an international rascal. On one hand, the United States is raising the attractive slogan of the "war on terror," and on the other, it has assumed the role of the greatest terrorist. Moreover, the United States is pursuing the communist ideology of telling lie and then standing firm in it.
Noam Chomsky considers the United States an international terrorist country in this situation. If we take stock of the international situation after 1990, we will be compelled to believe in what Noam Chomsky says. The way in which the United States made unjust intervention into different countries clearly proves that it is following the policy of imperialism.
US Intervention in Middle East
The greatest responsibility lies on the United States if peace could not be established in the Middle East to date. The United States openly supported the Jewish Israel. The United States supports atrocities being committed against the unarmed Palestinians. If Israel makes the lives of Palestinians miserable in flagrant violation of the UN resolution, the United States recklessly uses its veto in the UN Security Council to support it [Israel]. Thousands of Palestinians have been living in refugee camps in inhuman conditions since 1948. Not only this, Israel massacres innocent Palestinians even in the refugee camps. The killing in the camps of Sabra and Shatila is a clear instance in this regard. Ever since the establishment of Israel, the United States used it like a policeman in the Middle East and did so for the accomplishment of its agenda and to ensure protection of its national interests, particularly the oil supply. Even the United States declared the recent Israeli excesses just that it committed in the form of attack on Lebanon. The United States did not condemn the killing of hundreds of Lebanese citizens and recklessly used its unjust right in the Security Council in support of Israel. As a result, the war continued for approximately 40 days and scores of human lives were lost. The United States set up a puppet regime in Iraq to seize the country's oil reserves. Moreover, the potential threat that Jewish Israel could have faced from a powerful Muslim country [Iraq] has been eliminated. Having tightened Iraq into its clutches, the United States wants to fully focus on Iran, which aspires to acquire nuclear power. It is obvious from the problems that the United States had to face in Iraq regarding Iran, that it will not launch such an attack on Iran.
The US intervention in Afghanistan is approximately 26-year-old and its consequences are before us. Despite all of their drawbacks, the Taliban had succeeded in establishing a stable government in Afghanistan, but the United States made hundreds of Afghan target of its bombing on the basis of suspicion and pushed the country back into the Stone Age and established a puppet regime there. The prevailing situation in Afghanistan is such that innocent people are being killed every other day and the US brutality has crossed all limits.
Antihumanity Measures
When the Islamists set up a stable government in Somalia, which had plunged into civil war and peace started to return to the country, the United States attacked Somalia with the help of Christian Ethiopia. The United States annihilated approximately four Somali villages in the very first attack. The civil war has been going on there ever since.
The man of the contemporary world is fed up of these US antihumanity measures. Smaller and weak countries have started considering it "superpower" to remain safe from its mischief. It is necessary to reign in the US aggression if the terrorism is to be eliminated because it is promoting terrorism.

Withdrawal of Last US Troops From Iraq

The last US soldiers have rolled out of Iraq across the border to neighboring Kuwait, whooping, fist bumping and hugging each other in a burst of joy and relief. Their exit marked the end of a bitterly divisive war that raged for nearly nine years and left Iraq shattered, with troubling questions lingering over whether the Arab nation will remain a steadfast US ally. The mission cost nearly 4,500 American and well more than 100,000 Iraqi lives and $800 billion from the US Treasury. The question of whether it was worth it all is yet unanswered.
Captain Mark Askew, a 28-year-old from Tampa, Florida who was among the last soldiers to leave, said the answer to that question will depend on what type of country and government Iraq ends up with years from now, whether they are democratic, respect human rights and are considered a US ally.
Whither Stubborn Sectarian Clashes
US officials acknowledged the cost in blood and dollars was high, but tried to paint a picture of victory for both the troops and the Iraqi people now freed of a dictator and on a path to democracy.
But gnawing questions remain: Will Iraqis be able to forge their new government amid the still stubborn sectarian clashes. And will Iraq be able to defend itself and remain independent in a region fraught with turmoil and still steeped in insurgent threats.
Many Iraqis, however, are nervous and uncertain about the future. Their relief at the end of Saddam Hussein, who was hanged on the last day of 2006, was tempered by a long and vicious war that was launched to find nonexistent weapons of mass destruction and nearly plunged the nation into full-scale sectarian civil war.
Some criticized the Americans for leaving behind a destroyed country with thousands of widows and orphans, a people deeply divided along sectarian lines and without rebuilding the devastated infrastructure.
Some Iraqis celebrated the exit of what they called American occupiers, neither invited nor welcome in a proud country. Others said that while grateful for US help ousting Saddam, the war went on too long. A majority of Americans would agree, according to opinion polls.
The low-key exit stood in sharp contrast to the high octane start of the war, which began before dawn on March 20, 2003, with an air strike in southern Baghdad where Saddam was believed to be hiding. US and allied ground forces then stormed across the featureless Kuwaiti desert, accompanied by reporters, photographers and television crews embedded with the troops.
Saddam’s Secret Nuclear Weapon Program
The task assigned to them in 2003 has been accomplished. The United States under President George W. Bush entered the Iraqi war theatre after it had made substantial gains in Afghanistan where it had toppled the Taliban regime in the wake of 9/11. He found an excellent opportunity to use the anti-terrorism plank to achieve Washington’s larger objective of ensuring energy security. Unverified intelligence reports about Iraqi ruler Saddam’s “secret” nuclear weapon program were enough for President Bush to go ahead with his new plan. He also found out that Saddam had close connections with Al-Qaida mastermind Osama Bin Ladin.
The United States also did not bother about seeking the UN Security Council’s sanction for attacking Iraq. Even when it was conclusively proved that Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) and that Saddam had no link with Al-Qaida — both being ideologically poles apart — Iraq was bombarded and Saddam dethroned. Later, he was captured and executed. Iraq was liberated from the clutches of the tyrant. What could have been done by the people of Iraq during the Arab Spring now was finished by the US with the use of its military might. But can this be justified legally, morally, ethically or otherwise? The debate is still on.
Iran-Iraq Shia Bloc
Ousting and killing Saddam, a secular despot, may have gladdened US Arab allies, who are despotic but quasi-theocratic. Ironically, it also pleased Shia Iran as the United States leaves behind a Shia-run Iraq. A consolidated Iran-Iraq Shia bloc will be to the liking of neither America’s Arab allies nor the United States itself. In short, the times ahead in West Asia are likely to be threatened with prospects of heightened tension. Such a state of affairs may not always fall short of actual fighting, not least when the US continues to play the ouster game in West Asia in the name of promoting democracy.
Undoubtedly, the Iraq war was unpopular from day one within the United States. It had been launched on clearly false premises. US President Barack Obama wanted to end the campaign he had inherited. He gave himself the deadline of December 31 this year, and has stuck to it. But it is lost on no one — not in Iraq, not in the United States — that the United States may have wanted to extend its stay in a reduced way for strategic reasons, but could not.

Iran Continues Nuke Program: Threat to World Peace

Iran appears to have worked on designing an atomic bomb and may still be conducting secret research, the UN nuclear watchdog said in a report likely to raise tensions in the Middle East.
Citing what it called "credible" information from member states and elsewhere, the agency listed a series of activities applicable to developing nuclear weapons, such as high explosives testing and development of an atomic bomb trigger.
The report immediately exposed splits among the big powers about how best to handle the row over Iran's nuclear aims: the United States signaled tougher sanctions on Teheran but Russia said the report could hurt chances for diplomacy.
It was preceded by Israeli media speculation that the Jewish state may strike against its arch foe's nuclear sites. But Defence Minister Ehud Barak has recently said that no decision had been made on embarking on a military operation.
Iran, which denies it wants nuclear weapons, condemned the findings of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as "unbalanced" and "politically motivated."
IAEA Chief Yukiya Amano is "playing a very dangerous game," Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador, said.
Teheran's history of hiding sensitive nuclear activity from the IAEA, continued restrictions on IAEA access and its refusal to suspend enrichment, which can yield fuel for atom bombs, have drawn four rounds of U.N. sanctions and separate punitive steps by the United States and European Union.
The report detailed evidence apparently showing concerted, covert efforts to acquire the capability to make atomic bombs. Some of the cited research and development work by Iran have both civilian and military applications, but "others are specific to nuclear weapons," said the report.
Western powers have pressured the major oil producer, which says its nuclear program is aimed at increasing electricity generation, over its record of hiding sensitive nuclear activity and lack of full cooperation with UN inspectors.
The United States will look to put more pressure on Iran if it fails to answer questions raised by the IAEA report, a senior US official said in Washington. "That could include additional sanctions by the United States. It could also include steps that we take together with other nations," the official told reporters.
Russia criticized the report, saying it would dim hopes for dialogue with Teheran on its nuclear ambitions and suggesting it was meant to scuttle chances for a diplomatic solution.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said: "We have serious doubts about the justification for steps to reveal contents of the report to a broad public, primarily because it is precisely now that certain chances for the renewal of dialogue between the 'sextet' of international mediators and Teheran have begun to appear."
Russia and the United States are among the six big powers, also including China, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, which have been involved in stalled attempts to find a diplomatic solution to the nuclear dispute with Iran.
Sanction on Iran’s Energy Sector
The US Government has announced that it will slap sanctions directly on Iran's energy sector and warned the financial firms in the world against dealing with the Islamist state.
"Recent days have brought new evidence that Iran's leaders continue to defy their international obligations and violate international norms," US State Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said at the State Department, referring to the recent alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in the United States, and report by the UN nuclear watchdog on Iran's nuclear program.
Iran and its powerful ally Russia have slammed new Western sanctions imposed on Teheran over its suspect nuclear program, saying they were illegal and futile.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry stated that the unilateral measures against Iran's financial, petrochemical and energy sectors announced Monday by the United States, Britain and Canada amounted merely to propaganda and psychological They were "reprehensible" and would prove ineffective, it said.
Russia -- which with China had blocked any possibility of the Western steps going before the UN Security Council for approval -- took a sterner view, saying in a Foreign Ministry statement the sanctions were "unacceptable and against international law."
The declarations set the stage for a hardening of diplomacy over Iran and its nuclear program. The issue has already generated speculation that Israel is mulling air strikes against Iranian nuclear sites.
The country is already subject to four sets of UN sanctions designed to force it to give up uranium enrichment, along with additional, unilateral sanctions by the United States and the European Union (EU).
The latest sanctions put more pressure on Iran's financial sector, with the United States and Britain invoking anti-terrorist laws to target Iran's central bank and other financial institutions.
Rejection of UN Report
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has dismissed a report from the United Nations' nuclear agency that highlighted concerns Teheran had worked on designing an atomic bomb, saying it was based on "invalid" information from Washington.
"You should know that this nation will not pull back even a needle's width from the path it is on," he said in a speech carried live on state television.
However, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said Iran remains ready to engage in negotiations with world powers concerned about its nuclear program, but only if the other parties show it due respect.
The EU may approve fresh sanctions against Iran within weeks, after a UN agency said Teheran had worked to design nuclear bombs, EU diplomats said.
Iran denies trying to build atom bombs and its Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said any US or Israeli attack on its nuclear sites would be met with 'iron fists'.
The United States and Israel have refused to rule out any option to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear arsenal.
Diplomats in Brussels said preliminary discussions among EU capitals on new measures had begun and plans may be ready for EU foreign ministers in Brussels to approve on December 1.
Iran already faces a wide range of the UN sanctions, as well as some imposed unilaterally by the United States and the EU.
New EU sanctions would be a significant part of Western efforts to ratchet up pressure on Teheran after the UN nuclear watchdog's report this week that laid bare a trove of intelligence suggesting Iran is seeking nuclear weapons.
Teheran’s Confidence
Iran’s confidence emanates from the fact that its nuclear facilities are supported by Russia and China. Or is it that Ahmadinejad is sitting on a nuclear weapon facility already? Well, this is unlikely because nuclear weapons and the delivery system cannot be made overnight and in such secrecy.
The point is that Ahmadinejad’s brave anti-US postures must, in the natural course, make those who dream of an end to the US hegemony and those who detest George Bush, the war-monger, look up to him. And in that context express disgust over the Manmohan Singh regime’s decision to kow-tow the United States and its allies.
A generation that grew up detesting the United States and participated in umpteen demonstrations and other kinds of agitation against the successive regimes in the US — the Vietnam War some 40 years ago and against the Invasion of Iraq now — must feel happy that they are not alone.
Other View
Economic sanctions would hurt the West more than Iran. The premise of this argument is that any sanctions imposed on Teheran would result in a dramatic rise in oil prices, hurting the economies of Western countries and undermining public support for the sanctions.
WhileIran holds the world’s second-largest reserves of oil and gas and is the fourth-largest oil producer, it is in fact a net importer of refined oil products, including gasoline. And internal consumption of oil products in Iran is growing by 5.2 percent a year, far faster than its ability to increase refining capacity. This means that the levels of imports necessary to make the Iranian economy function will only increase over time.
Russia and China would never go along with sanctions. While persuading Russia and China to support sanctions might take some time and effort, these countries are unlikely to prove reliable allies for the Iranian regime.
Russia has little strategic interest in supporting the Iranian cause. While it may see Iran as a useful tool for balancing U.S. power in the Middle East, it has far more to fear from Iran’s nuclear program in the long term than does the United States or Europe. Iran’s support of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism across the Middle East and Central Asia is a direct challenge to Russian interests in territories that were part of the old Soviet empire and are still considered by Moscow to be within its sphere of influence.
Iran might respond to sanctions by irrationally lashing out at Israel and other U.S. allies. One of the most dangerous assumptions about Iran is that it is acting irrationally or is led by people who do not calculate the potential costs and benefits of their actions.

Fifth IBSA Summit

The fifth India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) Summit, which was held in Pretoria on 18 October, has come out with a declaration on major global issues with focus on reforms of multilateral organisations, including the UN Security Council (UNSC), the IMF and the World Bank to give greater voice to emerging countries like India.
The Summit came out with the Tshwane Declaration following the discussions between the leaders of India, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, President Jacob Zuma of South Africa and President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil.
On global governance reform, the three leaders reaffirmed their commitment to increase the participation of developing countries in the decision-making bodies of multilateral institutions.
UN and IMF Reforms
They underscored the need for urgent reform of the United Nations (UN) to render it more democratic and consistent with the current geopolitical reality. They particularly emphasized that no reform of the United Nations will be complete without a reform of the UNSC, including an expansion in both the permanent and non-permanent categories of its membership, with increased participation of developing countries in both.
IBSA, as like-minded countries, will continue to strive to contribute to a new world order whose political, economic and financial architecture is more inclusive, representative and legitimate, the declaration stated.
It also called for the early implementation of the targets for the reform of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in order to ensure that the body is democratic, responsive and accountable. The leaders reiterated that the governing structure of the Fund should reflect the changed realities of the global economy in the 21st century, through the increased voice and representation of emerging economies and developing countries.
Global Economic Growth
The leaders agreed that the Heads and senior leadership of all international institutions should be appointed through an open, transparent and merit-based process beginning with the selection of the next President of the World Bank in 2012.
The declaration expressed concern at the ongoing deterioration of the global economic scenario, which presents particular challenges for the economic policy and growth prospects of developing and low-income countries. Downside risks have increased substantially in recent weeks. They stressed the importance of the implementation of a credible plan of macro-economic and financial policies and structural reforms by the Eurozone countries, as a necessary step to prevent further negative shocks to the world economy. They also highlighted the importance of complementary measures by other key developed economies to boost recovery and help the global economy as a whole.
The leaders stressed on the need to increase policy coordination among G20 nations, with a view to avert a new recession and to promote a robust recovery in order to ensure strong, sustainable and balanced growth of the global economy in the medium term.
The current impasse in the World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations is a source of serious concern, the declaration said.
At the Summit of three leading economies, Manmohan Singh, joined by Zuma and Rousseff, cautioned that economic crisis in developed countries could affect developing nations and pressed for urgent steps by Europe and other advanced economies to prevent “double-dip” recession.
The three leaders also demanded reform of global institutions of governance, including the United Nations and financial bodies, to address current international challenges.
India’s Stand
The Indian prime minister said that the world financial and capital markets were showing signs of “acute distress” due to the negative signals sent by the sovereign debt crisis in Europe and recessionary trends in the “traditional engines” of global economy - the United States, Europe and Japan.
Dr Singh, Zuma and Rousseff, who represent the fast developing economies, discussed the crisis being faced by the advanced countries at their day-long trilateral Summit and were in agreement that the situation needs to be prevented from spiralling out of hand.
The Indian prime minister voiced his hope that effective and early steps will be taken by Europe and other advanced economies to calm the capital and financial markets and prevent the global economy from slipping into a double-dip recession.
Manmohan Singh said that there has been steady growth in the three economies despite the global economic slowdown and intra-IBSA trade has almost touched the $20 billion dollar mark, the Indian prime minister said. The IBSA countries have set a target of $25 billion by 2015.
India will host the next IBSA summit in 2013.

Afghan President’s India Visit: New Delhi and Kabul Establish Strategic Cooperation

Afghan President Hamid Karzai, came to India for a two-day visit on 4 October. Karzai’s trip to New Delhi is seen as one laden with significance where the deepening of bilateral ties between the two countries are concerned. The two countries entered into a strategic partnership under which India will, among other things, assist the war-ravaged nation in training, equipping and capacity building programs for Afghan National Security Forces.

The landmark agreement was signed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Afghan President Karzai after their wide ranging discussions on the situation in the embattled nation and how India could strengthen its capacity building programs in that country.

Political and Security Issues

The agreement envisions bilateral ties on an altogether different and broader plane, encompassing areas such as security and economic cooperation. The most significant aspect of the strategic partnership is the political and security cooperation it envisages in areas such as combating international terrorism.
The agreement provides for the training, equipping and capacity-building of Afghan national security forces, which is being seen as a preparation for the drawdown of US-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces by 2014. Thus far, treading carefully, New Delhi had been largely pumping aid to help build Afghanistan’s infrastructure.

Security cooperation between the sides was intended to help enhance their respective and mutual efforts in the fight against international terrorism, organized crime, illegal trafficking in narcotics, money laundering and so on, the text of the strategic partnership document said. India agreed to assist, as mutually determined, in the training, equipping and capacity building programs for Afghan National Security Forces.

The two countries also concluded a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on cooperation in the field of development of hydrocarbons and another on cooperation in the field of mineral resource development.

Under the agreement, the two sides will engage in close political cooperation by establishing a mechanism for regular bilateral political and Foreign Office Consultations. Political consultations will be led by the Foreign Ministries of both countries and include summit level consultations convened at least once a year.

The two sides will also consult and cooperate at the United Nations and other international, regional and multilateral fora. India and Afghanistan also agreed to establish a Strategic Dialogue to provide a framework for cooperation in the area of national security. The dialogue will be led by National Security Advisers (NSAs) and involve regular consultations with the aim of intensifying mutual efforts toward strengthening regional peace and security.

Support for UN Reforms

The strategic agreement also comprises joint initiatives on key international issues and support for UN reforms, including permanent seat for India in the UN Security Council. It entails a strategic dialogue to provide a framework for cooperation in the area of national security. "The dialogue will be led by NSAs and involve regular consultations with the aim of intensifying mutual efforts towards strengthening regional peace and security.

The two countries committed themselves to strengthening trade, economic, scientific and technological cooperation, as well as cooperation between other bodies of business and industry representatives, with a view to expanding trade and economic relations.

The major pacts signed include:

* An MoU on cooperation in the field mineral resource development concluded. The two sides will engage in close political cooperation
* India to assist in training, equipping and capacity building programmes for Afghan security forces
* Both nations committed to strengthening trade, economic, scientific and technological cooperation

India, South Africa Agree To Strengthen Bilateral Cooperation

India and South Africa have agreed to strengthen bilateral cooperation in the medium, small, and medium enterprises (MSME) sector. This was agreed in a bilateral meeting between Jyotiradiya M Scindia Minister of state Commerce and Industries and Scindia is on a one day visit to South Africa heading a Confederation of Indian Industries (CII) business delegation to South Africa. Scindia held wide ranging discussions with Elizabeth Thabethe, Deputy Minister for Trade & Industry. During the discussions Scindia referred to the historical ties and their common struggle against colonialism and apartheid. Addressing the press after the meeting the Minister for State for Commerce & Industry said, "South Africa houses many prominent centers of learning and excellence. There is a scope for the universities and research and scientific institutions to enter into R&D collaborations.
The MSME sector accounts for a large share of industrial output, employment and exports in both countries. There are immense opportunities of cooperation and strategic alliances in MSME sector, which could be in the form of joint ventures, technology collaborations or marketing tie-ups."
Bilateral Trade in 2010-11
The total trade between the two countries in the financial year 2010-11 was $10.6 billion, higher than bilateral trade target of $10 billion by the year 2012, set during the visit of South African President Jacob Zuma to India in June, 2010. A revised bilateral trade target of $15 billion has been set for the year 2014 during the meeting of Minister of Commerce and Industry, the Indian Government and the Minister of Trade and Industry, South African Government held on 10 January 2011. Scindia expressed hope that the India-SACU Preferential Trade Agreement (PTA) will be concluded soon, which will give a considerable boost to our exports in the Southern African region. South Africa is India's 2nd largest trading partner in Africa. There is, however, ample scope of diversifying the existing trade basket by bringing in many more manufactured goods.
Addressing the business conference "India-South Africa: Developing Partnerships for Future" at Johannesburg, Scindia said "Our economies are placed in similar positions in the global economic order, and both our governments are faced with similar socioeconomic imperatives. It is imperative for us to step up the bilateral cooperation, intensify knowledge sharing and jointly address developmental issues, leading to inclusive growth in our respective economies. "Speaking about the potential areas of cooperation he mentioned that there are tremendous prospects for South African diamond mining companies to enter into long term contracts with the Indian diamond companies/rough purchasers like DIL, MMTC etc. and there exists tremendous scope for co-operation and JVs between Public Sector undertakings of the two countries in the coal sector. He mentioned about the significant contribution made by 1.5 million strong Indian Diaspora in South Africa. The business conference was jointly organized by the CII and the Business Unity South Africa (BUSA).
Structured Engagement and Interaction
Addressing the conference he mentioned that the 1st India-Africa Forum Summit in New Delhi in 2008, and the 2nd Summit, recently held in May 2011 at Addis Ababa, have designed a new architecture for a structured engagement, interaction and cooperation between India and Africa in the 21st century. At the 2011 Summit, our Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, made several announcements for the next three years, including the availability of $5 billion Lines of Credit; more than 22,000 scholarships and an additional $700 million to establish new institutions and training programs in consultation with the African Union and its institutions.
In a meeting organized by the Indian High Commission, he also interacted with the leading CEOs of Africa and explained to them the opportunity India offers due to its unique democratic and demographic dividend.
There is active contact between India and South Africa in multilateral fora, particularly at the NAM, Commonwealth, G77, G20, New Asian-African Strategic Partnership (NAASP), and World Trade Organization (WTO). Both countries are part of the India, Brazil and South Africa (IBSA) trilateral initiative. Both countries are currently non-permanent members of the UN Security Council (2011-2012). South Africa rendered pro-active support in the NSG decision to enable full civil nuclear cooperation with India. South Africa recently participated in the BRICS summit held in China in April 2011.

Hillary Clinton’s India Visit

During the highly important recent visit to India by US State Secretary Hillary Clinton, the United States and India have expressed the resolve for promotion of cooperation in civil nuclear technology and defense sectors along with others departments also. Hillary Clinton has said that they will not tolerate the sanctuaries for the terrorists at all. Pakistan should take full-scale action against terrorism for the sake of stability in the region and that it should share intelligence information. It is necessary for the future of Pakistan itself.
India-Pakistan Dialogues
The US and Indian foreign ministers expressed these views while addressing a joint news conference at the conclusion of strategic dialogues. On this occasion, both the countries agreed to expand cooperation for curbing terrorism and to expedite the process of implementation of the civilian nuclear agreement. The strategic dialogues also discussed the Pakistan-India dialogues and they urged that Pakistan should destroy the safe havens of the terrorists for stability in the region and for security of its future. Clinton said that civil nuclear agreement is a ''vital investment'' between both the countries. For this purpose, the United States will keep cooperating with India.
Clinton assured the Indian officials that the Barack Obama administration will keep the pressure up against Pakistan to handle the extremists and that they will not allow Taliban to regain power in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of US military. She said that Pakistan-India talks are welcome development. The United States wants to see confidence restored between both the countries and for this purpose the settled measures should be properly acted upon.
War on Terror
She reiterated that the United States considers Pakistan an important ally in the war on terror. She confessed that the number of people who died in terrorists' attacks are far more than the people in the United States. However, Pakistan should secure its areas and its people. We want long term relations with Pakistan under the bilateral interests however we will not tolerate the safe hideouts of terrorists in any part of the world and we will have to work jointly in order to remove them. It is correct that no government can offer shelter to a terrorist since it is aware of the mortal consequences.
She said that it is in the interest of Pakistan' future to improve ties with India. She also said that we want to see justice done to the people who attacked India. The United States is committed to the agreement for civil nuclear technology and it will honor the agreement.
Expressing condolences and sympathies with the victims of Mumbai blasts, US State Secretary Hillary Clinton said that Indian war against terrorism is ''our war''. We will always side with India on this issue. Pakistan has also fallen prey to the terrorism. On this occasion, both the countries reached an agreement for the cyber security as well. Under the agreement, Indian secret agency -- Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) and the US CIA will provide intelligence information to each other in case of any incident of terrorism.
Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna said during the talks with US State Secretary Hillary Clinton, we have talked about the permanent membership of India in the UN Security Council and to expand the role of India in Afghanistan. Krishna said at the time of military drawdown from Afghanistan, the United States should keep the ground realities in view and ''ensure'' that following the withdrawal, the Taliban-led terrorists do regroup and strengthen themselves. We have made it clear to the other allied countries, including the United States, that their presence is highly necessary in Afghanistan.
US Withdrawal From Afghanistan
US State Secretary Clinton said I want to make it clear that though the United States has initiated the process of pulling out its troops from Afghanistan but it does not mean we are completely leaving the region. We are committed to performing our duties in the region. She said that in order to give the reconciliation a practical shape and to maintain it, the United States would need the cooperation of all the neighboring countries of Afghanistan, including India and Pakistan. India has recently shifted its stance after a longtime opposition to talks with the Taliban.
Referring to India's stance, US State Secretary Clinton said that India has expressed its ''concerns'' about foreign intervention during the process of reconciliation. We agree to these concerns and we are holding talks with India over these issues. We also believe that Pakistan's role in also very important in this process and Pakistan has ''fair interests'' which should be safeguarded. A democratic, stable and prosperous Pakistan is necessary for the durable peace and security in the region. The drawdown in the forces does not signify that we are leaving Afghanistan alone.
US State Secretary Hillary Clinton urged India that now it is the right time when India should play its leadership role in the Asia where China is spreading its influence and power. She said that India should help the neighboring countries Pakistan and Afghanistan that are suffering numerous difficulties. India should expand its political influence as it has its economic influence and power. Moreover, Washington is ''aware of the fact'' that India has the capability to do so as compared to China. The 21st century is the time to find new opportunities and playing leadership role. She said the United States and India share common vision with regard to the future of the region. US State Secretary Clinton said that Indian leadership has all kinds of abilities to positively shape the future of Asia Pacific region and in this process, we encourage India that it not only should look toward east but also engage itself in the east as well.
Evolution of Economic, Historical and Scientific Process
The statement of US State Secretary Hillary Clinton in India where she said, ''I want to make it clear that the United States is going to start the process of drawdown of its troops from Afghanistan but it does not mean that we are going to leave this region'' is no less than a tragedy for the terrorists and their patrons. The terrorists are jumping with joy that they will once again regain the control of the region after the US withdrawal from this region and again they will be able to do what they please with. Moreover, the 'West's' agenda in this region with regard to the terrorism and the terrorists will not change because of the US economy coming to the state of default. It is notable that now India is also part of west besides China and Russia. However, no matter they are the US allies or Russia or China, no wants to see the United States going bankrupt because in that case, these advanced countries will lose lots of their assets in the United States. It will result into anarchy as a result to which the religious fanatics and terrorists will take over the control of the entire world.
Impact of US Economic Collapse
To be a superpower and then come up the expectations of this responsible level is no joke because it all takes place as a result of a long evolution of economic, historical and scientific process.
As a result of the collapse of the US economy, the world will confront various crises of serious nature including economically and militarily and no one will be immune from the mortal and lethal repercussions of the US economic collapse. Therefore, all these countries including the advanced countries will make every possible effort that things do not go this way because to successfully discharge the duties of a superpower is not possible for anyone including the US allies, and Russia or China, at the moment.

Virus in World Civilization: Fundamentalists on Shoulder of Peril Humanity

The great creator has created seven skies and grounds that means the earth beautifully through the skilled artisans. He has created 18,000 species. Of them, the almighty announced the mankind as the greatest creature of the creator by vesting task of love and responsibility in the human being. He also handed over the responsibility of representation to other creatures. Moreover, he has kept the human being created by earth at the level of faults. He has also provided adequate knowledge of understanding good and bad ways to two communities---the human being and demons. He has created heaven for good people and hell for bad people. He has also kept ready a fine judiciary system for dooms day. He has sent saints to each locality to inform about the benefit of good work and bad work. He also sent time-befitting books on law for giving directives on positive and negative sides.
Extreme Peak of Development
The mankind as per its pervading natural rules thinks themselves as lovely and beautiful and members of well-civilized nation. On the other hand, they consider others as ugly, nasty, black sheep and uncivilized. The people before 10,000 years used to claim that they are well-civilized nation. Those who lived before them were barbaric, orthodox, primordial and wild people. We claim in today's world that we are well-civilized nation. We want to prove through various innovations and architecture that we are in extreme peak of the development. Those who lived before us were orthodox, barbaric, primordial, wild and uncivilized. The people crossed the 21st century would claim that they are well-civilized nation. Do you know what they would mention us? They are ugly, nasty, barbaric, orthodox, fanatics, illiterate, impolite and uncivilized. Or they would give a new hateful title. Let see are we really a well-civilized nation or holding any hatful adjective.
The creator has not only sent Hazrat Adam ,the first man, to the world as a complete great man by providing all kinds of education, rather the almighty has sent him as a messenger or teacher of animals of all species including human being and demons. He has sent Hazrat Hawa as the wife of Hazrat Adam. The spread of posterity is made from the above mentioned original father and mother and ancient Semitic, Hamitic, Ad Samud etc which have emerged as the successors of Adam and Hawa later. Various branches and tentacles of these nations spread at different places of the world. At the rotation of time, various nations and communities were born side by side with building of various civilizations. According to the testimony of the history, the Jews were nomadic nation before 1500 BC. In course of time, they were divided into three branches -- Finish, Aramaic and Hebrew. For finding out the lot, they left the Arab desert region and one branch set up settlement in Egypt, another in Palestine and the rest branch established settlement in Kenona town. During settlement in Egypt, the Hebrew nation took slavery of Faraun Kaus. The Hebrew nation was freed from the shackle of slavery after Kaus drowned in the Nile River during the war with Hazrat Musa . Under the leadership of Hazrat Daud and Hazrat Solaiman, they were installed in the seat of glory in phases and established the Hebrew empire side by side with building Hebrew civilization. At that time, Jerusalem was their capital. After the death of Hazrat Solaiman, the fall of the Hebrew empire began and they were spread at different parts of the world. In the year of 3500 BC, that great Babylon civilization was built due to reconciliation of Semitic civilization. Asiria civilization was one of its branch and ancient Hebrew civilization was a different branch of Semitic nation. At the rotation of time, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Sindhu and Arjya civilizations were built. The sum and substance is that it is the world civilization or modern civilization which has been built with mixing of culture of the East and West. Some historians expressed opinion that the Egyptian that means Arab civilization carries the inheritance of the Helle nic civilization. The claimants of these civilizations reached in such a stage in the 10th century by making great reconciliation of all civilization which has been called as the era of 'Aiyame Jaheliat' or the 'Era of Darkness'. After ups and downs, when the world people were engaged in injustice, unholy practice, wars, women, liquor, anarchy and violence, while indiscipline became a regular phenomenon, then the world civilization experienced stumbling in every step.
The creator has sent great saints or messengers in all ages to bring the derailed people in the right track. And Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet who was sent by the almighty Allah to the world about 1500 years ago as a messenger to show the light of the derailed people. We the Muslim community has taken shelter under the very pleasant shade of Islam, the religion preached by the great prophet. Our predecessors were baptized in the religious tenet preached by Hazrat Muhammad that means the great book Al Koran which was vested in the great prophet. It is necessary to mention as the all old constitutions that means religious opinions were annulled with the appearance of the great book Al Koran, what is the logic to call the Muslims as fundamentalists?
Despite remaining united by the Jews, Christians and Buddhists and following cancellation of their all ideologies and philosophies, they cannot spread their 30-40 thousand year-old religious opinion. Being fanatics and covered by the bigotry, they cannot accept the invitation of Islam. A few numbers of people were baptized in Islam by realizing its necessity, but the majority people remain orthodoxy. The mentioned fanatics are hatching bad and hatful conspiracies to prove themselves innocent. The thirsts of Jews, infidels, Christians, the Hindus and others, who claimed themselves well-civilized, are yet to end, by making the humanity in peril and shouldering the ghost of fundamentalism on the Muslims. Besides the fundamentalism, they have given various titles to the Muslims like orthodox Muslim, fanatics Muslim, militant Muslims, terrorist Muslim etc. Khwaza Ismail Mohammad Umrad, Golam Farid, Bahaullah, Golam Ahmad Qadiani, who are the successors of the posterity of Meer Jafar, Ghoseti Begum, the intruders of the Jews, infidels and Christians, were the claimers of feigning prophets. Earlier many feigning prophets faced outrage of Allah by claiming Nabuat.
Those who were condemned for opposing Islam openly were author of the Saternic Verses Salman Rushdi, insulters of Al Koran Sardar Alauddin, author of the controversial book, Lajja, feminist Taslima Nasrin. Their collaborators remain active that how make breach or crack in the Islami unity and belief. The Muslim women have been pressed into the streets alluring them employments and providing equal service through the non-government organizations and in the name of women renaissance. Our mothers and sisters are being naked by opening Hijab in the name of enforcement of various laws. By creating panic of famine, they are engaged in conspiracies to reduce the Muslim manpower, by distributing free contraceptives. Conspiracies are on to change the syllabus of Qaumi madrasa and stop fatwa, which is an integral part of Islam. Poet Daud Haidar made acrimonious comments to the Muslims as fundamentalists when he filed a story in favour of feminist Taslima Nasrin in daily Manab Jamin on July 15 in 2009.
You can read the titled 'Taslima Nasrin's Lajja and Others' edited by Mousi Yasmin as how the poets, litterateurs and newspapers of two Bengals and India undermined the Muslims. Or reading directly 'Lajja' as how Scud missiles have been thrown on Islam. The Muslim people waged a movement considering that the image of Islam will be tarnished and communal harmony in India and Bangladesh would be destroyed. As the then government banned Lajja by undertaking stringent measures, would the respected lawyers term the government as fundamentalists ? In fact, the word of fundamentalism has been evolved from Beng ali language. A section of Alem society in blind faith or other intention or going to express one-sided thinking, analyzed the misinterpretation of the word fundamentalism. But everybody admitted that the word fundamentalism has been turned into reviling like Meer Jafar. Many of their opinion is that we are accepting Adam to lone Allah, accepting the prophets and Risalat and laws of Allah from the beginning and believing those, so we are fundamentalists.
Why they are not trying to understand that the name of these acceptances and beliefs is oneness. The word Allah is the name of a unique entity. On the other hand, the fundamentalism is a law created by the human being and the name of an ideology. Two different matters--fundamentalism and oneness are not same in any way. If confusion is created by mixing up the two separate theories, the birth of different Ferqa or organization is no wonder. It is mentionable that Islam was sent to all prophets including Adam and Issa They all recognized the lone Allah and preached His faith. The rituals of Islam which were essential to perform by them were not applicable for us. The almighty Allah Himself through the holy Koran annulled all laws, theories and ideologies that were vested in the prophets. As the word of 'fundamentalism' has come from Bengali language and it is not a part of Quran-Hadith and has been turned into reviling and the word is applicable for separate religious faiths, would the consequence of shouldering the word on the Muslim nation be good? Rather, it carries the forecast of creating brotherly conflict in the Muslim society and separating the Muslim unity.
Is there any scope of thinking for a single time that the great philosophy and ideology named Al Koran sent by Allah and preached by Muhammad is a complete book where all kinds of present time-befitting laws have been incorporated. It has been clearly mentioned in the Koran that Islam is a complete code of life. This notion has been recognized by all irrespective of religions, caste and creed. It is our beyond realization that why a section of Muslims want to be fundamentalists after showing lame excuse.
A magazine on religious Tamuddun affairs in its January 2011 issue published the editorial titled 'Evaluation of fundamentalists and non-fundamentalists'. As per the language of the editor of the magazine, the fundamentalists are the real Muslims. However, in the last part of the editorial, he said the word 'fundamentalist' has been turned into a reviling.
It is the recognition of the Muslims as fundamentalist by describing the Muslims fundamentalists directly. It can be said with example that everybody has freedom of expression. It is his/her fundamental rights. But it does not mean that anybody could be reviled illogically in the name of freedom of expression. Does Abdul Wahed think the Muslims are blind, deaf and dumb or disabled? It seems that only Wahed holds the authority of 1500 million Muslims. Or he has the power of acceptance and denial of that matter which is vested in 1500 million Muslims!
The Western nations were worried after the discovering of a huge quantity of natural resources in the Muslim countries in Asia and Africa which were independent after the Second World War. The Western powerful nations thought that if the Muslim countries become the owners of huge natural resources and they remain united, they would dominate them very soon. From this apprehension and necessity, the Western nations are trying to create crack in the unity of Muslim countries. They are continuing creating anarchy through panicky propaganda against the Muslim nations which was highlighted in my article.
Undermining Muslims Through Mockery
Burden of shouldering one or one more communities:
The titles like Fundamentalist Muslims, Orthodox Muslims, Militant Muslims and Terrorist Muslims are the sharpen weapons or cruise missiles of the Western forces to destroy the Muslim community. These Western forces are always panicked before the jubilant spirit of Muslims. Despite not having any natural resources Japan, which was destroyed by the nuclear bomb during World War II, was the target of envy of the Western forces. So they are making all-out efforts to destroy the Muslims by giving up the civilization. The masked shameless people want to cover their stigma by observing the Hiroshima Day. In fact they do not bother the civilization. The non-Muslim community is continuing to undermine the Muslims. When they feel self satisfaction by undermining the Muslims through mockery, then their spies or agents welcome through various media to satisfy their lords. They are pushing the adjective named civilization towards the death through books, newspapers, handbill, leaflet, posters, radio, television, CD, VCD, DVD, websites and publicity machinery. As they do not know the correct definition of the fundamentalism and they have no capability of complete analyzing of fundamentalism, a section of the ulema society thinks that oneness and fundamentalism is same. They also think that they were baptized in Islam before Hazrat Muhammad It is not correct at all.
The holy Qran has annulled all ideologies and religious opinions including earlier religions. The role of that ulema society is so frustrating that does not need to say. It would be clear to the readers like daylight by unveiling the mask and some scattered incidents of America that who are infecting the world civilization by virus. And in the name of war on terror, who are burdening the fundamentalism on the shoulder of the Muslims and crippling the world civilization.
Situation in Arab World
Look at present Lebanon and Palestine. The air of Palestine has become heavy due to crying of bloody people of Palestine. Threat after threat is coming in Iran, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Jordan and other Muslim countries. Despite that, would you say that the world civilization remains unhurt?
Dear readers, the incident between Iraq and Kuwait was a brotherly conflict. Arab League had the responsibility to resolve the matter as it was the internal matter of the Arab world. But in the name of peacekeeping, the United Nations destroyed the country by violating thousands of mothers and sisters and looting the oil resources. The oil-rich nations are now the victims of hateful lust. The world civilization has been counting time of death.
Look at Afghanistan and Bosnia. Did the Western countries not carry out aggression on these countries? They are now over the moon by dividing Soviet Union into 15 pieces. The world civilization is now weeping after being emotionalized after extreme Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena under the leadership of LK Advani and under the guidance of fanatic Hindu Dharma Sabha and Biswa Hindu Parishad leveled the Babri Mosque with soil ignoring the High Court verdict.
Bangladesh’s Liberation War
Remember the Bangladesh’s Liberation War in 1971. Three million freedom fighters sacrificed their lives after they were bullet-hit by the Pakistani occupation forces which were equipped with arms provided by so-called super powers America and China. Ignoring the international war policy and painting foot step at the chest of the civilization, they violated 200,000 mothers and sisters. Where was the UN Human Rights Commission, where was the UN Security Council and Geneva Convention? They will be thrown into the dustbin of the history. The days are not far long, they would be awarded hateful titles to be given by the people of the 20th century. Besides, they would try to stigmatize us through false fishing net. The world civilization is now fighting for life after being attacked with the deadly disease. The Western people pushed the world civilization toward the death. How the world people would find out a remedy? Is there any preventive medicine?
Yes, the only preventive medicine is faith. Scud, cruise, and other deadly weapons are outdated before. The Muslims have no fear as they are martyrs if they die and Gazi (hero) if they live. So revive the faith. Jump with nuclear of faith. Whatever barriers have come, face this with courage of faith. It is the time for taking preparation of self-protection. Wake up as it is not the time for sleep. The tornado would be further strengthened if you sleep. Face the enemies of Islam with the strength of faith.
We should keep it in mind that the crushing of the Western people would not be good. The last victory of the faithful is sure because Allah would extend support to them. And Allah is the only resort of the faithful. So we are saying without any doubt that the world civilization suffering from deadly disease would be cured, the faithful would witness last victory.

2012: Year of Change of Big Powers’ Governments

US President Barack Obama has announced that he would contest the presidential election in 2012. Not only he, the leadership of four more permanent members of the UN Security Council is also facing election phase in their respective countries and the change of leadership may possible be seen. Obama announced to participate in the presidential election at a time when he recalled his bombers from Libya. But perhaps to fulfill his this promise or for the time being to show the American people that he intends to fulfill his promises, including the promises he had made in 2008 that he would call back the US troops from across the world, but it is the phase of producing the proof of his US citizenship. He is presenting his birth certificate.
Economic Crisis
British Prime Minister David Cameron too faces elections and perhaps he too may be far away from the success because his coalition government may face any economic crisis. There are signs of change in China as well. Xi Jin Yung will replace Hu Jintao there.
In the case of Russia, the election of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev depends on Vladimir Putin.
The success of the French president depends on his success in Libya and his office is at stake in the Libyan war.
As far as Obama is concerned, he still enjoys popularity and is moving fast and the killing of Usama Bin Laden has upped his popularity graph and history is with him. Republicans have yet not nominated their candidate. Perhaps, the 2016 election may be their target because currently they have no personality, who could compete with Obama. They are, however, definitely being accused in the US that they do not take hard stance against the enemies and ignore friends. If Sarah Palin emerged successful, it would be a historical jerk but its chances are very slim. For the success, Obama also needs success in Libya while the game of the chances of success in Afghanistan and withdrawal of troops from there will have to be played whereas in the US, there is talk of dialogue with 400 Taliban.
The Americans have made much investment on Russian President Medvedev, as they consider him a moderate person and supporter of a moderate policy. The Americans believe that he would avoid the policy of confrontation with the US because their problems too are of very serious nature. This is the reason that he avoids raising voice against the US and NATO because he is aware of the difficulties hovering around Russia. Their economy is not on sound footing and their population is decreasing. They too face threat from the Islamic extremists and they face the threat of the vacation of Siberia. As far as China is concerned, Obama knows that China is preparing to challenge them. It will definitely happen one day.
Correcting World Situation
The Americans are saying themselves that the US hunger that it correct the world situation or can lesson the difficulties of the world has died and it has started looking inwards. Then, the Americans know a little less about the incoming Chinese president but they are supporters of establishing relations on the economic lines.
1. The China challenging the US and the competition between the US and China is unavoidable. It is very important question as what arrangement Obama makes for it.
2. The Russian wholly depends on one vote of Vladimir Putin as to whether he supports the Russian president or not or he himself becomes the president. If he himself becomes the president, the difficulties may increase for the US but the affairs of Putin are not much good.
3. Third issue is of Afghanistan. This issue will be very important in the election campaign of Obama and that whether he starts fulfillment of his promise or not. The American people will definitely want to see it.
4. Last, the most important thing is that another major terrorism incident can change the entire global scenario. Any non-state actor may do anything such that the power game in the world can be turn down. The world may plunge into a global war or the tension may increase in the world. If the US president wins but the British and French rulers face defeat and in addition to Putin does not accept the pro-US president in Russia, the scenario may change. Bu after the arrest and humiliation of the International Monetary Fund Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn of French origin, who was a candidate for the French presidency, in a sex scandal, the chances of the success of the incumbent French president have increased. Thus, the US president is advancing the game of next five years.

Deteriorating Situation in Libya

It appears as if North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces are gradually succeeding in achieving their goal. Libya maintains that the Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's youngest son, Saif-al Arab, has been killed in a NATO-led operation but Gaddafi is safe. Moussa Ibrahim, the official spokesman of the Libyan Government, said that in the attack on the residence of Gaddafi's son, three of his grandsons were also killed. According to him, though Gaddafi along with his wife, relatives, and friends was very much present there, he is safe.
No Interest in Restoration of Peace
Confirming the incident, Moussa Ibrahim said the attack carried out with full might was aimed to kill Gaddafi. This makes it clear that Western powers have no interest in restoration of peace in Libya. Instead, they want to devastate and destroy Libya, he said. At the same time, NATO has refuted the allegation that its forces had attacked with the aim to kill Gaddafi.
Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard, the Canadian military officer who is commanding NATO forces in Libya, maintains that all attacks and targets of NATO forces have remained confined to military targets only, and the aim was to prevent the Libyan military from carrying out attacks on thickly populated areas and cities.
Loss of Human Lives and Property
Some observers, however, are of the view that even if the death of Gaddafi's three grandsons is confirmed, it may create further doubts and apprehensions about the purpose of NATO bombings being carried out for the last six weeks in Libya. NATO may have to face strong criticism from countries like Russia that it is going beyond the brief provided to it by the UN Security Council. A Russian legislator, Konstantin Kosachev, who usually expresses his views on foreign affairs, has condemned the attack on Tripoli in which of Gaddafi's three grandsons were killed. He said the situation is now indicating that the only purpose of the anti-Libya alliance is to kill Gaddafi.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has said in Caracas that there is no option left in believing that the attack was ordered with the sole purpose to kill Gaddafi. It is a different issue that [instead of Gaddafi], some other people got killed. Chavez said this is nothing but cold-blooded murder. British Prime Minister David Cameron has said in an interview to BBC that the NATO policy in this regard is absolutely clear and is in accordance with the 1973 UN Resolution. The only purpose is to target Gaddafi's war machinery to prevent loss of human lives and property there.
NATO said the building where the attack was carried out, and which is now claimed to be a residential complex, is in fact better known as a command and control building, from where the Gaddafi Army was busy in chalking out comprehensive military actions against rebels. It may be recalled that there are huge differences within NATO on the action against Libya. Of the 28 countries that form the NATO, only one-fourth are supervising and implementing the ban on arms, and the No Fly Zone affairs.
Aftermath of Killing of Gaddafi's Son
The enthusiasm of rebels in Benghazi turned cold when they came to know that the death of Saif-al Arab could be nothing more than propaganda by the Libyan Government. They maintained that Saif-al Arab's reported death could not be taken as true because Libyan TV had broadcast it. If the report is true, chances of the war coming to an end soon are remote. This is because Gaddafi is such an arrogant and adamant person that even if all members of his family get killed, he would not accept defeat until he dies.
Meanwhile, in the aftermath of the killing of Gaddafi's son and three grandsons, protesters against these killings attacked foreign missions and embassies in Libya, which forced the UN to recall its foreign staff posted in Tripoli. The United Kingdom has ordered the Libyan ambassador posted in London to leave the country within 24 hours. The decision was made after an attack on the British Embassy in Tripoli. Britain, like many other countries, has already recalled its diplomatic staff from Libya. Meanwhile, Italy has also condemned the attack on its embassy in Tripoli.

Tension Rises in Korean Peninsula

The South Korean military has recently conducted a live-fire drill on Yeonpyeong Island in the Yellow Sea, several kilometers from North Korea. The reclusive state did not respond militarily, despite initial concern that its possible retaliation could cause a new explosion in the tinderbox region. For now, the crisis appears to have passed.

However, there is no assurance North Korea will stop its acts of armed provocation against the South. Future prospects for the Korean Peninsula still look uncertain. Nations around the world, including Japan, cannot afford to let their guard down regarding that regime.

About a month ago, the North Korean military launched an artillery attack on Yeonpyeong, killing four South Koreans, including two civilians. Pyongyang defended its action, insisting the shelling was a response to what it said was a South Korean artillery strike on North Korean territorial waters.

The two Koreas still disagree over the military demarcation lines drawn by each nation in the waters near the frontline island, a situation that has given rise to frequent armed skirmishes between them.South Korea's latest firing exercise was the continuation of military activity that it had been forced to suspend because of the North's artillery attack last month. In explaining why it did not respond to the live-fire drill, the North's Supreme Command of the Korean People's Army said it 'did not feel the need to retaliate against every despicable military provocation.

Did the statement mean no artillery shell fired from the island reached North Korean waters? Was Pyongyang influenced by Seoul's avowed readiness to take strong action -- even conduct an air raid--if North Korea struck the South during the firing exercise?

Examine Actual Motives

Whatever the case, the true aim of any North Korean action must be calmly analyzed. That country's recent conduct appeared to be a calculated attempt to upset South Korea. The unpredictable nation first made a military provocation, and then issued a threat that proved to be an unloaded gun.

Bill Richardson--a former US ambassador to the United Nations and a diplomatic troubleshooter--has said Pyongyang agreed to allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect its uranium enrichment facilities. He also quoted Pyongyang as saying it would start negotiations over the sale of unspent plutonium fuel rods that could be used to build nuclear bombs.

Furthermore, the North has agreed to implement confidence-building measures aimed at averting military conflicts in the Yellow Sea. If North Korea honors these pledges, it would appear to mean that country had taken concrete steps to demonstrate a genuine commitment to denuclearization. Japan and other participants in the six-party talks over the North's nuclear weapons program have demanded such measures be implemented in exchange for returning to the negotiation table.Northern Promises UnreliableHowever, it should be remembered that Pyongyang has repeatedly broken its promises, reducing those pledges to waste paper. Given this, the details of the latest accord need to be closely examined while also trying to determine the true motive behind North Korea's agreement to the aforementioned measures.

The UN Security Council had to abandon efforts to issue a statement on the increasing tensions on the peninsula caused by North Korea's shelling. This was because China opposed wording the statement in a manner that denounced the North for its artillery assault on the South, despite most council members -- including Japan and the United States -- demanding the use of such language.As circumstances stand today, no progress can be expected in resolving the North Korean problem even if the six-nation talks are restarted.Japan, the United States and South Korea should further increase their cooperation in dealing with the North -- through both dialogue and deterrence.

Another important task for Japan will be to reconsider the Guidelines for Japan-US Defense Cooperation in preparation for any military contingency.

Inter-Korean Trade Falls Sharply
Inter-Korean trade has fallen about 30 percent this year, largely affected by South Korea's move to cut almost all business relations with North Korea after the North sank one of its naval ships in a torpedo attack in March. According to data provided by the Korea Customs Service (KCS), trade between the two Koreas amounted to $464 million during the January-November period, down from $649 million recorded a year earlier.

In May, a multinational team of investigators released a report saying that North Korea torpedoed the South Korean warship on March 26 near their disputed western maritime border, killing 46 sailors. The North has denied any involvement.In response, the Seoul government suspended almost all business relations with Pyongyang on May 24 with the exception of the industrial complex in the border town of Kaesong, where South Korean firms are doing business in cooperation with workers from the North.

South Korea's exports to the North came to $130 million during the cited period, down 28 percent a year earlier, while imports dropped 29 percent on-year to $334 million. Despite such a sharp shrinkage, trade through the Kaesong industrial complex, tallied in a separate statistic, remained robust. Trade amounted to $1.31 billion during the 11-month period, up 62 percent from a year earlier.

Seoul Should Regain Initiative in Fight and Talk

After a month of live-fire artillery drills and life-taking real attacks, the West Sea has calmed down -- for now. But the brief relief among South Koreans has quickly been replaced by a constant sense of apprehension about North Korea's next provocations.

The pseudo-peace cannot and should not last long. Seoul must relieve this uneasy calmness through its own initiatives.As some North Korea experts predicted, the reclusive regime returned to the dialogue phase of its two-track diplomacy just now. It was a vintage Pyongyang move when it proposed UN monitors' inspection and the sale of spent nuclear fuel rods following a deadly shelling on a populated island.

Seoul is right to doubt the sincerity of the North Korean proposal. Unless the communist regime allows the UN officials to inspect its uranium-enrichment facilities, the visit would end up as much ado about nothing. Nor has the belated fuel sale much meaning for the same reason.But these are no reasons for the Lee Myung-bak administration to spurn them as just political gestures, but to seize them as opportunities for a diplomatic counterattack.

Seoul, instead of adhering to the five preconditions it has set for resuming the six-party talks, will need to be bolder by accepting the dialogue offer and including the inspection of uranium power plants in inspection targets, to send the ball back to the North's court.The key lies in Seoul returning to the center of the diplomatic stage instead of shying away from it and only calling for the change in Pyongyang's attitude.

However, South Korea has maintained its own version of the 'strategic patience'-- waiting for either the North's voluntary denuclearization or implosion -- Pyongyang has gone even more wayward to insult Seoul with unprovoked violence, while the two Northern partners of China and Russia have come to admonish the South on self-restraint, unreasonably treating the villain and victim as the same. There is no reason whatsoever for South Korea to endure this insult and humiliation by remaining as a passive player.

The time has long passed for the South to drastically enhance both its defense and diplomatic capabilities. In any all-out war, the South is certain to win over the North, as there is more than 40 times' the gap in the economic powers of two Koreas. But an eventual reunification of the Korean Peninsula should be through cooperation and reconciliation, not through violence and war.

To persuade China and Russia that the Koreas' reunification under Seoul's control will not be harmful to them, the South needs a far more active and skillful diplomacy with the two northern powers. And such efforts should begin now by more flexibly responding to their proposals for regional dialogue. Seoul should of course maintain and even enhance military alliances with the United States and Japan, but that should be no reason to alienate Russia and China at least diplomatically.