Biden's West Bank tour clouded by settlement plans (AP)

AP - Israel's new plan to build 1,600 homes for Jews in east Jerusalem is overshadowing Vice President Joe Biden's visit to the West Bank.

US condemns Israeli expansion

Biden denounces move to build 1,600 illegal homes that could derail talks with Palestinians.
Read more [Al Jazeera]

Jerusalem Journal: Palestinian Family’s Eviction Stirs Old Ghosts in a Contested City

The removal of a Palestinian family has touched two nerves: the fate of East Jerusalem and the grievances of refugees from the 1948 war.
Read more [International Herald Tribune]

As Biden Visits, Israel Unveils Plan for New Settlements

The plan to build 1,600 new homes in Jerusalem is likely to complicate relations with the U.S. as Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. tours the region.
Read more [International Herald Tribune]

Syria and Israel eye nuclear plants

Middle East rivals announce plans to develop nuclear energy to meet energy need.
Read more [Al Jazeera]

Israel, Syria pursue nuclear-powered Mideast (AP)

AP - Is the Middle East about to go officially nuclear?

Biden condemns new Israeli settlement plan (AP)

AP - Vice President Joe Biden condemned an Israeli plan to build hundreds of homes in disputed east Jerusalem on Tuesday — a disagreement that tarnished a high-profile visit that had been aimed at repairing ties with the Jewish state and kickstarting Mideast peace talks.

Israel rebuffs Biden by announcing new settlement construction (McClatchy Newspapers)

McClatchy Newspapers - JERUSALEM — Hours after the arrival Tuesday of Vice President Joe Biden to help launch indirect Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, Israel announced the construction of 1,600 homes in a settlement block in mostly Arab East Jerusalem, an open rebuff that led Biden to issue a sharply worded condemnation.

US military: 2 soldiers die in Iraq in accident (AP)

AP - The U.S. military says two American soldiers have died in a vehicle accident in Iraq.

Former murder squad chief to head inquiry into Iraqi killings allegation

Claims that British troops killed and abused prisoners are rejected by the MoD, that insists there is no credible evidence

An investigation into claims that British troops killed and abused prisoners will be led by a former head of a Scotland Yard murder squad. The case will involve seeking evidence from witnesses to a fierce battle in southern Iraq six years ago.

The huge task was announced today at the launch of a public inquiry into allegations that British soldiers murdered 20 or more Iraqis after the "battle of Danny Boy", named after a checkpoint in Maysan province, north of Basra, on 14 May 2004.

The chairman of the inquiry, the former high court judge Sir Thayne Forbes, emphasised that he was embarking on his task "without any preconception as to where the truth may lie". He said the inquiry was not a trial and he had no power to make any finding of criminal or civil liability. Any decision about whether witnesses would be granted immunity from prosecution based on their own evidence was up to the attorney general, he said.

Ministers and defence officials insist there is no credible evidence to support the allegations.

"There is absolutely no meeting of minds between those making the allegations and the MoD," Lee Hughes, secretary to the inquiry, said. Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, conceded the case for an inquiry after high court judges attacked the failure of the MoD, and the military police in particular, to investigate complaints by the surviving Iraqis.

The high court attacked the MoD and its lawyers for withholding or losing relevant documents and for unnecessary secrecy. Its handling of the case was "lamentable", the court said.

The allegations relate to the transfer of bodies and prisoners to the British base at Camp Abu Naji and Shaibah detention centre after a battle between insurgents and British troops who were involved in a bayonet charge and hand-to-hand fighting.

The inquiry is named after Hamid al-Sweady, 19, one of those who died. His uncle, and five Iraqis held at the camps, say they were not involved in fighting British soldiers. It has been suggested the Iraqis were detained because soldiers were looking for people involved in the deaths of six British military policemen murdered in nearby Majar-al-Kabir in 2003.

Jonathan Acton Davis QC, leading counsel to the inquiry, said a "police-style investigation" would be led by Stephen Condon, a former detective chief superintendent who led a Scotland Yard murder squad. He was an adviser to the defence team that helped to clear the former Kosovan prime minister, Ramush Haradinaj, of war crimes charges in April 2008.

Acton Davis said: "I anticipate it will be necessary to obtain and take witness statements from those at the battlefield," as well as the two British bases.

Condon's four-man team is unlikely to visit Iraq because of security concerns and will probably have to interview Iraqi witnesses in a neighbouring country.

Acton Davis said the MoD had provided more than 8,000 documents for the case.

Forbes warned that if witnesses did not co-operate, "the inquiry will not hesitate to use its compulsory powers in relation to the production of documents and the attendance of witnesses.

"I would ask that anyone who has any relevant information should provide it as soon as possible." Public hearings are unlikely to take place before the end of the year.

The armed forces minister, Bill Rammell, said that for allegations surrounding the al-Sweady case to be true, there would have had to have been a "massive conspiracy".

A public inquiry is already under way into the death in British army custody of Basra hotel receptionist Baha Mousa in September 2003.

• Defence policy
• Military
• Iraq
• Crime

Israel, Syria pursue nuclear-powered Mideast (AP)

AP - Is the Middle East about to go officially nuclear?

US reassures Israel over security

US vice-president holds talks with Israel PM on Iranian threat and Palestinian peace.
Read more [Al Jazeera]

Biden condemns Israel over homes plan

• 1,600 homes to be built in East Jerusalem settlement
• Vice-president says the deal undermines trust

Joe Biden, the US vice-president, condemned a plan by Israel to build 1,600 homes on occupied Palestinian land in an East Jerusalem settlement.

The Israeli interior ministry's approval of the plan cast a cloud over a visit to the country by Biden just hours after he pledged strong support for the Israeli government.

In an unusually strong statement issued after he arrived 90 minutes late for a dinner with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, Biden said: "I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units."

He said the blueprint for Ramat Shlomo, an ultra-Orthodox settlement in an area of the West Bank annexed to Jerusalem, "undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions I've had in Israel".

The approvals came just a day after the Israeli defence ministry announced that 112 apartments would be built in Beitar Illit, a settlement on the occupied West Bank. The new building comes at a delicate moment in the long-stalled peace process after Israeli and Palestinian leaders agreed to start indirect negotiations.

The interior ministry said the Ramat Shlomo approvals had been passed by the Jerusalem district planning committee. A spokeswoman said there were 60 days to appeal against the decision. Ramat Shlomo, built 15 years ago, is on land captured in the West Bank in 1967 and annexed to Israel in a move not recognised by the international community.

Israel's interior minister, Eli Yishai, who heads a religious party in Netanyahu's governing coalition, said the timing of the plan's approval was coincidental. "There was certainly no intention to provoke anyone and certainly not to come along and hurt the vice-president of the United States," Yishai told Israel's Channel One television.

"Final approval [for the project] will take another few months. I agree that the timing [of the announcement] should have been in another two or three weeks."

Two years ago, when the Israeli government approved 1,300 homes in the same settlement, then US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, criticised the move as having a "negative effect" on peace talks.

Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said the announcements were "destroying our efforts" in peace negotiations.

"With such an announcement, how can you build trust?" he said. "It's a disastrous situation."

Earlier in the day, Biden said Israel and the Palestinians needed to "take risks for peace". But his talk of a "moment of opportunity" obscures a reality in which the two sides are a long way apart. Although the peace process has been under way for nearly two decades, there have been no direct negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leaders since Israel's war in Gaza a year ago.

Palestinian officials refused to hold direct talks unless Israel halted all settlement construction, in line with the demands of the US administration and of the US road map. But Netanyahu, agreed only to a temporary, partial curb to settlement building. It did not include East Jerusalem, or public buildings, or homes where construction had already started.

In talks with Netanyahu, Biden appeared to focus not on the struggling peace process but on Iran, saying Washington was committed to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. "There is no space between the US and Israel when it comes to Israel's security," Biden said after their meeting.

"We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," Biden said.

In private, he is also believed to have cautioned the Israeli government against any unilateral military strike on Iran, and to have tried to win Israeli support for the US administration's policy, which is moving towards sanctions against Iran.

Netanyahu made clear the Israeli government hoped for a tougher sanction regime against Iran. "The stronger those sanctions are, the more likely it will be that the Iranian regime will have to chose between advancing its nuclear programme and advancing the future of its own permanence," he said. Netanyahu frequently cites the need to address Iran's nuclear ambitions as his priority in government and Israeli leaders have pointedly not ruled out a military option.

• Israel
• Palestinian territories
• Middle East
• US foreign policy
• United States
• Joe Biden
• Binyamin Netanyahu

Israeli go-ahead for new settlement homes casts cloud over Biden visit

• 1,600 homes to be built in East Jerusalem settlement
• Vice-president says the deal undermines trust

Joe Biden, the US vice-president, condemned a plan by Israel to build 1,600 homes on occupied Palestinian land in an East Jerusalem settlement.

The Israeli interior ministry's approval of the plan cast a cloud over a visit to the country by Biden just hours after he pledged strong support for the Israeli government.

In an unusually strong statement issued after he arrived 90 minutes late for a dinner with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, Biden said: "I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units."

He said the blueprint for Ramat Shlomo, an ultra-Orthodox settlement in an area of the West Bank annexed to Jerusalem, "undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions I've had in Israel".

The approvals came just a day after the Israeli defence ministry announced that 112 apartments would be built in Beitar Illit, a settlement on the occupied West Bank. The new building comes at a delicate moment in the long-stalled peace process after Israeli and Palestinian leaders agreed to start indirect negotiations.

The interior ministry said the Ramat Shlomo approvals had been passed by the Jerusalem district planning committee. A spokeswoman said there were 60 days to appeal against the decision. Ramat Shlomo, built 15 years ago, is on land captured in the West Bank in 1967 and annexed to Israel in a move not recognised by the international community.

Israel's interior minister, Eli Yishai, who heads a religious party in Netanyahu's governing coalition, said the timing of the plan's approval was coincidental. "There was certainly no intention to provoke anyone and certainly not to come along and hurt the vice-president of the United States," Yishai told Israel's Channel One television.

"Final approval [for the project] will take another few months. I agree that the timing [of the announcement] should have been in another two or three weeks."

Two years ago, when the Israeli government approved 1,300 homes in the same settlement, then US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, criticised the move as having a "negative effect" on peace talks.

Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said the announcements were "destroying our efforts" in peace negotiations.

"With such an announcement, how can you build trust?" he said. "It's a disastrous situation."

Earlier in the day, Biden said Israel and the Palestinians needed to "take risks for peace". But his talk of a "moment of opportunity" obscures a reality in which the two sides are a long way apart. Although the peace process has been under way for nearly two decades, there have been no direct negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leaders since Israel's war in Gaza a year ago.

Palestinian officials refused to hold direct talks unless Israel halted all settlement construction, in line with the demands of the US administration and of the US road map. But Netanyahu, agreed only to a temporary, partial curb to settlement building. It did not include East Jerusalem, or public buildings, or homes where construction had already started.

In talks with Netanyahu, Biden appeared to focus not on the struggling peace process but on Iran, saying Washington was committed to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. "There is no space between the US and Israel when it comes to Israel's security," Biden said after their meeting.

"We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," Biden said.

In private, he is also believed to have cautioned the Israeli government against any unilateral military strike on Iran, and to have tried to win Israeli support for the US administration's policy, which is moving towards sanctions against Iran.

Netanyahu made clear the Israeli government hoped for a tougher sanction regime against Iran. "The stronger those sanctions are, the more likely it will be that the Iranian regime will have to chose between advancing its nuclear programme and advancing the future of its own permanence," he said. Netanyahu frequently cites the need to address Iran's nuclear ambitions as his priority in government and Israeli leaders have pointedly not ruled out a military option.

• Israel
• Palestinian territories
• Middle East
• US foreign policy
• United States
• Joe Biden
• Binyamin Netanyahu

Read more [Guardian America]

Some Iraq Results Coming Wednesday

Iraq’s electoral commission said Tuesday that it would announce partial results of parliamentary elections on Wednesday.
Read more [International Herald Tribune]

Tuesday: 2 US Soldiers, 12 Iraqis Killed; 5 Iraqis Wounded

Light violence left at least 10 Iraqis dead and four wounded today. More casualties were reported in an attack in Duluiya. Two U.S. soldiers were killed in a vehicular accident aw well. Also, British authorities opened an inquiry into allegations that British troops tortured and killed Iraqi civilians. Meanwhile, the two largest Iraqi parties are both claiming to lead in vote counts.
Read more [AntiWar]

Turkey sees positive signs for Israel-Syria talks (Reuters)

Reuters - Syria has said it is ready to restart peace talks with Israel mediated by Turkey, and there are some positive signals from the Israeli side, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said on Tuesday.

Iraq awaits election results

Initial results from polls seen as a test of democracy due for release on Wednesday.
Read more [Al Jazeera]

(AP)

AP - Israel approves 1,600 new homes in east Jerusalem, threatening to cloud Biden visit.
Read more [Yahoo World News]

Kurds set to be Iraq election kingmakers

Kurdish alliance set to play prominent role in coalition government despite Gorran group breaking away

A strong turnout from Iraq's Kurds in national elections on Sunday has enhanced their status of kingmakers in forming the central government, with preliminary voting results expected within 24 hours.

The electoral commission said today that votes had now all been counted, although the official results will not be declared until the end of March.

The ballot appears to have narrowly favoured the political list of the incumbent prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, but the rival bloc of former leader Iyad Alawi is also predicted to have performed well. Whoever wins will have to form a coalition in order to build a government, with the Kurds expected to play a prominent role.

However for the first time, a nascent Kurdish opposition has threatened to splinter the Kurdish alliance, whose truculent factions have invariably united when dealing with post-Saddam Baghdad. The allegiances of a breakaway Kurdish group, Gorran, are an unknown factor in the post-election negotiations. Gorran is thought to have won about 15 seats in the new 325 seat parliament, damaging the bloc of warlord turned president Jalal Talabani, who wants a second term as Iraq's head of state.

Even if Maliki, or his bloc, ends up with the most popular votes, his claim on the prime ministership remains heavily contingent on his ability to appease potential coalition partners and the residual wrath of any enemies he has made during the past four turbulent years. Maliki's supporters were privately claiming today that he has won as many as 85 seats in the new parliament, having swept the south and performed solidly in Baghdad.

Alwai's backers were equally upbeat, with a senior figure in Iraqiya, the secular alliance he took to the election, also claiming the party had won 85 seats. In private, officials are hoping for as many as 110.

A total of 38 people were killed in violence that heralded Sunday's ballot, but so far there have been no claims of vote-rigging or fraud. Election observers have generally endorsed the conduct of the election, which saw a 62% turnout nationwide, and up to a 73% showing of registered voters at provinces that had boycotted the previous poll.

• Iraq
• Kurds

Israeli group: Police improperly arrest Arab kids (AP)

AP - An Israeli rights group is accusing police in Jerusalem of improperly arresting Palestinian boys suspected of throwing stones.
Read more [Yahoo World News]

Iraq vote turnout figures released

Electoral commission says 62 per cent cast their ballots in national elections.
Read more [Al Jazeera]

OECD is ushering Israel in too easily | Seth Freedman

Economic pressure is a powerful tool when it comes to Israel, and the OECD is undermining the EU's firm stance

Despite all the diplomatic disquiet over Israeli policy towards the Palestinians, actions speak far louder than words when it comes to Israel's international status. In May, the country seems set to be ushered into the OECD, following years of campaigning from successive Israeli governments. Such a move would be another step in welcoming Israel in from the cold, and demonstrates certain states' willingness to overlook Israel's questionable behaviour as an occupier in favour of enhanced fiscal and political ties.

In January the OECD's incumbent secretary general implied that Israel's admission is all but guaranteed, and there seems little objection to the decision from the organisation's 30 member states. For Israel's part, accession to the OECD is of great advantage, both in terms of global prestige and practical economic benefits. Israel's credit rating will be upgraded as a result, and Israeli firms will find it much easier to raise capital on the back of the vote of confidence issued by the OECD's leadership.

The only fly in the ointment is a dispute over information submitted by Israel to the OECD as part of its application for membership. Data provided by Israeli officials included figures related to Israel's settler population, which contravenes OECD policy not to take account of a state's economic activity beyond its recognised borders. A leaked report reveals discord among OECD statisticians, who maintain that the data should either include everyone residing in the West Bank – Palestinians as well as settlers – or no one at all.

The row has the potential to derail Israel's acceptance to the OECD because revamped numbers could leave Israel short of the organisation's stringent entry criteria. However, according to the report, the proposed solution allows Israel to first gain membership to the OECD, and then be granted a year's extension to submit new figures – by which point Israel's status as a fully-fledged member will grant it the power to veto demands for updated statistics.

There have been several attempts to block Israel's membership on the basis of its alleged discrimination against its Arab minority, but so far the pleas have fallen on deaf ears. Instead, the message is being sent to Israel by the OECD that money rather than morals is the dominant factor in their decision-making process.

Such a stance flies in the face of EU intransigence over Israel's behaviour towards those Palestinians living under occupation. The EU has indefinitely suspended plans to upgrade Israel's association agreement with the union, pending developments in the peace process and signs that settlement expansion is coming to an end. As it stands, all Israeli exports to Europe are exempt from tariffs, with the exception of produce originating from settlements. On top of the political face lost by Israel over the issue, the financial impact of the EU's decision is designed to increase pressure on the Israeli government and encourage it to make concessions over its settlement policy.

The approval of Israel's membership to the OECD weakens the position of the EU over such key matters. Likewise, it encourages Israel's leaders to believe that they can get away with continuing to flout international law with impunity, safe in the knowledge that as one door closes another is flung open for them to walk through. The carrot and stick approach to coercing Israel to comply with its ethical obligations can only work if there is a concerted, united effort from the outside world, rather than the current batch of disjointed, piecemeal attempts.

Even as Israeli leaders declare their intention to enter into serious negotiations with their Palestinian counterparts, approval continues to be granted for further settlement construction, and peace efforts are undermined before they have even begun. Maintaining the status quo of grandiose, conciliatory statements at political level and counterproductive action on the ground is made all the more easy by the likes of the OECD refusing to stand up to Israel's tactics of deception.

Economic pressure is one of the most powerful tools in the outside world's arsenal when it comes to the Israel-Palestine conflict. It is to Israel's benefit to shed its status as a pariah state and to become closer to countries with whom it can trade and forge financial links. The Israeli economy is heavily reliant on exports, and anything which threatens the viability of Israeli businesses selling their products overseas will go down badly with both the public and, ultimately, the politicians for whom they vote.

Calling for an outright boycott of Israeli goods and services is an extreme way of exerting influence over government policy, and should be entertained only as a measure of last resort. In the meantime, it is incumbent on organisations such as the OECD and EU to flex their muscles in a fashion that is measured yet firm. That seems to be the approach that the EU is taking of late, but the OECD seems to be falling short of its own responsibilities. If, as expected, Israel's membership is ratified in May, it can only be hoped that the OECD's opposition to Israel's misdeeds comes late rather than never.

• Comments on this article will remain open for 24 hours from the time of publication but may be closed overnight

• Israel
• International Trade
• Palestinian territories
• European Union
• Middle East

Joe Biden offers Israel full US support

In talks with Binyamin Netanyahu, US vice-president stresses need to prevent Iran obtaining nuclear weapons

The US vice-president, Joe Biden, promised the Israeli government today that it had the strong support of Washington and said the US was committed to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

"There is no space between the US and Israel when it comes to Israel's security," Biden said, after meeting the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, in Jerusalem. Their talks appeared to focus on Iran and its nuclear ambitions, rather than on the new round of low-key, indirect peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians that was agreed yesterday.

Biden, who is the most senior US official to visit Israel since Barack Obama was elected last year, said addressing Iran's nuclear programme was a priority. "We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," he said.

In private he is also believed to have cautioned the Israeli government against any unilateral military strike on Iran, and to have tried to win Israeli support for the US administration's policy, which is moving towards sanctions against Iran.

Earlier, before a meeting with the Israeli president, Shimon Peres, Biden said Iran had become more isolated since the Obama administration came to power.

Netanyahu made clear today the Israeli government hoped for a tougher sanctions regime against Iran. "The stronger those sanctions are, the more likely it will be that the Iranian regime will have to chose between advancing its nuclear programme and advancing the future of its own permanence," he said.

Netanyahu frequently cites the need to address Iran's nuclear ambitions as his priority in government and Israeli leaders have pointedly not ruled out a military option.

Biden, who was later due to meet the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, repeated the US goal for a two-state peace agreement that would see the creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.

Yesterday, the US special envoy, George Mitchell, announced that Israel and the Palestinians had agreed to new, indirect talks, although discussion on the "structure and the scope" was only beginning.

The peace process has been under way for nearly two decades, but there have been no direct negotiations between the two since Israel's war in Gaza a year ago. Few on either side hold out much hope for the new "proximity talks".

Just before the announcement, the Israeli defence ministry said it had authorised the construction of 112 apartments in the Jewish settlement of Beitar Illit, on the occupied West Bank. That came despite a temporary, partial curb on settlement building announced by Netanyahu last November.

The Palestinians have insisted there would be no return to direct talks unless there was a full halt to Israeli settlement construction, in line with the obligations of the US road map. All settlements on occupied territory are illegal under international law.

• Binyamin Netanyahu
• Joe Biden
• Israel
• Palestinian territories
• Middle East
• United States
• US foreign policy
• Obama administration

Read more [Guardian America]

Biden offers Israel full support

In talks with Binyamin Netanyahu, US vice-president stresses need to prevent Iran obtaining nuclear weapons

The US vice-president, Joe Biden, promised the Israeli government today that it had the strong support of Washington and said the US was committed to preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

"There is no space between the US and Israel when it comes to Israel's security," Biden said, after meeting the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, in Jerusalem. Their talks appeared to focus on Iran and its nuclear ambitions, rather than on the new round of low-key, indirect peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians that was agreed yesterday.

Biden, who is the most senior US official to visit Israel since Barack Obama was elected last year, said addressing Iran's nuclear programme was a priority. "We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," he said.

In private he is also believed to have cautioned the Israeli government against any unilateral military strike on Iran, and to have tried to win Israeli support for the US administration's policy, which is moving towards sanctions against Iran.

Earlier, before a meeting with the Israeli president, Shimon Peres, Biden said Iran had become more isolated since the Obama administration came to power.

Netanyahu made clear today the Israeli government hoped for a tougher sanctions regime against Iran. "The stronger those sanctions are, the more likely it will be that the Iranian regime will have to chose between advancing its nuclear programme and advancing the future of its own permanence," he said.

Netanyahu frequently cites the need to address Iran's nuclear ambitions as his priority in government and Israeli leaders have pointedly not ruled out a military option.

Biden, who was later due to meet the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, repeated the US goal for a two-state peace agreement that would see the creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.

Yesterday, the US special envoy, George Mitchell, announced that Israel and the Palestinians had agreed to new, indirect talks, although discussion on the "structure and the scope" was only beginning.

The peace process has been under way for nearly two decades, but there have been no direct negotiations between the two since Israel's war in Gaza a year ago. Few on either side hold out much hope for the new "proximity talks".

Just before the announcement, the Israeli defence ministry said it had authorised the construction of 112 apartments in the Jewish settlement of Beitar Illit, on the occupied West Bank. That came despite a temporary, partial curb on settlement building announced by Netanyahu last November.

The Palestinians have insisted there would be no return to direct talks unless there was a full halt to Israeli settlement construction, in line with the obligations of the US road map. All settlements on occupied territory are illegal under international law.

• Binyamin Netanyahu
• Joe Biden
• Israel
• Palestinian territories
• Middle East
• United States
• US foreign policy
• Obama administration

Israeli spy Kimche dead at 82 (AP)

AP - David Kimche, the Israeli spy-turned-diplomat who played a key role in the Iran-contra scandal that rocked President Ronald Reagan's administration, has died. He was 82.
Read more [Yahoo World News]

The Hurt Locker is empty [contains spoilers] | Richard Adams

Kathryn Bigelow deserves her Oscar for best director but The Hurt Locker tells us nothing about Iraq [contains spoilers]

It's a sad commentary on Hollywood that Kathryn Bigelow is not merely the first female to win an Oscar for best director but just the fourth woman to even be nominated. So not only does she deserve the award but it's overdue. It's just a shame that The Hurt Locker – a taut thriller, beautifully filmed and edited – has such deep flaws that it won't be remembered as one of the great Oscar winners.

Of course, you can't please everyone and 2009 wasn't a vintage year for American cinema. But there's an small irony that Bigelow is lauded for being the first woman to win "best director" for a movie that has scarcely any speaking roles for women. The Hurt Locker is a very "male" movie in that sense. Maybe it's progress when a female director makes films on subjects that aren't traditionally "feminine" – although since there have been so few women nominated for the accolade – Jane Campion for costume drama The Piano; Sofia Coppola for her bildungsroman Lost In Translation; Lina Wertmuller for the obscure and unsettling Pasqualino Settebellezze – it's hard to say what such female movies might be.

The deeper flaw in Hurt Locker is that it has nothing to say about its setting. This is, after all, a contemporary film, set in Iraq. Yet it feels curiously detatched. It could just as easily have been set in any modern theatre of battle, from the second world war Germany to Korea to Vietnam to Afghanistan. The fact that it's in Iraq is rendered irrelevant – and this political neutrality might account for its success at the Oscars, where "political" films tend to do badly among the Academy's voters.

Very few Iraqi characters get a chance to be heard in The Hurt Locker. Only two get to speak in intelligble sentences, and no subtitles are provided for the others. Instead, the mass of Iraqis are portrayed as largely mute, anonymous and threatening figures, seen away in the distance. Mainly Iraqis are just a danger to be feared, sometimes firing weapons and planting bombs but more often being shouted at or stopped, pushed or pointed at with weapons. One small, quick-witted boy gets the bulk of the Iraqi dialogue, when he strikes up a friendship with James. He doesn't get a name, just a self-bestowed nickname: Beckham. And Beckham literally becomes dangerous when James comes to believe that the boy's dead body has been made into a "body bomb," a corpse wired as a booby-trap. It's commentary of some sort that after James carries "Beckham" outside there is an explosion from an IED that kills Cambridge, the only US military figure who engages sympathetically with Iraqi civilians. Later we discover that Beckham is alive and that James misidentified the boy's body – and James, in shock at the discovery, ignores him, leaving Beckham as confused as the viewer.

Of the other Iraqi characters, only one even merits a name: Professor Nabil, who may or may not be Beckham's father, who cryptically welcomes James as a member of the CIA, but with whom further dialogue is cut off by the appearance of "Nabil's wife", who attacks James and sends him fleeing out into the dark and dangerous streets of Baghdad – although James arrives back unharmed and receives rougher treatment from his wary comrades guarding the base. The other characters that James speaks with are, respectively, "DVD seller" and "Black suit man". Neither of them get much to say, although "Black suit man" is the subject of a heart-rending scene where James struggles to dismantle a bomb vest which has been locked on to the man. All othes are engaged with at the point of a gun.

The immediate contrast is with the excellent and markedly political Three Kings, also set in Iraq but after the first Gulf War, and more pointedly with The Battle of Algiers, the brilliant realist drama which manages to engage the viewer's sympathy despite the bleak cycle of violence into which it resolves. In doing so it personifies the character of Colonel Mathieu as one of the great paradoxes of post-war cinema: "Should we remain in Algeria?" is the question Mathieu poses. "If you answer yes, then you must accept all the necessary consequences." The Hurt Locker has no time for consequences.

There is much about The Hurt Locker that is confusing. That may be the point, of course, that war in such circumstances is both confusing and dangerous – as with the HBO mini-series Generation Kill, which The Hurt Locker resembles. Generation Kill had multiple, overlapping political narratives, and as a result was sprawling and very difficult to follow. The Hurt Locker is much more tightly focussed and successful, but any insights into America's involvement in Iraq won't be found there. In that sense The Hurt Locker is empty. Its general themes – that war is hell, that the soldiers on the ground were perplexed and isolated, sometimes frightened and sometimes exhilarated by combat – are familiar ones. We discover by the end that Sanborn can't take it any more but that James is addicted to the adrenaline.

Does The Hurt Locker need a political narrative? No, it doesn't: it's just a movie, about the psychosis of one character, James. But it seems empty in sitting outside its immediate context. Can we make a movie set in Iraq that is not about Iraq? Of course. But it seems strange. Still, Jane Austen managed to populate her novels with admirals, captains and soldiers and never once mention the war against Napoleon that she lived through and they were fighting in. Is it a coincidence that The Hurt Locker's main character is named William James? An earlier William James, brother of the novelist Henry James, was a founder of modern psychiatry and the author of an essay, The Moral Equivalent of War, which captured perfectly the continued existence of The Hurt Locker's leading man:

Modern war is so expensive that we feel trade to be a better avenue to plunder; but modern man inherits all the innate pugnacity and all the love of glory of his ancestors. Showing war's irrationality and horror is of no effect on him. The horrors make the fascination. War is the strong life; it is life in extremis; war taxes are the only ones men never hesitate to pay, as the budgets of all nations show us.

• Oscars
• Kathryn Bigelow
• Iraq
• United States

The Hurt Locker is empty [contains spoilers] | Richard Adams

Kathryn Bigelow deserves her Oscar for best director but The Hurt Locker tells us nothing about Iraq [contains spoilers]

It's a sad commentary on Hollywood that Kathryn Bigelow is not merely the first female to win an Oscar for best director but just the fourth woman to even be nominated. So not only does she deserve the award but it's overdue. It's just a shame that The Hurt Locker – a taut thriller, beautifully filmed and edited – has such deep flaws that it won't be remembered as one of the great Oscar winners.

Of course, you can't please everyone and 2009 wasn't a vintage year for American cinema. But there's an small irony that Bigelow is lauded for being the first woman to win "best director" for a movie that has scarcely any speaking roles for women. The Hurt Locker is a very "male" movie in that sense. Maybe it's progress when a female director makes films on subjects that aren't traditionally "feminine" – although since there have been so few women nominated for the accolade – Jane Campion for costume drama The Piano; Sofia Coppola for her bildungsroman Lost In Translation; Lina Wertmuller for the obscure and unsettling Pasqualino Settebellezze – it's hard to say what such female movies might be.

The deeper flaw in Hurt Locker is that it has nothing to say about its setting. This is, after all, a contemporary film, set in Iraq. Yet it feels curiously detatched. It could just as easily have been set in any modern theatre of battle, from the second world war Germany to Korea to Vietnam to Afghanistan. The fact that it's in Iraq is rendered irrelevant – and this political neutrality might account for its success at the Oscars, where "political" films tend to do badly among the Academy's voters.

Very few Iraqi characters get a chance to be heard in The Hurt Locker. Only two get to speak in intelligble sentences, and no subtitles are provided for the others. Instead, the mass of Iraqis are portrayed as largely mute, anonymous and threatening figures, seen away in the distance. Mainly Iraqis are just a danger to be feared, sometimes firing weapons and planting bombs but more often being shouted at or stopped, pushed or pointed at with weapons. One small, quick-witted boy gets the bulk of the Iraqi dialogue, when he strikes up a friendship with James. He doesn't get a name, just a self-bestowed nickname: Beckham. And Beckham literally becomes dangerous when James comes to believe that the boy's dead body has been made into a "body bomb," a corpse wired as a booby-trap. It's commentary of some sort that after James carries "Beckham" outside there is an explosion from an IED that kills Cambridge, the only US military figure who engages sympathetically with Iraqi civilians. Later we discover that Beckham is alive and that James misidentified the boy's body – and James, in shock at the discovery, ignores him, leaving Beckham as confused as the viewer.

Of the other Iraqi characters, only one even merits a name: Professor Nabil, who may or may not be Beckham's father, who cryptically welcomes James as a member of the CIA, but with whom further dialogue is cut off by the appearance of "Nabil's wife", who attacks James and sends him fleeing out into the dark and dangerous streets of Baghdad – although James arrives back unharmed and receives rougher treatment from his wary comrades guarding the base. The other characters that James speaks with are, respectively, "DVD seller" and "Black suit man". Neither of them get much to say, although "Black suit man" is the subject of a heart-rending scene where James struggles to dismantle a bomb vest which has been locked on to the man. All othes are engaged with at the point of a gun.

The immediate contrast is with the excellent and markedly political Three Kings, also set in Iraq but after the first Gulf War, and more pointedly with The Battle of Algiers, the brilliant realist drama which manages to engage the viewer's sympathy despite the bleak cycle of violence into which it resolves. In doing so it personifies the character of Colonel Mathieu as one of the great paradoxes of post-war cinema: "Should we remain in Algeria?" is the question Mathieu poses. "If you answer yes, then you must accept all the necessary consequences." The Hurt Locker has no time for consequences.

There is much about The Hurt Locker that is confusing. That may be the point, of course, that war in such circumstances is both confusing and dangerous – as with the HBO mini-series Generation Kill, which The Hurt Locker resembles. Generation Kill had multiple, overlapping political narratives, and as a result was sprawling and very difficult to follow. The Hurt Locker is much more tightly focussed and successful, but any insights into America's involvement in Iraq won't be found there. In that sense The Hurt Locker is empty. Its general themes – that war is hell, that the soldiers on the ground were perplexed and isolated, sometimes frightened and sometimes exhilarated by combat – are familiar ones. We discover by the end that Sanborn can't take it any more but that James is addicted to the adrenaline.

Does The Hurt Locker need a political narrative? No, it doesn't: it's just a movie, about the psychosis of one character, James. But it seems empty in sitting outside its immediate context. Can we make a movie set in Iraq that is not about Iraq? Of course. But it seems strange. Still, Jane Austen managed to populate her novels with admirals, captains and soldiers and never once mention the war against Napoleon that she lived through and they were fighting in. Is it a coincidence that The Hurt Locker's main character is named William James? An earlier William James, brother of the novelist Henry James, was a founder of modern psychiatry and the author of an essay, The Moral Equivalent of War, which captured perfectly the continued existence of The Hurt Locker's leading man:

Modern war is so expensive that we feel trade to be a better avenue to plunder; but modern man inherits all the innate pugnacity and all the love of glory of his ancestors. Showing war's irrationality and horror is of no effect on him. The horrors make the fascination. War is the strong life; it is life in extremis; war taxes are the only ones men never hesitate to pay, as the budgets of all nations show us.

• Oscars
• Kathryn Bigelow
• Iraq
• United States

Read more [Guardian America]

Biden begins talks with Israel

US vice-president meeting Israeli leaders over Iran and Israel-Palestinian negotiations.
Read more [Al Jazeera]

Lebanon's rival groups resume national dialogue (AP)

AP - Lebanon's rival political groups have resumed national reconciliation talks and Hezbollah's weapons are a main topic on the agenda.

Israel: Did the Alleged Mossad Hit in Dubai Really Help? (Time.com)

Time.com - While all the signs point to Mossad as the perpetrator and the Israelis are hardly denying it, the killing of a top Hamas operative may have caused the Israelis problems on other fronts
Read more [Yahoo World News]

Israel’s OECD Bid Poses Problems for Members

An exclusive club of the world’s most developed countries is poised to admit Israel as a member even though, a confidential internal document indicates, doing so will amount to endorsing Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian and Syrian territories. Israel has been told that its accession to the Organization for Economic [...]
Read more [AntiWar]

Iraqi parties both claim to be ahead in election (AP)

AP - The Iraqi prime minister's coalition and its main secular rival both claimed to be ahead in the vote count Monday, a day after historic parliamentary elections that the top U.S. commander said would let all but 50,000 American troops come home by the end of summer.

As Ballots Are Tallied in Iraq, U.S. Calls Vote a Milestone

The government reported a 62 percent turnout rate, as the American military commander in Iraq praised the Iraqi military for its handling of the election.
Read more [International Herald Tribune]

Iraq after the elections: Slogging towards stability | Editorial

Two significant differences separate Iraq's parliamentary election from the first postwar poll in 2005

Two significant differences separate Iraq's parliamentary election from the first postwar poll in 2005. US combat troops are now on their way out – and, barring unanticipated changes, will be gone by the end of August. The other is that the Sunnis who did not vote last time did so on Sunday, sensibly eschewing the idea that their interests could be served by another boycott. Turnout looks healthy at 62%, despite suicide bombings and mortar attacks that, notwithstanding extremely heavy security measures, claimed 38 lives (and more in preceding days). These were a sadly predictable reminder that determined men of violence are still at work, though they lack the power to stop brave Iraqis seeking change through the ballot box.

In the US and Britain, Iraq is yesterday's story. Oscars for the American film The Hurt Locker and the continuing Chilcot inquiry in London reflect a self-centred preoccupation with the past. But short attention spans and the shift of interest and controversy to the war in Afghanistan should not obscure important questions about the post-Saddam future. Nouri al-Maliki, the incumbent Shia prime minister, looks likely to be competing against the more secular-minded and Arab-orientated Iraqiya leader Iyad Alawi to head the next coalition government, which is certain to be the subject of weeks if not months of bargaining under Iraq's system of proportional representation. Deals will reflect the fragmentation of politics along sectarian and ethnic fault lines. Within the Shia ascendancy that the Sunni minority still finds so hard to bear there are prospects for splits – for example between the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq led by Ammar al-Hakim and supporters of the Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. The Kurds, the biggest beneficiaries of the 2003 cataclysm, will probably be kingmakers. The ban on former Ba'ath party members running was a sharp throwback to the bad old days – authoritarian instincts are not easily eradicated. Fears of Iranian meddling, through allies like Ahmed Chalabi, reflect how internal issues are intertwined with regional ones.

Prolonged coalition haggling carries the risk of renewed militia violence and the US imposing an agreement – any agreement – to avoid jeopardising its withdrawal timetable. So in a sense, what happens next is far more important than what happened at the polling stations. Huge difficulties face any government. Iraq is a weak state with large security forces, inefficient institutions and poor delivery of basic services such as electricity and healthcare. Corruption is a scourge at all levels. Optimists point to the potential of the vast oil revenues that will be generated under contracts signed with foreign companies. Yet there is no agreement on how to distribute the wealth. Millions of educated professionals are still abroad. Reconciliation is a mirage. Kirkuk, contested by Arabs and Kurds, is a crisis waiting to explode.

It is impossible – and unfair – to discuss Iraq's prospects without referring back to the bitterly divisive war, invasion, regime change and occupation, and the terrible human, social and political toll they exacted. Yet it would be dishonest to ignore the regional context. Iraq's election contrasts starkly with the contested presidential contest in Iran last summer, widely believed to have been rigged by the Islamic regime. Western-backed Arab states from Egypt to Saudi Arabia decry Iranian influence in Baghdad and the region but have no democratic credentials of their own.

In Washington hopes are rising for a final exit from the quagmire George Bush created. Vice-President Joe Biden has spun a clever line about how "politics have broken out" in Iraq. The truth is that in Iraq politics and violence go together. There are grounds for qualified optimism but there is no certainty that those politics will become more important and more effective in allowing this fractured country to slog on towards the stability it deserves.

• Iraq