[Peace-discuss] Just Foreign Policy News, November 14, 2006

[Robert Naiman]

Just Foreign Policy News
November 14, 2006

No War with Iran: Petition
More than 3500 people have signed the Just Foreign Policy/Peace Action
petition through Just Foreign Policy's website. Please sign/circulate
if you have yet to do so:
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/involved/iranpetition.html

Just Foreign Policy News daily podcast:
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/podcasts/podcast_howto.html

Summary:
U.S./Top News
President Bush came under new pressure yesterday to alter his policies
in the Middle East, the Washington Post reports.  British Prime
Minister Blair pushed for a broader Arab-Israeli peace initiative,
while the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee
pledged to take a hard line on seeking early troop withdrawals.

The president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said Monday
that the US should keep its troops in Iraq only as long as they are
contributing to a "responsible transition" to Iraqi rule, the
Washington Post reports. He said the nation needs an "honest dialogue"
that acknowledges past mistakes and seeks agreement on concrete steps.
The original agenda for the bishops' meeting in Baltimore did not
contain any discussion of Iraq, leading some bishops to wonder aloud
whether they were avoiding the most important moral issue facing the
country.

Democrats continue to resist the appointment of David Laufman as
Pentagon inspector general, the Washington Post reports, questioning
his independence from the Administration.

House and Senate Democrats introduced bills yesterday that would
extend the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq
Reconstruction, the New York Times reports. The Senate bill had
bipartisan support. The House version would not only extend the
lifetime of the inspector general's office, but also widen its
authority to include American programs for training and equipping
Iraqi security forces.

After years of denials, the CIA has formally acknowledged the
existence of two classified documents governing aggressive
interrogation and detention policies for terrorism suspects, the
Washington Post reports. But CIA lawyers say the documents are still
so sensitive that no portion can be released to the public.

The Israel-Palestine conflict is as central to Middle East stability
as the Iraq war is, writes former Israeli negotiator Daniel Levy in
the December issue of Washington Monthly. He suggests Congress should
broaden the scope of the Iraq study group to provide recommendations
for reviving the Middle East peace process.

Israel's Prime Minister Olmert drew fire from Democrats for praising
the Iraq war, Haaretz reports. Olmert, visiting President Bush, had
said that the war brought stability to the Middle East.

Iran
President Ahmadinejad said Tuesday that Iran would soon celebrate
completion of its nuclear fuel program and claimed the international
community was ready to accept it as a nuclear state, AP reports.

President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert kept up their tough talk on
Iran on Monday, warning it once again to drop its nuclear ambitions,
the New York Times reports.

Britain's Prime Minister Blair said Monday that Western strategy in
the Middle East must "evolve," possibly to include a "new partnership"
with Iran.

Iraq
Prime Minister Maliki discussed the "influence of the neighboring
countries on the security situation" with Gen. Abizaid, the top
American commander in the Middle East.

Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, says the
war in Iraq is not winnable, Der Spiegel reports.

The editor and two reporters from one of Denmark's main newspapers
have gone on trial charged with publishing secret intelligence about
Iraqi weapons BBC reports. The published report concluded that there
was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq prior to the US
invasion. The case raises the question of whether there are two
standards for freedom of expression in Denmark: one for offending
Muslims, the other for offending the Bush Administration.

Afghanistan
A joint NATO and Afghan investigation found that a NATO air attack
killed 31 civilians in southern Afghanistan last month, the highest
civilian death toll since NATO took over security in the south in
August, the New York Times reports.

Israel
Many conservative Christians say they believe that the president's
support for Israel fulfills a biblical injunction to protect Israel,
which some of them think will play a pivotal role in the second
coming, the New York Times reports. One evangelical leader called
support for Israel "God's foreign policy."

South Korea
South Korea said Monday that it would not join a US-led effort to
intercept North Korean ships suspected of carrying unconventional
weapons or related cargo, the New York Times reports. As the Bush
Administration sought to build unity ahead of the APEC meeting, South
Korea made clear it was hewing to its policy of avoiding confrontation
with the North.

Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) Bush Faces New Calls To Shift Policies On Mideast
Michael Abramowitz & Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post, November 14, 2006; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/12/AR2006111200250.html
President Bush came under new pressure yesterday at home and abroad to
alter his policies in the Middle East. British Prime Minister Tony
Blair pushed for a broader Arab-Israeli peace initiative to help
stabilize Iraq, while the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed
Services Committee pledged to take a hard line on seeking early troop
withdrawals.

Bush offered little indication that he is planning to adjust his
approach, telling reporters gathered in the Oval Office that "the best
military options depend upon the conditions on the ground" in Iraq.
The president also met for more than an hour with former secretary of
state Baker, former representative Hamilton, and other members of the
bipartisan Iraq Study Group, which is looking to chart a new course in
the war.

Asked about calls for dialogue with Iran and Syria to help curb
violence in Iraq, Bush said there was no change in his position that
Iran must first suspend uranium enrichment. "Our focus of this
administration is to convince the Iranians to give up its nuclear
weapons ambitions," Bush said after a meeting with Israeli Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert. "That focus is based upon our strong desire for
there to be peace in the Middle East. And an Iran with a nuclear
weapon would be a destabilizing influence."

Bush and Olmert told reporters that they spoke at length about the
problems posed by Iran. "There is no question that the Iranian threat
is not just a threat for Israel but for the whole world," Olmert said.

The day's events underscored the rapidly evolving political landscape
for the White House, which finds itself trying to balance the desire
for change voiced by the electorate last Tuesday with the president's
frequently stated conviction that the US must remain engaged
militarily in Iraq until the government there can maintain its own
security.

2) U.S. Catholic Bishops Call For 'Honest Dialogue' On Iraq
Alan Cooperman, Washington Post, Tuesday, November 14, 2006; A15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/13/AR2006111301234.html
The president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said Monday
that the US should keep its troops in Iraq only as long as they are
contributing to a "responsible transition" to Iraqi rule. Bishop
William Skylstad noted that both the U.S. bishops and top Vatican
officials sharply questioned the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. As a
result of the invasion, he said, the US now has "additional moral
responsibilities" to help Iraqis secure and rebuild their country.

In a four-page statement authorized by the entire body of bishops but
issued in his name alone, Skylstad called for Americans to move beyond
the "shrill and shallow" preelection rhetoric that "reduces the
options to 'cut and run' versus 'stay the course.' " He said the
nation needs an "honest dialogue" that acknowledges past mistakes,
recognizes positive developments and seeks agreement on concrete
steps.

The statement came as the Bush administration and the soon-to-be
Democratic-controlled Congress reexamine U.S. policy in Iraq, and as
the bishops primarily are focused on internal church matters,
including deep cuts in their budgets and staffs.

Their agenda for three days of meetings in Baltimore this week
includes statements reaffirming church teachings on contraception,
Holy Communion and homosexuality. But it originally did not contain
any discussion of Iraq, leading some bishops to wonder aloud whether
they were avoiding the most important moral issue facing the country.

3) Nomination Still Stalled For Pentagon Oversight Job
Griff Witte, Washington Post, Tuesday, November 14, 2006; A29
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/13/AR2006111301190.html
Even as the Senate moves quickly to consider Robert Gates's nomination
to be defense secretary, the nomination of the man who would be
looking over Gates's shoulder on behalf of taxpayers remains bogged
down nearly six months after he was tapped to fill one of the
government's most important oversight roles.

The nominee for Pentagon inspector general, David Laufman, is a
veteran prosecutor who has vowed to be an aggressive watchdog -
especially of work in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Laufman, nominated by
President Bush in June, has met resistance from Democrats who question
his independence. Republicans, meanwhile, have done little to advance
his nomination since confirmation hearings in July.

4) Lawmakers Seek To Continue Iraq Reconstruction Watchdog
James Glanz, New York Times, November 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14reconstruct.html
House and Senate Democrats introduced bills yesterday that would
extend the life of a federal oversight office that has issued a series
of sharply critical reports on the Bush administration's
reconstruction efforts in Iraq. The Office of the Special Inspector
General for Iraq Reconstruction would be abolished next year under a
Republican-backed provision included in a military authorization bill
that President Bush signed last month. Some lawmakers have said the
provision was hastily added without their knowledge.

The new bills were among the first indications that Democrats were
following through on their pledge to increase oversight of the Iraq
war. The Senate bill had bipartisan support. It was introduced by
Senators Susan Collins and Russ Feingold along with at least 15
co-sponsors on both sides of the aisle.

Representative Ike Skelton, who is expected to become chairman of the
House Armed Services Committee when his party assumes the majority in
January, introduced a similar bill in the House with 11 Democratic
co-sponsors, a member of Skelton's staff said. The House version would
not only extend the lifetime of the inspector general's office, but
also widen its authority to include American programs for training and
equipping Iraqi security forces.

Even as those lawmakers fought for the inspector general's office, a
new criminal case involving financial fraud and Iraq emerged late
yesterday. The Justice Department said four members of the California
National Guard had pleaded guilty to conspiracy in connection with a
payroll embezzlement scheme that netted them more than $340,000 after
they returned from Iraq.

5) CIA Acknowledges 2 Interrogation Memos
Papers Called Too Sensitive for Release
Dan Eggen, Washington Post, Tuesday, November 14, 2006; A29
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/13/AR2006111301221.html
After years of denials, the CIA has formally acknowledged the
existence of two classified documents governing aggressive
interrogation and detention policies for terrorism suspects, according
to the ACLU. But CIA lawyers say the documents - memos from President
Bush and the Justice Department - are still so sensitive that no
portion can be released to the public.

The disclosures by the CIA general counsel's office came in a letter
Friday to attorneys for the ACLU. The group had filed a lawsuit in
U.S. District Court in New York two years ago under the Freedom of
Information Act, seeking records related to U.S. interrogation and
detention policies.

The lawsuit has resulted in the release of more than 100,000 pages of
documents, including some that revealed internal debates over the
policies governing prisoners held at the military detention facility
at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Many other records have not been released
and, in some cases, their existence has been revealed only in media
reports. Friday's letter from John McPherson, the CIA's associate
general counsel, lists two documents that pertain to the ACLU's
records request.

The ACLU describes the first as a "directive" signed by Bush governing
CIA interrogation methods or allowing the agency to set up detention
facilities outside the US. McPherson describes it as a "memorandum."
In September, Bush confirmed the existence of secret CIA prisons and
transferred 14 remaining terrorism suspects from them to Guantanamo
Bay.

The second document is an August 2002 legal memo from the Justice
Department's Office of Legal Counsel to the CIA general counsel. The
ACLU describes it as "specifying interrogation methods that the CIA
may use against top al-Qaeda members." (This document is separate from
another widely publicized Justice memo, also issued in August 2002,
that narrowed the definition of torture. The Justice Department has
since rescinded the latter.)

6) Send the Baker Commission to Gaza
Daniel Levy, Washington Monthly, December 2006
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0612.levy.html
The much-neglected Israeli-Arab conflict - in particular the
Israel-Palestine conflict - is as central to Middle East stability as
the Iraq war is. The US can't truly address the latter without taking
on the former, too. A regional policy makeover that fails to make
these connections is unlikely to create the tipping point that will
move the Middle East from extremism towards moderation.

Given the president's lackluster performance on this front over the
last six years, some external impetus is clearly needed. The new
Democratic congressional leadership has a responsibility to provide
that impetus. They also have a handy tool with which to do so -if only
they will use it.

Congress doesn't have the power to legislate a change of opinion or
behavior on the part of the president and his foreign policy team.
Simply urging the president to change his strategy won't work; in
fact, it may just encourage him to dig in deeper. So legislators
should try another tactic, one that stands a far better chance of
forcing the White House to get it right: Give the job to Baker and
Hamilton. The new Congress should mandate the study group to expand
its scope of inquiry and provide recommendations for reviving the
Middle East peace process—the logical next step in the painful
rehabilitation of our policy for the region.

[Daniel Levy was an official Israeli negotiator at Oslo and Taba. He
was the lead Israeli drafter of the Geneva Initiative peace plan.]

7) Olmert draws fire in U.S. over praise of Iraq war
Aluf Benn & Shmuel Rosner, Haaretz, 14/11/2006
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/787238.html
President Bush, speaking after a meeting with Prime Minister Olmert,
called Monday for the world to unite in isolating Iran until it "gives
up its nuclear ambitions." In addition, Olmert publicly praised the
American operation in Iraq, which he said brought stability to the
Middle East.

Politicians from the Democratic Party said they wanted to speak to
Olmert about his comments on the Iraq war before responding publicly,
but said they were uncomfortable with the comments. If Olmert planned
his remarks and intended them to come out as they did, a Democratic
official said, then they are not acceptable and can be seen as an
attempt to influence the American political dispute.

Olmert said Israel and other countries in the area should be thankful
to the US and Bush. He said the Iraq war had a dramatic, positive
effect on security and stability in the Mideast, as well as having
strategic importance from Israel's perspective and that of moderate
Arab states.

Iran
8) Iran's Leader Says Nuclear Program Nears Completion
Associated Press, November 14, 2006, Filed at 10:58 a.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Iran-Nuclear.html
President Ahmadinejad said Tuesday that Iran would soon celebrate
completion of its nuclear fuel program and claimed the international
community was ready to accept it as a nuclear state. "Initially, they
(the U.S. and its allies) were very angry. The reason was clear: They
basically wanted to monopolize nuclear power in order to rule the
world and impose their will on nations," Ahmadinejad told a news
conference. "Today, they have finally agreed to live with a nuclear
Iran, with an Iran possessing the whole nuclear fuel cycle," he said.

President Bush said Monday there was no change in his position that
Iran must first suspend uranium enrichment before there can be any
dialogue with Tehran. "Our focus of this administration is to convince
the Iranians to give up its nuclear weapons ambitions. That focus is
based on our strong desire for there to be peace in the Middle East.
And an Iran with a nuclear weapon would be a destabilizing influence,"
Bush said Monday.

The Iranian leader said he hoped "to hold the big celebration of
Iran's full nuclearization in the current year." Iran's current
calendar year ends on March 20. Though Ahmadinejad did not specify, he
appeared to indicate that Iran was on the verge of proficiency in the
whole cycle of nuclear fuel - from extracting uranium ore to enriching
it and producing nuclear fuel.

Russia, which is backed by China, opposes tough action advocated by
the U.S., Britain and France, and its amendments to a Western draft
resolution would reduce sanctions and delete language that would cut
off Iran's access to foreign missile technology.

Iran has said it will never give up its right under the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel.
Officials have said they plan to generate 20,000 megawatts of
electricity through nuclear energy in the next two decades.

Since revelations more than three years ago of a covert uranium
enrichment program, Iran has moved to develop its capabilities,
activating two small experimental enrichment plants and enriching
small amounts of uranium to nuclear fuel level. Although that is far
short of the weapons grade uranium that could be used for nuclear
warheads, international concerns about Tehran's ultimate intentions
led the Security Council to set an Aug. 31 deadline for an enrichment
moratorium - which Tehran has ignored. Officials have said they plan
to have 3,000 centrifuges operating by next year - enough to make
enough material for several nuclear weapons a year.

Suspicions also are focused on Tehran's construction of a heavy water
reactor that - when completed in the next decade - will produce
plutonium waste, another pathway to nuclear weapons.

The Bush administration, frustrated by U.N. Security Council inaction
on sanctions against Iran, is pressing a new agenda - trying to deny
Tehran U.N. aid for a plutonium-producing reactor that could be used
to make nuclear warheads. Diplomats from nations on the IAEA board say
the U.S. is lobbying for denial of Iran's request for help on its Arak
research reactor, where Iran says it wants to produce radio isotopes
for diagnosing and treating cancer.

Seven diplomats told AP separately Tuesday they believed that the 35
member nations of the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog would deny
Iran's request when the IAEA meets next week. But even a total denial
of technical aid for Arak, while symbolically important, is expected
to do little to slow the eventual completion of the reactor, let alone
Iran's nuclear program. When finished - probably early in the next
decade - Arak could produce enough plutonium for about two bombs a
year.

9) Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Maintain Tough Front on Iran
Jim Rutenberg, New York Times, November 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14prexy.html
President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert kept up their tough talk on
Iran on Monday, warning it once again to drop its nuclear ambitions,
even as Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain suggested that Tehran
could take a role in stabilizing Iraq under "a new partnership."
Officials in Israel have expressed increasing fear that Bush will
reduce the pressure on Iran to cease its nuclear program as calls
increase from European allies and at home to seek Tehran's help in
Iraq.

But Bush, speaking after his meeting with the Israeli leader, said his
position on talks with Iran had not changed. "If the Iranians want to
have a dialogue with us, we have shown them a way forward," he said,
"and that is for them to verify - verifiably suspend their enrichment
activities."

10) Blair Urges Strategy Change in Mideast, Spotlighting Iran
Alan Cowell, New York Times, November 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/europe/14britain.html
Confronted by likely changes in American policy on the war in Iraq,
Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain said Monday that the "nature of
the battle" had changed and that Western strategy in the Middle East
must "evolve," possibly to include a "new partnership" with Iran.

Iran has a choice, Blair said, of partnership or isolation. But he
took pains, in his annual foreign policy speech, to avoid giving the
impression that he was making major policy changes in response to
uncertainties surrounding the Bush administration after the American
elections last week. He also laced his speech with criticism of Iran,
accusing it of "using pressure points in the region" to thwart Western
diplomacy.

Blair's nuanced gestures on Iran, and also Syria, were made a day
before he speaks by video link to a bipartisan panel in Washington,
the Iraq Study Group, on some of the same themes. Bush spoke to the
group on Monday. Blair's address Monday night was his first major
statement since last week's triumph by the Democrats in the American
elections.

Iraq
11) Iraqi Premier And U.S. General Discuss Syria And Iran
Sabrina Tavernise & Qais Mizher, New York Times, November 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/middleeast/14iraq.html
Prime Minister Maliki met on Monday with Gen. Abizaid, the top
American commander in the Middle East, as Iraqi political leaders
prepared new candidates for about 10 cabinet posts, lawmakers said. In
the third visit by a senior American official in recent weeks, General
Abizaid and Maliki discussed the "influence of the neighboring
countries on the security situation," according to a statement from
the prime minister's office.

The reference was to Syria and Iran, which the Bush administration has
accused of providing financing and weapons to militias in Iraq. But as
the administration begins a broad reassessment of its Iraq policy,
some - including Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, the closest
ally of America - are proposing opening talks with the two
governments.

12) "Iraq Is Not Winnable"
Interview with Richard Haass, Der Spiegel Online, November 13, 2006
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,447763,00.html
What happens next in the Middle East? SPIEGEL spoke to Richard Haass,
president of the Council on Foreign Relations, to find out. A widely
respected foreign policy expert, Haass warns that the Middle East
could become dangerous for years to come.

SPIEGEL: Haass, were the election results a message from the voters to
President George W. Bush that it's time for US troops to be pulled out
of Iraq?
Haass: The mid-term election is a signal of widespread popular
dissatisfaction with the course of the Iraq war. But it should not be
read as a signal of support for a particular alternative. Nor will it
lead most Democrats in Congress to call for a quick and complete
withdrawal of US forces. Instead, it will reinforce the likelihood
that American policy will be adjusted. We can anticipate force
reductions and redeployments and possibly a greater emphasis on
diplomacy, both within Iraq and with Iraq's neighbors, including Iran
and Syria.

SPIEGEL: Meaning that the Bush Era has come to an end?
Haass: There is something to what you say, in that Iraq was a war of
choice that proved to be much more difficult and expensive than
Americans bargained for. As a result, the public is pushing back.
However, it is not just premature but wrong to say the Bush era is
over. The president will be president for another 800 days. He will be
able to take initiatives, especially in foreign policy given that our
system favors executive leadership. He also may have a better chance
to fashion a consensus on immigration reform. And unanticipated crises
almost always provide a president with the opportunity to do dramatic
things.

SPIEGEL: Is Iraq still winnable for the US?
Haass: We've reached a point in Iraq where we've got to get real. And
this is not going to be a near-term success for American foreign
policy. The Iraq situation is not winnable in any meaningful sense of
the word "winnable." So what we need to do now is look for a way to
limit the losses and costs, try to advance on other fronts in the
region and try to limit the fallout of Iraq. That's what you have to
do sometimes when you're a global power.

SPIEGEL: A special commission headed by former Secretary of State
James Baker will soon present a study on how to go forward in Iraq.
Will this be the excuse for Bush to withdraw the troops?
Haass: The commission gives him something of an opportunity to change
course. Historically, commissions have often played an important role
when the traditional body politic was unable or unwilling to come up
with politically controversial but necessary proposals. We see a
tipping point not only on the ground in Iraq but also in the political
debate in the US. I believe more and more people in and around the
administration are coming to the conclusion that six or nine more
months of the same will not bring us anywhere.

SPIEGEL: The disaster of the last years leads many Americans to doubt
the military strength and moral superiority of the nation. Is this
country on the verge of a new isolationist phase?
Haass: The danger is an Iraq syndrome. The war is one the American
people weren't quite prepared for: They had not been told it was going
to be that difficult and expensive. After the military battlefield
phase, they thought it was going to be easy. So this has proven
shocking. Nearly 3,000 Americans have lost their lives. Maybe 15,000 -
20,000 Americans have been wounded. Hundreds and hundreds of billions
of dollars have been spent. It has been disruptive on many levels. The
danger is that the US now will be weary of intervening elsewhere, like
the cat that once sat on a hot stove and will never sit on any stove
again.

13) Danes on trial over Iraq secrets
BBC News, Monday, 13 November 2006, 14:18 GMT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6143794.stm
The editor and two reporters from one of Denmark's main newspapers
have gone on trial charged with publishing secret intelligence about
Iraqi weapons. In articles published in 2004 they quoted from analysis
by a Danish intelligence agent, Frank Grevil.

His report, written before the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, concluded
that there was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in
Iraq. The Berlingske Tidende journalists could go to jail if found
guilty.

It is being viewed as a landmark case in Denmark, which is usually an
ardent defender of freedom of expression. [BBC doesn't apparently
consider the possibility that there might be two standards for freedom
of expression in Denmark - one if you publish cartoons lampooning the
Prophet Muhammad and another if you publish government information
concerning the US doctoring of intelligence prior to the war in Iraq.
-JFP]

An offence of publishing confidential Danish government documents is
punishable by fines or up to two years in prison.

Afghanistan
14) Toll Of Civilians NATO Killed Was Worst Since It Took Over
David Rohde & Taimoor Shah, New York Times, November 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/asia/14kandahar.html
A joint NATO and Afghan investigation has found that a nighttime NATO
air attack killed 31 civilians in southern Afghanistan last month, the
highest civilian death toll since NATO took over security in the south
in August. The results of the investigation were relayed by a senior
NATO official.

The civilian casualties come at an important and delicate time for
NATO forces here. When NATO took over operations in the south it
promised to win support and bring stability by focusing on development
instead of combat. But fighting and suicide bombings continue.

Lt. Gen. David Richards, the British commander of NATO forces in
Afghanistan, has said that as much as seventy percent of the
population in the south is "on the fence," unsure whether to support
the Taliban or the country's American-backed government. If NATO
cannot deliver development and security this winter, he has warned,
the southern population could turn against the government. Interviews
last week with survivors of the NATO air attack suggest that the
incident might severely damage NATO's reputation among Afghans.

The investigation found that many of the civilians were nomadic
shepherds who had fled their tents with their wives and children after
a NATO bomb struck a nearby compound, killing 20 Taliban fighters,
according to the NATO official. When the surviving Taliban fighters
fled the compound, a C-130 gunship, armed with heavy machine guns and
cannons, strafed nearby fields. NATO ground forces also fired mortars
into the area.

Eighteen dead civilians were found scattered in one field. Ten
civilians were found dead in a ditch. Three more lay nearby, according
to the senior NATO official, who declined to say how many women and
children perished. Only two Taliban fighters who fled the compound
died.

Israel
15) For Evangelicals, Supporting Israel Is 'God's Foreign Policy'
David Kirkpatrick, New York Times, November 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14israel.html
As Israeli bombs fell on Lebanon for a second week last July, the Rev.
John Hagee of San Antonio arrived in Washington with 3,500
evangelicals for the first annual conference of his newly founded
organization, Christians United For Israel.

At a dinner addressed by the Israeli ambassador, a handful of
Republican senators and the chairman of the Republican Party, Hagee
read greetings from President Bush and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of
Israel and dispatched the crowd with a message for their
representatives in Congress. Tell them "to let Israel do their job" of
destroying the Lebanese militia, Hezbollah, Hagee said.

He called the conflict "a battle between good and evil" and said
support for Israel was "God's foreign policy." The next day he took
the same message to the White House.

Many conservative Christians say they believe that the president's
support for Israel fulfills a biblical injunction to protect the
Jewish state, which some of them think will play a pivotal role in the
second coming. Many on the left, in turn, fear that such theology may
influence decisions the administration makes toward Israel and the
Middle East.

Administration officials say that the meeting with Hagee was a
courtesy for a political ally and that evangelical theology has no
effect on policy making. But the alliance of Israel, its evangelical
Christian supporters and President Bush has never been closer or more
potent. In the wake of the summer war in southern Lebanon, reports
that Hezbollah's sponsor, Iran, may be pushing for nuclear weapons
have galvanized conservative Christian support for Israel into a
political force that will be hard to ignore.

For one thing, white evangelicals make up about a quarter of the
electorate. Whatever strains may be creeping into the Israeli-American
alliance over Iraq, the Palestinians and Iran, a large part of the
Republican Party's base remains committed to a fiercely pro-Israel
agenda that seems likely to have an effect on policy choices.

South Korea
16) South Korea Won't Intercept Cargo Ships From The North
Norimitsu Onishi, New York Times, November 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/world/asia/14korea.html
South Korea said Monday that it would not join a US-led effort to
intercept North Korean ships suspected of carrying unconventional
weapons or related cargo, raising fresh doubts about Washington's
drive to punish the North for its nuclear test last month.

The South Korean government of President Roh Moo-hyun has come under
increasing pressure from the political opposition and its American
ally to join the campaign since the test.

The effort to punish North Korea has become a part of the
Proliferation Security Initiative, a three-year-old, American-led
program to coordinate and develop procedures for intercepting
smugglers of unconventional weapons around the world.

But even as Washington sought to build unity ahead of a meeting of the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit meeting in Hanoi this week,
and the possible resumption of six-nation talks over the North's
nuclear program early next month, Seoul made it clear that it was
hewing to its policy of avoiding confrontation with the North.

South Korea has supported, but not joined, the security program,
fearing that inspecting North Korean ships by force could lead to a
military confrontation.

A loose coalition of countries that have joined, including Australia
and Japan, have carried out naval exercises to practice for
interdictions, and a few countries have already boarded ships to and
from North Korea in ports throughout Asia.

But the legality of intercepting ships in international waters remains
unclear, even under a UN Security Council resolution passed after the
North's test. The resolution calls on countries, though it does not
require them, to inspect cargo in and out of North Korea.

--------
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org

Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming
U.S. foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the
majority of Americans.