war and peace

As Kyrgyzstan gears up to elect a new kind of parliament based on political parties some analysts have predicted the emergence of bigger political entities based on policies rather than personalities. However with less than a month to go it looks like business as usual with numerous parties fielding prominent politicians in the hope that this will win them votes. When changes to the electoral rules were revealed in a constitutional draft announced by President Kurmanbek Bakiev in September and duly passed in a referendum on October 21 it was clear that the introduction of proportional representation in place of the old first-past-the-post system would favour more substantial parties. As things stood few of Kyrgyzstan’s 100-odd parties stood a chance of overcoming the five per cent hurdle and forming a government. The new constitution approved in October gives the majority party for the first time in Kyrgyzstan the right to pick a prime minister who then nominates ministers. To stand a chance of winning seats at all in the December 16 ballot let alone gaining a majority parties will need to be fairly substantial. The constitution sets a threshold of five per cent of the vote nationwide and 0.5 per cent in each of the country’s regions as a way of ensuring parties have national rather than local appeal. To achieve this many would need to formally merge into bigger entities. Under the electoral code passed at the same time as the constitution parties cannot form ad hoc election bloc. However apart from President Bakiev’s attempt to create a ruling party that has not happened. Bakiev announced the Ak Jol People’s Party on October 15 saying there was a need for “a new political force a party of construction responsibility and action�. The day after he was elected party chairman. Bakiev laid down his powers temporarily explaining that as head of state he could not participate in party politics. So far. Ak Jol has expanded by recruiting politicians from other parties rather than by swallowing up allied groups in their entirety.“There is a normal process of party amalgamation going on and it only can be welcomed,� said Elmira Ibraimova. Ak Jol’s deputy chairperson. The opposition meanwhile remains in at least three camps. Ak-Shumkar which emerged in April 2007 out of earlier opposition formations announced plans to team up with the older Ata-Meken party in late October. The new entity has taken the name Ata-Meken and has gone on to present a list of candidates to Kyrgyzstan’s election commission. Meanwhile. Ar Namys headed by Felix Kulov. Bakiev’s former prime minister and now one of his fiercest opponents is likely to go its own way. It has agreed a kind of mutual support pact with Ata-Meken but they will not form a closer relationship. The Social Democrats who also count as an opposition party despite having Prime Minister Almazbek Atambaev as their leader will field candidates separately. Political analyst Nur Omarov believes the different opposition parties have yet to recover from events in April this year which left them in disarray. Amid mounting tension between the Bakiev administration and the opposition the more moderate Movement for Reforms aligned itself with Kulov’s United Front for a Worthy Future for Kyrgyzstan for a rally that was broken up just over a week later. This confrontational strategy failed and Bakiev was not unseated and the opposition has struggled to regroup and find new tactics since then.“The leaders of certain parties and movements have been compromised particularly after the April events and this serves to keep these opposition parties away from one another,� Omarov told IWPR. Omurbek Tekebaev who heads the Ata-Meken party agreed that Kyrgyzstan’s parties were reluctant to join forces. “Many party bosses don’t want… to create new parties to suit the moment,� he said. “They would have to forget the history of their party the history of a glorious struggle against authoritarianism and amalgamate with someone else just to get into parliament. And the voters might not like it either.� By the time this report was published. 12 of the 50 parties that had applied to stand in the election had been approved by the poll commission. Under the rules of proportional representation each party can nominate up to 100 candidates and seats will then be allocated from the top of the list downwards according to well it fares at the polls. However the Central Electoral Commission has ruled that only the top five names on each party’s list will appear on the ballot papers for reasons of space. The result has been to encourage parties to focus their campaigns on big-name politicians and public figures rather than on policies. Thus. Bakiev’s Ak Jol has Cholpon Baekova the head of Kyrgyzstan’s Constitutional Court as number one in a top five that also includes State Secretary Adakhan Madumarov and Vladimir Nifadyev head of the Kyrgyz-Russian Slavonic University. Apart from Tekebaev the new consolidated Ata-Meken has noted opposition parliamentarians Kubatbek Baybolov and Temir Sariev while the Social Democrats have a constellation of well-known figures including ex-parliamentary deputy Omurbek Babanov and vice-president of the American University in Central Asia Bakyt Beshimov. Kulov and his deputy Emil Aliev are leading contenders in the Ar-Namys which also has Anvar Artykov and Valery Dil leading members of the ethnic Uzbek and German communities respectively. According to Omarov that leaves voters having to choose between individual politicians rather than clearly-defined political directions.“The voters will vote for personalities. In the forthcoming election it’s a serious problem that what people want is to see new faces and new politicians whereas what we’ll get is politicians who have been around for the past 15 years,� he said.“As for the programmes of the political movements they are all much of a muchness. They all make appeals to the people and say they’ll protect them. Just a set of hackneyed phrases with no real content.�Dooronbek Sadyrbaev who has been placed number five on the list of the moderate opposition party Asaba agreed that personalities – and money too – would count. “Reputation and money are still needed to win elections in our country. The top-five lists consist of either the wealthy or the famous,� he said. “The parties are bringing in well-known tried-and-tested politicians like me to win votes. I describe them as the ‘clapped-out steam engines’ that will pull the young fresh politicians in their train.� Sariev one of the leaders of Ata-Meken agrees that there is a point to using high-profile politicians as long as they form part of a good team. “People need to have confidence and they’re looking for leaders,� he said. “They’ll vote wholeheartedly for anyone in whom they have faith. In addition since these are party-based elections they will be voting for a list and they’ll want to see a team whose members complement each other.� As debate rages about the justice of imposing a regional as well as national threshold of votes which parties need to surpass in order to win seats politicians are divided on how much of a role regionalism will play in this election. “People don’t have time to study the [campaign] platforms of all the parties. Our voters may forget the one party’s programme the moment they read another. So the defining factor will be regionalism,� said Jenishbek Nazaraliev who is number one on the opposition Asaba party’s list. Sariev disagrees saying. “I don’t think the regional factor will play a significant role. Sociological surveys demonstrate that people gain more confidence in the opposition parties after they merge. That gives me hope that we will move away from the regional factor and pay more attention to personalities and teams�. Edil Baisalov a well-known opposition figure who has been nominated by the Social Democratic Party is also optimistic about the forthcoming ballot. “There’s rapid political development under way which is gratifying,� he said. “It won’t be an ideal election but it will offer important lessons for how to make this system take root and establish itself. It’s important for parties to galvanise the voters.�He concluded. “I think it will strengthen democracy and help make civil society more cohesive.�Yryskeldi Kadykeev is an IWPR contributor in Bishkek. Tolkunbek Turdubaev a BBC correspondent in Bishkek also contributed to this report.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.iwpr.net/EN-rca-f-340916

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

As Kyrgyzstan gears up to elect a new kind of parliament based on political parties some analysts have predicted the emergence of bigger political entities based on policies rather than personalities. However with less than a month to go it looks like business as usual with numerous parties fielding prominent politicians in the hope that this will win them votes. When changes to the electoral rules were revealed in a constitutional draft announced by President Kurmanbek Bakiev in September and duly passed in a referendum on October 21 it was clear that the introduction of proportional representation in place of the old first-past-the-post system would favour more substantial parties. As things stood few of Kyrgyzstan’s 100-odd parties stood a chance of overcoming the five per cent hurdle and forming a government. The new constitution approved in October gives the majority party for the first time in Kyrgyzstan the right to pick a prime minister who then nominates ministers. To stand a chance of winning seats at all in the December 16 ballot let alone gaining a majority parties will need to be fairly substantial. The constitution sets a threshold of five per cent of the vote nationwide and 0.5 per cent in each of the country’s regions as a way of ensuring parties have national rather than local appeal. To achieve this many would need to formally merge into bigger entities. Under the electoral code passed at the same time as the constitution parties cannot form ad hoc election bloc. However apart from President Bakiev’s attempt to create a ruling party that has not happened. Bakiev announced the Ak Jol People’s Party on October 15 saying there was a need for “a new political force a party of construction responsibility and action�. The day after he was elected party chairman. Bakiev laid down his powers temporarily explaining that as head of state he could not participate in party politics. So far. Ak Jol has expanded by recruiting politicians from other parties rather than by swallowing up allied groups in their entirety.“There is a normal process of party amalgamation going on and it only can be welcomed,� said Elmira Ibraimova. Ak Jol’s deputy chairperson. The opposition meanwhile remains in at least three camps. Ak-Shumkar which emerged in April 2007 out of earlier opposition formations announced plans to team up with the older Ata-Meken party in late October. The new entity has taken the name Ata-Meken and has gone on to present a list of candidates to Kyrgyzstan’s election commission. Meanwhile. Ar Namys headed by Felix Kulov. Bakiev’s former prime minister and now one of his fiercest opponents is likely to go its own way. It has agreed a kind of mutual support pact with Ata-Meken but they will not form a closer relationship. The Social Democrats who also count as an opposition party despite having Prime Minister Almazbek Atambaev as their leader will field candidates separately. Political analyst Nur Omarov believes the different opposition parties have yet to recover from events in April this year which left them in disarray. Amid mounting tension between the Bakiev administration and the opposition the more moderate Movement for Reforms aligned itself with Kulov’s United Front for a Worthy Future for Kyrgyzstan for a rally that was broken up just over a week later. This confrontational strategy failed and Bakiev was not unseated and the opposition has struggled to regroup and find new tactics since then.“The leaders of certain parties and movements have been compromised particularly after the April events and this serves to keep these opposition parties away from one another,� Omarov told IWPR. Omurbek Tekebaev who heads the Ata-Meken party agreed that Kyrgyzstan’s parties were reluctant to join forces. “Many party bosses don’t want… to create new parties to suit the moment,� he said. “They would have to forget the history of their party the history of a glorious struggle against authoritarianism and amalgamate with someone else just to get into parliament. And the voters might not like it either.� By the time this report was published. 12 of the 50 parties that had applied to stand in the election had been approved by the poll commission. Under the rules of proportional representation each party can nominate up to 100 candidates and seats will then be allocated from the top of the list downwards according to well it fares at the polls. However the Central Electoral Commission has ruled that only the top five names on each party’s list will appear on the ballot papers for reasons of space. The result has been to encourage parties to focus their campaigns on big-name politicians and public figures rather than on policies. Thus. Bakiev’s Ak Jol has Cholpon Baekova the head of Kyrgyzstan’s Constitutional Court as number one in a top five that also includes State Secretary Adakhan Madumarov and Vladimir Nifadyev head of the Kyrgyz-Russian Slavonic University. Apart from Tekebaev the new consolidated Ata-Meken has noted opposition parliamentarians Kubatbek Baybolov and Temir Sariev while the Social Democrats have a constellation of well-known figures including ex-parliamentary deputy Omurbek Babanov and vice-president of the American University in Central Asia Bakyt Beshimov. Kulov and his deputy Emil Aliev are leading contenders in the Ar-Namys which also has Anvar Artykov and Valery Dil leading members of the ethnic Uzbek and German communities respectively. According to Omarov that leaves voters having to choose between individual politicians rather than clearly-defined political directions.“The voters will vote for personalities. In the forthcoming election it’s a serious problem that what people want is to see new faces and new politicians whereas what we’ll get is politicians who have been around for the past 15 years,� he said.“As for the programmes of the political movements they are all much of a muchness. They all make appeals to the people and say they’ll protect them. Just a set of hackneyed phrases with no real content.�Dooronbek Sadyrbaev who has been placed number five on the list of the moderate opposition party Asaba agreed that personalities – and money too – would count. “Reputation and money are still needed to win elections in our country. The top-five lists consist of either the wealthy or the famous,� he said. “The parties are bringing in well-known tried-and-tested politicians like me to win votes. I describe them as the ‘clapped-out steam engines’ that will pull the young fresh politicians in their train.� Sariev one of the leaders of Ata-Meken agrees that there is a point to using high-profile politicians as long as they form part of a good team. “People need to have confidence and they’re looking for leaders,� he said. “They’ll vote wholeheartedly for anyone in whom they have faith. In addition since these are party-based elections they will be voting for a list and they’ll want to see a team whose members complement each other.� As debate rages about the justice of imposing a regional as well as national threshold of votes which parties need to surpass in order to win seats politicians are divided on how much of a role regionalism will play in this election. “People don’t have time to study the [campaign] platforms of all the parties. Our voters may forget the one party’s programme the moment they read another. So the defining factor will be regionalism,� said Jenishbek Nazaraliev who is number one on the opposition Asaba party’s list. Sariev disagrees saying. “I don’t think the regional factor will play a significant role. Sociological surveys demonstrate that people gain more confidence in the opposition parties after they merge. That gives me hope that we will move away from the regional factor and pay more attention to personalities and teams�. Edil Baisalov a well-known opposition figure who has been nominated by the Social Democratic Party is also optimistic about the forthcoming ballot. “There’s rapid political development under way which is gratifying,� he said. “It won’t be an ideal election but it will offer important lessons for how to make this system take root and establish itself. It’s important for parties to galvanise the voters.�He concluded. “I think it will strengthen democracy and help make civil society more cohesive.�Yryskeldi Kadykeev is an IWPR contributor in Bishkek. Tolkunbek Turdubaev a BBC correspondent in Bishkek also contributed to this report.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.iwpr.net/EN-rca-f-340916

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

As Kyrgyzstan gears up to elect a new kind of parliament based on political parties some analysts have predicted the emergence of bigger political entities based on policies rather than personalities. However with less than a month to go it looks like business as usual with numerous parties fielding prominent politicians in the hope that this will win them votes. When changes to the electoral rules were revealed in a constitutional draft announced by President Kurmanbek Bakiev in September and duly passed in a referendum on October 21 it was clear that the introduction of proportional representation in place of the old first-past-the-post system would favour more substantial parties. As things stood few of Kyrgyzstan’s 100-odd parties stood a chance of overcoming the five per cent hurdle and forming a government. The new constitution approved in October gives the majority party for the first time in Kyrgyzstan the right to pick a prime minister who then nominates ministers. To stand a chance of winning seats at all in the December 16 ballot let alone gaining a majority parties will need to be fairly substantial. The constitution sets a threshold of five per cent of the vote nationwide and 0.5 per cent in each of the country’s regions as a way of ensuring parties have national rather than local appeal. To achieve this many would need to formally merge into bigger entities. Under the electoral code passed at the same time as the constitution parties cannot form ad hoc election bloc. However apart from President Bakiev’s attempt to create a ruling party that has not happened. Bakiev announced the Ak Jol People’s Party on October 15 saying there was a need for “a new political force a party of construction responsibility and action�. The day after he was elected party chairman. Bakiev laid down his powers temporarily explaining that as head of state he could not participate in party politics. So far. Ak Jol has expanded by recruiting politicians from other parties rather than by swallowing up allied groups in their entirety.“There is a normal process of party amalgamation going on and it only can be welcomed,� said Elmira Ibraimova. Ak Jol’s deputy chairperson. The opposition meanwhile remains in at least three camps. Ak-Shumkar which emerged in April 2007 out of earlier opposition formations announced plans to team up with the older Ata-Meken party in late October. The new entity has taken the name Ata-Meken and has gone on to present a list of candidates to Kyrgyzstan’s election commission. Meanwhile. Ar Namys headed by Felix Kulov. Bakiev’s former prime minister and now one of his fiercest opponents is likely to go its own way. It has agreed a kind of mutual support pact with Ata-Meken but they will not form a closer relationship. The Social Democrats who also count as an opposition party despite having Prime Minister Almazbek Atambaev as their leader will field candidates separately. Political analyst Nur Omarov believes the different opposition parties have yet to recover from events in April this year which left them in disarray. Amid mounting tension between the Bakiev administration and the opposition the more moderate Movement for Reforms aligned itself with Kulov’s United Front for a Worthy Future for Kyrgyzstan for a rally that was broken up just over a week later. This confrontational strategy failed and Bakiev was not unseated and the opposition has struggled to regroup and find new tactics since then.“The leaders of certain parties and movements have been compromised particularly after the April events and this serves to keep these opposition parties away from one another,� Omarov told IWPR. Omurbek Tekebaev who heads the Ata-Meken party agreed that Kyrgyzstan’s parties were reluctant to join forces. “Many party bosses don’t want… to create new parties to suit the moment,� he said. “They would have to forget the history of their party the history of a glorious struggle against authoritarianism and amalgamate with someone else just to get into parliament. And the voters might not like it either.� By the time this report was published. 12 of the 50 parties that had applied to stand in the election had been approved by the poll commission. Under the rules of proportional representation each party can nominate up to 100 candidates and seats will then be allocated from the top of the list downwards according to well it fares at the polls. However the Central Electoral Commission has ruled that only the top five names on each party’s list will appear on the ballot papers for reasons of space. The result has been to encourage parties to focus their campaigns on big-name politicians and public figures rather than on policies. Thus. Bakiev’s Ak Jol has Cholpon Baekova the head of Kyrgyzstan’s Constitutional Court as number one in a top five that also includes State Secretary Adakhan Madumarov and Vladimir Nifadyev head of the Kyrgyz-Russian Slavonic University. Apart from Tekebaev the new consolidated Ata-Meken has noted opposition parliamentarians Kubatbek Baybolov and Temir Sariev while the Social Democrats have a constellation of well-known figures including ex-parliamentary deputy Omurbek Babanov and vice-president of the American University in Central Asia Bakyt Beshimov. Kulov and his deputy Emil Aliev are leading contenders in the Ar-Namys which also has Anvar Artykov and Valery Dil leading members of the ethnic Uzbek and German communities respectively. According to Omarov that leaves voters having to choose between individual politicians rather than clearly-defined political directions.“The voters will vote for personalities. In the forthcoming election it’s a serious problem that what people want is to see new faces and new politicians whereas what we’ll get is politicians who have been around for the past 15 years,� he said.“As for the programmes of the political movements they are all much of a muchness. They all make appeals to the people and say they’ll protect them. Just a set of hackneyed phrases with no real content.�Dooronbek Sadyrbaev who has been placed number five on the list of the moderate opposition party Asaba agreed that personalities – and money too – would count. “Reputation and money are still needed to win elections in our country. The top-five lists consist of either the wealthy or the famous,� he said. “The parties are bringing in well-known tried-and-tested politicians like me to win votes. I describe them as the ‘clapped-out steam engines’ that will pull the young fresh politicians in their train.� Sariev one of the leaders of Ata-Meken agrees that there is a point to using high-profile politicians as long as they form part of a good team. “People need to have confidence and they’re looking for leaders,� he said. “They’ll vote wholeheartedly for anyone in whom they have faith. In addition since these are party-based elections they will be voting for a list and they’ll want to see a team whose members complement each other.� As debate rages about the justice of imposing a regional as well as national threshold of votes which parties need to surpass in order to win seats politicians are divided on how much of a role regionalism will play in this election. “People don’t have time to study the [campaign] platforms of all the parties. Our voters may forget the one party’s programme the moment they read another. So the defining factor will be regionalism,� said Jenishbek Nazaraliev who is number one on the opposition Asaba party’s list. Sariev disagrees saying. “I don’t think the regional factor will play a significant role. Sociological surveys demonstrate that people gain more confidence in the opposition parties after they merge. That gives me hope that we will move away from the regional factor and pay more attention to personalities and teams�. Edil Baisalov a well-known opposition figure who has been nominated by the Social Democratic Party is also optimistic about the forthcoming ballot. “There’s rapid political development under way which is gratifying,� he said. “It won’t be an ideal election but it will offer important lessons for how to make this system take root and establish itself. It’s important for parties to galvanise the voters.�He concluded. “I think it will strengthen democracy and help make civil society more cohesive.�Yryskeldi Kadykeev is an IWPR contributor in Bishkek. Tolkunbek Turdubaev a BBC correspondent in Bishkek also contributed to this report.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.iwpr.net/EN-rca-f-340916

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

As Kyrgyzstan gears up to elect a new kind of parliament based on political parties some analysts have predicted the emergence of bigger political entities based on policies rather than personalities. However with less than a month to go it looks like business as usual with numerous parties fielding prominent politicians in the hope that this will win them votes. When changes to the electoral rules were revealed in a constitutional draft announced by President Kurmanbek Bakiev in September and duly passed in a referendum on October 21 it was clear that the introduction of proportional representation in place of the old first-past-the-post system would favour more substantial parties. As things stood few of Kyrgyzstan’s 100-odd parties stood a chance of overcoming the five per cent hurdle and forming a government. The new constitution approved in October gives the majority party for the first time in Kyrgyzstan the right to pick a prime minister who then nominates ministers. To stand a chance of winning seats at all in the December 16 ballot let alone gaining a majority parties will need to be fairly substantial. The constitution sets a threshold of five per cent of the vote nationwide and 0.5 per cent in each of the country’s regions as a way of ensuring parties have national rather than local appeal. To achieve this many would need to formally merge into bigger entities. Under the electoral code passed at the same time as the constitution parties cannot form ad hoc election bloc. However apart from President Bakiev’s attempt to create a ruling party that has not happened. Bakiev announced the Ak Jol People’s Party on October 15 saying there was a need for “a new political force a party of construction responsibility and action�. The day after he was elected party chairman. Bakiev laid down his powers temporarily explaining that as head of state he could not participate in party politics. So far. Ak Jol has expanded by recruiting politicians from other parties rather than by swallowing up allied groups in their entirety.“There is a normal process of party amalgamation going on and it only can be welcomed,� said Elmira Ibraimova. Ak Jol’s deputy chairperson. The opposition meanwhile remains in at least three camps. Ak-Shumkar which emerged in April 2007 out of earlier opposition formations announced plans to team up with the older Ata-Meken party in late October. The new entity has taken the name Ata-Meken and has gone on to present a list of candidates to Kyrgyzstan’s election commission. Meanwhile. Ar Namys headed by Felix Kulov. Bakiev’s former prime minister and now one of his fiercest opponents is likely to go its own way. It has agreed a kind of mutual support pact with Ata-Meken but they will not form a closer relationship. The Social Democrats who also count as an opposition party despite having Prime Minister Almazbek Atambaev as their leader will field candidates separately. Political analyst Nur Omarov believes the different opposition parties have yet to recover from events in April this year which left them in disarray. Amid mounting tension between the Bakiev administration and the opposition the more moderate Movement for Reforms aligned itself with Kulov’s United Front for a Worthy Future for Kyrgyzstan for a rally that was broken up just over a week later. This confrontational strategy failed and Bakiev was not unseated and the opposition has struggled to regroup and find new tactics since then.“The leaders of certain parties and movements have been compromised particularly after the April events and this serves to keep these opposition parties away from one another,� Omarov told IWPR. Omurbek Tekebaev who heads the Ata-Meken party agreed that Kyrgyzstan’s parties were reluctant to join forces. “Many party bosses don’t want… to create new parties to suit the moment,� he said. “They would have to forget the history of their party the history of a glorious struggle against authoritarianism and amalgamate with someone else just to get into parliament. And the voters might not like it either.� By the time this report was published. 12 of the 50 parties that had applied to stand in the election had been approved by the poll commission. Under the rules of proportional representation each party can nominate up to 100 candidates and seats will then be allocated from the top of the list downwards according to well it fares at the polls. However the Central Electoral Commission has ruled that only the top five names on each party’s list will appear on the ballot papers for reasons of space. The result has been to encourage parties to focus their campaigns on big-name politicians and public figures rather than on policies. Thus. Bakiev’s Ak Jol has Cholpon Baekova the head of Kyrgyzstan’s Constitutional Court as number one in a top five that also includes State Secretary Adakhan Madumarov and Vladimir Nifadyev head of the Kyrgyz-Russian Slavonic University. Apart from Tekebaev the new consolidated Ata-Meken has noted opposition parliamentarians Kubatbek Baybolov and Temir Sariev while the Social Democrats have a constellation of well-known figures including ex-parliamentary deputy Omurbek Babanov and vice-president of the American University in Central Asia Bakyt Beshimov. Kulov and his deputy Emil Aliev are leading contenders in the Ar-Namys which also has Anvar Artykov and Valery Dil leading members of the ethnic Uzbek and German communities respectively. According to Omarov that leaves voters having to choose between individual politicians rather than clearly-defined political directions.“The voters will vote for personalities. In the forthcoming election it’s a serious problem that what people want is to see new faces and new politicians whereas what we’ll get is politicians who have been around for the past 15 years,� he said.“As for the programmes of the political movements they are all much of a muchness. They all make appeals to the people and say they’ll protect them. Just a set of hackneyed phrases with no real content.�Dooronbek Sadyrbaev who has been placed number five on the list of the moderate opposition party Asaba agreed that personalities – and money too – would count. “Reputation and money are still needed to win elections in our country. The top-five lists consist of either the wealthy or the famous,� he said. “The parties are bringing in well-known tried-and-tested politicians like me to win votes. I describe them as the ‘clapped-out steam engines’ that will pull the young fresh politicians in their train.� Sariev one of the leaders of Ata-Meken agrees that there is a point to using high-profile politicians as long as they form part of a good team. “People need to have confidence and they’re looking for leaders,� he said. “They’ll vote wholeheartedly for anyone in whom they have faith. In addition since these are party-based elections they will be voting for a list and they’ll want to see a team whose members complement each other.� As debate rages about the justice of imposing a regional as well as national threshold of votes which parties need to surpass in order to win seats politicians are divided on how much of a role regionalism will play in this election. “People don’t have time to study the [campaign] platforms of all the parties. Our voters may forget the one party’s programme the moment they read another. So the defining factor will be regionalism,� said Jenishbek Nazaraliev who is number one on the opposition Asaba party’s list. Sariev disagrees saying. “I don’t think the regional factor will play a significant role. Sociological surveys demonstrate that people gain more confidence in the opposition parties after they merge. That gives me hope that we will move away from the regional factor and pay more attention to personalities and teams�. Edil Baisalov a well-known opposition figure who has been nominated by the Social Democratic Party is also optimistic about the forthcoming ballot. “There’s rapid political development under way which is gratifying,� he said. “It won’t be an ideal election but it will offer important lessons for how to make this system take root and establish itself. It’s important for parties to galvanise the voters.�He concluded. “I think it will strengthen democracy and help make civil society more cohesive.�Yryskeldi Kadykeev is an IWPR contributor in Bishkek. Tolkunbek Turdubaev a BBC correspondent in Bishkek also contributed to this report.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.iwpr.net/EN-rca-f-340916

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

As Kyrgyzstan gears up to elect a new kind of parliament based on political parties some analysts have predicted the emergence of bigger political entities based on policies rather than personalities. However with less than a month to go it looks like business as usual with numerous parties fielding prominent politicians in the hope that this will win them votes. When changes to the electoral rules were revealed in a constitutional draft announced by President Kurmanbek Bakiev in September and duly passed in a referendum on October 21 it was clear that the introduction of proportional representation in place of the old first-past-the-post system would favour more substantial parties. As things stood few of Kyrgyzstan’s 100-odd parties stood a chance of overcoming the five per cent hurdle and forming a government. The new constitution approved in October gives the majority party for the first time in Kyrgyzstan the right to pick a prime minister who then nominates ministers. To stand a chance of winning seats at all in the December 16 ballot let alone gaining a majority parties will need to be fairly substantial. The constitution sets a threshold of five per cent of the vote nationwide and 0.5 per cent in each of the country’s regions as a way of ensuring parties have national rather than local appeal. To achieve this many would need to formally merge into bigger entities. Under the electoral code passed at the same time as the constitution parties cannot form ad hoc election bloc. However apart from President Bakiev’s attempt to create a ruling party that has not happened. Bakiev announced the Ak Jol People’s Party on October 15 saying there was a need for “a new political force a party of construction responsibility and action�. The day after he was elected party chairman. Bakiev laid down his powers temporarily explaining that as head of state he could not participate in party politics. So far. Ak Jol has expanded by recruiting politicians from other parties rather than by swallowing up allied groups in their entirety.“There is a normal process of party amalgamation going on and it only can be welcomed,� said Elmira Ibraimova. Ak Jol’s deputy chairperson. The opposition meanwhile remains in at least three camps. Ak-Shumkar which emerged in April 2007 out of earlier opposition formations announced plans to team up with the older Ata-Meken party in late October. The new entity has taken the name Ata-Meken and has gone on to present a list of candidates to Kyrgyzstan’s election commission. Meanwhile. Ar Namys headed by Felix Kulov. Bakiev’s former prime minister and now one of his fiercest opponents is likely to go its own way. It has agreed a kind of mutual support pact with Ata-Meken but they will not form a closer relationship. The Social Democrats who also count as an opposition party despite having Prime Minister Almazbek Atambaev as their leader will field candidates separately. Political analyst Nur Omarov believes the different opposition parties have yet to recover from events in April this year which left them in disarray. Amid mounting tension between the Bakiev administration and the opposition the more moderate Movement for Reforms aligned itself with Kulov’s United Front for a Worthy Future for Kyrgyzstan for a rally that was broken up just over a week later. This confrontational strategy failed and Bakiev was not unseated and the opposition has struggled to regroup and find new tactics since then.“The leaders of certain parties and movements have been compromised particularly after the April events and this serves to keep these opposition parties away from one another,� Omarov told IWPR. Omurbek Tekebaev who heads the Ata-Meken party agreed that Kyrgyzstan’s parties were reluctant to join forces. “Many party bosses don’t want… to create new parties to suit the moment,� he said. “They would have to forget the history of their party the history of a glorious struggle against authoritarianism and amalgamate with someone else just to get into parliament. And the voters might not like it either.� By the time this report was published. 12 of the 50 parties that had applied to stand in the election had been approved by the poll commission. Under the rules of proportional representation each party can nominate up to 100 candidates and seats will then be allocated from the top of the list downwards according to well it fares at the polls. However the Central Electoral Commission has ruled that only the top five names on each party’s list will appear on the ballot papers for reasons of space. The result has been to encourage parties to focus their campaigns on big-name politicians and public figures rather than on policies. Thus. Bakiev’s Ak Jol has Cholpon Baekova the head of Kyrgyzstan’s Constitutional Court as number one in a top five that also includes State Secretary Adakhan Madumarov and Vladimir Nifadyev head of the Kyrgyz-Russian Slavonic University. Apart from Tekebaev the new consolidated Ata-Meken has noted opposition parliamentarians Kubatbek Baybolov and Temir Sariev while the Social Democrats have a constellation of well-known figures including ex-parliamentary deputy Omurbek Babanov and vice-president of the American University in Central Asia Bakyt Beshimov. Kulov and his deputy Emil Aliev are leading contenders in the Ar-Namys which also has Anvar Artykov and Valery Dil leading members of the ethnic Uzbek and German communities respectively. According to Omarov that leaves voters having to choose between individual politicians rather than clearly-defined political directions.“The voters will vote for personalities. In the forthcoming election it’s a serious problem that what people want is to see new faces and new politicians whereas what we’ll get is politicians who have been around for the past 15 years,� he said.“As for the programmes of the political movements they are all much of a muchness. They all make appeals to the people and say they’ll protect them. Just a set of hackneyed phrases with no real content.�Dooronbek Sadyrbaev who has been placed number five on the list of the moderate opposition party Asaba agreed that personalities – and money too – would count. “Reputation and money are still needed to win elections in our country. The top-five lists consist of either the wealthy or the famous,� he said. “The parties are bringing in well-known tried-and-tested politicians like me to win votes. I describe them as the ‘clapped-out steam engines’ that will pull the young fresh politicians in their train.� Sariev one of the leaders of Ata-Meken agrees that there is a point to using high-profile politicians as long as they form part of a good team. “People need to have confidence and they’re looking for leaders,� he said. “They’ll vote wholeheartedly for anyone in whom they have faith. In addition since these are party-based elections they will be voting for a list and they’ll want to see a team whose members complement each other.� As debate rages about the justice of imposing a regional as well as national threshold of votes which parties need to surpass in order to win seats politicians are divided on how much of a role regionalism will play in this election. “People don’t have time to study the [campaign] platforms of all the parties. Our voters may forget the one party’s programme the moment they read another. So the defining factor will be regionalism,� said Jenishbek Nazaraliev who is number one on the opposition Asaba party’s list. Sariev disagrees saying. “I don’t think the regional factor will play a significant role. Sociological surveys demonstrate that people gain more confidence in the opposition parties after they merge. That gives me hope that we will move away from the regional factor and pay more attention to personalities and teams�. Edil Baisalov a well-known opposition figure who has been nominated by the Social Democratic Party is also optimistic about the forthcoming ballot. “There’s rapid political development under way which is gratifying,� he said. “It won’t be an ideal election but it will offer important lessons for how to make this system take root and establish itself. It’s important for parties to galvanise the voters.�He concluded. “I think it will strengthen democracy and help make civil society more cohesive.�Yryskeldi Kadykeev is an IWPR contributor in Bishkek. Tolkunbek Turdubaev a BBC correspondent in Bishkek also contributed to this report.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.iwpr.net/EN-rca-f-340916

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

Pictures giving a unique view of life in a Taleban-controlled town. Photos by Aziz Ahmad Tassal. (ARR No. 275. 27-Nov-07) Some of Musa Qala's younger residents. Taleban control has restricted the flow of aid to the district with the exception of a polio vaccination campaign. None of the journalists on the move was threatened by the Taleban. But Ariana TV reporter Abdul Wadood Hejran (third from alter) was arrested by government security forces and imprisoned overnight upon returning to Lashkar Gah. © Institute for War & Peace Reporting 48 Grays Inn Road. London WC1X 8LT. UK Tel: +44 (0)20 7831 1030 Fax: +44 (0)20 7831 1050 The opinions expressed in IWPR Online are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting. Registered as a charity in the United Kingdom (charity reg no: 1027201 company reg no: 2744185)

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://www.iwpr.net/EN-arr-f-340938

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

One of the first on-line responses to the publication of the letter to President George W. Bush and Secretary of express Condoleezza Rice was a simple straightforward challenge: "What is in it for Israel?" The "it" referred to guidelines the earn proposed for an agreement that would end Israel's occupation of the territories the IDF overran forty years ago in a conflict—as Israelis were reminded by the celebrated compose David Grossman when he addressed a recent commemoration of fix attend Yitzhak Rabin's assassination—that is now in its 100th year. The occupation to the degree that it exists is no longer the occupation of 1967 or change surface 1993. For one thing all Jews undergo been evicted from Gaza. In Judea and Samaria there exists some create of Palestinian self-government however inept and corrupt it might be. The dispossession of the Palestinians is not vocation of Judaism it is however the vocation of the Palestinians' Arab brothers who have refused to settle them since 1948 keeping them instead as a cynical proof of the inhumanity of Zionism. The argument against an Israeli agreement with President Mahmoud Abbas and his fix Minister Salam Fayyad is that they are too weak and unpopular to implement an agree that would require them to put an end to the violence of Palestinian rejectionist groups. Indeed it is pointed out that the fact that most of the violence in the West Bank continues to come from the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades a faction that belongs to Abbas's Fatah underlines the limits of Abbas and Fayyad's authority and their capacity to establish the rule of law in the territories. That Abbas has been unable to control violence is adjust enough but it is nevertheless a disingenuous argument. Abbas's weakness is the result of Israeli policies—primarily the relentless expansion of Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory that continues even as fix attend Ehud Olmert speaks about removing settlements—that have convinced most Palestinians that Israel has no intention of returning to the pre-1967 border and allowing the establishment of a viable Palestinian state. An Israeli policy that seriously rewarded Abbas for his moderation—such as a significant channel of Palestinian prisoners instead of several hundred out of the over 10,000 prisoners being held by Israel; the removal of physical obstructions and checkpoints that have strangled Palestinian economic and social life; the dismantlement of outposts and a freeze on further construction in the settlements as required by the Roadmap—would move Abbas and Fayyad into strong leaders overnight. But Olmert has until now only offered token "gestures," and Palestinians undergo been given no cerebrate to believe that a change in Israeli policy will occur even when the Palestinians choose leaders committed to nonviolence and moderation. Actually. I'd add one more adjective to exposit Abbas and Fayyad - unwilling. They are unwilling to fight the terror groups because despite their nice suits and reputed Western leanings they both subscribe to the same ideology as the terrorists. Israel - not post 1967 but change surface affix 1948 - to them is an illegitimate entity. Israel has no right to exist. Claiming that agreeing that Israel is a Jewish express is a bargaining chip is disingenuous. The fact that Israel is a Jewish express is the same thing as declaring that Israel had a right to exist. To deny one is to deny the other. Checkpoints and roadblocks designed to prevent the movement of people and goods throughout the West Bank—come up over 500 such obstacles—have devastated the Palestinian economy and turned Palestinian life in all of its aspects into an endless nightmare. In 2005 following Abbas's election as president of the Palestinian Authority and before Israel's dismantlement of its settlements in Gaza. Secretary of express Condoleezza sieve and James Wolfensohn the former president of the World tip who was designated as the envoy of the Quartet (the EU. UN. US and Russia) worked out a detailed agreement with the Israeli government to remove many of these obstacles. The intend included the creation of a safe passage that would link the populations of the West tip and Gaza—a connection that is vitally important to the social cultural and economic life of these geographically separated entities to which Israel had already committed itself in the Oslo accords. The whole point of that agreement was to show Palestinians that Abbas's moderation and opposition to violence could acquire results that Israel had denied his predecessor. Yasser Arafat. It proved the opposite. According to Wolfensohn. Israel violated the agreement before the ink of its representatives' signatures had dried. "In the months that followed every aspect of the agreement was abrogated," Wolfensohn an observant Jew and a lifelong friend and generous philanthropic supporter of Israel recently told the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz. Indeed instead of removing checkpoints more were added. Reading the Ha'aretz interview it is difficult to forbid the impression that this firsthand experience with Israel's dealings with the Palestinians profoundly disillusioned Wolfensohn who came to see the equities of the contrast in a new light. I had never heard that Wolfensohn is an observant Jew. Maybe he is. But no matter. Wolfensohn invested a significant sum of his own money in the Gaza greenhouses that were abandoned by Israel only to have them destroyed by the very people they were meant to back up. My guess is that it was easier to accuse the failure of his contribution on Israel - which had to argue against - than to admit that he invested badly. Siegman is only too eager to give Wolfensohn's self-interested (and dishonest) claims and pretend that Israel set up more checkpoints arbitrarily rather than out of need. The signers of the letter to President Bush stressed that a successful outcome of the Annapolis conference would demand Syria's participation in the conference as well as efforts to start a dialogue with Hamas. Washington overcame its initial reluctance to include Syria. However. Syria has said it will not attend if the subject of a Syria-Israel peace agreement ordain not appear on the Annapolis agenda. Syria's nonattendance would result in the downgrading of Arab attendance at the meeting to the ambassadorial rather than ministerial level which in turn would blackball the American objective of using the Annapolis gathering to create a coalition of moderate Arab countries that together with Israel would be prepared to counter the growing threat of Iranian hegemony in the region. Israel and Washington have made clear their determination to deny Hamas the fruits of its 2006 victory in the most honest and democratic election—perhaps the only one—in the Arab lay East and to go to power a Fatah leadership that lost those elections. This has surely given Hamas's leadership an incentive to undermine any agreement reached by Abbas in Annapolis or in the negotiations that are supposed to follow the conference. But if Abbas emerges from Annapolis with parameters for an agreement with Israel that will be seen as fair by the Palestinian public—even if such parameters were not explicated in a joint statement of principles by Olmert and Abbas but by Bush in his address to the meeting—Hamas would damage its standing with the Palestinian public if it were to seek to wreck such an accomplishment. Palestinians undergo suffered too much for too long to tolerate that kind of recklessness. What? If Hamas would destroy an Abbas-Olmert agreement it would hurt Hamas with the public? Who does Siegman think he is kidding? After its election. Hamas had every incentive to make its governance work and show the world that it was reasonable. Instead it continued to accept its terrorists to rain rockets on Sderot and launched an attack into Israel killing a number of soldiers and kidnapping Gilad Shalit. Hamas has also restricted the touch and persecuted Christians. And comfort Siegman insists that Hamas is essential to peace. The only truthful thing that he says is that Hamas was democratically elected. Unfortunately that reflects poorly on the moderation of the public that chose them. Israel and the US have disqualified Hamas as a peace partner not only because it has refused to recognize Israel but also because it refuses to be bound by previous agreements between the PLO and Israel's government. A recent Op-Ed in Israel's Yedioth Ahronot newspaper by Zalman Shoval a former Israeli ambassador to Washington and a longtime senior adviser to Likud prime ministers illustrates the manipulative character of Israel's diplomacy. Shoval asks in his Op-Ed piece. "How could the government that would replace Olmert's cabinet be able to remove itself from the pledges and commitments to be made in Annapolis," given the "basic principle of international law that every government inherits the rights and obligations of its predecessors...?" What is remarkable is not only the shamelessness of a Likud leader himself a prominent Israeli lawyer urging publicly that Israel find ways to violate commitments it is about to alter to the Palestinians in a meeting to which the president of the United States is a party but of the answer Shoval proposes: This principle of international law applies only to states and "after all it is difficult to define the Palestinian Authority as a state." Apparently not so difficult as to prevent Israel from starving the civilian population of Gaza by pretending that Hamas is to be defined as a state. As noted above the Palestinian leadership denies that Israel is a Jewish state and thus denies its legitimacy. The basic exposit that allowed the PLO to be treated as a legitimate entity was that the PLO had accepted Israel's right to exist. We now see that premise was always a act. Israel has been negotiating with an organization (and its successor) that denies Israel's legitimacy. I can't think of a more "extreme manner" than that. It is not true as Israelis often claim that Palestinians react to compromise. (Former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu famously complained that "Palestinians take and take while Israel gives and gives.") That is an indecent charge not only because so far Israel has given Palestinians nothing but because Palestinians made the most far-reaching compromise of all when in 1988. Arafat formally accepted the legitimacy of Israel within the 1949 armistice line (i e. the pre-1967 border). With that concession. Palestinians gave up their claim to more than half the territory that the United Nations 1947 Partition Resolution had assigned to Palestine's Arab inhabitants. Palestinians have never received credit for this wrenching and historic concession made well before Israel formally recognized that Palestinians undergo a alter to sovereignty in any part of Palestine. The notion that Palestinians can now be compelled to accept "border adjustments" at the expense of the 22 per cent of the territory that is left them is deeply offensive to Palestinians and understandably so. Nothing? What's Gaza? What's effective hold back of Kalkilyeh. Jenin. Jericho. Bethlehem. Ramallah. Shechem/Nablus. Hebron and Tulkarem? Not to have in mind the millions of dollars and weapons? Thousands of terrorists released? That's nothing? That's one of the fundamental problems with negotiations. Every Israeli concession is promptly pocketed and denied. What's indecent is that Siegman justifies the terror that continues to kill Jews. Arafat mouthed words that were said to him in Geneva. He never accepted Israel's alter to exist in 1988. 1993 or 1998. Even if he said the words his subsequent actions (and the words and actions of his successors) prove that this basic go was never taken. If Annapolis fails it ordain be because of Israel's rejection of the hit most central condition for success: beat disclosure of its definition of viable Palestinian statehood. Olmert has already reneged on his earlier endorsement of sieve's insistence that the meeting must produce a joint statement outlining a permanent status agreement to avoid becoming a meaningless photo op and it remains unlikely that any meaningful joint declaration can be reached. According to Aluf Benn. Ha'aretz's diplomatic correspondent. Olmert is adept at marching "in the no-man's land between communicate and action." For Olmert. Benn says engaging in high-level talks and granting gestures to the Palestinians creates "the most convenient diplomatic situation," because such gestures are "in themselves sufficient to remove international pressure on Israel to go from the territories and to end the occupation." At the same measure. "as long as it's all communicate and there are no agreements," internal pressures not to cede the territories are neutralized. Olmert seems to have succeeded in turning Annapolis into that kind of no-man's arrive. No. If Annapolis fails it will be because the Palestinians don't accept the right of a Jewish express to exist. Benn's cynicism notwithstanding he's probably correct. Of course the cerebrate why there's little political support for more concessions to the Palestinians in Israel is not because of the extremists. It's because the add up Israeli sees his country as less obtain than it was 14 years ago when the peace affect (and concessions) started. The importance of reaching such an agreement now rather than in the future should be self-evident. For if Annapolis fails the likelihood that Israel will again have a discuss Palestinian interlocutor is close to adjust. Not only the prospect of a discuss Palestinian leadership but also the commitment of all Arab countries to normalizing relations with Israel following a peace agreement ordain be casualties. Hamas's insistence that moderation as understood by Israel is a synonym for Palestinian capitulation will become widely accepted and not only in the Arab world. The disillusionment that would follow a failed effort in Annapolis would therefore leave Israel with the most dismal of prospects for renewing a peace process with the Palestinians and with Arab countries. It certainly could not happen in circumstances as favorable as they are today for the growing skepticism in US policy circles about Israel's real intentions in the territories as suggested by the earn to Bush and Rice by this country's most eminent elder statesmen and stateswomen is bound to change what has been the reflexive US support that Israel has been able to count on until now particularly during the past two administrations. Again. Abbas desire Arafat before him is no discuss. There is no one for Israel to negotiate with. There are plenty of Palestinians who would be willing to take territory from Israel but none who are willing to forbid the terror stop the incitement and stop the deligitimization. The better time for Israel to deal with the Palestinians would be when the Palestinians have demonstrated that they are ready to be in peace with Israel. Siegman's protests to the contrary we are not at that point now. That Siegman identifies with Hamas makes him even less credible. More important should Annapolis fail prospects for resuming a viable peace affect at some future date will be made increasingly unlikely by the changing demographic fit in Palestine. A alter Arab majority in historic Palestine a situation that is imminent will persuade Palestinians and their leaders that the quest for a two-state solution is a cozen's pursuit. They may cerebrate that rather than settling for change surface less than 22 percent of Palestine—i e. less than half the territory that the international community confirmed in the 1947 Partition Resolution of the UN is the legitimate patrimony of Palestine's Arab population—it would be exceed to renounce displace Palestinian statehood and instead demand compete rights in a state of Israel that includes all of Palestine. Why settle for crumbs now if as a prove of their decisive majority they ordain soon become the dominant political and cultural force in all of Palestine?

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2007/11/25/siegspeak_war_is_peace.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

This conversation took place five minutes ago between myself and one of my roommates:Me: Hey guys. I've decided to get a cat after Christmas. And I'm going to label it Leo Tolstoy. Roommate: Who is that?Me: You mean Tolstoy?Roommate: Yeah. Who is that?Me: (Sitting up on couch turning around to approach him) Seriously?Roommate: Yeah. Me: it. I bet you most people don't know that. Especially not engineers. (Sidenote: Roommate is a software engineer.)Me: I bet you most college-educated people do. Maybe ninety percent. Shakers am I nuts? Do college graduates know who Tolstoy is? Engineers compassionate to defend yourselves?Update: I should add that the real cerebrate I mention this which just occurred to me whilst I was in the bathroom (a great place for thinking) is that Roommate is constantly telling me and Other Roommate about how he "met this girl today and she was anticipate what she said..." or how "this one chick was hot but she works at a

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2007/11/i-report-you-decide.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

CNN’s Jack Cafferty gave another of his rantings against the war in Iraq and the Bush administration on Monday’s "The Situation Room." Cafferty channeling Ramsey Clark called the war in Iraq "an unprovoked act of naked aggression," and charged that the issues of establishing a Palestinian state and the brokering peace between the Israelis and Palestinians have been "virtually ignored by the Bush administration through almost two terms." Cafferty made this commentary on the upcoming Annapolis. Maryland peace summit eight minutes into the 4 pm Eastern hour of "The Situation Room" as move of his regular "Cafferty File" divide. In addition to the above. Cafferty speculated that the reason that the arrive at was occurring at this time was due to President Bush rushing to obtain a legacy. CAFFERTY: The last time serious attention was paid to the subject [of Middle Eastern peace] was the dwell David meetings in 2000 under then-President Clinton and they were attended by only the U. S. the Israelis and the Palestinians. The United States of course entering an election make pass. President Bush is the lamest of ducks at this inform and don't kid yourself move of the reason for this is his legacy try to polish it up a little bit. It ain't in real good shape. Of course. Cafferty doesn’t mention the fact that the dwell David meeting took place during the last months of President Clinton’s presidency and his critics leveled the "legacy-building" accusation against the then-president. Cafferty’s accusation that "the international approval evaluate of this country is displace than it has been in decades maybe ever mainly because of our unprovoked invasion of Iraq" is a charge that is likely based on Pew Research Center’s. The project’s five years ago so obviously the international approval evaluate of this country can’t be "the lowest it has been in decades," since the analyse hasn’t been around for decades. The beat transcript of Cafferty’s commentary from Monday’s "The Situation Room:" JACK CAFFERTY: Any irony here? The United States is hosting a lay East summit meeting aimed at kickstarting the peace affect. Forty countries maybe more are expected to be including Syria. Saudi Arabia. But the only country currently at war in the Middle East is us the United States. Prosecuting two separate wars there count them two one of them an unprovoked act of naked aggression that would be the war in Iraq. The issue of a displace Palestinian state and peace between Israel and the Palestinians has been virtually ignored by the furnish administration through almost two terms. The measure time serious attention was paid to the subject was the dwell David meetings in 2000 under then-President Clinton and they were attended by only the U. S. the Israelis and the Palestinians. The United States of cover entering an election cycle. President Bush is the lamest of ducks at this point and don't kid yourself move of the cerebrate for this is his legacy try to burnish it up a little bit. It ain't in real good shape. The international approval rate of this country is lower than it has been in decades maybe ever mainly because of our unprovoked invasion of Iraq. Secretary of express Condoleezza Rice [is] generally considered to undergo been less-than-effective when it comes to diplomacy on issues considerably smaller and less complicated than achieving peace in the Middle East. No convey feat for that. fulfil to say anything substantial coming out of this summit would border on the miraculous. Here the challenge then: Is now the measure and is the United States the right place for a summit on Middle East peace? E-mail your thoughts to caffertyfile@cnn. Com or go to cnn com/caffertyfile. eat? The guys comes off as a daily Scrooge and finds creative ways to move the facts. Scrooge fails to distinguish between Clinton's diplomacy by coersion and furnish's diplomacy by persuassion. Clinton's Camp david resulted in mass suicide bombings in Israel. furnish won't have the same results. Don't analyse Les Nessman to Cafferty. Les was not a convey spirited drunken halfwit. Cafferty is more or less desire the grandpa some families have who spouts off with his normal rants & proclmations. & after he leaves the dwell everyone in the family looks around. & one says "what the hell are we gonna do about grandpa?" Laura Ingraham colorfully described Mr. Cafferty on her radio schedule today as being desire "that really old guy you see wandering in the create divide of your supermarket with a say pinned to his apparel." You also gotta express emotion whenever a leftie invokes the "America's unpopular" card.  Did these people ever progress emotionally beyond high school? Is everything a popularity oppose? Maybe when you're a media talking continue obsessed with your Q rating. Anyway when they say "the world hates us," they really mean. "the left-wing media types from other countries I drink with in the bar at the Hotel Intercontinental hate America." 

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2007/11/27/cnn-s-cafferty-spouts-middle-east-peace-war-iraq

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam

all he wants is war destruction and death that's the only way of life he knows and he is comfortable of so today in few hours measure from a very deep hit somewhere in Vanni ,he ordain go on air (if he can get to do that ) or may be its already recorded and ready to go off from a overseas location to recite out whats next in store for Sri Lanka and Tamils of the world over. Sinhalese people and tamil people should change integrity desire Singapore and Malaysia. Today 660 000 sinhalese women are working as maids in the world. In middle east they are raped beaten and in general exploited. There are 40 000 child prostitues in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is being sold to foreigners to contend the LTTE. At the end of the day when all assests of Sri Lanka by foreigners then what sri Lanka no longer is independent. after few years working for a Development related institution i find my self on a unpaid vacation after i opted not to seek any advance extension of my contract internal politics change minded people posing as colleagues and blatant incompetency within higher management were a few advantages for taking up the vacation. Finally. an alter take but peace in mind.

Forex Groups - Tips on Trading

Related article:
http://mockmenot.blogspot.com/2007/11/prabakarans-annual-no-hope-for-peace.html

comments | Add comment | Report as Spam