Northern Ireland: Why the Rise in Violence and Bombings?

In recent weeks, there has been a rise in violence, include a spate of bombings, in Northern Ireland. On Monday night, the Real IRA claimed responsibility for a car bomb outside a commercial centre in Derry.

The news has even caught the attention of The New York Times, and former US President Bill Clinton commented on the situation during his appearance last week at our partner in Dublin, the Clinton Institute for American Studies, noting that "every process leaves a trail of disappointees", especially amidst current economic difficulties, but adding that there is no evidence that politicians or the majority of the population want to abandon the path to reconciliation and stability.

Our partners at Outpost, a leading blog on Irish-American relations, have been providing cutting-edge coverage. Their latest comment, coming after the Derry bomb:

Apart from the continued condemnations [of the violence] that are a political necessity, more needs to be done. It is....time for constructive political engagement. The reversion to typical soundbites of condemnation and the need for entrenchment of peace and social stability have to be backed up [by action]. They can no longer be a disguise or vacuum for a lack of political dialogue.

Iraq: Is There Now a Government and "Stability"?

Given Friday's headlines that Iraq was on the verge of a government, seven months after national elections, you might have expected a bit of relief today.

Not really.

It appears that current Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki may retain office after a deal between his State of Law Party and the representatives of cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. However, the combination of the Shi'a factions raises a question as to whether Sunnis, who make up 20% of Iraq's population and enjoyed predominance in the Iraqi system until 2003, will be shut out. There is also the possibility of intra-Shi'a tension, with the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq excluded from the proposed Government.

So leading analyst Reidar Visser is more than cautious as well as scathing about what he sees as Washington's flailing, stemming from its long-time animosity towards Moqtada al-Sadr:

Click to read more ...

Pakistan: Stepping Up the Drone Killings (And How to Accept Them)

A curious --- and telling --- juxtaposition of stories this morning about the US use of drones for "targeted" killings in Pakistan.

The New York Times finally gets to the difficult question of relations between Washington and Islamabad, given that the US is taking out dozens of people on Pakistani soil, but notice how carefully it treads.

The opening paragraph makes clear that this is an operation --- implying, in my opinion, that it is a necessary operation --- against the "Taliban" and to prevent "possible terrorist attacks". Then, almost to forestall the response that might come from Islamabad, the story declares the "mounting frustration both in Afghanistan and the United States that Pakistan’s government has not been aggressive enough" in its approach.

And, while the article adds reassurances --- airstrikes that take out 50 people "are rare"; no US ground invasion imminent --- notice the caveat from US officials, which goes beyond any minor consideration of Pakistani opinion: "[This] could change...if Pakistan-based militants were successful in carrying out a terrorist attack on American soil."

Click to read more ...

Iran Update: Mahmoud's Road Show and the "Dazzled" US Media

If the Iranian President was less than successful today in the first of his talks at the United Nations, he could console himself that he got his talking points out through the US and "Western" media. 

I guess The New York Times should at least get credit for recognising what was going on: 

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran ran through his standard talking points at his annual gathering with American journalists on Tuesday — denying that dissidents languish in jail or that economic sanctions were biting, and rejecting the idea that Tehran deserves anything less than a gold star for its nuclear inspection record. 

This does not mean, however, that the Times interrogated the talking points, you know, by offering any consideration of the political prisoners. Instead, the Times is carried away because Ahmadinejad "embroidered his remarks with a little fresh bluster". And what dazzled them?

Click to read more ...

Afghanistan: Aid Groups "Security Deteriorating" (Nordland)

Rod Nordland writes in The New York Times:

Even as more American troops flow into the country, Afghanistan is more dangerous than it has ever been during this war, with security deteriorating in recent months, according to international organizations and humanitarian groups.

Click to read more ...

Iraq: Six Months with No Government, so US Tries Another Plan (Gordon/Shadid)

Iraq's elections for a national government were held on 7 March, but there is still no resolution of power amongst curent Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, leading challenger (at least in those polls) Iyad Allawi, Moqtada al-Sadr, and Kurdish leaders. In The New York Times, Michael Gordon and Anthony Shadid report on the latest US move for a settlement.... The Obama administration is encouraging a major new power-sharing arrangement in Iraq that could retain Nuri Kamal al-Maliki as prime minister but in a coalition that would significantly curb his authority

Click to read more ...