http://www.agentura.ru/english/infrastructure/sco/

or click on signature.

"It turns out that it’s not only the US to have a need in such a system. Special services of the former Soviet Union and China have been trying several years to build up a similar stuff. The process not being finished yet, it is obvious that the creators of the system follow the American pattern. The system is called Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (RATS SCO).

Besides Russia and China, SCO’s other members are Central Asian states: Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kirgizia and Kazakhstan. Joint struggle with terrorism, separatism and extremism is considered to be one of the main SCO purposes. In 2004 RATS was created especially for the mentioned purposes; actually it was formed for coordinating the actions of mutual giving up the suspects. Its main objective is helping special services of the states-members to bypass the obstacles presented by national legislations and by the norms of the international law about giving up the suspects. "

Read the whole thing if you can.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KL01Df03.html

or click on signature.

Quote:

US stalls as Pakistan drifts

By Syed Saleem Shahzad

ISLAMABAD - Three developments over the past few days have dealt a severe setback to the designs of the United States in the South Asian theater of war.

Firstly, Taliban leader Mullah Omar last week rejected any possibility of talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai or the United States, indicating that the only way towards peace was for foreign troops to leave Afghanistan.

Then, as war rages against Muslim militants in Pakistan's tribal areas, the chief of army staff, General Ashfaq Parvez Kiani,

shocked secular elements in the country by saying that "no one can separate Islam and Pakistan" and that the goal was to turn the country into a true Islamic state.

And thirdly, as Asia Times Online predicted, President Asif Ali Zardari issued an amended ordinance at the weekend in which he abdicated as chairman of the Nuclear Command Authority and transferred command of the country's nuclear arsenal to Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani. (See Pakistan's military stays a march ahead November 25, 2009)

Mullah Omar's statement is likely to derail any attempts at negotiations in Afghanistan, even at the level of junior Taliban commanders. Kiani's statement, meanwhile, can be expected to demoralize secular forces such as the Pashtun sub-nationalist Awami National Party in North-West Frontier Province.

The message is that their role is limited and no matter the hostilities between the Pakistani military and Muslim militants, secular forces will never be allowed to influence broader strategic matters; that is, only Islamic ideology and its flag bearers can have control.

Zardari's handing over of power over the nuclear arsenal is the beginning of the collapse of the Western-hatched secular and liberal coalition in Islamabad. .....

The first part of Obama's speech correctly lays out how the US got to be at war in Afghanistan. Among other things, it was an action that had international support. At that time the world was united behind the US (and without any arm-twisting as is often alleged here).

In the spirit of avoiding partisan rancor, Obama only mentioned in passing that the international coalition started falling apart with the US decision to invade Iraq.

In a counterfactual history, the US would have

a. eliminated OBL and co at Tora Bora.

b. not permitted the Kunduz airlift (and sorted out Pakistani embarrassment later)

c. Put in the 150K troops into Afghanistan instead of Iraq. Along with a. and b. this would have meant real security in Afghanistan instead of the continued sporadic fighting of 2003, etc.

d. Departed soon after the first national elections.

That would indeed have been Mission Accomplished.

Instead, Obama inherited a mess. What the right thing to do is not at all clear, except to the ideologues.

Col. Wilkerson sums it up well:

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/12/guest_note_by_l/

(or click on signature)

"All this to say that I understand the political circumstances that are compelling our President to the decision he will announce tonight--as much as any academic could understand them, at any rate.

If you are a praying person, he needs your prayers and support. If you are not, he needs your support. Because all of us Americans put him where he is--and I do not mean by votes.

We--all of us--let George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney set us up. Moreover, we all contributed to creating the perilous fiscal state that is now a more dangerous threat to our country than any terrorist could ever hope to be. "

""This [Afghanistan & Pakistan] is the epicenter of the violent extremism practiced by the US/Nato/ISAF.""

--- False. Judged by number of civilians killed, number of displaced people, and the existing infrastructure that was destroyed, the correct answer is Iraq.

Your turn.