Mideast Daily

Dubai seeks relief reforms for foreign workers

admin — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:06:54 +0000

Dubai is indebted to the foreign workers who toil in pitiable conditions to further its economic might and are integral part of its prosperity. The progress of Dubai from a desert city to the most polished city of the Middle East is possible only because of thousands of laborers from India and Pakistan who sweats in the desert heat to sustain its growth and advancement. But in return, these expatriate workers have got- indentured servitude, mistreatment, physical and mental torture along with few dollars per day to satisfy the hungry souls at home. Now, an enlightened Dubai government after so many years of negligence to labor issues is going to have a system in place to ensure their welfare. But it is not because of the liberal thinking of administration there or objective to attract more foreign investment. The steps are warranted after rising labor unrest threatened the economic boom of Dubai. The Dubai government is now serious enough to put into effect various labor friendly measures like midday sun breaks, enhanced health benefits, improved living conditions and crack downs on employers unashamed to stop paying foreign workers at all. These steps are sure to embolden the sweat-stained migrant workforce in Dubai who comprises a whopping 99% of its total work force and 85% of its population. But, the Dubai government looks unaware of the labor-contractor agreement system prevalent there under which the foreign workers have to surrender their passports to the employer and are forbidden to take leave and visit home for years. Their segregation from the local population and lack of social and political voice is a major cause of their unhappiness. The compensation arrears in case of death and injury are hardly given to the workers. The Dubai government is yet to officially conclude an agreement with the overseas ministries of India and Pakistan to procure skilled workers directly fearing more lawful obligations. Image1 Image2 Via: NY Times

Iran judiciary gives death sentence to two Kurdish journalists: Is ‘freedom of speech’ a farce in Iran?

admin — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 11:09:00 +0000

The Iranian adjudicators confirmed on Tuesday that two journalists from the Kurdish minority of the country have been given death sentence, according to the Iranian state media. As judiciary spokesperson Ali Reza Jamshidi told the Islamic Republic News Agency, that Adnan Hassanpour and Hiva Boutimar were condemned on the charge of ‘moharebeh’, which is a phrase used in Iran to depict a major offense committed against Islam and the state. The judges believed that the journalists were militants in Sanandaj, the capital of Kurdistan, bordering Iraq. They were in custody after the Kurds had rebelled in Sanandaj in 2005.Tehran holds the United States responsible for adding fuel to ethnic minority tensions in the Kurdish regions of northwest Iran. However, IRNA’s report on these death sentences did not identify the specific crime that the journalists were accused of. The report was also vague on when or how the death sentences would be implemented. In Iran a verdict is unusual for journalists, at least for his or her reporting, even though there is continuous pressure from the state on media personnel. Nevertheless, in this case the theocratic regime of Iran sentenced these two Kurdish journalists to death for being ‘enemies of God’. ‘Moharebeh’ literally means ‘fighting’ in classical Arabic, and the journalists are apparently facing a death sentence because of their reporting, which have been seen as ‘rebellious’ by the state. The RSF found Iran’s decision to be shocking and disgraceful. They were stunned by – How little Iran is bothered by international humanitarian law. How determined it is to use every possible means to silence the most outspoken journalists and human rights activists. So far, hostility against journalists came from extremist groups in the Middle East. Journalists have been tortured, threatened and murdered frequently in Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. Not that the governments of these countries were bothered much by these slaughters, but they at least pretended to be concerned. It seemed that they were aware of the basic rights of a journalist and respected his or her freedom of speech, at least to some extent. But this time, the State of Iran itself is about to commit organized murders of two journalists, whose only crime seems to be that they spoke out fearlessly, and perhaps said things that the state did not expect them to say. Should we, then, arrive at this conclusion, that ‘freedom of speech’ for journalists in Iran is limited to being an ideological concept, and in terms of practical implications, it is feasible only when the journalists stick to being ‘loyal’ to the state? Via : MSNBC, Asia News Image Credit : Iranian, Persian Impediment

Five more MPs join rebels’ ranks in Maliki’s crew

admin — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 11:03:05 +0000

Regardless of huge economic and military assistance, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s 15-month-old government has just failed to deliver on any of the key fronts, depressing not only people at home but abroad as well. In another political upheaval in Iraq, five more MPs have announced a complete boycott of cabinet gatherings, giving a nasty jab to Maliki’s claims to represent all Iraqi sects. The decision of the cabinet ministers – loyal to Iraq’s former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi – has deepened the political crisis for Iraq’s divided unity government, diminishing the lasting endeavors to reconcile Iraq’s warring parties. Expressing their distress over inactivity on various issues, for instance the status of Iraqi detainees, the repatriation of displaced Iraqis and the return of former members of Saddam’s Baath Party to government jobs; the ministers would not attend any Cabinet meetings but continue to run their ministries as earlier. Alia Nusaiyef Jasim, a legislator in Allawi’s secular Shi’ite al-Iraqiyah coalition, asserted, This act is not an escalation but it is an objection to what the government is doing. The Iraqiyah bloc participated in the government on the basis of sharing in the decision-making, but the bloc is marginalized in the government. The latest course of events in Iraqi cabinet, only days after the resignation of five other ministers and a deputy PM, has left the government without any politicians from Sunni factions in the Cabinet, largely dominated the representatives of the Shi’ite faction. The situation – be it political, communal and military – in Iraq is becoming precarious, reflecting the Coalition’s inability to establish a legitimate and representative political setup in the volatile nation. Source

No easy withdrawal from Iraq possible

admin — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 11:01:14 +0000

As army casualties mount in Iraq, voices are getting shriller in the US, demanding removal of its forces from the country. The House of Representatives recently passed a resolution aiming at that. Such a stance is understandable, coming from elected politicians, who are attuned to the prevailing public opinion. But the general public is often not capable of thinking out fully the implications of its demands. Strangely the esteemed Rand Corporation seems to have joined the popular clamour. Even assuming that a decision is made to withdraw forces from Iraq, it is not going to be as easy as packing the bags, kissing Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki goodbye and leave. Top retired US generals have said that a sensible withdrawal will at least take eighteen months. There is no way they’re going to pull out of that theater as fast as everyone thinks says retired Army Lt. Gen. William “Gus” Pagonis, who oversaw the withdrawal of nearly half a million US troops and hundreds of thousands of pieces of equipment from Saudi Arabia in 1991 over a seven-month period after the first Gulf War. Moreover even after a withdrawal, a small US military presence in Iraq will be indispensable. All experts agree on that. The aim would be to keep the Iraqi army propped up, lending it assistance in terms of training, not to forget the psychological support. It will keep the wolves of the Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia at bay. It will prevent all the groups in Iraq in check at least in some measure. The message would be, “Do not live on us. Grow up and take of yourself. But if things get too nasty, we will be always for you.” If there is a hurried US withdrawal, it will have to fight its way out of the country, reminiscent of Vietnam. All those with ill-will towards the US will not leave any chance to inflict as much harm as possible on the US troops leaving. If US wants to flee in hurry it could be done in three months, but its arms and equipment will have to be left behind. An unwise option indeed.

Israel for Missile Shield before West Bank pullout

admin — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 10:59:58 +0000

Russian and US standoff on Missile Defense Shield (MDS) is not yet over; however, now Israel joins the fray and wants a MDS in place – which it needs to fight against militants – before relinquishing West Bank. Meanwhile, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, expressed concerns over the rising Palestinian insurgent rocket attacks and emphasized the need for a MDS before West Bank pullout. Israeli concerns against the increasing threats of Iranian missile attack, tumultuous scenario in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, chaotic scenario in Syria, and the West Bank upheavals are making Israel apprehensive of its security. Moreover, US $30 billion arms deal to six Arab states has further increased the risk of annihilation for Israel rather than just a threat from Hamas terrorists.Hamas terror is nothing new for it, but recurrent occurrences and not a matter as grave as aforesaid. US MDS in Europe and Iranian Nuclear pursuit have started showing wicked pangs, as mad race for the arms has begun in the Mideast, which will not subside until it destroys the whole region or world either. In addition to these, US interests in the Mideast are adding more woe to the region. Well, these are more or less Israeli fears that force on it the necessity to defend itself from the growing Islamic threat. Israel wouldn’t like West Bank to become an Islamic terror stronghold like Gaza after its withdrawal, which would put it in great danger. Amid the rising al-Qaeda threat which is fast spreading its tentacles in Mideast, Israel is becoming apprehensive for its future security. Therefore, by deploying the MDS, Israel wants to make sure that after West Bank withdrawal – a possible quid pro quo for peace in the Mideast – it would be able to encounter any future uprising or terror attacks. These fears make not only Israel but also moderate regional Arab states like Jordan more prone to terror attack. Even if MDS can be an appropriate precautionary measure on Israeli side, but what of the arms race that, will follow in the region? Image Credit: Israelemb

Iran wants US to get out of Iraq

admin — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 10:58:50 +0000

Iraqi troublesome scenario, surmounting violence and differences with US on Key policies force latter to think over the troop surge and why not when the popular opinion is against US’s stay. How long will US continue there is a million dollar Question, but in either of the two conditions (Stay or withdrawal) there is rare chance of country becoming stable. Meanwhile, Iran backed Al-Maliki fully on US troop withdrawal and stressed that it is essential for the peace and stability of not only Iraq, but for the whole Mideast. Of course, we all rhyme when it comes to US withdrawal from Iraq. The reason is unabated violence that US failed to put an end to. Now the question remains, will violence subside after US withdraw? There are rare chances of the perception coming true. Al-Maliki Govt. is too fragile to provide security to Iraqis or save it from the division either. In case there is a withdrawal in near future, what will be the fate of Sunnis? After Saddam led Sunni suppression of decades, now Al-Maliki led Shiite govt. with the neighboring Shiite (Iran) help can strive to take revenge, which will end in unprecedented mayhem. Moreover, US is falling lonely in Iraq, as ‘coalition of willing’ is fast disappearing and now UK even is withdrawing its troops from the war ravaged country. Furthermore, now the difference between the US and its beset Al-Maliki Govt. are coming to fore on key policy issues and working of US officials. Therefore, is it wise to stay in a country against the wishes of people on both side and that too wasting mammoth amount of money and sacrificing the soldiers for a thankless country? Of course not, because it’s easy to put an end to a revolt, but too difficult to kill the spirit underneath. Why then US is bent upon continuing in Iraq? It’s some interests (oil) there, but how long will it continue there, particularly when the surmounting violence mocks at its bogus claims to quell violence? Therefore, if US can successfully eradicate violence till September – which seems a far cry – fine, if not, there is neither reason nor credibility for US to stay in Iraq to further jolt the moribund peace and stability of the region. Finally, the hazards to relinquish Iraq are imminent, as country can face the division, rising terrorist threats, riots, and ethnic cleansing. However it’s time for US to give heed to blunt massages and innocent plights. Why not to let Iraqis to take fatigue, is a question, an answer to which, every one is looking for, but who to put answer forth – None.

Mission experiment Iraq to put the final nail in the coffin

admin — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 10:57:41 +0000

The chaotic scenario in Iraq shows no signs to subside and with that the people’s hope for a peaceful future are diminishing. The lethal car bombs, sectarian violence, and streets gutted with dead bodies convey more than we can think even. Amid such scenario, how successful UN’s role will be or will it be better than Bush’s, I wonder. Security Council voted unanimously to put the Iraqi turmoil an end and opted for the UN’s wider role in Iraq. However, predicament spills over the successful working of the strategy. The labyrinth and the sectarian violence have the deep roots in Iraqi society and thus not an easy work for foreign forces to put an end to. The UN will face a tough job in Iraq because the Sunnis, Shias and Kurds are never at ease with each other and this is insoluble. All these groups will not shed the ideological differences, doesn’t matter how powerful the protective forces and effective the measures are. On the other hand, Kurds have started demanding a separate nation while Sunnis and Shiite groups fighting with each other. Former has already withdrawn support from the Al-Maliki led Shiite government thus further denting the dilapidated scenario in Iraq. If Al-Maliki Govt. falls then, the leadership crises will spark and there will be violence for grabbing power, which again will undo the country and will make the job difficult for the UN and for US as well. On this development UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon aptly avers: A peaceful and prosperous future is for Iraqis themselves to create, with the international community lending support to their efforts. We have seen roll of the dice. We have seen Saddam’s rule, we have seen UN’s earlier role, we have seen occupying forces, we have seen al-Mliki heading the Government, but violence continues unabatedly from Saddam to US to al-Maliki. So, is it the time to make experiments when people desperately yarn peace and stability? Of course not. But, what US and UN say? Image Credit: CMU

Insurgency moving towards ‘soft targets’ in Iraq

admin — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 15:29:17 +0000

The failure of the American misadventure in Iraq is all the more tragic as the engrossing occupation and insurgency moves side by side at a same pace. The insurgency, whether call it al-Qaeda or Shia, has turned into a dripping faucet that can’t be fixed. It has reached the most horrifying point where it seems that the country has declared a war against itself. Of all the suicide bombings that we witnessed in the last four years of the Iraq occupation the latest in the two Yazidi villages near Mosul is out-and-out one of the worst attacks. Suicide bombings that may have claimed up to 500 victims in Iraq were in revenge for the last month’s stoning to death of a teenage girl. The latest suicide bombings are high even to the cruelest standards of Iraq. It already go beyond the killing of just over 200 people in car bombings and mortar fire in Baghda’s Shia stronghold of Sadr City last November. Ahead of a mid-September deadline, when there will be a serious review of whether the current strategy is working, Iraq has already shown signs of no return and the worst comes from Washington that is busy debating more about who to blame than what to do. Since the ridiculously famous moment when President Bush stood under the ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner declaring that ‘major combat operations in Iraq have ended,’ deaths have risen from relatively few into the range of nearly 1000 a month or more. Although tired by the chaos and lack of basic services, most Iraqis applauded the United States for overthrowing Saddam Hussein but since the Bush administration invaded their country in March 2003, that almost two million may have fled to other countries, and that possibly millions more have been displaced from their homes in ethnic-cleansing campaigns. We also know that an estimated 4.5 million Iraqi children are now malnourished and that this is but ‘the tip of the iceberg’ in a country where diets are deteriorating, while children are dying of preventable diseases in significant numbers; that the Iraqi economy is in ruins and its oil industry functioning at levels significantly below its worst moments in Saddam Hussein’s day – and that there is no end in sight for any of this.

Mission experiment Iraq to put the final nail in the coffin

admin — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 10:56:43 +0000

Iran wants US to get out of Iraq

admin — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 10:33:55 +0000