>> ROYAL MESS?
Saud's royal house of cards
Restless youth, resurgent fundamentalism and a resentful middle class are an increasingly imminent threat to Saudi Arabia's rulers -- and to oil-addicted Westerners.
By Jon D. Markman
Saudi Arabia faces its gravest economic, social and political threat in years as hundreds of thousands of Muslims make their annual hajj to the nation's holy sites this week. And if the House of Saud is threatened, so, too, are the price of oil and the great American right to own two SUVs, a Harley and an RV.
The menace, long simmering under the surface of a seemingly content society, has boiled to the surface recently with clashes between Saudi police and armed extremists in Riyadh and Mecca. And we're not talking about the 250-plus pilgrims trampled while stoning Satan last weekend.
Last week, the Independent newspaper of Great Britain reported "an extraordinary level of political violence" in the al-Jouf province, power base of the al-Sudairy branch of the royal family, including assassinations of the deputy governor, police chief and a judge.
The Saudi government was forced Thursday to deny accounts in their own media of the existence of terrorist training camps in the kingdom. In a land already ruled with an iron fist, the German news service DPA reported that more than 1,000 surveillance cameras had been installed on roads to allow soldiers to monitor pilgrims' every move.
A South Africa newspaper, the Cape Argus, said police in its country had intercepted a Pakistani plot to use fake passports to fly to Saudi Arabia via Cape Town.
And Reuters reported that diplomats said the Saudi government was deeply worried the hajj could become a target for attack or be used as a cover for militants to infiltrate the kingdom. In 2003, more than 50 people died in suicide bombings in Riyadh.
Even if violent disruption is avoided this week, there is little doubt that extremist elements are gaining strength in the homeland of the West's most reliable Arab partner. The problem is not just al-Qaeda, which recruited most of the 9/11 suicide hijackers there. According to veteran observer John Bradley of the Independent, it's also merchant families and tribes who were prominent in the country before the Sauds consolidated power in the early part of the last century and now see a chance to reassert themselves upon the death of the aged, ailing King Fahd.
American investors ignore this danger at their peril. For if three disparate forces hook up -- the disenfranchised non-royal merchant class, religious fundamentalists and disaffected youths -- our cheap, easy access to the Saudis' vast petroleum reserves could be threatened for anywhere from a few weeks to years, sending oil prices north of $60.
Next week, I'll explain the many ways to hedge this menace by buying shares of small U.S. and Canadian energy producers. But for now, let's try to better understand the Saudi turmoil.
Disillusionment of the young
On paper, the Saudi succession after Fahd dies is clear: His 81-year-old brother, Abdullah, the crown prince, is next in line, and after him is another brother, 80-year-old Sultan. Thomas Lippman, author of the terrific new book "Inside the Mirage: America's Fragile Partnership with Saudi Arabia," said it's not clear there is a designated successor beyond those two. "There are just six people who have an idea of what would happen next, and I'm not one of them," quipped the former Washington Post foreign correspondent.
Lippman puts the chance of civil war at less than 10%. But he confirms that the amount of guns and explosives seized in recent months in raids by Saudi police -- munitions smuggled across the border from Iraq and Yemen -- has been staggering. The unrest stems as much from social and political complaints as religion. The country suffers from an unemployment rate upward of 20%, as the petroleum-industry work that is not automated is run by foreigners. Lippman says today's 24-year-old Saudi has two handicaps as he looks at the workplace: He grew up with a sense of entitlement because the country was rolling in cash, and his heavily religious education did not prepare him for a role in the world economy.
Like many developing countries, Lippman says, the Saudis have put too high a premium on having their elite kids get doctoral degrees, and not enough on having its middle-class kids get the sort of bachelor's degrees that help create a modern services and petrochemical plant workforce. Saudi Arabia has world-class oil derivatives industries -- fertilizer, plastics and industrial feedstock -- to supplement its vast crude oil production. But you may be surprised to learn that agriculture is the country's leading employer and its second-largest contributor to GDP, as it is self-sufficient in wheat, dairy products and poultry. Most of these jobs go to foreigners, also.
Historically, revolutions do not well up from the peasantry -- they come from the upwardly mobile class, like silversmith Paul Revere and lawyer John Adams in colonial America -- whose rising expectations are frustrated. Lippman points out that Saudi Arabia is plagued with a large swath of young people who have been "inculcated with the wrong kinds of ideas, don't have enough to do, truly resent the dominance and incursion of Americans into their society and have learned from their textbooks about the duty of Muslims to wage jihad against infidels." All the while, they face declining opportunities for personal economic advancement. "That's a lot to think about as you sit in coffeehouses listening to recordings of rabble rousers," Lippman said.
An extreme element in Saudi Arabia aspires to a Taliban-style state, a concept that has deep roots in the country's past. As Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes pointed out in an interview, al-Qaeda is an ideological descendent of a turn-of-the-century religious army known as the Ikhwan, or "brotherhood," which practiced a puritanical brand of Islam known as Wahhabism. Ibn Saud compromised with the Ikhwan by letting them run the country's educational and judicial system while he tried to make a buck by allowing infidel Americans drill for oil. But the idea of a purer, pre-Western state has remained, and Osama bin Laden is the archetype of those who want the heathens to take their lipstick, lattes and Big Macs and go home.
Will the monarchy prevail?
Of course, there are key differences between Saudi Arabia today and the classic Middle East revolution that occurred in 1970s Iran: The middle class is largely content; the Saudi royal family has thousands of male members infiltrated into every corner of social, political and military life; and the fundamentalist mullahs are on the government dole, not independent. Also, virtually all Muslims in Iran were united in their loathing of the Shah, whom they viewed as a usurper who extravagantly glorified the country's pre-Islam heritage, while Saudi citizens acknowledge the Bedouin roots of their own rulers. And also unlike Iran, or Nicaragua for that matter, there are few mountains or jungles in which insurgents can effectively hide except in the remote south.
However, this is a time of great uncertainty in Saudi Arabia as leaders look north across their border with Iraq and fret over the prospect of either a liberal secular democracy or Shiite theocracy (flip a coin) in Baghdad. Thus, they have allowed modest reforms, such as the limited municipal elections; economic reforms, such as the slow privatization of the telecommunications industry, national airline and postal system; and social reforms, such as the creation of independent courts to adjudicate commercial litigation.
The question is whether the Saudis can rev out of the 19th century fast enough to satisfy the yearnings of repressed GenNexters while at the same time not alienating their fundamentalist power base. Every time you hear about new incidents of explosive conflict within the kingdom, don't toss if off as just another remote overseas quarrel. Read between the lines to determine whether it is one more step toward a civil war that will irretrievably alter our access to the lifeblood of our electronic and motorized way of life.
Both Lippman and Pipes are betting on the monarchy, which has proven relentless so far in crushing its opposition, and point out that even a resolutely anti-American post-Saudi regime would probably eventually sell oil to the West to keep the cash flowing anyway. But just in case al-Qaeda or its permutations prove more diabolically clever than expected, next week I'll focus on the North American energy producers who would benefit most from higher oil prices and, at any rate, can do extremely well amid current supply uncertainty at $30 oil and $5.25 natural gas.
Fine Print
Lippman's book, which was just published in January, is really a fascinating, fast read. You can find the book at MSN Shopping. Here's a transcript of remarks he made at a Johns Hopkins University panel on U.S.-Saudi relations in November. . . . Daniel Pipes keeps an up-to-date Web site of his articles and speeches, and also a weblog. . . . Keep current on Saudi news at the Saudi Times Web site. . . . There are numerous independent sites on Saudi culture and history, such as www.alfaadel.com, as well as more official sites like the Saudi-US Relations Information Service. . . . Last week, I described Parlux Fragrances (PARL, news, msgs) as a relatively inexpensive small cap worth a look. Bill Mann, senior editor at Motley Fool, wrote to say he disagreed and referenced his Aug. 15, 2003 story; see it here. Meanwhile, Abraxas Petroleum (ABP, news, msgs), described in the same column, had a strong run last week. I spoke to chief executive and founder Robert L.G. Watson last week, who said his company is "very happy" in the current environment, is paying down the debt that pressured the stock last year, and expects to be profitable on a GAAP basis this year. . . . To follow commodity futures prices ranging from natural gas and gold to soybeans, live cattle and the euro, the best free page on the Web is this one at Barchart.com.
Jon D. Markman is publisher of StockTactics Advisor, an independent weekly investment newsletter, as well as senior strategist and portfolio manager at Pinnacle Investment Advisors. While he cannot provide personalized investment advice or recommendations, he welcomes column critiques and comments at jdm68@lycos.com. At the time of publication, Markman did not have positions in any securities mentioned in this column.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jemaah Islamiyah Group `Degraded,' Downer Says (Update1)
Feb. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Jemaah Islamiyah, a Southeast Asian terrorist group linked to al-Qaeda, is ``degraded,'' not yet defeated, Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said as an Asia-Pacific anti-terrorism conference started in Bali.
``JI's capacities have been degraded, but certainly not defeated,'' Downer said late yesterday in Bali, according to a Foreign Ministry transcript e-mailed to Bloomberg. ``They have been recruiting and trying to build their strength. There is still a long way to go and the one thing we shouldn't become is complacent,'' Downer said.
At the forum, Australia will propose establishing a training camp for police fighting terrorism in the Asia-Pacific region and ways to share intelligence, Downer said. Ministers and officials from the U.S., China, Japan and 25 other nations are attending the two-day meeting starting today.
Australia and Indonesia, hosting the meeting, have been cooperating since terrorist bombings in Bali in October 2002 killed 202 people, 88 of them Australians. Jemaah Islamiyah was blamed for the bombing. Investigations led to Indonesian police arresting 35 people, many of whom have gone on trial. Three have been sentenced to death and three given life terms.
``Terrorism can't be solved through any one country acting alone,'' Downer said in Bali. ``Australia and Indonesia have set up a bit of a template for the region through our co-operation post-Bali bombing.''
Money Laundering
Australia and Indonesia today agreed to share financial intelligence in a bid to stymie money laundering and terrorism funding, said Australian Attorney General Philip Ruddock.
Australia has agreements to swap finance intelligence with 24 other nations, including the U.S. and the U.K.
``Sharing this intelligence is vital in the prevention and detection of financial crimes, money laundering and the financing of terrorism,'' Ruddock said in an e-mailed statement.
Hambali, also known as Riduan Isamuddin, the suspected leader of the al-Qaeda terrorist network in Southeast Asia and the former operations chief of Jemaah Islamiyah, was arrested in Thailand in August last year. He is in U.S. custody.
``In time, we would be interested in direct access to Hambali,'' Downer said. ``At the moment, the American process is working alright.''
To contact the reporter on this story:
Gemma Daley in Canberra at
or gdaley@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor for this story:
Paul Tighe at
or ptighe@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: February 3, 2004 23:57 EST
?2004 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved.
---------------------------------------------------
Fed's Moskow Says Strong U.S. Economic Growth Won't Produce Inflation Soon
Feb. 3 (Bloomberg) -- Federal Reserve officials ``expect'' more rapid growth this year won't cause inflation to accelerate soon because there are still ample amounts of unused labor and industrial capacity in the U.S. economy, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago President Michael Moskow said.
``We have yet to see the kinds of pressure on labor and capital resources that often signal an increase in inflation,'' Moskow said in the text of remarks to the St. Joseph County, Indiana, Chamber of Commerce. ``And certainly our most recent numbers confirm that inflation is still extremely low.''
The Fed's preferred inflation indicator, the personal consumption expenditure price index minus food and energy, rose just 0.7 percent for the 12 months ending December, the smallest increase in 44 years of record keeping, the Commerce Department reported yesterday.
The slow pace of price increases came even as the economy grew at a 4 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter, following an 8.2 percent pace of growth between July and September. That suggests growth can remain elevated for some time before resources get tight enough to increase inflationary pressures.
``Today, the unemployment rate is elevated and industrial capacity utilization is below average -- both evidence of excess resources,'' Moskow said. ``Even with the solid growth expected as we move forward, slack resources could persist for some time.''
Momentum Growing
Moskow is the first member of the Fed's Open Market Committee to speak following the most recent policy meeting on Jan. 28. In a statement following their decision to leave the benchmark overnight bank lending rate unchanged at 1 percent, policy makers removed a pledge to keep rates low for a ``considerable period,'' substituting instead a promise to be ``patient in removing its policy accommodation.''
Traders in interest rate futures contracts took that to mean the central bank would consider raising interest rates sooner than had been expected. The implied yield on fed funds futures suggests they now expect the Fed to raise rates by the third quarter of 2004.
Moskow, who is a non-voting member of the Fed's rate-setting Open Market Committee member this year, said the economy is `beginning to pick up momentum' and he ``wouldn't be surprised'' if growth is faster than consensus for 2004, which he put at ``around 4 percent.'' The 2004 budget of President George W. Bush forecasts growth of 4.4 percent this year. The latest Blue Chip Economic Indicators consensus estimate is for 4.6 percent growth this year.
Employment Concern
Consumer spending is holding up and business investment has risen ``strongly'' in recent months, Moskow said. ``Furthermore, business confidence has been improving. The general tone of our contacts' reports on business conditions is noticeably better than it was during the summer.''
He suggested that should ``create conditions for businesses to increase hiring and utilize much of the economy's excess capacity'' this year.
The problem is that hasn't happened yet, he said. ``Labor markets are still a key area of weakness,'' Moskow said. ``Although the unemployment rate is down a half percentage point from its recent peak in May, employment growth has been disappointing.''
The economy created just 1,000 jobs in December, far fewer than the 150,000 median forecast in a Bloomberg News survey of economists.
Given that, the ``big question'' is whether ``the most recent surge in demand will sustain itself,'' he said. ``Even though the outlook calls for strong GDP growth, so long as the output gap persists and there are diminished pressures on resources, inflation rates are unlikely to increase significantly.''
To contact the reporter on this story:
Craig Torres in Washington at ctorres3@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor of this story:
Kevin Miller at kmiller@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: February 3, 2004 12:40 EST
?2004 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White House seeks to loan U.N. funds for renovations
By Betsy Pisik and David R. Sands
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
The Bush administration's new budget includes a $1.2 billion, 30-year loan to renovate the aging United Nations headquarters and build a new annex, although U.N. officials expressed disappointment that Washington will charge interest on the loan.
The loan was part of a $31.5 billion foreign-operations budget request released Monday that also includes major new funding for the fight against AIDS and a revamped U.S. foreign-aid program targeting poor countries that implement political and social reforms.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said yesterday the loan request, contained in the foreign-operations account of President Bush's proposed fiscal 2005 budget, was a "practical way to move forward" with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's plan to renovate and modernize the U.N. headquarters.
The loan to fund the U.N. Capital Master Plan still must win approval by Congress and the U.N. General Assembly. The world body must agree to accept the 5.54 percent interest rate. Interest and principal is to be paid off by all member states.
The loan announcement came on a day when Mr. Annan was in Washington for meetings with Mr. Bush and other senior administration leaders on the troubled political transition in Iraq.
Catherine Bertini, the U.N. undersecretary-general for administration and management, who accompanied Mr. Annan on his Washington trip, called the loan provision "great."
"It's exactly what we wanted, but we were hoping it would be interest-free," she said.
If approved, Washington will pay out $400 million a year for three years, and the organization will have 30 years to pay it back, plus interest. The total bill, with interest, will be close to $2.5 billion.
As part of its assessed contribution to the U.N. budget, the United States will supply 22 percent of that repayment figure -- $265 million on the principal alone.
Diplomats said yesterday they did not know enough about the loan to comment, but several were dismayed that Washington would charge interest.
One European envoy noted that the Swiss government donated the building and most of the operating costs for U.N. operations in Geneva.
The highly recognizable U.N. Secretariat building, the best-known example of the International architectural style, is dangerously outdated and in disrepair.
The 39-story, green-glass rectangle leaks heat in winter and air-conditioning in summer, is riddled with asbestos and lacks a sprinkler system.
A 2002 report from the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) affirmed the need for a speedy interior renovation, noting that each year's delay would add millions to the project's cost.
The GAO also backed the U.N. suggestion of a second office tower, which would house U.N. staff during the three-year renovation, and then consolidate far-flung agencies, programs and offices now renting space. The city of New York has made available a nearby asphalt playground for the proposed tower, although the community is reluctant to see it developed.
State Department officials, briefing reporters on background yesterday, said Mr. Bush's proposed foreign-operations budget cuts back on some traditional bilateral aid programs to fulfill the president's funding promises for AIDS and for the new Millennium Challenge Account, a program to target development assistance to countries that embrace economic and political reforms.
c Betsy Pisik reported from New York.
>> BLOOMBERG WATCH...
The Brian Lehrer Show
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/01282004
Photo by Edward Reed
Mike on Mic
Wednesday, January 28, 2004
Michael Bloomberg has been Mayor of New York for two years. In that time, he's taken control of city schools, reined in the budget, and turned City Hall Park into an open-air gallery for contemporary sculpture.
>> SMOKE? WHERE?
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/current
Human Traffic
Suzanne Tomatore Director, Immigrant Women and Children Project , Association of the Bar of the City of New York Fund, Inc.
on the problem of human trafficking in the New York area
>> HISTORY AND WMD HUNTS...
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/episodes/current
Pox Japonica
Wednesday, February 04, 2004
During World War II, Japanese medical researchers intentionally spread cholera, typhoid, dysentery, and anthrax throughout China, killing an estimated 580,000 innocent people. Daniel Barenblatt is here to talk about Axis Japan's secret germ warfare experiments.
Daniel Barenblatt
Daniel Barenblatt's new book is A Plague Upon Humanity: The Secret Genocide of Axis Japan's Germ Warfare Operation. It's about Japan's notorious Unit 731, a research facility headed by Dr. Shiro Ishii, also known as Japan's answer to Josef Mengele.
>>
A Tale of Two Reports
David Kay and Lord Hutton.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Friday, Jan. 30, 2004, at 8:55 AM PT
David Kay
Those who love the Near East are fond of repeating the legendary anecdotes of one Nasreddin Hodja, a sort of Ottoman Muslim Aesop of the region with a big following among Greeks and Greek Cypriots as well as among Turks, Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, and others. On one occasion, this folkloric wise man went to the hammam, or Turkish steam bath. His undistinguished and modest demeanor did not recommend him to the attendants, who gave him brief and perfunctory attention before hustling him out to make room for more prosperous customers. They were duly astonished when he produced an enormous tip from under his robes, and when he paid a return visit some time later, they were waiting for him with the richest and warmest towels, the longest and most detailed rubdown, the finest oils, the most leisurely service of sherbet, a long soak, and the most obsequious attendants. As he departed, the old man dropped a few meager coppers into their outstretched palms and, when they began to protest, told them: "The last tip was for this time. This tip is for the previous time."
So Saddam Hussein finally got his reward for all the unpunished times. Well, history doesn't move in a straight line, and irony is a dialectical hairpin. But if he really didn't have any stores of unlawful WMD, it was very dumb of him to act as if he still did or perhaps even to believe that he still did. And it seems perfectly idiotic of anybody to complain that we have now found this out (always assuming that we have, and that there's no more disclosure to come). This highly pertinent and useful discovery could only be made by way of regime change. And the knowledge that Iraq can be finally and fully certified as disarmed, and that it won't be able to rearm under a Caligula regime, is surely a piece of knowledge worth having in its own right and for its own sake.
David Kay and his colleagues in the post-1991 inspections met with every possible kind of evasion, deceit, and concealment. Then they had to watch as their most golden inside informers, the Kamel brothers, were lured back to Iraq by their father-in-law on a promise of safe conduct and put to death at once. Who would trust a word uttered by this gang, after that? It has since been established, by the Kay report, that there was a Baath plan to purchase weapons from North Korea, that materials had been hidden in the homes of scientists, and that there was a concealment program run by Qusai Hussein in person. This may look less menacing now that it has been exposed to the daylight, but there was no reason not to take it extremely seriously when it was presented as latent.
How come our intelligence agencies were so easily misled? This is an excellent question, which has lain upon the table ever since they left us defenseless in September 2001. The case for a thorough purge of the CIA would have been easier to make if the antiwar liberals had not gone on parroting the Langley line, which was to underestimate on some things and to overstate on others. The booby prize here goes (again) to Maureen Dowd, who in her column on David Kay on Jan. 29 said that the agency was "probably relying too much on the Arabian Nights tales of Ahmad Chalabi, eager to spread the word of Saddam's imaginary nuclear-tipped weapons juggernaut because it suited his own ambitions--and that of his Pentagon pals." As everyone with the slightest knowledge is well aware, the CIA was smearing and sabotaging Chalabi until the week of the fall of Baghdad and continues to do so. It remains, within the institutions of the U.S. government, the most devout opponent of regime change with the arguable exception of the Department of State.
If you want another free laugh, or another glimpse of the tiny-minded literalism of the neutralists and isolationists, take a look at the other "scandal" that has just been exploded by Lord Hutton's inquiry in London. One of Tony Blair's advisers, Jonathan Powell, changed the wording of a report in the following way. It had originally read: "Saddam Hussein is willing to use chemical and biological weapons if he believes his regime is under threat." The Blairite alteration removed the last eight words. Since everything was a threat in Saddam's disordered mind, and since he had used such weapons in the past as weapons of aggression inside and outside his own borders, the only "politicization of intelligence" would have occurred if the eight words had been left in, to give the impression that he would only fight in self-defense. The excised phrase lingers on, as a reminder that the opponents of regime change also believed in the existence of the weapons.
The British government's claim that such weaponry was deployable within "45" minutes is irrelevant from both sides, since if the weapons weren't there they couldn't be used at all, and if they were there they presumably existed in some condition of readiness. Many newspapers in London sold extra copies on the bannered "45 Minutes" headline and have been in a vengeful state ever since over their own credulity. That can't be helped. In this ontological argument, nobody claimed that there was no WMD problem to begin with. (German intelligence reported to Gerhard Schr?der that Saddam was within measurable distance of getting a nuke: That didn't deter the chancellor in the least from adopting an utterly complacent approach.)
It's been a few weeks since I have heard any new conspiracy theories about the suicide of Dr. David Kelly, who was himself a firm believer in "regime change" as the precondition for inspections. It has now been established that his identity was given away by Andrew Gilligan, a BBC journalist whose reportorial standards were a byword before he became famous. The most inventive theory I have heard this week is that Lord Hutton is an Ulsterman and that Gilligan is a republican-sounding kind of Irish name, and that this is all a subtext of the age-old struggle between Orange and Green. That'll do fine to keep the conversation going, as this ridiculous and paltry controversy recedes into the past.
Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair and a regular contributor to Slate. His most recent book is A Long Short War: The Postponed Liberation of Iraq.
Photograph of David Kay by Mannie Garcia/Reuters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPIEGEL ONLINE - 04. Februar 2004, 17:43
URL: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,284922,00.html
Stasi
Anatolische Fliegenf?nger
Von Hans Michael Kloth
Nicht nur Bundesb?rger werkelten als West-IM f?r Erich Mielkes Stasi. Eine neue Studie der Birthler-Beh?rde beschreibt, wie das MfS in der Bundesrepublik auch unter t?rkischen Gastarbeitern und anderen Ausl?ndern jede Menge Spitzel warb. Ein Spezialauftrag: DDR-Frauen k?dern, die dem SED-Staat durch Heirat entkommen wollten.
AP
Stasi-Chef Mielke (1982):Argwohn gegen Ausl?nder
Es muss schon ziemlich frustig f?r die selbstbewussten Jungs von der DDR-Grenztruppe gewesen sein - wenn einer der 115 000 t?rkischen Gastarbeiter in West-Berlin zwischen Ost- und Westteil der geteilten Stadt wechselte, machten sie beim Filzen wieder und wieder den gleichen Fund: "Hunderte von Kontaktanschriften und Telefonnummern von DDR-B?rgerinnen", registrierte 1981 eine MfS-Bilanz, w?rden jedes Jahr bei ein- und ausreisenden T?rken aus West-Berlin sichergestellt.
Den Erfolg bei der DDR-Damenwelt neideten die Genossen den Besuchern aber nicht nur pers?nlich. Noch mehr f?rchtete die Stasi, dass die "kaum zu kontrollierenden operativen Kontakte" der monatlich 6000 t?rkischen Tagesbesucher zur ostdeutschen Weiblichkeit Spionageaktivit?ten oder "gesetzwidrige Antragstellungen zur Ausreise" nach sich ziehen k?nnten: Sich einen Westler zu angeln war schlie?lich eine der wenigen wirklich viel versprechenden Methoden, die SED-Diktatur ohne langes Warten oder gar Knast zu verlassen.
Mielke selbst hatte es schon immer geahnt; bereits Anfang der siebziger Jahre argw?hnte er, "viele asoziale und kriminell aufgefallene Ausl?nder" k?nnten bei Besuchen in der "Hauptstadt der DDR" die Sicherheit des Arbeiter- und Bauernstaates gef?hrden. Es sei "nicht einfach, diese Leute zumindest soweit unter Kontrolle zu halten, dass sie uns keinen Schaden zuf?gen k?nnen".
So gab er mit einem eigenen "Ausl?nderbefehl" 1981 den Startschuss f?r eine Anwerbungskampagne unter Nichtdeutschen speziell in West-Berlin, um "von dort ausgehende feindliche und politisch sch?digende Aktivit?ten gegen die DDR" zu verhindern. Als die DDR 1989 unterging, waren dann immerhin f?nf Prozent der West-IM Ausl?nder, sch?tzt die Birthler-Beh?rde in einer aktuellen Studie - eine Quote, die nicht weit unter dem Ausl?nderanteil an der westdeutschen Gesamtbev?lkerung von 7,7 Prozent lag. Richtig eingesetzte "Ausl?nder-IM", so die Erkenntnis der MfS-F?hrung, k?nnten "Unglaubliches leisten".
AP
Stasi-Akten: Viele "Gastarbeiter" beim MfS
Besonderes Interesse hatten die Schlapph?te in der Lichtenberger Normannenstrasse an den politischen Aktivit?ten innerhalb der t?rkischen Gemeinde im Westen. Sp?testens seit dem Tod eines t?rkischen Anh?ngers des West-Berliner SED-Ablegers SEW bei einer Stra?enschlacht zwischen rivalisierenden t?rkischen Gruppen in Kreuzberg im Januar 1980 beobachtete die DDR-F?hrung "faschistisch-nationalistische, rechtsradikale und religi?s-fanatische Tarnorganisationen" der t?rkischen Diaspora in Westdeutschland genauestens.
Zwar gab es in der DDR gerade einmal 94 T?rken, doch 38 davon waren Funktion?re der am Bosporus verbotenen T?rkischen Kommunistischen Partei. Die sa? in Leipzig, betrieb mit SED-Geld einen eigenen Radiosender nebst Druckerei und galt als potenzielles Anschlagsziel politischer Gegner. Auch f?rchtete die DDR angesichts der 40 000 T?rken, die j?hrlich ?ber den Flughafen Berlin-Sch?nefeld in die Heimat reisten, das Risiko von Flugzeugentf?hrungen durch Extremisten. Um "leichter oder ?berhaupt erst" in die "Konspiration feindlicher Ausl?nder bzw. Ausl?ndergruppen eindringen" zu k?nnen, setzten die Stasi-Chefs folglich voll auf die IMA - trotz merklicher Skepsis bei den eigenen Hauptamtlichen.
Eingesetzt wurden die "'Gastarbeiter' beim MfS" (so der doppelb?dige Titel der Birthler- Studie) auch gegen die DDR-Bev?lkerung. So lieferte ein Iraner mit dem Decknamen "Amir" nicht nur allerlei Wissenswertes ?ber Aktivit?ten des iranischen Geheimdienstes in Berlin, sondern horchte auch Politiker der "Alternativen Liste" ?ber deren Kontakte zu DDR-Oppositionellen aus. Er selbst traf zum Teil ?ber Jahre DDR-Oppositionelle wie B?rbel Bohley oder Ulrike Poppe und berichtete dar?ber br?hwarm der Stasi. F?r "wertvolle Informationen, die mit dazu beitrugen feindliche Aktivit?ten zu verhindern" sollte "Amir" zum 40. Jahrestag des MfS 1990 die NVA-Verdienstmedaille und 1000 Mark bekommen; aus bekannten Gr?nden musste die Feier allerdings ausfallen.
Andere IMA dienten als "Fliegenf?nger", wie die MfS-Offiziere jene Romeos nannten, an denen ausreisewillige Ostfrauen bappen bleiben sollten wie an den gleichnamigen klebrigen H?ngestreifen. So konnten viele DDR-Damen, die ihrem Staat untreu zu werden drohten, von den Sicherheitsorganen problemlos eingesammelt werden.
DPA
Geteiltes Berlin (1984):"Kaum zu kontrollierende Kontakte"
Gelegentlich lief es allerdings auch andersherum: Als dem IM-Kandidaten "Kemal", einem linken West-Berliner T?rken, Anfang der achtziger Jahre die Abschiebung in seine Heimat drohte, half ihm das MfS bei der Suche nach einer heirats- und ausreisewilligen Ost-Berlinerin; die Erw?hlte durfte ohne Formalit?ten ausreisen und sicherte dem Agenten durch die Eheschlie?ung das Aufenthaltsrecht in Berlin (West). Bis Herbst 1989 berichtete "Kemal" anschlie?end bei monatlichen Treffs mit seinem Ost-Berliner F?hrungsoffizier unter anderem ?ber t?rkische Vereine und ?bergesiedelte DDR-B?rger.
? SPIEGEL ONLINE 2004
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
Vervielf?ltigung nur mit Genehmigung der SPIEGELnet GmbH
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> DEM WATCH...
Blocking Back
Clark stops Edwards from stopping Kerry.
By William Saletan
Posted Wednesday, Feb. 4, 2004, at 1:19 AM PT
Thoughts on Tuesday night's results and speeches in the Democratic presidential race:
1. Oklahoma. When Wes Clark entered the presidential race five months ago, I said it was a rebuke to John Kerry for failing to catch on as "the candidate with the war record, the candidate who was supposed to keep the party in the center and fend off the standard-bearer of the left." I still think it was a rebuke. But Kerry reclaimed his role, and now Clark is clearing his path to the end zone by blocking the only candidate who could stop Kerry: John Edwards.
First Clark squashed Edwards' official campaign kickoff in September, leaking word that very day that he would get into the race. Then, a week ago, Clark beat out Edwards for third in New Hampshire by a fraction of a percentage point. That cost Edwards the ability to claim plausibly that he had continued his momentum from Iowa. Tuesday night, it happened again: Clark eked out a margin over Edwards in Oklahoma so narrow that the state election board will have to review the ballots before declaring an official winner. Edwards argued that he had "exceeded my expectations" and that his finish in Oklahoma, combined with his win in South Carolina, was "a continuation of the surge we've seen in other caucuses and primaries."
Nice try. I think Edwards would be the strongest Democrat in the general election. Nobody expected him to do this well in Oklahoma. But when the history of the 2004 race is written, my guess is that we'll look back at Oklahoma as Edwards' Stalingrad. He had to kill off Clark. The media were itching to write off Clark, and a no-win night would have given them license to do so. Now they can't. Clark will go on to Tennessee and Virginia, where he'll do what he did in Oklahoma: split the non-Yankee vote and keep Kerry in the lead. Maybe Edwards will win Tennessee and Virginia, and Clark will fade. But by then it may too late to stop Kerry.
Edwards was clearly pining for a Clark defeat in Oklahoma. He delayed his flight to Tennessee more than an hour as he waited for the last returns to trickle in. On CNN before the Oklahoma returns were final, Edwards said, "This race has narrowed dramatically tonight." He said the differences between himself and Kerry would "become clearer and clearer as the race focuses on the two of us." On Fox News, Edwards said the contest was looking "more and more like it's a two-person race. I'm looking forward to that two-person race."
Oops. A couple of hours later, Clark took the stage in Oklahoma to declare, "The results are in! We have won!" Rubbing it in, Clark boasted that a week earlier he had "won the non-New England portion of New Hampshire." It's a thin but valid claim. And now Edwards will have more trouble running as the outsider against Kerry, because Clark will run as the outsider against both senators. As Clark put it to Larry King Tuesday night, "I'm an outsider, Larry. I haven't been in the Senate. I didn't vote for No Child Left Behind. I didn't vote to go war with Iraq, and I didn't vote for the Patriot Act." The general who auditioned for the role of John Kerry is ending up instead with the role of Howard Dean.
2. Attacking Kerry. Dean's doing it, but nobody's listening, because Dean has faded, and coming from him, it's just another Dean-bites-man story. Clark's doing it, but it doesn't carry much punch, since he has failed to establish himself as a plausible nominee. Edwards is more plausible but refuses to attack. Tonight he hinted at a few differences, noting that he could relate to working-class people because he came from a working-class family, and that he had opposed trade agreements such as NAFTA. But again, Edwards insisted on framing these differences in terms of his own virtues rather than Kerry's faults.
Edwards is being way too subtle about this stuff to hurt Kerry. The key ingredient in Kerry's comeback has been systematic theft of any message that's working for any other candidate. Kerry will give you whatever you're looking for in the other guy, plus credibility on domestic policy and national security. Edwards' and Kerry's speeches Tuesday night glaringly illustrated this. Edwards talked about standing for fairness against privilege. He decried the poverty of millions of Americans. He said he would seek opportunity for everyone, no matter where they came from, no matter what the color of their skin. Three hours later, Kerry talked about standing for fairness against privilege. He decried the poverty of millions of Americans. He said he would seek opportunity for everyone, no matter where they came from, no matter what the color of their skin. Kerry is like the aging boxer who hugs the challenger to deprive him of the distance necessary to land a solid punch.
What might yet save Edwards--and I half suspect he's counting on this--is that the media can't stand this civility. They're starving for a fight. Tuesday night, the TV interviewers practically begged Edwards to attack Kerry. On CNN, Bob Dole coached him to go after Kerry's record. It was all Dole could do to refrain from shouting, "Damn it, don't you have a dark side?" But Edwards has come a long way in this race by being patient and letting others--Dick Gephardt, Dean, and Clark--do the dirty work of attacking, so that Edwards could rise through the pack untarnished. Now he seems to be playing the same game with the media. Tuesday night, TV anchors pressed Kerry on his vulnerabilities, and CNN's Judy Woodruff reframed Edwards' positive comments about himself as implicit criticism of Kerry, in effect delivering the punch on Edwards' behalf.
3. National vs. regional candidates. Kerry's biggest achievement is that he's now the only candidate who's running strong everywhere. I winced when he claimed to have finished "enormously close" to Edwards in South Carolina; I don't recall Kerry aides treating Dean's finish in New Hampshire, which was nearer to the top than Kerry's finish was in South Carolina, as enormously close. But Kerry legitimately pointed out that he's the only candidate who campaigned in all seven of the Feb. 3 states, and he won five of them. Who else can make such a claim? Clark skipped Iowa. Edwards has competed everywhere but won only his native state. To hear Edwards tell it, winning South Carolina showed his ability to win among Southerners, blacks, and rural voters. Edwards also claimed in TV interviews that Oklahoma demonstrated his strength in the "heartland." This is how a clever lawyer makes strength in two states sound like strength in half the country. But they're still just two states.
4. Kerry's religion problem. On the night he won New Hampshire, Kerry criticized President Bush for trampling the boundary between church and state. Tuesday night he did it again. That's zero nods to faith and two warnings against religious overreach in a week. Kerry was supposed to be the guy who would save Democrats from Dean's tone deafness on taxes and national security. So far, however, he seems equally tone deaf on values.
5. Kerry's establishment problem. Dean squandered some of his populist resonance when he began to spotlight endorsements by big shots like Al Gore and Bill Bradley. Kerry had less populist resonance to begin with and can't afford to squander it the same way. Tuesday night on CNN, he brushed aside his defeat in South Carolina by noting that the state's top Democrats, Sen. Fritz Hollings and Rep. Jim Clyburn, had supported him. This has to be the first time I've seen a presidential candidate brag about having the endorsement of a state party elite after the voters rejected that endorsement. Kerry went on to boast that the governors of Michigan and Washington were backing him as well. Somebody needs to remind him that the voters call the shots, and they don't take well to candidates who appear to care more about courting self-styled power brokers.
6. Battlefield egalitarianism. Everyone expects Kerry's military record to patch up the Democrats' difficulty on national security. What's less understood is how it might patch up his difficulty connecting with ordinary people. In his victory speech, Kerry spoke again of his "band of brothers" from Vietnam. And when he was asked during an interview about his comfortable upbringing, he turned the discussion to his service in Vietnam, where "nobody cared about what your background was. They cared about whether you were a standup person and fought, and they cared about whether you did your duty and covered people." It's a tremendously powerful answer, and Kerry will need every bit of that power to overcome his Brahmin aloofness if he ends up in a showdown with Bush.
William Saletan is Slate's chief political correspondent.
Photograph of John Edwards on the Slate home page by Roberto Schmidt/Agence France Presse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> LINKS AND PHOTO AT ...
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_020304/content/rush_is_right_2.guest.html
Nobody Likes Phony JFK
February 3, 2004
For the past two weeks, I've been passing on stories from Democrats and members of the mainstream media about how John Kerry is not well-liked. This column headlined "What's to Like?" in the American Spectator makes plain that he's not liked by anybody! It cites the Boston Globe's seven-part series that "revealed everything embarrassing." Despite Kerry's people saying their guy is clean, his rivals in the party are taking shots at him.
"What you're going to see," a staffer for Johnny "the Breck Girl" Edwards says, "is more and more stories about how Kerry is just reviled by his fellow Democratic senators and by others. The man is genuinely disliked for just being a big phony." The staffer gives an example of the Vietnam vets Kerry's suddenly surrounding himself with, saying, "Almost to a one, these guys have said that they had reached out to Kerry over the years and never heard back from him. Suddenly he's running for president and he's all hot and heavy to use them to his advantage."
The staffer closes with a charge that Kerry "just tries to ride other people's coattails," which dovetails with all the other stories here about how he's a gigolo who gets wealthy by preying on single and divorced women who have inherited a lot of money, etc. The piece closes with a report that Kerry is preparing to ride the biggest coattails of all with the slogan, "A New Century. A New JFK."
Oh, I hope they do that. Do you know how delectable that would be?
Listen to Rush...
(...pass on more stories on the unliked, unlikable John F-ing Kerry)
Read the Article...
(American Spectator: What's To Like? John Kerry's main problem)
Previous Stories on the Real JFK-Wannabe...
(National Review: David Frum's Conversation with Mona Charen on "Mr. Both Ways")
(Rolling Stone: John Kerry's Desperate Hours)
(Slate: Teresa Heinz - Why John Kerry Needs Some of His Wife's Sauce)
(Slate: Does Teresa Heinz Trust John Kerry?)
(NewsMax: John Kerry's Newt Gingrich Problem?)
(Dukakis: Kerry is Best Bet for Democrats)
(Boston Globe: Kerry's Tax Shelter Documents)
(Former Congressman John LeBoutillier: Kerry the Candidate)
(Boston Globe: Running Mates 1982 - Dukakis/Kerry)
(Ann Coulter: Just A Gigolo)
(LA Times: War Hero and Waffling Windbag - Max Boot)
(Townhall: Howard Dean in a dress - Michelle Malkin)
(Slate: Why Didn't Kerry Speak Out? When Bush Broke Those Iraq "Promises")
(Kerry Says Threat of Terrorism Exaggerated)
(Washington Post: Steak Raises Stakes for Kerry in Philly)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EU airports expect more clashes over state aid
Reuters, 02.04.04, 1:56 PM ET
eLibrary @ Forbes.com more >
LONDON, Feb 4 (Reuters) - The European Commission may have opened the way to months of clashes over subsidies to the airline industry after it ordered Ryanair to repay four million euros of state aid, an airport industry group said on Wednesday.
"I think we'll see a series of challenges... It's just going to be messy," said Philippe Hamon, director general of ACI Europe, whose members handle 90 percent of Europe's commercial air traffic.
Ryanair
Such subsidies are common in the airport business where attracting an airline such as Ryanair can bolster local economies by drawing tourists and holiday home buyers.
"We're going to be fighting skirmishes in the European courts for the next 12 months," said Ryanair Chief Executive Michael O'Leary.
Known for his colourful barbs, he called the EU ruling a "numbnuts decision" and a "disaster" for low-cost airlines.
ACI's Hamon said the EU needed to issue more comprehensive guidelines to head off a long series of complaints, probes and court cases involving other airlines and airports.
"What we'd like to see is a set of rules by which this game can be played without the distractions and anguish and costs of these legal challenges," he told Reuters by telephone.
EU Transport Commissioner Loyola De Palacio told reporters on Tuesday that such guidelines were being considered.
Regional governments are also wary of precedents set in Tuesday's ruling, especially a five-year cap on state subsidies.
"Imposing a maximum duration of three to five years for regional aid could in many cases endanger the regions' long-term investments and their sustainable economic development," the Assembly of European Regions (AER), representing some 250 regional governments, said in a statement.
UK-based BAA Plc
Charleroi handled about two million passengers in 2003, compared to just 89,000 when Ryanair started flying there in 1997.
Copyright 2004, Reuters News Service
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> CORRUPTION INDEX...
Taiwan
Fugitive claims Chen accepted political funds
2004-02-03 / Taiwan News, Staff Writer / By Dennis Engbarth and Wang Chung-ming
Spokesmen for President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) denied yesterday charges by a convicted tycoon that Chen had accepted political funds as "an evil election trick."
In three open letters ostensibly addressed to President Chen but faxed to many opposition legislators yesterday, former Tuntex Group Chairman Chen You-hao (陳由豪) stated that he had contributed funds to now President Chen Shui-bian during the latter's re-election campaign for Taipei City mayor in 1998 and the presidency in 2000.
The fugitive tycoon was indicted on charges of breach of trust for allegedly stealing NT$800 million from the Tuntex Group's subsidiary Tunghua Development in 1995 and investing the money in China.
Chen, who fled from Taiwan to China last August, is number six on a list of Taiwan's 10 most wanted criminals issued by the Ministry of Justice in late November and was subject to an all-points bulletin after repeatedly refusing to appear at hearings on his alleged offenses.
Describing himself as a "political refugee," the fugitive businessman also accused the Office of the President of becoming "a center for shady 'black and gold' political corruption."
Chen You-hao wrote that he began to doubt President Chen's promise to wipe out corrupt "black and gold politics" after having "close dealings"with two of the president's "confidants," namely Chen Che-nan (陳哲男), now a deputy presidential secretary-general, and Chang Ching-sen (張景森), now a vice chairman of the Council for Economic Planning and Development.
Chen You-hau claimed that he had met with Chen Che-nan on many occasions before the 2000 presidential election and alleged that "each time I gave him cash to help finance Chen Shui-bian's presidential campaign."
The former Tuntex chairman also related having several encounters with Chang when the latter was deputy Taichung City mayor.
"It is regrettable that Chen You-hau has made accusations against President Chen in an insinuating manner," said Huang, who declared that Chen You-hau should have produced solid facts or evidence to back his allegations.
Noting that the "open letters" were first released by opposition Kuomintang and People First Party lawmakers, Huang stated that the action cannot avoid suspicion of having been a politically motivated ploy ahead of the March 20 presidential election. "This was an evil trick for political purposes," Huang charged.
The presidential spokesman also noted the efforts and achievements of President Chen's administration in promoting "sunshine" politics and cracking down on "black" gangsters and "gold" business influence in politics, efforts which have led to arrests, indictments and convictions of numerous businessmen formerly influential under the former Kuomintang regime, including Chen You-hau.
In addition, Wu Nai-jen (吳乃仁), a spokesman for the president's re-election campaign, related that not only is Chen You-hau a major suspected financial criminal, but that the former Tuntex chairman had admitted in a Control Yuan investigation to having contributed NT$100 million to the KMT.
"This is entirely a political move by the pan-blue camp," said Wu, who urged the fugitive to return to Taiwan as soon as possible to clarify his charges and face the judgements of the courts.
In a statement conveyed by Huang, Chen Che-nan denied having any "money dealings" with Chen You-hau, even though the presidential official acknowledged meeting Chen You-hau several times at the latter's initiative to "clarify" news reports that he had moved his capital to China while leaving huge debts in Taiwan."
Similarly, Chang Ching-sen faxed a written statement to the Presidential Office, saying that he once met with Chen You-hau in early 1999, but noted that he had then been unemployed and did not have any public post.
A source who was close to the Chen campaigns in 1998 and 2000 told the Taiwan News that Chen You-hau's charges were "illogical," as the two aides mentioned were both "fairly marginal" and "not involved in handing campaign financing."
Contemporary Monthly Editor-in-Chief Chin Heng-wei (金桓煒) said that the charges by the former Tuntex tycoon "should not affect" the presidential race. "The only possible problem would be if the political funds that Chen You-hao allegedly gave Chen involved some illegality or bribery," Chin stated.
"But even if that was the case, subsequent events have shown that Chen Shui-bian did not give Chen You-hao any special treatment," Chin noted.
Soochou University assistant professor of political science Sheng Chih-jen (盛治仁) also stated that the ex-tycoon's revelations "were not enough to influence the election situation." Sheng observed that Chen You-hao had not provided any concrete details or evidence to support his charges, but added that the DPP camp could be hurt if former Tuntex chairman succeeds in upsetting the tempo of the campaign.
"The objective of the 'green camp' must be to explain the situation clearly to get out of this difficulty," noted Sheng.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tehelka commission gives clean chit to Fernandes
HT Correspondent
New Delhi, February 4
Roughly two months ahead of the forthcoming general elections, the Justice S.N. Phukan Commission of Inquiry on the Tehelka expose on Wednesday said it had found "no impropriety" on the part of defence minister George Fernandes in the 15 specific cases of defence deals that it probed.
Sharply reacting to the one-man panel's report, Congress spokesman Abhishek Singhvi said it was ironical that an enquiry itself had become a scam.
Singhvi added that after Justice Venkataswami had ruled on the validity of the tapes and was proceeding further, the new arrival thought it fit to send the tapes for re-examination.
"While Justice Venkataswami was appointed by the Chief Justice of India, his successor was handpicked by the government without consulting the Supreme Court," said Singhvi.
After submitting the first part of the interim report to Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Justice Phukan would not commit himself to saying that Fernandes had been given a clean chit.
He, however, said that the recommendations contained in the 641-page report were "corrective" in nature. He strongly hinted that not all was right with the procurement procedures of defence equipment.
Justice Phukan said that two more reports would follow. One would focus on the allegations of Tehelka (revealed on tape as part of 'Operation Westend') and the other would deal with his findings on 37 people, including the role of middlemen, as also whether Fernandes' reputation was adversely affected or not.
The reports would be submitted to the government in March and June-July, respectively, Justice Phukan assured.
His interim report, based on 507 secret and top-secret files, primarily deals with 15 questionable defence deals between 1981 and 2000.
Observing that he was making an "exception" by addressing the media after submitting the report, Justice Phukan, a retired Supreme Court judge, said that "no impropriety was found" against the defence minister in the 15 deals.
But faced with a barrage of questions on whether he had absolved Fernandes or not, he appeared to be at pains to reiterate his earlier statement.
Asked whether procurement procedures were followed, Justice Phukan said the central theme of his recommendations was "improvement".
He said it took him over a month to author the report, the groundwork for which was mostly done by the Justice Venkataswami Commission.
The commission was set up in March 2001 soon after Tehelka played videotapes recorded in a sting operation which purportedly showed that bribes were paid for "defence deals".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rajiv Gandhi cleared of Bofors payoff stigma
HT Correspondent
New Delhi, February 4
In a landmark order, the Delhi High Court has ruled that there is no evidence to show that any public servant, including former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, received any bribes in the Bofors pay-off case.
In his 115-page order, Justice J.D. Kapoor observed that the CBI, despite investigating the case for 16 years, could not unearth any evidence against Rajiv Gandhi and former defence secretary S.K. Bhatnagar. "All efforts of the CBI ended in a fiasco...," Justice Kapoor noted.
The judge quashed charges of criminal conspiracy between public servants (Rajiv Gandhi and Bhatnagar) and the petitioners (Hinduja brothers and Bofors) that had been framed in a Special Court order in November 2002.
However, the court gave the go-ahead for framing of charges against the Hinduja brothers -- Srichand, Gopichand and Prakash -- for allegedly having entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the Union government in 1985-86 by representing that there were no agents or middlemen involved in the negotiation of the contract.
The court also ordered framing of charges against Bofors.
The court observed that the CBI had traced money received as commission by the Hinduja brothers and the other middlemen in the case, Ottavio Quattrocchi and Win Chadha. But the CBI had failed to establish any link to Rajiv Gandhi.
Justice Kapoor also noted that the army had had the decisive voice in selecting the Bofors gun.
The high court has now directed the chief metropolitan magistrate to hear the case on a day-to-day basis "as far as possible".
Justice Kapoor did not spare the CBI and media in his order. He said the case was an example of how "trial and justice by the media" could cause irreparable, irreversible and incalculable harm to the reputation of a person.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Embarras au Parti socialiste, lyrisme chez les chiraquiens
LE MONDE | 04.02.04 | 13h36
Les Verts et la LCR mettent en cause le pr?sident de la R?publique.
La d?cision d'Alain Jupp? de conserver ses mandats de d?put?, de maire de Bordeaux et de pr?sident de l'UMP "pendant la dur?e de l'appel"a d?clench? des r?actions embarrass?es au Parti socialiste. Son premier secr?taire, Fran?ois Hollande, qui a d?nonc? une "sorte de mise en sc?ne organis?e", voit "l'ombre de l'Elys?e"dans ce d?nouement. "C'est le choix de Jupp?, la pression de Chirac", a-t-il d?clar? au Monde, avant d'ajouter que, "sans doute, il ?tait n?cessaire pour le chef de l'Etat de pr?server la direction de l'UMP et de pr?venir tout autre d?bordement, politique et judiciaire". Laurent Fabius, d?put? PS de Seine-Maritime a estim?, sur France 3, que "Jacques Chirac a d? ?tre convaincant", mais en m?me temps il mettait en garde contre les "commentaires partisans". "Je comprends les raisons qu'il a donn?es. J'ai trouv? qu'il y avait dans ce qu'il disait une v?rit? humaine", a-t-il affirm?. Enfin, le PRG a not? sobrement que M. Jupp? avait "le droit" de prendre une telle d?cision "mais -que- ses engagements ?taient autres"...
Pour le porte-parole national des Verts, Yves Contassot, Alain Jupp? "r?pond ainsi aux injonctions de son chef, Jacques Chirac". "Au milieu d'un num?ro de fausse contrition larmoyante, M. Jupp? a eu un moment de sinc?rit? lorsqu'il a d?clar? : "On ne se change pas." Il utilisera toutes les ressources de la proc?dure, il joue la montre, comme le RPR l'a toujours fait. Je ne serai pas surpris qu'il y ait quelques nominations ou promotions, prochainement, ? la cour d'appel de Versailles."
"La justice, Alain Jupp? s'en fiche. Le fusible de luxe du pr?sident Chirac entend continuer comme si de rien n'?tait", a lanc? Olivier Besancenot, porte-parole de la LCR. Jugeant "scandaleuses" les "vingt minutes offertes ? la t?l?vision ? un responsable politique pour critiquer une d?cision de justice", il s'est demand? si "ces minutes seront prises en compte dans le cadre du d?compte du temps de parole donn? ? chaque parti pour la campagne ?lectorale pour les r?gionales".
A l'inverse, les r?actions ? la d?cision de M. Jupp? ont d?clench? l'enthousiasme dans les rangs de la majorit?. A noter cependant que les repr?sentants de l'UDF ont refus? de commenter l'?v?nement. " C'est son choix et il n'y a rien d'autre ? dire", a ainsi expliqu? Fran?ois Bayrou, son pr?sident.
Le premier ministre, Jean-Pierre Raffarin, a imm?diatement t?l?phon? ? M. Jupp? pour saluer "sa dignit? et son sens des responsabilit?s", et "l'assurer de son soutien dans ses d?marches". Le pr?sident de l'Assembl?e nationale, Jean-Louis Debr?, a exprim? "sa reconnaissance pour sa d?cision de poursuivre son action nationale et d'assumer son mandat de d?put?". Bernard Accoyer, premier vice-pr?sident du groupe UMP ? l'Assembl?e, a d?clar? : "Je crois que, ce soir, son autorit? est intacte."
Christian Poncelet, pr?sident UMP du S?nat, s'est ?galement f?licit? qu'" Alain Jupp? -ait- tenu ? assumer son devoir d'homme d'Etat malgr? les moments difficiles qu'il vient de traverser et ceux qui l'attendent dans les prochains mois". Dans la foul?e, le pr?sident du groupe UMP au S?nat, Josselin de Rohan, a form? "des v?ux pour que le jugement en appel efface les cons?quences dramatiques d'un verdict qui a atteint un dirigeant probe et respect? et -qui- risque de priver la France d'un homme d'Etat". Et Charles Pasqua, pr?sident du conseil g?n?ral des Hauts-de-Seine, a not? que "l'?preuve" v?cue par Alain Jupp? "lui a permis de fendre l'armure". Il a toutefois invit? "? relativiser tout cela -car- les Fran?ais ont d'autres sujets de pr?occupation".
Fran?ois Baroin, porte-parole de l'UMP, a estim?, sur Europe 1, que la d?cision de M. Jupp? "est un gage de stabilit? pour l'UMP, pour le gouvernement, pour la vie politique fran?aise dans sa majorit? actuelle". Il a d?plor? "le comportement de voyous de bas ?tage"de responsables de la gauche et le "silence crisp? qui prend peut-?tre la forme d'un sourire" de M. Bayrou. Mercredi matin, sur RTL, le ministre de l'agriculture, Herv? Gaymard, a affirm? : "Je crois qu'Alain Jupp? nous a donn?, ? tous, une grande le?on de d?mocratie, et tout simplement de classe."
A l'extr?me droite, le pr?sident du Front national, Jean-Marie Le Pen, a d?clar? que, "toute honte bue, Alain Jupp?, condamn? ? une peine infamante, poursuit sa carri?re politique comme si de rien n'?tait, contrairement ? ce qu'il avait annonc?".
Vincent Martinelli
* ARTICLE PARU DANS L'EDITION DU 05.02.04
M. Jupp? a admis sur TF1 le recours aux "emplois fictifs" qu'il avait contest? au proc?s
LE MONDE | 04.02.04 | 13h36
Il pourrait changer de strat?gie pour l'appel.
Dans moins d'un an, Alain Jupp? retrouvera sa place de pr?venu dans le proc?s en appel du financement du RPR. Parce qu'il estime ne pas "m?riter" la sanction prononc?e par le tribunal correctionnel de Nanterre - 18 mois d'emprisonnement avec sursis - et l'in?ligibilit? de dix ans qu'elle entra?ne, le pr?sident de l'UMP est d?cid? ? se battre et, comme il l'a dit mardi 3 f?vrier sur TF1, ? "essayer de montrer qu'-il peut- avoir un jugement diff?rent, moins s?v?re". Puis il a ajout? : "Pendant vingt ans, tous les partis politiques ont eu des difficult?s pour organiser leur financement. Beaucoup ont ?t? condamn?s, pas tous. Beaucoup d'organisations syndicales ont eu recours ? ce que l'on appelle, ? tort ou ? raison, des emplois fictifs."
CHERCHER LES FAILLES
Ces mots pourraient bien esquisser une nouvelle strat?gie de d?fense. Une fois pass?e la sid?ration du 30 janvier, M. Jupp? a eu le temps d'?tudier chaque attendu du jugement qui le condamne, et sans doute aussi celui de se repasser le film de ces trois semaines d'audience, d'en chercher les failles, voire les erreurs qu'il a pu commettre.
En ?voquant les "difficult?s de financement" rencontr?es par tous les partis ? l'?poque des faits et leur recours aux "emplois fictifs", m?me s'il a nuanc? cette derni?re expression, M. Jupp? se place sur un autre terrain que celui dans lequel il s'est enferm? en premi?re instance. Au fond, il ne fait que confirmer la phrase l?ch?e en pleine audience par son ancien directeur de cabinet, Yves Cabana, selon lequel "tout le monde savait" que le RPR avait recours ? des emplois fictifs. Lorsque la pr?sidente, Catherine Pierce, avait interrog? l'ancien secr?taire g?n?ral sur ces propos, il avait r?pondu, lapidaire : "Je ne partage pas l'opinion de M. Cabana. Personne n'a port? cette information ? ma connaissance lorsque j'ai pris mes fonctions", avait pr?cis? M. Jupp?.
Cette affirmation avait suffi, quelques mois auparavant, pour convaincre le procureur de la R?publique ? Nanterre, Bernard Pag?s, de prononcer un non-lieu en faveur de M. Jupp? sur la partie des emplois du RPR pris en charge par les entreprises priv?es. M. Pag?s estimait, en effet, que la connaissance qu'il aurait eue des emplois frauduleux n'avait pas pu ?tre d?montr?e. Se fiant ? cette premi?re victoire, M. Jupp? n'avait pas d?vi? de sa ligne devant le tribunal et n'avait pas pris la peine d'assister ? la premi?re semaine de proc?s qui, en droit, ne le concernait pas. Dans la m?me logique, il avait "formellement contest? la d?nomination d'emplois fictifs"pour les sept emplois pris en charge par la Ville de Paris qui lui ?taient reproch?s en sa qualit? d'ancien adjoint aux finances.
Ce fut sans doute l? son erreur. Les d?bats ? l'audience, marqu?s par les propos des chefs d'entreprise sur le "chantage"du RPR, par le refus de la hi?rarchie interm?diaire du parti d'endosser la responsabilit? d'un syst?me qui n'?tait pas la sienne, avaient affaibli la d?fense de M. Jupp?. Ses propos sur TF1 sonnent comme un d?but d'aveu.
Pascale Robert-Diard
* ARTICLE PARU DANS L'EDITION DU 05.02.04
Posted by maximpost
at 4:59 PM EST
