~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From LA Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Roman Polanski extradition delayed until next year, Swiss officials say

The Swiss government won't begin the extradition process of director Roman Polanski until sometime next year, officials said today.

The Los Angeles County district attorney's office wants to bring the famed director back to California for sentencing in a three-decade-old child sex case. Polanski admitted to having sex with a 13-year-old girl at the home of Jack Nicholson but fled to Europe before sentencing.

He was arrested in Zurich three months ago -- but it remains unclear exactly when the extradition process will  begin.

"There will be nothing more this year. At the earliest, we'll make an announcement early next year as to whether the criteria for extradition have been met," Folco Galli, a spokesman for the Justice Ministry, told ABC News.

Polanski has vowed to fight extradition, and legal experts say it could be a long process. He spent three months in a Zurich prison before being granted bail. He now is living under house arrest at his upscale Alpine chalet.

Swiss officials have said Polanski could face up to two years in prison if brought back to the U.S.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

U.S. sentences leader of Canadian drug gang to 30 years

Officials say British Columbia resident Clay Roueche's United Nations gang is 'equal parts corporate and violent,' and that his sentencing will mark a turning point in efforts to stem drug traffic.

by Kim Murphy

December 17, 2009

Reporting from Seattle

The leader of a violent Canadian drug gang known as the United Nations -- which has transported millions of dollars in cocaine, marijuana, firearms and cash up and down the West Coast -- was sentenced Wednesday to 30 years in a U.S. federal prison.

Officials said that the sentencing of Clay Franklin Roueche, 34, marked a turning point in British Columbia's attempts to stamp out a gang war and slow the flood of illegal drugs across the U.S.-Canada border.

In the late 1990s, Roueche, who once made his living as a scrap-metal salesman and welder in the comfortable suburbs east of Vancouver, founded the notorious U.N. gang, which prosecutors called both "corporate and violent."

Its multinational membership is known for a dedication to Eastern philosophy and adherence to the credo "honor-loyalty-respect," which is emblazoned on the organization's jewelry, T-shirts and gravestones.

The gang's battle with the rival Red Scorpions for control of the area drug market has bloodied the streets of British Columbia's Lower Mainland. At least 20 people died during the first few months of this year -- many of them in brazen attacks in nightclub parking lots and on busy street corners.

British Columbia drug organizations have made huge profits selling the province's powerful variety of marijuana, known as B.C. bud, in the U.S. and using the revenue to buy Mexican-imported cocaine. Some estimates have put the province's annual drug economy at $6.3 billion.

According to U.S. authorities, the U.N. gang ran helicopter shipments of marijuana into the mountainous backcountry of northern Washington state, then laundered millions of dollars of cash in Los Angeles and purchased cocaine for shipment back to Canada.

"To law enforcement in Canada and the U.S., Clay Roueche is the prototypical drug kingpin -- the leader of a dangerous gang of criminals who have taken over a multimillion-dollar drug trade," U.S. District Judge Robert S. Lasnik said.

"He was the one who started the U.N. gang, and that [marks] him clearly as the leader, with a capital L," the judge said. "The massive amounts of drugs, the highly sophisticated means of transport, the huge amounts of money and the pervasive presence of weapons all argue for a lengthy sentence."

Prosecutors said that Roueche would probably be eligible for parole after serving about 85% of his sentence.

Conversations secretly recorded by law enforcement showed that Roueche had avoided traveling to the U.S. in recent years, knowing he might face arrest there. But when he flew to Mexico in May 2008 -- ostensibly for a wedding -- he was turned away by authorities there and deported to Texas, where he was arrested.

A investigation of the gang in 2005-06, conducted with the help of undercover informants and wiretaps, resulted in the seizure of 2,169 pounds of Canadian marijuana, 335 kilograms of cocaine, $2.03 million in U.S. currency and five firearms.

"He told one witness he was sending $500,000 a week" in drug profits to be laundered, Assistant U.S. Atty. Susan Roe told the judge. "That's $26 million a year. . . . The size of this operation was enormous."

Roe said that Roueche ran a business "in equal parts corporate and violent" that employed workers to transport drugs to New York, Chicago, Texas and Los Angeles -- as well as Canada. He traveled to countries including Vietnam, Japan, the Netherlands, Lebanon, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates, China, Venezuela, India, Australia and Mexico, Roe said.

"Clay Roueche was a world traveler because he had a global business empire," she said.

Defense attorney Todd Maybrown argued that Roueche had admitted his crimes but should not be blamed for the full volume of drugs crossing the border. Most of the violence involving U.N. gang members saw them as victims, not perpetrators, Maybrown added.

The defendant, dressed in khaki trousers and matching shirt, sat staring at the defense table during the sentencing, his mouth resting tensely on his clasped hands.

"When a person is subjected to a horrible circumstance, they find out who their friends are. I'm proud to say I have some of the best friends in the world," Roueche said in a brief address to the court, referring to the letters of support written to the judge from former employers, family members and his young children.

"I can't change what's already done," he said. "Life is one big lesson, and it's important to learn from our mistakes. I promise I will not make the same mistakes. . . . I believe circumstances always change: What's negative today is positive tomorrow. That's why I live my life free of fear. At this point, I'll keep marching forward."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-vancouver-gang17-2009dec17,0,7944926,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mexico drug cartel leader killed in shootout with authorities

by Ken Ellingwood

10:17 PM PST, December 16, 2009

Reporting from Mexico City

The leader of one of Mexico's most notorious drug cartels was killed during a shootout with Mexican forces Wednesday, authorities said.

Arturo Beltran Leyva, who heads a Sinaloa-based gang, died along with four gunmen during a gunfight with Mexican navy forces in the city of Cuernavaca, south of Mexico City, the navy said in a statement. One of the gunmen committed suicide during the clash.

The Beltran Leyva group has been singled out by U.S. authorities as a major trafficker of cocaine into the United States. Beltran Leyva, known as the "boss of bosses," was listed among Mexico's 24 most wanted drug traffickers. The government had offered a $2-million reward for information leading to his capture.

Beltran Leyva's brother, Alfredo, was arrested early last year and remains in custody.

The gang was once allied with the Sinaloa trafficking organization headed by Joaquin "Chapo" Guzman, Mexico's most wanted fugitive, but the two groups fell out, spurring months of violence in Sinaloa that has left hundreds dead during the last two years.

The navy has increasingly joined army troops and federal police in the government's fight against drug gangs.

Three sailors were wounded by grenades during the battle, the navy said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-fg-mexico-druglord17-2009dec17,0,2584776,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Homeland Security rescinds Nation of Islam intelligence analysis

The Department of Homeland Security withdraws a 2007 analysis after deciding it broke rules on information collection.

by Sebastian Rotella

December 17, 2009

Reporting from Washington

The Department of Homeland Security issued but recalled a 2007 intelligence analysis about the Nation of Islam after deciding the document dealing with the black Muslim group broke rules on intelligence activity in the United States, officials said Wednesday.

Internal documents revealed that intelligence chiefs found analysts had "unintentionally and inadvertently" violated rules governing the collection, retention and distribution of information concerning "U.S. persons and organizations." The error took place during the George W. Bush administration, and steps have been taken to ensure it does not happen again, a Homeland Security spokesman said.

"DHS has implemented a strong and rigorous system of safeguards and oversight to ensure similar products are neither created nor distributed," spokesman Matthew Chandler said. "DHS is fully committed to securing the nation from terrorist attacks and other threats, and we take very seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people while fulfilling this mission."

The analysis under scrutiny, known as an intelligence note, was prepared in October 2007 by Homeland Security's office of intelligence and analysis, according to department officials and the documents, which were released Wednesday by the Obama administration in response to freedom of information lawsuits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy and civil liberties group.

The office helps coordinate intelligence between federal agencies -- principally the FBI -- and state and city law enforcement. Intelligence personnel in that office routinely write analyses based on information gathered by other agencies but do not work in the field, officials said.

The 2007 note was titled "Nation of Islam: Uncertain Leadership Succession Poses Risk," according to a Homeland Security report.

At the time, Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan had ceded control to an executive board and gone into seclusion to recover from complications of prostate cancer treatment. He has remained active in the organization, although his exact role is unclear.

Nation of Islam officials did not return calls for comment.

The intelligence note was distributed by e-mail to 482 recipients -- including federal intelligence officials, congressional staff and "at least one state government entity and one educational institution," a Homeland Security report said without naming them.

Immediately after the note was sent, the office's intelligence oversight officer and its associate general counsel "expressed concerns" about its "content and dissemination," documents said. Officials then contacted the recipients and asked them to delete the note.

A review found that the analysis had violated internal intelligence guidelines that protect civil liberties and govern the collection and retention of information on the Nation of Islam and other "U.S. persons," a supervisory official wrote.

"The intelligence note on the Nation of Islam should not have been written," the official wrote. "The organization -- despite its highly volatile and extreme rhetoric -- has neither advocated violence nor engaged in violence."

The official stressed that the violation had not been intentional and that during more than two years, this was the first among thousands of intelligence analyses about which questions had been raised.

The U.S. government long has been interested in leaders of the religious movement that melds black nationalism with the Islamic faith, said Zaheer Ali, a Columbia University researcher who focuses on the Nation of Islam. He said Wednesday's revelation recalled FBI probes in the 1960s and '70s.

"As a historian, it's not surprising that the federal agencies under a new name -- in this case Homeland Security -- would be so interested," Ali said.

Though no investigation has produced evidence suggesting the Nation of Islam poses a threat, such concerns linger, he said.

"In the minds of many, Islam poses a threat. Black people pose a threat. And the combination of black people and Islam pose a threat in the imagination of people," Ali said. "I don't think our intelligence community is immune to these kinds of perceptions."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-nation-of-islam17-2009dec17,0,6576680,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

White Americans' majority to continue until 2050, report says

The economic downturn and stepped-up immigration enforcement are slowing the growth of minority groups.

by Nicole Santa Cruz

December 17, 2009

As federal lawmakers continue to debate overhauling immigration law, the Census Bureau on Wednesday released a set of population projections that highlight the effects of immigration on the U.S. economy.

The country's financial meltdown and post-Sept. 11 immigration enforcement have slowed the growth of minority groups here. If those conditions remain the norm, whites would make up the majority of the population until 2050, eight years later than previously projected.

In addition, the Census Bureau last year predicted that the U.S. would hit the 400-million population mark in 2039. But if current migration patterns continue, the nation will not have hit that milestone by 2050.

The latest numbers, which supplement the 2008 National Population Projections , reflect four immigration scenarios -- high, low, constant and zero.

A falling immigration rate means a decreased vital workforce to replace the nation's baby boomers, said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution. "Young people bring new ideas, especially new people coming in from other countries," he said. "They're more globally aware of what's going on."

And, Frey said, the scenarios demonstrate that immigrants are an important part of the U.S. population, particularly in Southern California.

The nation is home to more than 308 million people, two-thirds of whom are non-Hispanic whites.

The latest projections, said demographics researcher John Pitkin, show "the stakes of immigration reform."

Pitkin said that if immigration continues to slow, it would affect planning and education. It also would mean fewer workers paying into Social Security and Medicare.

"The flow of immigration makes it more difficult to finance Social Security," Pitkin said. "It does slow down the economy a bit."

But it is hard to forecast immigration patterns, said D'Vera Cohn of the Pew Research Center.

"In terms of thinking of the U.S. and what kind of country it is, it's important to realize that its racial and ethnic composition is changing," she said. "It's hard to say if the lower immigration flow will become the new normal."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-white-minority17-2009dec17,0,57639,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Obama describes emotional toll of being wartime president

He tells ABC News about his reaction to deciding to send more troops to Afghanistan and greeting troops' caskets in Dover, Delaware. It 'hits you like a ton of bricks' to meet survivors, he says.

Associated Press

December 17, 2009

Washington

President Obama spoke in personal terms Wednesday about the weight of war, calling his middle-of-the-night trip to Dover, Del., to greet the remains of fallen soldiers the most powerful moment of his presidency.

Obama said that his decision to send 30,000 more troops into the Afghanistan war was not just an analytical decision about the best strategy.

"With this one, you feel it viscerally," he said in a White House interview with ABC News. "You lose sleep. You think about families. You think about history."

In late October, Obama made a surprise midnight flight to Dover Air Force Base to greet the flag-draped caskets of 18 Americans killed in Afghanistan. He took part in a solemn process that involved transferring the fallen from a C-17 plane to a transport vehicle after meeting with family members of those killed.

"Walking up the ramp of the transport plane by myself and seeing those caskets -- it's indescribable," Obama said. "It reminds you of the extraordinary courage and sacrifice that these young men and women are willing to make. But it also reminds you that you have the solemn obligation to make the best possible decision."

The president said he had foreseen the difficulty and weight of sending young men and women into war.

Yet he said, "When you're in the midst of making the decisions, though, nothing compares. And when you meet with the families and you talk to soldiers who've come home disabled as a consequence of their service -- the sheer emotional force of that, I think, is something you can't anticipate. It's something that hits you like a ton of bricks."

Obama spoke Wednesday with ABC News' Charles Gibson, the departing anchor of "World News."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-obama-abc17-2009dec17,0,5226943,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Washington Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

U.S. condemns Iran long-range missile test

by Matthew Mosk

The White House responded sharply Wednesday to word that Iran has tested an upgraded version of its most advanced missile, which is capable of hitting Israel and parts of Europe.

"At a time when the international community has offered Iran opportunities to begin to build trust and confidence, Iran's missile tests only undermine Iran's claims of peaceful intentions," said Mike Hammer, a National Security Council spokesman. "Such actions will increase the seriousness and resolve of the international community to hold Iran accountable for its continued defiance of its international obligations on its nuclear program."

The missile test was a provocative gesture at a time when the United States, the European Union and other allies are pondering tough, new sanctions aimed at persuading Iran to drop its suspected military nuclear programs.

But specialists on Iran said they did not believe the test was intended to stoke tensions as much as it was likely needed to help Iran continue to make progress with its increasingly sophisticated missile program.

"They're continuing to make steady progress on their missile program. This is a worrying fact," said Patrick Clawson, deputy director for research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "This is quite a sophisticated missile - better than the Scud knockoff they were using before."

The Sajjil-2, a two-stage, surface-to-surface missile that is powered entirely by solid fuel, has a potential range of 1,200 miles, easily putting Israel, parts of Southeastern Europe and U.S. bases in the Middle East within its reach. It is Iran's most advanced missile.

Mr. Clawson said it is believed Iran is still about three years from deploying the missile, but the test makes clear the research gains Iran has made in recent years.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the test provided more compelling evidence for those who are trying to persuade the international community to impose tougher U.N. sanctions on Iran - a move that could come early next year.

"This is a matter of serious concern to the international community, and it does make the case for us moving further on sanctions. We will treat this with the seriousness it deserves," Mr. Brown said after talks with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in Copenhagen, according to the Associated Press.

On Capitol Hill, Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, the second-ranking House Republican, also condemned the Iranian test.

"The United States must not fall silent in the face of Iranian aggression and provocation, and we must lead the international community to impose sweeping sanctions against the Iranian economy until Iran changes course," he said.

The House approved legislation this week giving the Obama administration new authority to impose sanctions on the Iranian regime, this time targeting international companies or individuals who sell or ship gasoline to Iran.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/17/us-condemns-irans-long-range-missile-test//print/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

N.K.-China accord feared in illegal arms

by Nicholas Kralev

Suspicions that China is facilitating illegal North Korean arms exports have gained new credence as authorities investigate a plane carrying weapons from Pyongyang that was detained during a refueling stop in Thailand.

The Russian-made Ilyushin-76, with a crew of four Kazakhs and one man carrying a passport from Belarus, was impounded Friday carrying 35 tons of weapons, reportedly including unassembled Taepodong-2 missile parts. The destination of the plane was not confirmed, but specialists said Iran was likely.

Larry A. Niksch, a specialist in Asian affairs at the Congressional Research Service who monitors North Korea's proliferation activities, said the Bangkok seizure raises serious questions about China's role.

"Two-thirds of the flight path of that plane was over Chinese territory," he said. "It should have raised Chinese suspicions."

The Obama administration brought up concerns about North Korean use of Chinese airspace for arms exports this summer - shortly after the adoption of a U.N. Security Council resolution banning such transfers - but has yet to receive a meaningful response, U.S. officials said.

"North Korean proliferation by air is an important matter for us, and [Philip] Goldberg brought it up during his meetings in July," said one official, referring to an Asia trip by the State Department envoy for the implementation of Resolution 1874. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was discussing private diplomatic communications.

The resolution, which China supported, lists detailed procedures on how to deal with suspicious vessels and illegal cargo on the high seas, but it is somewhat vague when it comes to air cargo.

In most cases, regardless of the destination of a flight originating in North Korea, it would have to refuel in China or at least fly over its territory, Mr. Niksch said.

China's state-run Xinhua News Agency quoted officials in Beijing in July as saying that inspections of air cargo should be carried out only if there is specific evidence of wrongdoing.

"China has been faithfully implementing relevant U.N. resolutions," Wang Baodong, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said Wednesday. "As to whether the North Korean plane violated U.N. resolutions, it's up to the U.N. Security Council to make a judgment."

Victor D. Cha, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a senior official in the George W. Bush administration, said Chinese officials see "it as too big a step for them" to inspect planes coming from North Korea. He said China's goal is "to balance just enough pressure to bring the North back to [nuclear] talks but not so much as to collapse them."

"It is one of the hardest lifts on the counterproliferation side with China. If they close off airspace, that would make a huge difference in counterproliferation efforts. It's easier to stop a boat than a plane," he said.

Mr. Cha, who was senior director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council under Mr. Bush, said the Bush administration "always raised this with China in the context" of the so-called Proliferation Security Initiative, which is aimed at preventing dangerous weapons and materials from falling into the hands of rogue states or terrorists.

U.S. nonproliferation policy in recent years has focused on seaborne cargo, but analysts say North Korea prefers air traffic for transfers of weapons, technology and scientists because it is harder to track. The incident in Thailand marks the first time air cargo from the North has been intercepted. Cargoes from several ships have been intercepted in recent years.

The Obama administration has been trying to persuade North Korea to return to six-nation talks on its nuclear program, but Pyongyang has been resisting. The State Department said Wednesday that U.S. special envoy Stephen Bosworth delivered a letter from President Obama to North Korean leader Kim Jong-il during Mr. Bosworth's visit to North Korea last week, but declined to share details.

Many questions remain about the plane detained in Bangkok, which was searched after a tip from U.S. intelligence, Thai officials said. One question is why the plane did not refuel in China. Another is whether Beijing was aware that the Americans were tracking the flight, Mr. Niksch said.

Despite initial reports that the weapons were destined for another country in the region - with Myanmar being the chief suspect - specialists now view Iran as a more likely candidate.

The five crew members have refused to talk to the police but have said in published interviews that their destination was the United Arab Emirates, which has been a transit point for clandestine North Korean arms shipments to Iran in the past.

As recently as July, United Arab Emirates authorities uncovered an arms shipment from North Korea at the Dubai port. The weapons found in Bangkok appear to be similar to those in Dubai, specialists and Thai officials said.

One Thai official familiar with the investigation was quoted Wednesday by Reuters news agency saying that "some of the components found are believed to be parts of unassembled Taepodong-2 missiles."

Pyongyang's long-range Taepodong-2 is a product of joint efforts with Iran, coinciding with Tehran's development of the Shahab-5 and Shahab-6 missiles. Iran on Wednesday test-fired another missile, the Sajjil-2, a two-stage, surface-to-surface missile that has a potential range of 1,200 miles.

"We need more information on the types of weapons found in Bangkok, but the preliminary information indicates that some of the weaponry is of the type that Iran regularly supplies to Hezbollah," Mr. Niksch said in reference to the Lebanese militant group.

"We know that Iran has rearmed Hezbollah substantially since the 2006 war with Israel," he said. "The discovery in Dubai should leave no doubt that North Korea has been involved in this."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/17/illegal-n-korean-arms-fly-in-chinese-airspace//print/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

U.S. tries to thin Taliban with jobs, cash offers

by Sara A. Carter and Nasir Khan

The United States and its allies are stepping up efforts to persuade Afghan insurgents to put down their arms by negotiating with representatives of Mullah Mohammed Omar and other Taliban commanders and offering cash and jobs to low-level fighters, according to Pakistani, Middle Eastern and U.S. officials and analysts.

The efforts, coupled with an increased U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, are meant to weaken the insurgency and promote a negotiated end to the region's violence.

"The strategy is to peel away so many fighters" from the insurgent chiefs that they will be left like "floating icebergs and have no one left to command," said Kenneth Katzman, an Afghanistan specialist at the Congressional Research Service.

Several Pakistani, Middle Eastern and U.S. officials said in interviews that Saudi and Pakistani officials, acting with tacit American encouragement, are talking with "second tier" Taliban leaders connected with Mullah Omar. The Washington Times reported recently that Mullah Omar has been hiding in the Pakistani metropolis of Karachi and was brought there with the knowledge of Pakistani intelligence.

"You've got a lot of players involved in the effort," said a U.S. official with knowledge of the talks, "not just within the U.S. government, but foreign partners, too."

The official, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because of the sensitivity of the topic, added: "U.S. intelligence isn't the lead on talking to members of the Afghan Taliban who may be interested in discussing reconciliation. But when it makes sense, the [U.S.] intelligence community is brought in for its expertise, relationships and judgment."

Such meetings were reported to have taken place in the Saudi holy city of Mecca in September 2008, but they continue elsewhere today.

Mr. Katzman said Qayyum Karzai, a brother of the Afghan president, participated in the 2008 talks. He also said there were meetings in January in Saudi Arabia and contacts in the United Arab Emirates.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, along with Pakistan, were the only countries that recognized the Taliban when it ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001.

A Western diplomat based in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, who asked not to be named, confirmed that Pakistani and Saudi officials are using their "connections and influence within Afghan Taliban to elicit some meaningful way to end the deadlock."

A senior Pakistani official who is familiar with the talks and also asked not to be named said that "the U.S. is trying to leverage the Taliban in order to find a resolution to the war in accordance with President Obama's strategy."

Saudi Embassy officials in Washington declined to confirm or deny the talks. But Noel Clay, a State Department spokesman, said the Obama administration supports "efforts towards reconciliation with the Taliban as long as certain criteria are met."

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton laid out those criteria in a speech in July. "We and our Afghan allies stand ready to welcome anyone supporting the Taliban who renounces al Qaeda, lays down their arms, and is willing to participate in the free and open society that is enshrined in the Afghan Constitution," she said.

Bruce Riedel, a former CIA analyst who headed Mr. Obama's first Afghanistan-Pakistan review, said such approaches "are worth exploring, but I would not expect to see tangible progress until the security situation changes" in Afghanistan.

"It's highly unlikely that people will switch from the perceived winning side," he said. "If you change the momentum on the battlefield and the Taliban is no longer seen as the winner, you may see the fractures come to the front."

The United States hopes to achieve that change of momentum by adding 30,000 troops to its force in the country.

Mr. Katzman and Mr. Riedel said it would be easiest to make a deal with followers of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a former mujahedeen fighter against the Soviet Union who has already authorized some of his followers to join the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Mr. Katzman said little progress has been made with Mullah Omar or another insurgent leader, Jalabuddin Haqqani.

Beyond talks with militant commanders, a second element of the U.S. strategy is to lure rank-and-file fighters with jobs and cash.

Mr. Obama, in his speech last month outlining his new Afghanistan strategy, spoke of "reintegration" of Taliban fighters into the Afghan army and police.

In testimony last week before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, said a force reintegration cell had been created to try to identify fighters who could be induced to join Afghan security forces.

Mr. Katzman said the cell, under the command of British Maj. Gen. Richard Barrons, would try to "standardize what a Taliban person gets if he surrenders."

U.S. officials say that starting salaries for Afghans in high-combat areas are being raised from $180 a month to $240 to better compete with the Taliban, which pays fighters $250 to $300 a month.

Defense Department spokesman Army Lt. Col. Mark Wright said the Pentagon is supporting commanders to win over the "$5- and $10-a-day Taliban-for-hire fighter."

"These fighters are not ideologues," he said. "So we'll use the [Commanders Emergency Response Program] money to bring them over so they don't feel like the Taliban is their only place to turn to. We don't necessarily pay them directly but can use the CERP for land projects and other necessities to win them over and reintegrate them."

Col. Wright added that U.S. forces also would focus on improving security because Afghans "are not going to come work for the U.S. or Afghan government if they feel their family is going to be threatened by the Taliban for their actions."

"This is a multi-pronged process," he said. "We need talks with Taliban, enhanced security and continuous efforts to lure back the low-level Taliban fighter."

Mr. Karzai, whose re-election was certified last month, has said repeatedly that negotiations with the Taliban could help end the war.

"The fight against terrorism and extremism cannot be won by fighting alone," he told the Associated Press recently.

Shuja Nawaz, director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council, said U.S. strategy is to "split up" the Taliban leadership. Mr. Nawaz expressed doubt, however, that Mullah Omar could be won over, calling him "the hardest nut to crack."

Ashraf Ghani, a former Afghan finance minister and presidential candidate, said that "there's a national consensus that we need a political framework for peacemaking."

Mr. Ghani told an audience at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington last week, "We've been attributing more unity to the insurgency than exists."

Many Afghans are concerned, however, that the Taliban is simply playing for time in anticipation of a U.S. withdrawal.

"What happens five years from now?" asked an Afghan official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "Will the Afghan people be under a centralized democratic government or the Taliban? Can the two live in harmony? It isn't possible."

Western diplomats in Pakistan said the Obama administration would allow the Taliban a role in the Afghan government but not a restoration of their harsh Islamic regime.

Ahmed Rashid, a Pakistani authority on the Taliban, said the militant group aims to restore that regime, which severely restricted the rights of women, forced men to wear beards and barred music and most other forms of entertainment.

A Kabul-based Afghan journalist named Ghaforzoy told The Times, "Of late, there are indications from the Taliban that they by posing as recalcitrant they want to win the lion's share in a future broad-based government."

Pakistan, which helped create the Taliban in the 1990s to defend Pakistani interests in Afghanistan against rival India, clearly wants to preserve its long investment in the militants, said Imran Khan, an analyst based in Peshawar.

"If Pakistan is ensured ... a friendly government in Kabul with minimum influence of India, it can do wonders to bring peace to Afghanistan," Mr. Khan said.

He said Pakistani interests in Afghanistan could best be safeguarded if a government includes Taliban and Hekmatyar's Hizb-e-Islami group.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/17/us-tries-to-thin-taliban-with-offers-of-jobs-cash//print/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What to expect from a nuclear Iran

by William S. Cohen

OPINION / ANALYSIS

With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's announcement that his country intends to build 10 new uranium enrichment facilities, it should now be patently clear that the effort to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons has failed.

For Tehran, the negotiations have been nothing more than one long stall -- a ruse to buy time, conduct more tests, and hasten the day Iran becomes a nuclear power.

The mullahs -- or the members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) who may be in charge -- intend to build the bomb. To date, no inducements from the West -- no offers of integration into international community, economic assistance or the lifting of modest sanctions -- have been able to deter them from their goal.

This leaves the United States and its international partners with three options:

First, persuade Russia and China to join in the imposition of more extensive, targeted sanctions against key financial and energy-related industries. It may be fanciful to think that the Iranian people, however courageous, could bring down the current regime that sits atop a million-man army and a brutally repressive and theocratic IRGC. But if the sanctions are sharp and biting enough, the possibility exists that Iranian leaders could change their conduct and even consider replacing certain colleagues whose words and deeds have produced such dire economic consequences. Admittedly, such a change of heart would not come easily, but a more moderate group of leaders might seize the opportunity to become a valued member of the international community rather than its pariah.

Second, set back the Iranian nuclear effort by military means - either by giving Israel our blessing to strike Iran's nuclear facilities or by joining Israel in such an attack. A military operation would be extremely high risk, requiring an extraordinary amount of intelligence and operational precision to be successful. The probability that such action would produce a devastating backlash by many Muslims across the ideological spectrum is high, with potential untold consequences to the global economy. A military strike is a dangerous option, but may prove unavoidable if diplomacy and other efforts fail.

Third, we learn to live with an Iranian bomb.

At this moment, we appear headed toward option three. So it is worth reflecting on what living with a nuclear Iran would mean for the United States, the Middle East and the world.

A nuclear Iran would be emboldened in its efforts to destabilize the Middle East and export its revolutionary ideology. Armed with nuclear weapons, Iranian leaders would enjoy a sense of invincibility. This could lead to bolder interference in Iraq and Afghanistan, greater mischief in Lebanon and more aggressive support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Tehran also could incite Shia populations in the Gulf States, thus threatening the survival of moderate Arab governments.

Iran's possession of a nuclear bomb would likely start a nuclear cascade across the Middle East, as nations threatened by Iran question U.S. security guarantees and seek their own deterrent capability. Within a decade, we could see the number of nuclear states grow dramatically, as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt and others seek nuclear weapons to protect against Iranian aggression. This would spell the end of nonproliferation. As more nations develop their own nuclear deterrent, our ability to control nuclear stockpiles and prevent the spread of nuclear materials to dangerous actors could collapse.

A nuclear Iran would itself pose an unprecedented proliferation risk. Tehran already supplies dangerous weapons to Hezbollah and Hamas, and might share nuclear materials with radical extremists. The result would be a growing risk that nuclear or radiological weapons will get in the hands of terrorists, who would not hesitate to use them against the U.S., Israel and other allies.

Some insist we could deter Iran much as we deterred the Soviet Union. This is far from clear. The leaders of the USSR dreamed of establishing a global communist empire, but they were also rational pragmatists whose first priority was survival in this world. The hard-line elements in Iran include religious fanatics who speak of ushering in the end of this world by hastening the arrival of the 12th Imam. While few Iranian officials are millenarian radicals, the existence of even one is too many. For such actors, the doctrine of "mutual assured destruction" might be taken as a promise, not a threat. We could wind up in a nuclear showdown with Iran, similar to the Cuban missile crisis, without the benign outcome.

These scenarios may seem far-fetched to some, but the terrible lesson of Sept. 11 is that "the future is not what it used to be." Rather than yield to the notion that the nuclear ambitions of Iran's current regime are unchangeable, we should redouble our efforts to bring about a change of heart in the regime through sanctions if possible; by other means if necessary.

• William S. Cohen is the chairman of the Cohen Group, an international business consulting firm. He served in the House and Senate from 1973 to 1996 and as secretary of defense from 1997 to 2001.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/17/cohen-what-to-expect-from-a-nuclear-iran//print/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EDITORIAL

Crazy for jihad

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Jihadists take note: The insanity defense may not work for you. On Tuesday, Naveed Haq, a self-styled soldier of Islam, was found guilty of aggravated first-degree murder and seven other counts related to a 2006 shooting rampage in Seattle. The prosecution successfully argued that Haq was a jihadi terrorist on a mission for martyrdom; the defense said that just proved he was crazy.

The facts are open and shut. On July 28, 2006, Haq forced his way into the offices of the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle and opened fire with two semiautomatic pistols, wounding five women and killing campaign director Pamela Waechter. Haq was a methodical killer. When the wounded Ms. Waechter attempted to flee, Haq ran her down and shot her in the head.

Haq explained his jihadist motives in detail after the shooting. He bragged about the killings in prison phone calls to relatives, tapes of which were played during the trial. "I'm proud of what I did," the murderer told his mother Nahida. "I'm a soldier of Islam." He said that she should be proud of him. "I'm a martyr now," he claimed. "I'm going to go to heaven." His mother argued with him that he was sick, that he was not in his right mind. "Yes I am," Haq said. "That's the path I've chosen. ... I did this for a reason. I wanted to be a martyr. I wanted to die on the battlefield."

Haq showed evidence of premeditation. He told police he had planned the attack over several days. He chose the Jewish Federation office as his target to make a statement about U.S. policy in the Middle East. He obtained the pistols specifically to conduct the attack and test fired them to see which was easiest to use. A police officer who pulled Haq over for a traffic violation just prior to the shooting found him calm and collected; he was not someone who simply snapped.

Like many terrorists, Haq was seeking publicity. While holding one of his victims at gunpoint, a pregnant woman he had already wounded, the killer told a 911 dispatcher he wanted to be patched through to CNN to - among other things - demand the U.S. military pull out of Iraq.

The legal defense conceded that Haq was the shooter, but contended that a "mental disease or defect" had impaired his ability to know right from wrong, which conforms to the standard for legal insanity in Washington state. Haq is an American born to Pakistani immigrants, had been raised a Muslim but for most of his life had not taken the religion seriously. He even renounced Islam for Christianity briefly before returning to the fold with a vengeance.

Haq's jihadist orientation was central to the attack, but the prosecution initially downplayed it. At Haq's first trial in 2008, the jury did not hear the revealing prison phone tapes because prosecutors thought they were irrelevant. The jury in that trial deadlocked over the question of Haq's intentions, and the judge declared a mistrial. The jury in the second trial heard the tapes, which seemed to have a clarifying effect on the question of intent. Declaring "I'm a soldier of Islam" leaves little to the imagination.

The Haq case has important implications for other domestic terror trials, such as the upcoming court martial of Fort Hood jihadist shooter Nidal Malik Hasan - or even the trial of al Qaeda mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and others in New York City. One lesson is that prosecutors should not downplay the jihadist motives behind such attacks. Terrorist ideology is the central framework for this type of violence, and absent that context, jurors may well misunderstand the nature and purpose of these religiously motivated attacks.

Another implication is that the insanity defense may not offer an escape route for terrorists. Violent jihadists may do things that normal people consider crazy, but they are not insane. They know right from wrong, they just think that killing innocents is acceptable behavior. They are clear in their motives; they see themselves as agents of a divine power waging war on the infidel. Given their premises, radical Islamists can justify everything from suicide bombing to Sept. 11-style mass murder.

Ignoring the jihadist impulse as a motive for attack, either because of political correctness or some other rationale, makes the insanity plea more plausible. A jihadist without the jihad is just a crazed killer.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/17/crazy-for-jihad//print/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Wall Street Journal

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Insurgents Hack U.S. Drones

$26 Software Is Used to Breach Key Weapons in Iraq; Iranian Backing Suspected

WASHINGTON -- Militants in Iraq have used $26 off-the-shelf software to intercept live video feeds from U.S. Predator drones, potentially providing them with information they need to evade or monitor U.S. military operations.

Senior defense and intelligence officials said Iranian-backed insurgents intercepted the video feeds by taking advantage of an unprotected communications link in some of the remotely flown planes' systems. Shiite fighters in Iraq used software programs such as SkyGrabber -- available for as little as $25.95 on the Internet -- to regularly capture drone video feeds, according to a person familiar with reports on the matter.

U.S. officials say there is no evidence that militants were able to take control of the drones or otherwise interfere with their flights. Still, the intercepts could give America's enemies battlefield advantages by removing the element of surprise from certain missions and making it easier for insurgents to determine which roads and buildings are under U.S. surveillance.

The drone intercepts mark the emergence of a shadow cyber war within the U.S.-led conflicts overseas. They also point to a potentially serious vulnerability in Washington's growing network of unmanned drones, which have become the American weapon of choice in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The Obama administration has come to rely heavily on the unmanned drones because they allow the U.S. to safely monitor and stalk insurgent targets in areas where sending American troops would be either politically untenable or too risky.

The stolen video feeds also indicate that U.S. adversaries continue to find simple ways of counteracting sophisticated American military technologies.

U.S. military personnel in Iraq discovered the problem late last year when they apprehended a Shiite militant whose laptop contained files of intercepted drone video feeds. In July, the U.S. military found pirated drone video feeds on other militant laptops, leading some officials to conclude that militant groups trained and funded by Iran were regularly intercepting feeds.

In the summer 2009 incident, the military found "days and days and hours and hours of proof" that the feeds were being intercepted and shared with multiple extremist groups, the person said. "It is part of their kit now."

A senior defense official said that James Clapper, the Pentagon's intelligence chief, assessed the Iraq intercepts at the direction of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and concluded they represented a shortcoming to the security of the drone network.

"There did appear to be a vulnerability," the defense official said. "There's been no harm done to troops or missions compromised as a result of it, but there's an issue that we can take care of and we're doing so."

Senior military and intelligence officials said the U.S. was working to encrypt all of its drone video feeds from Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, but said it wasn't yet clear if the problem had been completely resolved.

Some of the most detailed evidence of intercepted feeds has been discovered in Iraq, but adversaries have also intercepted drone video feeds in Afghanistan, according to people briefed on the matter. These intercept techniques could be employed in other locations where the U.S. is using pilotless planes, such as Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, they said.

The Pentagon is deploying record numbers of drones to Afghanistan as part of the Obama administration's troop surge there. Lt. Gen. David Deptula, who oversees the Air Force's unmanned aviation program, said some of the drones would employ a sophisticated new camera system called "Gorgon Stare," which allows a single aerial vehicle to transmit back at least 10 separate video feeds simultaneously.

Gen. Deptula, speaking to reporters Wednesday, said there were inherent risks to using drones since they are remotely controlled and need to send and receive video and other data over great distances. "Those kinds of things are subject to listening and exploitation," he said, adding the military was trying to solve the problems by better encrypting the drones' feeds.

The potential drone vulnerability lies in an unencrypted downlink between the unmanned craft and ground control. The U.S. government has known about the flaw since the U.S. campaign in Bosnia in the 1990s, current and former officials said. But the Pentagon assumed local adversaries wouldn't know how to exploit it, the officials said.

Last December, U.S. military personnel in Iraq discovered copies of Predator drone feeds on a laptop belonging to a Shiite militant, according to a person familiar with reports on the matter. "There was evidence this was not a one-time deal," this person said. The U.S. accuses Iran of providing weapons, money and training to Shiite fighters in Iraq, a charge that Tehran has long denied.

The militants use programs such as SkyGrabber, from Russian company SkySoftware. Andrew Solonikov, one of the software's developers, said he was unaware that his software could be used to intercept drone feeds. "It was developed to intercept music, photos, video, programs and other content that other users download from the Internet -- no military data or other commercial data, only free legal content," he said by email from Russia.

Officials stepped up efforts to prevent insurgents from intercepting video feeds after the July incident. The difficulty, officials said, is that adding encryption to a network that is more than a decade old involves more than placing a new piece of equipment on individual drones. Instead, many components of the network linking the drones to their operators in the U.S., Afghanistan or Pakistan have to be upgraded to handle the changes. Additional concerns remain about the vulnerability of the communications signals to electronic jamming, though there's no evidence that has occurred, said people familiar with reports on the matter.

Predator drones are built by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. of San Diego. Some of its communications technology is proprietary, so widely used encryption systems aren't readily compatible, said people familiar with the matter.

In an email, a spokeswoman said that for security reasons, the company couldn't comment on "specific data link capabilities and limitations."

Fixing the security gap would have caused delays, according to current and former military officials. It would have added to the Predator's price. Some officials worried that adding encryption would make it harder to quickly share time-sensitive data within the U.S. military, and with allies.

"There's a balance between pragmatics and sophistication," said Mike Wynne, Air Force Secretary from 2005 to 2008.

The Air Force has staked its future on unmanned aerial vehicles. Drones account for 36% of the planes in the service's proposed 2010 budget.

Today, the Air Force is buying hundreds of Reaper drones, a newer model, whose video feeds could be intercepted in much the same way as with the Predators, according to people familiar with the matter. A Reaper costs between $10 million and $12 million each and is faster and better armed than the Predator. General Atomics expects the Air Force to buy as many as 375 Reapers.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126102247889095011.html?mod=article-outset-box#printMode

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

German Donation Launches Fund for Auschwitz Memorial

BERLIN -- Germany will contribute €60 million ($87.2 million) to a new endowment for the Auschwitz memorial in Poland, half the money preservationists say they need for upkeep and repairs at the site of the Nazis' most notorious concentration camp.

The agreement, which comes after 10 months of talks between representatives for the Auschwitz foundation and German officials, significantly eases concerns about the memorial's future funding.

Germany is the first country to commit to the project. Its commitment was crucial because the more than 40 countries asked to contribute -- including the other European Union nations, the U.S., Israel, Russia and Brazil -- were waiting on Germany before finalizing their own commitments.

"It is an expression of our historic responsibility," said German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle of the contribution to the endowment.

Since the end of the war, the Polish government has paid for much of the upkeep at the nearly 500-acre compound west of Krakow. Auschwitz was the largest camp the Nazis built to intern and murder Jews and other prisoners during World War II.

The endowment will provide an additional €3.5 million to €5.5 million in interest annually to protect Auschwitz-Birkenau's complex of buildings, ruins, and expansive archive of documents and prisoners' belongings, said Jacek Kastelaniec, managing director of the foundation established in January to build the endowment.

"If we achieve this goal, it will mean the safety, the authenticity of this place is secure," Mr. Kastelaniec said.

Mr. Kastelaniec said nations other than Germany have yet to name a figure for their own contributions.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and governors from the country's 16 states agreed to the pledge in a meeting Wednesday in Berlin. The federal government and states will each provide half of the money, which the foundation has asked to be paid in installments over five years.

Mr. Westerwelle, whose office led the negotiations, has taken strides to improve relations with Poland since he assumed office with the new German government in October.

Mr. Westerwelle opposed the appointment of a controversial German politician and member of Ms. Merkel's party to a board overseeing the creation of a center documenting the expulsion of Germans from Eastern Europe after World War II. The politician, Erika Steinbach, is a lightning rod for lingering distrust between Germany and Poland.

German and Polish leaders still spar occasionally over proper compensation and remembrance of the war that ended more than 60 years ago. But Mr. Westerwelle has struck a notably conciliatory tone in Polish relations.

More than one million people, mostly Jews, were killed in gas chambers or worked to death at Auschwitz, which the Nazis built after invading Poland in 1939.

The complex contained three camps and at least 36 sub-camps that were built outside the town of Oswiecim in southern Poland between 1940 and 1942.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126100402980394555.html#printMode

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OPINION EUROPE

How to Stop Iran

The West has reached a defining moment in its bid to prevent the rogue state from going nuclear.

The lack of progress in negotiations with Iran, together with the latest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran's announcement that it would develop new enrichment facilities, all point toward an inconvenient truth: Iran is not only not serious about negotiating in good faith. It is also very likely that it has, for more than a decade now, concealed a significant part of what appears to be a major nuclear military effort. This week's revelations about Iran's recent work on warhead design underscore the point. No country has ever gone so far along the road toward the acquisition of a nuclear military capability without actually developing one.

Iran could well stop at the threshold of such capability, letting it be known to all specialists that it has a military capability without openly deploying it. This would still leave it uncertain, in the eyes of the public, whether it really has an effective nuclear arsenal. But this would not change much in practical terms. Western decision makers are now at a defining moment.

Politically, no Israeli prime minister could survive the fact that Iran became a nuclear-armed state, officially or unofficially, on his watch. The pressure on the Israeli government to do something to counter Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons would be so strong that it could well be tempted to play a desperate gamble, regardless of any security guaranties that the U.S. might offer.

Similarly, no U.S. president (especially one endowed with a Nobel Prize) could escape blame for having let Iran become a nuclear-weapon state by consistently underestimating its ability to conceal its preparations. The intelligence community's credibility would be devastated, and the indecision by successive administrations (Clinton, Bush and now Obama) to quash a program that has been suspected for 15 years and openly known for seven would be seen as a failure of major proportions.

What's more, the message sent to all U.S. and Western allies in the Gulf region would be dire. For all the promises made to these allies, the West has been unable to prevent a rogue state—one intent on destabilizing their societies, the strategic balance in the Middle East and beyond, and the oil market—from acquiring nuclear weapons that will make it much more difficult to compel it to behave prudently.

Last but not least, the nuclear non-proliferation regime, which has been significantly weakened by the North Korean antics and the Iranian finessing, would be close to collapse: If Iran has nukes, the temptation for countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey, among others, to equip themselves with such weapons would be almost irresistible. The 2010 review conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty would be rendered a feckless pantomime, with almost as little effect as those aimed, between the two world wars, at preventing armed conflict.

It is now necessary, therefore, to plan for the worst—some form of military constraint upon Iran. It is urgent that the U.S., Great Britain and France, together with Israel if possible (in a discreet and deniable way, of course), gather and try to reach agreement on how to terminate the Iranian nuclear program militarily. Those three permanent members of the U.N. Security Council should not be cowed by the argument—which has already been deployed repeatedly by Iranian advocates and idiots utiles —that such an endeavour would be akin to pitching "the West against the rest." They would actually be exercising an implicit mandate on behalf of all the states that have renounced nuclear weapons and do not accept being threatened and bullied by rogues.

How could this be done? The experience of the 1962 Cuban crisis provides an interesting precedent. Applying pressure on the Iranians by interdicting any imports or exports to and from Iran by sea and by air would send a message that would undoubtedly be perceived as demonstrative by Tehran. Additionally, reinforcing the Western naval presence inside or immediately outside the Gulf would make it clear to the Iranians, without infringing on their territorial waters, that they (and all states dealing with them) are entering a danger zone. In parallel to this slow strangulation, measures should be taken to deter Gulf states (such as Dubai) from engaging in any trade or financial transactions with Iran and to encourage them to freeze Iranian assets in their banks. This should not be too difficult, as the threat of disconnecting any renegade from the Swift system would be sufficiently persuasive in the current circumstances, in which Dubai sorely needs international financial assistance.

It might be necessary to go beyond that and actually resort to force to prevent the Iranians from achieving nuclear military capabilities. Planning for a massive air and missile attack on Iran's nuclear facilities (known and suspected) should be considered seriously, and this planning made public (at least partially) to convince Iran that the West can not only talk the talk, but also walk the walk. Such planning should also, to the extent possible, involve NATO, against the territory of which there is little doubt that the majority of Iranian missiles and nuclear weapons would be targeted (if only because they cannot yet reach the U.S.). The U.S., U.K., French and Israeli intelligence services should better co-ordinate what they know, and contributions from others should also be welcome, as well as any information that could be provided by internal opposition movements in Iran.

The idea here is simple, and has been expressed many times by theoreticians of deterrence: When one plans for war, when one deploys forces and rehearses military options, one actually conveys a message. Deterrence is about dialogue. Whether the Iranian government would listen to it is uncertain. But at least it would have been properly warned.

The time for diplomacy has passed. Iran must cave in, and quickly. If the West is not prepared to force it to comply with its commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, this in effect means that the treaty is dead and that the Gulf countries are being abandoned—stealthily, but nonetheless very definitely. It also means that the non-proliferation regime is, for all practical purposes, dead. Is this really what we want?

Mr. Debouzy is a lawyer and a former specialist in nuclear military affairs and intelligence for the French government. He writes here in a strictly personal capacity.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704541004574599610512260066.html#printMode

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the FBI

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.