Zimbabwe has been on the verge of political upheaval following last month's elections. Last week a Chinese cargo vessel packed with Chinese made arms docked in Durban, SA, with the intention to offload the cargo that was to be transported on to Zimbabwe. South African Trade Union Workers have since refused to offload the cargo and actually helped block the offloading out of fear the the incumbent Zimbabwe government will use the weapons to attack and intimidate opposition supporters. Today the boat reportedly headed back for China. Following the intended Chinese shipment, we wanted to examine the views of the Chinese, Zimbabweans and opposition sources, some which claim for deeper Chinese involvement in support of the incumbent Zimbabwean government, including the existence of Chinese military personnel in , to see if we can bring some clarity to the role, if any, that China is playing in the current turmoil in Zimbabwe.

Background:
For background summary info see: Opposition ‘Clear Victor’ in Zimbabwe, U.S. Says
For more information, including on a $240M arms deal conducted in 2004 between China and Zimbabwe, see: Chinese Supply of Weapons to Zimbabwe Blocked

Chinese:
Xinhua the official Chinese news Agency has reported scarcely on the Zimbabwe elections. In general they have maintained China's policy not to interfere with other states Sovereign matters and claim this shipment was a "regular" arms shipment. Today they issued the following report Zimbabwe 'free to source arms from any country' quoting a statement by a Zimbabwean minister at a press conference.

Zimbabwe:
The Herald, the voice of Mugabe and Zanu-PF the ruling party, has of course been critical of foreign medias attention to the matter and have asserted Zimbabwe's governments right to the arms, while stressing the strong relationship with China.  As in today's article:  China Clears Air on Arms Shipment, while at the same time reporting on alleged election fraud by the opposition: More ZEC Officials Arrested for Electoral Fraud

Opposition Sources:
This is Zimbabwe, a well written, anti Zanu-PF blog, provides interesting reporting on alleged abuse of the Zimbabwe government/army on opposition. The blog also cites reports from other publications that the arms boat discussed may actually be headed for Angola. However more importantly the blog reports on April 16th of the possible existence of Chinese soldiers in Mutare Zimbabwe: Chinese Soldiers Seen in Mutare.

Following the American Intelligence assessment stating that Iran halted its nuclear weapons efforts, we thought it would be interesting to compare the Iranian reaction as reported in the Western Press to the reaction in Iranian Press.
In the Western Press it was fairly mildly reported that Ahmadinejad called the US intelligence report a 'victory' for Iran's nuclear program even stating in some places that it was a shot against the Iranian enemies. In The Iranian press the news was celebrated with strong words of praise for the Iranian efforts, vows to continue and increase the nuclear efforts and condemnation for the US.

Baztab News, an Iranian newspaper reports that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that the US intelligence report on the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programs shot a bullet into the head of all ill-wishers of the Iranian nation. In Press TV, the website of the official Iranian English language news network, Ahmadinejad is quoted saying " The report released by 16 US spy agencies which signifies the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activities has put an end to the dreams... . Today the site followed up, reporting that Ahmadinejad is looking to build 50,000 centrifuges for Uranium enrichment. Another interesting item in the site, though unrelated to the latest report, is a report on the Islamic Republic of Iran's Broadcasting invitation to participate in a caricature contest about US Policy Toward Iranian Nuclear Program. Finally in the official site of President of the Islamic Republic of Iran (i.e Ahmadinejad), Ahmadinejad warns certain countries that if they do not change their behavior, he will change it for them.

We are continuing this series that started with the bombing of the Bhutto procession and continued with the imposition of Emergency rule.

General Public Forums

Seeing what is written in the forums gives a view of what what the public thinks although it is not completely representative (the people who post are younger and more technology savvy in general).

Net Pakistani Forum's, although messy, provide a diverse view of the situation. Quite a few posters supporting the Musharraf's move, as can be seen in the survey on the site Who can run the country better?,which shows that among the users of the site most support Musharraf with Nawaz Sharif a distant second. This seems to be in contradiction to a previous survey that shows that the large majority of users think Musharraf imposed emergency rule for his own interest: Who forced Musharraf to impose emergency. But is consistent with many postings that say the imposition of Emergency Rule was either "not surprising", but wrong or "necessary", although most hope it will be short lived.

A different very good forum that shows very diverse, but generally well voiced views is the forum of Muziq Pakistan, a popular Pakistani music site. The thread titled Emergency in Pakistan  provides many views condemning the move as dictatorial, but others defending Musharraf saying there is no one else who could bring order to Pakistan.

Opposition

Jamaat-e-Islami the Islamist party published a new item in which it claims to reached agreements to cooperate with the PML (Pakistani Muslim League), the party of Nawaz Sharif, the exiled former Prime Minister. In this article the claimed that the leaders of both parties directed workers to collect information on police and administrators that are harming lawyers and "political workers", so they can be held accountable after Musharraf's rule ends: Jamaat, PML (N) joins hand to agitate against Musharraf Martial Law

The PML the PML website does not mention anything about Jamaat-e-Islami and actually says they have contacted the PPP (Pakistan People's Party, headed by Bhutto) to coordinate efforts (and it is unlikely that the PPP will be involved in any efforts with the Jamaat) for more see the PML website.

We thought it essential to add an update following Musharra's declaration of Emergency (Military) Rule to our last item on the bombings on Bhutto's welcome procession. For a very good review of the situation and its causes see:
Pakistan Emergency Amidst Growing Talibanization

Pakistani Press:
Dawn, Pakistan's most read English language paper, which prior to the anouncement was very critical of Musharraf seems to have lowered its tone and seems to beleive that Musharraf does not seek to maintain military rule in the long term as can be seen Beyond emergency rule
Another popular paper, the News (the English version of Jang) condemns Musharraf primarily for media controls, but also takes an ambiguous view about his intentions and the direction of Pakistan: The Saturday surprise and after

Islamist Sources:
Jamaat-e-Islami naturally condemns the actions and is trying to mobalize people to protest claiming this is a US led move as can be seen in Qazi declares movement against military dictatorship
Very little on Lal Masjid other than a short claim that Emergency Rule was imposed only due to them: Emergency Imposed in Pakistan!

Intro:
First, I would like to point out that Pakistan related items are very interesting for the type of discussion that we are conducting, because of the relatively free and diverse press and other sources and because of the wide use of the English language.

The much anticipated return of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto to Pakistan after 8 years in exile was marred by disaster as unkown assailants set of explotions (supposed suicide bombings), killing more than 136 (according to most Western sources). See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Karachi_bombings for more about the bombing.

Following the bombing there began speculation regarding the perpetrators. Western press generally tended to point to the Islamists (primarily Taliban and Al Qaida), but various assumptions were made in Pakistan including by Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, the leader of Musharraf's party, who said Bhutto and her husband arranged the attack to stir up public sympathy. A good summary of the Western view and the divergent views in Pakistan can be found in Robert Novak's article Pakistan's Musharraf needs Bhutto, and U.S. may too in the Chicago Sun-Times.

Pakistani Press:
Much of the Language Pakistani press have blamed the same sources as the Western press (i.e. the Islamists) but have also been putting responsibility on different elements in the "Authorities" (as has Bhutto) as can be seen in a fairly thorough opinion piece in Dawn, the oldest English language paper, titled A nightmare foretold.
The Daily Times, a secular and more liberal paper put the blame exactly and directly on Islamist sources, primarily Al Qaida, as can be seen in Editorial: Attack on Ms Bhutto was foretold

General Forums: Net Pakistani, a Pakistani portal and forum, which provides diverse info and links about beauty, TV and the news provides a good idea of what the non-Islamist fairly educated general population thinks . In its News and Current Affairs forum the comments on the news of the bombing  show the confusion and mistrust in the public as to who actually perpetrated this as summed up by "Riz Ahmad": "could be pro-taleban guys could be agencies/government could be "external" factors orr could be PPP itself...
whoever did it... its bad.. killed innocent lives.. made so many children orphans and so many wives widows n so on.... the list of affectees is long..."

Islamist Sources:
An interesting source is Jamaat-e-Islami website, the largest muslim (some will say fundamentalist) political organizaiton in Pakistan who state: "The mission of Jama’at-e-Islami and the objective of all its efforts and struggle shall in practical terms be the establishment of the Deen (establishment of Divine Order or the Islamic way of life) and in essence the achievement of Allah’s pleasure and success in the Hereafter." In an article published on the site Qazi deplores blast in Benazir welcome rally, the president of Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), the opposition coalition between the religious-political parties, blames the government and police very directly. He said agencies always come out with the theory of suicide attack after such blasts to exonerate their own responsibility, although millions of people observed the blast in police van on TV."
Another interesting source is the forum of the Red Mosque Lal Masjid and the adjacant Jamia Hafsa Madrassa, which has tried to enforce Sharia law in its area until it was sieged by police in July. The Jamia press release on the matter is very harsh blaming Bhutto and Musharaf  of their murderous ways.  A corresponding Lal Masjid press release is just as harsh.

Intro:

Since it was discovered in 2002 that Iran has renewed its efforts to acquire nuclear capabilities, the topic has been a major press item. The related possibility of Iran possesing nuclear weapons is often presented in Western media as the greatest forseable risk to global stability. As such the West has been trying to halt Iran's nuclear development efforts through sanction and threats, including the threat of military action. Russia, which has been building one of the Iranian power plants, and China have been somewhat ambiguous about their desires and have often prevented various measures proposed primarily by the US and in the recent past, France.

Following Putin's meeting yesterday with Ahmadenijad, in which, he stated that Iran has the right to nuclear power and warned the against the use of force and Bush's subsequent speach today in which he warned that a nuclear Iran would result in World War III, we thought it would be interesting to get some insight into the Russian view on Putin's visit and a Nuclear Iran.

Summaries:
For comprehensive summaries of the Iranian Nuclaer program see:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran
and
www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke.htm

The Russian View:
Presenting the official view the government funded RIA Novosti or Russian Information and News Agency presents a good summary of the view of the relations between the two countries in the article Vladimir Putin's first visit to Iran, published on Oct. 15th, with the main theme that "Iran has proved to be a good partner and one that Moscow would like to keep. " the Agency also published a couple articles on the Russian Commitment to complete the Busheher nuclear plant on time.
ITAR-TASS, another official news agency presents a good summary of Putin's and Ahmadinejad's statements following the meetings, which again retierates the good relations and agreement between the two on many foreing policy issues.

Some of the most interesting Russian sources are that Nationalist papers and websites. One good sources is the site Pravda.ru, which is not to be confused with  Pravda, the popular daily newspaper. Pravda.ru claims to be different by taking the "pro-Russian approach". The paper has an opinion article following the visit about the different approaches taken by Russia's President and the Empire's despot (the US is often referred to as the Empire by the Nationalist sites) titled:Two men - one sane, one not. The article insinuates that the US, not wanting Putin to go to Iran, may have had something to do with the warnings Putin received about a planned assasination attempt.
Another good source is the Strategic Culture Fondation, which a few days before the meeting putlished, on the 12th of October published Vladimir Putin’s Visit to Iran: A Breakthrough is Needed which states that "In conditions of U.S. aggressive lobbying of its interests only heads of the Russian and Iranian states that have had long historic ties, can provide a corresponding impetus..." and on the advantages of a good relationship between the two countries "A new war against Iran can be unleashed under any pretext other than its factual or mythical “nuclear ambitions”. It can be much more prosaic, linked with its oil..... The situation will give more headaches to our “partners” in what is known as the “anti-terrorist coalition”, which is without any exaggeration “a myth at its finest."

*We are still waiting for the commentary of another more extreme source, which is always an interesting read, but updates infrequently - ARI.ru, the online Russian Information Agency, which in its principles published on its site they state "We think that the information field formed by the international (mainly Jewish) clique, which has taken over the best part of the mass media, is far from contributing to a thorough insight into the current events, misinforms and distract the Russians' minds from actual problems. Thus, it sideways contributes to the Russians DYING OUT." and that "What we need is a modern, original, authentic Russia, a country of free people who believe in God, love their Motherland, their nation and their own culture."

The below map represents information from the US Department of State
Intro:

Following the September 29th killing of 10 of the Nigerian African Union Peace Keepers (as they are referred to) at Haskanita base and the subsequent burning down of Haskanita village and reported deaths of 45 to 115 villages, we thought it would be good to introduce the conflict in Darfur and present some of the different involved parties points of view, presently focusing on the the massacre.

Conflict Summaries:
A fairly good, although outdated summary of the civil/tribal war (or genocide for those who prefer), including a description of the events and the roles of the different parties involiced including, the rebels groups (SLA/M, JEM), Sudanes forces, the Janjaweed, Chad, the UN and the African Union can be found at globalsecurity.org

Another good (though also 10 months outdated) description which also highlights the effect on the humanitrian situation in neighboring Chad and the Central African Republic (which unlike Chad, does not seem to be directly involved in the struggle) can be found at:
www.cfr.org/publication/12309/sudan_chad_and_the_central_african_republic.html


Official Sudanese Sources:
A good Government funded source is Sudan Safari, which blames a "Visible Hand" of an unnamed, yet "renowned international power" for the problems in Haskanita in Main analysis: Who is manipulating security in Haskanita? .

The  National  TV website is a decent source for finding out the Official Sudanese point of view. In general the site blames the rebels, primarily JEM for the situation (not so much SLA/M) for the situation and tried to downplay the severity.
A few days before the Massacre on Sept. 23rd:
JEM and Other Rebel Factions Main Cause for Strife In Darfur
The first mention of the Massacre was on Oct. 1st:
Government Condemns Attack against AU Forces at Haskanita
but nothing much more than that

Another source is SUNA, the Sudan News Agency, however the website is very hard to navigate and not very good in general. Today the Agency published an article
The Armed Forces affirm that it has nothing to do with what is going on at Mehajeria area
he Armed Forces affirm that it has nothing to do with what is going on at Mehajeria area

Rebel Forces:
For some background on the SLA/M view their Political Declaration.
For more information on JEM, see the sudanjem.com website (which is actually quite impressive).

A good source for the opinion of the rebels, which seems to be close to JEM's is the Sudan Tribune. On October 7th  an article was written: Sudanese army and Darfur militias burned down Haskanita – UN source. Today an article in the opinion's section was published: Why Sudan is behind Darfur’s Haskanita attack

Intro:

I will not get into the history of the conflict from the historical division of North and South Korea following the Japanese occupation at the end of WII and the subsequent Korean War. Nor will I get into the history of North Korean Nuclear armament, of which you can read more on the CNN mini-site about the recent North Korea Nuclear Tension.
But, only mention the most recent events.

In February's Six Party Talks North Korea agreed to gradual disarmament of its nuclear weapons program and to non-proliferation. The agreement was finally signed in September. Along the way there were some concerns and rumors that North Korea was helping Syria develop a nuclear program. Yesterday in a breakthrough at the continued talks North Korea apparently agreed to shut down its main reactor at Yangbon, including issuing out an invitation for a US team to start disabling the reactor next week. In addition to the aforementioned exciting developments today a historical meeting was held in Pyongyang between the South Korean President, Roh Moo-hyun and Kim Jung Il (the first since 200 between leaders of the two countries). The two signed a peace pledge (whatever that means).

In any case we thoug

ht it interesting to bring the North Korean point of view, although it is hard to come by.

North Korean Press:

Another reasonable source is the Naenara News Section. Naenara, the central online portal of North Korea. The site gives a reasonable idea of the press in the country, which is quite similar to that of Myanmar seen in yesterday's post (many congratulations to Kim Jung Il and leaders of foreign countries and condemnations of the US).
There is no mention of the talks or the North Korean Nuclear Program.  

Another source is the Korean Central News Agency of DPRK, the official North Korean news agency (although

in North Korea they are all official).
In this site there is a mention of the agreement reached in February:  
Third Phase of Fifth Round of Six-Party Talks Held
In September there is a mention of the rumors of nuclear cooperation with Syria:

Rumor about Secret Nuclear Cooperation between DPRK and Syria Dismissed
There are also several mentions of the Six Party talks held in September. However, there is no mention of the most recent agreement.
Kim Jung Il's meeting with the South Korean President does get quite a few headlines in the last few days.

And one great article speaking of "Proliferation":
New Technology for Frog Proliferation and Breeding Developed

Intro:

The protests in Burmar (our shortened combination of the disputed name) and subsequent crackdown by the ruling regime have become a major Western press item since Buddhist monks joined pro-democracy protesters following sharp price increases about a month ago (There were a total of about 18,000 articles in GoogleNews with Myanmar or Burma in the title in the past month compared with less than 8,500 in all of 2006). These protests have been presented by the Western press as a threat to the authority of the ruling military regime and have been compared to the protests that brought down the previous regime in 1988. According to Western press the regime has started to crack down on protesters killing many more then the 11 reported by the regime.

As foreign relations are concerned, China has been Burmar's main ally and trading partners (for an in depth look at these relations see: www.ide.go.jp/English/Publish/Dp/pdf/066_kudo.pdf published by the Japanese Institute of Developing Economies). China (and Russia) blocked a Security Council Resolution condemning Burmar earlier this week (they had blocked a similar resolution a year ago as well). 

Today though, both China and Russia voted in favor of a UN Human Rights Council resolution condemning the regime and urging restraint that was passed by unanimous decision.

Burmar Press:

In the New Light of Myanmar (unfortunately it is not possible to link directly to the articles so please use this link and browse to the respective dates), the official English language paper sanctioned by the ruling regime, there was not mention of the protests, but only the regular news of visits of foreign leaders, road building and the general progress of the country. In the past two weeks the paper has published a stream of articles about the protests. Initially the reports blamed various mysterious internal and foreign elements for inciting violence and urging the population from participating in gathering. In the past week they have directly blamed monks and urge them to not interfere in secular affairs. This may be a sign of justification of more and stronger action by the military.

The first mention of the events was on September 19th titled (and this is just the title):

"Destructive elements inciting instigation to grab power through short cut. Foreign radio stations airing exaggerated news, trying to instigate public, launching propaganda campaigns
Due to exaggerations, tricks and instigation by bogus monks, violent demonstrations break out in Pakokku, some monks stage protest walk in Sittway. Some Buddhist monks also march in procession in Yangon. People oppose any attempt to destroy peace and stability, wish Sayadaws to guide monks to follow Vinaya rules in interest of people"

On the 24th an article was published titled:

"Root cause of problems is perpetration of internal and external destructionists, who are jealous of national development and stability. Some global powers in collusion with group of destructioninsts from inside the nation inciting disturbances"

and another titled:

"State Sangha Maha Nayaka Committee has duty to reinforce and observe basic principles and rules and regulations and implement religious matters The directives state all the rules and regulations for the monks prohibiting them from participating in secular affairs."

On the 26th:

"Some monks and people enter homes. Saboteurs threaten families demanding them to join protest if not provide cash, kind. Authorities urge people to make complaints in person or on line to Ward PDCs, Township PDCs or local authorities against intimidations, extortions, coercion"

Chinese Press:

It is interesting to analyze the response in Xinhua, the official news agency of the Chinese government, initially ignoring the protests, then reporting what the Burmar regime does and gradually presenting independent information about the growth of the demonstration, which mimics the reaction of the Chinese government.

The paper does not mention the protests until September 9th, even publishing the following article on "Myanmar's move towards democracy" more than a week after the demonstrations started:
 Myanmar accomplishes first step of roadmap to democracy as national convention ends

The first mention of the demonstrations is on the 9th in an article that mentions some small scale protests and states that "Myanmar vows not to tolerate acts of instigating unrest"

In the next couple of week the paper occasionally brings statements from Burmar officials and the Burmar official media. Only on the 22nd does it print a first article about the continuation of the protests without presenting a point of view.  On the 25th the paper publishes two articles, one about the EU urging Burmar government to not use violence and the other of Germany urging the same.

On the 27th finally the paper publishes a Chinese government reaction: China urges restraint from all parties in Myanmar