As American troops move deeper into southern Afghanistan to fight Taliban insurgents, US officials are expressing new concerns about the role of fugitive Taliban leader Mohammad Omar and his council of lieutenants, who reportedly plan and launch cross-border strikes from safe havens around the southwestern Pakistani city of Quetta. But US officials acknowledge they know relatively little about the remote and arid Pakistani border region, have no capacity to strike there, and have few windows into the turbulent mix of Pashtun tribal and religious politics that has turned the area into a sanctuary for the Taliban leaders.

--Washington Post

AFGHANISTAN / PAKISTAN

White House Starts Review of Afghan Strategy - Peter Spiegel and Jonathan Weisman, Wall Street Journal. The White House began its review of the Afghan war strategy in earnest Tuesday, with senior administration officials meeting via videoconference with the top commander in Kabul, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, at the start of what could be weeks of debate over whether to send thousands of reinforcements. White House officials said President Barack Obama will join in the discussions Wednesday, when he is expected to meet with Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, among other top officials. The White House unexpectedly decided to review its strategy in Afghanistan after a series of recent setbacks in the war, including allegations of fraud following last month's presidential elections and surging violence throughout the country. It begins just days after Gen. McChrystal submitted his request for as many as 40,000 additional troops to the Pentagon. Some in the administration, notably Mr. Biden, have argued for a smaller military footprint and a tighter focus on counterterrorism as the best way forward. Advocates of such a shift point to the effective use of Predator drone strikes to kill Taliban leaders in Pakistan.

Obama, NATO Chief Agree on Afghanistan Strategy - Kent Klein, Voice of America. The secretary general of NATO says he agrees with US President Barack Obama's approach to the war in Afghanistan. The two leaders discussed strategy on Tuesday. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the leader of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, says President Obama is right to decide strategy, then troop strength, for Afghanistan. "The first thing is not numbers," Rasmussen said. "It is to find and fine-tune the right approach to implement the strategy already laid down. And all NATO allies are right now looking at McChrystal's review." Army General Stanley McChrystal, the US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has sent his evaluation of the situation on the ground to Mr. Obama and European leaders. Among other things, he is calling for more combat troops. In the Oval Office on Tuesday, the president joined Mr. Rasmussen in saying the NATO operation in Afghanistan is a team effort. "This is not a American battle; this is a NATO mission as well," Mr. Obama said. "And we are working actively and diligently to consult with NATO at every step of the way." Mr. Obama is considering whether to send more troops to Afghanistan to prevent the Taliban from again taking control of the country or to use special forces and unmanned spy planes to target al-Qaida in Pakistan. Either way, the president said US goals in Afghanistan have not changed.

NATO is in Afghanistan for the Long Haul, Says Anders Fogh Rasmussen - Giles Whittell and James Bone, The Times. The NATO Secretary-General assured President Obama yesterday that the alliance would stay in Afghanistan “as long as it takes to finish our job”. Anders Fogh Rasmussen and Mr Obama used their first meeting to present a united front that masked intense debate within NATO and the US on how to prevail in Afghanistan, given the crisis of legitimacy that has engulfed the Government of President Karzai since last month’s fraudulent election. Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary-General, said yesterday that the result of the election would be announced by October 7. Mr Obama has deferred a decision on new troop deployments until November at the earliest but is under pressure to provide General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, with as many as 40,000 reinforcements. Kai Eide, the top UN official in the country, called yesterday for more troops to train the Afghan security forces but he urged European nations to supply them - and stopped short of calling for more combat troops. The UN special representative in Kabul told the Security Council that “expanding the training, mentoring and equipping of the Afghan Army and police cannot be a US effort alone”.

Obama Calls Afghanistan NATO’s Most Important Mission - John J. Kruzel, American Forces Press Service. President Barack Obama today called Afghanistan the most important mission to NATO and underscored that the war there is a multinational effort. The president appeared with new NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen at the White House following talks that also covered missile defense and NATO-Russia relations. “We both agree that it is absolutely critical that we are successful in dismantling, disrupting, destroying the al-Qaida network and that we are effectively working with the Afghan government to provide the security necessary for that country,” Obama told reporters after the meeting. “This is not an American battle,” he said, referring to the 39,000 NATO forces fighting alongside 66,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. “This is a NATO mission as well, and we are working actively and diligently to consult with NATO at every step of the way.” Rasmussen also underscored the multilateral approach, saying Afghanistan is “not America’s burden or responsibility alone.” “It is, and it will remain, a team effort,” he said. Obama’s remarks today come after he recently received an on-the-ground assessment from Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top NATO and US commander in Afghanistan. The president said he wants a new strategy in place - one that weighs the outcome of the Afghanistan election review -- before committing more resources to Afghanistan. Rasmussen, expressing optimism in the Afghan missions, endorsed the president’s stance. “I agree with President Obama in his approach: strategy first, then resources,” he said.

UN's Top Afghan Envoy Supports Call for More Troops - Margaret Besheer, Voice of America. The UN's top envoy for Afghanistan, Kai Eide, has expressed support for the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan's call for more troops in that country. Eide told the UN Security Council Tuesday that more international troops are necessary to help train Afghan military and police forces. Eide said he did not want to get into the debate over the need for additional international fighting forces, but he called US Army General Stanley McChrystal's assessment of the war, "clear, straightforward and demanding." "We agree on the need to improve the strength and capacity of the Afghan army and police," he said. Later, he told reporters that the debate in Western countries regarding engagement in Afghanistan should be reason for concern for both the current and future Afghan governments. He also explained that he thinks more troops are necessary to support the country's nascent police and military. "I think that more troops are certainly needed, particularly to do one thing - we need to build up the Afghan security forces quickly - both the army and the police. That will, by necessity, need more troops, not only for the training, but for the mentoring in the field. It is quite inevitable," he said.

From McChrystal’s Mouth to Obama’s Ear - Peter Baker, New York Times. When President Obama looks at the screen in the Situation Room on Wednesday, he will find a face he has not seen lately except in newspapers. There, via secure video from Kabul, will be Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, his commander in Afghanistan, explaining directly to the president for the first time why more troops are needed. General McChrystal has not spoken with Mr. Obama since submitting his grim assessment of the war a month ago and has spoken with him only once in the 100 days since he took command of all American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. The lack of direct communication has generated criticism and fueled suspicions of strains between the White House and Kabul. Mr. Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, made a point of speaking with his Iraq commander roughly once a week at the height of the war there, a habit that forged a close working relationship between them even if it effectively bypassed the normal chain of command. Mr. Obama’s aides said he relied on General McChrystal’s advice but did not feel the need to duplicate Mr. Bush’s personal engagement with battlefield generals. Instead, they said, he receives weekly memos from General McChrystal and meets weekly with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Aides said the president had thoroughly studied the general’s report, and they noted that it was Mr. Obama who approved firing the last commander and replacing him with General McChrystal.

30 Afghan Civilians Killed in Roadside Bombing - Sean Maroney, Voice of America. Local officials in southern Afghanistan say a roadside bomb blasted a passenger bus Tuesday, killing 30 civilians and wounding at least 39 others. The latest violence comes days after a UN report declared August the deadliest month of the year for civilians in Afghanistan. The Afghan government is blaming the Taliban for the latest attack outside the southern city of Kandahar. No one has claimed responsibility for the attack, which killed dozens of civilians, including women and children riding on the bus. Afghan presidential spokesman Humayoon Hamedzada says authorities are investigating. "We are deeply sorry for the loss of life, but our provincial authorities and the security agencies have received instructions to complete the investigations," Hamedzada said. Tuesday's explosion occurred just west of the city on a highway where a similar blast killed three civilians a day earlier. Late last week, the United Nations issued a report that said it had recorded some 1,500 civilian casualties between January and August. August was this year's deadliest month, as the Taliban sought to discourage people from voting in the presidential election. The report also said almost three times as many civilian deaths were attributed to anti-government elements than to pro-government forces. The spokesman for international forces in Afghanistan, US Army Colonel Wayne Shanks, says NATO troops are working with local populations to clear the roads of Taliban bombs.

30 Afghan Civilians Killed as Packed Bus Hits Bomb Outside Kandahar - Martin Fletcher, The Times. At least 30 Afghan civilians were killed and 39 wounded yesterday when their packed bus hit a roadside bomb outside the southern city of Kandahar. The dead included ten women and seven children. Afghan authorities blamed the Taleban, and the bombing underscored the grave dangers faced by a civilian population as the eight-year-old conflict between the insurgents and the US-led NATO forces turns increasingly violent. A UN report issued last Saturday said that 1,500 civilians had been killed between January and the end of August, up from 1,145 for the same period last year, and that August was the deadliest month. Around 68 per cent of those deaths were the result of insurgent attacks, while 23 per cent were caused by Afghan and foreign troops. The bus destroyed yesterday was travelling from the western city of Herat. It hit the roadside bomb in the Taleban-controlled district of Maiwand 25 miles west of Kandahar, where three civilians were killed in a similar explosion on Monday. The dead and wounded were ferried to NATO bases and the city hospital.

Suspected US Missile Strikes Kill 12 Militants in Pakistan - Voice of America. Two suspected US missile strikes in Pakistan's semi-autonomous tribal region bordering Afghanistan killed at least 12 militants Tuesday. Local officials say that in the first attack in South Waziristan, missiles fired from an unmanned aircraft hit the compound of Taliban commander Irfan Mehsud, killing at least five militants and wounding six others. They say the compound, located some 60 kilometers north of the region's main town of Wana, was completely destroyed in the strike. Hours later, another missile hit militants associated with the al-Qaida-linked network of Taliban leader Jalaluddin Haqqani in neighboring North Waziristan. Officials say seven insurgents were killed in that attack. The region is a known hotbed for Taliban and al-Qaida militants responsible for attacks in Pakistan, as well as Afghanistan. Officials blame Mehsud's militant network for attacks against Pakistan's government and NATO supply lines. Militant strongholds in the tribal regions also are believed to serve as bases for launching attacks against foreign troops in Afghanistan.

Forward in Pakistan - Washington Post editorial. Pakistan - the "Pak" in the critical "Afpak" theater where the United States faces the twin threats of al-Qaeda and the Taliban - has taken a back seat in the emerging debate over US strategy in Afghanistan. That reflects some modest but significant good news: In contrast to last April, when many in Washington feared that Pakistan was in danger of collapse as a secular state, the civilian government and the army have rallied. The army has driven Taliban forces out of the Swat Valley near Islamabad and taken the offensive in neighboring districts of the North-West Frontier Province. Civilian political leaders have mostly ceased feuding, and public support for the anti-Taliban offensives has been strong. Closer cooperation between US and Pakistani forces has produced a stepped-up tempo of US missile strikes in Pakistan, and one major success: the killing in August of Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud, which appears to have produced at least temporary disarray in Pakistani Taliban forces. That's not to say that the Obama administration is close to achieving even its minimum political and military objectives in this nuclear-armed state. Though willing to tackle the ethnic Pashtun Taliban when its forces threatened the country's heartland, the army still declines to invade the areas where the Taliban operations against Afghanistan are based.

Decision Time for Obama - Michael Gerson, Washington Post opinion. As President Obama approaches a decision on the way forward in Afghanistan - the most historically consequential choice of his presidency so far - military leaders seem impressed with his decision-making process. During the next few weeks, Obama has scheduled considerable time to be personally involved in discussions. In the White House economy, presidential attention is the most valued commodity - coveted, hoarded and stolen. Obama's engaged, deliberate style has fans in the military. But there are also risks when arguments about military strategy are too public for too long. An enemy can try to influence the outcome of a debate with attacks and propaganda. Al-Qaeda's most recent video warns Europeans that they are about to be abandoned: "It won't be long until the dust of war clears in Afghanistan, at which point you won't find a trace of any American, because they will have gone away far beyond the Atlantic." There are also risks for American military morale. Soldiers in Afghanistan are going outside the wire, dismounting from their vehicles and mingling with the people - increasing their chances of being killed - for the sake of a counterinsurgency approach that the president has publicly questioned and may now change. No one wants to be the last to die for the sake of yesterday's strategy. Major military decisions require deliberation. The debate, however, should generally take place in private and produce outcomes with all deliberate speed. At some point soon, the seminar must end.

How Not to Defeat al Qaeda - Frederick W. Kagan and Kimberly Kagan, Weekly Standard opinion. President Obama has announced his intention to conduct a review of US strategy in Afghanistan from first principles before deciding whether or not to accept General Stanley McChrystal's proposed strategy and request for more forces. This review is delaying the decision. If the delay goes on much longer, it will force military leaders either to rush the deployment in a way that increases the strain on soldiers and their families or to lose the opportunity to affect the spring campaign. The president's determination to make sure of his policy before committing the additional 40,000 or so forces required by General McChrystal's campaign plan is, nevertheless, understandable. The conflict in Afghanistan is complex, and it is important that we understand what we are trying to do. At the center of the complexity is a deceptively simple question: If the United States is fighting a terrorist organization- al Qaeda - why must we conduct a counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan against two other groups - the Quetta Shura Taliban and the Haqqani Network -that have neither the objective nor the capability to attack the United States outside Afghanistan? Shouldn't we fight a terrorist organization with a counterterrorist strategy, customarily defined as relying on long-range precision weapons and Special Forces raids to eliminate key terrorist leaders? Why must we become embroiled in the politics and social dysfunctionality of the fifth-poorest country in the world?

IRAQ

General Says Iraq Troop Reductions May Quicken - Thom Shanker, New York Times. The senior American commander in Iraq said Tuesday that he could reduce American forces to 50,000 troops even before the end of next summer if the expected January elections in Iraq went smoothly. That could ease the strain across the American armed forces and free up extra combat units for duty in the Afghanistan war, which has become a priority for the Obama administration. In an interview at the Pentagon, the commander, Gen. Ray Odierno, said he had already ordered some service members and equipment diverted from the Iraq mission to Afghanistan, in particular surveillance aircraft and units known as “combat enablers,” which include engineers for clearing roadside bombs and military police officers for training Afghan forces. The United States and Iraq agreed last year that American combat forces would be out of Iraq by August 2010, leaving 50,000 troops to advise and support the Iraqis. Since that schedule was set, the need for troops in Afghanistan has made that timing especially important - all the more so if commanders in Afghanistan formally request even more troops and President Obama agrees. In recent months American combat forces pulled out of Iraq’s city centers.

US General Says Iraq Exit Is on Track - Yochi J. Dreazen, Wall Street Journal. The top US commander in Iraq said the US is on pace to withdraw tens of thousands of troops from Iraq in coming months despite a spate of recent attacks there. In an interview, Gen. Raymond Odierno, who is due to testify on Capitol Hill about the war Wednesday, said American troop levels in Iraq will fall to 115,000 by year-end and then to roughly 50,000 by mid-2010. A bilateral security accord between Washington and Baghdad calls for the remaining troops to leave Iraq by the end of 2011. The comments from Gen. Odierno offer the clearest indication to date of how senior commanders in Baghdad envision winding down the US-led war in Iraq, which the Obama administration sees as a lower national-security priority than the war in Afghanistan.

Iraqi Journalists Fear for Safety as US Exit Nears - Heath Druzin, Stars and Stripes. Muhammad Khalil looks warily to the quickly approaching day when US Strykers rumble out of his dust-blown desert compound for the last time. He fears it may be a deadly change. Khalil is neither a member of the Iraqi Security Forces nor a high-profile politician, but he works in one of the most dangerous professions in Iraq: journalism. “Right now if you write an article against someone powerful, he could send someone to come kill you in the night,” said Khalil, the manager of the Diyala Media Center, an affiliate of al-Iraqiya, a national television network set up after the fall of Saddam Hussein. The Diyala Media Center’s plight is repeated all over Iraq, as US forces draw down. While the US presence is widely unpopular in Iraq, many residents and Iraq experts worry that violence will flare as the US pulls out and insurgents test the Iraqi security forces. At least 139 journalists have been killed in Iraq since the US invasion in 2003, according to a June report by the New York-based nonprofit Committee to Protect Journalists, which promotes press freedom worldwide.

IRAN

UN Chief Says Iran Must Prove Its Sincerity on Nuclear Issue - Colum Lynch, Washington Post. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said Tuesday that Iran's construction of the Qom uranium-enrichment facility violates UN resolutions requiring it to halt all nuclear enrichment activities, adding that Tehran must prove to the world that it has no intention of developing nuclear weapons. Ban's remarks placed the UN leadership squarely behind the Obama administration's campaign to ratchet up international pressure on Iran to curb its nuclear ambitions on the eve of talks it is to hold Thursday with the United States, Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia. Ban said that he had outlined his concerns in a face-to-face meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday and that he would press the same message in talks later Tuesday with Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki. "The burden of proof is on their side," Ban said. "This new Iranian enrichment facility is contrary to the Security Council resolution... They should give full access to the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] -- this is what I told him." Also Tuesday, Iran's nuclear chief said in an unusually frank disclosure that the country's new enrichment site was built for maximum protection from aerial attack: carved into a mountain and near a military compound of the powerful Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Associated Press reported.

In Dispute With Iran, Path to Iraq Is in Spotlight - Scott Shane, New York Times. To many Americans, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell’s February 2003 speech to the United Nations on Iraq’s unconventional weapons was powerfully persuasive. It was a dazzling performance, featuring satellite images and intercepts of Iraqi communications, delivered by one of the most trusted figures in public life. Then a long and costly war began, and the country discovered that the assertions that Iraq possessed illicit weapons had been completely unfounded. Now the United States’ confrontation with Iran over its nuclear program is heating up, with the disclosure last week that the Iranian government is building a second uranium enrichment complex it had not previously acknowledged. The question is inevitable: Is the uproar over the secret plant near Qum another rush to judgment, based on ambiguous evidence, spurred on by a desire to appear tough toward a loathed regime? In other words, is the United States repeating the mistakes of 2002?

Iranian Lawmakers Warn West Ahead of Nuclear Talks - Elizabeth Arrott, Voice of America. Iran's parliament has warned the world's major powers not to repeat what it called their past mistakes during nuclear talks set for Thursday. Iranian lawmakers say the Geneva meeting this week offers a historic chance to resolve the dispute over the nation's nuclear program. In a statement issued Tuesday, parliament voiced its support of the talks within the framework of Iran's package of proposals. So far, that package, counter-offers to Western demands it open up about its nuclear activities, has sparked little interest. Ali Nouri Zadeh, the director of the Center for Arab and Iranian Studies in London, says that's not likely to change. "I don't think they're going to come up with any new idea," Zadeh said. "On the contrary, the Iranian proposal contains all sorts of issues but the nuclear issue." The matter gained new urgency last week when Iran revealed, apparently under duress, that it was building a second uranium enrichment plant. According to reports it is located in or near a Revolutionary Guard military base.

Tehran Promises to Let Inspectors In, as Sanctions Loom - Catherine Philp, The Times. Iran sought to deflect international outrage over its newly discovered clandestine nuclear plant yesterday, denying that it had any military purpose and promising to allow inspections. The comments by the country’s nuclear chief, Ali Akbar Salehi, came in the run-up to crucial talks tomorrow between Iran and six foreign powers, with questions about the hidden facility expected to top the agenda. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard have staged two days of missile test-firing, aimed at demonstrating their readiness to respond to any military attack. Mr Salehi said at a press conference that the uranium enrichment plant near Qom had been housed on a Republican Guard base to protect it, and not because it formed part of a military nuclear programme. “This site is at the base of a mountain and was selected on purpose in a place that would be protected against aerial attack,” he said. Iran was in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency to set a timetable soon for a visit, he added.

Iran Offers Conflicting Messages - Paul Richter and Christi Parsons, Los Angeles Times. With tense international talks drawing near, Iran on Tuesday boldly reasserted its right to build nuclear installations, while fissures appeared in the coalition of nations seeking to steer the country's leadership away from its nuclear ambitions. Iran held fast to its hard-line position in the wake of revelations of a new underground nuclear site, but also offered a conciliatory gesture by saying it would set a timetable "soon" to admit international inspectors to the facility, near the holy city of Qom. The split image of confrontation and vague cooperation injected an added sense of drama to Thursday's nuclear talks in Geneva, leaving diplomats uncertain whether Iran will negotiate seriously with the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany. US and allied officials maintain that Tehran's ultimate aim is to build nuclear weapons, but Iran says its nuclear program is strictly for civilian energy purposes. Its chief energy director said Tuesday that developing atomic weapons would be "against our religion." But Ali Akbar Salehi, director of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, also told reporters that "the new site is part of our rights and there is no need to discuss it."

Iran Dashes Hopes of Talks on Secret Nuclear Plant - Richard Spencer, Daily Telegraph. Iran has dashed hopes the latest revelations about its nuclear programme would shame it into concessions by saying it would refuse to discuss them at talks with Western powers on Thursday. The head of the country's nuclear programme, Ali Akbar Salehi, promised to allow United Nations inspectors to visit its uranium enrichment plant, whose existence was made public last week. But America and its western allies fear Iran is trying to draw the sting from the threat of sanctions that hovers over the talks, at which they are demanding Iran discuss all aspects of its overt and covert nuclear programmes. Mr Salehi said discussions on the plant would take place with the IAEA, not the six nations - the five permanent security council members and Germany - at the meeting in Geneva. "We are not going to discuss anything related to our nuclear rights, but we can discuss about disarmament, we can discuss about non-proliferation and other general issues," he said. "The new site is part of our rights and there is no need to discuss it."

China’s Ties With Iran Complicate Diplomacy - Michael Wines, New York Times. Leaders of the House Foreign Affairs Committee swept into Beijing last month to meet with Chinese officials, carrying a plea from Washington: if Iran were to be kept from developing nuclear weapons, China would have to throw more diplomatic weight behind the cause. In fact, the appeal had been largely answered even before the legislators arrived. In June, China National Petroleum signed a $5 billion deal to develop the South Pars natural gas field in Iran. In July, Iran invited Chinese companies to join a $42.8 billion project to build seven oil refineries and a 1,019-mile trans-Iran pipeline. And in August, almost as the Americans arrived in China, Tehran and Beijing struck another deal, this time for $3 billion, that will pave the way for China to help Iran expand two more oil refineries. The string of energy deals appalled the Democratic chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Representative Howard L. Berman of California, who called them “exactly the wrong message” to send to an Iran that seemed determined to flout international nuclear rules. But some analysts see another message: as the United States issues new calls to punish Iran for secretly expanding its nuclear program, it is not at all clear that Washington’s interests are the same as Beijing’s.

Oil, Ideology Keep China From Joining Push Against Iran - John Pomfret, Washington Post. In its effort to muster support for sterner action against Iran, the Obama administration will have to overcome China's reluctance to punish a country that is one of its top oil suppliers and a major beneficiary of its energy-related investments. The administration's frustration with Beijing is growing. US officials have noted that China has appeared even more reluctant than Russia to take action against Iran after disclosures about its nuclear program. US officials said they are particularly concerned that China has blocked their efforts to target freight-forwarding companies based in Hong Kong that reship goods, including prohibited weaponry, to Iran. The Chinese "have not displayed a sense of urgency" on Iran, said a senior administration official. Instead, the official said, China has attempted to "have it both ways," preserving its relationship with Iran while also working with the United States and other countries involved in the effort to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Why is China protecting Iran? Two reasons, analysts say: oil and ideology. Iran is China's second-biggest supplier of oil, and imports are rising. In a country where more people are expected to buy cars this year than in the United States, China's appetite for oil is unquenchable.

Israel Mutes its Rhetoric Against Iran as Talks Loom - Richard Boudreaux, Los Angeles Times. Israel has warned for years that it might carry out military action to prevent Iran from building an atomic bomb. But as the United States and other powers prepare to confront Iran in talks this week, the message from Jerusalem is more restrained. Israeli leaders say they are willing to wait as President Obama plays out his strategy of negotiating with Iran while threatening stronger sanctions if talks fail. They say last week's disclosure of a previously secret uranium enrichment plant under construction in Iran strengthened the case for harsh international measures. And though they remain skeptical that anything short of force will derail Iran's nuclear plans, the Israelis are careful to emphasize that attacking its reactors and missile sites is an option the Obama administration, not just Israel, holds in reserve."The foundations have been laid for halting Iran by establishing a broad international coalition led by the United States," Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said this week. "The tools the United States has at its disposal are much stronger, much more serious."

Iranian Students Stage 2nd Big Protest Since Returning to University Campuses - Nazila Fathi, New York Times. Students at one of Iran’s largest universities staged an antigovernment protest on Tuesday, the second big demonstration at a major university in two days and a further indication that government efforts to intimidate student leaders have not been entirely successful. Over 1,000 students demonstrated at Sharif University in Tehran on Tuesday morning to protest a visit by the minister of science and higher education, Kamran Daneshjoo, a student Web site, Advarnews, reported. Protesters carried green balloons and ribbons, a symbol of the protest movement since the disputed June 12 presidential election, and banners that read “The university is still alive,” according to the Web site. The Web site also reported that the university’s security guards were not able to disperse the crowed as it kept growing. On Monday, hundreds of students at Tehran University demonstrated, causing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to cancel his visit there. On Sunday, students held a smaller protest outside the philosophy department building of Tehran University, where a member of Parliament, Gholam Ali Hadad Adel, gave a speech. The student protests were the first of the new school year, which began last week, and took place despite the arrests of dozens of student leaders around the country this summer and increased pressure on others not to demonstrate.

Obama's Iran Talks Will Fail - Washington Times editorial. Talks set to open Thursday between Iran and the permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany (the G5+1) are bound to fail. All the earnest good faith in the world won't change the character of the Iranian regime. The Iranian leadership doesn't appear eager to trade away its nuclear plans. Iran insists that the "nuclear talks" are not even about the nation's nuclear program. Tehran's unwillingness to address the nuclear issue could cause an instant impasse, forcing the meeting to a close before anyone can decide on the shape of the table. Just as Iran prefers to avoid the issue, the Obama administration has been reluctant to confront the fact that Iran is trying very hard to obtain nuclear weapons. On Sunday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates tiptoed around the issue on ABC, saying it was his "personal opinion" that Iran intends to have nuclear weapons but may not have made the "formal decision" to move ahead. This hair-splitting comes just after the revelation of Iran's secret nuclear-enrichment plant at Qom, the latest evidence that Iran has a covert nuclear-weapons program.

The Iran Charade - Rich Lowry, National Review opinion. The revelation of an Iranian uranium-enrichment facility buried in a mountain at an Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps base near the religious city of Qom might seem ominous. If, that is, the Iranians were determined to develop a nuclear weapon. Fortunately, we are advised that they are not. In November 2007, US intelligence agencies wrote a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) concluding, “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.” The intelligence community appears to be sticking by its judgment, which means - cue the sighs of relief - that the Qom facility may be only a strange curiosity. Apparently, the Iranian regime is an obscurantist theocracy with an unquenchable taste for conducting massive experiments in advanced physics. In secret. In heavily defended facilities. The 2007 NIE had a very circumscribed definition of a weapons program, but it included “covert conversion-related and uranium enrichment-related work.” Exactly what Qom is for. What do the Iranians have to do to convince US intelligence they have a weapons program? Iran has been very lucky in its watchdogs. The 2007 NIE, which stands exposed as about as worthless as George Tenet’s prewar talk of a “slam-dunk” on Iraq’s WMD, crushed any thought of the politically weakened Bush administration moving against Iran. And the punch-pulling International Atomic Energy Agency has been suppressing damaging material, concerned more with forestalling a conflict over Iran’s nuclear program than forestalling the program itself.

Forget the Nukes - Robert Kagan, Washington Post opinion. The past two weeks have been a big success for the rulers in Tehran, despite what many in the United States and Europe may think. The Obama administration, the Europeans and the media have been obsessively focused on Iranian missile launches and secret enrichment facilities, on Russia's body language, and on the likely success or failure of Thursday's talks in Geneva. What the world has not focused on is the one thing Iran's rulers care about: their own survival. You have to give the clerics credit for keeping this grave matter off Western agendas. The fraudulent presidential election in June and the subsequent mass demonstrations produced the biggest regime crisis in years. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei must have been panicked at the prospect of losing control - and with reason. Western democrats, not knowing what it is like to rule by fear and force, generally underestimate what a scary and uncertain business it can be, how a single wrong move, usually a too-timid response, can spell catastrophe. Even the masterful Deng Xiaoping, faced with much smaller opposition demonstrations in 1989, believed his Communist oligarchy could lose power absent a decisive show of force followed by a thorough purge of unreliable figures in the regime. In Iran, the regime's violent crackdown, its mass arrests of opposition figures - including the children of high-ranking clerics - and all the farcical show trials have been signs of weakness and anxiety, not confidence.

Three Pressure Points to Make Iran Crumble - Rosemary Righter, The Times opinion. Tomorrow in Geneva, a moderately senior American diplomat will sit down with the other four permanent members of the Security Council and Germany, for the first direct talks between the US and Iran in seven years - the first since their quietly productive encounters after 9/ll and the invasion of Afghanistan. The elaborate pretence underlying tomorrow’s confrontation - which is what everyone knows it will be - is that this is an “opportunity” for Iran, in Hillary Clinton’s words, to come clean about its nuclear programme and renounce nuclear weapons. This, she said, not the three sets of missile tests that Iran conducted at the weekend, is the “test that counts”. If Iran obliges, President Obama has promised the Islamic republic “a clear path” away from pariah status, and repeated that “that offer stands”. This emphasis on conciliation is, to put it mildly, odd given that it came at a press conference expressly called to read the riot act to a regime that had been caught for the third time illicitly constructing a nuclear facility that Mr Obama baldly defined as “inconsistent with a peaceful programme”. It was left to President Sarkozy to tell it like it is: that confidence in Iran’s rulers is zero; that the menace they pose is global; and that “we cannot let the Iranian leaders play for time while the centrifuges are spinning”. But after years of playing Europe like a harp, Iran is not listening to Paris; the regime has ears only for the Great Satan. And the GS, Obama version, is approaching Iran as tentatively as if the Islamic republic held all the thunderbolts.

A Human Rights Lever for Iran - Andrew Albertson and Ali G. Scotten, Washington Post opinion. The situation has changed significantly since the Obama administration's initial offer to talk with Tehran. The post-election protests this summer and the regime's subsequent crackdown have undermined whatever merit the administration may have once seen in a realpolitik negotiations strategy. With the talks looming, the United States cannot pretend that the violence in the streets never happened, but neither can Washington be seen to fold. In fact, it should raise the stakes by broadening the agenda to include human rights. The critics of diplomacy have a point: Tehran has nothing to lose, and much to gain, by drawing out talks and committing to little. However, beyond diplomacy, the administration's policy options are limited and in all likelihood counterproductive. Broad sanctions of the kind Congress is considering won't work; going after Iran's ability to import gas is likely to simply frustrate ordinary Iranians. Nor would the US negotiating position be bolstered by encouraging Israel to bomb Iran, as John Bolton, a former US ambassador to the United Nations, has suggested. Far from weakening the regime, these steps would strengthen it politically as Iranians rallied to support the hard-liners around President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad against the perceived bullying of the United States.

Lifting Iran’s Nuclear Veil - Gary Milhollin and Valerie Lincy, New York Times opinion. The disclosure of Iran’s secret nuclear plant has changed the way the West must negotiate with Tehran. While worrisome enough on its own, the plant at Qum may well be the first peek at something far worse: a planned, or even partly completed, hidden nuclear archipelago stretching across the country. The Qum plant doesn’t make much sense as a stand-alone bomb factory. As described by American officials, the plant would house 3,000 centrifuges, able to enrich enough uranium for one or two bombs per year. Yet at their present rate of production, 3,000 of Iran’s existing IR-1 centrifuges would take two years to fuel a single bomb and 10 years for five weapons. This is too long a time frame for the American assessment to be feasible. To build one or two bombs a year, Iran would have to quadruple the centrifuges’ present production rate. (While this feat is theoretically within the centrifuges’ design limits, it is not one Iran has shown it can achieve.) Perhaps Iran was planning to install more efficient centrifuges at the plant, like a version of the P-2 machine used by Pakistan. These could fuel a five-bomb arsenal in just over a year. But while we know Iran has tested such machines, there is no evidence that it can make them in bulk. Regardless of the machines used, it would take a couple of years at the front end to get them installed. Iran would be looking at three to five years of high activity at the site, during which the risk of discovery would skyrocket.

We've Been Talking to Iran for 30 Years - Michael Ledeen, Wall Street Journal opinion. The Obama administration's talks with Iran - set to take place tomorrow in Geneva - are accompanied by an almost universally accepted misconception: that previous American administrations refused to negotiate with Iranian leaders. The truth, as Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said last October at the National Defense University, is that "every administration since 1979 has reached out to the Iranians in one way or another and all have failed." After the fall of the shah in February 1979, the Carter administration attempted to establish good relations with the revolutionary regime. We offered aid, arms and understanding. The Iranians demanded that the United States honor all arms deals with the shah, remain silent about human-rights abuses carried out by the new regime, and hand over Iranian "criminals" who had taken refuge in America. The talks ended with the seizure of the American Embassy in November.

THE LONG WAR

Success Against Al-Qaeda Cited - Karen DeYoung and Walter Pincus, Washington Post. US and international intelligence officials say that improved recruitment of spies inside the al-Qaeda network, along with increased use of targeted airstrikes and enhanced assistance from cooperative governments, has significantly reduced the terrorist organization's effectiveness. A US counterterrorism official said that the combined advances have led to the deaths of more than a dozen senior figures in al-Qaeda and allied groups in Pakistan and elsewhere over the past year, most of them in 2009. Officials described Osama bin Laden and his main lieutenants as isolated and unable to coordinate high-profile attacks. Recent claims of significant success against al-Qaeda have become part of White House deliberations about US strategy in Afghanistan, centering on a request by Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top American and NATO commander there, for an expanded counterinsurgency campaign that will require more US troops. Discussions began in earnest Tuesday as senior national security and military officials met with President Obama.

2 US Troops Killed in Philippines Blast - Jim Gomez, Associated Press. Two US soldiers were killed Tuesday in a roadside bomb believed planted by al-Qaida-linked militants, US officials said. They were the first American troops to die in an attack in the Philippines in seven years. A Filipino marine also was killed and two others were wounded in the blast on Jolo island, a poor, predominantly Muslim region where the Americans have been providing combat training and weapons to Filipino troops battling the Abu Sayyaf militants. The Philippine military suspects the group was behind the attack. A senior Filipino commander said he did not think the assault would shake the Americans' resolve to fight Muslim extremists in the country. "I don't think they'll contemplate leaving," said Maj. Gen. Benjamin Dolorfino, a regional military commander who oversees counterterrorism assaults in Jolo and nearby regions. "Terrorism threats are transnational, and the US has a very strong commitment to fight it here."

Jakarta Suicide Bombers Set Sights on Australia - Angus Hohenboken, The Australian. Two Indonesian suicide bombers were filmed discussing martyrdom and being instructed to target Australians, just weeks before they blew up two Jakarta hotels, killing seven people, including three Australians. The video was found on a laptop in a backpack worn by terrorist leader Noordin Mohammed Top after he was killed by police during a raid on a home in central Java earlier this month. Lounging back in a park across the road from the Ritz-Carlton, terrorists Dani Dwi Permana, 18, and Nana Ikhwan Maulana, 28, chat in the footage with an unseen cameraman, who tells them "this is our target". "America has to be destroyed," the cameraman says. "Australia has to be destroyed. Indonesia has to be destroyed." Permana, a high school graduate, justifies the violent act through an extreme interpretation of his religion. "This is a very noble way to destroy the enemies of Islam," he says. "This is not suicide. Suicide is only for frustrated people." Three weeks later, the men walked into the lounges of the Ritz-Carlton and Marriott and triggered bombs that killed seven people, including Australians Craig Senger, Garth McEvoy and Nathan Verity, and wounded more than 50 others. The cameraman, believed to be fugitive Top follower Saifuddin Jaelani, is alleged to have recruited the bombers.

NY Terror Suspect Pleads Not Guilty - Associated Press. An Afghan immigrant pleaded not guilty Tuesday to planning a New York terrorist attack with bombs made from beauty-supply chemicals - a purported plot authorities say was assisted by at least three accomplices whose whereabouts and level of involvement haven't been revealed. "The conspiracy here is international in scope," Assistant US Attorney Jeffrey Knox told a federal judge in Brooklyn. Najibullah Zazi, wearing a blue jail smock, never spoke and showed no emotion as his lawyer entered the plea in a packed courtroom. He was ordered held without bail. "You get the impression he's a nice guy, don't you?" defense attorney Michael Dowling told the reporters afterward. The 24-year-old Denver airport shuttle driver has been the only terror suspect identified so far. But authorities have said three people traveled from New York City to suburban Denver this past summer and used stolen credit cards to help Mr. Zazi stockpile products containing hydrogen peroxide and acetone - common ingredients for homemade bombs. Mr. Dowling acknowledged that his client visited Pakistan last year, and made purchases earlier this year at a beauty supply shop in Aurora, Colo. But he added, "Those acts are not illegal" and cautioned against a "rush to judgment."

Retired Military Officers Push to Close Guantanamo Prison - Peter Finn, Washington Post. A group of retired senior military officers on Tuesday backed the Obama administration's troubled effort to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, saying that those who oppose transferring detainees to the United States for trial are engaging in fear-mongering. At a forum on Capitol Hill, the retired generals and admirals argued that shuttering the facility in Cuba is in the strategic interest of the United States because it will destroy a potent propaganda and recruitment tool used by terrorists. But, they said, the president's goal has nearly been overwhelmed by fear and misinformation. "It appears to us that a campaign to ratchet up fear has taken off," John D. Hutson, a retired Navy rear admiral and former judge advocate general, said ahead of the forum, which was organized by Human Rights First, a New York-based advocacy group. Added Hutson: "We believe the people going to be prosecuted are not warriors. They are criminals and thugs.,, We ought to be using the criminal justice system."

'Myth' of Gitmo Closure Dismissed - Ben Conery, Washington Times. A group of retired military leaders Tuesday accused critics of the Obama administration's plan to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, including former Vice President Dick Cheney and several Republican congressman, of demagoguery and fear-mongering. The group, which included retired generals and admirals, said it is actually more dangerous for Americans to leave Guantanamo open than to bring detainees to the US for incarceration and trial. Retired Brig. Gen. James P. Cullen, who served in the Army Reserve Judge Advocate General's Corps, dismissed as "a myth" the notion that Guantanamo detainees brought to the US to face trial could escape prison and endanger Americans. "Trade that off against the real danger to our security by leaving Guantanamo open. Guantanamo has served to recruit far more terrorists than it has ever contained," Gen. Cullen said. "That's the real threat. And by making all these false arguments and distractions, we are ignoring what is the real threat by keeping that place open." Gen. Cullen was one of six retired military leaders who spoke with The Washington Times during an interview arranged by Human Rights First, a group with which the leaders are all affiliated. They were among the group of military leaders who lobbied candidates in last year's presidential election to close Guantanamo and were with President Obama when he signed the executive order to close the prison.

The Meaning of Freedom - Washington Post editorial. More than one year after it decided that detainees at the US Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, had a right to challenge their detentions in federal courts, the Supreme Court is being asked to deal with the latest controversy: Do federal judges have the power to order detainees released into the United States? The question is far from academic, as illustrated poignantly by the case of brothers Bahtiyar Mahnut and Arkin Mahmud. As reported by The Post's Del Quentin Wilber, the brothers are Uighurs, Chinese Muslims who face oppression, intimidation and often worse treatment in their homeland because of their religion. In 2001, Bahtiyar traveled to Afghanistan, where he bunked down with other Uighurs and received rudimentary arms training. At the behest of his mother, Arkin went to Afghanistan in search of his younger brother. Both men were captured after the US invasion of Afghanistan and have been held in Guantanamo since 2002. The Bush administration years ago conceded that they were not enemy combatants and that they should be freed. But the men cannot be returned to China for fear they will be tortured.

AFRICA

A Cold War Man, a Hot War and a Legal Gray Area - Dan Eggen, Washington Post. The government of Sudan, eager to curry favor with a US government that accused it of genocide, sought help last fall from an unlikely source: a former Reagan administration official known for his role in the Iran-contra scandal. The approach by Sudanese officials led to a $1.3 million contract for former national security adviser Robert "Bud" McFarlane, who went on to meet with two of the Obama administration's top policymakers on Sudan and its strife-torn Darfur region, according to documents and interviews. The unusual talks between Sudan and McFarlane featured meetings in Middle Eastern capitals, clandestine communications with Sudan's intelligence service and a final agreement with the government of Qatar, which is employing McFarlane as part of its peacemaking role in the eastern African region. The episode puts an old Cold War hand in the middle of the volatile 21st-century conflict in Sudan, whose president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, faces international war crimes charges for allegedly orchestrating a campaign of murder, torture and forced expulsions in Darfur.

Human Rights Group: Guinea Military Kills 157 in Crackdown - Ricci Shryock, Voice of America. Guinea's military ruler is trying to distance himself from Monday's killing of at least 150 opposition demonstrators by security forces. The death toll from Monday's shootings continues to rise as victims of the violence are located. Military police opened fired on demonstrators at Conakry's September 28 Stadium who were protesting the expected candidacy of military ruler Captain Moussa Dadis Camara. International condemnation of Monday's killing is mounting, with the Economic Community of West African States expressing its 'disgust' at the attacks. Former colonial power France says Captain Camara should listen to the Guinean people's legitimate aspiration to choose their leaders democratically. Captain Camara is trying to distance himself from the killings, which mark the worst violence since he took power in a bloodless coup last December. In an interview with Senegal's RFM Radio, Captain Camara said he wanted to go to the site of the attacks, but advisors told him it was not safe. He insisted he did not want the violence to occur and did not take power to have a confrontation with the Guinean people.

Guinea Junta Troops 'Killed and Raped Hundreds at Democracy Rally' - Catherine Philp, The Times. The African Union threatened to impose sanctions on the junta in Guinea yesterday after more than 150 pro-democracy demonstrators were killed and hundreds were raped by government soldiers on Monday. About 50,000 demonstrators had gathered at the main stadium in Conakry, the capital, to protest after reports that the head of the regime, Captain Moussa Dadis Camara, had reneged on a deal to stand down in favour of free elections. Presidential guards opened fire on the protesters with live ammunition and teargas. “Soldiers were firing at people and those who tried to get out were caught and finished off with bayonets,” Souleymane Bah, a Guinean human rights activist, said. The bodies of 157 people were taken to hospital mortuaries and 1,253 wounded were admitted for treatment but an unknown number of dead were removed from the stadium by the military. Many witnesses testified to brutal and sexual violence. “I saw the Red Berets [government soldiers] catch some of the women who were trying to flee, rip off their clothes and stick their hands in their private parts,” one witness told Human Rights Watch. Another said: “I saw several women stripped and then put inside military trucks and taken away.”

United Nations Focuses on Congo Rape Crisis - Betsy Pisik, Washington Times. There will be no end to the ravages imposed on women and girls in eastern Congo until firm laws are put into place and enforced with trained police and honest judges, the UN human rights chief says. Navanethem Pillay will be one step closer to getting her wish after the UN Security Council meets Wednesday to pass a resolution focusing the world's attention on one of the most devastating yet unresolved aspects of conflicts around the world - calculated sexual brutality. With Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton presiding, delegates say, the 15-nation council will unanimously approve a U.S.-sponsored resolution that would create a UN envoy to help the victims of such abuse and take steps to prosecute the perpetrators. While the problem is widespread - reports of large-scale rape accompanied the massacre of dozens of people when soldiers set upon an opposition rally in Guinea this week - nowhere is it more common than in eastern Congo, where militia rule and lawlessness have reigned since the 1994 genocide in neighboring Rwanda.

Nigerian Rebel Group Appoints Mediators - Gilbert da Costa, Voice of America. The main militant group in Nigeria's oil-producing south on Tuesday named a team of mediators to negotiate with government, days before an amnesty and disarmament offer is to expire. The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta, the group responsible for the loss of production of about one million barrels of oil a day in Nigeria, said in an e-mail statement that the team would negotiate with the government on its behalf. Nigerian Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka is a member of the four-member panel, which also includes two retired army generals. Nigerian President Umaru Yar'Adua granted amnesty to Niger Delta militants in June and urged them to lay down their arms between August 6 and October 4. MEND rejected the offer and demanded talks on improving the lives of delta's impoverished residents and fixing the massive environmental damage caused by decades of unregulated oil production. A spokeswoman for the amnesty implementation committee, Timiebi Koripamo-Agary, says the rebel group's acceptance of the amnesty offer could open the door for meaningful discussions with the government.

AMERICAS

A Crack Appears in Honduras' Deadlock - Alex Renderos and Tracy Wilkinson, Los Angeles Times. The meeting, by all accounts, was tense and difficult. Whether it erupted in shouted insults remains a matter of dispute. On one issue, everyone agreed: Something must be done to ease the political crisis engulfing Honduras. US Ambassador to Honduras Hugo Llorens and the diplomat representing the Organization of American States, John Biehl, got an earful from Honduran business leaders and senior politicians. And they gave back some of what they got, according to several participants. But two significant themes emerged from the secret session at Llorens' residence on Sunday, themes that have the potential to finally ease the deepening political crisis that has divided and isolated Honduras and vexed Washington and other regional powers. Key backers of the coup that ousted President Manuel Zelaya three months ago have begun to temper their support for the de facto government they helped to install. And some even mention a concession until now taboo. They might agree to allow Zelaya to be reinstated and finish his term due to expire in January.

US Official Meets With Cuban Authorities - Ginger Thompson, New York Times. In another sign of improving relations between Cuba and the United States, a senior State Department official has talked with high-level Cuban officials in Havana about a variety of issues, including ways to improve cooperation on migration and the fight against drug trafficking. State Department officials said the main purpose of a trip two weeks ago by the official, Bisa Williams, was to discuss restarting mail service between the United States and the Communist-ruled country. But a State Department spokesman, Charles Luoma-Overstreet, said Tuesday that Ms. Williams was also able to meet with a senior member of Cuba’s Foreign Ministry for broader talks and was given the opportunity to tour a Cuban agricultural facility and areas affected by hurricanes in the Western province of Pinar del Río. The talks were first reported by The Associated Press. Mr. Luoma-Overstreet said Ms. Williams, an acting deputy assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs, was the highest-ranking State Department official to visit Cuba since 2002; in 2004, the Bush administration ended twice-a-year migration talks with Havana.

US, Cuba Held Extended Talks - Mary Beth Sheridan, Washington Post. In an unusual move, Cuban authorities this month invited a State Department official to turn a brief visit to the Communist-ruled island into a six-day stay that included meetings with officials, opposition figures and people from Cuban civil organizations, US officials said Tuesday. State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said that Bisa Williams, the deputy assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs, was "taking advantage of an opportunity to have further talks on specific subjects." "I wouldn't characterize this as any kind of a breakthrough," he said of the previously undisclosed trip. But Julia E. Sweig, a Cuba expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said US diplomats had not been permitted to travel around the country and hold such meetings for years. "This is definitely a departure from standard practice for a good 10 years at least," Sweig said. The invitation to extend the visit appeared to be another sign of a warming of relations that has occurred under the Obama administration. President Obama has lifted restrictions on family visits and remittances sent to the island and permitted investments there by US telecommunications companies.

In Mexico City, a Political Deal Redone - Marc Lacey, New York Times. Back-room deals have long been a staple of Mexican politics, but no one has focused more attention on what goes on in the country’s smoke-filled rooms than a political neophyte who goes by Juanito. Just months ago, Juanito, whose real name is Rafael Acosta Ángeles, 46, was an activist and street peddler who sold umbrellas in the rainy season and sweaters when the temperature dropped. An accomplished protester, he roared at rallies wearing a red, green and white headband that has become his trademark. Then, thanks to political deal-making gone awry, he found himself elected president of Iztapalapa, Mexico City’s most populous and problematic borough. His story goes like this: The leftist Democratic Revolution Party found itself divided and Clara Brugada, a former congresswoman who sought to represent Iztapalapa, was bounced from the ballot by an electoral tribunal in favor of a rival. Andrés Manuel López Obrador, a populist who lost the nation’s presidency by a hair in 2006, hatched a plan by which Mr. Acosta would be elected, then resign and name Ms. Brugada in his place. Mr. Acosta, with his everyman image - and Mr. López Obrador’s backing - did win. But then, clearly enjoying the attention, he resisted stepping down. Soon he was hobnobbing with top politicians and appearing on front pages. Power clearly agreed with him, and not just when he took off his shirt at a bodybuilding competition and flexed his biceps for the cameras.

ASIA PACIFIC

US Concerned About China's Military Modernization - Meredith Buel, Voice of America. October 1, 2009 is the 60th anniversary of the People's Republic of China, and the nation's armed forces will take part in a massive program celebrating the Communist Party's takeover in 1949. US officials have carefully watched China's efforts to modernize its military in recent years and are concerned it could pose a threat to America's military power in the Pacific. For more than a decade, China has been rapidly modernizing the People's Liberation Army. And US officials have expressed concern about how Beijing might use its expanding military power. China's Defense Minister, Liang Guanglie said recently that his country's armed forces have made such huge strides in modernization that China's fighter jets, tanks, warships and ballistic missiles equal or come close to matching the arsenals of Western nations. The United States uses fleets of aircraft carriers, submarines, and other military assets to project power in the Pacific region. Military analysts warn that China is trying to develop a new anti-ship ballistic missile that could threaten the US Navy's ability to stage operations close to China. Roger Cliff focuses on Chinese military strategy at the RAND Corporation here in Washington. "US surface ships, including US aircraft carrier strike groups that are within about 1,000 miles of China's coast, are going to be vulnerable to attack by aircraft, surface ships and submarines," said Roger Cliff.

For China, a March of Progress - Steven Mufson, Washington Post. Advanced weaponry, performers and masses of students, and precision-marching soldiers will roll through Beijing's Tiananmen Square this week to mark the 60th anniversary of the Communist Revolution. The parade is to be a display of China's growing political and military strength, and preparations have consumed this country's top leadership. Nearly 200,000 students from Beijing middle and high schools have been rehearsing since early July, and recently some staged dry runs lasting until 3 a.m. Military brigades have been practicing goose-stepping formations on the outskirts of the city. And all week television shows have featured celebrities praising the nation and singing heartfelt songs about the Chinese Communist Party. Film director Zhang Yimou, whose early movies were banned in China, is helping to choreograph the National Day celebration, as he did the opening ceremony for the 2008 Summer Olympics. The Thursday parade, the first in 10 years, marks China's continuing rise since the Communist Party shed its strict ideology and started embracing economic reforms in the 1980s. It offers the military, which is in the midst of a long-term modernization program, a chance to show off its latest equipment, including 108 missiles and perhaps a new armored fighting vehicle.

US Tightens South Korean Ties - Evan Ramstad, Wall Street Journal. The long-running North Korean nuclear standoff appears to be inching toward a return to the multilateral disarmament process, US Ambassador to South Korea Kathleen Stephens said in a wide-ranging interview Tuesday. "It is up to North Korea," Ms. Stephens said in an interview. "What we have been trying to do over the last few weeks and longer is to relay to the leaders in Pyongyang a consistent and united message … that they're on the wrong track." She said she hopes North Korean leaders will re-assess their self-interest and "see the path to real security does lie in a return to the six-party talks." "We've said that in a number of ways and in a number of times," she said. "And the same message has come from the other capitals in the region in a number of ways and in a number of times." Her comments came in a wide-ranging interview, her first with a US newspaper since becoming ambassador a year ago. Ms. Stephens also discussed several US-South Korean agreements reached in recent years that are now hitting stride and form a big part of the day-to-day work of the US Embassy in Seoul. "The mechanical part of the alliance is in good shape," she said.

Command Remains Flexible as North Korean Threat Changes - Jim Garamone, American Forces Press Service. The North Korean threat is changing and the response to the nation’s provocations must change too, the commander of Combined Forces Korea said here today. Army Gen. Walter Sharp, who also commands US Forces Korea, spoke to reporters of the Defense Writers Group. North Korean dictator Kim Jong-il is in charge in the country - for good and bad, Sharp said. After a year of reports on his health and questions on potential succession, the general said, the despot still is in command. The nuclear tests, the missile shots, the release of the American journalists and family reunions between North and South Korea all indicate that “the Dear Leader” is in charge, he noted. “We have seen him out in public many more times this year,” the general said. “Part of that is he wants to prove that he is in charge to his people. He has some paralysis of one arm and seems to be in decent health, but he is in charge and moving around.” North Korea maintains a large, though aging, conventional force. The nation is concentrating on developing missile technology, enlarging special operations forces and perfecting nuclear weapons. “What we’re really looking at is the capability to defend against that missile threat,” Sharp said. “We’re working on Patriot missile systems and defending against that threat.” US and South Korean forces are working hard to learn the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan on improvised explosive devices and other types of weapons the North Koreans are developing. “Their [special operations forces] capability is really very large, and they will use these tactics,” he said. Combating the nuclear weapons threat is a priority, but the general would say only that his command is working with others in the US military on capabilities to counter weapons of mass destruction. North Korea also is looking at cyber warfare. “The North Koreans probably realize that they could not win in an all-out conventional attack to reunify the peninsula by force,” Sharp said. “With our capability and the Republic of Korea capability, that’s a nonstarter.” Instead, he added, North Korea is looking at other vital nodes they can hold at risk, and asymmetric warfare is a possibility. In addition to the main battle plan, Sharp’s command is looking at other likely scenarios involving North Korea. These run from refugee problems because of famine or internal struggles. “In every case, we have to be prepared to defend South Korea,” he said.

Talking With Myanmar - New York Times editorial. President Obama has decided to open talks with Myanmar’s repressive government. Kurt Campbell, the assistant secretary of state for East Asia, met in New York on Tuesday with Myanmar’s United Nations envoy and a member of the government cabinet - the highest-level meeting between the two governments in many years. We have no affection for the ruthless military junta that has denied its citizens the most basic freedoms and has kept Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate, under house arrest for 14 of the last 20 years. On Monday at the United Nations, Myanmar’s prime minister, Gen. Thein Sein, again brushed aside calls for Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi’s release. But talking is not a concession. And if handled skillfully, it might lead, in time, to positive change.

MIDDLE EAST

UN Report Calls for Investigation Into Alleged War Crimes in Gaza - Lisa Schlein, Voice of America. A UN fact-finding mission accuses both Israel and Hamas militants of committing war crimes during the three-week war in Gaza that began in late 2008. The report, which has just been submitted to the UN Human Rights Council, calls for both parties to conduct a credible investigation into alleged violations within the next six months or risk having the situation turned over to the International Criminal Court. Head of the fact finding mission, South African Justice Richard Goldstone, criticized Israel for not cooperating with the mission and strongly rejected accusations that the investigation was politically motivated. He described a number of incidents in which Israeli forces launched direct attacks against civilians with lethal consequences. With one exception, he said there was no military objective or advantage that could justify the attacks.

UN Fact-finding Mission - Robert P. Barnidge Jr., Washington Times opinion. Mark Twain once wrote, "Truth is stranger than fiction," and the largely negative international reaction to Operation Cast Lead, Israel's military effort to stop thousands of Hamas rockets from being launched into southern Israel from the Gaza Strip at the turn of the year, certainly seemed to confirm this. It was truly amazing to see the streets of major international capitals filled with the protests of self-proclaimed "human rights" and "peace" activists joined in lock step with militant Islamists and anti-Semites. It seemed as if Hamas could do no wrong and Israel could do no right. Unsurprisingly, the United Nations Human Rights Council took an immediate interest in Cast Lead. On Jan. 12, it adopted Resolution S-9/1, which called for a fact-finding mission to "investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying Power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression." The mission, led by South African Justice Richard J. Goldstone with the assistance of Irish Col. Desmond Travers, University of London international law professor Christine Chinkin and Pakistani Supreme Court Advocate Hina Jilani, released its report Sept. 15.

SOUTH ASIA

Network of Militants Is Robust After Mumbai Siege - Lydia Polgreen and Soaud Mekhennet, New York Times. Ten months after the devastating attacks in Mumbai by Pakistan-based militants, the group behind the assault remains largely intact and determined to strike India again, according to current and former members of the group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and intelligence officials. Despite pledges from Pakistan to dismantle militant groups operating on its soil, and the arrest of a handful of operatives, Lashkar has persisted, even flourished, since 10 recruits killed 163 people in a rampage through Mumbai, India’s financial capital, last November. Indian and Pakistani dossiers on the Mumbai investigations, copies of which were obtained by The New York Times, offer a detailed picture of the operations of a Lashkar network that spans Pakistan. It included four houses and two training camps here in this sprawling southern port city that were used to prepare the attacks. Among the organizers, the Pakistani document says, was Hammad Amin Sadiq, a homeopathic pharmacist, who arranged bank accounts and secured supplies. He and six others begin their formal trial on Saturday in Pakistan, though Indian authorities say the prosecution stops well short of top Lashkar leaders.

BOOKS

Horse Soldiers: The Extraordinary Story of a Band of Soldiers Who Rode to Victory in Afghanistan - Doug Stanton.

Horse Soldiers tells the important story of the Special Forces soldiers who first put American boots on the ground in Afghanistan in 2001. Fighting alongside the Northern Alliance, the troops, often riding on horseback, achieved several important victories against the Taliban.

War 2.0: Irregular Warfare in the Information Age - Thomas Rid and Marc Hecker.

War 2.0: Irregular Warfare in the Information Age argues that two intimately connected trends are putting modern armies under huge pressure to adapt: the rise of insurgencies and the rise of the Web. Both in cyberspace and in warfare, the grassroots public has assumed increasing importance in recent years. After the dot-com bubble burst in 2000, Web 2.0 rose from the ashes. This newly interactive and participatory form of the Web promotes and enables offline action. Similarly, after Rumsfeld's attempt to transform the US military into a lean, lethal, computerized force crashed in Iraq in 2003, counterinsurgency rose from the ashes. Counterinsurgency is a social form of war - indeed, the US Army calls it armed social work - in which the local matrix population becomes the center of strategic gravity and public opinion at home the critical vulnerability.

The New Counterinsurgency Era: Transforming the U.S. Military for Modern Wars - David H. Ucko.

Confronting insurgent violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US military has recognized the need to "re-learn" counterinsurgency. But how has the Department of Defense with its mixed efforts responded to this new strategic environment? Has it learned anything from past failures? In The New Counterinsurgency Era, David Ucko examines DoD's institutional obstacles and initially slow response to a changing strategic reality.

Journey into Darkness: Genocide in Rwanda - Thomas P. Odom.

In July 1994, Thomas P. Odom was part of the US Embassy team that responded to the Goma refugee crisis. He witnessed the deaths of 70,000 refugees in a single week. In the previous three months of escalating violence, the Rwandan genocide had claimed 800,000 dead. Now, in this vivid and unsettling new book, Odom offers the first insider look at these devastating events before, during, and after the genocide.

Joker One: A Marine Platoon’s Story of Courage - Donovan Campbell.

Donovan Campbell, first as a Marine and then as a writer, shows us that the dominant emotion in war isn’t hatred or anger or fear. It’s love. His story stands as a poignant tribute to his men–their courage, their dedication, their skill, and their love for one another, even unto death.

The Battle for Peace: A Frontline Vision of America's Power and Purpose - Anthony Zinni and Tony Koltz

The intellectual complement to Zinni and Clancy's bestselling Battle Ready (2004), a narrative memoir salted with specific policy recommendations, this volume provides the former US Central Command chief's analysis of America's current global position. Zinni begins by asserting that America's status as "the most powerful nation in the history of the planet" has created a de facto empire. The US has no choice: if it fails to take the lead, nothing significant happens. At the same time, Americans must recognize that, in a global age, there can be no zero-sum games.

The Unforgiving Minute: A Soldier's Education - Craig Mullaney

The Unforgiving Minute is the ultimate's soldier's book - universal in its raw emotion and its understanding of the larger issues of life and death. Mullaney, a master storyteller, plunges the depths of self-doubt, endurance, and courage. The result: a riveting, suspenseful human story, beautifully told. This is a book written under fire - a lyrical, spellbinding tale of war, love, and courage. The Unforgiving Minute is the Three Cups of Tea of soldiering.

Great Powers: America and the World after Bush - Thomas P.M. Barnett

In civilian and military circles alike, The Pentagon’s New Map became one of the most talked about books of 2004. “A combination of Tom Friedman on globalization and Carl von Clausewitz on war, [it is] the red-hot book among the nation’s admirals and generals,” wrote David Ignatius in The Washington Post. Barnett’s second book, Blueprint for Action, demonstrated how to put the first book’s principles to work. Now, in Great Powers, Barnett delivers his most sweeping - and important - book of all.

The Accidental Guerrilla: Fighting Small Wars in the Midst of a Big One - David Kilcullen

A remarkably fresh perspective on the War on Terror. Kilcullen takes us "on the ground" to uncover the face of modern warfare, illuminating both the big global war (the "War on Terrorism") and its relation to the associated "small wars" across the globe: Iraq, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Chechnya, Pakistan and North Africa.

The Gamble: General David Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq, 2006-2008 - Thomas Ricks

Thomas E. Ricks uses hundreds of hours of exclusive interviews with top officers in Iraq and extraordinary on-the-ground reportage to document the inside story of the Iraq War since late 2005 as only he can, examining the events that took place as the military was forced to reckon with itself, the surge was launched, and a very different war began.

Why Vietnam Matters: An Eyewitness Account of Lessons Not Learned - Rufus Phillips

Phillips details how the legendary Edward G. Lansdale helped the South Vietnamese gain and consolidate their independence between 1954 and 1956, and how this later changed to a reliance on American conventional warfare with its highly destructive firepower. He reasons that our failure to understand the Communists, our South Vietnamese allies, or even ourselves took us down the wrong road. In summing up US errors in Vietnam, Phillips draws parallels with the American experience in Iraq and Afghanistan and suggests changes in the US approach. Known for his intellectual integrity and firsthand, long-term knowledge of what went on in Vietnam, the author offers lessons for today in this trenchant account.

Baghdad at Sunrise: A Brigade Commander's War in Iraq - Peter Mansoor

This is a unique contribution to the burgeoning literature on the Iraq war, analyzing the day-to-day performance of a US brigade in Baghdad during 2004-2005. Mansoor uses a broad spectrum of sources to address the military, political and cultural aspects of an operation undertaken with almost no relevant preparation, which tested officers and men to their limits and generated mistakes and misjudgments on a daily basis. The critique is balanced, perceptive and merciless - and Mansoor was the brigade commander. Military history is replete with command memoirs. Most are more or less self-exculpatory. Even the honest ones rarely achieve this level of analysis. The effect is like watching a surgeon perform an operation on himself. Mansoor has been simultaneously a soldier and a scholar, able to synergize directly his military and academic experiences.

The Strongest Tribe: War, Politics, and the Endgame in Iraq - Bing West

From a universally respected combat journalist, a gripping history based on five years of front-line reporting about how the war was turned around - and the choice now facing America. We interpret reality through the clouded prism of our own experience, so it is unsurprising that Bing West sees Iraq through the lens of Vietnam. He served as a Marine officer there, and he thinks politicians and the media caused the American public to turn against a war that could have been won. Now a correspondent for the Atlantic, West has made 15 reporting trips to Iraq over the last six years and is almost as personally invested in the current conflict as he was in Vietnam; this book, his third on Iraq, is his attempt to ensure that the "endgame" in Iraq turns out better than in his last war.

Tell Me How This Ends: General David Petraeus and the Search for a Way Out of Iraq - Linda Robinson

After a series of disastrous missteps in its conduct of the war, the White House in 2006 appointed General David Petraeus as the Commanding General of the coalition forces. Tell Me How This Ends is an inside account of his attempt to turn around a failing war. Linda Robinson conducted extensive interviews with Petraeus and his subordinate commanders and spent weeks with key US and Iraqi divisions. The result is the only book that ties together military operations in Iraq and the internecine political drama that is at the heart of the civil war. Replete with dramatic battles, behind-doors confrontations, and astute analysis, the book tells the full story of the Iraq War’s endgame, and lays out the options that will be facing the next president.

The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008 - Bob Woodward

Woodward interviewed key players, obtained dozens of never-before-published documents, and had nearly three hours of exclusive interviews with President Bush. The result is a stunning, firsthand history of the years from mid-2006, when the White House realizes the Iraq strategy is not working, through the decision to surge another 30,000 US troops in 2007, and into mid-2008, when the war becomes a fault line in the presidential election. As violence in Iraq reaches unnerving levels in 2006, a second front in the war rages at the highest levels of the Bush administration. In his fourth book on President George W. Bush, Bob Woodward takes readers deep inside the tensions, secret debates, unofficial backchannels, distrust and determination within the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department, the intelligence agencies and the US military headquarters in Iraq. With unparalleled intimacy and detail, this gripping account of a president at war describes a period of distress and uncertainty within the US government from 2006 through mid-2008. The White House launches a secret strategy review that excludes the military. General George Casey, the commander in Iraq, believes that President Bush does not understand the war and eventually concludes he has lost the president's confidence. The Joint Chiefs of Staff also conduct a secret strategy review that goes nowhere. On the verge of revolt, they worry that the military will be blamed for a failure in Iraq.

We Are Soldiers Still: A Journey Back to the Battlefields of Vietnam - Harold Moore and Joe Galloway

In their stunning follow-up to the classic bestseller We Were Soldiers Once... and Young, Lt. Gen. Hal Moore and Joe Galloway return to Vietnam and reflect on how the war changed them, their men, their enemies, and both countries - often with surprising results. It would be a monumental task for Moore and Galloway to top their classic 1992 memoir. But they come close in this sterling sequel, which tells the backstory of two of the Vietnam War's bloodiest battles (in which Moore participated as a lieutenant colonel), their first book and a 1993 ABC-TV documentary that brought them back to the battlefield. Moore's strong first-person voice reviews the basics of the November 1965 battles, part of the 34-day Battle of the Ia Drang Valley. Among other things, Moore and Galloway (who covered the battle for UPI) offer portraits of two former enemy commanders, generals Nguyen Huu An and Chu Huy Man, whom the authors met - and bonded with - nearly three decades after the battle. This book proves again that Moore is an exceptionally thoughtful, compassionate and courageous leader (he was one of a handful of army officers who studied the history of the Vietnam wars before he arrived) and a strong voice for reconciliation and for honoring the men with whom he served.

In a Time of War: The Proud and Perilous Journey of West Point' Class of 2002 - Bill Murphy

The West Point cadets Murphy follows through their baptism by fire are an admirable sample of young American men and women: intelligent, ambitious and intensely patriotic. Most come from career military families and hold conservative opinions. Murphy describes their four years at West Point with respect even when discussing their love lives and marriages. All yearn for battle, and most get their wish. The book's best passages describe the confusion of moving to Iraq or Afghanistan and fighting insurgents, for which they lack both training and equipment. All feel something is not right but concentrate on the job at hand; some inevitably die or are grievously wounded.

Iraq and the Evolution of American Strategy - Steven Metz

Today the US military is more nimble, mobile, and focused on rapid responses against smaller powers than ever before. One could argue that the Gulf War and the postwar standoff with Saddam Hussein hastened needed military transformation and strategic reassessments in the post–Cold War era. But the preoccupation with Iraq also mired the United States in the Middle East and led to a bloody occupation. What will American strategy look like after US troops leave Iraq? Metz concludes that the United States has a long-standing, continuing problem “developing sound assumptions when the opponent operates within a different psychological and cultural framework.” He sees a pattern of misjudgments about Saddam and Iraq based on Western cultural and historical bias and a pervasive faith in the superiority of America’s worldview and institutions. This myopia contributed to America being caught off guard by Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, then underestimating his longevity, and finally miscalculating the likelihood of a stable and democratic Iraq after he was toppled. With lessons for all readers concerned about America’s role in the world, Dr. Metz’s important new work will especially appeal to scholars and students of strategy and international security studies, as well as to military professionals and DOD civilians. With a foreword by Colin S. Gray.