Target Centermass

Category: Europe

  • Chirac: Lifting Chinese Arms Ban ‘Legitimate’

    It’s just Jacques being his usual cheese-dick Jacques self: Oui, we should sell arms to China.

    French President Jacques Chirac told a concerned Japan that China’s desire for the European Union to lift its arms embargo was “legitimate” and would not entail exports of sensitive weapons and technology.

    France has been a prime supporter of ending the ban on selling arms to China, a move opposed by both the United States and its ally Japan.

    “The prime minister told me of his concerns. He asked me for explanations,” Chirac told a joint news conference after talks with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi.

    “I indicated to him that the decision of the European Union does not imply a change in exports of sensitive arms or technology to China as they are subject to rules which cannot be broken,” Chirac said.

    “Hence the decision does not mean things would change. It’s a political decision,” he said.

    “We believe that this lifting is legitimately sought by China and that’s why we have taken this decision.”

    Koizumi reiterated Japan’s opposition to lifting the embargo.

    “We told the president that we are against it,” Koizumi said.

    “Japan does not regard China’s economic growth as a threat. Rather we regard it as an opportunity. However, in relation to security concerns such as the Taiwan issue Japan has been asking for a peaceful resolution,” Koizumi said.

    The European Union had initially set a goal of lifting the ban by the end of June, when the presidency of the 25-member bloc shifts from Luxembourg to Britain.

    Britain had suggested that the end of the weapons sale ban could be delayed after China on March 14 adopted the Anti-Succession Law. Chinese Foreign Ministry said China opposes to linking the lifting of arms ban with the new law, saying they are irrelevant.

    But Chirac has vowed to push ahead and end the embargo by the end of June.

    Look, there’s a reason that the U.S. Army only somewhat-jokingly divides its answers in armor vehicle identification to three categories — friend, foe or French. The bastards have historically proved that they’ll sell to anyone. It’s all about the Franc.

    Ahh, the French, unable to successfully protect themselves since the days of Napoleon, and quite willing to expect the Americans to save their collective asses for almost a century. Don’t give me that crap about WWI until you read John Mosier’s The Myth of the Great War and can counter the argument that, contrary to prevailing opinion that American intervention only provided the Allies’ tipping point, the Americans actually saved an imcompetent French military from destruction. I won’t discuss the WWII or Indochina French debacles, but will point that the country meekly chose the wrong side of history by hedging its bets by bailing out of the military side of NATO in 1966 (only to boldly return to the fold in 1992 after the Cold War was over).

    It’s all about the Franc. Despite the obvious, oh so obvious, intentions of the Chinese.

    It’s all about the Franc.

    Hey, Jacques, let me be the first to welcome you and your ilk to the wrong side of history once again.

  • Italians Plan Retreat from Iraq

    Italy has announced that it will begin drawing down its forces in Iraq, beginning in September. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi claims the decision is unrelated to the recent checkpoint shooting of a car carrying communist reporter and supposed hostage Giuliana Sgrena.

    Asked whether Italy’s decision was tied to the shooting incident, Mr McClellan said he had not heard Italian officials saying that.

    “I’m not sure I’d make a connection there,” he said.

    Dr. Rusty Shackleford at the Jawa Report disagrees.

    Giuliana Sgrena has finally gotten her way. Islamist media already attributes Italy’s announced withdrawal as a response to the Sgrena debacle. Expect more hostage taking (real or feigned) immediately.

  • US Wants Bases in Romania, Bulgaria

    A baby step in the right direction — getting our troops closer to the likely action and away from the whiners.

    The commander of U.S. forces in Europe, General James Jones, says the United States is ready to begin negotiations with new NATO members Romania and Bulgaria about basing U.S. forces in those countries.

    General Jones told a House of Representatives committee Wednesday that officers under his command have made repeated visits to Romania and Bulgaria, and the time has come to begin formal talks on basing U.S. forces in those countries.

    “We are definitely at the launching point, as opposed to the conceptual point,” he said.

    General Jones says the possibility of basing U.S. forces in Romania and Bulgaria fits into the Defense Department’s plans re-structure its force deployment around the world. The plan is to move away from large bases far from potential conflict zones, to smaller bases closer to where the forces might be used.

    “We’re very excited at the possibility, in the European transformation, of basing an Eastern European brigade, a rotational brigade, in Bulgaria and Romania, along with the accompanying air assets and logistical assets necessary to sustain that presence,” he added.

    A brigade would be between 3,000-5,000 troops, plus supporting units.

    General Jones, who is also the NATO supreme commander, says talks with the two new NATO members should begin soon on details of the basing arrangements, which he said could include ports, airfields and facilities for ground forces.

    “I believe that this year we will now turn to dialogue with both nations to work out the basing agreements, the status-of-forces agreements, and the most important one is the access that the United States wishes to have to its forces,” General Jones said. “I think the secretary of defense has been very strong in saying that we don’t want to put forces where we can’t get at them. And so we have to work out those agreements. But I think that in the case of Bulgaria and Romania we will.”

    In the past, some countries that host U.S. forces have refused to allow those forces to be deployed directly to conflict areas, or the base facilities to be used in operations that the host country does not support. This was a problem with U.S. forces in Turkey when the Iraq war began two years ago.

    But General Jones indicated he does not expect such issues with Bulgaria and Romania, which he described as “extraordinarily accommodating” and expressing a strong desire to have part of the U.S. European Command on their soil.

    The general did not mention the incident last week in which U.S. forces apparently killed a Bulgarian soldier by mistake in Iraq.

    After the last couple of years, I want us to completely get out of Germany and base our European forces where they can be closer to the expected fight, away from the spineless, and in a position to economically reward our current allies and friends. Put them in Romania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and especially Poland.

    And maybe put a hell of an R&R base in England. Like Vegas with fish and chips.

  • Shark Risk off British Coast

    Ever since I saw the classic movie Jaws back in 1975, I have been fascinated with sharks. Although only in second grade at the time, I read Peter Benchley’s novel and was enraptured (sure, I didn’t understand the sex stuff around the affair that was left out of the movie). Although all three sequels were crap, I was so hooked that I had to see them all on the big screen. For the next seven years, I swore that I was going to grow up and become an ichthyologist, devoting my life to researching sharks.

    Well, the years go by and life takes its funny twists and turns. I never went on to the shark research gig (and have little idea how I ended up doing computer work for a living). Despite this, I never really got over my interest in sharks, as evidenced by my eagerness to post this and this.

    Now, there’s this unusual occurence out of England, which I feel absolutely obligated to post.

    The chilly waters off northeastern England are rarely that inviting for bathers, but at least those who do venture in for a dip have been able to do so in the knowledge they are safe from sharks.

    Until now, that is.

    In a virtually unprecedented warning, British maritime agencies warned surfers, divers and others thinking of braving the North Sea to be on the alert for a possible shortfin mako shark.

    The discovery of a series of dead porpoises washed up onto beaches in northeast England, some with large chunks apparently bitten out of them, has prompted the warning, the Daily Mail newspaper reported on Wednesday.

    Around 45 porpoises have been found along with the headless bodies of seals and remains of other large fish.

    Experts say this points to the presence of a large mako shark nearby. The shark, which grows up to 12 feet (3.65 metres) in length, is known to be found in the North Sea but rarely ventures near shore.

    It is thought that conservation efforts off northeast England which have greatly increased the local porpoise population might have attracted a shark, the paper said.

    “We would advise all those using the water, including surfers, fishermen and divers, to be especially careful and vigilant,” the Maritime and Coastguard agency said in a statement.

    “There have been no reported sightings of this shark yet, but we cannot rule out the possibility that one might be out there.”

    Some of the porpoise bodies have been sent to London’s Natural History Museum so the cause of death can be determined, the paper added.

    Just as a little added tidbit, the mako was the ridiculously-oversized species featured in the silly, disappointing flick Deep Blue Sea.

  • Sgrena’s Car — How Fast, How Shot?

    An Italian government official and the U.S. Army are in sharp disagreement on the speed of the car that was carrying alleged hostage and anti-American journalist Giuliana Sgrena and the late intelligence officer Nicola Calipari.

    Italian Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini told his country’s parliament today that the shooting was an accident, but he contradicted the U.S. military’s account of the incident. The U.S. Army’s 3rd Infantry Division, which controls Baghdad, said in a statement that the vehicle was “traveling at high speeds” and did not stop at the checkpoint, despite a number of warnings. The military said U.S. soldiers only opened fire after the car ignored the warnings.

    Fini, however, said the car was traveling no faster than 25 mph, and disputed the U.S. military’s assertion that several warnings were given. He said the U.S. government must conduct a thorough investigation, “that responsibilities be pinpointed, and, where found, that the culprits be punished.”

    Okay, so we’ve established with some degree of certainty the vehicle was traveling somewhere over a 75+ mph range. I’m sure that’s a clue somehow. Oh yeah, it’s a clue that Sgrena’s a liar, as she’s on record as saying the driver had almost lost control. And perhaps Fini can explain why he wants to punish the “culprits” of an admitted accident.

    Meanwhile, pictures of the car have been released that cast further doubts on Sgrena’s tale of an “avalanche of gunfire” from the American’s so-called ambush. Dr. Rusty Shackleford, on the story at the Jawa Report since the beginning, has them and links to a solid collection of other blogs’ postings on the matter.

  • Ex-hostage Disputes U.S. Account of Shooting

    Much has been made in the media and the blogosphere of the release of Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena and her subsequent wounding at a Baghdad checkpoint by U.S. forces. Itailian security agent Nicola Calipari was killed in the incident.

    Since the day Sgrena was kidnapped, Dr. Rusty Shackleford at the Jawa Report predicted her release and said he felt something was “fishy” about the whole story. He has repeatedly written about the Sgrena affair and today blogs his mounting suspicions about the story.

    Doesn’t this whole incident seem more than a little odd?

    Sgena was kidnapped by her admitted friends in Iraq.

    She was kidnapped while on the phone with another journalist.

    A tape was released of her begging Italy to cave to the terrorists demands of pulling Italian troops out of Iraq the day before the Italian Senate was to vote on that very issue.

    On the tape Sgrena appears to tell the ‘terrorist’ holding the camera to stop. He follows her order as if she is directing.

    The tape came exactly two-weeks after she was captured.

    One month to the day after her abduction she is released.

    On the day of her release her car speeds toward a US checkpoint, fails to stop when ordered, fails to heed warning shots, and the car is ultimately fired upon.

    In the end, who looks like the bad guys? The terrorists? The jihadis? The ‘insurgents’? No, the US.

    Today, CNN carries Sgrena’s tale. Sgrena, who writes for the communist Il Manifesto, disputes the U.S. version of the story.

    […]Giuliana Sgrena wrote, “Our car was driving slowly,” and “the Americans fired without motive.”

    She described a “rain of fire and bullets” in the incident.

    The U.S. military said Sgrena’s car rapidly approached a checkpoint Friday night, and those inside ignored repeated warnings to stop.

    Troops used arm signals and flashing white lights, fired warning shots in front of the car, and shot into the engine block when the driver did not stop, the military said in a statement.

    But in an interview with Italy’s La 7 Television, the 56-year-old journalist said “there was no bright light, no signal.”

    Apparently, however, Sgrena cannot keep her story straight, as the very next paragraph shows she told an Italian government official a different tale.

    And Italian magistrate Franco Ionta said Sgrena reported the incident was not at a checkpoint, but rather that the shots came from “a patrol that shot as soon as they lit us up with a spotlight.”

    Well, Ms. Sgrena, was there a light or wasn’t there?

    In an interview with Sky TV, Sgrena said “feeling yourself covered with avalanche of gunfire from a tank that is beside you, that did not give you any warning that it was about to attack if we did not stop — this is absolutely inconceivable even in normal situations, even if they hadn’t known that we were there, that we were supposed to come through.”

    So now it was a tank away from a checkpoint that lit up the car? Folks, I’m not buying a word this woman says.

  • Canada Expels Holocaust Denier

    I’m all for free speech and against supposed “hate speech” laws, having faith in the market of ideas. That said, I see plenty in this nutcase to take in joy the action taken but still cannot yet call it justice.

    A white supremacist from Germany who denies the Holocaust ever took place has been expelled from Canada after a two-year legal battle.

    Ernst Zundel, 65, arrived in Germany on Tuesday and was immediately taken into custody by German authorities.

    Germany was able to seek his extradition on the grounds that he was running a web site denying the existence of the Holocaust.

    Zundel once described Adolf Hitler as a “decent and very peaceful man”.

    Last week, a Federal Court judge ruled the his anti-Semitic and hatred-inciting activities were “not only a threat to Canada’s national security, but also a threat to the international community of nations”.

    I have to question whether Zundel was really a threat to the community of nations or just an idiot a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic.

    It took Canadian authorities two years to establish whether Zundel, who authored a book called “The Hitler we loved and why”, posed a security threat.

    During that time, he was being held in near-solitary confinement.

    Denying the Holocaust is a crime in Germany, where Zundel’s theories could be easily accessed and read through the Internet.

    This enabled authorities there to open a case against him.

    Zundel, who was born in Germany, moved to Canada in the late 1950s.

    In 1988 he was convicted of “knowingly publishing false news” after issuing a leaflet carrying the title “Did six million really die?”.

    But in 1992, the Supreme Court struck down the “false news” law on the grounds that it violated freedom of expression.

    Zundel, who never managed to obtain Canadian citizenship, moved to the US in 2001 but was later deported back to Canada for allegedly violating immigration laws.

    A group that led a campaign to have him extradited, B’nai Brith Canada, welcomed last week’s verdict.

    “For decades, Zundel has spewed his venom and imbued his brand of hate in a new generation of white supremacist groups that had made him a hero,” the association’s vice president, Frank Dimant, said in a statement.

    Zundel is now expected to be kept in custody while a German judge reviews his case.

    Canada has every right to thrust this burden back upon Germany, as Zundel has no Canadian citizenship. While one could question Germany’s laws regarding denying the Holocaust, one certainly has to question their jurisdiction on internet postings from international sources. I’ll try to look more into this case tomorrow to resolve my qualms, but for now I’ll say pragmatically that Canada did well in getting rid of some trash.

  • U.S. Arabic Channel to Expand to Europe

    While much of Europe seems quite willing to ignore the growing danger to its future coming from Islamic radicals in its midst, the U.S. is already moving against the threat by confronting it over the airwaves.

    The Bush administration is planning to expand the reach of its Arabic-language satellite channel, Alhurra, into Europe, an official overseeing the network said Sunday.

    Alhurra, which means “the free one,” began beaming programming to the Middle East about a year ago.

    Home to an estimated 15 million-20 million Muslims, many of Arab descent, Europe is a “significant location for Arabic-speaking people,” a U.S. official said.

    Kenneth Tomlinson, chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the U.S. agency in charge of Alhurra, said Sunday that the channel’s goal is to “foster and support debate” and to give Arabic speakers the chance to hear the “Western side of arguments on women’s rights, economic opportunity and freedom and democracy.”

    Officials said Alhurra is intended to provide competition to the Arabic-language channel Al-Jazeera, which they contend is biased against the United States.

    […]

    Tomlinson said U.S. officials hope to begin beaming Alhurra programming into Europe this fall.

    Just before the channel’s launch last February, Bush said, “We are telling the people in the Middle East the truth about the values and the policies of the United States, and the truth always serves the cause of freedom.”

    “As long as that region is a place of tyranny and despair and anger, it will produce men and movements that threaten the safety of Americans and our friends,” he added.

    In the war against Islamist terror, the U.S. has two key advantages — it cannot lose any significant engagement on the battlefield and it cannot lose when ideas and ideologies are communicated and contrasted. Are these advantages enough to continue the fight or will they be undermined by defeatism and myopia, both at home and abroad? Ay, there’s the rub.

    The article also notes that the $2 million cost for expanding Alhurra to Europe will come out of the pending $81 billion supplemental budget request for Iraq and Afghanistan, further demonstrating that Europe is indeed viewed as a theater in the war against Islamist terror.

  • A Few Quick Hits

    Not much news tonight grabbed me so I thought I’d throw out a few links that I found interesting.

    NATO: an outdated alliance? — Some leading German pols are itching at the current NATO situation, hankering for a more established US-EU setup. I expect to blog my thoughts on this very soon.

    Analysis: A powerful message that could boomerang — A look at the possible repercussions of the bombing of a key Lebanese political figure.

    Tolerance fetish — Mark Steyn looks at the losing battlefields of the war against Islamist terror. No, not Afghanistan or Iraq, but instead he examines cultural setbacks in western nations.

  • Bush to Seek $100 Million in Military Aid for Poland

    I’ve stated before that Poland, steadfast ally that they have been in our efforts against radical Islamic terror, needed to be rewarded. It seems that is about to come to pass.

    President Bush told President Aleksander Kwasniewski of Poland on Wednesday that he would ask Congress for $100 million to modernize the Polish military, part of a program of support for a new NATO ally that has more than 2,000 soldiers in Iraq.

    In an interview shortly after his meeting with Mr. Bush, the Polish president said he had no intention of withdrawing Poland’s troops from Iraq this year, unless the new government asked them to leave. “I’m almost sure that if it will be necessary, they will be there,” said Mr. Kwasniewski, who has been under pressure at home to bring the troops back. “The question is how to organize it.”

    That indication of support is critical to Mr. Bush, who is struggling to maintain a broad international presence in Iraq, where the United States and to a lesser extent Britain have provided the great majority of the troops.

    Mr. Kwasniewski has been among the strongest supporters of Mr. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, and there are 2,400 Polish soldiers in Iraq, leading a 5,000-strong multinational division in the central and southern parts of the country. About 800 Polish soldiers are to leave this month.

    […]

    The $100 million for military modernization was hinted at by the new secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, during a brief stopover in Warsaw a week ago. “I don’t get to write the checks in the American system,” Mr. Bush cautioned. “The government – the Congress does that. But I get to put out requests.”

    […]

    Mr. Bush also announced that he would ask Congress for $400 million in additional funds “to strengthen the capabilities of our partners to advance democracy and stability around the world.” Poland would receive a significant portion of those funds as well, officials said.

    Mr. Kwasniewski said the money was not a quid pro quo for Poland’s troop presence in Iraq. But clearly, returning home with financial commitments from Mr. Bush will help him in a parliamentary debate about how long to remain in Iraq, at a time when opinion polls show that a clear majority of Poles want an end to the troops presence.

    Military assistance is entirely appropriate for a country with a backbone and a willingness to stand along side its allies. Certainly, Poland and other coalition nations, particularly those whose militaries were shaped and equipped during the days of the Warsaw Pact, could stand to have some martial modernization.

    I entirely endorse this move, though I’m certain that some will deride it as a payoff, as little more than a twenty left on the dresser on the way out the door. I hope those who take this view, those who sided with Sen. John Kerry when he derided our allies as the “coalition of the bribed and coerced,” will recall that Kerry himself called for rewarding Poland after he essentially insulted our staunch ally.