Gulf investment flow to Erbil and Gulf Airways is seeking to seize the opportunities

Gulf investment flow to Erbil and Gulf Airways is seeking to seize the opportunities Translated by IRAQdirectory.com - [12/23/2009] The city of Erbil, the oldest inhabited city in the world and the capital of the Kurdistan region, is considered an economic weight of a region that is a mine of oil wealth in a country, struggling to enjoy security, and this is why Gulf companies invest in tourism sector which is expected to boom, including Gulf Airways Co. , one of the few operators in Erbil airport. In spite of that infrastructure of Erbil, which is the third largest city, not the same as their counterparts in some of the large Arab cities, but it is clear that they take steadily towards building a strong infrastructure of roads and electricity under normal conditions and hard terrain. In a visit by the journalists from Bahrain to experience the tourism in Erbil, sponsored by Gulf Airways , which flies directly from Bahrain to the city, it was possible to see a number of tourist attractions which are expected to qualify the city to be a tourist city that attract Gulf tourists, this city is an opportunity to Gulf airways to take advantage of the weight of the city which will increase with economic development of Iraq and the fruition of the reconstruction effort. For example, Shaqlawah which lies on the edge of the mountain city of Erbil, a city tour of first-class, it contains the old commercial streets are paved with bricks ways to remind us of the cities of the Mediterranean basin. And on aspects of this street shops offer local production and sweets , this mountainous region of Erbil famous of nut farming and confectionery of various kinds. And Shaqlawah is not the only tourist area in the city of Erbil, there is the famous historical Citadel of Erbil. The city settled a number of civilizations such as Assyrians, Persians, and Sasanian and Arab and Ottoman empires, it is clear that there were Turkish influence in the city, particularly with regard to the number of modern Turkish goods that flood to markets there. On a visit to the Citadel of Erbil, which has a height of around 415 meters above sea level and covers an area over 102 square meters, except houses which are contained in the castle and the city represented the past and that have been vacated in preparation for the development of the region or the old city, it seems clear the eastern architecture and bathrooms spread and inspired from the Turks. The organizers of the castle, seek to the inclusion of the castle within the World Heritage List adopted by the United Nations. The city of Erbil, has a high level of security compared with other countries of Iraq and this has made the city the capital to attract large conferences and exhibitions and meetings for large companies operating in Iraq.

Iraq: Stryker troops doing detective work

SCOTT FONTAINE; The News Tribune Last updated: December 22nd, 2009 05:27 AM (PST) KHANDARI, Iraq – The man sat crossed-legged on a floor cushion, sipped tea and explained his woes to the soldiers from Fort Lewis. As an Iraqi policeman on the American payroll, he has killed plenty of enemy fighters – and now his enemies are taking revenge. Al-Qaida in Iraq killed his mother, brother and uncle. The man started the habit of checking under his car each morning. One day last month, he discovered a magnetically attached bomb. “They are targeting me,” he told members of a Fort Lewis Stryker platoon. “The bomb was meant for me and my kids.” Lt. Chris Fradin, a platoon leader with the 4th Battalion, 9th Infantry Regiment, asked the policeman for specific details and took notes. A local sheikh earlier had given Fradin names of men who might have planted the bomb. The policeman provided his own list of possible suspects. Fradin, 25, questioned the man about tribal links that permeate Nasir wa Salam, an area of 150,000 people at the western edge of Baghdad province. What did he know about the suspects? To what tribes did they belong? Do they have a reason to kill him? “Look, man, I’m just trying to get to the bottom of this whole thing,” said Fradin, a New York native and Spanaway resident on his first deployment. “We want this guy caught as much as you do.” U.S. soldiers increasingly find themselves in the detective-like role of Fradin and other members of the 2nd Platoon, Torch Company. They investigate crimes, chase leads and build cases against suspects. They gather enough information so that an Iraqi court can order an arrest warrant, and then Iraqi security forces can arrest the suspect. It is one of the ways the American military’s mission in Iraq has transformed in the last several months into an advisory and training capacity. “Last time we were here, we saw lots of fighting, lots of kicking in doors, lots of cordon and searches,” said Staff Sgt. Fernando Villafana, a squad leader on his second deployment with the same Stryker brigade. When the 4th Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division first deployed from Fort Lewis to Iraq, it was spring 2007; the unit served 15 months at the height of the violence, and lost 37 soldiers. The brigade returned to Iraq in September and has not had a single soldier killed. “It’s totally different now. It’s a whole new mission,” Villafana said. FIRST OF SEVERAL LEADS The policeman was the first of several leads the Stryker soldiers pursued Sunday. Their search for people behind a recent spate of magnetic bomb attacks also took them to the nearby towns of Abu Mansier and Shahada Abu Nasir. The policeman believed the would-be assassin was either a neighbor or a criminal he recently arrested. He provided names and background information to the soldiers. They asked about three other names, included on the list provided by a local sheikh. During the interview, the varied spelling of Arabic names hindered progress at times. The policeman appeared eager to give up damaging information about his neighbors and tribesmen. “It can get frustrating,” Fradin said after it was over. “Anytime accusations get thrown around, you need to think about all the possibilities. Like the names of the suspects we’ve received: Are they insurgents, or are others trying to get them out of the way because of some blood feud? It’s not always easy to tell.” KNOCKING ON DOORS The platoon’s next stop was Abu Mansier, a ramshackle town of buckling streets and crumbling buildings. The soldiers searched for the brother of a man killed by another magnetic bomb. The soldiers knew the man lived near the mosque. Fradin and the unit’s Iraqi interpreter knocked on doors around the area. Children ran from their home to stare at the soldiers, who patrolled the dirt streets with their Stryker vehicles following several hundred feet behind. One fireteam remained in constant search of higher ground; members talked to shopkeepers and homeowners who allowed them to use the top floor of their homes to scan for potential attacks. Many people who spoke to Fradin said the same thing: They weren’t sure where the man in question lived – a claim the lieutenant doubted. The soldiers next mounted their Strykers and drove to Shahada Abu Nasir, seeking family members of a third person killed by a similar-style bomb. The Americans visited a produce market, where merchants sold crates of oranges, bananas, potatoes and carrots. ‘WHAT THE WAR HAS BECOME’ The shopkeeper told Fradin he had heard about the attack, but didn’t know the person killed. As they spoke, most bystanders acted as if the Americans weren’t there. They shopped, sipped tea or smoked cigarettes and talked. “People in these neighborhoods know the sight of American troops,” said Staff Sgt. Brenden Bersey, a Spokane native on his third Iraq deployment. “It used to be that we would attack pretty much anybody who looked at us the wrong way. But we don’t do that anymore, and I think everyone here realizes that.” The platoon next visited a house of another Iraqi policeman who found a bomb attached to the undercarriage of his car. This policeman agreed to visit the joint security station where the platoon lives and talk to one of the battalion’s intelligence experts. Based on what he says, one of the 2nd Platoon’s upcoming missions could be to piece together more information on the bombmaker. “This is the way things are over here now,” said Sgt. Derek Quade, a team leader on his second deployment. “This is what the war has become.” scott.fontaine@thenewstribune.com blog.thenewstribune.com/military

Iraqi Prime Minister in Cairo to improve ties with Egypt

The Associated Press Sunday, December 20, 2009; 11:58 AM CAIRO -- Iraq's prime minister opened a landmark visit to Egypt on Sunday in what aides described as an ambitious attempt to improve relations with one of the Arab world's most powerful players. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's last visit to Egypt was in 2007 as part of an international conference to discuss his war-ravaged country's future. But this visit was designed specifically for meetings with Egyptian officials. A statement posted on the prime minister's Web site following his arrival in Egypt expressed al-Maliki's happiness at moving forward with a new phase of cooperation between the two countries. The trip appeared intended to drum up support in the Arab world, where Iraq's Shiite-led government and its close ties to Iran are often viewed with suspicion by its mostly Sunni neighbors. Al-Maliki appears particularly eager for better relations with Egypt, an influential U.S. ally and host of the Arab League. Relations, already strained during the reign of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, deteriorated further after Egypt's ambassador to Baghdad was kidnapped and killed by al-Qaida in 2005. Since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, the post-Saddam Hussein government struggled to build ties with other Arab nations. Several have since named ambassadors to Baghdad, including Egypt, which appointed a new envoy in June. Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh told the Associated Press before the Sunday visit that the prime minister would be meeting with government officials and Amr Moussa, the secretary general of the Arab League, during his two-day visit. "The visit to Egypt is a political one which will enhance good bilateral relations between the two countries," al-Dabbagh said. Al-Dabbagh said the visit would include signing of many "agreements and memorandums of understanding" but did not elaborate. Al-Maliki is expected to return to Iraq on Monday. As violence has subsided in Iraq, the country has been trying to attract international investors to help rebuild after years of violence and neglect. The Iraqi prime minister also renewed calls for Egyptian companies and expertise to invest in Iraq's provinces. Tens of thousands of Egyptians used to work in Iraq, but the vast majority left after Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait and the 2003-U.S. led invasion of Iraq. Iraqi political analyst Hadi Jalo said that al-Maliki likely believes he has a better chance at mending ties with the Arabs through Egypt, rather than Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are seen as much more aligned with Iraq's Sunni parties, while Egypt is seen as more moderate. "Al-Maliki's chances with Saudi Arabia are so weak, he could not approach Saudi Arabia so he wants to penetrate the Arab rejection shield of his government through his visit to Egypt," he said.

Mullen in Iraq: US drawdown on schedule

By ANNE GEARAN The Associated Press Friday, December 18, 2009; 7:50 AM BASRA, Iraq -- The top U.S. military officer, arriving in Iraq Friday, said he is confident that the war-torn country will hold elections on March 7 and that the U.S. drawdown will begin on schedule that month. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a group of enlisted troops that the U.S. withdrawal plans are fixed and will come quickly after the election. "That draw down from 115,000 to 50,000 is going to happen, no doubt in my mind," Mullen said. The election was postponed from January, but Mullen said that will not change U.S. plans. Mullen toured U.S. bases in Basra and Talil, and met with an array of Iraqi military and civilian leaders. In Talil, Mullen saw an Army brigade that is the model for the changing US military role in Iraq. The troops' main job is giving advice and backup to Iraqi forces. In Basra, near the Iranian border, a Shiite cleric greeted Mullen warmly. Abdul Aziz Moosawi told Mullen he is grateful for U.S. help despite earlier skepticism. But Moussawi bluntly explained the calculus of life next door to powerful and influential Iran after the admiral said he is worried about Iran's activities abroad. Iran's influence is inevitable and sometimes works in positive ways, Moosawi said. "But I think we feel the negative impact more," he said.

Pelosi says rallying votes for troop surge in Afghanistan will be Obama's job

By Paul Kane Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, December 17, 2009 President Obama will have to argue his own case to House Democrats as he seeks support for a planned surge of 30,000 troops into Afghanistan, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Wednesday, adding that she is finished asking her colleagues to back wars that they do not support. "The president's going to have to make his case," Pelosi told reporters at a year-end briefing on the legislative session. While the next round of war-funding legislation is not likely to be considered until spring, Pelosi said there will be a test vote in January on support for the troop buildup. Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio) has said he will offer a privileged resolution next month calling for an immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. The vote is likely to fail because of broad Republican support for the war, but it could reveal the depth of the schism between Obama and his fellow Democrats on the new troop plan. "The president looked at, obviously, a number of options that he believed did not adequately change the calculus of what was currently going on in Afghanistan, and that the best way forward was to do this," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said in his daily news briefing. "The president may not get the agreement of every member of Congress or every Democratic member of Congress, but will certainly make the case for why he believes this is the best path forward." Asked if the administration was surprised by Pelosi's position, Gibbs said the speaker had in the past made statements "in opposition to adding more forces, as, quite frankly, a number of members of Congress have done." The last real legislative effort to alter war funding came in June, when Republicans balked at the more than $100 billion supplemental funding bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because Obama asked Democrats to attach funding for the International Monetary Fund to the must-pass legislation. Most GOP lawmakers opposed the IMF funding as a "global bailout." With just five Republicans voting for the war measure, Pelosi had to beg Democratic colleagues who had long opposed the two wars to support the legislation, and she promised not to "ever ask them to vote for it" again. Pelosi, who has warned of "serious unrest" among House Democrats about Afghanistan, said Wednesday that she intends to live up to that vow on the upcoming supplemental bill, which will require $30 billion to $40 billion for the additional 30,000 troops. "We have to do this for the new president," Pelosi said Wednesday, recounting her conversation with Democrats in June. "Then he will come up with a plan, and then it's up to him to ask you for your support. What I've told the members is to give the president room, to listen to what he has to say, that we will provide the briefings and they will have the information. But I can't -- this, for members, is a vote of conscience. War votes are votes of conscience." Once the full 30,000 troops are in place, the number of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan will top 100,000, roughly tripling the number taking part in operations there a year ago. The buildup in Afghanistan has left many Democrats disillusioned with Obama, who campaigned for the Senate in 2004 and the presidency in 2008 in opposition to the Iraq war. Some anti-war liberals in the House and Senate have demanded consideration of the supplemental funding early in 2010 so they can be on record opposing the surge before most of the new troops are sent, probably in March. But Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), head of the Pentagon subcommittee that will first consider the supplemental appropriation, has conceded that, though a majority of Democrats probably oppose the surge, there will not be enough votes to pull funding for the effort. For now, Pelosi said she is hoping the vote on the Kucinich resolution will meet the demands from the anti-war wing of her party. "There are many members in the caucus who are eager to have a vote soon on Afghanistan," she said. "This may satisfy that need. We shall see." Asked how she would vote on the Kucinich resolution, Pelosi declined to answer.

Vietnam, U.S. Will Expand Military Links, Hold Talks Next Year

By Viola Gienger Dec. 16 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. and Vietnam agreed to expand their defense links during only the second visit to Washington by a Vietnamese defense minister in more than 30 years, the Pentagon said. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and General Phung Quang Thanh agreed during a one-hour working lunch yesterday that defense officials will meet next year “to enhance military to military engagement,” said Air Force Major Maureen Schumann, a spokeswoman for the Defense Department, in an e-mailed statement. The two countries have taken steps on defense cooperation since normalizing relations in 1995, including visits by U.S. Navy ships to Vietnamese ports, as they eye the rising influence of China in the region. They established ties 20 years after the Vietnam War ended. The U.S. and Vietnam will move slowly toward further defense cooperation in part because of their history and also to avoid antagonizing China, said Ernest Bower, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “You don’t want to provoke the Chinese,” said Bower, a former president of the U.S.-ASEAN Business Council, which seeks to advance trade links with the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, a group that includes Vietnam. The defense chiefs said joint work in demining, military medicine and operations related to missing soldiers was “positive,” according to the Pentagon statement. “They further agreed to look at ways to expand cooperation in peacekeeping, search and rescue and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief,” Schumann said. “There are steps in this process” of re-establishing military ties, said Bower, who was briefed by both sides in advance of Thanh’s visit. U.S. Vessels With the ship visits under way, the countries are discussing locations for facilities in Vietnam that could be used to supply and maintain U.S. vessels, Bower said. “You sort of move up the spectrum of engagement on military-to-military cooperation that eventually leads to technology sales,” he said. The defense minister also met with other officials in the U.S. government and in Congress, including Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg and Senator Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat and Vietnam veteran who serves on the Foreign Relations and Armed Services committees. Vietnam and the U.S. agreed to exchange such visits every three years after Defense Secretary William Cohen made a trip to the capital, Hanoi, in 2000. The first postwar visit to the U.S. by a Vietnamese defense minister occurred in 2003, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld traveled to Hanoi in 2006. Nuclear Programs Steinberg was in Hanoi in September on a swing through the region and his discussions with officials in Vietnam touched on North Korea and Iran’s nuclear programs. Vietnam holds one of the rotating seats on the United Nations Security Council. The Vietnam War also has shadowed American relations with Southeast Asia more broadly, Bower said. Vietnam’s chairmanship of Asean next year might step up U.S. involvement in the region, a process already begun this year with President Barack Obama participating in the first U.S.-Asean summit last month in Singapore. “There really was a Vietnam hangover after the war,” Bower said. “The United States really didn’t have the appetite to engage in Southeast Asia.” Southeast Asia Webb, who speaks Vietnamese and is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific, called the ties with Vietnam “very important.” “It is vitally important that the United States engage with Southeast Asia at all levels,” Webb said in an e-mailed statement after his 35-minute meeting with Thanh. Vietnam, which fought its most recent war with China in 1979, is interested in solidifying ties with the U.S. for security, Bower said. China told some international oil and gas companies to halt exploration in offshore areas that Vietnam considers part of its territory, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Scot Marciel told a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee in July, according to testimony posted on the panel’s Web site. The U.S. is “concerned about tension between China and Vietnam, as both countries seek to tap potential oil and gas deposits that lie beneath the South China Sea,” Marciel said. For that reason and others, the U.S. shares an interest in “a strong Southeast Asia that could balance China,” Bower said. “Ironically, it’s the country that kind of pushed us away that may be a key part of bringing us back,” Bower said.

Al Qaeda on the Defensive

Bill Roggio- Weekly Standard: Over the weekend, Adam Gadahn, the American traitor who serves as a chief propagandist al Qaeda, released a videotape titled 'The Mujahideen Do Not Target Muslims.' Gadahn and al Qaeda are overly defensive about recent reports that the terror group primarily kills Muslims, and not Westerners. Gadahn is responding to the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point's recently released report which found that Muslims have accounted for 85 percent of the casualties from al Qaeda attacks between 2004-2008. In fact, the report shows that since 2007, only 2 percent of al Qaeda's victims have been non-Muslims. Gadahn's attempt to defend al Qaeda from these facts is clumsy and unconvincing. The Combating Terrorism Center won a rare victory in the information war, where al Qaeda dominates the narrative while Western governments refuse to engage al Qaeda in the ideological sphere. Here is what Defense Secretary Robert Gates had to say about our inability to communicate in November 2007: ...we are miserable at communicating to the rest of the world what we are about as a society and a culture, about freedom and democracy, about our policies and our goals. It is just plain embarrassing that al-Qaeda is better at communicating its message on the internet than America. As one foreign diplomat asked a couple of years ago, "How has one man in a cave managed to out-communicate the world's greatest communication society?" Little has changed in those two years.

Defense secy tells US troops Iraq mission critical

By ANNE FLAHERTY The Associated Press Friday, December 11, 2009; 7:54 PM KIRKUK, Iraq -- U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday that plans are on track to reduce American forces in Iraq next year and warned that neighboring Iran risks sanctions soon if it fails to cooperate on its controversial nuclear program. At a town hall meeting with about 300 soldiers and airmen at the Kirkuk airbase, Gates was asked whether political turmoil might threaten plans to send more American troops home after Iraq's March elections. He said all indications are that Iraqi leaders were tired of war and wanted a unified country. The secretary also said significant international sanctions would be levied if Iran continues with its current nuclear program, and added that all options, including military action, must stay on the table. "I think that you are going to see some significant additional sanctions imposed by the international community," Gates said. He cautioned that "any military action would only buy some time, maybe two or three years." Gates said Iran's provocations were bringing together the international community, including Russia and China, which have long been reluctant to punish Tehran but are now showing more willingness to confront the regime over its nuclear program. Iran insists its program is for civilian energy purposes. The secretary also told troops that Afghanistan will be a "tough fight" but that the security situation would improve as more troops arrive. Before departing Iraq Friday, Gates met with Massoud Barzani, president of the semi-autonomous region of Kurdistan in the area's capital, Irbil. Barzani recently lifted his objections to Iraq's elections law. U.S. officials say the political agreement is critical to keeping the U.S. troop withdrawal schedule on track. Earlier, Gates met with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Baghdad for about 45 minutes. Gates expressed his condolences for a wave of bombings that have claimed 127 lives and rattled the country's government, and offered any assistance Iraq might need. The bombings have raised tough questions for al-Maliki about the ability of Iraq's security forces ahead of next year's planned withdrawal of U.S. combat troops. The U.S. says it plans to keep the bulk of its 120,000 forces in Iraq through the March 7 elections, but plans to leave the country entirely by December 2011. U.S. officials are nervous that following the nation's March elections Iraqi officials will drag their heels in forming a unified government, as they did in 2005 when insurgents tried to exploit the temporary leadership vaccuum and destabilize the government.

1 year into Obama era, threats posed by Iran, North Korea worsen

Analysis By Associated Press December 13, 2009, Associated PressIn this Nov. 30, 2009, photo released by the semi-official Iranian Students News Agency, Iranian technicians work with foreign colleagues at the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, just outside the southern port city of Bushehr, Iran. Iran's announcement of plans to build 10 more uranium enrichment facilities is largely bluster following a strong rebuke from the U.N.'s nuclear agency, according to analysts. GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria -- Another year has passed in the world's standoff with Iran and North Korea over nuclear weapons, and the situation has only gotten worse. Both countries have pressed ahead with their programs, while the U.N. has stuck to sanctions that seem to have little if any effect, and a slew of other countries are now seen as candidates for the nuclear club. "The world is worse off than a year ago," says Gao Shangtao, a professor of international relations at China Foreign Affairs University in Beijing, when asked about Iran and North Korea's defiance. "They will not give up." Tensions were already high a year ago. Back then, as the Obama administration was preparing to take office, it heard a chilling assessment from William Perry, President Bill Clinton's defense secretary when the North Korea crisis first blew up in the early 1990s. "If North Korea and Iran cannot be contained, we face the real danger of a cascade of proliferation of nuclear-armed states," he told a conference on the challenges facing the incoming White House team. "Indeed, I believe that today we are clearly at the tipping point of nuclear proliferation. Under Barack Obama, Washington has sought to talk directly with both Tehran and Pyongyang — tactics shunned by the Bush administration. The U.N. Security Council has approved a second package of sanctions in response to the North's nuclear defiance and could agree on a fourth set for Iran within months. More about Iran More about Korea More about Obama More world news: Cleveland.com/world More national news: Cleveland.com/nation But both countries seem impervious. A year ago, North Korea's negotiations with the U.S., Russia, China, South Korea and Japan were stalled — but the North had at least mothballed its nuclear weapons program and was still discussing dismantling it. Since then, it has expelled International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, restarted its atomic facilities, test-fired ballistic missiles, quit the six-party talks and conducted its second nuclear test. U.S. envoy Stephen Bosworth was in North Korea this week, trying to salvage the talks. He reported no commitments, just "a common understanding" that talks should resume. Iran, meanwhile, has moved closer to being able to develop nuclear weapons, even while insisting that its atomic program is meant solely to generate energy. Its thousands of centrifuges have produced enough enriched uranium to produce two nuclear weapons, compared with one a year ago — even though Tehran maintains the stockpile will only be used for nuclear fuel and not for weapons-grade material. It only belatedly revealed that it is building a second enrichment site and stonewalled an IAEA probe of allegations that it had experimented with making nuclear weapons. Tehran has threatened to expand its enrichment program tenfold, even while rejecting an IAEA-brokered plan to supply fuel for its research reactor if Iran exports of most of its enriched stockpile. On Saturday, Iran's foreign minister said his country was ready for a swap of enriched uranium for nuclear fuel — the key demand of a U.N.-sponsored initiative to defuse global fears over its nuclear program. In what is almost certain to be a deal breaker, however, Manouchehr Mottaki spoke of exchanging the material in phases rather than all at once as is called for in the U.N. plan. Such a staggered swap would leave Iran in control of enough uranium to make a bomb. A senior Obama administration official said Mottaki's remarks appeared to fall short of demands. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the U.S. has yet to formulate an official response to the development. Mottaki's remarks were part of a string of conflicting Iranian statements that began with initial word in October that the country would accept the proposal as is. Several Iranian lawmakers later rejected the plan outright and the ensuing volley of various Iranian responses — all via the media instead of the form of an official answer — have strengthened the belief that Iran is simply playing for time. The U.S. administration has signaled willingness to hold off on further sanctions and wait out the year for Iran to signal readiness to negotiate. Russia has indicated it may support extra sanctions, despite its strategic and economic interests in Iran. China, which previously opposed new sanctions, usually follows the Kremlin's lead on Iran. Still, neither Moscow nor Beijing is likely to go beyond the present relatively selective and symbolic sanctions and impose crippling penalties such as blocking gasoline exports which Iran needs because its oil-refining capacity is weak. In June, after the second North Korean nuclear test, the U.N. strengthened its arms embargo and authorized searches of North Korean ships on the high seas. But Pyongyang shows no sign of buckling. "Nothing seems to have worked," says Mark Fitzpatrick, a nonproliferation expert at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies. The remaining options, he said, are isolation and deterrence until eventually the North Korean system will collapse.'" For Iran, "threatening military force" may be the way forward, he said. The Obama administration has not moved away from the Bush administration's position that every option remains on the table to prevent Iran from going nuclear. But such threats come primarily from Israel, which has the Mideast's most formidable military arsenal, including submarines capable of carrying nuclear-tipped missiles. "The Israelis will not sit idly by" once they decide that diplomacy has failed, warns analyst John Swenson-Wright of London's Royal Institute of International Affairs. The fear of a nuclear-armed Iran and North Korea propelling regional arms races is also growing. Japan's advanced civilian nuclear program can easily be retooled to produce weapons, should it lose faith in the U.S. nuclear umbrella. South Korea could follow suit. "Already, North Korea's nuclear advances have triggered reflections in Seoul, Tokyo, and other regional capitals about options that were previously considered taboo," writes nonproliferation expert Graham Alison, director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. "Japan has a ready stockpile of nearly 2,000 kilograms (over 4,000 pounds) of highly enriched uranium and a well-developed missile program. ... it could adopt a serious nuclear weapons posture virtually overnight," he writes in the January-February issue of "Foreign Affairs." Iran's neighbors to the west also are unlikely to tolerate the Islamic republic going nuclear. "Saudi Arabia, for example, has insisted that it will not accept a future in which Iran ... has nuclear weapons and it does not," writes Alison. "Egypt and Turkey could also follow in Iran's nuclear footsteps."

No bombs dropped in Iraq in November

By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer Air Force Times Saturday Dec 12, 2009 For the second time this year, no bombs were dropped in Iraq for an entire month, according to Air Forces Central Command. While Air Force fighters flew 821 close-air support sorties over Iraq in November, none of the missions resulted in a bomb release. June had the same zero tally. Over Afghanistan, Air Force, Navy and coalition warplanes flew 2,916 close-air support sorties, releasing 271 bombs. Transport planes were busy over Afghanistan, airdropping 4.13 million pounds of supplies to bases. Tankers pumped 120 million pounds of fuel in missions across the Persian Gulf region and Central Asia. Reconnaissance aircraft flew 2,233 sorties.

What If We Had Captured Al-Somali?

Weekly Standard Blog ABC reports that the high-level al Qaeda operative killed in Tuesday's drone strike in Pakistan was Saleh al-Somali. According to ABC, U.S. officials believe al-Somali "was responsible for al Qaeda's operations outside of the Afghanistan-Pakistan region and formed part of al Qaeda's senior leadership circle." No doubt we should enjoy the battlefield execution of a thug like al-Somali, and no doubt the Obama administration deserves credit for stepping up the drone war in Pakistan, where al Qaeda's upper echelons have been battered to the point of seeking refuge in Afghanistan according to some accounts. But you have to wonder what kind of information al-Somali might have produced if exposed to the vigorous interrogation methods this administration has renounced. This guy was in operational control of all al Qaeda cells in Europe and North America -- he had to have some useful information. Now if this administration had ordered a bunch of special ops guys in to capture al-Somali, they would have had to read him his rights and ship him straight to NYC for a meeting with the public defender (that or the "black prison" at Bagram, which doesn't exist, because this administration rejects the false choice between our ideals and our security). It would be foolish for this administration to risk American lives to capture a terrorist like al-Somali, only to waste millions in taxpayer dollars to go through a years-long trial just for the chance that we might get to execute him instead of paying for him to live out his days in a prison in your neighborhood. But what if this administration could have used the most effective enhanced interrogation techniques on al-Somali? Imagine the intel this guy could have produced, the operations he could have given up, the cells he could have destroyed ... unfortunately we'll never know how much damage this terrorist could have done to his own networks.

Victory in Afghanistan

What Deciders Must Do Jennifer Rubin Commentary magazine- 12.11.2009 - 8:58 AM Stephen Hadley, George W. Bush’s national security adviser, knows a thing or two about surges. He writes in support of Obama’s Afghanistan surge and urges bipartisan support for the plan. First, he must console and assure conservatives that Obama’s 18-month deadline is meaningless: “The president and his national security team have said there is no arbitrary withdrawal schedule or exit date.” Well, at least the security team has said it. He quotes Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates, who’ve spent the past week reiterating this point. And Hadley retraces the significant troop increases authorized under the Bush administration, which has been maligned as blocking or ignoring commanders’ requests. But his central point is simple: It will take time and great effort, but we can succeed by convincing friends, foes and our own forces that we are committed to success and will not fail; motivating and enabling the Afghan government and people to accept greater responsibility for their future; and helping Pakistan in its effort to put down its own Taliban threat and control its territory. The last goal is paramount. A destabilized Pakistan would threaten regional stability and ensure that Afghanistan could not be stabilized. Success will depend on proving to Pakistan that it has an enduring partner in the United States. Our strategy can succeed in Afghanistan if we are committed to succeeding, not just getting out. Hadley’s advice is a not-so-subtle prodding of the president. A successful counterinsurgency is as much about “motivating and enabling” our allies and intimidating our foes as it is about getting the troop numbers right. Also essential to victory is the projection of staying power. And frankly, Obama has been rather mute since the West Point Speech, allowing his advisers to do the clean-up work on a speech that has been seen, by both supporters and critics, as a weak effort in defense of an essential policy. It seems that Obama’s task is to convince our allies that he is every much committed to victory, yes victory, and to staying put until the job is done, as was his predecessor in Iraq. Obama has adopted the “surge” terminology; now he must demonstrate the determination that will ensure its success. It can’t be delegated to his advisers, and it can’t be hedged. It must be unequivocal and without regard to the sensibilities of former political soul mates on the Left. That, after all, is what commanders in chief must do

After Delays, Deal Set on Iraq Election Law

When the New York Times is reporting on progress from Iraq, well that certainly says something about the state of affairs.. New York Times By MARC SANTORA and RIYADH MOHAMMED BAGHDAD — Lawmakers pulled Iraq back from the brink of a constitutional crisis on Sunday night, brokering a last-minute compromise that will allow for the first national elections since 2005. A deal on the election law has fallen apart before, underscoring the deep sectarian divide that remains in Iraq, despite a drop in violence. Fighting over the law also threatens to complicate the American withdrawal. After months of wrangling, the Iraqi Parliament gathered just before midnight to approve a deal that had been secured only hours before in closed-door talks. “It is a great achievement for Iraq,” said Khalid al-Attiya, a deputy speaker of Parliament, shortly after the vote. The deal had been approved Sunday by Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish leaders, according to government officials, so it was unlikely to collapse again. American and United Nations diplomats worked furiously over the weekend to secure the compromise, but were often unsure of what was happening as the discussions among Iraq’s senior political leaders broke down time and again. At one point on Sunday, a group of Western diplomats gathered in the dismal Parliament cafeteria, which was bombed by militants in 2007, comparing notes to see if they could make sense of the latest developments. The deal was not very different from the original election law, which was vetoed by Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni and one of Iraq’s two vice presidents. He said the law underrepresented Iraqis outside the country, who are largely Sunnis who fled the sectarian war that plunged the country into turmoil. Essentially, the dispute centered on the allocation of seats in Parliament, with each sect angling to get as many seats as possible in the areas where it felt strongest. Because a national census that was supposed to take place earlier this year was postponed, there is no accurate count of Iraqi citizens, and each political faction was wary of being shortchanged. The initial effort to pass an election law was delayed on 11 separate occasions, but when an agreement was reached Nov. 8, it was hailed as a sign of progress. That deal quickly fell apart when Mr. Hashimi used his constitutional authority to veto it. Mr. Hashimi is one of three members of Iraq’s Presidency Council, which also includes President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, and Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi, a Shiite. Together they have the power effectively to veto any law passed by Parliament. In response to the first veto, Parliament passed a law that was viewed as even more unfavorable to Sunnis, prompting Mr. Hashimi to threaten a veto once again. Fearful that another veto could delay elections indefinitely, top American officials have been appealing directly to the country’s top lawmakers to step back from the abyss. The White House said in a statement on Sunday that the United States welcomed adoption of the resolution on the Iraqi election law. Yet as night fell in Baghdad on Sunday and no deal had been reached, aides to Mr. Hashimi waited outside the door of the speaker’s office with a veto order at the ready. It was only around 10 p.m. that the outlines of a deal became clear. Parliament would be expanded to 325 seats from 275, with 310 of those seats allotted to Iraq’s 18 provinces and the remainder reserved for Iraqis living outside the country. But even after the deal had been largely agreed upon, lawmakers were still haggling over such issues as how the Christian minority would be represented. For all the fighting, the compromise represented little change from the law passed Oct. 27 and then vetoed. Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki had warned that the delay could lead to increased violence, and there were fears of a replay of the 2005 election, which was largely boycotted by the Sunnis and fueled a sense of anger that bolstered Sunni militants. Over the weekend, a series of attacks underscored just how fragile the security gains remain. On Friday, militants in Saddam Hussein’s hometown, Tikrit, killed four members of the police force, including a local commander who had gained a reputation as one of the staunchest foes of Sunni insurgents. While much of the recent violence has been concentrated in Sunni strongholds, there has been concern about Shiite militias regaining traction. In Basra, where more than 150 prisoners once affiliated with the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr have been released in recent weeks, there have been a spate of assassinations of political figures, according to local security officials. If the deal holds, it will be a relief to American military commanders, who have been timing their withdrawal to the elections. While the American military role here has already been greatly reduced, the idea was to still have a sizable presence at the time of the election and during the seating of a new government. Election officials have said they would need at least 60 days’ notice to write up ballots, secure polling stations and generally prepare for a vote. Barring another political meltdown, that means a date for the elections could be set for as early as the end of February. Gen. Ray Odierno, the commander of American forces in Iraq, has said that while the military has built flexibility into the withdrawal timeline, the plan was to step up troop departures in the spring to meet President Obama’s goal of having all combat troops out of the country by August 2010.

Retailers report surprise drop in sales for November

By ANNE D'INNOCENZIO (AP) – 16 hours ago NEW YORK — A decline in sales at the nation's retailers in November after two consecutive months of gains is an ominous warning sign for the holiday shopping season and for an economy in the early stages of a fragile recovery. Many merchants may be forced to discount more than they planned to get financially strapped holiday shoppers to buy after last weekend's respectable bargain buying surge didn't offset weak spending for the rest of the month. The 0.3 percent decline, according to one measure, is especially worrisome because it comes on top of a freefall last November as spooked shoppers went into a defensive crouch after the financial meltdown. Analyst had expected a solid gain. Consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of all economic activity. According to sales results announced Thursday, a diverse group of stores, including department store chains Macy's Inc., Saks Inc., teen merchant Abercrombie & Fitch Co. and discounter Target Corp. posted sharper-than-expected sales declines. Children's Place Stores Inc. was among the biggest disappointments, suffering a steep drop, though Wall Street expected a small gain. Analysts caution that a better gauge of the month may lie in government retail sales numbers, slated to be released Dec. 11. The numbers offer a broader view of spending, including online sales and results from electronics chains — two bright spots for the holiday season, analysts said. Thursday's figures also don't include Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, which stopped releasing its monthly figures after announcing April results. Warm weather also was a factor in depressing shoppers' appetite for seasonal apparel like coats, analysts said. Nevertheless, November's buying trends show that Americans mostly will shop only when the bargains are deep. "I think we are seeing the true stripes of the consumer," said BMO Capital Markets analyst John Morris. "She is still motivated by need rather than want." After consumers showed some signs of life in September and October, merchants saw a sales lull throughout November until shoppers crowded stores for the early morning deep-discounted merchandise for the day after Thanksgiving. However, shoppers were picky about what they bought for themselves and others, focusing on discounted electronics like flat-panel TVs and hard-to-find toys like Zhu Zhu Pets. But mostly shoppers stuck to sharply reduced basics like boots and bed sheets. Trish Groski from Tucson, Ariz., plans to spend less than the several hundred dollars she spent last year to keep in line with her dwindling income. Groski and her husband have been out of full-time work for about two years and are getting by with their online businesses selling things like handmade items and vacuum parts. "If there's a coupon and it corresponds with an item I want to get, absolutely I'll use it," Groski said. Economists say such depressed spending could persist for several years amid stubbornly high unemployment — now at 10.2 percent. The Commerce Department reported last week that over the 12 months ending in October, wages and salaries, the most important component of incomes, fell 2.9 percent. Target said strong sales during Thanksgiving weekend were not enough to offset weak business the rest of the month, sending sales in stores open at least a year down 1.5 percent. The drop was bigger than the 0.5 percent drop analysts were expecting. Warehouse club operator Costco Wholesale Corp. posted a 6 percent sales gain, though smaller than expected and half of which came from higher gas prices and currency shifts. Another exception was Limited Brands Inc., which runs Victoria's Secret and Bath & Body Works. It reported a solid sales gain instead of the sales decrease that Wall Street projected. The figures are based on sales at stores open at least a year and are considered a key indicator of a retailers' health. Though business was weak, stores have cut inventory, reasoning it's better to leave some sales on the table than be stuck with unsold merchandise. That could help protect their profits. The 0.3 percent drop compared with a year ago, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers tally, is well below the reduced growth forecast of 3 to 4 percent. The results come on top of a 7.7 percent drop a year ago. Another sales tally from Thomson Reuters, which uses different methodology, was up a meager 0.5 percent in November. Niemira said he wasn't lowering his already conservative 1 percent holiday sales growth forecast.

Iran President Says Nuclear Enrichment Will Grow

By WILLIAM J. BROAD The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said Wednesday that his nation would produce a higher grade of nuclear fuel on its own, escalating its war of words with the international community over its disputed nuclear program. His declaration continued a daily drumbeat of defiant proclamations from the Iranian leadership, which has vowed to expand its nuclear plants and hone its capability to enrich uranium despite strong warnings from the United Nations and Western powers that its program violates its commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. “I declare here that, with the grace of God, the Iranian nation will produce 20 percent fuel and anything it needs itself,” Mr. Ahmadinejad told a cheering crowd in the central city of Isfahan, according to the Reuters news agency. Iran claims it needs a relatively high grade of nuclear fuel for civilian uses. But many in the West suspect its program is aimed ultimately at producing atom bombs. Uranium enriched to 20 percent can fuel a reactor and also marks the dividing line between what nuclear specialists call low-enriched uranium and high-enriched uranium. At the 20 percent level, Iran could, in theory, make an extremely crude and heavy nuclear weapon. The bigger threat would be that its enrichment could quickly accelerate from there to the much higher grade of fuel — enriched to 90 percent — typically used in modern nuclear warheads. Iran has said the 20 percent uranium is needed for a reactor in Tehran that produces medical isotopes. The country denies that it has any intention of developing nuclear arms, and Mr. Ahmadinejad has not threatened to turn its current stockpile of enriched uranium into bomb fuel. But his new declaration came just days after Iran angrily rejected demands that it shut down a once secret enrichment plant, and instead vowed to build 10 more. Mr. Ahmadinejad also announced that his cabinet would study what Iran needed to enrich its existing stockpile of uranium. In the past two months, the United States and its Western allies have offered to supply uranium enriched to 20 percent for the Tehran medical reactor, but only if Iran shipped some of its current reported stockpile of low-enriched uranium out of the country. The deal, brokered by the United Nations with support from the United States, sought to defuse tensions surrounding Iran’s program. Iran, with uranium enriched to 20 percent in the form of fuel rods for a reactor, would then presumably have no cause for enriching more uranium on its own. But Iran effectively rejected the offer, calling it a ploy by the West to confiscate its existing stockpile. “We asked for 20 percent enriched uranium fuel, which, according to the regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency, they can provide us with,” Mr. Ahmadinejad said Wednesday, according to Iran’s PressTV. “However, they refused to do so.” A weapon made with 20 percent enriched fuel would be unwieldy compared with one made from 80 percent or 90 percent enriched fuel — what experts often call weapons grade. “It’s hundreds of kilograms that would be needed, versus a few tens of kilograms at 90 percent,” said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation. “At 20 percent, a weapon would be doable but impractical” because of its gargantuan size. He called it “a monster.” Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist in the nuclear program of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private group in Washington that tracks atomic arsenals, said Iran would need more uranium that it currently possesses to make a bomb whose fuel was enriched to only 20 percent. “That’s not the risk,” he said. “The risk is that it would be relatively easy for Iran to further enrich that material to something that is usable in a nuclear weapon.” For Iran or any other country, the open production of highly enriched uranium would violate no treaties or safeguard agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency. From its headquarters in Vienna, the agency monitors the globe for potential diversions of nuclear materials from civil to military programs. But in Iran’s case, the United Nations Security Council, starting in 2006, has demanded repeatedly that Iran cease the enrichment of uranium altogether — so continuing and accelerating the process toward a more concentrated form of uranium would stir apprehensions that Iran was positioning itself for the production of nuclear arms. In Vienna, a diplomat who works with the energy agency and closely monitors the Iranian program said the threat of the higher level of enrichment boded ill for a diplomatic solution to the impasse, despite the intrinsic difficulty of using such uranium to fuel a weapon. “They’re almost asking to be attacked,” said the diplomat, who requested anonymity because of the delicacy of the matter. “By definition, 20 percent is weapons-usable.” Mr. Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security said that Iran would need a month or two to prepare its sprawling enrichment plant at Natanz for the production of uranium enriched to 20 percent, and another month or two to make enough of the enriched material to supply the Tehran Research Reactor, a small plant that makes medical isotopes for treating many diseases. He added, however, that the Iranians, while showing the skills to achieve that high level of enrichment, had little of the manufacturing expertise needed to turn the enriched material into safe reactor fuel. “They don’t know how to do it,” Mr. Albright said, “which makes the whole situation more unnerving.”

Democrats balk at Afghanistan deployment plan

By Susan Page and Kathy Kiely, USA TODAY WASHINGTON — President Obama's long-awaited decision on the course ahead in Afghanistan provoked a topsy-turvy world on Capitol Hill. Republicans who oppose Obama on almost everything else praised his decision, sometimes grudgingly, to deploy 30,000 additional U.S. troops. Democrats who are usually his most reliable allies expressed criticism, sometimes heatedly, over his failure to detail when the U.S. mission would end. "I'm a big fan of the president's," said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. "But I think he's come to the wrong conclusion." That leaves Obama in a perilous political situation, facing a potential mutiny on this issue among liberal interest groups such as MoveOn that helped elect him and Democratic legislators on whom he is counting to pass a health care bill in the next few weeks. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who must shepherd the president's proposals through Congress, acknowledged that Obama's plan would spark debate in Democrats' ranks. Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin of Michigan expressed misgivings about the Afghans' willingness to take charge of their own security. Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad of North Dakota worried about the costs involved, especially when many Americans are struggling. Several Democratic lawmakers who described themselves as supporters of the president called a news conference to denounce his decision. "As an early supporter of the president, I believe it is our duty and responsibility to respectfully disagree," said Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., said he will pull out all the parliamentary stops to block the plan and "prevent this error from occurring." House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer downplayed Democratic divisions. When asked whether he supported the president's plan, Hoyer gave it less than a warm embrace. "I think the option he has chosen may be the only option he has at this time," he said. Addressing cadets at West Point, Obama tried to thread a needle. He reiterated his view that battling al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan is critical to U.S. security, but he sought to reassure Americans the war won't go on forever. He courted support from allies to dispatch more troops and offered an expanded strategic partnership to neighboring Pakistan, where al-Qaeda forces have settled. He sent a message to Hamid Karzai's government in Afghanistan that it had to step up to the task ahead. He warned that "the days of a blank check are over." Obama's tone was somber and professorial, the seriousness of the occasion underscored by the fact that his speech was interrupted only a few times by applause from the rows of straight-backed cadets. There were few rhetorical flourishes and none of the heart-tugging anecdotes presidents often tell on such occasions. Instead, the 35-minute speech was a sweeping discussion not only of the war in Afghanistan but of the U.S. role in the world. He reviewed the history of this war, launched in response to the 9/11 attacks, and described the situation there as deteriorating and unsustainable. Obama took on some of the specific criticisms he faces — denying the parallels to the Vietnam War made by Democrats and rejecting criticism from some Republicans that setting a timetable to begin withdrawal was unwise. He closed with a call for national unity. "It's easy to forget that when this war began, we were united — bound together by the fresh memory of a horrific attack and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear," he said. "I refuse to accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again." Obama said he will accelerate the new deployment so the additional forces will be in Afghanistan by next summer — at that point, he will have tripled the U.S. forces there when George W. Bush left office — and pledged to begin withdrawing them by July 2011. He didn't detail how fast the pullout would take place or when it would be completed, saying that would depend on "conditions on the ground." And he didn't explain what would happen if the Afghan government failed to score gains. All that calls for patience Americans may not have. Support for the war has been eroding as U.S. casualties mount. At a roundtable Monday with a bipartisan group of voters from the Philadelphia area, Democratic pollster Peter Hart asked participants to stand up if they thought it was time to begin withdrawing American forces. Six of the 11 rose to their feet — most of them Obama supporters in the 2008 election. "What the public is looking for as much as anything is a sense of leadership and a definition of goals and objectives," Hart said. At a White House luncheon Tuesday with newspaper editorial writers, Obama admitted the political difficulties ahead. "One speech is not going to suddenly persuade (the American people) that investing a lot more blood and treasure in Afghanistan is an attractive proposition. My goal is to explain to the American people why we have to finish the job." Obama did get support from some unfamiliar quarters. Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, a former Democratic vice presidential nominee who backed Republican John McCain in last year's presidential election, said he was encouraged by Obama's decision and suggested he had learned from President George W. Bush's experience. "It's the strategy that worked in Iraq," Lieberman said of increased troop levels. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said he believes Obama's plan would work, though he accused the president of taking "political advice" in setting the timetable to begin withdrawal. "It's obvious where we're going to be in three years," he said. "We're going to be in the middle of a presidential election."

Iraqi civilian deaths drop to lowest level of war

* Monthly toll under 100 for first time BAGHDAD, Nov 30 (Reuters) - The civilian death toll in Iraq fell to its lowest level in November since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion as bombings receded, defying predictions of a spike in violence before an election next year, officials said on Monday. Eighty-eight civilians were killed this month in violence, health ministry data showed, the first time the monthly bodycount has dropped below 100. "These statistics are the lowest since the invasion," said an Interior Ministry official, asking not to be identified. The civilian death toll in Iraq has been gradually falling for two years as the sectarian warfare unleashed between once dominant Sunni Muslims and majority Shi'ites by the U.S. invasion began to subside. Suspected Sunni Islamist insurgents such as al Qaeda and adherents of Saddam Hussein's outlawed Baath party are still capable of staging devastating attacks. Two suicide truck bombs on Aug. 19 killed 95 people at the foreign and finance ministries in Baghdad, and two similar bombings in the Iraqi capital on Oct. 25 killed 155 people in the deadliest strike in two years. The October bombings took that month's civilian bodycount to 343, compared to 125 in September -- the previous lowest monthly toll of the war. But the steady drumbeat of bombings that rocked market places and bus stations in Baghdad and other cities on a daily basis just a year ago appears to be fading as the insurgents shift their focus away from reigniting sectarian bloodshed. U.S. military officials say al Qaeda and other groups now appear to be trying to undermine faith in the authorities with spectacular attacks on what should be well-protected government buildings, ahead of the next parliamentary election. No big attacks occurred in November, leading to the low death toll, but more are expected ahead of the vote, which appears likely to be delayed beyond its constitutional deadline of end-January due to political wrangling. The number of U.S. military personnel killed in combat in November also remained low at three, according to website www.icasualties.org. In October, two U.S. soldiers died as a result of hostile fire, a reflection of the fact that U.S. forces are spending much more time in their bases and far less out on patrol since withdrawing from Iraqi urban centres in June.