The Voice of Mirza Xazar

Tue 13 April 2010 | 07:22 GMT

News.Az

By Alsou Taheri

Hillary Clinton Serves on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Board of Directors.

(PRAGUE) To gala reception in Prague Castle that on April 8th crowned the ceremony of signing the new Russian-American strategic arms reduction treaty by presidents Medvedev and Obama, Czech senator Jaromir Stetina was not invited. Maybe the Russians did not want to see there a well-known politician who permanently protests the trampling of human rights in Chechnya. However, quite a different scenario is thinkable too. The Deputy chairman of the Czech Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Defense and Security, a member of the Senate Commission on International Support for Democracy, senator Stetina in mid-February sharply criticized human rights violations at the Prague-based American RFE/RL. Perhaps he did not quite fit into celebratory crowd that included Hillary Clinton.

As the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is a full member of U.S. Federal Agency Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) that serves simultaneously as RFE/RL corporate Board of Directors. It is a very exclusive corporate board, for RFE/RL is financed by American Congress and all BBG members are assigned by the President of the United States personally with consent and approval of U.S. Senate. It is to American senators that Jaromir Stetina addressed his internationally widely published letter “Actions of Radio Free Europe Damage Czech Republic and the United States”. Personal copies of the letter were forwarded to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. In his letter, Jaromir Stetina calls discrimination of RFE/RL foreign employees “ patiently indecent, unfair, cynical and hypocritical”.

The great majority of discrimination victims are Muslims. Broadcasters, editors, producers, technicians… RFE/RL broadcasts in 28 languages. Eighteen, as listed on RFE/RL website, are spoken predominantly by Muslim people: Albanian, Arabic, Avar, Azerbaijani, Bashkir, Bosnian, Chechen, Circassian, Crimean Tatar, Dari, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Pashto, Persian, Tajik, Tatar, Turkmen, Uzbek.

Discrimination as a Matter of Policy

According to the “United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994”, BBG, which oversees all U.S. non-military broadcasters, “makes all major policy determinations governing the operations of RFE/RL” that “shall be consistent with the broad foreign policy objectives of the United States”. By law, it is precisely the function of the Secretary of State within BBG and RFE/RL to make sure that their policies are in consent with political intentions of the United States. The BBG’s Office of Human Resources “provides worldwide personnel management policies, programs, and services that enable the Agency to carry out its mission”. What are those personnel policies?

In his letter to American colleagues Czech senator Stetina wrote:
“RFE/RL hires its foreign employees on labor contracts, which explicitly deny them protections and guarantees automatically granted to any employee in this country by Czech labor laws. At the same time, as you are definitely aware, American laws, including Civil Rights Act of 1964, 1991 and District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977, are not applicable to foreigners working for American employers outside the United States – even if RFE/RL preprinted uniform contracts are composed with the reference to American laws. It is deceptive reference.

In fact, foreigners employed by RFE/RL are covered only by RFE/RL internal policies evidently formulated by BBG. By RFE/RL employment policies, its foreign personnel in Prague may be fired at any time, for any reason or without any stated reason whatsoever, without prior warning, without any preliminary disciplinary measures if deserved; and even without contractual severance pay for the years of service unless one signs the letter of consent with such employment termination and, also in writing, gives up the inalienable (at least, in Czech Republic) human and civil right to seek protection in the courts of law.
By such a mode, RFE/RL had disposed of quite a number of its foreign employees in Prague.”

To RFE/RL foreign employees also are not applicable, among others, such critically important American labor protection laws as Fair Labor Standards Act, Equal Pay Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, Family and Medical Leave Act.

Senator Stetina never received any answer from his Washington addressees. Recently, by the “mode” described in the senator’s letter was fired an employee of RFE/RL Turkmen Service. Sacked in legal vacuum. Indeed, as wrote Armenian newspaper AZG (People),

“There is less foreign detainees placed in legal vacuum at the U.S. naval base on Guantanamo, Cuba, than foreign journalists deprived of legal protections by the U.S. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in Prague, Czech Republic.”

Their Words are Beautiful. Their Deeds are…

President Obama’s appeal to the Muslim world delivered last June in Cairo can be quoted line by line as a spirit-lifting poem:
“I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: rule of law and the equal administration of justice; those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere”; “There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us”, “Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead.”
And BBG started to act, i. e. write boldly. Instead of changing its discriminative policies and actions, it designed and published its “Implementation Strategies” Build on BBG Reach and Impact Within the Muslim World. Let us quote BBG strategies one by one:

“Help audiences in authoritarian countries understand the principles and practices of democratic, free and just societies”. They understand. And not only the audiences in authoritarian countries. Hence, some expressive titles of the articles published in print and electronic media in English, Czech, Russian, Armenian, Serbo-Croatian, etc:
"Radio Liberty Betrays its Ideals", "Radio Free Europe – Guantanamo in Prague", "Equality With Precondition. Practice of Free Europe Contradicts Its Ideals", "U.S. Attorney General is Asked to Investigate Fraud at RFE/RL", "Doomsday of Radio Liberty. From Double Standards to Double Morals?” "A Sense of Betrayal", “ Czech Politician Accuses U.S. of Discrimination Against Foreign Journalists”, “On Air in Legal Vacuum”, “Czech MP Writes to U.S. Counterparts Over Work Conditions in RFE/RL”, and so on.
BBG: “Broaden cooperation within U.S. public diplomacy”. International media:
"New Administration Must Undo RFE/RL Anti-Diplomacy Abroad", "BBG, RFE/RL: Bring Public Diplomats Instead of Public Bureaucrats", "Don’t Feed Kremlin’s Public Diplomacy With U.S. Public Hypocrisy", "Public Disaster Instead of Public Diplomacy" …
BBG looks into the future: “Engage the world in conversation about America”. God save America and its reputation should U.S. institutions BBG and RFE/RL themselves become a topic of such conversation, for discussion will inevitably touch upon

The Culture of Lies

Suffice it to say that on BBG website one reads that this Agency is “an exiting place to work” -- a straightforward self-serving honest lie. In reality, BBG is, year to year, officially rated as the worst workplace within American government.

RFE/RL is more sophisticated. On RFE/RL web pages one would not find a single word about the ongoing lawsuits triggered by its no-rights-to-foreigners employment policies. One court case (plaintiff Snezana Pelivan, Croatian citizen) is pending in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Here the American bureaucrats managing RFE/RL contrived to get involved as a defendant the Czech Republic, RFE/RL host country. Another case (plaintiff Armenian citizen Anna Karapetian) is in the Czech Supreme Court. Instead, one could read there RFE/RL Mission Statement: “The first requirement of democracy is a well informed citizenry”, “RFE/RL provides objective news” serving as “a model for local media”. Fortunately, “local media” is less prone to lies-by-omission than its condescending tutor financed by American taxpayer. Again just a few international tell-tell headlines:
“Cases of Karapetian and Pelivan as Morality Check for Obama Administration. Radio Free Europe to Face European Court of Human Rights”, “Czech MP Questions Pelivan Case”, "Czech Sovereignty Ends at RFE/RL", "Free Europe With Its Own Laws in Colonial Czech Republic?", "From Human Rights Show to Human Rights Court", "Prague Spring of 2009 Leads to Strasbourg", ”News Flashes From Radio Free/Radio Liberty. The Face of America Abroad”, “Czech senator angry about Croat’s lawsuit”, etc.

Is Hillary Clinton, as the BBG and RFE official, to be blamed personally for BBG-RFE/RL shamefully discriminative policies? For instance, a pregnant Uzbek woman (or Afghan, Albanian Arab, Avar, Azerbaijani… and further on by alphabet) receives 16 weeks maternity leave prescribed by her employment contract with RFE/RL. Her female Czech colleague at RFE/RL gets 28 weeks, i.e. almost three months more, as provided by Czech law to anyone else in the Czech Republic. To whom the discriminated Uzbek woman shall complain? For her, by American law, U.S. courts are of no access as to the foreigner working for American company (RFE/RL) outside the United States. Czech courts are of no use to her because her discriminative contract with RFE/RL is not governed by Czech laws -- by RFE/RL decision.

Should she complain directly to Hillary Clinton? She could, but will she be heard? Some of her discriminated colleagues complained. They never got any answer. And the question remains: Is not the Secretary of State who time and again raises her voice in defense of women’s rights worldwide, personally responsible for doing nothing to eradicate glaring national inequality in American institutions where she has a decisive voice? Hillary Clinton during her presidential campaign proclaimed:
“I’m going to send a message to the world that America is back – we’re not the arrogant power that we’ve been for the last several years. We want to be an admired country again in the world. There is a lot of work to be done.”
She was not elected a president but what prevents her to clean up the stables at BBG and RFE/RL, the American organizations directly to her entrusted as to the Secretary of State? In the meantime, respectable Czech newspaper quoted by senator Stetina in his letter to American senators stands correct:
“Prague headquarters of RFE/RL, which pretends to be a messenger of freedom, democracy and the rule of law, behaves as an employer in such a way as if the principles it heralds, are relevant “just” for the whole planet but not for what is going on inside that estimable organization itself.”

Simple Steps Instead of Pompous Words

The second time within one year Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton visited Prague in their official capacity. The President definitely lived up to his campaign promise -- to “Show the world the best face of America”. Prague also fulfilled its role of a perfect host and cheerfully said “cheese”, as was expected. There is even a good chance that now to the hospitable Czech Republic will be assigned an American ambassador. That largely ceremonial place is vacant exactly since the day of Obama’s inauguration.

After the fateful 9/11/2001, State Department has designated two most important American institutions in Prague to be protected with special care: the embassy and RFE/RL. In the nearest future, the Obama’s administration will restore the representative dignity to the embassy. Concerning RFE/RL, real dignity should be restored to that historically valuable American institution of trusted public diplomacy. To quote senator Stetina again:
“There are two simple steps dictated by common sense and by presumption of moral and political sensitivity:
Step 1. Harmful lawsuits should be stopped. RFE/RL should be instructed to make a peaceful offer to the plaintiffs, Snjezana Pelivan and Anna Karapetian, commensurate with human and professional injustice suffered by them already;
Step 2. Abandon RFE/RL discriminative employment policies.”
Those steps are not contained in BBG’s “Implementation Strategy”. But the presumption of moral and political sensitivity is absent there, either.

Alsou Taheri is Prague-based journalist working at RFE/RL.

source: http://www.news.az/articles/13149/print

By Ivan Simic

For the past few months we had the “honour” to read many articles and news reports in which above countries have been described as mayor threats and terrorism/terrorist supported states without any sustainable evidence. It is not a secret that these states are facing much political and economical turbulence’s, but that does not necessary means they are the world threats.

The titles like “Pakistan Terrorism Heaven”, “Iran the Most Active Terror Sponsor”, ”Pakistan Supports Terrorism” and “Iran Worst Terror Proliferator”, among others, are very insulting and unfair as they present sovereign countries and their citizens as terrorists.

Are the attacks and accusations on these and other states work of bad journalism or maybe corrupted journalism, or both, or maybe government propaganda or failed intelligence?

Let’s take a look on some interesting facts concerning these states which are not propaganda, accusations or attacks, rather information’s available to all interested in so called “another side of the story”.

THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN

Iran, a founding member of the United Nation, has a population of over 74 million and is a home to one of the world's oldest continuous major civilizations.

Since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, Iran has been accused by a number of states, including the United States, Israel and some European countries, of funding, providing equipment, weapons, training and giving sanctuary to terrorists.

Particularly, the United States broke diplomatic ties with Iran in 1981, after the Iranian students seized the American Embassy in Tehran, where they held 53 Americans hostage for 444 days. According to the US officials, the US Government objects to Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism, its nuclear weapons ambitions, and its violations of human rights. The US Department of State lists Iran as the most active state sponsor of terrorism.

In addition, Iran has been accused of using the Ministry of Intelligence and Security to gather intelligence to plan terrorist attacks, of giving weapons and support to the Iraqi insurgency, of giving weapons and support to the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, for murder and kidnapping of the US Colonel William Higgins in Lebanon, among other things.

We are more or less aware of accusations against Iran and current public opinion concerning Iran, but there are many things about Iran which are less known to the public.

We can sum the reasons of Iran’s isolation from the rest of the world, and Iran’s classification as a terrorist state trough Iran’s defying policy and Iran’s ties with Hezbollah. Other reasons, like links to the Islamic Jihad (Palestinian Islamic Jihad) are more or less speculations, rather than the real deal. Concerning links with Hamas, the Hamas is not politically tied to Iran and it is mostly financed from Saudi Arabia. Hamas and Iran’s connections are subjected to deeper debate.

Iran’s Defying Policy

Iran's post revolution challenges have included the imposition of embargo and suspension of diplomatic relations between Iran and the United States because of the Iran hostage crisis and other acts of terrorism that the US government and some others have accused Iran of sponsoring. To overcome foreign embargo, Iran has developed its own military industry, produced its own tanks, armoured personnel carriers, guided missiles, submarines, military vessels, radar systems, helicopters and fighter planes.

Iran's foreign policy is based on two strategic principles: to eliminate outside influences in the region and to pursue extensive diplomatic contacts with developing and non-aligned countries. The Islamic Republic of Iran accords priority to its relations with the other states in the region and with the rest of the Islamic world. Presidents of Venezuela and Iran have both described themselves on the world stage as opposed to the US imperialism. Two states regard each other as closest allies.

Iran has been accused by the United States of giving weapons and support to the Iraqi insurgency. Despite these claims, no supportive evidence has ever been made viewable to the public, and while in the past US officials made the claim that the evidence was held in Iraq's possession and it would be up to them to decide whether to reveal it or not, Iraqi officials have claimed on various occasions that no such evidence exists. Nouri Maliki, Iraqi’s Prime Minister has praised Iran for its positive and constructive stance on Iraq, including providing security and fighting terrorism.

Iran's nuclear program has become the subject of debate with the Western world due to suspicions that Iran could divert the civilian nuclear technology to a weapons program. This has led the UN Security Council to impose sanctions against Iran on select companies linked to this program.

The controversy over Iran's nuclear programs centers in particular on Iran's failure to declare sensitive enrichment and reprocessing activities to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Iran asserts that there is no legal basis for Iran's referral to the United Nations Security Council since the IAEA has not proven that previously undeclared activities had a relationship to a weapons program, and that all nuclear material in Iran (including material that may not have been declared) had been accounted for and had not been diverted to military purposes. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful, and has enriched uranium to less than 5 percent, consistent with fuel for a civilian nuclear power plant.

There are nearly 8,000 active nuclear warheads and about 23,300 total nuclear warheads in the world. Since 1945, nuclear weapons have been detonated on over two thousand occasions for testing purposes and demonstration purposes. Countries known to have detonated nuclear weapons are: the United States, the Soviet Union (Russia), the United Kingdom, France, the People's Republic of China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. Israel is widely believed to have nuclear weapons, though it has refused to confirm or deny this. South Africa produced six nuclear weapons in the 80s, but disassembled them in the early 90s. Iran has no nuclear warheads.

The US and British officials have accused Iran of giving weapons and support to the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan. The US Time Magazine described Iran as "implacably hostile to the Taliban over that movement's extremist theology and over its killing of Afghan Shiite Muslims. In 1999, Iran almost went to war against the Taliban after its militia killed eight Iranian diplomats and a journalist after capturing a predominantly Shiite town, and has worked together with Russia to support anti-Taliban opposition forces". The Islamic government of Iran has a hard-line policy against drugs. This has often brought the government of Iran into direct conflict with the Taliban, which controls the drug trade in neighbouring Afghanistan.

Iran's new foreign policy has had a dramatic effect on its global standing. Relations with the European Union have dramatically improved to the point where Iran is a major oil exporter and trading partner for countries such as Italy, France and Germany. China, India, Sudan, Senegal, Morocco have also emerged as friends of Iran. Next to the well known relations with Venezuela, Iran has close relations with Brazil, Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador and Nicaragua.

There has also been some low-level cooperation between the US and Iran on antidrug policies, counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan in the aftermath of September 11 attack, and anti-oil-smuggling efforts in Iraq. It was said on that Iran was willing, under the right conditions, to improve its chilly relations with the US. Number of US experts, who include academics and former US ambassadors, warned against a military attack on Iran and called for unconditional negotiations with Iranian Government. Even President Barack Obama spoke directly to the Iranian people in a video saying "The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations. You have that right - but it comes with real responsibilities."

Iran now has a leading manufacture industry in the Middle East; these include fields of car-manufacture and transportation, construction materials, home appliances, food and agricultural goods, armaments, pharmaceuticals, information technology, power and petrochemicals. Iran holds 10% of the worlds proven oil reserves and 15% of its gas. It is OPEC's (the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) second largest exporter and the world's fourth oil producer. Iran ranks seventh among countries in the world with the most archeological architectural ruins and attractions from antiquity as recognized by UNESCO.

Iran is an example of a country that has made considerable advances through education and training, despite international sanctions in almost all aspects of research during the past few decades. Despite the limitations in funds, facilities, and international collaborations, Iranian scientists remain highly productive in several experimental fields as pharmacology, pharmaceutical chemistry, organic chemistry, and polymer chemistry.

Hezbollah

Iran has been widely accused of supporting and financing Hezbollah for years. The US Government estimates that Iran was giving Hezbollah about $60-$100 million per year in financial assistance but that assistance declined as other funding was secured, primarily from South America. Besides financial, Hezbollah also receives political assistance, as well as weapons and training from Iran. As of July 2009 it was reported that Iran is helping Hezbollah rebuild Lebanon.

What is Hezbollah?

Hezbollah is a Shi'a Islamist political and paramilitary organization based in Lebanon. Some western governments consider Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, some however, do not.

Hezbollah is believed to be a major provider of social services, which operate schools, hospitals, and agricultural services for thousands of Lebanese Shiites, and plays a significant force in Lebanese politics. Hezbollah holds seats in the Lebanese government, and has a radio and a satellite television-station, and programs for social development. Lebanon's new Cabinet unanimously approved a draft policy statement which secures Hezbollah's existence as an armed organization and guarantees its right to liberate or recover occupied lands. Lebanon continues to reject the US-Israeli demands that they freeze Hezbollah's bank accounts and force it stop providing social services.

Since the Supreme Leader of Iran is the ultimate clerical authority, Hezbollah's leaders have appealed to him for guidance and directives in cases when Hezbollah's collective leadership was too divided over issues and failed to reach a consensus. After the death of Iran's first Supreme Leader, Khomeini, Hezbollah's governing bodies developed a more independent role and appealed to Iran less often.

Governments disagree on Hezbollah’s status as a legitimate political entity, a terrorist group, or both. In 1999, Hezbollah was placed on the US State Department terrorism list. After Hezbollah's condemnation of the September 11 attacks, it was removed from the list, but it was later returned to the list when Dick Cheney opined that a "presumed Hezbollah operative" probably met with an Al Qaeda representative in South America in 2001.

At the urging of the US and Israel, Canada classified Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, which limits the group's ability to raise funds and travel internationally. A Canadian peace coalition called Tadamon Montreal is working to remove Hezbollah from the Terrorism list in Canada.

Australia and the UK distinguish between Hezbollah's security and political wings, and other countries like China, Russia, and member states of the European Union and the United Nations have refused the US-Israel demands to label Hezbollah a terrorist organization at all.

It appears Iran is doing the world a favour by financing Hezbollah. If not, Hezbollah would be desperate for funds, and would be engaged in numerous illegal activities to reach them.

Unfortunately, today Iran is known to the public for “bad things”; however the truth is Iran gave us so many good and useful things.

Iran is home to one of the world's oldest continuous major civilizations, with historical and urban settlements dating back to 4000 BC. Iran is a founding member of the United Nations, and host of the Tehran Conference in 1943. Persian scientists contributed to the current understanding of nature, medicine, mathematics, and philosophy. Persians made important contributions to algebra and chemistry, invented the wind-power machine, and the first distillation of alcohol. Ethanol (alcohol) was first identified by Persian alchemists Muhammad ibn Zakarīya Rāzi. Muhammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī is widely hailed as the father of algebra.

Iran is ninth country in the world capable of both producing a satellite and sending it into space from a domestically-made launcher. Iran's Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics is a UNESCO chair in biology. Stem cell research in Iran is amongst the top 10 in the world. Iran is the 7th country in production of Uranium Hexafluoride. Iran is ranked 15th in the world in nanotechnologies. Iran is the birthplace of polo, and Varzesh-e Pahlavani (traditional Martial art and a style of Wrestling). There are currently between 70-80 Iranians working for NASA, making up approximately 43% of NASA's researchers. Iran has a vast number of professors and scientist working around the world in most prestigious institutions and Universities, among others.

Terrorist attacks and mass car bombings in Iran

On January, 12, 2010, Tehran University professor, particle physics scientist Massoud Ali-Mohammadi was killed in a remote control bomb explosion in the Iranian capital and at least two people were lightly wounded in the explosion. No organization has yet reliably claimed responsibility.

On May 28, 2009, an explosion at a prominent Shi'ite Muslim mosque in the southeast Iranian city of Zahedan killed 25 people and wounded 80. On June 20, 2009, a suicide bomb reportedly explodes at the shrine of former Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leaving 1 dead and 2 injured. In October 2009, 42 people have died in the suicide attack, in the province of Sistan-Baluchistan, and dozens more injured.

On April 12, 2008, a bomb exploded inside of the Shohada Hosseiniyeh mosque leaving 13 dead and over 200 injured. Same year, a suicide bomber belonging to the Sunni militant group Jundallah killed 4 and wounded 12 civilians.

On June 12, 2005, bombs exploded in the cities of Ahvaz and Tehran, leaving 10 dead and 80 wounded days before the Iranian presidential election. On October 15, same year, two bombs exploded at a shopping mall in Ahvaz, Khuzestan leaving 6 dead and over 100 injured. The list goes on.

Numerous civilians, including women, children, government officials, activists, intellectuals and clerics have been victims of terrorism over the course of modern Iranian history.

Therefore, the questions are: Does Iran really present threat to the world? Is Iran a victim of political or deadly terror, or both?

THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN

Pakistan has been accused by many countries like India, Poland, Bangladesh, Iran, Afghanistan, the United States and the United Kingdom of persistent involvement in terrorism in Kashmir and Afghanistan.

Pakistan has been accused by Human Rights Watch of sheltering and training the Taliban, bankrolling Taliban operations, providing diplomatic support for Taliban, arranging training for Taliban fighters, recruiting skilled and unskilled manpower to serve in Taliban armies, planning and directing offensives, providing and facilitating shipments of ammunition and fuel, and on several occasions apparently directly providing combat support. Pakistan is also said to be a haven for terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Omar, Lashkar-e-Toiba, and Sipah-e-Sahaba.

Many consider that Pakistan has been playing both sides in the US "War on Terror". The Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI, the largest intelligence service in Pakistan) has often been accused of playing a role in major terrorist attacks across the world including the September 11 attacks, terrorism in Kashmir, Mumbai Train Bombings, 2005 London Bombings, Indian Parliament Attack, Varnasi bombings, Hyderabad bombing and Mumbai terror attacks. The ISI is also accused of supporting Taliban forces and recruiting and training mujahedeen to fight in Afghanistan and Kashmir. Satellite images from the US Federal Biro of Investigation and India's Research and Analysis Wing clearly suggest the existence of many terrorist camps in Pakistan.

The government of Pakistan has come under the fire for the alleged involvements in terrorist bombings in India, which killed thousands over the last decade. India alleged that the recent 2008 Mumbai attacks originated in Pakistan, and that the attackers were in touch with a Pakistani colonel and other handlers in Pakistan. In July 2009, current President of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari admitted that the Pakistani government had "created and nurtured" terrorist groups to achieve its short-term foreign policy goals. In fact, the US has stated that the next attack on the US could originate in Pakistan.

Knowing this entire story about Pakistan, why did the US in 2004 recognized closer bilateral ties with Pakistan by designating Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally, making it eligible, among other things, to purchase advanced American military technology? Why did the US and Pakistan conclude the sale of F-16 aircraft in late 2006 to Pakistan Army, further reflecting their deepening strategic partnership? Why the US shelters Pakistan nuclear development and warheads, when Pakistan has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)?

If all concerning Pakistan is true, why did the fallowing countries form “Friends of Pakistan” group: Britain, France, Germany, the United States, China, the United Arab Emirates, Canada, Turkey, Australia and Italy, plus the United Nations and the European Union? Why did the US congress approve $7.5 Billion non-military aid to Pakistan over the next 5 years?

Despite all this, Pakistan stands strong in international community, and it appears Iran has much to learn from Pakistan when it comes to bilateral relations with the United States.

Actually, Pakistan and Iran are much more then so called “Terrorist States”. Pakistan and Iran are two out of eleven countries classified as “the Next Eleven - N-11”. Goldman Sachs investment bank indentified the two for having a high potential of becoming the world's largest economies in the 21st century along with the BRIC’s (fast-growing developing economies) countries like Brazil, Russia, India and China.

Terrorist attacks and mass car bombings in Pakistan:

On February 5, 2010, a motorbike laden with explosives targeted a bus carrying a group of Shias to a religious festival. A second bomb exploded outside the entrance to the emergency ward of the Jinnah hospital, where the victims of the first attack were being treated. More than 33 people were killed and 170 injured. On February 3, a blast near a school hits a Pakistani Frontier Corps convoy. The attack kills several children and 3 US Marines attached as trainers to the Pakistani frontiersmen.

On January 30, 2010, a suicide bomber detonates at a checkpoint in Khar, the main town in the troubled Bajaur tribal region, killing 16 and injuring 20 people. January 23, a car bomb exploded against a Police Station in South Waziristan, killing 4 people. January 12, a rocket struck a two storey building in city of Peshawar resulting in the building collapsing. Emergency services were able to evacuate five people to hospital with various injuries but one person was reported trapped in the building as is presumed dead from the terrorist incident. January 6, a suicide bomber targeted a Pakistan army patrol in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, killing four Pakistani soldiers and injuring eleven other soldiers. Pakistan officials blamed the attack on the Pakistani Taliban. January 3, a bomb attack hit the north-western Pakistani town of Hangu, killing a former provincial minister and two other people.

On January 1, 2010, At least 105 people died and over 100 were injured, many of them critically, when the suicide bomber blew up his sport utility vehicle filled with explosives in the middle of a crowd that had gathered to watch a volleyball game. As of 3 January 2010, it is the deadliest bombing in Pakistan since the Peshawar bombing in October 2009 when more than 110 people died.

On December 28, 2009, a suicide bomber detonates at a crowded Shia Muslim parade, killing 43 and injuring 60. December 27, a suicide bomber detonates at a checkpoint outside a local Shia Muslim gathering point in the town of Muzaffarabad, killing 5 injuring 62. December 27, Pakistan Militants blow up the house of local official Sarbraz Saddiqi, killing him, his wife and four children. December 24, a suicide bomber detonates his explosives at a checkpoint, killing 4and injuring 12. December 22, a suicide bomber blew himself up outside a press club, killing 3 and injuring 17. December 18, a suicide bomber detonates near a mosque, killing 12 and injuring 28. December 15, a bomb blast hits a market in the central Pakistani town of Dera Ghazi Khan, killing 33 and injuring 50. December 8, Suicide attackers raid an Inter-Services Intelligence office in the city, killing 12 and injuring 25. December 7, two bomb blasts ripped through a busy market as it was crammed in by shoppers. The attack, which injured some 100 people, sparked a huge blaze at the city's Moon Market. The blasts came just hours after a suicide bomber killed 10 and injured 44 people in Peshawar. December 7, two anti-Taliban tribal elders were assassinated by a remotely controlled bomb near a mosque. December 4, four gunmen attack a mosque which is frequented by current and former Pakistani military personnel, killing 38 and injuring 80. Security forces responded to the incident and a gun battle erupted, followed by three of the attackers detonating themselves. December 2, Suicide bomber detonates at entrance to Pakistani Naval HQ, killing 2 people. December 1, Pakistani government official is assassinated in a suicide bomb attack at his residence. And the list goes on.

Looking at this, we can say without doubt that Pakistan is “the world’s largest magnet for terrorist attacks”.

Just in 2009 Pakistan had around 60 terrorist attacks in which more than 1,000 people lost their lives and more than 2,400 were injured. In 2008 Pakistan had around 45 terrorist attacks in which more than 750 people lost their lives and more than 1,400 were injured. And the list of attacks continues.

Pakistan and Iran are not the only major victims of terrorist attacks. A report of terrorist incidents shows that Afghanistan, Iraq, India, Somalia, Yemen, Israel, Lebanon, Spain, Sri Lanka, Turkey and Philippines are as well major victims of terrorism.

For the end, the question is: how come the countries which are accused of supporting and protecting terrorism are in fact the main victims of terrorism?

By Ivan Simic

The year 2009 is definitely Presidential year; Barack Obama is inaugurated as the 44th, and first African American President of the United States, Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir is appointed as the new Prime Minister of Iceland, becoming the world's first openly lesbian head of government. Morgan Tsvangirai is sworn in as the new Prime Minister of Zimbabwe following the power-sharing deal with President Robert Mugabe, the President of Guinea-Bissau, João Bernardo Vieira, is assassinated during an armed attack on his residence in Bissau.

Also, in 2009, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issues an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur. Al-Bashir is the first sitting head of state to be indicted by the ICC since its establishment in 2002. The President of Madagascar, Marc Ravalomanana, is overthrown in a coup d'état, following a month of rallies in Antananarivo. The military appoints opposition leader Andry Rajoelina as the new president of Madagascar. Former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori is sentenced to 25 years in prison for ordering killings and kidnappings by security forces.

In addition, former President of South Korea Roh Moo-hyun, under investigation for alleged bribery during his presidential term, committed suicide, El Hadj Omar Bongo Ondimba, President of Gabon dies in Spain. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is reelected as the president of Iran. The Supreme Court of Honduras orders the arrest and exile of President Manuel Zelaya, claiming he was violating the nation's constitution by holding a referendum to stay in power, Barack Obama is awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, Prime Minister of Belgium Herman Van Rompuy is designated the first permanent President of the European Council, among others.

However, let’s focus on the EU, since the EU got its first President.

The EU has chosen its first president, Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy. Leaders of the EU 27 member states also chose a woman, British commissioner Catherine Ashton, who will be the EU's new foreign policy chief.

Van Rompuy remained almost completely unknown outside Belgium's frontiers, until he was anointed as a candidate for President of the European Council by Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, at a Brussels summit in October 2009.

The final decision for Van Rompuy for the President was entirely made by prominent leaders; Angela Merkel, Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy. Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi had its vast share in this decision, since he initially supported Tony Blair for the EU President.

What is done is done; the EU finally got its first permanent President. But, let’s find out what does it means being the President of the EU:

1. Is this presidential appointment solution to stop Muslim expansion to the Western Europe? We all know that in particularly three countries that supported his appointment; France, Germany and UK have large number of Muslims among population. We also know that Van Rompuy is a strong opponent of Turkey joining the European Union. In 2004, he stated:

"Turkey is not a part of Europe and will never be part of Europe. An expansion of the EU to include Turkey cannot be considered as just another expansion as in the past". "The universal values which are in force in Europe, and which are fundamental values of Christianity, will lose vigour with the entry of a large Islamic country such as Turkey."

Does this mean that the EU did not have solution to say no to Turkey’s EU membership; therefore they installed Van Rompuy as the President to deal with the matter?

2. How much will this new presidential position cost the EU and its citizens, who by the way did not vote to elect Van Rompuy and were not even asked what they think about him? What we know is: he will be paid over €400.000 a year, he will have a staff of 60 people, a cabinet of 22, 10 body guards and 28 support staff. His total office budget will be €24.7 million. His new office building, which is currently under construction, will cost more than €300 million.

What about armored limousine, annual expense account, a non-taxable travel account, account for entertainment, place of residence, a country retreat, official guest house, aircraft, among others? These are all privileges and amenities that US President Barack Obama has.

3. Does Van Rompuy holds the power to declare war on another country? A declaration of war is a formal performative speech act or signing of a document by an authorized party of a government in order to initiate a state of war between two or more nations. In many nations power is given to the head of state or sovereign.

Is Van Rompuy that head of state?

4. If one country wishes to declare war on the EU, can that same country send the letter to Van Rompuy, declaring the war, or it needs to send the letter to every member of the Union individually? Van Rompuy probably knows how protocol goes, but, let us reminds him. The Hague Convention from 1907, section III – The Opening of Hostilities states:

Article 1

The Contracting Powers recognize that hostilities between themselves must not commence without previous and explicit warning, in the form either of a reasoned declaration of war or of an ultimatum with conditional declaration of war.

Article 2

The existence of a state of war must be notified to the neutral Powers without delay, and shall not take effect in regard to them until after the receipt of a notification, which may, however, be given by telegraph. Neutral Powers, nevertheless, cannot rely on the absence of notification if it is clearly established that they were in fact aware of the existence of a state of war.

How can this be done in the EU case?

5. Will the new EU military be under Van Rompuy’s command? According to The Helsinki Headline Goal by the year 2010, the EU will have full military capabilities in humanitarian and rescue tasks, disarmament operations, support to third countries in combating terrorism, peacekeeping tasks and tasks of combat forces in crisis management, and peacemaking.

By the way, with this new European army in place, will the EU-NATO Member States suspend their membership in NATO?

6. Will Van Rompuy be the new Commander-in-Chief of the EUFOR (European Union Armed Forces)? Javier Solana, the High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy is the main coordinator of the Common Foreign and Security Policy within the European Union. Solana will be replaced by Catherine Margaret Ashton, the EU's first High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Great number of countries has Presidents or Monarchs as Commanders-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, therefore, now when the EU has permanent President, who will command the EUFOR?

7. Who is the supreme authority for military affairs, Van Rompuy or Catherine Margaret Ashton, and who is the only competent authority for the use of nuclear weapons? This is the case with French President Sarkozy and the US President Obama, among other head of states. What about the EU?

8. Which country/member state will benefit most from Van Rompuy, the UK, Belgium, Germany, France or Italy? We know that Van Rompuy is a close ally to Gordon Brown, the UK Prime Minister, and in addition the UK now has its own chief of EU foreign policy. Does this mean that the UK got its long desired advantage over other EU members?

9. Who will be the first head of state to meet Van Rompuy; Barack Obama or Dmitry Medvedev, or none of the above?

10. Does this mean Van Rompuy will be awarded with Nobel Peace Prize in 2010? Barack Obama got the Peace Prize after being elected the first African American President, why not Van Rompuy, after being elected the first permanent.