While definitive results for legislative elections are expected for this afternoon, tentative data recalculated by the electoral commission appear to confirm a victory for Morgan Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), which seems to have kept its majority over the government party (with 105 seats in relation to the 94 seats of ZANU-PF, according to initial results). Despite the pressure exerted through UN channels by Great Britain and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), though the latter’s actions don’t appear, however, sufficiently incisive (it suffices to look at the wavering and irresolute conduct of South Africa), the presidential election results continue to be delayed.

The delay in the release of definitive results of the March 29th elections has created political uncertainty and has fueled social tensions, all in an environment of severe economic depression that is making the potential to organize fair and impartial elections between Tsvangirai and Mugabe improbable. On a political level, the internal break of the ZANU-PF is more and more evident, with several moderate fringes that would be in favor of creating a government of national unity. This possibility has been rejected not only by President Magbe, who has no intention of leaving power, but also by the South African mediator and by the opposition led by Tsvangirai. In the event of a loss, Tsvangirai would urge the formation of an executive branch that would proportionally represent all of the country’s political trends. The objectives of such a government would be the promulgation of new draft of the constitution and the organization of new elections supervised by the international community.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, urging a solution that that would be capable of resolving the political and economic deadlock, has underlined how the crisis in Zimbabwe is jeopardising the credibility of the entire African democratic process. Faced with continued and repeated violations of human rights and intimidating acts directed toward the opposition, the only possibility for a resolution to the crisis, in the event elections continue to be concealed, would be a combined effort by the UN, the AU and SADC.

Massimo Corsini

The scandal that has involved several of among the most noted military pundits accused of supporting the Bush administration’s Iraq policy as result of being guided in their analyses and paid by the Pentagon to back the White House plans, has stirred up much outcry and heated controversy. It appears the Department of Defence had planned the entire operation in 2002 and that it was approved by former Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld in person. This would have allowed the Bush administration to have, within the media circuit, a group of experts on military issues able to defend, and in certain cases promote, White House plans for the war on Saddam Hussein without officially representing the government.

The investigation has revealed the existence of a mechanism of exclusive meetings between the analysts in question and high level Washington military personnel and politicians. During the course of these meetings, former Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld, former Attorney General Gonzales and Vice President Chaney would have indicated which positions to support regarding topics that have placed the White House in most difficulty in recent years: the course of operations in Iraq and the situation of the prisoners detained in Guantanamo Bay. The work of the analysts appear to have been continually monitored by the Pentagon to verify its precision and reliability and Department of Defence personnel seemed to conclude that the results obtained were highly satisfactory.

The analysts hired by the Pentagon have been proven to be directly tied to the interests of private companies called upon to work in Iraq. Many former generals involved are consultants of private groups operating in the security field, groups whose profits are connected to important contracts in the defence sector. This situation demonstrates how important the ties are and the level of interconnection between the current US administration and the interests of private groups working in the security field, which in the case of Iraq could reveal themselves to be actually counterproductive to US national interests. The scandal shows, moreover, the difficulties of the Bush administration in promoting decisions on the more sensitive issues of foreign policy without making use of solutions directed toward moulding the perception and consensus of public opinion, as was the case in September of 2002 when President Bush stated that Iraq was in the possession of weapons of mass destruction capable of hitting countries of the West.

Simone Comi

The attack on Sunday the 27th on President Karzai and other government members while they were attending the military parade commemorating the victory of Mujahiddin over the Soviets was a demonstrative act. The Taliban wanting to demonstrate to the world and, above all, to the Afghan people, its capability of striking anywhere and on any level, fired rockets and automatic weapons, on live TV, from a building located less than 500 metres from the grandstand on which the president was located. Karzai could have been assassinated considering Parliament member Fazel Rahman Samkanai was killed only 30 metres from the president.

The attack is a sign of the probable beginning of a spring offensive which the Taliban has prepared for months and has been strengthened by support coming to them from the tribal areas of Pakistan. There has been an intensification of attacks in Pakistan itself in recent weeks directed at the supply lines of Coalition forces, above all in the Khyber Agency, an area through which are transported 70% of the materials delivered by land which support the war effort against the Taliban. Disturbances reached their apex on March 20 when 40 fuel transports were blown up, a move that convinced NATO to make agreements to open new and more costly supply lines from the north. The countermeasure conducted by Pakistani paramilitary forces in the Khyber Agency seems to have recently reduced the capabilities of the Taliban. This, however, doesn’t negate the fact that ample FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) sectors are still secure areas where the Taliban are able to organize attacks on the southern zones of Afghanistan.

It is very likely that these attacks will intensify in upcoming weeks and that the Taliban will try to achieve important image boosting successes by striking within Kabul. Considering the difficulties that NATO forces have encountered, the Taliban objective to throw the country into chaos this year seems ever closer.

Asian and Pacific Desk

Diplomatic relations between Moscow and Tblisi have worsened as a direct consequence of the NATO summit in Bucharest. The republics of Abhkazia and South Ossetia appear to have become principal themes of Moscow’s foreign policy. Sources from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs have confirmed that in the event the crisis between Tblisi and the two separatist republics were to lead to a true armed conflict, the Russian Army could be ready to intervene. Such an intervention would be justified as necessary to protect citizens of Russian ethnicity who represent the majority of the population of the two republics.

Severe accusations by Tblisi authorities have emerged along with a partial confirmation of Moscow’s willingness to employ possible military countermeasures. According to Georgian sources, in fact, a Drone that was flying over Abhkazia was reportedly shot down by Russian anti-aircraft artillery. Furthermore, is was not the first incident of its kind that has occurred in skies over the two separatist republics. Tblisi has repeatedly attempted to involve international authorities in condemning Moscow, but with little success. Each time an incident has occurred, Russian authorities have been quick to deny responsibility, accusing Tblisi at the same time of orchestrating everything in an attempt to damage the image of Russia. Moreover, according to Moscow, it is the Georgian government that wants an escalation of the conflict, seeing as they have set up a series of military structures on the borders of the separatist republics, violating previously drawn up agreements that have allowed, among other things, the deployment of peace keeping troops in the area. Nevertheless, the Tblisi government seems to have recently adopted a more conciliatory stance toward South Ossetia and Abhkazia. According to Tblisi authorities, however, it is Russian peace keeping troops that are a threat to the stability of the area.

Moreover, it must be also noted that, as has already occurred during the last NATO summit, the majority of European countries haven’t voiced their opinion regarding Moscow’s warlike statements. Also relevant is the fact that Moscow has also reopened official diplomatic relations with the two Georgian separatist republics. Washington’s relationship is different however, showing renewed activism regarding the former Soviet republics. The situation in Georgia seems to be, therefore, more tied to international dynamics with many European countries which prefer not to displease Moscow, the government on which they depend for a large part of their energy needs and with the Bush administration that wishes to put a close to its political term, leaving a mark on territory of former Soviet influence.

Felice Di Leo

On Thursday, members of US intelligence presented a video to Congress in which there was reported evidence proving the fact that Damascus had plans to construct a nuclear reactor. The episode refers to the Israeli air raid that took place during the night of the 5th and 6th of last September. On that occasion, neither Jerusalem nor Syria released statements concerning the situation. A few days later, however, rumours leaked out regarding the fact that the target of the attack was indeed a structure capable of containing a reactor. According to accusations (now repeated by Washington) North Korea assisted Damascus in the development of a nuclear programme. In this regard, Israeli intelligence denounced the presence of Korean officials in Damascus days prior to the bombing.

Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed el-Baradei has critised the timing of the US condemnation. The new video that is in the hands of White House officials reportedly shows the building just before the attack and presents, according to the same sources, clear proof of both the fact that the reactor would have been active several weeks after its destruction and the involvement of Pyongyang. North Korean reactors and the alleged Syrian reaction appear, in fact, to have the same characteristics.

By these means, Bush could want to reassure the more extreme faction of his “establishment, who in recent months has found itself in disagreement with the president and, in light of the end of his political term, has denounced his more soft line stance regarding international policy. With this move, it is also probable that Washington intends to exercise more pressure on the North Korean regime. In fact, Pyongyang announced last year that it would dismantle its nuclear infrastructures and would abandon the programme in exchange for oil. Its policy, however, has been ambiguous and it is unclear whether North Korea has really renounced its nuclear programme. The US fears that North Korea could send its technology abroad; Damascus would be part of this plan. Finally, US accusations could be clear sign for Teheran as well as for the Syrian government. At a time when the US is not able to sustain efforts to establish another war front in the Middle East, a simple policy of admonishment could help in maintaining the status quo and avoid dangerous escalations regarding the situation. In recent days, even Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan has been engaged in meetings with his Syrian counterpart to mediate a possible peace accord with Israel. This proves how involving Damascus in dialogue rather than jeopardising its regime is still of general interest.

Stefano Torelli


Translation by Marco Zanelli