Aziz Poonawalla: October 2009 Archives

City of Brass will be on a short hiatus starting today and all through next week. I am sure most of the blogsphere will not even notice, but for anyone who does actually stop by here to read what I have to say, I think you'll find Talk Islam a far superior substitute in my absence.

Also, don't forget that the nominations period for the Brass Crescent Awards ends on Friday, so it's your last chance to get your nominations in! Hurry up and nominate! Right now!

Aside from the August recess of Congress, there has been strong support for the so-called public option all along:

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that support for a government-run health-care plan to compete with private insurers has rebounded from its summertime lows and wins clear majority support from the public.

Americans remain sharply divided about the overall packages moving closer to votes in Congress and President Obama's leadership on the issue, reflecting the partisan battle that has raged for months over the administration's top legislative priority. But sizable majorities back two key and controversial provisions: both the so-called public option and a new mandate that would require all Americans to carry health insurance.

Independents and senior citizens, two groups crucial to the debate, have warmed to the idea of a public option, and are particularly supportive if it would be administered by the states and limited to those without access to affordable private coverage.

It was a high of 62% in favor back in September, a low of 52% in August, and now up to 57% in October. So, clear majorities all along.

I am still not clear on what the point is of the public option is if it is indeed "limited to those without access to affordable private coverage" - it certainly won't be a cost-competitive check on the private industry in such a case. Seems to me the better hobbyhorse for the progressive movement would have been to argue for Medicare-for-all at guaranteed +5% rates, but what do I know?

This is fantastic news - there will be a run-off election in Afghanistan:

Afghanistan's election commission Tuesday ordered a Nov. 7 runoff in the disputed presidential poll after a fraud investigation dropped incumbent Hamid Karzai's votes below 50 percent of the total. Karzai accepted the finding and agreed to a second round vote.

The announcement came two months to the day after the first round vote and follows weeks of political uncertainty at a time when Taliban strength is growing.

The chairman of the Independent Election Commission, Azizullah Lodin, said the commission, which organized the Aug. 20 vote, did not want to "leave the people of Afghanistan in uncertainty" any longer.

"The commission is agreed to go to a second round and say that nobody got more than 50 percent," Lodin said. Afghan electoral law says a runoff is needed if no candidate gets above that percentage.

(...) Karzai announced his acceptance of the findings at a press conference alongside U.S. Sen. John Kerry and Kai Eide, the head of the U.N. mission in Afghanistan. Kerry said the agreement on a second round had transformed the crisis into a "moment of great opportunity."

Kerry said Karzai "has shown genuine leadership in the decision he has made today."

The decision to accept the fraud findings and move to a run-off showed that Afghanistan "recommits to the democratic process." He complimented Karzai for his "openness to finding ways of resolving differences."

"The international community is 100 percent committed to helping to carry out this election," Kerry said.

The possibility of a runoff emerged Monday after a U.N.-backed panel threw out a third of Karzai's votes from the Aug. 20 ballot, pushing his totals below the 50 percent threshold needed for a first round victory and setting the stage for a run-off against former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah.

An excerpt from Karzai's response:

"We believe that this decision of the IEC (Afghanistan's Independent Election Commission) is legitimate, legal and constitutional and that it strengthens the path toward democracy."

I'm glad to hear Karzai saying the right thing, though he clearly was inclined otherwise. Obama had indicated he wouldn't make a decisioin about troops to Afghanistan until after the election was settled. I predict this means that we will indeed see President Obama send most if not all the additional troops that General McChrystal is asking for. Obama already took a troop reduction off the table; It would have been nigh-impossible to justify the cost in blood and treasure had Karzai played hardball, since we are essentially fighting in Afghanistan on Karzai's behalf. But Karzai probably didn't have much choice; his actual hold on power is precarious and totally dependent on our goodwill. We aren't in this to setup yet another tinpot regime - that serves neither our interest nor that of the Afghan people.

Still, it won't be an easy task. The Taliban will be a huge problem, and of course there's now the winter to contend with. And no one wants to say it, but given that Karzai tried to bend the first election to his will, why wouldn't he try again with the second? In some respects the outcome of the run-off is already known. It's unlikely in the extreme that Abdullah Abdullah will prevail; but the important thing is the legitimacy that shows the Afghan people that there is a rule of law. To some extent there is theater involved, but it's theater with a purpose. The perfect here would indeed be the enemy of the good.

UPDATE: President Obama's statement, which is careful to avoid any mention of the troops issue, but does emphasize "partnership" between the people of the US and Afghanistan.

I welcome President Karzai's statement today accepting the Independent Electoral Commission's certification of the August 20 election results, and agreeing to participate in a second round of the election. This is an important step forward in ensuring a credible process for the Afghan people which results in a government that reflects their will.

While this election could have remained unresolved to the detriment of the country, President Karzai's constructive actions established an important precedent for Afghanistan's new democracy. The Afghan Constitution and laws are strengthened by President Karzai's decision, which is in the best interests of the Afghan people.

I congratulate the Afghan people on the patience and resilience they have shown throughout this long election process. Given Afghanistan's recent history, it is extraordinary that they were able to overcome threats and violence to express their democratic right to choose their leader. Insecurity in the country prevented some Afghans from voting, but it is a testimony to the bravery of the Afghan people that so many of them did come out to vote in the first round under tremendously difficult circumstances.

I commend both the Independent Electoral Commission and the Electoral Complaints Commission for carrying out their mandates. Throughout this process, the United States has been interested above all in the strength and independence of those institutions, and the need for them to fulfill their mandate on behalf of all Afghans.

I congratulate President Karzai and Dr. Abdullah, who both earned the support of voters from across the country. I also commend all of the other Presidential candidates who made this such a vibrant campaign.

It is now vital that all elements of Afghan society continue to come together to advance democracy, peace and justice. We look forward to a second round of voting, and the completion of the process to choose the President of Afghanistan. In that effort, the United States and the international community are committed to partnering with the Afghan people.

Reading between the lines, I am convinced more than ever that Obama is going to approve the full complement of Gen. McChrystal's troops request. To be honest, since more troops will mean less reliance on drones and thus fewer civilian casualties from aerial attacks, I am fine with this.

Related reading - extensive profie in the NYT about Gen. McChrystal and the "long war" strategy. This is really a must-read and did a lot to convince me of the need for (and purpose of) the additional troops.

This is deeply disturbing to me:

Quotations from Quran start appearing on the body of a 9-month boy named Ali from Kizlyar, Dagestan, his parents claim.

Birthmarks in form of Arabic scripts have been appearing on the baby's body since his birth. First, there were individual letters, then texts and, according to local imams, these are texts from the Quran, the Vesti TV has reported on Thursday.

Thus, one of the baby's legs has an inscription, "Allah is the creator of all things."

"First, there was a hematoma on his chin. When the bruise went off, we saw the word "Allah," Ali's mother Madina Yakubova said.

Words similar to birthmarks show up on his shank and ankle usually on Monday and Friday and then disappear.

When new inscriptions are appearing, Ali doesn't sleep all night long and has high temperature and even strong drugs cannot send it off.

The picture is horrific because the Qur'an phrases are so detailed and legible. I can't see this being anything other than a case of child abuse. I can't imagine what drives these parents to do something like this to their child - the discussion at Talk Islam suggested "Munchausen Syndrome", but what concerns me more is how they are actually marking the baby. It looks like bruises to me.

This case is horrible and seems akin to the recent "faith healing" case in central Wisconsin where the parents let their child die from untreated diabetes. Religious convictions are important but harming your children as proxy for proving how devout you are is monstrous and about the furthest thing from genuine piety you can imagine.

Take this with a heavy dose of salt, as it may more reflect wishful thinking on the part of the American Enterprise Institute (which is neocon central), but there are supposedly rumors in Tehran that Khamenei has died:

Rumors that Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, has died began circulating yesterday in Tehran's bazaar. Today, Iranian bloggers report an "abnormal atmosphere in the city" and increased presence of plainclothes agents in the capital.

(...) The passing of Khamenei would represent a seismic shift in the Islamic Republic's power equations. With no successor-designate, Khamenei's death would unleash a huge power struggle.

Several things will happen once Khamenei dies. Officially, the Assembly of Experts, currently headed by former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, anoints the next Supreme Leader. Behind the scenes, however, the major power brokers-whether on the assembly or not-will jockey for power and seek consensus. If the decision is fractious, the assembly may decide to appoint a clerical council in the interregnum period.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) will seek to influence the selection, either of the interregnum council or of the next Supreme Leader. The most radical scenario-but an increasingly plausible one-would be for the IRGC to lobby to abolish the institution of leadership, thereby transforming the Islamic Republic into a presidential system and giving ultimate power to current president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a veteran of the IRGC and its primary benefactor.

I think that this analysis (by stalwart neocons at the AEI) discounts Rafsanjani a bit too easily. Power centralizing in Ahmadinejad's hands would be a wet dream of sorts for those who insist on cataclysmic confrontation with Iran; they prefer the simplistic view of Iran's internal politics, rather than the complicated picture that emerged during the post-election protests. It's extremely unlikely that the IRGC would not want at least some clerical figleaf for their puppet; if the Supreme Leader title ceases to exist, so too does the Islamic Republic itself, as far as ideology goes. If it's Ahmadinejad in power, then Iran might as well be... Egypt.

I'd scan the Iranian tweets to see what they make of this, but Twitter is down as of this post. Maybe the rumors are true and the twitterverse just imploded as the entirety of Iran came online to exult. But I doubt it. Or it could just be wishful thinking/rumor mongering by Michael "faster, please" Ledeen, citing "excellent sources."

UPDATE: twitter is back; here's the real-time search results for "Khamenei". Rumors are thick, with Khamenei reputed to be in a coma or dead. Among the memes taking shape, is the suggestion that Khamenei has been "disposed of". Oh, boy.

UPDATE 2: Rumors say that there will be an official announcement on Iranian state television in the morning (which is actually pretty soon - I'll stay up late as I can to monitor). Here's what Ledeen's source claims, though I find the reference to "gods" (plural) rather suspicious:

Yesterday afternoon at 2.15PM local time, Khamenei collapsed and
was taken to his special clinic. Nobody - except his son and the
doctors - has since been allowed to get near him.
His official, but secret, status is: "in the hands of the gods".

Reportedly this collapse is natural. Many would like him to move to his
afterlife but reportedly the collapse was not 'externally induced'
[no poisioning]. The few insiders who know about the collapse see
this development "as a gift from the gods".

His condition had already seriously deteriorated over the last
months, aggravated by his nervous condition due to [1] his
inability to solve the problems created by his manipulation of the
election results and the refusal of [a large part of] the
population to accept this, plus [2] his loss of religious authority
by means of the repeated condemnations of events by senior clerics

Reportedly the principal aims of Khamenei of the last couple of
weeks, if not months, were to ensure [1] a positive reputation as
his legacy and [2] the physical survival of his family members and
their wealth, reportedly now largely in Syria and in Turkey (remember the truck convoy of $8.5 billion in cash and gold that was seized by the Turks?).

Outlook is uncertain but speculation is - considering that he is in
coma since more than 24 hours - that he may not come out of his coma and/or that he may die very soon.

If he dies it is expected that immediately a bloody clash will
develop between the powers behind Rafsanjani, who will immediately
claim temporary religious authority and overall control, and the
powers behind Achmadinejad who will scramble in order to regain
control and ensure their survival.