Bad borders, good neighbours

Today, as US, European, Russian and UN officials meet in Washington to discuss the future of the Middle East peace process, Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, remains adamant that a peace deal premised on returning to Israel's pre-1967 borders poses an unacceptable risk to its security.

He is right: The country's 1967 borders are not militarily defensible. But his use of this argument to reject the only viable formula for Israeli-Palestinian peace -- a negotiated two-state solution based on mutually agreed upon land swaps -- is wrong, and it does not serve Israel's security interests.

Israel needs peace with the Palestinians, and that will likely require a return to the 1967 lines with a few adjustments. These borders can be made defensible if they come with a security package consisting of a joint Israeli-Palestinian security force along the West Bank's border with Jordan, a demilitarized Palestinian state and a three-way Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian defense treaty. Combined with such a package, the balanced formula President Barack Obama outlined in his May 19 speech can give Israel the security it needs and deserves.

Until June 1967, Israelis feared that a swift Arab military move could cut Israel in two at its narrow "waist" -- an area near the city of Netanya, where the country is less than 10 miles wide. By doing so, Arab tanks and artillery could have reached Tel Aviv within a few hours. In the 44 years since, the geography has not changed, but the threat has.

Today, there is a menace we did not face in 1967. Short- and medium-range rockets, mortars and missiles supplied by Iran are making the lives of Israeli civilians a nightmare. Thousands of these rockets have been launched from Gaza into Israeli towns and villages since Hamas wrested control of Gaza in 2007; and if an independent Palestine emerges on the West Bank, these weapons could find their way there, too.

That is why the border between the West Bank and Jordan must be made impenetrable. This cannot be done remotely, from the 1967 lines; it will require a joint Israeli-Palestinian military presence along the Jordan River.

Such joint military activity would not violate Palestinian sovereignty and could be modeled on Israel's current coordination with Palestinian security forces in the West Bank. It would be far more effective than deploying an international force. After all, UN forces in southern Lebanon have failed to prevent a colossal military buildup by Hezbollah since Israel withdrew from the area in 2000.

Second, the Palestinian state must be demilitarized. No tanks, artillery or missiles can be deployed within its boundaries. In the absence of this weaponry, international guarantees will ensure Palestine's security and territorial integrity.

Third, an Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian defense treaty is necessary to safeguard their common strategic interests. Joint military planning and sharing early warning systems to prevent threats from Iran, its proxies and other jihadist forces in the region would cement this treaty.

This security package would make the 1967 borders defensible, and keep Palestine from becoming another launching pad for terror. Moreover, an Israeli-Palestinian agreement would bring about a dramatic, strategic change in the Middle East. It would remove the obstacle preventing moderates in the region from uniting against militant Islamist extremists and lay the groundwork for a new strategic alliance in the region, including the Persian Gulf countries, which are natural business partners for Israel, Jordan and Palestine.

As a result, Israel would be able to extend its hand to new democratic and secular governments in the Arab and Muslim world. And those committed to Israel's destruction would be confronted by a new alliance with enormous economic and military power.

I have devoted more than three decades of my life to defending Israel, from the Litani River in Lebanon to the western bank of the Suez Canal in Egypt, and I would never support irresponsible, hazardous solutions to Israel's security problems. I don't believe durable peace in the region is possible unless Israel remains the strongest military power between Tehran and Casablanca.

We have no choice but to protect ourselves in a perilous world of aggressive Islamist fanatics and complacent, confrontation-averse Western democracies. But nurturing settlements in the West Bank and maintaining an occupation in order to protect them is not the proper way to do it.

Following that path will lead to disaster. Israel could become a binational state of first- and second-class citizens at war with each other; a third Intifada could break out, damaging Israel's economy and destroying Palestine's nascent infrastructure; or the pro-negotiation policy of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, could collapse, allowing Hamas to take power in the West Bank. If this happens, the doomsday prophecy of rockets raining down on Ben-Gurion International Airport just might be fulfilled.

To avoid this fate, we must embrace the proposals of our American friends, end this conflict and allow Israel to become an active member, rather than an isolated actor, in the rapidly changing Middle East.

Arctic may be ice-free within 30 years

Sea ice in the Arctic is melting at a record pace this year, suggesting warming at the North Pole is speeding up and a largely ice-free Arctic can be expected in summer months within 30 years. The area of the Arctic ocean at least 15% covered in ice is this week about 8.5m sq kilometres - lower than the previous record low set in 2007 - according to satellite monitoring by the US National Snow and Ice Data
Centre (NSIDC) in Boulder, Colorado.
In addition, new data from the University of Washington Polar Science Centre, shows that the thickness of Arctic ice this year is also the lowest on record.
In the past 10 days, the Arctic has been losing as much as 150,000 square kilometres to sea a day, said Mark Serreze, director of the NSIDC.
"The extent [of the ice cover] is going down, but it is also thinning. So a weather pattern that formerly would melt some ice, now gets rid of much more. There will be ups and downs, but we are on track to see an ice-free summer by 2030. It is an overall downward spiral."
Global warming has been melting Arctic sea ice for the past 30 years at a rate of about 3% per decade on average. But the two new data sets suggest that, if current trends continue, a largely ice-free Arctic in summer months is likely within 30 years.
That is up to 40 years earlier than was anticipated in the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report.
Sea ice, which is at its maximum extent in March and its lowest in September each year, is widely considered to be one of the "canaries in the mine" for climate change, because the poles are heating up faster than anywhere else on Earth.
According to NSIDC, air temperatures for June 2011 were between 1 and 4C warmer than average over most of the Arctic Ocean.
The findings support a recent study in the journal Science that suggested water flowing from the Atlantic into the Arctic ocean is warmer today than at any time in the past 2,000 years and could be one of the explanations for the rapid sea ice melt now being observed.
Computer simulations performed by Nasa suggest that the retreat of Arctic sea ice will not continue at a constant rate. Instead the simulations show a series of abrupt decreases such as the one that occurred in 2007, when a "perfect storm" of weather conditions coincided and more ice was lost in one year than in the previous 28 years combined. Compared to the 1950s, over half of the Arctic sea ice had disappeared.
What concerns polar scientists is that thicker ice which does not melt in the summer is not being formed fast as the ice is melting. On average each year about half of the first year ice, formed between September and March, melts during the following summer.
This year, says Jeff Masters, founder of the Weather Underground climate monitoring website, a high pressure system centred north of Alaska has brought clear skies and plenty of ice-melting sunshine to the Arctic.
"The combined action of the clockwise flow of air around the high and counter-clockwise flow of air around a low pressure system near the western coast of Siberia is driving warm, southerly winds into the Arctic that is pushing ice away from the coast of Siberia, encouraging further melting." Sea ice has an important effect on the heat balance of the polar oceans, since it insulates the (relatively) warm ocean from the much colder air above, thus reducing heat loss from the oceans.
Sea ice also has a high albedo - about 0.6 when bare, and about 0.8 when covered with snow - compared to the sea - about 0.15 - and thus the loss of sea ice increased the absorption of the sun's warmth by the sea.

Farewell To Fair Elections?

Unquestionably the ruling Awami League (AL) government has opened a Pandora's box by annulling the Caretaker Government (CG) system. On May 10 , 2011 the Supreme Court of Bangladesh repealed the 13 th amendment to the Constitution declaring the Non-party CG void and ultra vires to the Constitution; but allowed holding of "two more parliamentary elections" under the CG. Disregarding the second part of the verdict the AL has abolished it in parliament. This action can best be described as the farewell to fair elections that could lead to serious turmoil because many people do not support the AL. It is advisable to the incumbents: the ruling AL government should see reason to avert disorder of its own making because the Prime Minister must not forget that a large section of the polity favour the CG system and distrust the AL, pure and simple.    Noted jurist of international acclaim, Dr Kamal Hossain, who always advocates for national unity, on 5 July last said the repeal of the CG system will be major barrier to free and fair parliamentary elections. Terming the government's decision suicidal, he urged the Election Commission ( EC) at a two-hour dialogue on 5 July with EC to take bold stance for the restoration of the CG system through further amendment to the Constitution.    The system, brainchild of Jamaat- e-Islami but enthusiastically adopted as the singular agenda for movement and agitation against the BNP government, was institutionalised by means of the 13 th Amendment to the Constitution in 1996.    As we look at the political scenario, abuse of judicial process and administrative power is rampant. Out on a spree the government has allegedly applied for withdrawal of more than 16 , 000 cases filed against the leaders and workers of the ruling AL. What is more, in September 2010 , President Zillur Rahman granted clemency to 20 AL activists who had been sentenced to death for murder.    The helpless people of this country are witnessing with dread and disgust their dear motherland Bangladesh being metamorphosed into a police state where the government is using the police force to unleash repression and atrocity to rigidly throttle the voice of dissent a la fascist regime which eliminates opposition and under which rule rights are nonexistent and laws are selectively enforced.    The police, under the leadership of two police officers -- reported to be former student front leaders of AL -- beat up, kicked and injured Opposition Chief Whip Zainul Abdin Farroque in the morning severely at one stage of an altercation with him at Manik Mia Avenue in the capital. As his head was bleeding profusely the BNP leader was hospitalised. This nefarious act has beaten up Democracy itself, to say the least. During the incident five lady MPs of opposition BNP were hurt in police action. Several hundred opposition party leaders and activists were arrested.    Lower grade policemen, not to speak of police officers, have sufficient knowledge that an opposition chief whip enjoys the rank and status of a State Minister. Then how could it happen? However, Speaker Abdul Hamid was kind enough to express regret about the assault on Opposition lawmaker Farroque during Hartal. [ It is worth noting that according to a recent survey conducted by six Bengali daily papers including the Prothaom Alo and the Jugantaor, 80 per cent respondents were in favour of Hartal ]This he said when an 18- member delegation of the BNP-led opposition met him at his parliament office, and also assured opposition lawmakers of writing to the home minister who in her usual cavalier style later said that she would see to it.    Since the start of the ruling AL government Opposition political parties, have been repeatedly prevented from exercising their constitutionally guaranteed fundamental right to protest against the government's failure to secure the basic needs of the ordinary people. During their street agitation the police, aided by members of the Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL), the student wing of the ruling party attacked and seriously injured leaders and activists of BNP and its allies.    The bottom line is: fascism is baring its fangs jeopardising people's life. It is time the citizens, intellectuals and jurists protest in one voice against the government- sponsored atrocities.

Constitutional Crisis Adds To Instability, May Spark Anarchy

The long feared season of instability has begun to strike terror in the heart of the ordinary people. Streets look deserted. Billowing smokes from charred vehicles scare poor hawkers off their daily avocations.    A hurriedly concluded scheme to alter the Constitution has accentuated this already precipitous slide toward what seems like an inexorable move toward anarchy. This 48- hours- strike may be a prelude to many more prolonged ones. There is blood in the horizon.         Shot from without    This nation is now plagued by a combination of political, economic and constitutional crises; prompting the most suave-and the otherwise dispassionate-Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, to forewarn an unpredictable political transition to hit home sooner. Yet, our ruling party leaders are too complacent. They think there's no alternative other than them. The French proverb " Après moi, le deluge" is as pet a deduction within our kitchen cabinet as is the buzzword recession in the West.    That Dr. Singh did utter such a caution prior to his official visit here shall evoke more curiosity, although his view is a view from without. Within the nation, one finds the vital institutions facing impending dismemberment or incapacitation; due to too many police chiefs being in custody, too many generals being on the run or in captivity, and, too many political dissidents being subjected to cruel and degrading treatments. The Parliament, on the other hand, has long been a one-party monologue of monotony, obsessed in composing and singing its own eulogy.         Precedent overlooked    The Constitution is the solemn charter of the people. Its amendments must be inclusive of public opinion from all spectrum of the society. It must also be reflective of the unified national desire. The manner in which a Constitution is amended speaks about the degree of deference a government attaches to the rule of law.    Constitutional amendments in Australia and the Republic of Ireland require that they are placed before the people for voting after being passed by the legislature. In Denmark, once an amendment is approved by the parliament, a general election must be held and the new parliament must approve the amendment again before it is finally submitted to a referendum.    In Canada, there are five different methods of amendment set out in the Constitution, each relating to the specificity of the proposed amendments. Most of the methods require the consent of various provincial legislatures too, following the passage of an Act by the federal parliament.    In the USA, any constitutional amendment must be mooted by a joint resolution by the ruling and the opposition parties. Once passed, it is taken as being reflective of the public desire and does not require a Presidential assent.         Hurried move    The failure of our President to refer the 'relevant' Amendments to a referendum constituted a serious omission in discharging his constitutional obligations, which the Article 48 guided him to do in a manner that 'shall take precedence over all other persons' and shall conform to the Constitutional and other legal standards. We may understand why it happened in the manner it did. That, however, must not preclude us from analyzing the intricacies involved in it.    Every circus needs a joker. The lingering circus of the Constitutional Amendments was destined from the beginning to using the President as the gullible joker. That is what has led.    President Zillur Rahman signed the 15 th Amendment bill into a law on July 3 , within 72 hours of its passing by a Parliament where opposition members were absent. The amendment brought 55 changes to the Constitution, some of them involving the revival of the 1972 Constitution. Such a sea change occurred in a hurry; the lapse between the SC verdict in May - that the "Constitution ( Thirteenth amendment) Act 1996 ( Act 1 of 1996) is prospectively declared void and ultra vires the Constitution"-and the enactment of the 15 th Amendment Act being only weeks apart.    The caretaker system too having been annulled in the process, the BNP and the other opposition parties do have an issue relating to their participating in an election under the ruling party. That is the political dimension of the crisis. The legal dimension is: The nation will hold the AL-led government responsible for amending the Preamble to the Constitution without seeking public mandate through a referendum, as was required.         Procedural pitfalls    The exercise was a purely partisan manoeuvring of narcissist vintage, and, it has added more fuel to the frenzy of instability that the nation has been enduring for too long. People are now braced for another prolonged spate of insecurity which may lead to anything, anytime, according to many observers.    This crisis is more ominous than what is being seen or felt. The Amendments have imperilled the fundamental principles of our State policy, which Part II (Articles 8-25) of the Constitution lays out elaborately and are ingrained firmly in the 'inviolable' Preamble of the Constitution. It's not that they couldn't be changed, if needed; but not in the manner the 15 th Amendment had done it. Yet, adamant to do it anyway, a legally correct way for the government would have been to amend Article 142 first, which contains the statutory guidelines relating to amending any provision(s) of the Constitution. Instead, by doing it through sheer majority prowess, and avoiding the mandatory guidelines, a gaping vulnerability is laid exposed for prospective judicial challenges to pounce upon it and to seek for instant annulment of these Amendments.    Article 142 contains a statutory definition of the word ' Amendment,' Article 142 (1)( a) being more explicit. It states: "any provision may be amended by way of addition, alteration, substitution or repeal by Act of Parliament," but not without complying with the procedures outlined in Article 142.    These procedures were wilfully violated. Article 142(1 A) explains the necessity of holding a referendum if the bill, passed by the two-thirds of the parliamentarians, proposes to amend the Preamble to the Constitution, or, Articles 8 , 48 , or 56 , in specific.    Article 8 , in particular, refers to the fundamental principles of state policy, the first subsection of which (ss 8(1)) saying, "The principles of absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah.....shall constitute the fundamental principles of state policy." The Preamble to the Constitution also states in para 2 : " high ideals of absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah....shall be the fundamental principles of the Constitution."         Preamble altered    The 15 th amendment removed ' Absolute Faith and Trust in Allah' from the Constitution; the alteration directly relating to and altering the Preamble, as well as Article 8. Above all, the revival of Article 12 to restore secularism is a substitute to that fundamental state principal, i. e., 'absolute trust and faith in Almighty Allah,' which came into force vide the Proclamation Order No 1 of 1977 , and, later, got ratified by the Parliament to be an integral part of the Preamble.    Finally, the word 'Allah' has been removed in the translation of Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim, which too constitutes an alteration of the Preamble. The new translation reads, 'Absolute Faith and Trust in God.' Secularism denotes defiance of God and Allah, both. The replacement of Allah with God is politically pretentious, substantively hollow, religiously misleading.    Other major additions to the Preamble are the incorporation of the speech of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, made on March 7 , 1971 ; the alleged declaration of independence by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman after midnight of March 25 , 1971 ; and, the proclamation of Independence declared at Mujibnagar on April 10 , 1971.    Playing with the preamble being a serious matter-politically and legally-it required of the President, pursuant to Article 142(1 A), to refer the proposed Amendments, within seven days after the passing of the bill at the Parliament, to the Election Commission for holding a referendum on the subject in order to obtain public opinion with respect to whether he (the President) should assent to such a bill, or not.    That is what the framer of the Constitution had intended to, aiming to absolving the President from any blame in such sensitive matters. But the President had squandered that opportunity. Earlier, he is on record for saying that his PM makes no mistake. Although many brushed aside his comment about the PM's infallibility as a mere satire, this intentional disregard for the rule of law is unlikely to be pardoned by the today's suffering multitudes, by the posterity, and a bloody history being bigoted by this agonizing ordeal of a nation in tears.

Police Violence Unfolds Ugly Side Of AL's Rule

The extreme viciousness with which two police officers and the men under their command repeatedly beat up Zainul Abedin Faruk, Chief Whip of the Opposition in the Jatiya Sangsad ( parliament) on Wednesday has revealed afresh the ugly and terrifying side of Awami League's rule. On the same day Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in parliament, Home Minister Sahara Khatun, Minister of State for Home Shamsul Huq Tuku elsewhere and by Awam League Joint Secretary Mahbub Alam Hanif at an office of his party made statements endorsing the police atrocity. While Sheikh Hasina and some MPs of the ruling alliance virulently spewed vituperative against the main opposition party BNP, its chief former prime minister Begum Khaleda Zia and the severely tortured Zainul Abedin Faruk, on their part the Home Minister, her deputy and the influential Mr. Hanif attempted not only to lay the blame for the wounding of the Opposition Chief Whip on himself but they suggested that his injuries are only a few and quite light. On the other hand, they accused Faruk of provoking the police officers and of being violent. The Home Minister and the Minister of State for Home both sympathised with the police.    On the other hand, Zainul Abedin Faruk has received severe injuries in the head and back. To stop the bleeding from his head doctors at the United Hospital had to apply eleven stitches. BNP's acting Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir has said that eight more stitches were needed to close the wounds on his back. Eye witnesses saw as did viewers of TV news on private channels that Faruk was bleeding a great deal even while he ran for his life towards the MP's dormitory. The policemen dragged him out from a lift there and mercilessly beat him.    Earlier they had kicked him with their riot boots on and also trampled his body. A physician at the United Hospital told journalists that there were marks of beating all over Zainul's body. A report in the Amar Desh daily newspaper said that Zainul's tongue came out of his mouth after he was thrown on the street from a police vehicle. Zainul himself said that when he was losing his sense at this stage he thought he was going to die. In spite of these atrocities government leaders are justifying the actions of two police officers who led the attacks on Zainul.    Meanwhile, it has come to light that both these officers were leaders of Awami League's student wing before they joined the police force and that the present government has kept them in their jobs despite there being records of serious breach of discipline in their service career. One of them was in the police hospital yesterday for on injury sustained on Wednesday. The Home Minister went to see him and other policemen injured in scuffles during the first day of the two-day countrywide general strike (hartal) called by BNP. Jamaat-e- Islami has also simultaneously called a strike. Several groups have supported it. BNP has claimed that on the Wednesday about 300 of its supporters were injured by mainly police action and 400 others arrested at different places in the country. A number of vehicles have been burnt in Dhaka and elsewhere allegedly by hartal supporters.    The merciless beating up of Zainul Abedin Faruk took place when he was picketing, along with other opposition MPs, on the roads adjacent to the parliament building. Such activities were temporarily banned in the area because the parliament was in session. A newspaper photograph shows that at one stage Faruk was threatening to throw a stone towards a passing vehicle. (The vehicle is not seen in the photo which perhaps is because it sped away). It seems the police took this action of Faruk as the pretext to torture him. This police atrocity seems to be deliberate because they could have easily arrested him and removed him from the scene. There were many times more policemen than the few MPs picketing there.    Begum Khaleda Zia and other BNP leaders have charged that police attacked Faruk with an intention of killing him. However, they did not instantly declare any hard line protest action beyond continuing the strike into the second day. Perhaps they will in the next phase of their agitation.    What seems to be clear from the angry and negative reaction of the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her party men to the BNP-led strike and Faruk's falling victim to police atrocity the ruling party is in no mood to restore the non-party care-taker government system during general elections. This has strengthened the suspicion of most of the other political parties that Awami League wants to remain in charge of government during elections so that it can manipulate the election results in its favour. The opposition seems certain that Awami Leaguers are hell-bent on retaining power so that (a) they do not have to face punishment for their corruption and other crimes and (b) so that they can loot more in future.    Meanwhile, Awami League has lost much ground in the Union Parishad elections just held in the country. They have secured a little more than half the positions of the local council chairman with BNP closely behind them. This means BNP has improved its support significantly since the parliament elections two and a half years ago. Out of 3790 posts of UP chairman Awami League and allies have won 1844 while BNP and allies 1627. These elections were marred by violence and by rigging by ruling party's candidates.    Violence during the union parishad elections was widespread in which 65 persons, including children, were killed. More than 8000 persons have been wounded in clashes and attacks. Police fired more than 1000 rounds of bullet during these disturbances. The Election Commission remained a mere spectator during these election violence. This high level of violence has shown that there cannot be peaceful and fair elections yet in Bangladesh under a party rule.