The constitutional changes I wrote about two weeks ago just got their rubber-stamp pass in the Zimbabwe parliament. Did you see that coming? I sure didn’t!

JOHANNESBURG, Aug. 30 — Zimbabwe’s parliament voted Tuesday to give President Robert Mugabe new constitutional powers to seize farmland and to restrict travel by government opponents in a country whose government is already regarded as among the most repressive in Africa.

The parliament, flush with new members from Mugabe’s ruling party after a March legislative election that was denounced by many international observers as rigged, cast 103 votes for the constitutional changes, enough for the two-thirds majority needed in the body of 150 members. News reports from Harare, the Zimbabwean capital, said ruling party lawmakers began singing and dancing over the victory.

Basically, this is the first step in the long (or short, maybe) process of demolishing any opposition Mugabe has in the country.

In his Marxist policy of land seizures, he has been mostly hung up by challenges to the actions by white farmers who were evicted from their farms several years ago. This constitutional amendment would effectively allow Mugabe to seize the land without any judicial process whatsoever. Those who have their cases in court will lose, and those whose land will now be seized might as well leave the country and forget about it.

Well, they would, if the other constitutional amendment didn’t restrict travel. Those affiliated in any way with the opposition to Mugabe will now be faced with the possibility of having their passports revoked. White commercial farmers, urban traders, unionists, missionaries, it doesn’t matter. They all essentially lose their right of citizenship if they oppose the government.

Additional Reading: Zimpundit has a strong essay on the subject.

Today marked the 25th anniversary of the founding of the Solidarity trade union, which broke the grip of Soviet communism over the freedom-loving nation of Poland. It isn’t a national holiday, or even one that many people were alive to remember, but people took to the streets in celebration to remember the birth of freedom in their country.

It might not have been a public holiday - but it was a national day of celebration in Poland.

Gdansk, the home of the Solidarity movement, was particularly festive.

Thousands of people crammed into Solidarity Square beside the main gate of the shipyard to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the birth of the movement.

Crowds filled the streets leading to the square. Among them were pensioners, families with children’s strollers and scouts.

Many wore armbands in the national colours of red and white. Others brought flags with Solidarity written in its famous red letters.

Under a clear blue sky they listened to an open-air Mass led by Pope John Paul II’s former private secretary, Archbishop Stanislaw Dziwisz.

Other countries wouldn’t have got their freedom if the Poles had not broken the Soviet bear’s teeth.

The overwhelming majority of Poles look to the Roman Catholic Church for moral and spiritual guidance. And under communism, the Church was one of the few places they could go to to hear the truth.

The Church and in particular the Polish pope, played a vital role in galvanizing support for Solidarity.

Above the huge stage in the square a banner quoted John Paul II.

It read: “Solidarity opened the gates to freedom.”

Also, if it hadn’t have been for the support of the democratic west, these freedom fighters may never have had the support they needed to rise up against communism. It is because of great leaders like the Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, and Margaret Thatcher, who unrelentlingly stood with them in total solidarity, that men like Lech Walesa were able to be born of such historic events.

It serves as both a reminder and a warning. Freedom is the natural tendency of every human being, but it also leaves people to their own choices. In order for freedom to be won, and for tyranny to be defeated, the men and women of the west must continue to stand in solidarity for democratic values, and isolate those governments which seek to oppress their own people. It is because of this that Poland was finally able to achieve its freedom. And twenty five years after the founding of Solidarity, that truth keeps marching on.

Following up on Glenn’s post, I’ve just donated to and would recommend donating to the Union for Reform Judaism’s Disaster Relief Fund. They have an option to donate specifically for Katrina help, and 100% of your donation is used for relief. You don’t have to be a member or anything to donate (I’m not).

Check out Glenn’s post and follow along at Instapundit for further details and updates, and many more ideas for donating or otherwise helping out.

UPDATE: the truth laid bear is keeping tabs on Katrina relief and offers a comprehensive list of blogs and charities.

ANOTHER UPDATE: If you donate, or if you’ve already donated, don’t forget to log your contribution.

This blog post is difficult to write - it doesn’t really seem revolutionary, so I didn’t want to write anything.

But it is relevant.

We in the U.S. seem frozen in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. If it was just the winds, big deal, it would have a simple, if costly solution.

But it’s so much worse than that. There’s the slow but total flooding of New Orleans, with some analysts saying the treasured city may be a total loss. There’s the unexpected destruction of the Gulf cities of Mississippi and Alabama - the damage of which is unknown due to impassability - much like Sumatra’s cities after the tsunami.
There are the tens of thousands of survivors who must be rescued - while bodies floating in the water must be ignored.

There’s more than the nature aspect, there’s the social one. There is the edge of riots by tens of thousands of people at the Superdome and the prisoners and hostages. There’s the knowledge that none of them will be allowed to go back to their homes for a long long time. There’s the monstrous looting.

There’s the known corruption of the New Orleans officials and their poor planning and maintenance of infrastructure as well as the weakling leadership of Louisiana’s babbling and stupid governor, a woman well beneath her office.

Besides the problems of people, there’s the destruction to our nation’s infrastructure - key to our economy. As I read bulletin boards I learn of all the little businesses up and down the Mississippi river who are out money and work due to the paralyzation of New Orleans - an instant recession for them. I slide into even deeper dread when I realize the extent of damage to our energy infrastructure at a bad time - 95% of our oil must pass through New Orleans - and so much of not only oil production but oil refining and oil imports must pass through there - and can’t.

That it’s all in one place is a real horror - and if we do not believe we can fix it in reasonable time - an erosion in national confidence.

Clearly this was something we were not ready for. There is some kind of culture of disbelief going on. You can see it in the looting, for one. And perhaps the bigness as GatewayPundit noted. Instapundit reported that the overhyping of past hurricanes made many people reluctant to clear the city. And now Val reports that donations are not coming in. I wonder if it is because of the experience with tsunami aid and the refusal to rebuild the World Trade Center as well as the mismanagement of those funds for all sorts of special-interest projects instead of the One Common Purpose of rebuilding - so many billions were donated and all that were rebuilt were giant bureaucratic fiefdoms. Gee, how inspiring.

It’s a body blow, not delivered by terrorists, but by nature. And our attitude toward it. Maybe it’s because already there are some thing out of our control happening. Our economy already is in trouble (look at the inverted yield curve heralding recession ahead) and this is certain to make it come faster. We already know what Hurricane Ivan did to our economy and oil prices last year - we know this will be worse. And so much more painful because it’s at home - where we know how complex things are. We are not too impressed with even our national leadership, as polls show.

Overseas, things look simple and soluble. Here, we know things are not simple. If the rest of the world doesn’t see us as a beacon, what will the impact be on world revolutions inspired by our example and actions?

Will they stop?

American Thinker has an intelligent essay on the breakdown of civil society in the wake of the hurricane and the critical need for faith and hope in the wake of this hurricane.

Where is our revolution?

Today’s Wall Street Journal has an in-depth essay today on the Babes of Politics theory, developed in depth here at Publius Pundit, at WILLisms and at Gateway Pundit.

It’s excellent. Read it here.

Jesse Jackson and Hugo Chavez, in Caracas, August 29, 2005

In the interest of continuing the elevation of debate, I think it’s about time to once again tackle the issue of swim suits in Saudi Arabia. You will want to read the first post if you haven’t, which deals with what exactly these swim suits look like, and then the second post, which deals with the discussion that erupted because of it.

Stefania dropped an image off that explains everything perfectly. Just click here.

That’s right, folks, another reaffirmation that Publius is not a blog to be showing your kids before bed time.

Hey all,

Here’s an update. I’m moving to Boston right now, heading off to the airport at this moment. I won’t have access to a computer for a few days, probably into Thursday or maybe even Friday. But don’t worry — this place will be kept going smooth, smart, and sexy in the meantime because of Publius’ other contributors that you know and love. So stick around.

On the plane I’ll be reading Kremlin Rising which is about Putin’s consolidation of power and the backtracking of democracy in Russia from his election to the Beslan massacre. It looks very good and detailed.

Also, make sure to check out the Carnival of Revolutions over at One Free Korea, which is impossibly comprehensive.

As Jesse Jackson visits Venezuela’s strongman Hugo Chavez at the presidential palace this weekend, with timing that suggests a plan to denounce what he calls the ‘Rumsfeld-Robertson connection’, outside in the streets - violent protests have engulfed Caracas in a sign of Chavez’s tightening grip on power.

El Universal has the story in Spanish here and Globovision has the story in Spanish here. Miguel explains it in English for us here.

Sources: El Universal, Globovision, Union Radio, Venevision, Reuters and El Nacional.

Reuters has the story here.

UPDATE: Aleksander Boyd points out media errors in some of the captioning in a short, strong essay here.

Larry Kudlow has an important essay on the one economic force stronger than oil and all the tyrants who ride in on it: The Federal Reserve.

He warns that the Fed doesn’t quite get it on interest rates - it’s obsessing over mortgage prices and risk management instead of commodity prices and the yield curve as it should be. Will the Fed lower oil prices - by destroying everyone’s economy? I agree with Larry in that I don’t think destroying something in order to save it is the way do something. This isn’t way democratic revolutions are best made/

Read Larry’s economic thinking in language a baby could understand here.

Hey everyone,

I’ll be moving up to Boston on Monday to start going to school again, so there will no longer be any posts on the weekends. What this means is less burn out and better quality posting during the week. So what I’ll do, every weekend, is put a post on the top linking out to a bunch of articles and blog posts that I believe are good reading. It should keep you busy! And if you have an interesting link, be sure to drop it in the comments section for me to add.

The only exception to the no weekend posting policy is if there is revolutionary activity or an election afoot. See the Venezuela protests above, a perfect example.

But first, I’m also going to pimp out my advertisers, who I’d love for you to click on:
Defend the White House
Contra Cafe
Congressional Deskbook 2005-2007

Now, here’s your weekend reading:
Ethiopundit has a new essay on revolutionary democracy in Ethiopia, dealing with how the ruling parties maintains power.

Zimpundit writes extensively about amendments to Zimbabwe’s constitution, which will effectively eradicate property rights and trap people in the country.

If you’re keeping up on Azerbaijan’s elections, make sure to read the series of reports at Azerbaijan’s Parliamentary Election Monitor.

A new blog right out of Minsk, Belarus, that I hope will be posting often.

Egypt trying on democracy, and Big Pharaoh is stunned that criticism of Mubarak was aired on national television.

More on the rumors of the ousting of Burma’s top military general.

Transitions Online argues that Poland’s policy toward Belarus is correct, while the EU’s policy is a failure so far.

The Harvard International Digest is always good reading, just scroll.

Alenda Lux responds to those who think the new Iraqi constitution gives women less rights than Saddam’s constitution.

More on the crackdown in Belarus.

Every reason about why Iraqis are divided over the constitution, from Islamic law to oil distribution to Saddam’s tighty whities, has been beaten like a dead camel in the desert. And almost all of these controversial issues have been worked out, getting down to nit-picky arguments about words like a and the. Important words, no doubt, but ones that could be and were eventually resolved through necessary negotiation. The only issue that can’t seem to be resolved is that of federalism, probably the single most divisive and important issue regarding how Iraq will be ruled in the years to come. It’s an issue that has mired the constitution continually, and has now forced President Bush himself to intervene, urging the two sides to cooperate.

President George W. Bush has intervened directly to encourage Iraqis to compromise over a new constitution, reflecting growing fears in Washington that an Iraqi failure to reach consensus could halt political progress in the country.

The White House confirmed on Friday that Mr Bush had placed a call late this week to Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, a key Shia leader, urging that efforts be continued to reach a compromise with Sunni leaders on the text of the draft constitution, which is scheduled to go to a referendum in October.

Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman, told reporters at the president’s Crawford, Texas, ranch that the brief call was made “to discuss current developments in Iraq’s constitutional process”.

“This is an Iraqi process, but the United States is doing everything it can to assist them in meeting their own obligations and deadlines under the Transitional Administrative Law,” he said. Following the call, Shia negotiators in Baghdad said Friday they had presented a final compromise offer to Sunni leaders to break the impasse, after parliament on Thursday missed its own latest deadline for a deal. Negotiations were continuing through the night in Baghdad.

Al-Hakim, you may remember, is a top Shiite politician and head of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution, along with its affiliated militia the Badr Brigade. He was also the first major politician to call for Shiite autonomy in the south. After President Bush’s call, and recent events in Iraq itself, have forced the issue to further compromise.

The biggest myth being perpetrated at the moment is that this is solely a Sunni versus everyone else (especially Shiites) issue; that the Sunnis are just trying to blow the whole thing by making impossible demands. This is terribly false and misrepresentative of the situation. Moqtada al-Sadr, who is a Shiite, coming out against federalism (and therefore his co-religionists), clashes between his group and the religious Shiite Badr militia, the threatened resignation of 23 of his followers from the assembly and ministries, and the large protests staged in about eight cities should shatter the myth completely.

What this means is not simply that Sunnis are against the way federalism is being done, but that many others outside of the Kurdish and proposed southern autonomy regions, including Shiites, are against it as well. In it’s current manifestation, federalism gives the Kurds and the south, and this is the main beef, way too much autonomy.

There are two main issues regarding this. For one, the Iraqi government isn’t allowed to deploy the army to the region without express permission from the regional parliament. The ability to develop more efficient administration of resources and development isn’t the problem, it’s the local militias affiliated with political parties in parliament that want to keep power by suppressing freedom and intimidating people. This happens to a large degree in the south, in places like Basra, where the religious Shiite and Iran-affiliated Badr militia has been known to harass people for doing things “unIslamic.” It is a bad precedent to set, and one that can lead to an all out struggle for the country’s unity should the south ironically decide to secede due to its personal consolidation of power.

The other problem is the distribution of resources, which is another reason why many people of different ethnic and sectarian backgrounds oppose the current federalism. It isn’t about being Sunni or Shiite, it’s about being stuck in the middle of the country with few resources for development. Currently, the federal government takes a percentage of all exploited resources, but all undeveloped resources will remain the sole propriety of the regions. This is coupled with the previous concerns that the federal government won’t be able to stop the resource-rich north and south from seceding, leaving them high and dry.

If a re-run election were to be held in the case of the national assembly being dissolved, Sunnis would get a much greater representation in parliament and the religious Shiite parties would likely take a big hit now that people know more about the various political agendas. It would allow better representation to hammer out a better way to do federalism for the whole country. The problem with this is that a political vacuum would occur in Iraq, and even moreso in the United States. The reason the negotiations have to go through now as well as possible is because politics in Iraq are inexorably tied to politics in America, where people are desperate to see some real signs of progress in our mission of liberation.

Therefore, new elections for re-drafting the constitution can’t be held now, because if the people of America perceive this as a huge failure, the entire thing could fold. This is why President Bush intervened, so as to work everything out definitely. Because of the talk with Al-Hakim, a couple of concessions have been made regarding federalism and former Baath officials.

Following Bush’s call, Shiite officials submitted compromise proposals to the Sunnis, agreeing to delay decisions on federalism and the status of members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party until a new parliament is elected in December.

Late Friday, the Shiites said a “consensus” had been reached and the revised draft was ready to be submitted to parliament.

Sheik Humam Hammoudi, a Shiite and chairman of the constitutional committee, said the draft would be submitted over the weekend and 5 million copies distributed nationwide ahead of the Oct. 15 referendum.

The compromise will put the decision off until the next parliament is elected, which is basically the same thing as having a re-run election without all the time lost (I argued for this solution when the draft was first delayed). It would also let the issue of allowing former Baath officials, of which many are Sunnis, to be put off until then, which should relieve even more tension.

This is a very good compromise, and the ones against the current federalism would do well to take it. If they do, they will gain many more seats and much more negotiating power in the next election should they choose to participate in full force. They have a huge stake in the future of Iraq, and it is difficult to take such a leap of faith, but they will have a much more powerful voice to shape the way they want federalism to work should they do so.

Of course, the Sunni negotiators are flaming mad just like usual, but hopefully this one will cut right over there heads and relieve the fears about the future in so many hearts. A vast majority of people want federalism, but it has currently been created in a way that will make the federal government impotent to the regional governments and politically-aligned militias. This is why the unity of the country is in danger. But given the generous nature and the rewards to be gained by Sunni and Shiite citizens living between regions, the message may go past the rabid negotiators and straight to the voters. It is they, in the end, who will approve or reject this potential future.

More thoughts on Pat Robertson’s public recommendation that Hugo Chavez be assassinated from Venezuelan bloggers:

Tomas Sancio in Venezuela, in an open note to Robertson, notes Chavez’s many incompetences and says he’s incapable of being the ruthless dictator who could use assassination. (I strongly differ with Sancio here - all the dictatorships I have seen up close or studied are characterized by venal incompetence, including Nazis.) But its broader point about Chavez’s sloppiness is correct and it’s a well-argued essay full of interesting information.

Aleksander Boyd takes a clear-eyed view of Robertson’s cheap inane statements and makes the point that this is serious business happening in Venezuela. The chances for a democratic transition are fading fast there, so making a media hoopla circus out of Robertson’s remarks is singularly unconstructive. This is a real dictatorship in formation. It’s a superb effort well worth reading.

Boli-Nica reports that Abimael Guzman, the chief of Peru’s Sendero Luminoso, the monstrous Shining Path terrorists who murdered nearly a hundred thousand people, mostly poor people, throughout Peru in the last quarter of the 20th century, is finally facing justice in a civil court. Boli has a picture of Peru’s freakish Pol Pot (an ex-philosophy professor, of course - remember that Pol Pot was educated at the Sorbonne) in his prison stripes, a satisfactory sight indeed, along with an appropriately cold-raged piece about just who the hell he was and why he belongs in prison forever.

Democratic Peru is going to win this time.

Read it here.

Alexandra Beech has a fantastically insightful essay debunking a truly lousy piece by airheaded Washington Post columnist Marcela Sanchez, who claims Hugie Chavez is just a teddy bear in the region capable of stabilizing it. Well, yeah, the way graveyards tend to be stable places I guess.

But Alex shows the reality much better - take a look at the depth of this:

That Ms. Sanchez has been hood-winked into believing that Chavez has a Robin Hood side is not surprising. After all, she believes that ???????Latin America today is not in the midst of a Cold War where externally financed leftist rebel movements wage guerrilla warfare against democratic governments.??????? That is only true to a certain degree, if one thinks solely of the influence of the former Soviet Union on Latin America years ago. But Marxists have grown much more savvy over the years. They????????ve realized that a revolution gets much further in a business suit and ???????elections??????? than by impromptu attacks from the mountains. In this globalized era, financing the explosion of an oil pipeline doesn????????t accomplish what financing a social explosion in front a presidential palace does, then calling it an ???????increasingly frustrated population…taking to the streets and demanding that their elected leaders deliver the goods promised by U.S.-touted reforms.??????? That she would think that those ???????protests??????? are spontaneous either reflects extreme naivety or a hidden agenda to promote a particular political bend.

It just keeps getting better, a truly awesome read. Read the whole thing here.

Oh man, this is really gross - Hugo Chavez is bed with Marc Rich, the most corrupt speculator of all, a guy who makes George Soros look like a sweet little daisy. Rich is the ultimate sleaze in the world of capitalism, in bed with every dictator and criminal out there. I know a lot of speculators myself but none, not one, ever wants anything to do with his tainted name. They back away from him like salt from pepper in a bowl of water not out of fear or shame, for they have none, but out of disgust. They don’t want to be associated with crooks.

Rich is the guy who got the pardon from Bill Clinton in his final disgusting act in return for campaign contributions via Marc’s ex-wife Denise Rich. Now Rich, through a company where he’s a major shareholder, is buying oil in suspect transactions with Hugo Chavez. For political reasons. Of all the people the supposedly anti-capitalist Chavez could deal with, somehow Rich is the one Chavez chooses to do business with. Why is it that any time something incredibly vile goes on, Marc Rich’s name turns up?

Alek Boyd has the incredible expose here.

Venezuela’s revolution is complex because it has two sides claiming to hold the revolutionary mantle. The reality is, only one does, the one that does the democratic housework, not the one that spends the night painting the town - with red graffiti.

What do the real revolutionaries do? They build the case for democratic revolution. They hold the powerful accountable. They show where the problems are, and precisely. They don’t focus on personality (like the Chavistas do, and come to think of it, Pat Robertson, too). They focus on acts, deeds, facts. Tangible things. They act as voices in the wildnerness of media hype and hoopla. They show the world what is going on.

Which is exactly what Venezuelan bloggers Miguel, Daniel and Veneconomy have done this week.

Miguel exposes Venezuela’s central bank shenanigans with government money, complete with diagrams, showing how the Chavistas are chiselling and stealing from the government left and right for their own aggrandisement. He shows how the money is being concealed and disappeared. Just like all other decadent corrupt dictatorships do.

Daniel and Miguel together expose more trouble together this week in Venezuela’s public hospitals, all of which are starved for funding in the name of Chavez’s castroite ‘revolution.’ Chavez is taking money that used to go to Venezuela’s many public hospitals and handing it to these new showcase ‘misiones’ full of Cuban doctors adept at putting bandaids on, and more to the point, monitoring the barrios for dissent. Meanwhile, patients are dying in the real hospitals, poor people who need major medical care and cannot afford private hospitals. Four died of oxygen starvation in Caracas hospitals this week and they have a thoughtful and informative item on what’s happening structurally that such a thing could be possible.

Meanwhile, Veneconomy exposes the scandal of collapsing and absent housing in Chavez’s revolution. Venezuela is a country of vast natural resources like wood and cement (never mind oil and gas) and a booming youthful population full of laborers and buyers. But substandard housing has skyrocketed upward and virtually no housing has been built under the Chavez regime. So much for humanitarian instincts - his idea of humanitarian is Castro’s dilapidated housing stock in Cuba. Which is what Venezuela is hurdling to.

This kind of corruption needs to be exposed. Documented. Told to everyone. There is no other way to make people who might otherwise think the Chavistas have a point understand what is going on now. Nor in Venezuela is there any other way to make revolution. So much for the facade of revolution that Chavez claims, the Chavistas are nothing more than pocket-lining Somozas, Castros, Papa Docs, Trujillos, Echeverrias, Velascos, Perons, Videlas, Galtieris, Stoessners, Batistas and Noriegas, all playing to the populist peanut gallery.

These Venezuelan Tom Paines are the real revolutionaries who blog the democratic revolution!

El Salvador’s soldiers have served the effort to spread democracy through the world with great distinction. Not only are Salvadorans always there when a tyrant is in need of dislodging - side by side and doing heavy lifting with the U.S., they are well-known for their courage and heroism. Salvadorans do what they do not because they are interested in benefits, but because they are committed to freedom. They are true idealists in today’s world. Ask any U.S. military man, he will know all about it.

Here is a great interview with a Salvadoran soldier who passionately defends the cause for spreading freedom on his mission in Iraq.

Bear in mind that as international as their mission is, Salvadoran soldiers are great patriots. They are often accused by leftists of being mercenaries-for-America but this charge is blatantly false. They don’t get paid like U.S. soldiers, and if they get killed, their death benefits to their families are sadly limited. They could easily enlist in the U.S. army if they wanted, and get citizenship besides, but most prefer to enlist in the Salvadoran army, sending a freedom message to Iraq that is more distilled and powerful. El Salvador, is one of the countries that already has demonstrated to the world that free and fair elections, as well as democracy itself, are possible even after decades of despair and warfare. They did this in our lifetimes.

Think about what that must mean to a country like Iraq.

The patriotic heroism of the Salvadorans is also alive because there is a new spirit in El Salvador. Democratic reforms have led to great economic reforms there. Those reforms are spreading around the region. That’s leadership.

The currency stabilized. Salvadorans are buying homes and moving back from abroad. Investors are coming there. El Salvador is becoming worth living in again and its lessons are worth sharing with the world. And because it’s worth living for, it’s also worth dying for. That’s the root of their courage that so puts the false glory claims of terrorists to shame.

CAFTA makes El Salvador’s horizon even brighter, but make no mistake, El Salvador was a star before CAFTA was passed and part of the reason CAFTA was passed at all was the fact that El Salvador was so impressive on its own.

El Salvador, quite simply, is a democratic nation of heroes.

Presidents Kocharian of Armenia and Aliyev of Azerbaijan, two countries tangled in constant conflict, are due to meet face to face at a CIS meeting today and will likely discuss relations between the two countries. In particular, the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. Secretary Rice made sure to call them both up and put her word in, urging a solution to be found soon.

Question: What did Secretary Rice discuss during her phone calls to Presidents Aliyev and Kocharian?

Answer: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice spoke briefly this morning with President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and President Robert Kocharian of Armenia. She did so in order to stress to them the importance that the United States attaches to their upcoming meeting in Kazan, and to express our hope that the two Presidents will make the compromises necessary in order to reach a settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Both leaders were upbeat about the prospects for making progress.

The Secretary stressed to President Aliyev the importance of free and fair parliamentary elections this November in Azerbaijan, and noted his important role in this.

The Secretary also told President Kocharian she hoped Armenia would make progress toward enacting a package of constitutional reforms now before the parliament.

Some have proposed a referendum so that they could choose which country they want to be a part of, but there is opposition on both sides for a variety of reasons. Both stake a claim, and I believe that it would probably go to Armenia at the moment, but due to demographics Azerbaijanis would probably surpass the Armenian population within a decade or two. Also, government forces of both countries are constantly at work to sway the territory, and given the distrust between the two already, I doubt either could trust each other enough to have truly free and fair elections there. They don’t even have free and fair elections themselves!

Speaking of which, Azerbaijan will be having parliamentary elections and Armenia will vote on constitutional reforms this fall. Both could shift the political scene enough to the point where any negotiations now may not matter. If any solution is found, it probably won’t be until afterward, though I can imagine any grandstanding political maneuvers and high-level meetings are done solely for the purpose of shoring up the respective governments before their elections. It’s what happens afterward that will matter.

This piece was beautifully written by D.J. McGuire at the China e-Lobby, which is “dedicated to exposing the abuses of human rights, threats to American security, and attacks on general decency committed by Communist China, and to influencing American policy to ensure these egregious acts do not go unopposed.” Make sure to check him out.

Fifty-six years ago today, a plane carrying the leadership of the Republic of East Turkestan was on its way to Beijing for talks with Mao Zedong. In circumstances that can at best be called suspicious, the plane crashed, killing everyone on board. Upon hearing the news, Mao sent in the Communist military, and the occupation of East Turkestan began.

In the more than half century since, the people of East Turkestan ???????? known generally as the Uighurs, although there are also ethnic Kyrgyz, Tajiks, and Kazakhs there ???????? have been brutally persecuted. Mosques have been razed to the ground. Political prisoners have been shot ???????? after show trials in which they are branded as terrorists. In a pattern Tibet watchers will find all too familiar, the Communists have sent wave upon wave of Han Chinese to East Turkestan to reduce the Uighur majority there (this has been so successful the Uighurs are soon to become a minority in their own land, if they aren????????t already). Large-scale development projects, ordered by the Communist leadership in Beijing, are set up as economic colonies, with all the jobs going to ethnic Chinese. In some of the major cities in East Turkestan, ethnic Chinese outnumber native Uighurs by 9 to 1. Even the name East Turkestan is nearly lost to history; Communist China has insisted all call the occupied nation ???????Xinjiang.???????

Many who have suffered under Communist persecution, especially ethnic minorities within Communist China and occupied Tibetans, have similar experiences, but the East Turkestani people have two other painful effects that are all their own ???????? nuclear fallout, and the Communist slander of ???????terrorism.???????

For nearly four decades, Communist China has conducted nuclear testing in East Turkestan. Most of these tests were conducted above ground, in open air, with no concern for those who would suffer from the nuclear fallout. Over 200,000 have died, and tens of thousands more have fallen ill with cancer.

For over five decades, Communist China desperately tried to keep all of this a secret, let anyone feel sympathetic to the anti-Communist resistance in East Turkestan. On September 11, 2001, that all changed. While America licked its wounds, and the people of East Turkestan expressed their sympathy and support for the United States to anyone who would listen, Communist China saw an opportunity to smear the entire occupied nation for its own benefit. Suddenly, resistance to Communism in East Turkestan was supposedly everywhere, and according to Beijing, all it was tied to and supported by Osama bin Laden. Never mind that bin Laden himself never uttered one word about East Turkestan. Never mind that bin Laden himself was allowed to use Communist Chinese front companies on stock exchanges around the world to launder drug money for his terrorist operations. Never mind that East Turkestanis have shown themselves to be the most pro-American Muslims on Earth, to the point that in cities and towns throughout the occupied nation, the most popular scarf is modeled on the Stars and Stripes (third, third, second, second, and second items).

However, today????????s significance goes far beyond the Communist occupation of what was once a free land. As America fights the terror triumvirate of Wahabbism, Ba????????athism, and Khomeinism, her people have asked: where are the Muslims who don????????t hate America? Where are the Muslims who do not see the fulfillment of their faith in emulating the hijackers of September 11, 2001? Where are the Muslims who understand us, our vision, and our desire for freedom for all?

Those of us fortunate enough to know the people of East Turkestan do not ask these questions. We don????????t have to ask them. We see these Muslims every day; we work with them; we are proud to call them our friends. We also know who Communist China considers its friends. It has signed economic agreements with Wahabbists in the Taliban (second and third items), and helped Osama bin Laden launder money. It has sold arms to Saddam Hussein, in some cases for millions of dollars in oil-for-food-vouchers. It has been involved in every major step of Iran????????s nuclear weapons program, and has been the Khomeinist regime????????s largest missile parts benefactor.

While Communist China fights phantom terrorists in East Turkestan, it arms and enables real terrorists throughout the world as ???????some kind of check on U.S. power.??????? Thus East Turkestan????????s resistance to Communist China is in fact the complete opposite of what the Communists say it is. By forcing Zhongnanhai to divert its energies, the East Turkestanis have limited, not enhanced, the anti-American forces of terrorism. In resisting Communism, East Turkestanis make America safer every day.

Last September, East Turkestan found its voice again, with the formation of the East Turkestan government in exile. If you have any time this weekend, please take a look at what they are trying to do to resist the occupation of their homeland, and the systematic annihilation of their people.

Fifty-six years ago today, Communist occupation of East Turkestan began. On this day, let us join them in their sorrow, and let them know they will never be forgotten. God Bless the American, Chinese, and Uighur peoples.

Al-Hayat is reporting that the editor of the independent newspaper Al-Wasat was kidnapped by armed men driving a government vehicle at about 6:00 a.m. on Aug. 23. He was bound, beaten, and threatened with beheading. Then they told him that he might want to “remember his children.” What did this journalist do to deserve this? As Al-Hayat reports: “Al-Wasat had published information regarding the children of government officials studying in the United States, Britain and Malasia with all expenses paid by Ästate-runÅ oil companies.” It has also “published articles criticizing the political system.”

For more details, see this post from Armies of Liberation: Yemeni Journalist Kidnapped and Beat Up by Government Thugs.

Contributed by Kirk H. Sowell of Window on the Arab World, and More!

Daniel Berczik remember’s that yesterday was Ukraine independence day, which doesn’t bode well for we who didn’t remember at all. So to make up for it, in an ever-increasing desire to raise the level of discourse here at Publius, here is Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko’s hot daughter dressed down in black leather during the festivities.

Let me introduce you to Yevgenia Tymoshenko, aged 25, someone who obviously has her mother’s genes.

According to a Chinese government report, income disparity and government corruption will cause instability throughout the entire country by 2010 if action isn’t taken. This would certainly coincide with anecdotal evidence of increasing large protests, in both size and frequency.

China’s rapidly widening income gap has reached dangerous levels, risking social instability by 2010 if the present trend continues, a government report warns.

“China’s growing income gap is likely to trigger social instability after 2010 if the government finds no effective solutions to end the disparity,” the Ministry of Labour and Social Security warned in the China Daily.

Su Hainan, president of the ministry’s income research institute, found income disparity in China had reached the crucial “yellow” stage — the second most serious in a scale of four defined by the institute.

The situation would deteriorate to the most dangerous “red” stage in 2010 if no effective measures were taken within the next five years, he said.

Violent protests and riots have become common among Chinese frustrated by soaring social inequality, massive corruption and illegal land requisitions, sparking government fears of triggering mass-scale social instability.

Of course, even under the best of conditions, income inequality is impossible to eradicate without being, er, communist. But the report goes on to note that the differences in the rise of income between urban and rural areas, especially in the impoverished interior, may be a source of tension. While this is possible, I don’t think it addresses the issue directly. A bigger problem than any income gap would be the too-slow development in rural areas, and the outright municipal corruption that squanders hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

When most of these protests break out, it is over the latter, and not over the income inequality that exists between them and others in cities that they’ve never been to or interact with. The issue are: Why is the government allowing that factory to poison or local well water? Taxing us greatly and using the money to buy a yacht? Leaving us to the elements while others get schools and highways? Making it hard to just live?

These are the kinds of questions that the people will expect the government to answer between now and 2010. The problem is that China’s own internal contradictions are so entrenched that I find it highly unlikely that it will be able to reform its own practices between now and then. Social unrest will continue to grow, and as that happens, the government will have to deflect that growing frustration elsewhere. That could mean that, following the typical totalitarian model, the Chinese government will seek to turn the attention of its people away from its own local problems to external forces, such as the relationship with Taiwan, Japan, or even the United States. Given the Chinese military build up, this should be cause for great concern as the government may be forced by social unrest to do such a thing. Pragmatically speaking, this is where the next Cold War may occur.

I was afraid this might happen. By suspending parliament and taking absolute power, Nepal’s monarch has effectively isolated and turned civil society against him. Now, it seems that the seven main political parties from parliament, which represent some 95% of the population, will be staging joint protests with the Maoist rebels against the king. Not good.

KATHMANDU (Reuters) - Nepal’s royalist government urged opposition parties on Wednesday to call off proposed talks with Maoist rebels, saying they were playing into the hands of the guerrillas to sow fresh divisions in the troubled kingdom.

The warning came a day after the country’s seven mainstream parties said they were preparing to talk with the rebels to launch joint protests against King Gyanendra, who seized power in a royal coup in February.

“There is no use for such talks. It is not proper … and such a meeting cannot be in the interest of the country,” Information and Communications Minister Tanka Dhakal told Reuters.

He said the rebels were trying to create a rift between the parties and the government, installed after Gyanendra took power on February 1. “This is part of their game. Democratic forces must not get into that game,” said Dhakal.

Gyanendra says he was forced to take charge because the political parties were unable to end the nine-year Maoist rebellion which has killed more than 12,500 people.

But the world’s only Hindu kingdom is no closer to peace. There have been no talks between the government and the rebels, and no military progress in the war.

The reason that the king gave for suspending parliament and establishing a state of emergency was that the political parties were failing to combat the Maoists effectively. Despite absolute rule, the king has fared no better in the fight, except now civil society is facing government oppression as well. They’re stuck between a rock and a hard place.

This is a classic case of how government-sponsored oppression can drive otherwise peaceful political participants to extremism. Crackdowns on protesters and journalists isn’t going to defeat the Maoists, but it will certainly make the king even more enemies among the people. Now, that’s not to say that these people will take up arms with the Maoists or even agree with their political views. It means that they are willing to form a temporary anti-government alliance for the purpose of pressuring the king.

If the king truly wants to combat the Maoists, he isn’t doing a very good job, and it makes me wonder about his real intentions for disbanding parliament. In order to win, he needs to have civil society and the political parties on his side. But by driving them away from himself, he is risking perhaps more than he can handle. Most people do not like the Maoists, but if the king isn’t willing to let them act as normal, then they may of perceived yet dangerous necessity team up with the Maoists.

It seems that my post on sexy Saudi swimwear has turned into something of a blogospheric debate.

Our good friend Stefania over at the Free Thoughts blog posted on the swimwear as well, and it triggered some disagreement with Egyptian blogger Miss Mabrouk, who says that we were being culturally insensitive and the real issue is modesty. My post got linked under the word “disrespect.” Ouch.

In any case, Stefania wrote another post responding to Miss Mabrouk in which she lays out how it isn’t really about modesty, but how women should have the choice of whether they want to go to the beach in bikinis or ninja gear. I completely agree with Stefania, though judging by the comments section on Miss Mabrouk’s blog, she believes in the freedom of choice as well. Just that she might not choose to sport it.

As for me, I’m going to have my girlfriend come over right now for a swim, and I’m going to prod her into the smallest bikini possible. Ah, freedom!

UPDATE: She has since then performed her womanly duties by bouncing on the trampoline in said swimsuit. Freedom!