NightWatch

For the Night of 19 October 2009

Japan: Democratic Party coalition Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa has made multiple statements in the past week that strongly reassert the Party’s platform position opposing US military personnel living in Japan, specifically with respect to Okinawa. His statements are sharper and more provocative than any by Prime Minister Hatoyama or Foreign Minister Okada.

Kitizawa, for example, described the Status of Forces Agreement with the US as humiliating to Japan. This is the agreement that governs the conduct of US personnel in Japan and jurisdictional determinations in the event of criminal behavior or other misconduct.

Japan also announced on 13 October that in January it will terminate its refueling operations for coalition naval ships in the Indian Ocean that are participating in “anti-terrorism” operations. Kitizawa said Japan also will investigate sources of military equipment other than the US.

Tomorrow, 20 October, Defense Secretary Gates is due to arrive in Tokyo for talks on renegotiating a 2006 rebasing agreement for US forces on Okinawa. The 2006 agreement would move 8,000 U.S. troops to Guam, but the Marine Corps Air Station at Futenma will be moved only to another location on Okinawa. Some government Coalition members want it removed from Japan entirely. Kitizawa promised to raise the issue of the Status of Forces Agreement as well.

Comment: The statements are partly sensational public posturing in advance of the high level defense talks. The Democratic Party coalition government already has announced its commitment to and reliance on the US alliance. Nevertheless, the tone and substance of Kitizawa’s remarks appear deliberately provocative and prone to incite Japanese nationalism, at least that is how they appear in translation.

For interesting background on the “understandings” of the terms in the Defense Agreements, Readers should consult George Washington University’s National Security Archive, again, which has published and posted declassified “minutes” that interpret the agreements that make up the defense relationship during the Cold War and during the Nixon administration.

They establish that successive Liberal Democratic Party governments agreed that Japan could be used as a base from which the US could launch military operations in defense of Korea and Taiwan and agreed to conditions under which US nuclear armed ships and weapons would be permitted in Japan. Not surprising in themselves, but not widely known in Japan apparently.

On the National Security Archive homepage Look for: Nuclear Noh Drama: Tokyo, Washington and the Case of the Missing Nuclear Agreements.

Afghanistan: Update. The U.N.-backed panel investigating election complaints ruled today that thousands of ballots counted in Afghanistan's disputed 20 August presidential election were fraudulent. Investigators said enough votes for President Karzai were thrown out that his total dropped below the 50 percent needed to avoid a runoff with top challenger Abdullah Abdullah.

The Afghan Independent Election Commission refused to accept the findings. Hundreds of Karzai supporters protested in the south over the weekend, calling for the electoral commission to release results quickly and saying they will reject a second round. One demonstration occurred in Spin Buldak, a border town. Protestors shouted, "We want the result!" and "Karzai is our leader!"

Comment: The strong US interest in a credible election looks to some Afghans a lot like political manipulation. In some coverage, Karzai appears to be a sympathetic victim, partly because of the international media descriptions of the work of the UN panel, “throwing out votes” and “disqualifying results.” The imagery depicts outsiders upsetting and re-engineering the Afghan election.

The news is not all bad because it increases the chances that Pashtuns will ignore the latest Taliban threats to vote for Karzai, in the event of a runoff, to ensure the Tajik Dadullah Dadullah does not win.

The not-so-good news is that a runoff election contains a very high likelihood of political violence by Pashtuns and non-Pashtuns tribes as the process goes forward.

No outcome from a runoff is likely to be credible to most Afghans, regardless of the final vote count. Northerners will denounce a Karzai win, as they already have. The Pashtuns will be certain they were robbed of victory if Karzai loses. Perhaps the Afghans will find a third way.

Pakistan: The international press description of the operation in South Waziristan does not seem to fit. Again, various media described the operations as “an onslaught” and “an assault” and “wresting control of militant strongholds,” etc., but the lack of embedded reporters and independent journalists prevents details. Readers are treated to headlines without facts.

The Army only said the forces are making steady progress on three roads into South Waziristan from different directions. There is no possible way those roads can support a rapid corps-echelon advance by up to 30,000 soldiers. The press reporting is not credible.

If past is prologue, the Army units that can move on the roads are moving slowly, creeping carefully along. The militants are doing some shooting, but air and artillery support probably are pushing them back, not infantry “onslaughts.” There are no reports of battles and few casualties.

The matter of fact official report suggests the Army is making a cautious entry into potentially hostile territory at this point.

The Associated Press (AP) reported on 20 October, that the Army has protected its flanks by making deals with two “anti-US” Taliban leaders in South Waziristan. According to the AP report, two “renegade: Taliban leaders, Maulvi Nazir and Hafiz Gul Bahadur, agreed to remain neutral during the operations in South Waziristan. They also will allow the Army safe passage through their lands unimpeded, freeing troops from security duties.

In exchange, the Army promised to ease patrols and bombings in the lands controlled by Nazir and Bahadur, “two Pakistani intelligence officials based in the region told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because revealing their identities would compromise their work.”

An army spokesman described the deal as an "understanding" with the men that they would stay neutral. The AP reporters commented,” the agreements underscore Pakistan's past practice of targeting only militant groups that attack the government or its forces inside Pakistan.” The group the Army is seeking to destroy is that formerly led by the late Baitullah Mehsud, and now led by Hakimullah Mehsud. It is responsible for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto among many other atrocities directed against Pakistan.

Army spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said there was no agreement with the two men, but "there is an understanding with them that they will not interfere in this war."

He said the army "had to talk to the devil" to isolate its main target.

Comment: This is typical of the kinds of deals that Musharraf made repeatedly: tactically sound, potentially strategically foolish. It is premature to be cynical, but this begins to look like another Pakistani good show, but not a serious effort to suppress militant terrorism. The Army does not appear to sense a threat to national survival. Rather, it appears to be punishing the Mehsuds for anti-government bombings and attacks, rather in British colonial style. But stay tuned.

Footnote: The Pakistan Army issued a statement through the local press that it was tired of getting criticized.

Iran: Update. General Mohammad Ali Jafari said a Tehran delegation will travel to Pakistan to deliver proof of Pakistani support to rebel leader Abdolmalek Rigi and his militant group, Jundullah, AAJ News reported 19 October. Jafari said the delegation will ask that Pakistan hand over Rigi. He stated that Rigi's group has direct contact with the American, British and Pakistani intelligence services, adding that Rigi is acting under their orders and plans.

Iran also promised to retaliate against the UK and US for the bombings.

Yemen: For the record. Shiite rebels in northern Yemen are receiving finances from "certain" Iranian officials and are being trained "in the same manner followed by Hezbollah in south Lebanon," Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh said today, AFP reported. Saleh said the rebels are plotting to create a Shiite zone along the Saudi border. He also said the al-Huthi militants in Yemen have connections with an al Qaida network in the region.

He provided no proof, but he said all the right words to get international attention.

Terror: For the record. The Washington Post reported today “U.S. and European counterterrorism officials say a rising number of Western recruits -- including Americans -- are traveling to Afghanistan and Pakistan to attend paramilitary training camps. The flow of recruits has continued unabated, officials said, in spite of an intensified campaign over the past year by the CIA to eliminate al-Qaeda and Taliban commanders in drone missile attacks.”

That would seem to be a poor return on investment.

Somali anti-piracy patrol: Reuters reported pirates hijacked a Chinese bulk carrier carrying 25 Chinese crew members in the Indian Ocean on Monday, the European Union's counter-piracy force in the region said. The ship was seized 550 nautical miles northeast of the Seychelles and 700 nautical miles off the east coast of Somalia, the EU naval force said in a statement.

The report listed this as the sixth ship under the control of Somali pirates. International piracy monitors predicted an increased pace of attacks after the rainy season, but thus far that does not appear to be the case. Updates are invited.

End of NightWatch for 19 October.