Sri Lanka military says it shot down rebel planes

An injured survivor of a suicide attack in northeast Sri Lanka on February 9
Military officials in Sri Lanka said they shot down a Tamil Tiger aircraft near the Colombo International Airport on Friday, in an air engagement with rebels that killed two people and left about 50 wounded.

Sri Lankan officials claimed both planes were shot down by the Sri Lankan Air Force, SLAF, refuting the Tiger’s claim they were conducting suicide missions in the country’s capital. A spokesperson for the Sri Lankan Military said the body of a Tamil Tiger guerrilla was found by the plane’s wreckage after it was shot down near the Colombo International Airport. The other plane, which entered the capital of Colombo, dropped a bomb but crashed into the offices of the Department of Inland Revenue, two blocks away from Air Force Headquarters, a military spokesman said. According to the Sri Lanka’s Lankapuvath news agency, the country’s air defense was activated at 9:30 p.m.( 11 a.m ET) Friday after receiving information that two of the rebels light aircrafts were circulating over Colombo. “Both aircrafts were brought down by air force firing,” Lankapuvath reported. “The dead body of the LTTE pilot was also found strewn about.” The news agency said 50 people were admitted to Colombo General Hospital due to injuries from the crash. Two died from their wounds.

Don’t Miss
Sri Lanka accuses rebels of killing 17 civilians

Sri Lanka says 10,000 civilians flee fighting

Explainer: Sri Lanka and the Tamil Tigers

According to the pro-Tamil Tiger Web site Tamil.net.com, two Black Air Tiger Pilots — the group’s elite squadron –died after carrying out diving missions into Sri Lanka’s air force headquarters in Colombo and an air force base in Katunayaka. CNN could not independently verify the claims made by the rebels or the government. In a report released on Thursday, Human Rights Watch criticized the Sri Lankan government for its “indiscriminate” killings of civilian as it attempts to fight the rebel movement. As the rebel stronghold continues to shrink, civilians are trapped in the cross-fire, HRW said. “Sri Lankan forces are shelling hospitals and so-called safe zones and slaughtering the civilians there,” James Ross, legal and policy director at Human Rights Watch, said in a statement. HRW also condemned the Tamil Tigers for its treatment of civilians.

The organization’s 45-page study said 2,000 civilians have been killed and another 5,000 have been wounded. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) — commonly known as the Tamil Tigers — have fought for an independent homeland for the country’s ethnic Tamil minority since 1983. The civil war has left more than 70,000 people dead.

Share

Gitmo detainees treated humanely, U.S. report says

Attorney General Eric Holder, shown earlier this week, has formed a detainee review task force.
WASHINGTON (CNN) — A new Defense Department report concludes that the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, treats detainees humanely, to a department official with knowledge of the report.

The conclusion comes in a Pentagon report prepared for President Obama, who has ordered the closing of the facility within a year. The Defense Department review also recommends that high- value and violent detainees be allowed to pray and have recreation time in groups of three, the official said. The official declined to speak on the record because the report has not yet been delivered to the White House or publicly released. Separately, Attorney General Eric Holder announced Friday a formal structure for deciding what to do with detainees held at the military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay. Holder said the Justice Department’s point man on counterterrorism, Matthew Olsen, will lead a multiagency detainee review task force, which will be responsible for making final recommendations to a senior review panel. “The task force will consider whether it is possible to transfer or release detained individuals consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States,” a Justice Department statement said. Several detainees have claimed in court documents that they were tortured and subjected to inhumane treatment in the military prison at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay.

Don’t Miss
Approach to Afghanistan detainees stays in place

Gates: U.S. fighting ‘tough test’ to oust Taliban

Commentary: Holder wants to tear down wall of race

Most of the complaints concern the early years of the facility, after then-President Bush determined that “minimum standards for humane treatment” spelled out in the Geneva Conventions “did not apply to al Qaeda or Taliban detainees,” according to a Senate Armed Services Committee report issued in December. Holder announced earlier this week he plans to take a firsthand look at the Gitmo military facility and will take Olsen with him on the trip.

Share

Man accused of lying about ties to al Qaeda

A poll shows approval of President Obama slipping, but most of the loss of support is among Republicans.
An Afghanistan native living in California has been arrested and charged with lying to federal authorities, including trying to hide a trip he took to Pakistan to visit Osama bin Laden’s security coordinator.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey, released Friday, also suggests that six in 10 support the economic stimulus package that Obama signed into law Tuesday. Obama’s approval rating stands at 67 percent in the new poll. That’s down 9 percentage points from the most recent CNN poll, which was conducted in early February. But a breakdown by party suggests that the drop doesn’t mean that the new president is in serious trouble. “Since nearly all of the decline came among Republicans, this doesn’t indicate that the honeymoon is already over,” said Keating Holland, CNN’s polling director. “Among Democrats, Obama’s approval went from 96 percent to 92 percent; among Republicans, it dropped from 50 percent in early February to 31 percent now.” Among independents, the president’s approval rating now stands at 61 percent, down 6 percentage points from earlier in the month. Sixty percent of those questioned in the poll favored the economic stimulus plan, with 39 percent opposing the package. The $787 billion law is designed to pump up the economy by increasing federal government spending, sending aid to states in fiscal trouble and by cutting taxes. Watch Obama’s comments after signing the stimulus » Do Americans think the stimulus will work A slight majority, 53 percent, said the plan will improve economic conditions, while 44 percent said it won’t help stimulate the economy. And 31 percent of those questioned indicated the package will improve their own financial situation, with two out of three saying the stimulus won’t help them personally.

Don’t Miss
Ticker: RNC’s verdict of first month: ‘Disappointing’

Obama shines stimulus spotlight on urban areas

Schneider: Obama repairing America’s image abroad

“Americans often don’t see a connection between big government programs and their own wallets,” Holland said. “That’s what makes the various bailout packages such a hard sell with the public, and why the White House might have felt that they needed to include tax cuts in the stimulus package.” Of those 53 percent who said the plan will work, 19 percent felt it will start improving the economy by the end of the year, with 16 percent saying it will make a difference by next year and another 18 percent feeling it will take longer than two years. “It goes without saying that Democrats support the stimulus bill and Republicans oppose it,” Holland added. “Nearly nine in 10 Democrats favored the plan, while three-quarters of Republicans thought it was a bad idea.” iReport.com: How is Obama doing so far Forty-nine percent said they think the passage of the economic stimulus plan was a major victory for Obama, with 28 percent calling it a minor accomplishment and 22 percent indicating it was not a positive achievement. The bill passed Congress less than four weeks after Obama took office. It passed the House of Representatives with no Republican support. In the Senate, three of 41 Republicans backed the bill.

The survey’s release comes one month after Obama’s inauguration. Fifty-eight percent of those polled said Obama has so far met their expectations, and another 16 percent suggested that he’s exceeded their expectations. Nearly one in four said that the president has fallen short of what they expected. The CNN/Opinion Research poll was conducted Wednesday and Thursday, with 1,046 people questioned by telephone. The survey’s sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Share

Revolutionary Road Finds Readers, If Not Viewers

Revolutionary Road Finds Readers, If Not Viewers

Bleak. That’s always been the rap against American novelist Richard Yates. Though he has been celebrated as a writer’s writer and a consummate craftsman since his death in 1992, even his admirers found his work depressing. Fellow novelist Carolyn See explained it in 1981: “He’s not going to get the recognition he truly deserves because to read Yates is as painful as getting all your teeth filed down to the gum with no anesthetic.” Joyce Carol Oates agreed, writing in the Nation, “A sad, gray, deathly world — dreams without substance — aging without maturity; this is Yates’ world, and it is a disturbing one.”

In December, part of Yates’ disturbing world found its way to the big screen, with the release of a film version of his first novel, Revolutionary Road, pairing Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet in their first cinematic get-together since Titanic. The novel chronicles the painful disintegration of the marriage of Frank and April Wheeler, a seemingly model couple in vapid 1950s suburbia. The film, which faithfully captures that pain, promptly sank at the box office — grossing just $21 million so far — despite the fact that Winslet won a Golden Globe as Best Actress for her tortured role.
But the novel has caught fire. More than a million paperback copies of Revolutionary Road, which made little commercial ripple when it came out in 1961 , are now in print, and the Vintage paperback has been on the New York Times best seller list for 11 weeks.

Yates’ daughter Monica, 51, who lives near Flint, Michigan, is understandably happy with the turn of events. “A 48-year-old novel, having a life, which it never had in the first place!” she says enthusiastically. “It’s excellent.” She’s not really surprised that the book has found an audience, though. “I never doubted, and I don’t even think he really doubted.” But, she adds, “He would have liked to have it before he died.”

No doubt. Yates’ life was as sad as his writing. When he was working on Revolutionary Road from 1956-1960, his marriage was falling apart and he was sinking into hardcore alcoholism. A four-pack-a-day smoker with emphysema, he devoted himself to his craft. “Yates’ work was infinitely more important to him than anything in his life,” says his biographer, Blake Bailey, whose 2004 book, A Tragic Honesty: The Life and Work of Richard Yates, opened a window on the novelist’s anguish. “He lived in these squalid apartments, with cockroaches squashed all around his desk chair and curtains grey with nicotine and what not. And people would think, oh, my God — how can he live like that But the fact was, for Yates, if the work was going well, then he couldn’t have cared less what sort of apartment he was living in.”

So now the Yates oeuvre is in popular demand. Blake, his biographer, notes that an Everyman’s Library edition of the author’s best work has just been published. “There’s an introduction by Richard Price, who was a student of Yates,” says Blake. “Price says something like, because Yates had such integrity, and was so self-effacing, that he’d be pissed off by this acclaim.” He laughs. “Nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing is more absurd. Yates longed to have more readers, and he knew that he deserved to have more readers.” And now he does.
See the 100 best movies of all time.

See TIME’s Pictures of the Week.

Share

Interpreting Obama

Interpreting Obama

Hours after the lowest point of his boss’s first two weeks in office, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs ended the first chapter of the Obama presidency and launched the second. At the end of his morning staff meeting — where his team had gathered to discuss the handling of issues from the first fortnight, including Tom Daschle’s unexpected failure to join the Cabinet because of tax-compliance problems — Gibbs reminded members of his team what they had come to Washington to do.

“One other thing,” Gibbs said as the room went quiet. “When the President said ‘I screwed up’ last night, that officially ended our experiment with sipping from the waters of the Potomac,” he continued, referring to the Obama team’s determination not to be sucked into old Washington ways. “I, for one, don’t want to look back four years from now and think, We should have done this differently.” In the days that followed, the Obama Administration, with Gibbs serving as both point man and presidential confidant, made its first big pivot. Gone was the emphasis on backroom schmoozing, the Capitol Hill and Super Bowl mixers, the bipartisan glad-handing. Instead, Obama notched up his criticism of the Republicans and set off on a cross-country sales tour through struggling towns and cities, culminating in his mid-February swing through Phoenix and Denver, where he signed his historic $787 billion stimulus bill.

The pivot had a simple purpose, as Gibbs never hesitated to remind reporters: to show Americans that Obama is a different kind of leader, one who will make Washington a more transparent and functional place. “There were 17 people who ran for President, and only one survived,” Gibbs said in his staff pep talk. “People didn’t vote for us just so that we would do the things that any of the other 16 candidates would do.”
Gibbs’ Southern twang and peachy face do not make him the most likely daytime-television star, even if he has, in the words of presidential aide David Axelrod, “classed himself up” since the election by buying a rainbow of pastel ties and dropping about 15 lb. . Yet almost every weekday, Gibbs anchors his own show with the White House press corps, and it has become a key place to discover what the Administration is planning next.
And a good place to take the ambient temperature of the busiest White House in a generation. Gibbs often deflects the harshest questions with a quick joke, sports metaphor or canned response about Obama’s plans to “change” Washington. Once the cameras stop rolling, he retreats to his office for a moment alone to power down. “There is a pretty big adrenaline rush when you are out there,” he says. “You do need about half an hour to just sort of decompress.”

Born in 1971, Gibbs was raised in Auburn, Ala., where both parents worked for the Auburn University library system. He played goalkeeper for the men’s soccer team at North Carolina State, a position that may have prepared him for the series of campaign press jobs he took after graduation. By 2002, he had landed at the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, where he had an easy way with reporters — displaying a sharp edge when needed. “He had a real mean streak,” fondly remembers Jim Jordan, who worked with Gibbs at the time and later during John Kerry’s 2004 presidential-primary campaign.

By 2004, Gibbs found himself out of work, with a wife, a newborn son and a job offer in Chicago to work for an upstart U.S. Senate candidate named Barack Obama. Brad Woodhouse, a fellow Democratic operative and sometime fishing buddy, remembers telling Gibbs at the time that Obama could be President one day. There was no way of guessing then how integral a role Gibbs would play in that effort. But it turned out to be a vital one. “There isn’t a single decision that the President has formed in the course of his campaign or the presidency that Robert didn’t weigh in on,” says Valerie Jarrett, one of Obama’s most senior advisers.

When Gibbs said the President was done drinking from the Potomac, an aide recalls, the message was received as if it had come from Obama himself, given the frequency with which the two men talk. Gibbs and Obama have developed what Pete Rouse, another top aide, calls a “back-and-forth, locker-room camaraderie” that includes occasional heated arguments with raised voices. “Robert will never pull his punches with the President,” says Rouse. They tease each other frequently: asked by Jarrett to describe Gibbs’ sense of humor for Time, Obama deadpanned, “Robert is very funny, but I can’t remember any of his jokes.”

Maybe not, but what matters most to White House reporters is that Gibbs has the President’s ear and can get to the Commander in Chief when an answer is needed. Though Gibbs’ aides speak of him affectionately as a “silent killer” whose mood can turn from warm to ice-cold when his boss’s motives are challenged, they add that he has been consciously trying to shift into a more press-friendly role at the White House, a move symbolized by his often open office door. “He’s always been good with the stick,” Axelrod jokes about Gibbs. “He has also learned over time to use the carrot.”
That’s change you can believe in. See pictures of how President Obama prepared his inauguration speech.See TIME’s pictures of the week.

Share

Europeans Who Sat Out the Iraq War Now Line Up for Its Business

Europeans Who Sat Out the Iraq War Now Line Up for Its Business

“Old Europe” famously declined to join the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. But six years on, countries such as France and Germany are eager to get in on the cleanup process in Iraq — and the hundreds of billions of dollars in business that effort is expected to generate.

The most recent European move to woo Iraq came this week when German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier made a surprise visit to Baghdad. In addition to discussing diplomatic issues, Steinmeier made it clear that restoring the bustling business that Germany Inc. was doing in Iraq before the war is a key priority for Berlin. “Germany wants to assist Iraq in reconstruction,” declared Steinmeier, who was accompanied by a delegation of German business leaders. “My visit demonstrates that we want to support this new Iraq on the path of democratic consolidation.”

While stability in Iraq is still shaky, Germany wants to make sure it gets a piece of the reconstruction pie early. As Steinmeier made the rounds in Baghdad during his
unannounced trip, German Economy Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg was back in Berlin touting the initiative as seeking to “contribute to reviving the once intensive economic relations between Germany and Iraq.”

The German Foreign Minister’s trip to Iraq came just a week after French President Nicolas Sarkozy visited Baghdad. “My coming here is to tell French companies: the time has come. Come and invest!” Sarkozy declared, explaining to his host, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, how French investment would be mutually beneficial. “We seek cooperation in the economic field, energy, rebuilding, and to help the police, security and Iraqi military forces, as well as restoring the international position of Iraq,” Sarkozy promised. “We want to encourage all European countries to come. It is in Europe’s interest to extend a hand here and to support the peace.”

European firms don’t exactly need Sarkozy’s invitation to get to know Iraqi officials. Earlier this year, France’s Total and the Anglo-Dutch firm Royal Dutch Shell began talks with Iraqi authorities about developing five new oil fields in the north and south of the country. European chemical, engineering and construction companies and arms producers would also like to re-establish ties that were severed by the international embargo of Iraq before the war. British and Italian firms, meanwhile, long to kick-start contracts they had from 2003 to 2004, when an explosion of insurgent violence forced most of them to abandon the country.

Westerners are not the only ones eyeing Iraq. Last March, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad became the first Iranian leader to visit Baghdad. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is also expected to travel to Iraq soon, to renew once strong economic and commercial ties between the two countries.

But it’s Europe’s capitals that are leading the way for now. Will Washington appreciate the help or view it as an attempt at business gain from American military pain “They don’t have any choice, because the business world doesn’t quibble with concerns of woulds, shoulds or oughts, but rather who gets the signature on the contract first,” says Philippe Moreau Defarges, a senior fellow on international relations at the French Institute on Foreign Relations in Paris. “Tragically for America, meanwhile, now that stability and order is starting to be imposed, the Iraqi leadership is increasingly defining and evolving itself in opposition to what the U.S. wants or demands. That’s unfair, given the military sacrifice America has made, but
it will be a boon to European diplomats and businesspeople over time.”

That reality was on show during the French President’s Iraq visit. Maliki used Sarkozy’s presence and words of support to respond to comments by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden that Washington would be “more aggressive” in demanding political reform from Baghdad. Delivered as Biden left for an international security summit in Munich, the sentiment apparently annoyed the Iraqi Prime Minister. “The time for putting pressure on Iraq is over,” Maliki said during a Baghdad
press conference with Sarkozy. That must be music to Old Europe’s ears.

See pictures of Iraq’s revival.

Read a TIME story on rebuilding Basra.

Share

Internet Pirates Face Walking the Plank in Sweden

Internet Pirates Face Walking the Plank in Sweden

A criminal trial underway in Sweden is testing a very American notion: that artifacts that carry a copyright should not simply be lifted or stolen — that their use requires permission and compensation. That definition of intellectual property may appear almost quaint in these days when it is easy to find almost anything on the Internet and just as simple to download. But the founders of ThePirateBay.org — three geeky Swedish would-be cultural revolutionaries who were funded in part by user donations — are in the process of finding out whether they face prison time for facilitating that process for their users.

Each day, millions of users visit ThePirateBay.org, where they can browse hundreds of files containing copyrighted music, movies and other digital media — including some works like the Beatles’ Let It Be album that have yet to be commercially released as digital files. The Pirates — and their supporters who have staged street demonstrations, Twittered the court proceedings and may have crashed the websites of their perceived enemies — insist that they simply bring users together to who have files they are willing to share. If users choose to find illegal content and trade it, the site’s operators say, that’s their business. Not so, say the Hollywood and music-industry heavies who brought the civil case that accompanies Sweden’s criminal prosecution, it’s really our business.

After years of legal challenges by corporate lawyers and rhetorical ripostes by the Pirates, the battle between profiteers and buccaneers was joined when Swedish police raided the site in 2006, resulting in the ongoing civil and criminal trials. The proceedings are the latest twist in a long history of a global fight over property rights — a struggle that some say began in America with the country’s Founding Fathers and extended through Yippie Abbie Hoffman .

But in 2009, the fight is more than just a new way to wage an old war of ideas. It’s about whether Internet companies whose business is to help users find content that other companies have spent money to create ought to be hailed as innovators or hauled into court as thieves. Some folks, for example, see Google News as a quick and easy way to find the best journalism on the Web. Others complain that it lets the search engine company make billions while the media companies that paid to produce the content struggle to break even.

The trio behind ThePirateBay.org could face prison if convicted on charges that amount to aiding and abetting copyright infringement on a massive scale. The most serious charge — complicity in the production of copyrighted material — was dropped earlier this week for lack of evidence, but the trio still could walk the plank, should prosecutors prevail. If they lose the criminal case, they could owe nearly $10 million sought in the civil action being heard simultaneously in the Stockholm courtroom.
See the worst business deals of 2008.
See the top 10 iPhone applications.

Share

Mind-Control Toys: The Force Is With You

Mind-Control Toys: The Force Is With You

This fall, the Force can finally be with you — for a suggested retail price of $129.99. Put on a headset, focus on a small ball in a cylinder, and use your mind to make the sphere rise. It’s cool, not to mention a little strange.

Stranger yet, Uncle Milton’s Force Trainer wasn’t the only levitational gadget at this year’s American International Toy Fair, the four-day trade show that brings a gazillion manufacturers and retailers together every February in New York City. Also on display was Mattel’s new Mindflex, which has players move a tiny foam ball through a mini-obstacle course with their thoughts. Or, more precisely, with their brainwaves.

Both toys employ EEG, or electroencephalogram, technology. EEGs measure electrical activity in the brain and have been used to diagnose seizures, assess head injuries, and explore sleep disorders, among other conditions. In other words, the science behind these toys is legit; there’s no magic trick involved. “The fact that you can use EEG, that you can modulate it, that you can control it, it’s well-known, it’s true,” says Dr. Ronald Emerson, a neurology professor at Columbia University. Upon hearing about the new toys, his colleague, Dr. Catherine Schevon, said: “Our fellows would go ape for this!”

Each toy includes a wireless headset equipped with forehead and ear sensors that read two kinds of brainwaves — alpha and beta, naturally — then relay signals to the bases of the toys, triggering fans that cause the balls to rise. Mindflex’s headgear comes with earlobe clips, which significantly increases the I-look-like-a-fool factor. The game also requires players to move the ball sideways as well as vertically. There’s a knob on the base unit that players must turn while focusing to get the ball, for example, through a tiny hoop. At the toy fair, a Mattel spokesperson jokingly referred to Mindflex requiring “mind-eye coordination.”

Just think of it as a drinking game, an onlooker said during the Mindflex demo at the Toy Fair, which, irony of ironies, does not allow any kids inside. The $79.99 game, like Uncle Milton’s Force Trainer, is intended for ages 8 and up.

The Force Trainer — which is limited to moving a ball up and down in a tube — may not be as complicated as Mindflex. But it does, however, have Star Wars branding, which possesses a magical retail power all its own. The toy features 15 levels of training, i.e., increasingly difficult challenges involving how high to raise the ball and how long to hold it steady before changing its height. Along the way, Yoda and Obi-Wan Kenobi offer words of encouragement as hopefuls try to attain Jedi Master status. May your limited discretionary-spending power be with you.
See pictures of the best animated movies.
Read “The Army’s Totally Serious Mind-Control Project.”

Share

Catholic Judges and Abortion: Did the Pope Set New Rules?

Catholic Judges and Abortion: Did the Pope Set New Rules?

Much has been made of the statement on abortion that Pope Benedict XVI issued earlier this week after meeting with Nancy Pelosi. But the Vatican’s choice of words as they related to the Speaker of the House was quite predictable, given her pro-choice stance and her position as a high-ranking Catholic Democrat. The Holy Father simply made clear their differences on the issue and reminded the American politician of her responsibilities as a Catholic to protect life “at all stages of its development.”

What was quite surprising, and overlooked, had to do with a different branch of the U.S. government. If you read it carefully, the statement is actually quite radical — perhaps unintentionally so. The brief message — just two short paragraphs — draws no distinction between the moral duties of Catholic policymakers and Catholic judges to work against abortion.

As a lifelong Catholic, Pelosi could not feign surprise at being called upon by the Church to use her gift for persuasion to restrict abortion legislatively, or at least not to be its advocate. But until now, the Church had not formally instructed judges in a similar fashion. As written, the Pope’s statement has the potential, at least theoretically, to empty the U.S. Supreme Court of all five of its Catholic jurists and perhaps all other Catholics who sit on the bench in the lower federal and state courts.

“His Holiness,” the statement read, “took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.”

To get a sense of just how sharp a break with the past this is, all one has to do is take a look at what Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, himself a Roman Catholic, wrote in 2002 in an essay in First Things. “[Abortion involves] … private individuals whom the state has decided not to restrain. One may argue that the society has a moral obligation to restrain. That moral obligation may weigh heavily upon the voter, and upon the legislator who enacts the laws; but a judge, I think, bears no moral guilt for the laws society has failed to enact,” he wrote. “Thus, my difficulty with Roe v. Wade is a legal rather than a moral one … [I]f a state were to permit abortion on demand, I would — and could in good conscience — vote against an attempt to invalidate that law for the same reason that I vote against the invalidation of laws that forbid abortion on demand: because the Constitution gives the federal government no power over the matter.”

Until the Pelosi statement, the prior instruction from the Church’s Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and encyclical writing seemed to confirm Scalia’s reasoning. There was an implicit understanding that the Church’s admonition to its faithful to change the law permitting the choice of abortion had to be understood and applied in light of the scope of office. Catholic legislators make policy and could be so instructed, but judges, as Scalia wrote, had “no moral responsibility for the laws [their] nation has failed to enact.”
See pictures of Pope Benedict XVI’s fashion looks.
See pictures of spiritual healing around the world.

Share

After Netanyahu: Where Does Obama’s Peace Initiative Go?

After Netanyahu: Where Does Obamas Peace Initiative Go?

Barack Obama’s economic team likes to say that crisis breeds opportunity. His foreign policy team is unlikely to feel that way about the political turmoil in Israel and the Palestinian territories right now. The ascension of Benjamin Netanyahu in the wake of the fragmented Israeli parliamentary elections puts a hawk in control in Jerusalem and sets up a period of political uncertainty that blunts any early moves the U.S. had planned to make in pursuit of peace. But the Obama administration has pledged an early diplomatic push and seems intent on sticking to it, which leaves Hillary Clinton and her Middle East envoy George Mitchell undertaking a kind of zombie peace process that moves around but has no life.

The first step will be support for the effort to rebuild Gaza. John Kerry’s congressional delegation to Gaza this week was the first move in that direction, signaling support from the U.S. for reconstructing the devastated enclave. Secretary of State Clinton has confirmed that she will attend the international donors’ conference in Cairo March 2. How much the U.S. will actually put up for reconstruction of the Hamas-dominated strip may be less important than the general symbolic support for the people of Gaza, a break from the Bush administration’s general policy of ignoring them.

Next week, Clinton’s Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, is expected to travel to the region. With a government still unformed by soon-to-be Prime Minister Netanyahu, Mitchell is not going to have a lot of business to transact in Jerusalem. But he is already signaling a shift in the U.S. approach to the divided Palestinian leadership. In a 45-minute telephone conversation with U.S. Jewish leaders Thursday, Mitchell reportedly expressed support for a unity government involving both the impotent Palestinian Authority and Hamas. Though the U.S. will adhere to the four conditions for talking to Hamas that Clinton laid out in her confirmation hearing, the move allows European and Arab diplomats to try and bridge the divide between the Palestinian factions.

Will any of this produce real movement toward peace They will, at minimum, create a sense among the players in the Middle East that the Obama administration is breaking with the Bush approach to Arab-Israeli peace. Neither move would have been possible under even the more flexible approach taken by Condoleezza Rice in the last year of the Bush administration, when it made a belated attempt to pursue peace.

But the formation of a government under Netanyahu is going to unfold slowly and uncertainly and will be determined largely by local political concerns impervious to outside influence. Most likely, they will produce a weak government unwilling and unable to pursue any political objectives with an equally unstable Palestinian government, unified or not.

The biggest danger now is that Washington expends too much diplomatic activity at a time when it is least likely to have an effect. The U.S., as it continues to engage, faces the danger of becoming part of the furniture if George Mitchell begins making monthly visits during a period of minimal possibility for progress. “One or two listening tours will do,” says Rob Malley of the International Crisis Group, “But at a certain point it will become better not to go than to go.” Indeed, it may be better to hope a resting Middle East peace process can be resurrected in the future than to insist on creating the appearance of life when there is none.
See pictures of Israeli soldiers sweeping into Gaza. See pictures of 60 years of Israel.

Share