Analysis: A Mideast nuclear war?
By MARTIN WALKER (UPI Editor Emeritus)
Published: November 22, 2007
TOOLBAR
Print Story
Add Comments
Anthony Cordesman may be the most influential man in Washington that most people have never heard of. A former director of intelligence assessment for the secretary of defense and director of policy and planning in the Department of Energy, he is now the top strategic guru at the Center for Strategic & International Studies.
Most serious politicians and journalists have for some years based their analyses of the Iraq war and its aftermath on his universally respected research. Cordesman is a facts man who likes and reveres good data and cool, clinical analysis as the keystones of policymaking.
He has now turned his laser-like research and forensic intelligence skills to studying the real implication of the endless diplomatic minuet at the United Nations over Iran's nuclear ambitions. In the real world, this matters mainly because an Iranian nuclear capability would transform the power balance in the wider Middle East, and leave the region and the rest of us living under the constant prospect of a nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel.
This would mean, Cordesman suggests, some 16 million to 28 million Iranians dead within 21 days, and between 200,000 and 800,000 Israelis dead within the same time frame. The total of deaths beyond 21 days could rise very much higher, depending on civil defense and public health facilities, where Israel has a major advantage.
It is theoretically possible that the Israeli state, economy and organized society might just survive such an almost-mortal blow. Iran would not survive as an organized society. "Iranian recovery is not possible in the normal sense of the term," Cordesman notes.
The difference in the death tolls is largely because Israel is believed to have more nuclear weapons of very much higher yield (some of 1 megaton), and Israel is deploying the Arrow advanced anti-missile system in addition to its Patriot batteries. Fewer Iranian weapons would get through.
The difference in yield matters. The biggest bomb that Iran is expected to have is 100 kilotons, which can inflict third-degree burns on exposed flesh at 8 miles; Israel's 1-megaton bombs can inflict third-degree burns at 24 miles. Moreover, the radiation fallout from an airburst of such a 1-megaton bomb can kill unsheltered people at up to 80 miles within 18 hours as the radiation plume drifts. (Jordan, by the way, would suffer severe radiation damage from an Iranian strike on Tel Aviv.)
Cordesman assumes that Iran, with less than 30 nuclear warheads in the period after 2010, would aim for the main population centers of Tel Aviv and Haifa, while Israel would have more than 200 warheads and far better delivery systems, including cruise missiles launched from its 3 Dolphin-class submarines.
The assumption is that Israel would be going for Iran's nuclear development centers in Tehran, Natanz, Ardekan, Saghand, Gashin, Bushehr, Aral, Isfahan and Lashkar A'bad. Israel would also likely target the main population centers of Tehran, Tabriz, Qazvin, Isfahan, Shiraz, Yazd, Kerman, Qom, Ahwaz and Kermanshah. Cordesman points out that the city of Tehran, with a population of 15 million in its metropolitan area, is "a topographic basin with mountain reflector. Nearly ideal nuclear killing ground."
But it does not end there. Cordesman points out that Israel would need to keep a "reserve strike capability to ensure no other power can capitalize on Iranian strike." This means Israel would have to target "key Arab neighbors" - in particular Syria and Egypt.
Cordesman notes that Israel would have various options, including a limited nuclear strike on the region mainly inhabited by the Alawite minority from which come the ruling Assad dynasty. A full-scale Israeli attack on Syria would kill up to 18 million people within 21 days; Syrian recovery would not be possible. A Syrian attack with all its reputed chemical and biological warfare assets could kill up to 800,000 Israelis, but Israeli society would recover.
An Israeli attack on Egypt would likely strike at the main population centers of Cairo, Alexandria, Damietta, Port Said, Suez, Luxor and Aswan. Cordesman does not give a death toll here, but it would certainly be in the tens of millions. It would also destroy the Suez Canal and almost certainly destroy the Aswan Dam, sending monstrous floods down the Nile to sweep away the glowing rubble. It would mean the end of Egypt as a functioning society.
Cordesman also lists the oilwells, refineries and ports along the Gulf that could also be targets in the event of a mass nuclear response by an Israel convinced that it was being dealt a potentially mortal blow. Being contained within the region, such a nuclear exchange might not be Armageddon for the human race; it would certainly be Armageddon for the global economy.
So in clear, concise and chillingly forensic style, Cordesman spells out that the real stakes in the crisis that is building over Iran's nuclear ambitions would certainly include the end of Persian civilization, quite probably the end of Egyptian civilization, and the end of the Oil Age. This would also mean the end of globalization and the extraordinary accretions in world trade and growth and prosperity that are hauling hundreds of millions of Chinese and Indians and others out of poverty.
Cordesman concludes his chilling but dismayingly logical survey with the warning: "The only way to win is not to play
Monday, March 10, 2008
Analysis: Iran's secret Syrian plan
http://www.metimes.com/International/2007/11/19/analysis_irans_secret_syrian_plan/7451/
Analysis: Iran's secret Syrian plan
By OLIVIER GUITTA
Published: November 19, 2007
Syria's President Bashar Assad. Some Lebanese commentators say Syria's alliance with Iran should not be a reason to isolate it from the Arab fold by boycotting next month's Arab summit in Damascus, saying this would only deepen the inter-Arab rifts and push Damascus further into Tehran's lap. (KRT via Newscom)
TOOLBAR
Print Story
Add Comments
Israel has been providing intelligence and satellite images to the U.S. about a secret Syrian nuclear program for several months, according to media reports. Discussions between Israel and the United States took place last summer regarding a possible strike. But when Israel found the matter so pressing that when they realized the U.S. was not ready to act, on September 6 they attacked a Syrian nuclear site. Hence the question: what is Syria really up to or more to the point what is Iran up to?
First, let's start with an underreported explosion that occurred in a Syrian military base outside Aleppo on July 26. Jane's Defense Weekly reported, citing Syrian defense sources, as saying the explosion took place during a test to fit a "Scud C" missile with a mustard-gas warhead. It quoted the sources as saying the explosion occurred when fuel caught fire in the missile production laboratory.
But there might be another explanation. Kuwait's Al Seyassah newspaper recently reported that a Shiite Lebanese religious cleric claimed the Iranians were allegedly supervising a chemical weapons manufacturing program and that tens of Iranian experts and engineers died as a result of that explosion. He also said Israelis attacked the base. He added that Western officials told him they received proof from Israel on the Syrian chemical weapons program. Even if Israel's involvement is not proven, what remains sure is that it must be very happy that a chemical weapons facility in Syria has been partly destroyed.
Now regarding the September 6 strike; while we may never know what really occurred, what remains sure is that the situation is direr than one could imagine and that most likely, Israel did not just bomb a nuclear site in the early stages. Indeed, the silence of the international community and especially the Arab world after the attack is a first, and it shows the gravity of what happened. Even though Syria and its Iranian sponsor are detested, and in the case of Iran feared, in the Muslim world, the fact that there was no condemnation of Israel at the U.N. could be interpreted as a tacit relief that Israel acted.
Another proof of what transpired came from ranking Republicans on the House Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Peter Hoekstra, who were briefed on the Israeli strike and sworn to secrecy. They wrote an op-ed in the October 20 Wall Street Journal clearly underlining the seriousness of the situation regarding both the North Korean and Iranian involvement in the Syrian arms program.
Finally, the fact that the Bush administration (including President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and most notably Defense Secretary Robert Gates) has been ramping up the rhetoric and taking action against Iran (including the latest sanctions against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards) in the past week, might also be linked to what really happened in Syria.
The Syrian story is far from over: in fact, on October 23, Al Seyassah ran a story about potential new secret nuclear sites in Syria. According to Western sources cited by the paper, it is possible that Syria is developing other nuclear sites with the help of North Korea, Iran and Iraqi experts, the latter who fled their country at the start of the Iraq war in 2003. In fact, observation satellites have allegedly located in Syria at least two other sites similar to the one destroyed by Israel last month.
Iran's handwriting is all over the wall from the chemical to the nuclear arms program in Syria. Indeed, in research conducted last year as part of an article published in Washington's The Examiner, this reporter delved into Syrian's secret nuclear program, making the point that Syria might actually be "Plan B" for Iran. By helping develop nuclear sites in Syria, strikes on Iran might turn out to be useless. This was a smart strategy until Israel bombed the Syrian nuclear site on September 6 and made the world notice.
Analysis: Iran's secret Syrian plan
By OLIVIER GUITTA
Published: November 19, 2007
Syria's President Bashar Assad. Some Lebanese commentators say Syria's alliance with Iran should not be a reason to isolate it from the Arab fold by boycotting next month's Arab summit in Damascus, saying this would only deepen the inter-Arab rifts and push Damascus further into Tehran's lap. (KRT via Newscom)
TOOLBAR
Print Story
Add Comments
Israel has been providing intelligence and satellite images to the U.S. about a secret Syrian nuclear program for several months, according to media reports. Discussions between Israel and the United States took place last summer regarding a possible strike. But when Israel found the matter so pressing that when they realized the U.S. was not ready to act, on September 6 they attacked a Syrian nuclear site. Hence the question: what is Syria really up to or more to the point what is Iran up to?
First, let's start with an underreported explosion that occurred in a Syrian military base outside Aleppo on July 26. Jane's Defense Weekly reported, citing Syrian defense sources, as saying the explosion took place during a test to fit a "Scud C" missile with a mustard-gas warhead. It quoted the sources as saying the explosion occurred when fuel caught fire in the missile production laboratory.
But there might be another explanation. Kuwait's Al Seyassah newspaper recently reported that a Shiite Lebanese religious cleric claimed the Iranians were allegedly supervising a chemical weapons manufacturing program and that tens of Iranian experts and engineers died as a result of that explosion. He also said Israelis attacked the base. He added that Western officials told him they received proof from Israel on the Syrian chemical weapons program. Even if Israel's involvement is not proven, what remains sure is that it must be very happy that a chemical weapons facility in Syria has been partly destroyed.
Now regarding the September 6 strike; while we may never know what really occurred, what remains sure is that the situation is direr than one could imagine and that most likely, Israel did not just bomb a nuclear site in the early stages. Indeed, the silence of the international community and especially the Arab world after the attack is a first, and it shows the gravity of what happened. Even though Syria and its Iranian sponsor are detested, and in the case of Iran feared, in the Muslim world, the fact that there was no condemnation of Israel at the U.N. could be interpreted as a tacit relief that Israel acted.
Another proof of what transpired came from ranking Republicans on the House Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Peter Hoekstra, who were briefed on the Israeli strike and sworn to secrecy. They wrote an op-ed in the October 20 Wall Street Journal clearly underlining the seriousness of the situation regarding both the North Korean and Iranian involvement in the Syrian arms program.
Finally, the fact that the Bush administration (including President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and most notably Defense Secretary Robert Gates) has been ramping up the rhetoric and taking action against Iran (including the latest sanctions against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards) in the past week, might also be linked to what really happened in Syria.
The Syrian story is far from over: in fact, on October 23, Al Seyassah ran a story about potential new secret nuclear sites in Syria. According to Western sources cited by the paper, it is possible that Syria is developing other nuclear sites with the help of North Korea, Iran and Iraqi experts, the latter who fled their country at the start of the Iraq war in 2003. In fact, observation satellites have allegedly located in Syria at least two other sites similar to the one destroyed by Israel last month.
Iran's handwriting is all over the wall from the chemical to the nuclear arms program in Syria. Indeed, in research conducted last year as part of an article published in Washington's The Examiner, this reporter delved into Syrian's secret nuclear program, making the point that Syria might actually be "Plan B" for Iran. By helping develop nuclear sites in Syria, strikes on Iran might turn out to be useless. This was a smart strategy until Israel bombed the Syrian nuclear site on September 6 and made the world notice.
Monday, February 25, 2008
UN warns of new face of hunger
UN warns of new face of hunger
26 February 2008 07:17
Click here!
The United Nations on Monday warned that it no longer has enough money to keep global malnutrition at bay this year in the face of a dramatic upward surge in world commodity prices, which have created a "new face of hunger".
"We will have a problem in coming months," said Josette Sheeran, the head of the UN's World Food Programme (WFP). "We will have a significant gap if commodity prices remain this high, and we will need an extra half-a-billion dollars just to meet existing assessed needs."
With voluntary contributions from the world's wealthy nations, the WFP feeds 73-million people in 78 countries, less than a 10th of the total number of the world's undernourished. Its agreed budget for 2008 was $2,9-billion. But with annual food-price increases around the world of up to 40% and dramatic hikes in fuel costs, that budget is no longer enough even to maintain current food deliveries.
The shortfall is all the more worrying as it comes at a time when populations, many in urban areas, who had thought themselves secure in their food supply, are now unable to afford basic foodstuffs. Afghanistan has recently added an extra 2,5-million people to the number it says are at risk of malnutrition
"This is the new face of hunger," Sheeran said. "There is food on shelves but people are priced out of the market. There is vulnerability in urban areas we have not seen before. There are food riots in countries where we have not seen them before."
WFP officials say the extraordinary increases in the global price of basic foods were caused by a "perfect storm" of factors, including a rise in demand for animal feed from increasingly prosperous populations in India and China, the use of more land and agricultural produce for biofuels, and climate change.
The impact has been felt around the world.
Food riots have broken out in Morocco, Yemen, Mexico, Guinea, Mauritania, Senegal and Uzbekistan, and Pakistan has reintroduced rationing for the first time in two decades. Russia has frozen the price of milk, bread, eggs and cooking oil for six months. Thailand is also planning a freeze on food staples.
After protests around Indonesia, Jakarta has increased public food subsidies. India has banned the export of rice, except the high-quality basmati variety.
"For us, the main concern is for the poorest countries and the net food buyers," said Frederic Mousseau, a humanitarian policy adviser at Oxfam. "For the poorest populations, 50% to 80% of income goes on food purchases. We are concerned now about an immediate increase in malnutrition in these countries, and the landless, the farm workers there, all those who are living on the edge."
Much of the blame has been put on the transfer of land and grains to the production of biofuel. But its impact has been outweighed by the sharp growth in demand from a new middle class in China and India for meat and other foods, which were previously viewed as luxuries.
"The fundamental cause is high income growth," said Joachim von Braun, the head of the International Food Policy Research Institute. "I estimate this is half the story. The biofuels is another 30%. Then there are weather-induced erratic changes, which caused irritation in world food markets. These things have eaten into world levels of grain storage.
"The lower the reserves, the more nervous the markets become, and the increased volatility is particularly detrimental to the poor, who have small assets."
The impact of climate change will amplify that already dangerous volatility. Record flooding in West Africa, a prolonged drought in Australia and unusually severe snowstorms in China have all had an impact on food production.
"The climate-change factor is so far small but it is bound to get bigger," Von Braun said. "That is the long-term worry and the markets are trying to internalise it."
The WFP is holding an emergency meeting in Rome on Friday, at which its senior managers will meet board members to brief them on the scale of the problem. There will then be a case-by-case assessment of the seriousness of the situation in the affected countries, before the WFP formally asks for an increased budget at its executive board meeting in June.
But the donor countries are also facing higher fuel and transport costs. For the biggest US food-aid programme, non-food costs now account for 65% of total programme expenditure.
Global impact: Where inflation bites deepest
1. United States
The last time America's grain silos were so empty was in the early Seventies, when the Soviet Union bought much of the harvest. Washington is telling the WFP it is facing a 40% increase in food commodity prices compared with last year, and higher fuel bills to transport it, so the US, the biggest single food aid contributor, will radically cut the amount it gives away.
2. Morocco
Thirty-four people jailed this month for taking part in riots over food prices.
3. Egypt
The world's largest importer of wheat has been hard hit by the global price rises, and most of the increase will be absorbed in increased subsidies. The government has also had to relax the rules on who is eligible for food aid, adding an extra 10,5-million people.
4. Eritrea
It could be one of the states hardest hit in Africa because of its reliance on imports. The price rises will hit urban populations not previously thought vulnerable to a lack of food.
5. Zimbabwe
With annual inflation of 100 000% and unemployment at 80%, price increases on staples can only worsen the severe food shortages.
6. Yemen
Prices of bread and other staples have nearly doubled in the past four months, sparking riots in which at least a dozen people were killed.
7. Russia
The government struck a deal with producers last year to freeze the price of milk, eggs, vegetable oil, bread and kefir (a fermented milk drink). The freeze was due to last until the end of January but was extended for another three months.
8. Afghanistan
President Hamid Karzai has asked the WFP to feed an extra 2,5-million people, who are now in danger of malnutrition as a result of a harsh winter and the effect of high world prices in a country that is heavily dependent on imports.
9. Pakistan
President Pervez Musharraf announced this month that Pakistan would be going back to ration cards for the first time since the 1980s after the sharp increase in the price of staples. These will help the poor (nearly half the population) buy subsidised flour, wheat, sugar, pulses and cooking fat from state-owned outlets.
10. India
The government will spend 250-billion rupees on food security. India is the world's second biggest wheat producer but bought 5,5-million tonnes in 2006, and 1,8-million tonnes last year, driving up world prices. It has banned the export of all forms of rice other than luxury basmati.
11. China
Unusually severe blizzards have dramatically cut agricultural production and sent prices for food staples soaring. The overall food inflation rate is 18,2%. The cost of pork has increased by more than half. The cost of food was rising fast even before the bad weather moved in, as an increasingly prosperous population began to demand as staples agricultural products previously seen as luxuries. The government has increased taxes and imposed quotas on food exports, while removing duties on food imports.
12. Thailand
The government is planning to freeze prices of rice, cooking oil and noodles.
13. Malaysia and the Philippines
Malaysia is planning strategic stockpiles of the country's staples. Meanwhile, the Philippines has made an unusual plea to Vietnam to guarantee its rice supplies. Imports were previously left to the global market.
14. Indonesia
Food price rises have triggered protests and the government has had to increase its food subsidies by over a third to contain public anger.
FAQ: Food prices
Few winners and many losers
What is the problem?
In the three decades to 2005, world food prices fell by about three-quarters in inflation-adjusted terms, according to the Economist food prices index. Since then they have risen by 75%, with much of that coming in the past year. Wheat prices have doubled, while maize, Soya and oilseeds are at record highs.
Why are food prices rising?
The booming world economy has driven up prices for all commodities. Changes in diets have also played a big part. Meat consumption in many countries has soared, pushing up demand for the grain needed by cattle. Demand for biofuels has also risen strongly. This year, for example, one third of the US maize crop will go to make biofuels. Moreover, the gradual reform and liberalisation of agricultural subsidy programmes in the US and Europe have reduced the butter and grain mountains of yesteryear by eliminating overproduction.
Who are the winners and losers?
Farmers are the obvious winners, as are poor countries that rely extensively on food exports. But consumers are having to pay more, and the urban poor in many developing states will be hardest hit, as they often spend more than a third of their income on food.
How long are prices likely to be high?
The US Department for Agriculture says the country's wheat stocks are at their lowest for 50 years and demand will continue to exceed supply this year. There is potential to bring more land into production in countries such as Ukraine, but that could take time. And as all foodstuffs have risen sharply in price there is little incentive for farmers to switch from one crop to another.
What about the EU's common agricultural policy?
High food prices certainly remove the need to subsidise farmers and so there is a chance, say experts, that badly needed reductions in CAP subsidies, which cost European taxpayers dearly, could now be within reach.
Are other commodity prices also rising?
Oil, metals and coal have seen their prices rise strongly as the global economy has expanded rapidly, driving up demand for almost everything, particularly from emerging economies such as China and India. Some economists think speculation may also play a part. Disappointed by the subprime collapse and falling property values in many countries, investors have piled money into commodities. -- guardian.co.uk © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2008
26 February 2008 07:17
Click here!
The United Nations on Monday warned that it no longer has enough money to keep global malnutrition at bay this year in the face of a dramatic upward surge in world commodity prices, which have created a "new face of hunger".
"We will have a problem in coming months," said Josette Sheeran, the head of the UN's World Food Programme (WFP). "We will have a significant gap if commodity prices remain this high, and we will need an extra half-a-billion dollars just to meet existing assessed needs."
With voluntary contributions from the world's wealthy nations, the WFP feeds 73-million people in 78 countries, less than a 10th of the total number of the world's undernourished. Its agreed budget for 2008 was $2,9-billion. But with annual food-price increases around the world of up to 40% and dramatic hikes in fuel costs, that budget is no longer enough even to maintain current food deliveries.
The shortfall is all the more worrying as it comes at a time when populations, many in urban areas, who had thought themselves secure in their food supply, are now unable to afford basic foodstuffs. Afghanistan has recently added an extra 2,5-million people to the number it says are at risk of malnutrition
"This is the new face of hunger," Sheeran said. "There is food on shelves but people are priced out of the market. There is vulnerability in urban areas we have not seen before. There are food riots in countries where we have not seen them before."
WFP officials say the extraordinary increases in the global price of basic foods were caused by a "perfect storm" of factors, including a rise in demand for animal feed from increasingly prosperous populations in India and China, the use of more land and agricultural produce for biofuels, and climate change.
The impact has been felt around the world.
Food riots have broken out in Morocco, Yemen, Mexico, Guinea, Mauritania, Senegal and Uzbekistan, and Pakistan has reintroduced rationing for the first time in two decades. Russia has frozen the price of milk, bread, eggs and cooking oil for six months. Thailand is also planning a freeze on food staples.
After protests around Indonesia, Jakarta has increased public food subsidies. India has banned the export of rice, except the high-quality basmati variety.
"For us, the main concern is for the poorest countries and the net food buyers," said Frederic Mousseau, a humanitarian policy adviser at Oxfam. "For the poorest populations, 50% to 80% of income goes on food purchases. We are concerned now about an immediate increase in malnutrition in these countries, and the landless, the farm workers there, all those who are living on the edge."
Much of the blame has been put on the transfer of land and grains to the production of biofuel. But its impact has been outweighed by the sharp growth in demand from a new middle class in China and India for meat and other foods, which were previously viewed as luxuries.
"The fundamental cause is high income growth," said Joachim von Braun, the head of the International Food Policy Research Institute. "I estimate this is half the story. The biofuels is another 30%. Then there are weather-induced erratic changes, which caused irritation in world food markets. These things have eaten into world levels of grain storage.
"The lower the reserves, the more nervous the markets become, and the increased volatility is particularly detrimental to the poor, who have small assets."
The impact of climate change will amplify that already dangerous volatility. Record flooding in West Africa, a prolonged drought in Australia and unusually severe snowstorms in China have all had an impact on food production.
"The climate-change factor is so far small but it is bound to get bigger," Von Braun said. "That is the long-term worry and the markets are trying to internalise it."
The WFP is holding an emergency meeting in Rome on Friday, at which its senior managers will meet board members to brief them on the scale of the problem. There will then be a case-by-case assessment of the seriousness of the situation in the affected countries, before the WFP formally asks for an increased budget at its executive board meeting in June.
But the donor countries are also facing higher fuel and transport costs. For the biggest US food-aid programme, non-food costs now account for 65% of total programme expenditure.
Global impact: Where inflation bites deepest
1. United States
The last time America's grain silos were so empty was in the early Seventies, when the Soviet Union bought much of the harvest. Washington is telling the WFP it is facing a 40% increase in food commodity prices compared with last year, and higher fuel bills to transport it, so the US, the biggest single food aid contributor, will radically cut the amount it gives away.
2. Morocco
Thirty-four people jailed this month for taking part in riots over food prices.
3. Egypt
The world's largest importer of wheat has been hard hit by the global price rises, and most of the increase will be absorbed in increased subsidies. The government has also had to relax the rules on who is eligible for food aid, adding an extra 10,5-million people.
4. Eritrea
It could be one of the states hardest hit in Africa because of its reliance on imports. The price rises will hit urban populations not previously thought vulnerable to a lack of food.
5. Zimbabwe
With annual inflation of 100 000% and unemployment at 80%, price increases on staples can only worsen the severe food shortages.
6. Yemen
Prices of bread and other staples have nearly doubled in the past four months, sparking riots in which at least a dozen people were killed.
7. Russia
The government struck a deal with producers last year to freeze the price of milk, eggs, vegetable oil, bread and kefir (a fermented milk drink). The freeze was due to last until the end of January but was extended for another three months.
8. Afghanistan
President Hamid Karzai has asked the WFP to feed an extra 2,5-million people, who are now in danger of malnutrition as a result of a harsh winter and the effect of high world prices in a country that is heavily dependent on imports.
9. Pakistan
President Pervez Musharraf announced this month that Pakistan would be going back to ration cards for the first time since the 1980s after the sharp increase in the price of staples. These will help the poor (nearly half the population) buy subsidised flour, wheat, sugar, pulses and cooking fat from state-owned outlets.
10. India
The government will spend 250-billion rupees on food security. India is the world's second biggest wheat producer but bought 5,5-million tonnes in 2006, and 1,8-million tonnes last year, driving up world prices. It has banned the export of all forms of rice other than luxury basmati.
11. China
Unusually severe blizzards have dramatically cut agricultural production and sent prices for food staples soaring. The overall food inflation rate is 18,2%. The cost of pork has increased by more than half. The cost of food was rising fast even before the bad weather moved in, as an increasingly prosperous population began to demand as staples agricultural products previously seen as luxuries. The government has increased taxes and imposed quotas on food exports, while removing duties on food imports.
12. Thailand
The government is planning to freeze prices of rice, cooking oil and noodles.
13. Malaysia and the Philippines
Malaysia is planning strategic stockpiles of the country's staples. Meanwhile, the Philippines has made an unusual plea to Vietnam to guarantee its rice supplies. Imports were previously left to the global market.
14. Indonesia
Food price rises have triggered protests and the government has had to increase its food subsidies by over a third to contain public anger.
FAQ: Food prices
Few winners and many losers
What is the problem?
In the three decades to 2005, world food prices fell by about three-quarters in inflation-adjusted terms, according to the Economist food prices index. Since then they have risen by 75%, with much of that coming in the past year. Wheat prices have doubled, while maize, Soya and oilseeds are at record highs.
Why are food prices rising?
The booming world economy has driven up prices for all commodities. Changes in diets have also played a big part. Meat consumption in many countries has soared, pushing up demand for the grain needed by cattle. Demand for biofuels has also risen strongly. This year, for example, one third of the US maize crop will go to make biofuels. Moreover, the gradual reform and liberalisation of agricultural subsidy programmes in the US and Europe have reduced the butter and grain mountains of yesteryear by eliminating overproduction.
Who are the winners and losers?
Farmers are the obvious winners, as are poor countries that rely extensively on food exports. But consumers are having to pay more, and the urban poor in many developing states will be hardest hit, as they often spend more than a third of their income on food.
How long are prices likely to be high?
The US Department for Agriculture says the country's wheat stocks are at their lowest for 50 years and demand will continue to exceed supply this year. There is potential to bring more land into production in countries such as Ukraine, but that could take time. And as all foodstuffs have risen sharply in price there is little incentive for farmers to switch from one crop to another.
What about the EU's common agricultural policy?
High food prices certainly remove the need to subsidise farmers and so there is a chance, say experts, that badly needed reductions in CAP subsidies, which cost European taxpayers dearly, could now be within reach.
Are other commodity prices also rising?
Oil, metals and coal have seen their prices rise strongly as the global economy has expanded rapidly, driving up demand for almost everything, particularly from emerging economies such as China and India. Some economists think speculation may also play a part. Disappointed by the subprime collapse and falling property values in many countries, investors have piled money into commodities. -- guardian.co.uk © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2008
Sheep Aids hits hundreds of farms
Sheep Aids hits hundreds of farms
February 25 2008 at 07:22AM
By Karen Breytenbach
The Department of Agriculture has appealed to Western Cape sheep farmers to remain calm in the face of the spread to hundreds of farms of Ovine Johne's Disease, better known as "sheep Aids" because of the emaciation it causes.
The disease was first detected on 47 farms in Caledon, Ceres and Mossel Bay a decade ago, but has slowly spread to hundreds of farms, especially in the Caledon area and Southern Cape. Some cases were also reported in Cradock in Eastern Cape.
But the Western Cape Agriculture Department has moved to reassure farmers that their interests would be protected. "The situation is under control, we have vets working on it full-time," said spokesperson Alie van Jaarsveld.
Click here!
'The situation is under control'
Johne's Disease (OJD), or paratuberculosis, is a chronic and contagious disease found worldwide, characterised by persistent diarrhoea, weight loss, debilitation and eventual death.
It is considered a problem in South Africa because it is hard to detect and can cause losses of up to 20 percent of sheep in very infected flocks.
During a 1996/7 survey of 1 718 farms, when 47 showed infection, tests were ineffective, causing half of infected farms to skip detection.
Van Jaarsveld said an official count of sheep affected was not available yet, but the mutton market could suffer if it spread further and it was decided on slaughtering.
For now, the Small Stock Health Advisory Body has urged that heavily infected areas be declared "OJD Control Areas" to allow free movement of live
animals within these confines, but to prevent their transportation to the outside world, except for slaughter.
'We have vets working on it full-time'
The body also advised farmers to vaccinate their sheep and announced the requirement of vendor declarations on their flocks' OJD status.
OJD surveys would be conducted in areas that had not so far come across infection.
Van Jaarsveld said the enforcement of the Animal Disease Regulations, requiring the isolation and slaughter of infected animals and the isolation and testing of all animals in contact with them, would hit sheep farmers hard.
"In an effort to minimise this impact, but at the same time to prevent spread of this disease to uninfected flocks and areas, the veterinary services... launched an intensive round of workshops and meetings with the view to formulate a policy to address this situation," Van Jaarsveld said.
This led to the formation of the advisory body, which will present its final policy proposals to Agriculture Minister Lulu Xingwana and provincial authorities for acceptance and promulgation into law.
The provincial department would also provide funding for post-graduate research on OJD.
# karen.breytenbach@inl.co.za
February 25 2008 at 07:22AM
By Karen Breytenbach
The Department of Agriculture has appealed to Western Cape sheep farmers to remain calm in the face of the spread to hundreds of farms of Ovine Johne's Disease, better known as "sheep Aids" because of the emaciation it causes.
The disease was first detected on 47 farms in Caledon, Ceres and Mossel Bay a decade ago, but has slowly spread to hundreds of farms, especially in the Caledon area and Southern Cape. Some cases were also reported in Cradock in Eastern Cape.
But the Western Cape Agriculture Department has moved to reassure farmers that their interests would be protected. "The situation is under control, we have vets working on it full-time," said spokesperson Alie van Jaarsveld.
Click here!
'The situation is under control'
Johne's Disease (OJD), or paratuberculosis, is a chronic and contagious disease found worldwide, characterised by persistent diarrhoea, weight loss, debilitation and eventual death.
It is considered a problem in South Africa because it is hard to detect and can cause losses of up to 20 percent of sheep in very infected flocks.
During a 1996/7 survey of 1 718 farms, when 47 showed infection, tests were ineffective, causing half of infected farms to skip detection.
Van Jaarsveld said an official count of sheep affected was not available yet, but the mutton market could suffer if it spread further and it was decided on slaughtering.
For now, the Small Stock Health Advisory Body has urged that heavily infected areas be declared "OJD Control Areas" to allow free movement of live
animals within these confines, but to prevent their transportation to the outside world, except for slaughter.
'We have vets working on it full-time'
The body also advised farmers to vaccinate their sheep and announced the requirement of vendor declarations on their flocks' OJD status.
OJD surveys would be conducted in areas that had not so far come across infection.
Van Jaarsveld said the enforcement of the Animal Disease Regulations, requiring the isolation and slaughter of infected animals and the isolation and testing of all animals in contact with them, would hit sheep farmers hard.
"In an effort to minimise this impact, but at the same time to prevent spread of this disease to uninfected flocks and areas, the veterinary services... launched an intensive round of workshops and meetings with the view to formulate a policy to address this situation," Van Jaarsveld said.
This led to the formation of the advisory body, which will present its final policy proposals to Agriculture Minister Lulu Xingwana and provincial authorities for acceptance and promulgation into law.
The provincial department would also provide funding for post-graduate research on OJD.
# karen.breytenbach@inl.co.za
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Isaiah 30 (New International Version)
Isaiah 30 (New International Version)
Isaiah 30
Woe to the Obstinate Nation
1 "Woe to the obstinate children,"declares the LORD,
"to those who carry out plans that are not mine,
forming an alliance, but not by my Spirit,
heaping sin upon sin;
2 who go down to Egypt
without consulting me;
who look for help to Pharaoh's protection,
to Egypt's shade for refuge.
3 But Pharaoh's protection will be to your shame,
Egypt's shade will bring you disgrace.
4 Though they have officials in Zoan
and their envoys have arrived in Hanes,
5 everyone will be put to shame
because of a people useless to them,
who bring neither help nor advantage,
but only shame and disgrace."
6 An oracle concerning the animals of the Negev:
Through a land of hardship and distress,
of lions and lionesses,
of adders and darting snakes,
the envoys carry their riches on donkeys' backs,
their treasures on the humps of camels,
to that unprofitable nation,
7 to Egypt, whose help is utterly useless.
Therefore I call her
Rahab the Do-Nothing.
8 Go now, write it on a tablet for them,
inscribe it on a scroll,
that for the days to come
it may be an everlasting witness.
9 These are rebellious people, deceitful children,
children unwilling to listen to the LORD's instruction.
10 They say to the seers,
"See no more visions!"
and to the prophets,
"Give us no more visions of what is right!
Tell us pleasant things,
prophesy illusions.
11 Leave this way,
get off this path,
and stop confronting us
with the Holy One of Israel!"
12 Therefore, this is what the Holy One of Israel says:
"Because you have rejected this message,
relied on oppression
and depended on deceit,
13 this sin will become for you
like a high wall, cracked and bulging,
that collapses suddenly, in an instant.
14 It will break in pieces like pottery,
shattered so mercilessly
that among its pieces not a fragment will be found
for taking coals from a hearth
or scooping water out of a cistern."
15 This is what the Sovereign LORD, the Holy One of Israel, says:
"In repentance and rest is your salvation,
in quietness and trust is your strength,
but you would have none of it.
16 You said, 'No, we will flee on horses.'
Therefore you will flee!
You said, 'We will ride off on swift horses.'
Therefore your pursuers will be swift!
17 A thousand will flee
at the threat of one;
at the threat of five
you will all flee away,
till you are left
like a flagstaff on a mountaintop,
like a banner on a hill."
18 Yet the LORD longs to be gracious to you;
he rises to show you compassion.
For the LORD is a God of justice.
Blessed are all who wait for him!
19 O people of Zion, who live in Jerusalem, you will weep no more. How gracious he will be when you cry for help! As soon as he hears, he will answer you. 20 Although the Lord gives you the bread of adversity and the water of affliction, your teachers will be hidden no more; with your own eyes you will see them. 21 Whether you turn to the right or to the left, your ears will hear a voice behind you, saying, "This is the way; walk in it." 22 Then you will defile your idols overlaid with silver and your images covered with gold; you will throw them away like a menstrual cloth and say to them, "Away with you!"
23 He will also send you rain for the seed you sow in the ground, and the food that comes from the land will be rich and plentiful. In that day your cattle will graze in broad meadows. 24 The oxen and donkeys that work the soil will eat fodder and mash, spread out with fork and shovel. 25 In the day of great slaughter, when the towers fall, streams of water will flow on every high mountain and every lofty hill. 26 The moon will shine like the sun, and the sunlight will be seven times brighter, like the light of seven full days, when the LORD binds up the bruises of his people and heals the wounds he inflicted.
27 See, the Name of the LORD comes from afar,
with burning anger and dense clouds of smoke;
his lips are full of wrath,
and his tongue is a consuming fire.
28 His breath is like a rushing torrent,
rising up to the neck.
He shakes the nations in the sieve of destruction;
he places in the jaws of the peoples
a bit that leads them astray.
29 And you will sing
as on the night you celebrate a holy festival;
your hearts will rejoice
as when people go up with flutes
to the mountain of the LORD,
to the Rock of Israel.
30 The LORD will cause men to hear his majestic voice
and will make them see his arm coming down
with raging anger and consuming fire,
with cloudburst, thunderstorm and hail.
31 The voice of the LORD will shatter Assyria;
with his scepter he will strike them down.
32 Every stroke the LORD lays on them
with his punishing rod
will be to the music of tambourines and harps,
as he fights them in battle with the blows of his arm.
33 Topheth has long been prepared;
it has been made ready for the king.
Its fire pit has been made deep and wide,
with an abundance of fire and wood;
the breath of the LORD,
like a stream of burning sulfur,
sets it ablaze.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
South Africa - Civil War or Peaceful split?
South Africa - Civil War or Peaceful split?
South Africa - Civil war or Peaceful split?
By Mike Smith – Cape Town 9 December 2007
Watching the current power struggle within the ANC, it is clear that the party can no longer exist in its current form after the Polokwane conference or in the run-up to the 2009 elections. A split is inevitable. This will be no peaceful divorce. The split will be messy and we will see similar scenes as that of the early ‘90s; Xhosas against Zulus, Communism against Tribal Nationalism, basically one big orgy of violence and death.
In the early ‘90s the white population of South Africa was mostly excluded from this fight and it was only the army and police who actually got involved trying to keep the sides separate. This time around it will be different. Whites will be sucked into this future conflict and it will be during this time that we might see the Afrikaners reclaiming their two Boer Republics. The Zulu’s will claim KwaZulu Natal and the Cape Coloureds along with some liberal whites will claim the Cape. This break-up of South Africa is a serious possibility if we look at some examples.
The first example is the former Yugoslavia, an artificially created Kingdom since 1918 and an artificially created Socialist state since 1943, until its breakup in 1991. Yugoslavia today are split up into six independent countries and two autonomous provinces and it serves as an example of what happens when different races, cultures and religions are forced together in the name of multiculturalism, diversity and “Nation building”. It is artificial and it cannot last!
We further saw in Yugoslavia that the Communist never give up land or grants a people autonomous rule without a fight. The various freedom wars were bloody and the conflicts are still not fully solved, as can be noted in Kosovo.
A bloody civil war is not always the answer. Are there examples of countries that have had peaceful splits? Yes certainly.
Norway peacefully separated from Sweden in 1905. Norway's growing dissatisfaction with the union with Sweden during the late 19th century combined with nationalism prompted the dissolution of the union. After a national referendum confirmed the people's preference for a monarchy over a republic, the Norwegian government offered the throne of Norway to the Danish Prince Carl and Parliament unanimously elected him king. He took the name of Haakon VII, after the medieval kings of independent Norway. Today the relationship between Norway and Sweden is better than it ever was when they were in a union.
Czechoslovakia is another example. In February 1948 the Communists seized power, winning an electoral victory in May. The country was divided into 19 regions and, in 1960, into 10 regions plus Prague and Bratislava. During the 1960’s there were some uprisings and calls for democratic change, but in 1968 the USSR sent 600,000 troops to brutally suppress these demonstrations and return rule to the orthodox line.
Influenced by events elsewhere in Eastern Europe, a series of initially student-led pro-democracy rallies were held in Prague in November 1989. The 10 million Czechs saw economic reform as more important than State reform, which was high on the priority list of the 5 million Slovaks. Instead of fighting and blocking each other, the Czechs and the Slovaks decided that a split would be in the best interest of both sides. Many people who were opposed to the split, said that it would be catastrophic, but it went smoothly. Buildings in the Czech part were given to the Czechs and those in Slovakia to the Slovaks. Moving assets and debt were split up evenly and the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic became sovereign states on 1 January 1993.
Recently we have seen the creation of the Scottish parliament, giving the Scots more self rule and it might even lead to an independent Scotland in the future. I certainly will not rule that possibility out.
In Belgium we see the Dutch speaking Flemish wanting to break away from the French speaking Wallonians. The Flemish are economically stronger than the Wallonians and so strong is the cultural and language divide between these two groups, that less than one percent of all Belgium marriages are between Flemish and Wallonians; this in a country where these two groups are both white and Christian. People there say that the split is coming soon, it is only a matter of time and the fuse of the powder keg is burning ever shorter. I certainly hope that the split will be a peaceful one.
If we now turn our attention to South Africa, it is only logical to deduce that South Africa will go the same way as Yugoslavia. South Africa was also artificially created in 1910. The two British colonies of the Cape and Natal along with the two former Boer Republics of the ZAR and the Orange Freestate, were forced together into the Union of South Africa and former autonomous states were reduced to mere provinces. When the ANC took over, they made it nine provinces and artificially created what Mandela refers to as “The Rainbow Nation”. South Africa has nine official languages and fourteen major tribes or ethnic groupings, each with its own distinct culture, traditions and religion. It is madness to think that these groups will live “peacefully” together for much longer. The Marxist, terrorist ANC’s policies of multiculturalism and ethnic diversity is a ticking nuclear time bomb, let alone a burning fuse on a powder keg.
My prediction is that the break up of South Africa will start in KwaZulu-Natal with some student uprisings. The Zulus want to be independent; next will follow the two Boer Republics and lastly the Cape. It is during this time that other smaller nations will also claim independence and new borders will be defined.
A peaceful split would definitely be in the best interest of all, but somehow I do not think it will be possible; not as long as the Communists are in control of South Africa.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Zechariah 14
- 10And from Geba to Rimmon in the Negeb, all the land shall turn into a plain; but Jerusalem shall remain exalted in its place. From the Gate of Benjamin to the place of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate; and from the Tower of Hananel to the king's wine presses,
- 11
- they shall occupy her. Never again shall she be doomed; Jerusalem shall abide in security.
- 12
- And this shall be the plague with which the LORD shall strike all the nations that have fought against Jerusalem: their flesh shall rot while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall rot in their sockets, and their tongues shall rot in their mouths.
- 13
- On that day there shall be among them a great tumult from the LORD: every man shall seize the hand of his neighbor, and the hand of each shall be raised against that of his neighbor.
woord vir die dag ...........................gee net so 6 maande
- 14
- Judah also shall fight against Jerusalem. The riches of all the surrounding nations shall be gathered together, gold, silver, and garments, in great abundance.
- 15
- Similar to this plague shall be the plague upon the horses, mules, camels, asses, and upon all the beasts that are in those camps.
- 16
- All who are left of all the nations that came against Jerusalem shall come up year after year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to celebrate the feast of Booths.
- 17
- If any of the families of the earth does not come up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, no rain shall fall upon them.
- 18
- And if the family of Egypt does not come up, or enter, upon them shall fall the plague which the LORD will inflict upon all the nations that do not come up to celebrate the feast of Booths.
- 19
- This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all the nations that do not come up to celebrate the feast of Booths.
- 20
- On that day there shall be upon the bells of the horses, "Holy to the LORD." The pots in the house of the LORD shall be as the libation bowls before the altar.
- 21
- And every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holy to the LORD of hosts; and all who come to sacrifice shall take them and cook in them. On that day there shall no longer be any merchant in the house of the LORD of hosts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
