Ads 468x60px


Showing posts with label Timecom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Timecom. Show all posts

Saturday, July 2, 2011

Sex, Lies And American Justice: French Still Try To Understand Strauss-Kahn Case (Time.com)

By PIOTR SMOLAR / LE MONDE / WORLDCRUNCH Piotr Smolar / Le Monde / Worldcrunch – Sat Jul 2, 2:25 am ET

This post is in partnership with Worldcrunch, a new global-news site that translates stories of note in foreign languages into English. The article below was originally published in Le Monde.

The startling turnaround in the Dominique Strauss-Kahn affaire has nothing to do with what happened May 14 in the now famous Sofitel hotel room 2806. It is all about the credibility of the plaintiff, the Guinean housekeeper who has accused "DSK" of sexual assault. For the American judicial system, in its Protestant and Puritan culture, lying is considered absolutely unacceptable.

According to the revelations in the New York Times, and subsequent details from prosecutors, there was a healthy amount of incoherence in the statements of the Sofitel Hotel employee. (See pictures of the legal battle of DSK.)

"The American system is based on truth," explains Arthur Dethomas, a Parisian lawyer who is also a member of the New York bar. "Litigants take an oath, they swear not to lie, even in matters that involve themselves. In France, on the contrary, a person who is testifying on his own case is not required to be sworn in, because it is assumed that he can protect himself."

The French system thus gives the accuser a sort of "right to lie." In court, before any statement is recorded, the witnesses are questioned about their connections with the individuals involved in the case. Are they close friends or relatives? Have they had any connection of dependence on them, such as a salary?

According to Dethomas, the revelations mark a decisive turn of events in the investigation. "It has to do with an unexpected affair in a closed room, between two individuals," says the lawyer. "The accusation rests on a sexual encounter between them. For a rape to be established, there must be an absence of consent. If the person who claims to have not given consent ceases to be credible, it's over. Even the fact that she possibly lied on a federal document, the application she filled out for refugee status, would be a felony, a perjury sufficient enough to disqualify everything else she says." (Who was Strauss-Kahn's accuser?)

U.S. Justice Works Both Ways

Between France and the United States, the differences in judicial philosophy and practice, notably concerning the status of the victim, explains part of the incomprehension coming from this side of the Atlantic. But so too does the soap opera of a judicial procedure that has taken place since the beginning in New York against Dominique Strauss-Kahn: his being paraded before the media, handcuffed in front of the cameras, his three-day temporary detention, then the heavy weight given to the prosecution, in contrast to the tactical silence of the defense. "In its brutality, the American justice system works both ways," says a Parisian lawyer.

For his part, Patrick Baudoin, a lawyer as well as the honorary president of the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), listened rather incredulously to the avalanche of commentaries since the latest turn of events. "One thing struck me: as soon as certain unfavorable, thorny elements were discovered in the past history of the plaintiff, it was deduced that her testimony no longer stands."

Baudoin himself encountered the ways of the American justice system when he defended the mother of Zacarias Moussaoui, accused of having wanted to participate in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The comparison between the United States and France prompted him to distinguish justice from public life. "In terms of public morality, it is much better in the United States," he notes. "In France, there is much more leeway and allowance for half-truths. However, in terms of law, it is striking to see what is going on in the United States from one extreme to another. We saw a vilified and reviled DSK who was being dragged through the mud. Suddenly, the victim, who contrary to the French system is merely a witness and not a plaintiff, is discredited." (See pictures of the flashly life of Strauss-Kahn.)

The lie is not only a "mortal sin" inside the courtrooms of America. It is also devastating in front of the cameras. In 1998, Bill Clinton was nearly thrown out of office through an impeachment procedure for having been accused of perjury in the Monica Lewinsky affair. He was not criticized for having a sexual relation with his assistant, but for having lied about it.

In the same way and more recently, the Democratic representative Anthony Weiner had to resign from his position in Congress on June 21. He had sent risquE photos of himself in his underwear through his Twitter account. But the reason for his fall was caused by his first version of the facts, which were misleading and dishonest. He had pretended that his account was hacked. This insupportable line of defense forced him, within a few days, to backtrack and confess with sobs in his voice in front of the cameras. It was already too late.

Also from Worldcrunch:

Human Trafficking in the Middle East
- Die Welt

Food-Safety Scares in China Prompt Government to Choke Press Freedom
- Economic Observer

Surviving a Night in Zurich's Worst Hotel
- Tages Anzeiger

See France's reaction to the collapse of the DSK case.

See pictures inside Rikers Island.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

Game, Sex and Match: The Perils of Female Sports Advertising (Time.com)

How you feel about Kim Clijsters doing a split in a frilly orange skirt probably depends on your reaction to a well-oiled Caroline Wozniacki serving a tennis ball into a wind machine. Then again, these provocative scenarios, which form part of the Women's Tennis Association's new "Strong is Beautiful" advertising campaign, seem tame compared to the spot starring Belarusian tennis ace Victoria Azarenka. "I like to hit the ball hard. Crush it," the 2011 Wimbledon semi-finalist says in a voiceover, as the camera pans from crotch to chest to face. "If the ball comes back then it's trying to tell me something. How about a little harder?"

Some call them racy, others call them inspiring. Either way, the series of photos and commercials that will roll out in 80 countries over the next two years certainly make a statement. Hoping to raise the profile of the women's game, the WTA filmed 38 of its players - from Serena Williams to Li Na to Petra Kvitova - slugging away at balls that release glitter and colored powder on impact. With thighs bulging and arms taut, the women's athleticism is meant to cut through the layers of chiffon and lace, and suggest that beauty stems from strength. "The images are very much about power and grit, and artistic beauty as opposed to physical beauty," says Andrew Walker, chief marketing officer for the tour. "We're very focused on who our players are: the world's best female athletes." (See TIME's special "30 Legends of Women's Tennis: Past, Present and Future)

That may be true. But according to a number of sports-media researchers, the campaign - like so many others in female sports - undermines its players' achievements by sexualizing them, inadvertently or otherwise. And that just adds insult to injury. A recent study found that major television networks in the U.S. devote just 1.6% of airtime to women's sports - down from 6.3% in 2004 - and across TV and print media, female athletics makes up, at most, 8% of overall sports coverage. When female athletes are featured in ads, it tends to be in ways that hyperfeminize them rather than highlighting their athletic competence. "Yes, these women are beautiful, but we see lots of cleavage and legs, and it's set to music that is reminiscent of soft-core porn," says Nicole LaVoi, associate director of the Tucker Center for Research on Girls & Women in Sports at the University of Minnesota. "That might be interesting and titillating, but it isn't going to make me turn on Wimbledon."

LaVoi, who writes a popular blog on female athletics called "One Sport Voice," says there is no evidence that sex actually sells sports. She believes the overwhelming presence of men on executive boards accounts for all the flashing of flesh in ad campaigns for women's sports, and says they may not even realize what they're doing. It's an issue that appears again and again. In May, the World Badminton Federation, hoping to raise the sport's popularity, decreed that from June 1 all female players must wear skirts on the court "to ensure attractive presentation of badminton." (Following widespread outrage from players and fans alike, the Federation is now reviewing its decision). In February, the LPGA released its first ad spot in four years. It featured uber-feminine player Natalie Gulbis, despite the fact she is ranked No. 108 in the world. The WNBA has come under fire for focusing campaigns on its more attractive players - like Diana Taurasi, who has long flowing hair and appeared nude on the cover of ESPN magazine last October.

It's no mystery why these campaigns strictly conform to gender norms, showcasing female athletes as feminine and sensual. It's the same reason why men's tennis will probably never run a campaign suggesting "strong is handsome," or try to court viewers by showing tennis' new world No. 1 Novak Djokovic with his shirt off. The issue at play is homophobia. "That's a huge part of this," says Marie Hardin, associate director of the Curley Center for Sports Journalism at Penn State. "There's this idea of the lesbian bogeywoman, the predatory lesbian in sports. Unfortunately there's a real fear mongering that doesn't help women's sports at all." (See TIME's video "10 Questions for Tennis Champ Li Na.")

But it isn't just organized sporting bodies who try to capitalize on notions of femininity. Mindful that they need to sustain their personal brands long after they retire, a number of female sports personalities portray themselves less as athletes and more as pin-ups. Timed with this month's Women's World Cup, five of Germany's professional soccer players posed in German Playboy in their underwear. "We want to disprove the clichE that all female footballers are butch," German midfielder Kristina Gessat told the magazine. "The message is: look, we are very normal - and lovely - girls!" And last November, U.S. skier Lindsay Vonn recreated Sharon Stone's infamous crossed-legs scene from Basic Instinct on the cover of ESPN magazine. "There's a real tension there," says Hardin of Penn State. "What female athletes choose to do to empower themselves personally does often times chip away at the collective power of female athletes and of women's sports."

Ultimately, the controversy surrounding the portrayal of female athletes comes down to the context in which the public is comfortable looking at women. With that in mind, it's harder to fault the WTA. In fact, in their 30-second commercials they blend the provocative imagery with details of the players' lives - and that elevates the ads beyond mere fluff. The spot featuring Ana Ivonovic is particularly stirring. "During the war in Serbia, they bombed us all day and all night," we hear her say as she takes a swing at a ball in slow motion. "But if I got up early enough, I could practice before the planes came." It's just a shame that her inner strength has to be wrapped in a billowy dress.

- With reporting by Sonia Van Gilder Cooke

See the 2011 TIME 100

See the 140 Best Twitter Feeds

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

Anti-Gaddafi Forces Distrustful of Western Reporters (Time.com)

As the push to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi has stalled, journalists have increasingly borne the brunt of the frustrations of Libya's rebels. Although the foreign press was eagerly welcomed just months ago, reporters in rebel-controlled areas have recently been harassed and intimidated. Officials of the rebel-led National Transitional Council (NTC) have steadily begun to treat correspondents as hostile elements: some have been prohibited from filming bomb scenes; others have been accused of being spies.

In several incidents in the months following the February uprising against Gaddafi, rebels have prevented journalists from recording events they consider embarrassing. For example, when a skirmish erupted in March after one fighter ordered another to stop firing an antiaircraft gun outside the town of Brega, which is about 130 miles (210 km) west of the rebel capital, Benghazi, other rebels kept correspondents from filming the incident. On another occasion, journalists were prevented from photographing a rebel who accidentally shot himself in April near Ajdabiyah, approximately 95 miles (155 km) west of Benghazi. (See TIME's video "Colonel Gaddafi's Camera-Ready Victory Celebrations.")

In Benghazi, reporters face similar restrictions. In April, a man barged into a press conference featuring the rebels' military chief of staff, Abd al-Fattah Yunis, and accused the former Gaddafi loyalist of persecuting the Libyan people for 40 years. After the intruder was rushed from the conference hall, journalists were barred from following him and were forced to remain in the room. In June, rebels prevented reporters from filming a car that exploded in a hotel parking lot in Benghazi.

In recent weeks the NTC has intensified pressure on journalists, with most of the intimidation occurring in the rebel enclave of Misratah, 117 miles (188 km) from Tripoli, the capital. Officials there accused reporters of being "spies" and working for "outside powers." They prevented journalists from traveling to the front and began vetting them, even though the reporters had already registered with the NTC Media Center in Benghazi and had been approved to work in all rebel-controlled areas of Libya. Suspicion has fallen particularly heavily on those correspondents from non-English-speaking countries, because Misratah's officials cannot read their foreign-language articles on the Internet. A Polish correspondent was accused of not being a "real" journalist because he took a number of pictures and no one there could understand his published pieces.

Officials in Misratah have stipulated that foreign correspondents can use only "approved" translators, a condition the NTC has not imposed in other areas under its control. In addition, journalists are being hassled about the subject of their articles. In June, one correspondent asked a media official to help arrange meetings with prisoners captured from Gaddafi's forces; the official chastised him and suggested that he instead visit civilian amputees wounded by Gaddafi fighters. When asked why he was muzzling coverage, the official responded, "I am the new Gaddafi! I control everything here!" Another writer was accused of being a spy because his questions had vexed a Misratah official. (See TIME's photo-essay "Scenes from the Battle for Libya.")

Some NTC officials sought to discount events in Misratah by blaming battlefield conditions. "There is paranoia in Misratah because Gaddafi is making a serious push lately," explains Jalal al-Galal, the council's media-committee spokesman. "When Misratis become agitated, they lash out at the first target they find, and that is foreigners."

Privately, NTC officials concede that the actions of their counterparts in Misratah are somewhat justified. "We can't discount that Gaddafi has spies operating in our midst," says a military official who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We have an open environment where people come and go. And being a journalist affords the best cover to provide information." The rebels have already apprehended foreigners they believe were working for Gaddafi. In May they detained a group of French security contractors, claiming they were relaying military information to Gaddafi's forces in Tripoli.

Others, however, believe the problem lies with Libyans' unfamiliarity with Western journalistic standards. "Many here just don't understand how journalists behave," says Salah al-Senoussi, a professor of political science. "We never had a free media. For the last 40 years, the papers and television have been telling us how great our political system was, and no journalists ever challenged this farce. This is the legacy of Gaddafi. When journalists challenge the politicians, they believe there is some hidden agenda. Journalists are seen as enemies because they want information politicians don't want to give up."

And with Western reporters eager to learn why the rebels are faltering at the front and how they plan to resolve the dilemma, the NTC's frustrations with journalists are not likely to subside anytime soon.

(See TIME's photo-essay "The Libyan Conflict.")

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

Thailand's Election: A Test of Its Fragile Democracy (Time.com)

Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand's exiled former Prime Minister, likes to compare himself to Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of Burma's pro-democracy movement. Both are in conflict with their country's military-backed leaders. But that's where the similarities end. Suu Kyi is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, whereas Thaksin backed two violent anti-government protests. Suu Kyi spent more than decade under house arrest for her political convictions, while Thaksin fled rather than do time for corruption. Suu Kyi is a champion of democracy, Thaksin's critics call him an autocrat.

But as Thailand heads toward a national election this weekend, Thaksin looks set to get a new lease on his political life. The Pheu Thai party, which he controls from Dubai, is poised to defeat incumbent Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his Democrat Party. And the person he can thank for that turnaround is the woman he hand-picked to lead and who may become Thailand's first female prime minister: Yingluck Shinawatra - his youngest sister. (Read about the tumultuous Thai election.)

Although Yingluck Shinawatra has never held office, the 44-year old executive has emerged as this election's brightest political star. She either carries the sheen of the Shinawatra name or the taint of Thaksin, depending upon a Thai's political point of view. Many aren't sure what to think; Polls show between 20% and 40% of voters remain undecided. The split reflects lingering anger about the violent protests that rocked Bangkok last year. To sway voters, Yingluck has cast herself as a pacifist: "As I am a female I do not encourage violence. I will unite Thailand,'' she told Time.

Indeed, Yingluck displays none of her brother's notorious temper. With her soft physicality, photogenic looks and ever-present smile, she has the aura of the "good girl" that so many Thais root for in television soap operas. "Her gender, in Thailand's male-dominated politics, also serves to take the edge off her party's portrayal as representing a dangerous autocratic extreme,'' says Hasan Basar, the founder of Bangkok Public Relations.

Although her opponent, Oxford-educated Abhisit, also has soap-star looks, he is backed by the military. Top generals haven't been shy about urging voters to elect what they call "good people," a euphemism for non-Pheu Thai candidates. The military's involvement "drives people away," says Pavin Chachavalpongpun of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies in Singapore. "They don't appreciate the direct intervention in politics.'' It also sets up a dynamic reminiscent of Burmese politics, where powerful generals appear to bully 'The Lady.' Yingluck certainly isn't Aung San Suu Kyi, but the narrative could sway some of the undecided.

If it doesn't, Yingluck and her party are offering voters a raft of goodies: free tablet computers for one million students, a guaranteed rice price, credit cards for farmers and taxi drivers, and debt moratoriums. Economists worry that the programs will create unmanageable levels of government debt. The Democrats are offering their own populist package, but it pales in comparison to Pheu Thai's giveaways. (Read about the Thai elections one year after the protest.)

Although much is still unknown, most analysts predict that Pheu Thai will win the most seats but not an outright majority in Thailand's 500-seat House of Representatives. In that case, the military may lobby smaller parties to join a Democrat-led coalition government. Even if Pheu Thai wins an outright majority, or succeeds in putting together a coalition, uncertainty may persist. Victors have been disqualified in the past. "If the traditional elite decide to overturn the results, a new round of violent conflict may start,'' says Pavin.

As Prime Minister Yingluck could also generate conflict by granting her exiled brother amnesty, allowing him to return to Thailand. She's vowed to clear anyone charged with political crimes in the aftermath of the 2006 coup, including her brother. "That would be a mistake,'' says Pavin. Yingluck has now back-tracked, saying only that a committee will consider amnesties. Few, however, believe she won't facilitate her brother's return. "For a Thai, where family bonds and loyalty are extremely important, it is perfectly natural and 'right' for her to do as her older brother would want her to do,'' says Hasan.

The country is so politically polarized that some prominent Thai columnists express fear of a civil war between Thaksin camp (the rural and urban poor in the north and northeast, the Red shirts and those who oppose the military meddling in politics) and anti-Thaksin factions (the Democrat Party, the military, members of the conservative establishment, middle class voters, southerners, monarchists, and the Yellow Shirts). Jon Ungpakorn, a former Senator, warns of a "long and violent civil war." "The next opportunity for reconciliation may well not arrive again for many years," he wrote.

In that sense, Sunday's election may be the easy part. With so many post-vote scenarios and warring factions, the future of Thailand, once regarded as the most stable country in Southeast Asia, looks anything but bright.

See TIME's Pictures of the Week.

See the Cartoons of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Day of the Dead (Time.com)

This is how Mexican investigators believe gangsters murdered business student Juan Francisco Sicilia: Two of his friends had been assaulted in Cuernavaca, south of Mexico City, by a pair of policemen moonlighting as muggers for the PacIfico Sur drug cartel. The friends reported the criminal cops, who panicked and asked their mafia bosses for help. On March 27, eight PacIfico Sur thugs, including a crazed psychopath called El PelOn (Baldy), abducted the two accusers, as well as Juan Francisco and four other buddies, from a bar. They were bound with packing tape, tortured in a safe house and suffocated to death. Their bodies were found the next day outside the city.


Both the cops and the killers likely expected the massacre to go unnoticed: in Mexico, gangland homicides have claimed nearly 40,000 lives in the past five years, up from less than 7,000 from 2001 to 2005. But Juan Francisco was not destined to be a statistic. He was the son of Javier Sicilia, one of the nation's best-known authors and poets, who has turned the young man's murder into a national movement of outrage over the unchecked violence of drug cartels, known as los narcos, and the government's inability to put an end to their reign of terror.


With the rallying cry "Estamos hasta la madre!" (a Mexican colloquialism that means "We've had it up to here!"), Sicilia has helped organize large protest marches in Cuernavaca, Mexico City and more than 30 other towns. In June he led a bus caravan to the border city of JuArez, where 3,200 were killed last year - a murder rate of more than 200 per 100,000 residents, which makes it the most dangerous city not just in Mexico but the world - and where hundreds of families met Sicilia holding pictures of slain relatives. (See photos of a Mexican meth gang that waged a holy drug war.)


Sicilia has at least achieved some poignant literary symbolism. In one of Mexico's most celebrated novels, Pedro PAramo by Juan Rulfo, the victims of murder clamor for rule of law in their lawless land, and the poet hears those voices now. "We're finally articulating names for the drug war's dead," Sicilia tells me. "We're letting their voices rise above ours and be more than just numbers and abstractions in this demoniacal tragedy."


Mexico's national horror story is often told as a gangster epic full of lurid detail of the lives and deaths of drug kingpins. Or it's reduced to dry figures: the cartels make $30 billion a year, equal to the economy of a midsize Central American nation, moving marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine into the U.S. At home they earn extra from activities like kidnapping, a crime that's up 317% in Mexico since 2005. Protests led by a bereaved poet are giving the tragedy a human face, as are the heroic acts of civilians like teacher Martha Rivera, who in late May became an Internet star because of a YouTube video showing her calming her kindergarten class as hit men executed five people with assault rifles outside her school in the northern city of Monterrey.


For 22 years, I've covered the rise of Mexico's drug gangs, charting their evolution from trafficking mules for Colombian cartels to the dominant players of the narcotics trade in the western hemisphere. They've morphed from mafiosi who once killed only one another - I remember the national trauma when a Roman Catholic cardinal was caught in their cross fire in 1993 - into monsters who routinely slaughter innocents. Last August, Los Zetas, a bloodthirsty gang led by former army commandos, executed 72 migrant workers on a ranch in northern Tamaulipas state just because they couldn't pay the extortion money the gangsters demanded. (See photos from a murder by the Arizona Mexico border.)


The violence is so pervasive, so constant, that only the most egregious episodes remain in the memory. Like last year's massacre of 15 teenagers at a JuArez party by narcos who mistook them for rivals. Or the eight people killed in 2008, when thugs tossed grenades into a crowd celebrating Mexico's independence day in western MichoacAn, President Felipe CalderOn's home state. Or what happened in 2009 after Mexican marines killed drug lord Arturo BeltrAn Leyva: his gunmen went to southern Tabasco state, to the funeral of a marine killed in the shoot-out, and gunned down the man's mother and three relatives.


On June 23, CalderOn started a formal dialogue with victims' groups designed to lead to the kind of police, judicial and social reforms Mexico desperately needs. Inside Mexico City's ChapUltepec Castle, Sicilia and CalderOn butted heads, but they know they are in this together. "I join your outcry," said CalderOn. "I'm willing to make changes."


See photos inside Mexico's drug tunnels.


A Criminal Insurgency
It has been more than four years since CalderOn started a military campaign against spiraling drug savagery, backed by a $1.5 billion pledge of U.S. aid. The cartels - there are at least six major gangs and several smaller outfits - reacted by unleashing a wave of violence, fighting for turf. CalderOn insists this shows the gangs are rattled, but his critics say his strategy has often made matters worse. Drug lords are now engaged in an arms race, firing everything from assault rifles to rocket-propelled grenades at the army, police, rival gangsters and any civilians who get in their way. The military has scored some victories, taking out the leaders of a few cartels, but even those successes usually spawn new, more vicious power struggles. The carnage now threatens the fledgling democracy and growing economy of one of the U.S.'s most important trade and security partners. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has gone so far as to describe the cartels as a criminal "insurgency" that seeks not to overthrow the Mexican government but rather to keep it under its blood-soaked thumb.


The U.S. helped create this beast. According to the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Americans consume $65 billion worth of illegal drugs annually, roughly what they spend on higher education, and most of those drugs are either produced in Mexico or transit through it. The U.S. is also a primary source of the weapons the cartels use to unleash their mayhem: the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives estimates that 70% of the guns seized in Mexico in the past two years were smuggled from north of the border. "The current flow of weapons," Mexico's ambassador to the U.S., Arturo SarukhAn, charged last year, "provides the drug syndicates with their firepower." (See pictures of Culiac[a {a}]n, the home of Mexico's drug-trafficking industry.)


CalderOn's war against the cartels may have been poorly thought through, but a succession of U.S. Presidents has pursued equally ineffectual policies. Since President Richard Nixon declared a "war on drugs" 40 years ago this summer, Washington has opted for a sweeping policy of incarcerating drug offenders at home and eradicating drug sources abroad. The Obama Administration has begun to balance law enforcement with more drug-rehab-oriented policies that reduce demand, but it dismisses the recent suggestion of several Latin American leaders to legalize arguably less harmful drugs like marijuana. Such a move might put a serious crimp in drug-cartel finances, but the White House says it would "make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe." However the legalization debate goes, the U.S. could at the very least do more to help Mexico develop modern investigative police forces in addition to sending high-tech helicopters to CalderOn's army.


Mexicans don't hold out much hope for constructive help from their northern neighbor. They realize that making their communities safe again means pressuring their politicians to get serious for once about the rule of law - about ensuring that powerful criminals and the officials who protect them are brought to justice in a timely way in a legal system that has a broad measure of public confidence. That is far from the case now. The corruption watchdog Transparency International estimates that Mexicans paid $2.75 billion in bribes to police and other officials last year. Meanwhile, 95% of violent crimes in Mexico go unsolved.


There are plenty of examples of governments that have driven out, or at least greatly diminished, once dominant criminal gangs. Perhaps the most appropriate example is Colombia, where powerful cartels have been cut down in the past two decades thanks largely to the professionalization of the police and judiciary. CalderOn himself knows his military campaign is not enough. In May he repeated his long-term goal of "judicial institutions that Mexico has too long lacked and without which the advance of criminals is understandable - and a future for Mexico is incomprehensible." (See "Crusaders of Meth: Mexico's Deadly Knights Templer.")


But the time for lofty rhetoric is long past. Measured in lives claimed, the level of violence in Mexico now surpasses that in Afghanistan or Pakistan. And the drug lords are engaged in a macabre competition to ratchet up the gore. Groups like the Zetas are fond of posting Internet videos of the prolonged torture and murder of their enemies. One top investigator tells me that the cartels wage bidding wars for the services of the best butchers and surgeons to perform beheadings of murdered rivals. The craniums are triumphantly displayed in town plazas like Halloween decorations.


Drug thugs killed by their competitors are easily replaced. In a country where most workers earn less than $10 a day, the cartels have little difficulty recruiting new legions. The Chihuahua state attorney general estimates that close to 10,000 Mexicans work for drug cartels in JuArez alone, not least because even foot soldiers can earn hundreds of dollars a week as sicarios, or triggermen.


See the top 10 notorious Mexican drug lords.

It isn't just the unemployed who get sucked into the war. If you have a pilot's license, for example, you're useful to a cartel, which makes you a target for rival gangs. A few years ago in CuliacAn - the capital of northern Sinaloa state, the cradle of Mexican drug trafficking - I arrived at the scene of the murder of pilot Manuel LOpez, 29, just as paramedics loaded his bullet-riddled body into an ambulance. Gunmen had shredded him and his Jeep Sahara in front of his home and relatives - who told me, in tear-stained shock, that they had no idea he was airlifting drugs.

A Slaughter of Innocents
I've seen too many scenes like that. But even the most hardened souls were shaken by the discovery in recent weeks of fosas, or mass graves, in several locations across northern Mexico. So far, close to 500 corpses have been recovered. Many were innocent victims, ordinary Mexicans grabbed at roadblocks erected by gunmen who shake them down and then, in many cases, murder them. Perhaps most depressing of all is the fact that the culprits include policemen: 17 cops were recently arrested in connection with massacres in Tamaulipas. In fact, police in Mexico, who are usually miserably paid and poorly trained, often join up precisely because the force is a recruiting pool for the cartels. (See why it's time to scrap the drug war.)

Human-rights advocates say the fosas recall the killing fields of the Balkans in the 1990s or Central America in the 1980s. "I think the world should be as worried about what's happening here as they are about what's happening in North Africa," says Carlos GarcIa, president of the human rights commission in the northern desert state of Durango, where seven mass graves have been found, many in middle-class neighborhoods or near schools. When I arrived with forensics officials last month at a newly located fosa in the eponymous state capital, I thought we'd gotten bad directions: the site was the backyard garden of a house in the upper-crust Jardines de Durango neighborhood. State officials wouldn't permit me a records search to identify the property's owner because they feared it could get them - and the records clerks - killed.

One of those buried in Durango may be Victor Camacho, or so his family believes. They're among some 350 families who've come to the state attorney general's compound to offer DNA samples, hoping to identify a relative among the 238 corpses exhumed there so far. Camacho, a successful tortilla-restaurant owner in TorreOn, northeast of Durango, was 39 when thugs nabbed him off the street in broad daylight three years ago, in front of his wife. Despite the fear that criminal spies known as halcones, or hawks, were listening in on us - "We don't know who's friend or enemy around here anymore," a Durango official says - Camacho's son Victor Jr., 24, wanted to talk. "Anybody can be caught in this now," he told me, "and we're tired of being quiet about it."

While Victor Jr.'s mother wept softly behind us, covering her nose from the stench of decomposing bodies arriving at refrigerated trailers nearby, he spoke of having to leave law school to support her and his two sisters after his father vanished. A fierce turf battle is raging in TorreOn between the Zetas and Mexico's most powerful narco-group, the Sinaloa Cartel, led by JoaquIn GuzmAn, known as Chapo (Shorty). "Every part of your life is affected," said Victor Jr. "Economically, morally, physically, you live with a daily fear of losing your family, your livelihood, everything. And the authorities don't raise a hand." (See Mexico's "Caravan of Solace.")

Putting the Economy at Risk
Mexican authorities are prey themselves, sometimes because they are in the pay of a cartel, but sometimes because they refuse to be co-opted. That seems to be the case with Minerva Bautista, who until last summer was the security director in MichoacAn, which is also the base of a bizarre "narco-Evangelical" cartel, La Familia. After I interviewed Bautista in April 2010 - she had just laid out stricter police recruitment guidelines in defiance of La Familia - I started to walk her to her car. A Mexican journalist gently stopped me. "She's a target now," he whispered. A few days later, Bautista's SUV was ambushed by gunmen who fired 2,700 high-caliber rounds at the vehicle. Miraculously, she survived; her two bodyguards were killed.

Despite the high-profile successes of CalderOn's campaign - it has since killed or captured La Familia's top leaders, for example, including Nazario Moreno, a.k.a. El Mas Loco (The Craziest One), who wrote his own "bible" - most Mexicans feel abandoned by law enforcement in this conflict. Perhaps the most painful stop during Sicilia's recent bus caravan was the northern city of Chihuahua. Marisela Escobedo's 16-year-old daughter RubI was murdered in 2008 by a member of the Zetas, Sergio Barraza. He confessed, but judges acquitted him for lack of convincing evidence, a chronic problem in Mexico. Critics said the judges feared reprisal. A higher court convicted Barraza last year. By then, however, he was on the lam.

Infuriated, Escobedo stood vigil for weeks last year on the steps of the Chihuahua state government palace to protest. Just before Christmas, a gunman chased her down and shot her. The murder was caught on a security camera, but no one has been arrested. Escobedo's terrified family is seeking asylum in the U.S. "We want to be as courageous as Marisela," a relative, who asks not to be identified, tells me. "But how can we not feel that it gets you nothing in the end?"

See pictures of Mexico City's police fighting crime.

Not surprisingly, this is all taking a political and economic as well as human toll. Mexico is far from being a failed state. Traditionally an inward-looking economy, it started to open to the world in the 1980s, signed the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993, wrote trade pacts with 42 other countries and is now Latin America's biggest importer and exporter. After a sharp contraction following the financial crisis, it enjoyed one of the fastest economic recoveries among Latin American countries last year, growing 5.5%. Mexico is not a BRIC - the now ubiquitous acronym for top emerging markets Brazil, Russia, India and China, coined by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O'Neill. But it is part of O'Neill's latest catchy acronym, MIST, which brings together up-and-coming economies Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea and Turkey.

The unchecked violence could undermine all that. In Tamaulipas, the Zetas are, in effect, the law; they're the top suspects in last year's assassination of gubernatorial candidate Rodolfo Torre. In once booming JuArez, from where thousands have fled across the Rio Grande to El Paso, Texas, the commercial tax base has shrunk 40% since 2008, and many business owners refuse to pay taxes since they already fork over extortion "tolls." (See Durango's "Killing Fields: The Grave in the Garden.")

Drug violence also harrows Monterrey, long Mexico's business capital, where kindergarten teacher Rivera soothed her students amid gunfire and where victims have been found hanging from bridges and overpasses. Commuters in Monterrey can find themselves trapped between roadblocks during rush hour, at the mercy of gangsters who storm through the paralyzed traffic to steal money or cars at gunpoint.

The gangsters' impact on civil society is just as significant. Garish music and fashion celebrating the drug lords are popular. Almost 70 Mexican journalists have been murdered by the gangs since 2007 - most recently Veracruz newspaper editor Miguel Angel LOpez, 55, gunned down with his wife and son on June 20. Many in the media now self-censor their drug coverage. The Catholic Church, too, has been linked to the cartels: Zetas leader Heriberto Lazcano, known as El Verdugo (the Executioner), funded construction of a chapel in his home state of Hidalgo, complete with his name on a bronze plaque.

Solving the Problem of Impunity
Can Mexico pull itself out of this living hell? Much depends on its ability to modernize the police and judicial system. As part of CalderOn's reform package, federal and state courts are beginning to conduct oral trials, in which lawyers have to argue before the bench rather than simply push papers across a clerk's desk. It is hoped that the change will force police and prosecutors to improve their methods of gathering and presenting evidence. Mexico's Congress is considering CalderOn's proposal to incorporate all the police into a more unified national network, similar to the one Colombia reconstituted to great effect in the 1990s. The belief is that a centralized police force will be better able to weed out corrupt members and ensure a coordinated offensive against the Hydra-like cartels. In April lawmakers passed a bill granting new powers and resources for money-laundering investigations: it's aimed at the web of corrupt politicians and businessmen who abet the cartels. And in early June, CalderOn pushed through a change in Mexico's criminal-appeals system that makes it harder for the accused to frivolously block or delay prosecutions. (See pictures of the fence between the United States and Mexico.)

The harder task is changing a culture that was centuries in the making. "Mexico's biggest problem," says Sicilia's lawyer, Julio HernAndez, "is still the problem that leads to all its other problems: impunity." Mexico's lawlessness is often thought to be a legacy of the Spanish conquistadors, who were more interested in pillaging than policing and who left the country with the warped sense that law enforcement is a private rather than a public concern. That civic negligence was a boon for the drug mafias that emerged after World War II. Their brutality was regulated only by the venal, authoritarian Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which ruled for 71 years and was the cartels' tacit partner. When CalderOn's National Action Party toppled the PRI in 2000, the cartels splintered and embarked on an orgy of violence that spawned soulless killing machines.

Tackling them will take a sustained commitment by governments on both sides of the border. But for all the horror, there are some reasons for hope. The homicide rate in JuArez is down this year. And the military recently arrested JesUs "El Negro" Radilla, the alleged leader of the gang that murdered Juan Francisco Sicilia and his friends. Juan Bosco, the police director in Morelos state, which includes Cuernavaca, was also collared for his alleged ties to the PacIfico Sur cartel.

That is not enough for Javier Sicilia, who had hoped to watch his son receive a business degree this month. Known to readers for his Catholic mysticism, he has given up writing poetry. "They choked it out of me when they choked Juanelo," he tells me. He's thrown himself fully into his movement against the drug gangs. "I'm doing this," he says, "because I believe it's the dead who are going to lead Mexico to the light." If so, his son, and the countless others in pictures being held up across Mexico, will not have died in vain.

Yahoo! News

It's All Greek to U.S. (Time.com)

As Europe confronts another act in its Greek drama, many are watching and wondering, Is the U.S. next? Could our debt-ceiling debate be the beginning of a crisis that makes the world lose faith in American credit? Anything could happen, but it's worth noting the big differences between Greece and the U.S.

Greece faces three problems. First, it has an uncompetitive economy that cannot generate growth. Its labor is too expensive, it exports few products, and its people are not rich enough to power an expansion. This is not a recent problem. Greece has never been an economic dynamo.

Greece also has a long history of borrowing too much and being unable to pay its debts. Over the past 179 years, it has been in default about 50% of the time. Its debts are huge and could not be paid under any plausible scenario. Finally, because it is part of the euro zone, Greece does not have control over its currency, which means it cannot make its goods cheaper on world markets. (See how the U.S. can avoid its own Greek tragedy.)

The U.S., by contrast, remains one of the world's most competitive economies. It is home to the leading companies in the most advanced industries, houses the largest capital markets and continues to spawn new companies and, indeed, whole new industries. It exports everything from aircraft to entertainment to health care products around the world. Its demographics are strikingly healthy: it will be the only rich country in the world to actually increase its population over the next 30 years - which means more young workers, producers, entrepreneurs and taxpayers. It also has control over its currency. Finally, America's credit history is impeccable. The U.S. has never defaulted on its debt.

Greece faces a set of terrible choices. In order to get more funds to pay its loans and bills, it needs to make draconian spending cuts and tax increases that will surely choke economic growth. The situation in the U.S. could not be more different. The solutions to America's deficit problems are relatively straightforward, almost simple.

Take a few examples. If Congress were to enact the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles commission, it would reduce the deficit by $3.8 trillion over 10 years. By 2015, the U.S. would have a deficit that was 2.2% of GDP, among the lowest of the world's major economies. Were Congress to do nothing and let the Bush tax cuts expire and return rates to what they were during the Clinton era, that would generate an estimated $3.6 trillion in tax revenue over the next decade, largely solving the short-term deficit problem. (See "Our Greek Tragedy.")

The great truth facing the U.S. is not that we lack solutions to our problems but that our political system seems unable to do anything. With a deficit as large as the one we face, it should be clear that we cannot sort things out through either spending cuts alone or tax increases alone. (Spending on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is set to rise from 10% of GDP now to 15% by 2030. That is simply unsustainable.) And yet the two parties seem stuck in adolescent fantasies, one ruling out tax increases, the other ruling out any serious cuts in entitlement spending. Sure, in a country of 312 million, people will disagree. But on the deficit, the disagreement is not a theological one. Debates over money are always amenable to compromise. You can split the difference!

The world has not lost faith in the U.S. economy. People lend America money more cheaply than they do any other country. Our stock markets remain strong. Our companies continue to thrive. But as you watch the dangerous game of chicken in Washington, it is easy to conclude that the U.S. has lost a serious governing class and has become a place where ideology and talk-radio rhetoric have replaced the business of governance. That Republicans would consider playing games with America's creditworthiness is not simply terrible public policy but also, as Richard Stengel pointed out in the previous issue of TIME, almost certainly unconstitutional.

Right now, we could actually learn something from Greece. The current Greek government has faced up to its problems and initiated a series of spending cuts and tax increases and the sale of state-owned assets. What it has proposed dwarfs anything contemplated in the U.S. And the Greek government has made the case to its people patiently and persistently, not pandering to populist sentiment - despite mobs rioting in the streets. It has also set about enacting a longer-term program to make the economy more competitive.

In this respect, America is not like Greece at all, alas.

See five destructive myths about the economic recovery.

See "A Flight Plan for the American Economy."

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Greece Passes Austerity Bill -- Now Comes the Hard Part (Time.com)

Vasso Sarafidou wasn't carrying a gas mask when she walked from her home near the Acropolis to the anti-austerity demonstration outside parliament in Athens on Wednesday. Passing rows of riot police, some not much older than her teenage grandchildren, Sarafidou, 72, said she knew Greek lawmakers were going to pass the bill that would raise taxes and sell some state assets in exchange for more bailout loans. But she thought the bill was a bad idea, and she joined the protest against it.

The tear gas hit her not long before the bill passed with a final vote of 155-138, as police held back angry protesters trying to storm parliament. A young woman sprayed Sarafidou's face with liquid Maalox, the stomach antacid, to keep her eyes from burning. "I suppose this means they want me to go home," she said, shielding her eyes with large sunglasses. "Well, I'm not going."

Wednesday's vote may have eased, at least for now, the worries of European Union leaders in Brussels and the fragile government of Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou - but Greeks remain stubbornly opposed to the implementation of austerity policies in exchange for bailout loans. Greece was set to run out of cash next month without the latest installment of some $17 billion of loans from the EU and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The EU and the IMF said that the new austerity plan had to pass for Greece to get the cash infusion. Athens is bracing for more demonstrations on Thursday, when parliament takes up a vote on how to implement the new austerity measures. (See photos of the protesters in Athens.)

Though leaders in Brussels greeted Wednesday's vote with relief - European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek praised it as "a turning point for Greece and the euro zone" - big challenges remain. Privately, many economists say Greece's default is inevitable, since its debt is rising and its antiquated, almost Soviet-style economy has few sources of growth. If Greece defaults, Europeans fear that the debt crisis will spread to other indebted countries such as Ireland and Portugal, who are also seeking bailouts, and vulnerable economies such as Spain and Italy.

"The vote itself - albeit important for dealing with pressing issues like the Greek government running out of cash - is less critical than the long-term response," says Fredrik Erixon, director of the European Centre for International Political Economy, a Brussels-based think tank. "Everyone understands Greece will have to default, and until we work out how to do this, there will be new crises erupting time and time again."

The challenge for Papandreou's government is even more immense. It must implement the unpopular austerity package while also convincing an angry Greek public that this is the right way to dig the country out of more than $450 billion in debt. At the same time, it must deal with the worst recession since the 1970s. Unemployment is at more than 16%, and is almost three times that rate for young Greeks. "Greek society may have reached a breaking point," says Ian Lesser, a Senior Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund. (See photos of clashes between protesters and police.)

Polls show that Greeks are skeptical that more public-spending cuts and tax hikes will solve the debt problem, since the country's public debt is forecast, in the most optimistic scenario, to rise to about 140% of GDP by 2015. But Dimitris Katsikas, a research fellow with the Hellenic Institute of European and Foreign Policy in Athens, says the government could still win people over if it tackles tough reforms, such as reducing Greece's bloated public sector - and shows results. Such results could also move skeptical Europeans, Katsikas says, who are currently discussing a second bailout for Greece that could total $150 billion.

"If the Europeans move quickly and a second bailout is agreed, then I think we'll see tension recede over the next couple of months," Katsikas says. "If the [Greek] government fulfills its tasks, then this calm might last a little longer as its own MPs will be able to respond to angry constituents by pointing to achievements."

Unless it wins over hearts and minds - and does it soon - Papandreou's government could fall if deputies in the ruling Socialist PASOK party defect. That means snap elections before 2013, when PASOK's term ends. But even then, Greece would likely end up with a coalition government, since the public also has little faith in the center-right New Democracy party, the main opposition. Smaller parties, such as the Communist Party of Greece and the right-wing Popular Orthodox Rally, have also picked up little new support from Greeks, who dismiss most politicians as thieves. Yiota Valaoura, a 52-year-old worker at a weapons factory, says the Greek Orthodox Church would do a better job legislating than those in parliament. "We don't take anyone in that building seriously," says Valaoura, who drove three hours from her home in Aegion, a city in the Peloponnese, to get to Wednesday's demonstration outside parliament. (See how the U.S. can avoid its own Greek tragedy.)

Many of the protesters made their distaste clear by throwing yogurt at lawmakers arriving for the vote. The more militant threw rocks, chunks of marble and petrol bombs at riot police, who responded with volleys of tear gas. The now-familiar stench of burning gas cloaked Syntagma, the square across the street from parliament.

Clashes between police and fringe anarchist and far-left protesters continued into the evening. The Red Cross reported that at least 500 people have been treated for injuries or breathing problems and more than 30 were sent to the hospital. Police also reported that 31 officers were hurt in the days violence. Greek media, meanwhile, reported that the police response around the square was especially brutal. Motorcycle police chased protesters fleeing on foot, and also attacked journalists. Italian photojournalist Gabriele Micalizzi told TIME that he received five stitches after police beat him while he was photographing a fight between an anarchist and a police officer.

Before the day devolved into chaos, Vasso Sarafidou, the grandmother from Athens, had stood her ground near Syntagma for hours. She clapped when protesters chanted slogans equating the government to the 1967–1974 military junta. She frowned when the young riot police edged toward the crowd, their shields raised, and when the kids in black threw rocks at them. "I don't know what else to do but to come out here and let my feelings be known," she said, her eyes watering from another dose of tear gas. "I feel like this country is dying, and I'm afraid that our politicians don't know how to save it. So maybe we have to save it. Someone has to save Greece."

With reporting by Leo Cendrowicz/Brussels and Nick Malkoutzis/Athens

See "Fear and Anger as Greece Stares into the Abyss.

See TIME's Pictures of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

The Kabul Intercontinental Attack: The Taliban's Clear Message (Time.com)

Ali Omar and his son Ali Omar had returned to Kabul for a visit. The father had moved to the U.S. years ago and the son was born there. On Tuesday, they were having dinner by the pool of the Intercontinental Hotel in the Afghan capital where they were staying during their trip. It was a festive evening with several parties of well-to-do Afghans celebrating birthdays and other occasions. Then came the sound of gunfire. "The police told us it was some kids messing around and not to worry about it," says Ali Omar the younger, the owner of an Afghan restaurant in Fremont, California. "Then the gunshots kept getting closer and closer." His father adds, "At first, it was one or two shots from far away. After 15-16 minutes it was wild. War. Everyone was escaping."

Nine Taliban fighters had entered the heavily fortified Intercontinental Hotel in a brazen attack on foreigners and Afghan provincial officials who were in town to prepare for the wind-down of coalition forces set to begin in July. Once the intruders got past three heavily defended security checkpoints up a winding road and into the hotel - still decorated in a decaying, late 1970s style of plate glass windows, marble and heavy velvet curtains - there was chaos. Ali Omar the restaurant owner began videotaping what he saw. "I recorded it up to the point where a guy came in and started shooting into the crowd, then it was a free-for-all," he says. The video shows police standing on the pool deck with AK-47 rifles. People walk by the camera and Omar points out a policeman who he said was shot and killed minutes later. The tape cuts off as a loud explosion is heard. (See "The Taliban's War in Pakistan.")

Eyewitnesses say about 60-to-70 people, including women and children, were on the pool deck having dinner when men in white headscarves, carrying AK-47s and grenades and apparently suicide vests ran in shouting in Pashto and started shooting. The people on the pool deck all ran and jumped off the back wall, onto a steep, wooded hillside that leads down to a main road. The crowd had to knock down a section of a wall topped with barbwire to make it to safety on the street, according to the younger Omar, who recounted the episode, still in a blood spattered shalwar kimeez. Diners and hotel guests tell TIME the attack began around 10 p.m. Most of the fighting did not end until around 4 a.m., after NATO helicopter gunships killed three insurgents on the roof of the hotel. But the siege only came to a close early in the morning when the last bomber, who had been hiding out in the hotel, blew himself up.

The assault left between 18 and 21 dead and 13 wounded, Ministry of Interior spokesman Sadiq Sadiqi told TIME. Local news said nine civilians, two policemen, one Spanish national and nine suicide bombers were killed and that 13 civilians, five government officials and two NATO soldiers were wounded.

The Taliban had its official version. The group's spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid tells TIME that "eight suicide attackers entered from the west gate of the Intercontinental Hotel. One of them blew himself up at the gate. He killed some guards and police and destroyed the gate." Mujahid tells TIME that "only 13 foreigners were killed" without mentioning any Afghan fatalities. "The suicide attackers were contacting me while they were attacking and told me how many foreigners they were killing." He continues, "then they heard the helicopters coming. They went to the windows to shoot at them and they were killed by the helicopters. It was around 4 AM when we lost connection with them. Every five minutes they were calling us to tell us about the casualties."

The attack came a day after the end of a high-level meeting in Kabul that was preparing for the Bonn 2 Conference, a 50-nation meeting that will be held to discuss the upcoming security transition in July and the withdrawal of foreign military forces in 2014. Mujahid, the Taliban spokesman, told TIME that the target of the attack was guests staying at the hotel: governors and mayors from the three provinces and four cities - Kabul, Bamyan and Panjsher provinces and the cities of Mazar-e-Sharif, Herat, Lashkar Gah and Mehtarlam - that will be the first to see the security transitions from coalition to Afghan forces in July. (See "In Afghanistan, Civilians Help Soldiers in Counterinsurgency.")

As the transition draws near, the attack on the hotel has only reinforced the belief of Afghans and foreigners that Afghan forces are not ready to take over security responsibilities. "We heard shooting and we saw the police dropping their weapons and running from the area," says Noor Mohammad, a member of the National Directorate of Security who was still in uniform and had been at the hotel for his boss' birthday party. "I can't trust them. How can I trust them? They dropped their weapons because they heard some shooting. How can they ensure security for us? How can they fight against the Taliban? No way, I don't trust them at all," he says quietly as he cradled a hand that had been cut by barbwire as he helped his boss' children escape down the hillside.

"In any way possible, the program will be successfully implemented. Our enemies know that they don't have the capability to hurt our national intention," said Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai, the Chief of the Security Transition Program. "Our country is ready to take any sacrifice necessary on this path," Ahmadzai said today at the government's first security handover conference, Tolo TV reported. But in light of today's attack many Afghans will continue to disagree.

Sahel Wafa, an Afghan who now works for a pharmaceutical company in London after having fled the fighting in the 1980s, watched the attack unfold from the roof of his parents' house. He saw the entire assault and the police reaction from his vantage point across the street from the entrance to the hotel. "I don't think they're ready to take over security. I suppose that as soon as the Americans troops leave, you will see a lot of chaos. Not only from the Taliban, but within the Afghan people, the society. I don't think the security forces are ready to take over at all."

(See "Osama bin Laden's Legacy: 13 Years of Terrorist Attacks.")

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

Is This the Death of Dutch Multiculturalism? (Time.com)

When an Amsterdam court acquitted far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders of all charges of discrimination and inciting hatred against Muslims on June 23, it seemed a fitting climax to a week that saw the end of the decade-long Dutch experiment with integration. Judges ruled that although the comments the politician made in the Dutch press and on the internet between October 2006 and March 2008 comparing Islam to Nazism may be offensive, they are nonetheless legal and part of a legitimate government debate - one that's taken on tones that were unthinkable - or at least unspeakable - only a few years ago.

"The good news is it's legal to be critical about Islam," Wilders told reporters after his acquittal. "And this is something that we need because the Islamization of our societies is a major problem and a threat to our freedom. And I'm allowed to say so." (See pictures of Muslims in America.)

"I'm very disappointed," said Dutch Moroccan Zenap al-Garboni, as she smeared cream cheese on her children's bagels in a restaurant near the courthouse shortly after the verdict. "He's creating hate against Islam." Added her 11-year-old daughter Amra: "When I see him speaking on TV it really scares Me ... for all the children, it's really scary to see and I think it shouldn't be like that."

Wilders has never shied away from attacking Islam, despite having to live under constant protection since 2004, when controversial Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered by a Muslim extremist. Wilders has called for a ban on the Koran - which he compared to Hitler's Mein Kampf - and a "head-rag tax." He's also on record as saying the Netherlands should close its doors to Muslim immigrants and even take away the nationality of some who are already there. And his short film Fitna juxtaposes images of the 9/11 attacks and other terrorist acts with verses from the Koran. (See pictures of the rise of Hitler)

In court last week, Presiding Judge Marcel van Oosten called some of those comments "crude and denigrating," but ruled that they fall within the scope of protected speech - especially because his remarks were made during the country's heated debates on multiculturalism.

Others disagree. "He got away with Islamaphobic expressions that, in light of the U.N. Convention against Racism, should have fallen within the scope of our criminal law," says Egbert Dommering, a lawyer and professor at the University of Amsterdam. While Wilders has declared his acquittal a victory for free speech, Dommering says "it's a victory for free speech for himself, but it will lead to a deterioration in the quality of debate and a legitimization of using strong language against the Muslim religion which is in fact aimed against people." Wilders has always maintained he's against Islam and not its practitioners, a distinction that's legal under Dutch law.

Wilders' acquittal seems to be a sign that his once radical views have become mainstream in a country that for decades was viewed as one of the most liberal and tolerant in the world. "The judgment doesn't turn the tide," says Dommering, "but it's symbolic of what's going on in the Netherlands." Wilders is already an enormously popular politician - many analysts say the ruling will only make him more so - and his PVV party is the third largest in parliament. Although not a formal partner in the ruling conservative coalition, PVV's backing is crucial in giving it a voting majority. In turn, the government supports many of Wilders' anti-immigrant positions - from limiting immigration to banning face-covering attire. (Read: "The New Dutch Government: An End to Tolerance?")

The verdict came just days after Dutch ministers backed away from current integration policy and announced plans to cut funding for programs designed to help immigrants. Saying Dutch values must come first, Home Affairs Minister Piet Hein Donner told parliament that the government "will distance itself from the relativism contained in the model of a multicultural society." A June 19 poll found that three-quarters of the Dutch support the cabinet's slashing of funds that go toward aiding immigrants.

"In the 1990s, saying a multicultural society should end was ruled discriminatory," says Channa Samkalden, a lawyer at the firm BOhler Advocaten who specializes in free speech and freedom of religion. She's referring to the case of another anti-immigration politician, Hans Janmaat, who was prone to saying "full is full" and "our people first." Says Samkalden: "We've simply changed our minds on what's allowable." (See more on Wilders.)

For Ronnie Eisenmann, head of the board of the Amsterdam Jewish Community, the latest twists in the Dutch culture wars reek of political strategy. "The fact that politicians say multiculturalism has failed doesn't mean you can ignore that a multicultural society exits," he says. "They're saying it because they want to cut funding." Muslim and Jewish organizations have recently come together to oppose a ban to ritual slaughter that parliament members approved on Tuesday - a ban that Wilders supports. (Read about the march to the Far Right.)

But while Amsterdam's politicians may be declaring the death of multiculturalism, the picture on the streets tell a different story. At Sunday's Roots Festival in the Oosterpark - a musical celebration of all things cultural not rooted in Western Europe - stands selling Turkish kebabs co-exist happily with Dutch herring sellers and African artists. "I think the politicians don't know what they're talking about," said Amsterdam student Shola Verschuren. Originally from Nigeria, she is currently taking government-funded Dutch lessons, classes that would get the axe under the cabinet's current plans. "I will be angry if they're cut," she says. "Integration rocks."

See TIME's Pictures of the Week.

See the Cartoons of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

The Kabul Intercontinental Attack: The Taliban's Clear Message (Time.com)

Ali Omar and his son Ali Omar had returned to Kabul for a visit. The father had moved to the U.S. years ago and the son was born there. On Tuesday, they were having dinner by the pool of the Intercontinental Hotel in the Afghan capital where they were staying during their trip. It was a festive evening with several parties of well-to-do Afghans celebrating birthdays and other occasions. Then came the sound of gunfire. "The police told us it was some kids messing around and not to worry about it," says Ali Omar the younger, the owner of an Afghan restaurant in Fremont, California. "Then the gunshots kept getting closer and closer." His father adds, "At first, it was one or two shots from far away. After 15-16 minutes it was wild. War. Everyone was escaping."

Nine Taliban fighters had entered the heavily fortified Intercontinental Hotel in a brazen attack on foreigners and Afghan provincial officials who were in town to prepare for the wind-down of coalition forces set to begin in July. Once the intruders got past three heavily defended security checkpoints up a winding road and into the hotel - still decorated in a decaying, late 1970s style of plate glass windows, marble and heavy velvet curtains - there was chaos. Ali Omar the restaurant owner began videotaping what he saw. "I recorded it up to the point where a guy came in and started shooting into the crowd, then it was a free-for-all," he says. The video shows police standing on the pool deck with AK-47 rifles. People walk by the camera and Omar points out a policeman who he said was shot and killed minutes later. The tape cuts off as a loud explosion is heard. (See "The Taliban's War in Pakistan.")

Eyewitnesses say about 60-to-70 people, including women and children, were on the pool deck having dinner when men in white headscarves, carrying AK-47s and grenades and apparently suicide vests ran in shouting in Pashto and started shooting. The people on the pool deck all ran and jumped off the back wall, onto a steep, wooded hillside that leads down to a main road. The crowd had to knock down a section of a wall topped with barbwire to make it to safety on the street, according to the younger Omar, who recounted the episode, still in a blood spattered shalwar kimeez. Diners and hotel guests tell TIME the attack began around 10 p.m. Most of the fighting did not end until around 4 a.m., after NATO helicopter gunships killed three insurgents on the roof of the hotel. But the siege only came to a close early in the morning when the last bomber, who had been hiding out in the hotel, blew himself up.

The assault left between 18 and 21 dead and 13 wounded, Ministry of Interior spokesman Sadiq Sadiqi told TIME. Local news said nine civilians, two policemen, one Spanish national and nine suicide bombers were killed and that 13 civilians, five government officials and two NATO soldiers were wounded.

The Taliban had its official version. The group's spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid tells TIME that "eight suicide attackers entered from the west gate of the Intercontinental Hotel. One of them blew himself up at the gate. He killed some guards and police and destroyed the gate." Mujahid tells TIME that "only 13 foreigners were killed" without mentioning any Afghan fatalities. "The suicide attackers were contacting me while they were attacking and told me how many foreigners they were killing." He continues, "then they heard the helicopters coming. They went to the windows to shoot at them and they were killed by the helicopters. It was around 4 AM when we lost connection with them. Every five minutes they were calling us to tell us about the casualties."

The attack came a day after the end of a high-level meeting in Kabul that was preparing for the Bonn 2 Conference, a 50-nation meeting that will be held to discuss the upcoming security transition in July and the withdrawal of foreign military forces in 2014. Mujahid, the Taliban spokesman, told TIME that the target of the attack was guests staying at the hotel: governors and mayors from the three provinces and four cities - Kabul, Bamyan and Panjsher provinces and the cities of Mazar-e-Sharif, Herat, Lashkar Gah and Mehtarlam - that will be the first to see the security transitions from coalition to Afghan forces in July. (See "In Afghanistan, Civilians Help Soldiers in Counterinsurgency.")

As the transition draws near, the attack on the hotel has only reinforced the belief of Afghans and foreigners that Afghan forces are not ready to take over security responsibilities. "We heard shooting and we saw the police dropping their weapons and running from the area," says Noor Mohammad, a member of the National Directorate of Security who was still in uniform and had been at the hotel for his boss' birthday party. "I can't trust them. How can I trust them? They dropped their weapons because they heard some shooting. How can they ensure security for us? How can they fight against the Taliban? No way, I don't trust them at all," he says quietly as he cradled a hand that had been cut by barbwire as he helped his boss' children escape down the hillside.

"In any way possible, the program will be successfully implemented. Our enemies know that they don't have the capability to hurt our national intention," said Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai, the Chief of the Security Transition Program. "Our country is ready to take any sacrifice necessary on this path," Ahmadzai said today at the government's first security handover conference, Tolo TV reported. But in light of today's attack many Afghans will continue to disagree.

Sahel Wafa, an Afghan who now works for a pharmaceutical company in London after having fled the fighting in the 1980s, watched the attack unfold from the roof of his parents' house. He saw the entire assault and the police reaction from his vantage point across the street from the entrance to the hotel. "I don't think they're ready to take over security. I suppose that as soon as the Americans troops leave, you will see a lot of chaos. Not only from the Taliban, but within the Afghan people, the society. I don't think the security forces are ready to take over at all."

(See "Osama bin Laden's Legacy: 13 Years of Terrorist Attacks.")

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

Is This The Death of Dutch Multiculturalism? (Time.com)

When an Amsterdam court acquitted far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders of all charges of discrimination and inciting hatred against Muslims on June 23, it seemed a fitting climax to a week that saw the end of the decade-long Dutch experiment with integration. Judges ruled that although the comments the politician made in the Dutch press and on the internet between October 2006 and March 2008 comparing Islam to Nazism may be offensive, they are nonetheless legal and part of a legitimate government debate - one that's taken on tones that were unthinkable - or at least unspeakable - only a few years ago.

"The good news is it's legal to be critical about Islam," Wilders told reporters after his acquittal. "And this is something that we need because the Islamization of our societies is a major problem and a threat to our freedom. And I'm allowed to say so." (See pictures of Muslims in America.)

"I'm very disappointed," said Dutch Moroccan Zenap al-Garboni, as she smeared cream cheese on her children's bagels in a restaurant near the courthouse shortly after the verdict. "He's creating hate against Islam." Added her 11-year-old daughter Amra: "When I see him speaking on TV it really scares Me ... for all the children, it's really scary to see and I think it shouldn't be like that."

Wilders has never shied away from attacking Islam, despite having to live under constant protection since 2004, when controversial Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered by a Muslim extremist. Wilders has called for a ban on the Koran - which he compared to Hitler's Mein Kampf - and a "head-rag tax." He's also on record as saying the Netherlands should close its doors to Muslim immigrants and even take away the nationality of some who are already there. And his short film Fitna juxtaposes images of the 9/11 attacks and other terrorist acts with verses from the Koran. (See pictures of the rise of Hitler)

In court last week, Presiding Judge Marcel van Oosten called some of those comments "crude and denigrating," but ruled that they fall within the scope of protected speech - especially because his remarks were made during the country's heated debates on multiculturalism.

Others disagree. "He got away with Islamaphobic expressions that, in light of the U.N. Convention against Racism, should have fallen within the scope of our criminal law," says Egbert Dommering, a lawyer and professor at the University of Amsterdam. While Wilders has declared his acquittal a victory for free speech, Dommering says "it's a victory for free speech for himself, but it will lead to a deterioration in the quality of debate and a legitimization of using strong language against the Muslim religion which is in fact aimed against people." Wilders has always maintained he's against Islam and not its practitioners, a distinction that's legal under Dutch law.

Wilders' acquittal seems to be a sign that his once radical views have become mainstream in a country that for decades was viewed as one of the most liberal and tolerant in the world. "The judgment doesn't turn the tide," says Dommering, "but it's symbolic of what's going on in the Netherlands." Wilders is already an enormously popular politician - many analysts say the ruling will only make him more so - and his PVV party is the third largest in parliament. Although not a formal partner in the ruling conservative coalition, PVV's backing is crucial in giving it a voting majority. In turn, the government supports many of Wilders' anti-immigrant positions - from limiting immigration to banning face-covering attire. (Read: "The New Dutch Government: An End to Tolerance?")

The verdict came just days after Dutch ministers backed away from current integration policy and announced plans to cut funding for programs designed to help immigrants. Saying Dutch values must come first, Home Affairs Minister Piet Hein Donner told parliament that the government "will distance itself from the relativism contained in the model of a multicultural society." A June 19 poll found that three-quarters of the Dutch support the cabinet's slashing of funds that go toward aiding immigrants.

"In the 1990s, saying a multicultural society should end was ruled discriminatory," says Channa Samkalden, a lawyer at the firm BOhler Advocaten who specializes in free speech and freedom of religion. She's referring to the case of another anti-immigration politician, Hans Janmaat, who was prone to saying "full is full" and "our people first." Says Samkalden: "We've simply changed our minds on what's allowable." (See more on Wilders.)

For Ronnie Eisenmann, head of the board of the Amsterdam Jewish Community, the latest twists in the Dutch culture wars reek of political strategy. "The fact that politicians say multiculturalism has failed doesn't mean you can ignore that a multicultural society exits," he says. "They're saying it because they want to cut funding." Muslim and Jewish organizations have recently come together to oppose a ban to ritual slaughter that parliament members approved on Tuesday - a ban that Wilders supports. (Read about the march to the Far Right.)

But while Amsterdam's politicians may be declaring the death of multiculturalism, the picture on the streets tell a different story. At Sunday's Roots Festival in the Oosterpark - a musical celebration of all things cultural not rooted in Western Europe - stands selling Turkish kebabs co-exist happily with Dutch herring sellers and African artists. "I think the politicians don't know what they're talking about," said Amsterdam student Shola Verschuren. Originally from Nigeria, she is currently taking government-funded Dutch lessons, classes that would get the axe under the cabinet's current plans. "I will be angry if they're cut," she says. "Integration rocks."

See TIME's Pictures of the Week.

See the Cartoons of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

A Lose-Lose for Greeks Facing Austerity Measures (Time.com)

As the antiausterity demonstration in Athens on Tuesday, June 28, devolved into familiar violent, tear-gas-soaked clashes between fringe anarchists and police outside Parliament, Giorgos Rallis shut off his television and stewed quietly about the immense dilemma facing his country.

On Wednesday, Greek lawmakers are due to vote on an unpopular austerity bill that includes more tax hikes and a controversial plan to privatize state-owned enterprises, including the Public Power Corporation (PPC), where Rallis has worked as a technician for 19 years. European leaders and the International Monetary Fund have already lent Greece €110 billion ($150 billion) and say that unless the government passes the austerity bill, they won't hand over the latest installment of bailout loans, totaling €12 billion ($17 billion). That would leave the country, which runs out of cash in July, to default on its massive sovereign debt. But many Greeks say the year of austerity they have already suffered in exchange for the previous bailout loans has impoverished Greeks and done nothing to help the country pay back its debt. (See photos of the protests in Greece.)

"The world has cornered us, and our own politicians have cornered us," says Rallis, 46, who escaped to the island of Evia, some 40 miles (65 km) away from Athens, to avoid the two-day general strike that shut down much of the country's public transportation, public services and businesses. "The populists in Europe ridicule us as a bunch of lazy people and tell us to sell the Acropolis. I am tired of this country being the easy target. Let Greece go bankrupt. Let all of Europe go bankrupt. I want them to stop bleeding me for money I just don't have."

Rallis is just one member of the quiet but angry majority that has Greek lawmakers nervous, even as world headlines are dominated by the dramatic images of young self-styled anarchists and far-left militants, many donning gas masks and crash helmets, fighting with police and one another. During Tuesday's protests, police fired several rounds of tear gas to disperse rioters and the rest of the crowd. At least 46 people - 37 police officers and nine protesters - were injured on Tuesday, according to Greek authorities. By late evening, the tear gas was still thick in the air around Syntagma, the square across the street from parliament. Fires set by rioters burned in many garbage bins, and bits of marble hacked off from storefronts littered the streets. The protesters who had camped out at Syntagma for weeks strummed guitars and sang songs as angry kids spray-painted revolutionary slogans on the facades of fancy hotels and riot police patrolled the square. More drama was unfolding inside Parliament, as Prime Minister George Papandreou and his new Finance Minister, Evangelos Venizelos, tried to keep Socialist lawmakers from defecting before the crucial vote. At least four deputies from the Socialist PASOK Party have said publicly that they may vote against the new austerity bill. If one more lawmaker votes against it, the bill fails.

Though opposition parties have been largely united against the new austerity measures, Elsa Papadimitrou, a deputy from the main opposition, the center-right New Democracy Party, said she was mulling a vote for the austerity package "to put the good of the nation above party interests," according to the Greek daily Kathimerini.

Meanwhile, the political maelstrom continues to worry leaders in Brussels. Some have discussed alternative options for Greece in case the austerity bill fails in Parliament. But the E.U.'s economic chief, Olli Rehn, shut down that talk. "There is no Plan B to avoid default," he said Tuesday. "The European Union continues to be ready to support Greece. But Europe can only help Greece if Greece helps itself."

Rehn added that Greek political leaders should be "fully aware of the responsibility that lies on their shoulders." But those same politicians also are facing historic levels of distrust from the Greek public, who view the country's political system as hopelessly corrupt and broken.

Papandreou's government - which has borne the brunt of the antiausterity backlash - is fragile, even after a Cabinet reshuffle last week that was meant to rally Socialist deputies who had lost faith in his Ministers. The reshuffle brought on board new Finance Minister Venizelos, a steely constitutional-law scholar who has a strong following in PASOK, but analysts say the move may only buy the party a little more time. (See why Greeks living in urban areas are going back to their ancestral villages.)

Pollsters and analysts predict that if the vote fails on Wednesday, the government will collapse quickly. But even if the new austerity bill passes, snap elections look increasingly likely. And even if there are new elections, it's unclear just who would lead the country, since polls show that Greeks also have little faith in the New Democracy Party and its leader, Antonis Samaras.

According to Christoforos Vernardakis, the president of leading polling agency VPRC and a political-science professor at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, the economic crisis is bringing to light a long-simmering political crisis in Greece. Since the mid-1990s, when political scandals became commonplace, "more and more people have suspected their politicians are involved in a network of unlawful and corrupt practices," Vernardakis says. "Now people are demanding from their representatives ethics, more efficiency in dealing with problems and a vision for the future. I doubt that these politicians of today can fulfill these demands."

But the prospect of bankruptcy, laden with political chaos, unnerves many Greeks, including Kostas Ifantis, a political-science professor at the University of Athens. He and others fear that the political polarization in Greece today could foment social unrest that in turn could upend the country and even the euro zone. "I hope cooler heads prevail and people sit down and work out what's best for all of us," Ifantis says. "This is not the time for posturing. When you stare at the abyss, you find your consciousness. That's my only hope."

But Giorgos Rallis says he lost hope a long time ago. His wages have been cut; his tax bill has gone up. He worries that he won't be able to pay his rent and support his wife and two young sons if he has to pay for more austerity measures. And he also worries that he will lose his job if the power company PPC is partially privatized.

"I am personalizing this, but why shouldn't I?" he says. "I feel austerity every single day. I see people losing their jobs and homes, eating at soup kitchens, losing their pride. Let the country go broke. I've already gone broke."

- With reporting by Leo Cendrowicz / Brussels and Nikolas Leontopoulos / Athens

See "Uprisings in Greece: Europe's Own Arab Spring?"

See how the drama in Greece could threaten the euro.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

Monday, June 27, 2011

Peru's Airport Siege: A Bad Omen for the New President (Time.com)

If the past few days are any indication of things to come, Peru's President-elect Ollanta Humala is in for a rough ride when he takes office on July 28. On Saturday, indigenous protesters in the country's southeast radically upped the stakes in their nearly seven-week campaign against the government's mining and oil/gas policies by taking over an airport in Juliaca, the business hub of the Puno department. Five protesters were killed by the police the previous day in an earlier attempt to take the airport. The losses from the series of strikes and shut-downs is estimated at close to $100 million and, apart from the violence, are sending shudders through an economy already nervous about Humala's left-leaning proclivities. Indeed, the controversy has become more than a quarrel about a single project but has come to symbolize a larger debate about development in Peru.

"The government allowed this problem to grow from opposition to a mining project to opposition to mining and hydrocarbons in general," says Rolando Luque, of the Peruvian government's human rights ombudsman's office. (See why Peru is fearful of its new president.)

Luque says such conflicts will likely increase when Humala takes office, with Peruvians expecting him to make good on campaign promises to better distribute the wealth generated by the country's decade-long economic boom. "We are talking about economic growth between 6% and 10% annually for the past few years, which has created expectation in the population," says Luque. "These expectations are likely to increase, forcing the state to be more representative and effective when it comes to how resources are used."

The protests in Puno began in early May in a few towns bordering Lake Titicaca, the world's highest navigable lake, which Peru's shares with neighboring Bolivia. The initial demand was for the cancellation of a mining concession granted in 2007 to Canada's Bear Creek Mining. Protesters blocked the bordering crossing with Bolivia and other highways. The government of incumbent President Alan GarcIa began responding only after the first flare-up of violence in late May, when protesters set fire to several government buildings and threatened to disrupt the June 5 presidential elections that Humala eventually won. (Humala took Puno department with almost 78% of the vote, his largest margin of victory among Peru's 26 administrative departments.) (See pictures of Peru's sacred glacier.)

The GarcIa government offered to partially meet the demands of the indigenous protesters and environmental activists, announcing that it would suspend mining concessions for 12 months. Protests leaders, however, rejected the offer and re-erected roadblocks on June 7, insisting on the elimination of Bear Creek's permit. The strike then spread from the four provinces around Lake Titicaca to the whole of Puno department, affecting other industries as well. "We have been clear from the start that we want this concession, which was illegally awarded, to be withdrawn," Walter Aduviri, head of the environmental front that led the initial strike, told TIME in a telephone interview prior to the violent incident at the airport.

The government finally decided to rescind the Bear Creek concession on June 24, but the move came just as 4,000 protesters were already marching on the Juliaca airport. Police officers fired on the protesters when they tried to take over the runway. Thousands returned to the airport the following day, taking over the terminal and occupying the runway. Protest leaders have not indicated whether they plan on lifting the strike, but demonstrators had left the Juliaca airport by Sunday morning and there were no reports of protests in other areas of Puno. President GarcIa on Saturday said there were "dark political interests" behind the protests that want to pressure Humala, who is just now beginning to form his Cabinet and the roadmap he will follow in his five-year term.

Humala, for his part, has refused demands from members of GarcIa's APRA party that he get involved in the conflict. "I call on the central government and leaders in Puno to put aside violent actions and look for a peaceful solution," Humala said on Saturday even as he refused to get into the direct negotiations with any party in the Puno conflict. Most analysts agree that any solution reached between the GarcIa government and the protesters will likely be temporary; and that Humala will inherit the mess upon his inauguration, facing intense pressure not only from the protesters but from corporations, both local and global, with huge investments in Peru. (See the Nobel prize winner that didn't become Peru's president.)

The government and mining and oil/gas companies estimate that there will be more than $50 billion in investment in new projects in the coming 10 years. Bear Creek is not the only company to be adversely affected by protests. In April, the government revoked the concession for a $950-million copper project being developed by Southern Copper Corporation. That move came after four people were killed in clashes with police officers. Last week, the GarcIa government also cancelled a $4-billion hydroelectric plant that would have been built in Puno's Carabaya province.

Meanwhile, according to Luque's office, nearly 100 protesters have been killed past three years in clashes with police officers, including 24 police officers and 10 indigenous protesters killed during a clash on June 5, 2009. The ombudsman's office catalogued 227 local protest movements in May, with Puno in second place nationally with 21 such conflicts. Hernando de Soto, Peru's best known economist, told TIME in an interview several weeks earlier that his Democracy and Liberty Institute estimates around 1,000 social conflicts simmering in the country.

See the 25 best blogs of 2011.

See the world's most influential people in the 2011 TIME 100.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News

After Iraq and Afghanistan, Is Negotiation Inevitable in Libya? (Time.com)

As NATO's war in Libya entered its 100th day on Monday, an end to the conflict may be in sight - but not necessarily a decisive one. Military and diplomatic signs point increasingly towards some measure of compromise by both sides in shaping an outcome that neither the regime nor the rebels would have countenanced when their struggle began. Rebel forces who have been consolidating their hold on villages in mountains to the West of Tripoli launched a furious assault Sunday on the approaches to the capital, but were repelled by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. The regime appears unable for the foreseeable future to restore control over those - slowly growing - parts of the country where rebel forces have broken Gaddafi's iron grip, yet the rebels and their NATO backers so far appear unable to deal the regime's forces a knockout blow. And while the rebel forces may be growing in confidence, the commitment of the Western allies that have enabled rebel advances is clearly finite.

The intensification of fighting so close to the capital suggests that both sides may be aware that the clock is ticking down towards what may be an inevitable negotiated solution, and are doing their best to shape it to their advantage. Recent comments by British military commanders and Defense Secretary Robert Gates underscore the sense that the European NATO members responsible for the air war will be hard-pressed to continue the campaign much beyond the current summer, and diplomatic support for the military intervention is ebbing fast: Italy last week called for a suspension of hostilities, although that suggestion was quickly squelched by NATO partners; the African Union, China, Russia and the Arab League have begun to retract their endorsement of a military campaign they authorized to protect Libyan civilians, but which has morphed unmistakably into a regime-change operation. And President Obama is under fire from both sides of the aisle over U.S. involvement in the campaign. (See exclusive photos of Libya's rebels.)

Such are the limits on rebel military strength that NATO's decision-making may be decisive - it seems unlikely right now that the rebels could press the fight without outside intervention. And the Western powers that have intervened in Libya may have plenty of reasons to press for a compromise.

The Europeans are increasingly focused on the diplomatic arena, where an African Union delegation headed by South Africa's President Jacob Zuma is pressing the regime to negotiate a solution that involves sidelining Gaddafi himself, even if the rump of his regime is included in a new political process. The South Africans reported progress at the weekend, at least in as much as they claimed Gaddafi had agreed to stay out of peace talks involving his regime. The AU appears to be pushing for a cease-fire that would establish a transitional government - presumably composed of elements of the current regime (although not Gaddafi himself) and of the rebel leadership in Benghazi - and a mechanism for a democratic transformation.

Last week, Gaddafi was rumored to be considering leaving Tripoli in what some said was some sort of agreement in which he would accept some form of internal exile while a new political process was worked out. But both the regime and the rebel leadership dismissed such talk. (See "Death, Prison or Exile: Gaddafi Is Out of Options.")

Even if there are weeks of intense fighting ahead, NATO's calendar and the shifting diplomatic terrain, as well as the regime's resilience after more than three months of pummeling by the Western alliance, suggest that the endgame is afoot.

And while NATO clearly needs a rapid solution, it's not only the haste prompted by the limits of Western military commitment to Libya that points towards a compromise outcome. The Western experience of regime-change in both Iraq and Afghanistan suggests that any solution that entirely excludes the old regime is a recipe for protracted instability, and possibly even failure.

The exclusion of the Ba'athists and the Sunni base of the old regime from the post-Saddam political order - and the summary dissolution of the old Iraqi army - made inevitable an insurgency that has tied down U.S. forces in Iraq for eight years. Those decisions left tens of thousands of men who had been vested in the old order, still well armed and organized, with plenty of incentive to destabilize the new one, in which they had no stake. (See pictures from the Battle for Libya.)

In Afghanistan, the Taliban were scattered by the U.S. invasion, but not destroyed. As reviled as they were by many in the society, they retained a base in the Pashtun south. And they were excluded from the creation of a new political order, heavily tilted in favor of the ethnic Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras of the Northern Alliance. The new arrangement, which installed India's Afghan allies at the expense of Pakistan's erstwhile proxy, also gave Islamabad an incentive to ensure its failure. And almost ten years later, some 100,000 U.S. troops remain in Afghanistan facing an insurgency that has grown stronger over the past four years.

The lesson for Libya is obvious: Even if Gaddafi were killed in a Western air strike, or if he fled to the desert or abroad, the many thousands of Libyans who have fought for his regime would have to be incorporated in shaping a new political order in Libya. Indeed, bringing the war to an end by a negotiated settlement, as NATO clearly intends, all but guarantees that the outcome will not be a simple transfer of power from Gaddafi to the rebel leadership in Benghazi. The question of how much power the regime, even without the Colonel, maintains in the transition is one that will be settled not only in talks, but more importantly on the battlefield. Which is why the fighting is likely to be intense in the days and weeks ahead, in what may well be the Libya war's final crescendo.

See TIME's exclusive photos on the ground in Tripoli.

Watch "Libyan Rebels Have Passion, Lack Order."

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:


Yahoo! News