Search This Blog

Sunday, March 10, 2013

Nelson Mandela hospitalized in South Africa

Nelson Mandela new photo released

Former South African President Nelson Mandela was admitted to a hospital for tests Saturday, a government official told CBS News.



Mac Maharaj, a spokesman for the South African government, told CBS News that Mandela's admission is a scheduled visit for tests commensurate with someone of his age. Mandela is 94.



"Doctors are conducting tests and have thus far indicated that there is no reason for any alarm," read a statement issued by the country's presidency.



Nelson Mandela new photo released
Mandela is in a hospital in the capital city of Pretoria, but Maharaj would not specify which one.

He was also not sure how long Mandela would stay in the hospital.

Mandela was released from a hospital Dec. 26 after receiving nearly three weeks of treatment for a lung infection and gallstones.



The first picture of Mandela after his discharge wasn't released until early February. At the time, his granddaughters said he was in good health and good spirits.



At his birthday last July, CBS News correspondent Mark Phillips was granted rare access to the party at Mandela's home.
Nelson Mandela new photo released

The former president appeared to be physically healthy but detached from things going on around him, Phillips reported.

IRAN-PAKISTAN-CHINA: New Powers Emerge in Strait of Hormuz

Bottom Line: Last week Pakistan announced that construction on the Pakistani portion of the Iran-Pakistan pipeline will begin on 11 March. This week Iran announced it would build a refinery in Gwadar, in Pakistan's Baloch province. This will spur China's energy plans in Pakistan and sets up Gwadar to become a major oil city near the Strait of Hormuz and out of Washington's hands.


Analysis: The Iranian-funded refinery—announced by Iran but not yet signed into force by the two parties—will have a 400,000 barrel per day capacity and comes on the heels of an announcement that construction on a massive Iran-Pakistan pipeline would begin on 11 March, despite sanctions threats from the US and shadow attempts by the US and Saudi Arabia to sabotage these plans. This will give greater impetus to Chinese oil and gas plans in Pakistan, and reshape Pakistan’s foreign policy clearly towards China and Iran and out of Washington’s hands. What would happen next would be this: China would revive its own oil refinery plans at Gwadar and eventually build its own pipeline from Gwadar to western China.

China is on a solid footing in Gwadar, though its projects have been stop and start over the past several years. In February, China took over operational control of the port and agreed to become its largest investor. For China, this is a significant port because of its proximity to the Strait of Hormuz. For the US, this development is significantly negative as it will not only give Iran more influence in the Strait of Hormuz, but it creates an Iran-Pakistan-China triangle of influence over this key strategic oil and gas transit point. China will feel less insecure about the volatility in Balochistan with Iran pursuing a refinery there as well. Essentially, this means a merger of the Hormuz Strait, Iran, and a Chinese-Pakistani energy corridor. US threats of sanctions will not sabotage the projects. The timing of these announcements is also important, as Pakistan has general elections coming up and Iran is keen to get these deals finalized before any potential government upset in which the US is expected to meddle.


Recommendation: Watch for a strategic shift to Gwadar as a major energy hub for Asia and as an emergent petrochemical center in the next 3-5 years. In addition to the Iranian-led refinery, we expect a Chinese oil refinery and petrochemical facilities and storage complexes to go up here, turning Gwadar into an “oil city”.

Saturday, March 9, 2013

Pirates In Global Waters: In Somalia, Has The Business Model Fallen Flat For Criminals On The Oceans? Is High Sea Piracy Unprofitable?




It’s a tight squeeze for commercial vessels trying to move their goods between Europe and Asian markets -- but not as tight as it used to be.

Beginning in the Mediterranean Sea, ships have to pass through the Suez Canal and into the Red Sea. Then they navigate the narrow Bab-el-Mandeb -- Arabic for the “Strait of Grief” -- between the sandy coastlines of Yemen and Djibouti. Next comes the Gulf of Aden, which borders northern Somalia and opens up to the Arabian Sea.
Photo: Reuters/Sgt. Mats Nystrom/Combat Camera Swedish Armed Forces/Scanpix
A soldier aboard the Swedish corvette HMS Malmo aims his machine gun at a boat carrying suspected pirates in the Gulf of Aden on May 26, 2009.
Tens of thousands of ships pass through the Gulf of Aden annually, as do tens of billions of dollars in cargo, and about 4 percent of the world’s oil supply.

That's a rich bounty for criminals, and so in recent years, piracy -- an old scourge -- has exploded onto the scene with new intensity.

Since 2008, pirates based in the East African country of Somalia have launched hundreds of attacks against passing ships and held thousands of hostages. It’s ransom they’re after: On a good day, just one seizure can yield millions of dollars in profit.

But times aren’t what they used to be for these maritime criminals. The business of piracy has taken a nosedive in Somalia, and now lucrative old networks are falling apart at the seams.

Data compiled by the International Maritime Bureau, or IMB, show that piracy hit a five-year low in 2012. Only 28 ships were successfully hijacked. A total of 297 were attacked, down from 439 the year before and 445 the year before that. Those figures are global: In the areas surrounding Somalia, only 75 ships reported attacks last year, with 14 of them hijacked.

Tipping The Scales

As with all shady enterprises, the costs and revenue associated with piracy are difficult to pin down. One 2012 report by researchers at the London School of Economics and Political Science and the Institut d’Analisi Economica in Barcelona, Spain, estimated that during piracy’s golden years, its total gross revenue from ransom amounted to $200 million a year. Accounting for presumed operating costs leaves a net profit of around $120 million.


Even shared among thousands of pirates, criminal financiers, and go-betweens, that’s a big chunk of change for citizens of a country among the world's poorest, with no functioning government and nearly one-half the people living below the poverty line, and where society is in such turmoil that even the World Bank has no current estimate for its gross domestic product per capita.

But the gains of Somali pirates are a pittance compared with the costs they force on the global economy. According to an Oceans Beyond Piracy report, the combined costs of increased security, insurance, rescue efforts, lost business, and ransoms amounted to between $6.6 billion and $6.9 billion in 2011. At least 80 percent of those costs are incurred by the shipping industry alone.

Human costs are also high. Another Oceans Beyond Piracy report tallied up the deaths and found that 35 hostages lost their lives as a result of pirate captivity in 2011. These tragedies result from attacks, malnutrition, or simply getting caught in the crossfire. In total, 1,206 people were held hostage by pirates that year, and 57 percent of them reported mistreatment, including abuse and employment as human shields. Also during that year, 111 Somali pirates died in clashes.

Despite all this, the hijackers don’t see themselves as bad guys, or so they say. Many argue their original goal was to stop foreign vessels from invading their waters and fishing in their territories.




Illegal fishing is indeed a problem for many African countries. Foreign trawlers regularly invade the nautical territories of poverty-stricken nations that lack defense resources. The crews use irresponsible and wasteful fishing methods, harming marine life and ultimately depleting supplies for communities that rely on fish for sustenance and commerce.

But Somalia’s case is a difficult one to judge. Although the country has the longest coastline in Africa, its main export is livestock, not fish. In terms of data, Somalia is one of the most obscure places on earth, making it difficult to tell just how much of the country is dependent on fish for food or income.

Furthermore, Somalia has never officially laid claim to its own Exclusive Economic Zone, or EEZ.

“Legally, every nation has jurisdiction up to 12 nautical miles from the coast,” explained Cyrus Mody, assistant director of the IMB. Everything beyond that, up to 200 nautical miles from land, has to be declared. Somalia has not done that. If the country has not declared an EEZ, then, arguably, those waters are international.”

Mody added that, given the human-rights abuses committed by pirates, their claims of morality are hard to swallow. “You could say they’re trying to legitimize what they’re doing. But they are treating crews in captivity in an inhumane manner,” he said.

Keeping It Local

Most of Somalia’s piracy is based in the northern, semiautonomous region of Puntland, with some spillover farther south into Galmadug and central Somalia.

The criminals had their heyday between 2008 and 2011. Kingpins enjoyed lavish lifestyles, complete with fancy cars, showy villas, and, most important, lots of khat -- a bitter leaf that, when chewed, acts as a stimulant and plays a role similar to that of espresso in Western countries. But even the high rollers have lately seen their incomes dwindle and their creditors come calling.

Canadian journalist and author Jay Bahadur spent a total of three months living among Somali pirates in 2009. A connection to the son of Abdirahman Farole -- who was elected Puntland’s president on Jan. 8 of that year -- helped him to stay out of danger, and Bahadur got a rare glimpse of the pirate lifestyle during its peak.

As it turned out, 2009 was the beginning of the end for pirates in Puntland. Farole put anti-piracy initiatives high on his political agenda, and his administration proved more successful than its predecessors.

“One of the things the new government was able to do was go into Eyl [a coastal town and piracy hub] and secure it, and this was in part because the president was from the same clan as many of the people there. The previous administration’s clan hadn’t been able to do it,” Bahadur said.

Although they were helped by international naval patrols at sea, these local efforts played a significant role in hampering pirates’ activities on land.

Puntland was able to pursue its anti-piracy campaign with a high degree of autonomy. It essentially functions as a nation-state, since a kaleidoscope of militant gangs farther south have made Somalia’s capital city of Mogadishu too weak to assert its power.

That may be precisely why piracy was able to thrive in Puntland.

“For pirates, Puntland had a perfect blend of security and insecurity,” Bahadur said. There werent other armed gangs to interfere with pirates activities, but at the same time security was just lax enough for them to operate.” 

The situation has grown more complicated over the past year, with Somalia taking baby steps to cobble together a new government after two decades of failed statehood. A new administration was put in place in September. It was not popularly elected; that would be a logistical nightmare at this point.

Already, the young government is plagued by corruption. But President Hassan Sheikh Mohamoud has been welcomed into the international community. Aid flows into the poverty-stricken country are increasing, and, just this week, the United Nations Security Council voted to partially lift an arms embargo against Somalia for a trial period of one year. Restrictions on heavy weaponry are still in place.

Mogadishu’s law-enforcement capabilities -- especially on the high seas -- remain light. But Mohamoud has taken a symbolic step to combat the piracy problem. In late February, he released a statement suggesting amnesty for younger pirates to draw new recruits away from a life of crime.

“It’s kind of symbolic,” Bahadur said. But pirates are willing to do it because they have nothing else to gain. When you’re a pirate making calculations, the fact that piracy is less profitable has to factor in.”

Walking The Plank

Piracy was once an attractive option for young Somalis looking for a quick shilling, but it has increasingly lost its luster.

Commercial ships passing through the Bab-el-Mandeb and Gulf of Aden have responded to increased risks by beefing up their own security. It’s a simple solution, though not a cheap one. Armed guards were usually effective deterrents for Somali pirates, who could wait for more vulnerable prey given the high volume of ships passing through these waters.

But as more vessels began armoring up, the pickings grew slim.

“Because the commercial vessels started arming themselves so well, the types of vessels these pirates could get their hands on in late 2011 and 2012 did not belong to owners who were able to afford multimillion-dollar ransoms,” Mody said. The catch was not as rewarding.”

To add insult to injury, commercial vessels are longer going it alone. Keen to protect the valuable exports and imports passing around the Horn of Africa, various navies -- representing European Union nations, NATO countries, and independent states -- swooped in to offer another level of protection.

Personnel on these ships can be more proactive than crews on commercial vessels. In international waters, naval forces from around the world can pursue suspicious skiffs, arrest crew members, and seize equipment.

Feeling more and more tightly squeezed, Somali pirates realized their market was shrinking, so they decided to raise their prices in compensation. Scoring millions of dollars, rather than hundreds of thousands, became the ideal. But that backfired, since demanding higher ransom only drags out the negotiation process. Pirates thereby incurred extra costs, since they had to keep seized vessels running and feed their hostages. Profit margins continued to shrink.

“It has become more difficult for pirates to successfully hijack ships, and the financiers who put money into these ventures are coming back with a loss,” Mody said. That has contributed to a rethink on the part of the pirates as to whether this business model, which used to be extremely lucrative in the initial years, is not that lucrative anymore.”

Although Somali piracy is on the decline, it’s not over yet. Incidents are still occurring in the Horn of Africa and around the world: So far this year, 44 attacks are on record with the IMB. There are seven vessels and 113 hostages currently in captivity.

“We’re not there yet,” Mody said. We are still advising extreme caution while going through these areas because there are still sporadic incidents occurring.”

In Somalia, a long-term solution will depend on peace and progress. The establishment of a new government marks just one more in a long line of attempts to establish order in Mogadishu, and it could take years before the country even has the resources to arrange something as basic as a general election.

But some areas within Somalia, such as Puntland, offer signs of hope. Farole, whose familiarity with clan-based politicking has been a major boon to his administration, has proven his efficacy in tackling the piracy problem. Under his administration, the Puntland Maritime Police Force, or PMPF, was deployed in early 2012. While international navies did their part at sea, PMPF dismantled piracy strongholds on land.

The PMPF, mainly funded by the United Arab Emirates, was frowned upon by the U.N. due to concerns about a lack of oversight, a risk of destabilization, and violations of Somalia's arms embargo. Moving forward, it seems that a Mogadishu-based approach will do more to lend legitimacy to domestic anti-piracy efforts.

Meanwhile, disillusionment may already be changing attitudes on the grassroots level.

"“There have been independent efforts in communities along the Gulf of Aden," Bahadur said. "The local people chased the pirates out. I think these communities got a bit irritated about pirates driving up prices and corrupting local economies, corrupting women and youth, and bringing in drugs and alcohol."

The scourge won't end soon, but it's headed in the right direction for now.

These are times of great potential and enormous challenge for Somalia, which sits at the crossroads of commerce but comes from 20 years of chaos and failed statehood. Mogadishu is making its way, with help from the international community, toward a time when growth can begin and a long-divided country can come together. And that, something all Somalis can take part in, would be the real buried treasure.

Kenyatta wins presidency by slim margin in Kenyan election

Uhuru Kenyatta
NAIROBI -Reuters - Uhuru Kenyatta, the son of Kenya's founding president, won the presidential election by the slimmest of margins with 50.03 percent, provisional results showed, just enough to avoid a run-off after a race that has divided the nation along tribal lines.

Kenyatta faces trial for crimes against humanity. If he is declared president-elect by the election commission, which has still to announce the official result, Kenya will become the second African country after Sudan to have a sitting president indicted by the International Criminal Court.

In the early hours of Saturday joyous supporters of Kenyatta thronged the streets in his tribal strongholds, lighting fluorescent flares and waving tree branches and chanting "Uhuru, Uhuru," television pictures showed.


Kenyatta's main rival, Prime Minister Raila Odinga, trailed with 43.28 percent of the vote. A close adviser to Odinga said he would not concede the election and would launch a legal challenge if Kenyatta was officially declared the victor.

"He is not conceding the election. If Uhuru Kenyatta is announced president-elect then he will move to the courts immediately," Salim Lone told Reuters, speaking on behalf of the prime minister.

Odinga's camp had said during tallying that the ballot count was deeply flawed and had called for it to be halted.

To secure an outright win a candidate needed more than 50 percent of the votes. Kenyatta, the deputy prime minister, achieved that but with a margin of just 4,100 of the more than 12.3 million votes cast.

The first-round win, which must be officially confirmed by the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), means Kenyans who waited five days for the vote result will not now face a second round that would have prolonged uncertainty.

The winner also needs to get at least 25 percent of the votes in 24 counties out of 47. This is expected to be confirmed by the electoral commission. The IEBC is due to announce the official result on Saturday at 11 a.m. (8 a.m. British time).

Odinga also lost in a disputed vote in 2007 that led to weeks of tribal killings. His camp has said any challenge will follow the rule of law and Kenyans generally have greater trust in the judiciary now than they did five years ago after reforms.

WESTERN TIES

John Githongo, a former senior government official-turned-whistleblower, urged the rival coalitions, Odinga's CORD and Kenyatta's Jubilee, to ensure calm. "Jubilee and CORD, what you and your supporters say now determines continued peace and stability in Kenya. We are watching you!" he said on Twitter.

International observers broadly said the vote and count had been transparent so far and the electoral commission, which replaced an old, discredited body, promised a credible vote.

Provisional figures displayed by the electoral commission showed Kenyatta won 6,173,433 votes out of a total of 12,338,667 ballots cast. Odinga secured 5,340,546 votes.

The result will pose a dilemma for Kenya's big Western donors, with Kenyatta due to go on trial in The Hague accused of orchestrating the tribal violence five years ago.

The United States and other Western states warned before the vote that diplomatic ties would be complicated with a win by Kenyatta, whose running mate William Ruto has also been indicted by the International Criminal Court.

How Western capitals would deal with Kenya under Kenyatta and the extent to which they would be ready to deal with his government will depend heavily on whether Kenyatta and Ruto cooperate with the tribunal.

"It won't be a headache as long as he cooperates with the ICC," said one Western diplomat. "We respect the decision of the majority of the Kenyan voters."

Both Kenyatta and Ruto deny the charges and have said they will cooperate to clear their names, though Kenyatta had to fend of jibes during the campaign by Odinga that he would have to run government by Skype from The Hague.

Kenyans hope this vote, which has until now passed off with only pockets of unrest on voting day, would restore their nation's reputation as one of Africa's most stable democracies after mayhem last time.

"FORGET THE PRESIDENCY"

The city of Kisumu, the biggest in Odinga's tribal heartland and a flashpoint in the violence five years ago, was calm early on Saturday and there appeared little appetite for unrest, even if some believed the poll was flawed.

"I urge our candidate to forget the presidency and let the will of God prevail," said cloth vendor Diana Ndonga.

As businesses in Kisumu began opening, Erick Odhiambo, another Odinga supporter said, "The vote was rigged and I'm not happy. Raila (Odinga) should battle it out in court."

The test will be whether any challenges to the outcome are worked out in the courts, and do not spill into the streets.

Odinga's camp had said even before the result that they were considering legal action, but said they would pursue it through the courts and the newly reformed judiciary.

That is a change from 2007, when Odinga said he could not trust the judiciary at the time to treat the case fairly.

Kenyatta's camp had also complained about delays in counting and other aspects of the process. But many Kenyans said this race was more transparent than previous votes.

Turnout reached 86 percent of the 14.3 million eligible voters, in a nation where tribal loyalties largely trump ideology at the ballot box.

(Writing by Richard Lough and Edmund Blair; Editing by Todd Eastham and Lisa Shumaker)

In U.S. court, Bin Laden kin pleads not guilty to 9/11 charges

The case against Sulaiman abu Ghaith, Osama bin Laden's son-in-law, reignites political debate about whether terrorism suspects should be tried in civilian court in the United States.

Osama bin Laden's son-in-law Sulaiman abu Ghaith is depicted listening as his court-appointed attorney, Philip Weinstein, speaks in federal court in Manhattan on Friday. Abu Ghaith, an Al Qaeda spokesman, pleaded not guilty to conspiracy to kill Americans in the Sept. 11 attacks. (Associated Press, Elizabeth Williams / March 8, 2013)




By Richard A. Serrano and Tina Susman, Los Angeles Times

March 8, 2013, 9:52 p.m.

NEW YORK — In jailhouse blues, hands cuffed behind his back, the son-in-law of Osama bin Laden pleaded not guilty in Manhattan on Friday to a federal charge of conspiring to murder Americans — reigniting the debate over where alleged terrorists should be prosecuted.

Sulaiman abu Ghaith, a 47-year-old senior Al Qaeda leader who for the last decade had been hiding in Iran, now may become the first defendant to be tried in a U.S. civilian court on charges related to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, just blocks from where the World Trade Center towers were destroyed.

Abu Ghaith is also part of a broader political drama that once again pits the Obama administration, which eventually wants to close the prison for terrorism suspects at the U.S. naval base on Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, against Republicans demanding its continued use.

Three years ago, the administration attempted to have five alleged Sept. 11 plotters tried in New York as well, only to be blocked by congressional legislation prohibiting any Guantanamo prisoners from being transferred to civilian courts.

Abu Ghaith was seized in Turkey recently and flown to the U.S.

"We're putting the administration on notice," warned Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). "We think that sneaking this guy into the country, clearly going around the intent of Congress when it comes to enemy combatants, will be challenged."

But sources in the Department of Justice said they were confident the case against Abu Ghaith would pass muster in federal court. They said they reviewed classified information related to the case to ensure it could be properly handled.

They also alerted New York officials that the case was pending, hoping to avert the backlash that erupted in 2010 when Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. tried to get alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four others moved from Guantanamo to the same courthouse in New York.

"There was a lot of due diligence done here," said one source close to the case.

Much of it appeared to have paid off.

"It's the federal government's choice," said New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, speaking to New Yorkers in his weekly radio interview.

He rejected any large security concerns, as were voiced the last time, saying, "If you are in federal court here in New York, you go from the holding pen to the courtroom underground."

Jim Riches, a former deputy New York fire chief whose police officer son died in the 2001 attacks, said it was equally important that Sept. 11 survivors and relatives of the dead finally get a local trial.

"The families haven't had any justice for years," he said. "We were promised justice. It's been anything but. It's just been a political fight."

Other Sept. 11 families agreed with Republicans in Washington that Abu Ghaith should not be tried in New York.

Debra Burlingame, whose brother Charles was the pilot of the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, said Holder had provided a platform for Abu Ghaith to espouse his views.

"He's going to make maximum use of that stage a few blocks from ground zero," she said. Of Holder, she said, he "has really made a hash of this."

Tim Sumner, whose brother-in-law, firefighter Joseph Leavey, was killed at the World Trade Center, warned that this "will come back to bite America."

In court, Abu Ghaith appeared thinner and older than he did in the videos and photographs that emerged through the years, which showed him espousing Al Qaeda propaganda through a microphone, often with a rifle nearby, and sitting beside Bin Laden. The turban he once wore was gone, revealing a balding head. The thick, black beard had gone gray. The flowing tunics were replaced by a prison jumpsuit.

He sat quietly beside his court-appointed attorney, Philip Weinstein, as U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan repeated some of Abu Ghaith's words from the videos back to him.

He is accused of swearing allegiance to Bin Laden and asking others to do so, and, on the morning after Sept. 11, appearing in a video with Bin Laden calling on the "Nation of Islam" to battle "the Jews, the Christians and the Americans."

During the arraignment, Assistant U.S. Atty. John P. Cronan announced the defendant had given a 22-page "extensive post-arrest statement" to authorities. He did not reveal the contents.

Graham and Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) said a full interrogation of Abu Ghaith at Guantanamo would be more valuable than bringing him to justice in a U.S. court. Otherwise, Ayotte said, "we lose valuable intelligence that can be used to prevent future attacks — can be used to understand further who also is involved in Al Qaeda and what they're planning against our country."

Republicans also questioned whether the overarching conspiracy charge against Abu Ghaith was brought to keep the case out of Guantanamo. Stand-alone conspiracy cases are not considered war crimes and are not permitted in military tribunals.

Wells C. Bennett, a Brookings Institution expert in national security law, said the restrictions Congress passed after the Mohammed controversy "in no way prohibited" the administration from bringing Abu Ghaith directly to trial in the U.S. The law "explicitly left open the option of civilian trials for foreign terrorists apprehended abroad," he said.

The Obama administration has not moved any new prisoners to Guantanamo since the president took office in January 2009.

During that time, Abu Ghaith is only the second Al Qaeda militant captured overseas and brought to the U.S. Thousands more purported militants have been killed in drone strikes.

And with the slow pace of cases at Guantanamo, going there was clearly "an extremely unattractive option for the administration," Bennett said.

The charges against Abu Ghaith at this point portray him as a spokesman for Al Qaeda who after the Sept. 11 attacks warned in the videos of a "storm" of planes to follow. He also encouraged Muslims and anti-Americans not to board planes or live in high-rise buildings. As a close relative to Bin Laden, he is said to have "assisted" the Al Qaeda leader, who was killed in a U.S. raid in Pakistan in 2011.

In 2002, after the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, Abu Ghaith smuggled himself into Iran and, according to U.S. intelligence officials, hid there until recently, when he showed up in Turkey. He was held briefly, and then taken into custody by U.S. officials.

richard.serrano@latimes.com

tina.susman@latimes.com

Serrano reported from Washington and Susman from New York.