Not, mind you, that I think it would be a good idea -- but if Russia is correct in recognizing breakaway areas of Georgia as independent, shouldn't the rest of the world recognize the independence of those who don't want to be under Moscow's thumb?

Russia on Tuesday recognized the independence of two enclaves that have long sought to secede from neighboring Georgia. The action deepened strains with the West over the conflict in the economically vital crossroads of the Caucasus and roiled a broader debate over how to respond to separatist movements around the world.

* * *

The Russian president, Dmitri A. Medvedev, declared in a nationally televised address that South Ossetia and the other pro-Russian enclave, Abkhazia, would never again have to endure what he described as oppressive Georgian rule.

“This is not an easy choice, but it is the only way to save the lives of people,” Mr. Medvedev said.

Hey -- Russian actions in Chechnya have been pretty heavy-handed and oppressive. Why shouldn't the rest of the world start adopting the logic of Medvedev and Putin and recognize the independence of a part of Russia that has been fighting for independence for years -- and any other part of the country that wants to break away as well?

And after all, Russia seems to be welcoming a new Cold War.

Posted by: Greg at 10:19 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

As much as I despise the man, I'm worried about the future of Pakistan without him.

Bowing to pressure from Pakistan's newly-elected civilian government, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, once a top U.S. ally, said Monday that he will resign from office immediately, effectively ending nearly nine years of military rule in the country under his leadership.

Musharraf announced his decision to step down in a nationally televised public address 10 days after leaders of Pakistan's two ruling coalition parties called for his impeachment. Demand for his resignation became increasingly vocal last week after Pakistan's four provincial assemblies voted overwhelmingly for his ouster.

Who will succeed Musharraf? Will that successor be an ally in the war on terror, or an ally of the terrorists? And what of Pakistan's nukes? Until I see some clear answers to those questions, I'm not ready to celebrate.

Posted by: Greg at 11:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 146 words, total size 1 kb.

I've made it clear that I am not a fan of Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf. That said, I'm not sure that his impending resignation is good news.

While it appeared almost certain that Mr. Musharraf would leave before facing impeachment, there was great uncertainty over what would follow. Many Pakistanis believe the country could suffer even greater instability after Mr. Musharraf goes.

The coalition partnership between Mr. Zardari and Mr. Sharif has been deeply troubled from the start, and the current accord on ousting Mr. Musharraf is likely to fragment as soon as he is gone, politicians say.

There is little agreement, for example, between the two men on the choice of the next president.

Mr. Zardari, head of the Pakistan Peoples Party, would like the post, according to his party supporters and senior members of the Pakistan Muslim League-N.

Mr. Sharif, his rival and coalition partner, is opposed to Mr. ZardariÂ’s ascendancy to the presidency, but would go along with it if the presidency were stripped of many of its current powers, Pakistan Muslim League-N officials said.

So, the result of the impending change will be a fragmenting of the parliamentary coalition that exists in Pakistan, and the probable weakening of the Pakistani executive branch. Will the remaining government be able to deal effectively with the Islamist question along the Afghan border -- or perhaps I should ask if it will be able to deal with that problem any more effectively than Musharraf has, given the failures of the current regime which has at least had the support of the military and has at least somewhat responded to the terrorist threat as an ally. At least one of the two major opposition parties is openly sympathetic to the Islamist cause, which could make for a less effective response from the new government of Pakistan.

Posted by: Greg at 02:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 320 words, total size 2 kb.

Just when it seemed like the mob bosses who run Fatah and Hamas were all set for a cozy sitdown to resolve their turf wars and get on with the important business of killing Jews, their inner nature got in the way and they turned on each other.

It started with a breakdown of talks mediated by the Egyptians between Hamas and Fatah,with the principles and their various spokesmouths calling each nasty and perfectly accurate names. Then it escalated with arrests and crackdowns in both Gaza and the Palestinian occupied areas of Judea and Samaria (AKA The West Bank)with Fatah and Hamas rounding up members of the opposition in their respective gang territories and subjecting them to a little Palestinian-style 'justice'...nothing too terminal Mohammed, just a quiet little chat between you and me and my pals in a quiet little cell with baseball bats, electrodes and a few lit cigarettes to keep the party fun and interesting.

The real fireworks started at the end of last week when a bombing took out five Hamas members in the Gaza Strip.

It's fascinating observe how Hamas reacted to a terrorist bombing as opposed to the way Israel does...Chicago rules all the way. The Green Hat boys went berserk and started arresting and questioning everyone associated with Fatah they could lay their greasy hands on and soon fingered the Fatah allied Hilles clan. They then attacked the clan's stronghold in Al-Shuja'iyah district in eastern Gaza, killing nine people and wounding more than one hundred,including the clan's leader, Ahmed Hilles.

Over 180 members of the Hilles clan and their assorted allies, including the wounded clan leader fled to - get this - Israel, of all places. And believe it or not, once the Israelis disarmed them and searched everybody and made sure no one was carrying a bomb under their clothing, the hated Jews actually allowed them in and hospitalized the wounded Fatah fighters!

In a bizarre twist, when the Israelis attempted to repatriate the non-hospitalized Fatah clansmen, Mahmoud Abbas refused to accept them into the Palestinian occupied territory in the West Bank and told the Israelis to return them to the tender mercies of Hamas in Gaza...where they were all promptly arrested.Abbas' rationale for this was that he didn't want to eliminate a powerful group of Fatah loyalists from Gaza,but there was apparently something else involved, since that makes no sense whatever, even to a Palestinian. I have a feeling that the real reason Abbas didn't want them in the West Bank is because he was nervous about importing yet another group of fighters into the area whom weren't under his complete control.

It's important to remember that the Palestinians are not a nation as we think of it, but a feudal collection of frequently warring clans.

Meanwhile,Fatah continued its own clean up of the rival mob's gangsters. In Nablus, Fatah gunmen seized the senior Hamas operative on the West Bank Muhammad Ghazal and his family and threatened to execute them all unless Hamas ends the crackdown on their followers in Gaza and releases the Fatah goons Hamas has in its jails.

And in Gaza, Hamas arrested Fatah operatives Ibrahim Abu an-Naja and Zakaria al-Agha, who were put in charge of Fatah's people in Gaza by Abbas with the same rationale..to put pressure on Abbas to release Hamas prisoners he's holding on the West Bank.

This will probably end up with another mob sitdown and a return to the status quo,believe it or not. Abbas isn't strong enough to oust Hamas from the West Bank,and Hamas needs Fatah to continue forwarding to Gaza The Green Hat Mob's share of the aid money doled out by gullible infidels like the US State Department.

-Robert@Joshuapundit-

Crossposted at JoshuaPundit

Posted by: RobertM at 05:52 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 633 words, total size 6 kb.