Friday, March 31, 2006

Condoleezza Rice - war criminal, terrorist or ally

A war criminal in Liverpool and a terrorist in Blackburn? And on both occasions, accompanied by the UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw?

Has the UK government changed its policies to so that it can be a complicit to known unlawful and illegal acts?

Come on now, what is happening? Don't fret. It's just the people's reactions to the visit by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to northern England this week.

The Stop The War coalition in Liverpool says it will demonstrate against the Iraq war everywhere Rice goes. The movement has labelled her as a war criminal for the US-led invasion into Iraq three years ago.

Some of them had gathered outside her Liverpool hotel and chanted slogans on Thursday night.

A spokeswoman for Stop the War, Lindsey German said:
"It is disgusting that a woman who was so central to it (the war) should be
wined and dined and feted in this way, at the taxpayers' expense."
And in Blackburn, Ms Rice was denied entry into a local mosque over her government's involvement in the war.

And mind you, Muslim voters in Blackburn were vital in electing Mr Straw in the last two elections and their blunt objection against Ms Rice is surely a slap in the face for the state secretary and his government.

A Blackburn cleric Cleric Saeed Ahmed said:
"Letting Ms Rice inside a mosque is like allowing Ariel Sharon inside or a terrorist. We don't think it is right that a woman with thousands of people's blood on her hands should be able to visit our mosques and have her picture taken."
Obviously there will be other community leaders who will think it is okay to have Ms Rice visiting the mosque. Like Ibrahim Master, who said:
"We need to show that, far from producing terrorists, mosques create citizens
that respect other people's values."
And Mr Straw himself is said to be furious. His spokesman said:
"To claim a leading figure of one of our great allies is a terrorist is totally
inappropriate. Everything is being done with respect to communities involved and taking people's views into consideration."
However the community's largest lobby group in the UK, the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), is not surprised by the mosque's decision.

MCB spokesman Inayat Bunglawala said:
"This particular US administration has upset many Muslims in the UK and around
the world ... so it is not particularly surprising that the visit to a Blackburn
mosque has had to be canceled."
And what about the lady herself? She is clearly unperturbed by all these and continues with her visit and says she is enjoying the warm welcome.

She said:
"People have the right to protest - that's what democracy is all about. I have no problem with people exercising their democratic rights. I am equally - if not more - impressed with the warm welcome."
How gracious of her. But surely she must also believe that in a democratic state, the views of the majority matters just as much as the views of the minority.

Right now I think it is only the minority that still wants the US troops to remain in Iraq. And I believe the majority of Iraqis themselves believe they can self-govern.

Will she listen and adhere to these democratic rights too?

(p/s: photographs courtesy of agencies.)

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

So you believe in God...

Below is an email which was forwarded to me by someone. This email has been making its rounds for some time now. It is a conversation between a professor and his student about the existance of god. I am not going to pass a judgment on who is correct and who is not. I just think this is an interesting conversation.

So here it goes:

An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, The Almighty.

He asks one of his new students to stand and.....

Prof: So you believe in God?

Student: Absolutely, sir.

Prof : Is God good?

Student: Sure.

Prof: Is God all-powerful?

Student : Yes.

Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him.

Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm?

(Student is silent.)

Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?

Student: Yes.

Prof: Is Satan good?

Student : No.

Prof: Where does Satan come from?

Student: From...God...

Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?

Student: Yes.

Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct?

Student: Yes.

Prof: So who created evil?

(Student does not answer.)

Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they?

Student: Yes, sir.

Prof: So, who created them?

(Student has no answer.)

Prof: Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God?

Student: No, sir.

Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God?

Student: No, sir.

Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?

Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.

Prof: Yet you still believe in Him?

Student: Yes.

Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?

Student: Nothing. I only have my faith.

Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has.

Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat?

Prof: Yes.

Student: And is there such a thing as cold?

Prof: Yes.

Student: No sir. There isn't.

(The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)

Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat.

But we don't have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.

(There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)

Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?

Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?

Student : You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?

Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man?

Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.

Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how?

Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it.

Now tell me, Professor.Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?

Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.

Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?

(The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.)

Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher? (The class is in uproar.)

Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain?

(The class breaks out into laughter.)

Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir.

With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?

(The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face unfathomable.)

Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.

Student: That is it sir... The link between man & god is FAITH . That is all that keeps things moving & alive.

p/s: This conversation was supposedly between the Indian president APJ Abdul Kalam and his professor. However I have no proof of that.

more read: Debating God

Monday, March 27, 2006

If this is not civil war, what is

If this is not a civil war then what is. Since Sunday, a new wave of violence has killed at least 81 Iraqis. Close to 1,400 Iraqis have died since late February when the Sunni-Shiite score-settling began following the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra, north of Baghdad on Feb 22.

In the latest killings, the police made a gruesome discovery of about 30 beheaded bodies dumped by the roadside in north of Baghdad.

And to make things worse, at least another 16 Iraqis were killed in a US-backed raid in a Shiite neighborhood of the capital.

The Americans of course say these 16 are insurgents. The locals, understandably, will have another version. As it is the accounts of the raid varies. Aides to the Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and Iraqi police both said it took place at a mosque, with police claiming 22 bystanders died and al-Sadr's aides saying 18 innocent men were killed.

At the rate this sectarian violence is going, thousands of more Iraqis are surely going to be killed.

Sadly at present there seems to be no action plan in place to find for an amicable solution between the warring Sunnis and Shiites. The invading US troops are looking for “insurgents” in a country where they are no longer welcomed.

And I think they have also lost their moral authority to bring democracy to Iraq after having failed to even provide for basic safety and amenities for the people. After all this, I don’t see the Iraqi population wanting to help the Americans to look for these “insurgents”.

In fact it looks like it is not just a small band of “insurgents” that is involved in the violence. Reports from Iraq are saying that many American-hired civil servants and the police are part of the insurgency. That being the case, if it is true, then this is not going to be an easy task for the Americans.

In a nutshell the Americans have got themselves in corner where wiggling out is going to be more expensive and difficult than what they would have earlier thought.

And the American president says there is no civil war in Iraq. And he blamed the terrorists for the ongoing violence. He should wake up and see the reality now.

Sunday, March 26, 2006

Chirac’s linguistic patriotism

On Friday French president Jacques Chirac made headlines around the world by walking out of the EU’s spring economic council in Brussels along with three of his ministers.

It was not over his objection over some union policies but more owing to his linguistic sensitivity of his fellow countryman not using their own language, but English while addressing all 25 heads of government.

The culprit was Ernest-Antoine Seillière, the French head of the European employers' group Unice, who defended his decision to speak in "the language of business".

No doubt that this was a dramatic gesture of the French president but wasn’t it irresponsible of him to walk out of the summit? Wasn’t he showing disrespect to the other leaders?

It is the reality of the day that English has become the most popular language in all aspects of life, especially in this era of globalization.

Mr Chirac is within his rights to promote his language as well, but he has to do that within the boundaries of his country and through his embassies and language centres around the world. He should not have chosen to make a stand at an international summit.

Mr Chirac defended his walkout by saying:
"We fight for our language. I was profoundly shocked to see a Frenchman express
himself in English at the table."

“It is not just national interest, it is in the interest of culture and the dialogue of cultures. You cannot build the world of the future on just one language and, hence one culture."
French once dominated the EU, but English has overtaken it since the bloc expanded to take in Nordic countries in the 1990s and east European members in 2004.

The Forbes website has this to say over this issue:

Chirac, who normally sticks to French during economic and political summits
despite his good spoken English, would do well to note that German was once the
lingua franca in big chunks of Europe throughout 19th and 20th centuries, especially in business, politics, science and sociology. And French was long the international language of diplomacy and commerce before it was replaced by English in the years after World War II.

Perhaps the French President should leave the purification and preservation of his language to the Academie Francaise--an official body that promotes the immortality of French, which no doubt meets once a week to sob over foreign neologisms in Sony adverts and the worrying presence of English-made brie in the communal fridge.


And BBC Online says this:

It would be hard not to read this as a display of "linguistic patriotism" to go with the official French government policy of "Economic Patriotism".

You could see both varieties of patriotism as either an inability to face up to the real world or a brave stand against the crushing force of Anglo-Saxon hegemony. Or both.

But they certainly reflect the reality of France's position within the European Union, which has been changing over the last decade.

Or could it be that Mr Chirac was just trying to win some brownie points back home which is rife with student riots over a new labour law?

Saturday, March 25, 2006

The last days of academic freedom

I strongly believe that academics should have the full freedom to have their say no matter how unpalatable or unpopular their views are. They should not be controlled or held back from expressing their opinions. I think their freedom to hold their views, even in the most controversial nature, can only be beneficial to their students.

University students should be able to debate, discuss, understand and comprehend various different views and then make up their own mind based on their educated and logical reasoning.

I know it has been very common in the Third World to have their academics under tight leash as not to influence their students to move away from the establishment. These governments are not keen to have a student population that will question its every policies and act as a check and balance against corruption and abuse of power.

These governments realise the power of student revolts – as have been seen from Paris to Bangkok in recent decades.

In Malaysia for example, there is the notorious Universities and University Colleges Act which bans students from participating in political debates and politics. Academics here are compelled to sign a pledge to the government not to be anti-establishment. And they also have university regulations that effectively control their academic freedom.

This is the situation throughout in the Third World – the fledgling democracies. I would have thought it was very much different in the west, especially in the UK. But is that the case really?

Even in the UK, they have laws, such as the Race Relations (Amendment) Act, which among others prohibits academic freedom. And its very first victim is a university lecturer who has been suspended pending his disciplinary hearing after expressing his views on some controversial matter.

Prof Frank Ellis, from the University of Leeds, has been suspended after claiming that black people were less intelligent than whites in an interview with a student newspaper.

The good professor has apparently backed a theory set out in The Bell Curve, a book published in 1994 by Richard J Herrnstein and Charles Murray, which claimed that the white people had higher average IQs than blacks.

No doubt a controversial issue from the professor and this prompted demonstrations from the students at the university, calling for Ellis to be dismissed.

The university initially stated that Ellis had a right to express his views. Furthermore there is no evidence to show that his beliefs had led him to discriminate against students or colleagues.

However, yesterday the university said that it had a duty to apply the Race Relations Act to promote racial harmony in the UK, and as such the suspension and the disciplinary proceedings.

For me the Act was just another tool by the government to be politically correct and win votes to continue ruling.

So here too in the UK, just like in the Third World, the government is placing barricades to bar academic freedom.

This Ellis situation could have been handled in a far better manner. The university could have distanced itself from Ellis’ comments while stating that he was entitled to have his own opinion.

Alternatively, it could have had other academics disprove Ellis’ theory. Surely they could have found some academic to disprove this controversial theory.

Similarly, the student newspaper too could have had other contributors to debunk this theory.

I won’t blame the protesting students as I think protesting is a democratic process. However the students, led by its union, could have turned this into an educational experience by holding debates, seminars and even a talk by Ellis and a proponent.

But the bottom line is that it is the UK government which had interfered and limited the freedom of expression by passing the Race Relations Act in 2000.

It is very sad indeed that governments everywhere are the same. These are politicians who aspire to continue leading and to remain popular, they won’t mind introducing politically correct policies and inane laws that will keep eroding our freedom to think, express and act.

And at the same time they also don’t want a thinking society to question them. And where else is a good place to begin if not the universities?

Thursday, March 23, 2006

Will Proton survive in a level playing field?

This must be the fear of many backers of the Malaysian national car Proton now that the government has announced measures to liberalize Malaysia's auto industry.

This would mean that foreign cars will be cheaper and affordable to the consumers as the government has cut excise duties on foreign cars and reduced import duties for vehicles made in Southeast Asia from 15 percent to 5 percent.

The government’s decision to do this is to make Malaysia a regional auto industry hub.

And the party most affected by this will be Proton. It has now been asked to drop its prices to compete with other makes.

Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has thrown Proton some challenges – to cut prices, to compete, to improve and to expand.

He said:
“The prices of Proton (cars) will unavoidably be reduced. Proton has to compete.
Proton has to have a price on its products which will be acceptable by the market. For them to survive, Proton must grow big and be competitive. Right now, it has a very small capacity. There is room to improve.”
The invasion of cheaper Asian cars in the recent past has affected Proton badly, so much so that its founder and present adviser Dr Mahathir has been asking the government to change some government policies to continue protecting Proton.

Proton’s share of the domestic passenger car market dwindled to 41 percent in 2005 from around 60 percent in 2002.

With this new development now, Proton needs to catch up fast if it still wants to be the popular brand in Malaysia.

The question remains if it would still be able to compete in both local and international market which is awashed with many cheaper and better quality cars.

Professor Shamsul Baharrudin from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia said this in a radio interview:
“Proton cars, as it is, are still winning the market by virtue of the price
difference. So if the price is reduced, most likely a lot of people will most
likely want to have an imported car, more out of prestige and out of the
confidence of the car's performance rather than physically and technically
better cars.”

It is now up to Proton to show that it truly can make quality and affordable cars. However we don’t want them to come running to the government in a year or two asking to be bailed out.

Match of the day: gay v Muslim

What would you do if your fellow citizens are homophobic? Well for starters, you could embark upon a publicity campaign to generate awareness and acceptance. You could also organize events to promote tolerance.

Or you could organize a game of football. That’s precisely what a Dutch gay campaign group did (pic). It organized a football game between a gay side and a team of Muslims. Why Muslims?

You see, in Netherlands, there is a rising case of homophobia amongst its migrants, most of whom are Muslims.

Frank Van Dalen, chairman of a collection of Dutch gay groups said:
“There is tension between the gay and Muslim communities and a lot of this tension comes from ignorance.”
Though the Dutch are proud of their liberal attitude on issues such as gay marriage, the murder of Pim Fortuyn, an openly gay and anti-immigration public figure, in 2002 brought homophobia firmly into the public debate.

According to media reports, a survey published last week showed that 40% of gay people polled feared that aggression towards them was on the rise. Homophobic attitudes have been blamed on the growing Dutch immigrant community, in particular on Muslims who make up 6% of the country’s population.

Dutch politicians are also saying that many Muslim youths in Netherlands are homophobic and unwilling to have a gay friend.

Coming back to the main event, how did the game end? The Muslims thrashed the gay team by 4-0.

No one knows the potential long term outcome of this game. Also it is too early to say if it will help smoothen the relationship between these two communities.

And on a lighter note, media reports however did not say if any of the gay players were taunted during the game!

And I do wonder what next? Perhaps a joint poetry session? For me the answer lies in an education system that instils religious tolerance in everyone.

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

'Why did you really want to go to war?'

US President George W Bush was given a grilling by a veteran journalist who asked him bluntly for his reasons to invade Iraq.

The president got defensive, stammered and worked around his words to say that he went to Iraq to flush out the terrorists who attacked his country.

However seeing him on telly telling that did not look convincing at all to me.

He also denied that Iraq was heading into a civil war but admitted that there is sectarian violence.

And he blamed the enemy (the terrorists) for the violence and somehow ironically said that the terrorists are:
“…tough-minded. They like to kill. There's going to be more tough fighting ahead.”
And he claimed that his government and troops were making progress because:
“we've got a strategy for victory.”

Below is an excerpt of the interesting Q&A with the president:


QUESTION:

I'd like to ask you, Mr. President _ your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime.

Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is: Why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, your Cabinet officers, former Cabinet officers, intelligence people and so forth _ but what's your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil, the quest for oil. It hasn't been Israel or anything else. What was it?



BUSH:

I think your premise, in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist _ that I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect.


QUESTION:

And ...


BUSH:

Hold on for a second, please. Excuse me. Excuse me.

No president wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true.

My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. When we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people.

Our foreign policy changed on that day. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life.

And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people, that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.

Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy, and that's why I went into Iraq.


QUESTION:

Iraq's interim prime minister said Sunday that violence is killing an average of 50 to 60 people a day and that if this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is. Do you agree with Mr. Allawi that Iraq has fallen into civil war?


BUSH:

I do not. There are other voices coming out of Iraq, by the way, other than Mr. Allawi _ who I know, by the way; like; he's a good fellow.

President Talabani has spoken. General Casey the other day was quite eloquent on the subject. Zal Khalilzad, who I talk to quite frequently _ listen, we all recognize that there is a violence, that there's sectarian violence. But the way I look at the situation is that the Iraqis took a look and decided not to go to civil war.

They (the enemy) use violence as a tool to do that. You know, they're willing to kill innocent people.

‘Newspapers will change, not die’

Media mogul Rupert Murdoch said that.

He added:
“Power is moving away from the old elite in our industry - the editors, the chief executives and, let's face it, the proprietors. A new generation of media consumers as risen demanding content delivered when they want it, how they want it, and very much as they want it.

This new media audience - and we are talking here of tens of millions of young people around the world - is already using technology, especially the web, to inform, entertain and above all to educate itself.

I believe traditional newspapers have many years of life left but, equally, I think in the future that newsprint and ink will be just one of many channels to our readers. As we all know, newspapers have already created large audiences for their content online and have provided readers with added value features such as email alerts, blogs, interactive debate and podcasts.”
So he believes the newspaper will continue to strive along side the new technology.

However technology guru Bill Gates has a different opinion all together. He believes in the very near future we will carry an object he calls the tablet, a slim device like a clipboard that will cater for all our information and entertainment needs. He says this tablet will revolutionise our lives within a decade.

This technological advancement, he says, would mean paper becomes a thing of the past and there are no textbooks, no magazines and no newspapers.

He adds:
“The tablet is the place where it can all come together. I definitely see the tablet, whether it's textbooks going digital or the newspaper going digital or magazines going digital, I see the person with that very, very thin, - we don't have it yet today - very inexpensive, high-bandwidth, wireless device... where a lot of the print and video consumption will take place."
However he does concede that it will be awhile before newspapers are totally gone – at least 50 years, he reckons.
"I'm sure it will be more than 50 years when somebody is still printing a newspaper and taking it to someone, somewhere… we are seeing the shift where younger people appreciate the flexibility of the internet to let them select the subjects that they have particular interest in, and to navigate links and see what's hot.

We are in the throes of a transition where every publication has to think of their digital strategy."
And thus the debate continues.

Monday, March 20, 2006

Political cartoons on the painful war


The Iraqis mark ‘painful anniversary’ of war and the increasing violence stirs unease as military operations enter fourth year.

The Associated Press reported this:

"As the Iraq war entered its fourth year, nearly 1,500 U.S. and Iraqi soldiers on Sunday sought to root out insurgents from farming villages an hour’s drive north of the capital, and at least 35 people died in insurgent and sectarian violence nationwide."

further read: Three years later, the good, the bad and the ugly - Comparing life in Iraq under Saddam with that experienced today.

This interesting analysis is by a NBC news correspondent.

Below are more collections of political cartoons on the Iraqi war:



Why is Iraq in civil war

What a timely remark from an Iraqi politician. The country's former interim prime minister Iyad Allawi says the country is in civil war - something which is totally denied by the Americans and their ally the UK.

Mr Allawi's remarks comes on the third year anniversary of the US-led invasion of Iraq.

Sectarian violence in the country sees people being killed almost daily. Even yesterday another 12 were killed in a cycle of sectarian reprisals and revenge killings between Sunnis and Shias.

The Brits are realising that things in Iraq are getting out of control, and coupled with tremendous pressure from home, have decided to gradually remove their troops beginning this summer.

However the Americans are not so keen to leave just yet. Their reasons? Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says if the US leaves Iraq now there is every reason to believe terrorists would fill the vacuum.

He said:
"The terrorists are determined to stoke sectarian tension and are attempting to spark a civil war."
Well, we now know who he is blaming for the appalling conditions in Iraq today.

But sadly for him, millions of people who protested all around the world on Saturday against the war firmly believe the turmoil in Iraq was a direct result of the US intervention in that country.

For these protesters, there is only one person to blame - US president George W Bush!

Friday, March 17, 2006

The perils of clinical trials



On Offer:

£150 per day for 11 days.


The Condition:

Young, healthy, adult males – all under 40 - to take part in the early stages of a trial for a drug to treat conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and leukaemia.


The Volunteers:

Eight took part. Two given dummy pills while six others were given the drug TGN1412 during the trial at a research unit based in a London hospital on Monday. It was the first time the drug, designed to treat conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, leukaemia and multiple sclerosis, had been tested on humans.


The Status:

The six men have been in intensive care since falling ill, suffering multiple organ failure, immediately after taking the drug. Two of them remain in a critical condition. They have been given several blood transfusions to try to rid their bodies of toxins. Four were said to be showing signs of improvement but doctors said it was still early days.


The Symptoms:

A volunteer’s girlfriend said he was "completely gorgeous, a beautiful person, really buoyant, oozing with charm and really muscly."

And now,


"I went in expecting to see his smiley face and curly black hair. But he was
completely lifeless. He's like a shell of who he is. He can't even move his
eyelids. This machine is pumping out his lungs. His chest is puffed out, his
face is puffed out like the elephant man. A day ago I was talking to him and he
was fine and now they are saying he could die at any moment."

The Problem:

The growing resistance to animal testing in Britain and the effect this might be having on drugs trials.


Those Responsible:

American company Parexel, which ran the trial, said it had followed recommended guidelines.

TeGenero, which manufactures the anti-inflammatory drug, apologised to the sick men's families and said the medicine had showed no signs of problems in earlier tests.

TeGenero said TGN1412 had been tested extensively in laboratories and on rabbits and monkeys for safety with no adverse effects and no drug-related deaths.


Possible Outcome:

Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the police are investigating. The MHRA is investigating whether the reaction suffered by the men was caused by a manufacturing problem, contamination, a dosing error or whether it was some completely unanticipated side-effect of the drug in humans.


The Miracle:

That’s what the doctors are saying the six volunteers now need.


Read more:

Q&A: Drug trials
Making a career out of drug tests
Ryan's drug test anguish

Thursday, March 16, 2006

French students protest against job laws

Thousands of students marched through Paris and blockaded universities across France as their revolt against the Government over a controversial new youth employment law intensified.

Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin has staked his reputation, and possibly his job, on a measure that aims to cut rampant youth unemployment with two-year contracts that enable employers to sidestep rigid French labour laws and fire young workers without reason.

This means the controversial new law would loosen France's labour code and allow companies to fire job-seekers under 26 within two years of hiring them, without giving cause or shelling out the restrictive severance payments usually due when an employee is laid off.

Bloomberg reported that in scenes reminiscent of the student protests in the 1960s, police stormed the Sorbonne on March 11 to evict 200 students who had occupied the university in the heart of Paris's Latin Quarter.

Several hundreds of youngsters clashed with the police on Tuesday in Paris, after they occupied the College de France, one of the country's most prestigious research institutions. The police cleared them away in the night.

The University of Nanterre, one of the largest in Paris, was occupied by 250 students and professors, who took over one of the college's largest amphitheatres.

Time.Com reported this:

The government rammed the law through parliament last week under special emergency procedures, and now students and unions are demanding its full retraction. Meant as a bold symbol of the government's resolve to take a new
approach, the law is proving a rallying point for opponents of the conservative
government, which is looking tired and tattered just over a year away from presidential elections in May 2007.

Sorbonne history student Leonardé Roche, 22, says the measure will make it even easier for French employers to deny job security to youth who already spend years shuffling between unpaid internships and short-term contracts.

"The opposition is growing, and not just among students," he says.
Hundreds of students gathered outside the Sorbonne University in Paris where riot police evicted sit-in students at the weekend. The Sorbonne was the birthplace of a 1968 uprising that shook France.

Here are some agencies' photographs of the clash between the students and French riot police.

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Jericho violence - who is to blame?

Was it proper for Israel to storm into the Jericho prison inside the Palestinian territory and capture six Palestinian prisoners - including one accused of killing a Jewish minister - on the grounds that these prisoners were not accorded punishment proper to their alleged crime?

The Israeli government claimed that the Palestinians have given a free rein to the prisoners and now wants to take them back to Isreal to face proper trial and punishment.

This Israeli attack on Jericho sparked uprising in Gaza and West Bank where the British Council office in Gaza was set on fire and foreigners kidnapped (though some released later).

Two French nationals and a South Korean were still captive after militants kidnapped nine foreigners in a wave of violence in Palestinian areas following the siege. Six were released soon after they were snatched in Gaza and the West Bank.

However the Palestinians are promising a wave of demonstrations and strikes to protest Israel's seizure of the leader of a radical group Ahmed Saadat from a West Bank jail.

So it looks set now that the jail-storming action by the Israelies to uphold law and justice brings about a reaction which is going to tear up all form of order in the middle east. We can see suicide bombing rates going up and similarly the Israeli retaliation.

With militants Hamas about to take control of the PA, peace in this region looks a little less likely now.

And what was Israeli's real motive in blasting into Jericho?

One commentator says:
"With Israeli elections in the offing, the Israeli government wants to show that
it is tough on security."
So was the whole military power show just a performance to shore up local political support, and in the process just to take a dig at the old nemesis?

Lets see how this develops.

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Change lifestyle or change government...

The image right shows Malaysian protesters complaining against the recent oil price hike. The government said the people must change their lifestyles to adjust the price hike but the banner right says the people's response to that is to "change government".

In the past two Fridays, thousands of Malaysians gathered at Petronas Twin Towers to protest against the increase in petrol prices. The opposition parties and non-governmental groups are also planning two more anti-government rallies on March 19 and 26.

The government’s reaction to the first protest on March 3 was to instruct the local media not to report it, which they all complied. The police just sat back and watched the protesters.

The protesters demand that the nation's leaders either resign or reverse a recent fuel price hike.

Then on March 10, with a larger and angrier crowd to deal with, the police fired water cannon to break up the rally. See Paul Ooi’s blog for a detailed eye-witness account of what happened at the rally and for more photographs.

Again the Malaysian media failed to report anything about the protest or the police action.

I don’t see the Malaysian media reporting on the two remaining rallies either even though the participants might be more than the previous ones.

However I see a stronger participation by the police and the ministers – in demanding that people don’t protest, and if they do, they will have to be responsible for any police action!

At the same time, the government is also engaged in its charm offensive by embarking on a public-relations exercise to justify the rises and said it would announce measures to offset the effects.

But questions do remain. Like what will happen to the RM4.4 billion that the government will save as a result of this price hike? Will it go for public projects or to bail out GLCs?

Backgrounder:

The price of petrol and diesel was raised by 30 sen per litre to about RM1.90 and RM1.58 respectively in the biggest of five hikes since May 2004.

Pump prices remain lower than in neighbouring nations, but the move touched off public outrage. Malaysia is a net oil exporter, public transport is poor and people are dependent on their vehicles.

Below are some photographs that the Malaysian media missed - courtesy of reuters and ap.

Friday, March 10, 2006

Column published minus the sting

Malaysia's The Star today published Marina Mahathir's column on the apparent double standards imposed on matters of law on Muslim women in Malaysia - two days after the column was supposed to be published.

However the daily has removed the last two paragraphs in which she takes a jab at government leaders for not protecting Muslim women's rights.

Many earlier speculated that The Star failed to publish the column in time as it feared the column might offend the government. Pak Lah's administration has been extra sensitive when it comes to religious matters involving Islam. The government says it wants to protect the people from racial hatred.

However Marina said that she was told about The Star's decision to cut her last two paragraphs.

"I think it's silly (of The Star) but I will not sweat it. The main points are there."
However she went on to take a dig at the government over its over-sensitiveness and its policies to win the hearts of Muslims so that it can win one over opposition Islamic party PAS.

In an interview with The Associated Press on Thursday, Marina said the interpretation of Shariah laws has become more austere in the country as a result of a fight between the two main political parties to win Muslim votes.

Marina said Umno and PAS are increasingly trying to portray themselves as more Islamic in a bid to establish their credentials.

Marina said the government's move last year to pass contentious legislation that promotes polygamy and discriminates against Muslim women in matrimonial issues was an indication of the rivalry between the two political parties.

She said:

"It's all politics. There's a kind of race to see who is more Islamic. It's unfortunate because the more conservative voice has become louder while the progressive ones find it harder to speak. It's scary."
How true, but would anyone else be brave enough to tell this. Marina can because her father ruled Malaysia for over 22 years.

But more worryingly is the way the Malaysian media is cowering to the whims of the government.

And here is what The Star omitted in the last two paragraphs:
In this country, our leaders claim to stand for all citizens. Our Prime Minister is the Prime Minister of all Malaysians, our Ministers work for all Malaysians in their respective fields. There are two exceptions to this. The Minister for Islamic Affairs is obviously only for Muslims; even though some of the things he does affect others. While the Minister for Women purports to work for all Malaysian women, even though not all Malaysian women benefit from that work. Perhaps we should consolidate the apartheid of women in this country by having a Ministry for Non-Muslim Women which works to ensure that Non-Muslim women enjoy the benefits of the Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, a UN document which Malaysia signed and is legally bound to implement, and a Ministry for Muslim Women which works to gag and bind Muslim women more and more each day for the sake of political expediency under the guise of religion.
Today is International Women’s Day. Unfortunately only about 40% of thewomen in this country can celebrate. The rest can only look at their Non-Muslim sisters in despair and envy.
my other blog

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Malaysian popular daily censors sensitive column

Malaysia's top selling English daily The Star looks like to have succumbed to fears of reprisals from the government in running articles that discuss Islam.

One of its popular columnist Marina Mahathir was to have written her column that attacked the treatment of Muslim women in Malaysia. Her column was in conjuncton with the International Women's Day on March 8. However on that day (Wednesday), the column failed to appear in The Star.

In her article, she compared the situation of Muslim women in Malaysia to that of South African blacks under apartheid.

She wrote:
"In our country, there is an insidious growing form of apartheid among Malaysian women, that between Muslim and non-Muslim women."
Marina told AFP she was prompted to write the article amid outrage over legislation passed last year which critics say will help Muslim men to take multiple wives and claim property after divorce.

She also said that The Star will publish her column today instead. It didn't and had made no comments as to when the article will now be published. It merely said that the editor responsible for handling Marina's article was too busy to deal with it at the time.

Malaysiakini quoted her as saying that The Star will now publish her column tomorrow (Friday) and that the editors were concerned over the sensitive nature of her article.

She added:
"The main thing for me is that newspapers seem to be running a bit scared on any
issue relating to religion, especially with all the issues relating to the cartoons."
She was referring to the Danish caricatures controversy.

The Malaysian government had come down hard in recent months against newspapers - including indefinite suspension - that had directly or indirectly published the Danish cartoons that had ridiculed Prophet Muhammad.

The media now fears that their printing permits will be revoked if they continue publishing any sensitive articles on Islam. Following this trend, I think Marina's article is just first of many that will be censored by the media in the days to come.

Welcome to press freedom in Malaysia.

Just in case The Star misses the publication of Marina's article tomorrow, here it is in full:

Marina Mahathir for The Star - Our Own Apartheid
In 1948, one of humankind’s most despicable ideas, apartheid, was made into
law in South Africa where racial discrimination was institutionalized. Race laws
touched every aspect of social life, including a prohibition of marriage between
non-whites and whites, and the sanctioning of “white-only” jobs.

Although there were 19 million blacks and only 4.5 million whites in South Africa, the majority population were forced to be second-class citizens in their homeland, banished to reserves and needing passports to travel outside them, even within their own country. It was only in 1990 that apartheid began to crumble and South Africans of all colours were finally free to live as equals in every way.

With the end of that racist system, people may be forgiven for thinking that apartheid does not exist anymore. While few countries practice any formal
systems of discrimination, nevertheless you can find many forms of discrimination everywhere. In many cases, it is women who are discriminated against.

In our country, there is an insidious growing form of apartheid among Malaysian women, that between Muslim and non-Muslim women.

We are unique in that we actively legally discriminate against women who are arguably the majority in this country, Muslim women. Non-Muslim Malaysian
women have benefited from more progressive laws over the years while the
opposite has happened for Muslim women.

For instance, since the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, polygamy among non-Muslims was banned. Previously men could have as many wives
as they wanted under customary laws. Men’s ability to unilaterally pronounce
divorce on their wives was abolished and in its place, divorce happens by mutual
consent or upon petition by either spouse in an equal process where the grounds
are intolerable adultery, unreasonable behaviour, desertion of not less than two
years, and living separately for not less than two years. Compare that to the
lot of Muslim women abandoned but not divorced by their husbands.

Other progressive reforms in the civil family law in the late 1990s were amendments to the Guardianship Act and the Distribution Act. The Guardianship of Infants Act 1961 was amended to provide for equal guardianship for both father and mother, rather than the previous provision where only the father was the primary guardian of the children.

In contrast, the Islamic Family Law still provides for the father as the sole primary guardian of his children although the mother is now allowed to sign certain forms for her children under an administrative directive.

The Distribution Act 1958 was also amended to provide for equal inheritance
for widows and widowers, and also granted children the right to inherit from
their mothers as well as from their fathers. Under the newly proposed amendments to the Islamic Family Law, the use of gender neutral language on the issue of matrimonial property is discriminatory on Muslim women when other provisions in the IFL are not gender-neutral. Muslim men may still contract polygamous marriages, may unilaterally divorce their wives for the most trivial of reasons (including by SMS, unique in the Muslim world) and are entitled to double shares of inheritance.

These differences between the lot of Muslim women and non-Muslim women beg
the question: do we have two categories of citizenship in Malaysia, whereby most
female citizens have less rights than others? As non-Muslim women catch up with
women in the rest of the world, Muslim women here are only going backwards. We should also note that only in Malaysia are Muslim women regressing; in every other Muslim country in the world, women have been gaining rights, not losing them.

In this country, our leaders claim to stand for all citizens. Our Prime Minister is the Prime Minister of all Malaysians, our Ministers work for all Malaysians in their respective fields. There are two exceptions to this. The Minister for Islamic Affairs is obviously only for Muslims; even though some of the things he does affect others. While the Minister for Women purports to work for all Malaysian women, even though not all Malaysian women benefit from that work. Perhaps we should consolidate the apartheid of women in this country by having a Ministry for Non-Muslim Women which works to ensure that Non-Muslim women enjoy the benefits of the Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, a UN document which Malaysia signed and is legally bound to implement, and a Ministry for Muslim Women which works to gag and bind Muslim women more and more each day for the sake of political expediency under the guise of religion.

Today is International Women’s Day. Unfortunately only about 40% of the
women in this country can celebrate. The rest can only look at their Non-Muslim
sisters in despair and envy.
-ends-

read my other blog here

Goal-shy Liverpool dumped out

Benfica did the unthinkable in Anfield tonight by scoring twice and not conceeding a goal, resulting in dumping a blunt Liverpool out of the Champions League.

So much for Anfield being a fortress where goals are difficult to come by for away teams! The home team is only perpetuating the fact that it them who can't score.

Cup holders Liverpool have only themselves to blame for failing to convert the numerous chances they had. It has been apparent for sometime now that Liverpool have a serious problem in scoring.

It's strikers just simply could not find the back of the net. And today that problem came back to haunt them and ended in them tamely surrendering their trophy.

If this situation is to continue, I think the club can forget its dreams of winning the FA Cup and taking the second spot in the league.

Maybe the manager should just give a chance to some of the young reserve strikers in the coming games. Surely they can't do much worse than the first team strikers!

Whatever it is, it is now important for the team to pick itself up and start performing well in the league and the FA Cup.

And maybe in the summer, the manager will get the fund he needs to buy a truly world class striker.

After tonight's defeat, Liverpool manager Rafa Benitez said:

"We can beat teams but you need to score before them. Now we have two
competitions and we need to keep going."
All the best to you Rafa but I bet you that you can't do that with the strikers you have now. I sincerely hope he can prove me wrong.

my other blog

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Mourinho's fantasy world

Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho needs to be humble in defeat. He should not be such a sore loser, claiming everytime his team loses that they did so to an inferior team.

However his remarks last night after being soundly beaten by a technically superior Barcelona was simply pick of the best. It just proves that Jose does indeed live in his own fantasy world.

Asked by ITV Sports if the better team (Barcelona) had won over the two legs, the self-styled special one said:
"I don't think so."
Hello? Was he watching the same tie between the two teams. No doubt Chelsea is flying high in the Premier League. But at the Champions League two-leg tie, no one was left with any doubt which team played better.

Barcelona simply had too many magical performers to out-run and out-manourve Chelsea. That was evident in the game in Stamford Bridge and last night at Nou Camp. Chelsea's midfield just could not cope with the flair of Ronaldinho and Co.

But how does Jose see the end result? Here are some of his funny quotes:
"Barcelona haven't won against 11 players, so that's all I can say. We were
playing with 10 players for most of the first leg so we haven't seen two games
where we had 11 against 11."
How funny that this manager could come up with such classic lines everytime his team fails to produce the goods.

Remember last year's Champions League semis against Liverpool. Well, he still insists the Liverpool goal never crossed the line and questions Liverpool's moral intergrity in that victory. Never mind if Liverpool did go on to win the Champions League for the fifth time.

And again, his vocal outpouring becomes endless when he sees other players diving in the game. However if it is his own players, only an eerie silence follows from the special one.

Many football fans do not hate Chelsea for their new found money and success. It's the manager's lack of humility that is turning the team into such an embarassment.

my other blog

Sniffer dogs, Bush, Gandhi and Varanasi

A minor diplomatic row is brewing between India and the US and it is caused by sniffer dogs flown in to accompany President Bush's state visit last week.

And at least one Indian MP is asking for a US apology.

The cause for this storm (in a tea-cup) - the sniffer dogs had defiled the memorial of Mahatma Gandhi, the Indian independence leader.

Prior to Bush's visit to the memorial, the sniffer dogs were used to scour the area. And this has displeased many, including priests and politicians, in India.

Hindu priests had to conduct a purification ceremony at the shrine after Bush's visit. The memorial was cleansed with water brought from the Ganges, which Hindus consider holy.

The site, where Gandhi was cremated, is considered sacred and all visitors must remove their shoes before entering, including Bush and his wife, Laura.

Letting dogs into the memorial also drew sharp protests from Hindu politicians, along with Tushar Gandhi, the Indian leader’s great grandson, who called the incident a “national shame”.

Another politician, Shailendra Yadav of the Socialist People's Party, said:

"The holy shrine (of Gandhi) was defiled. The government should seek an apology
from the US over this."
It makes a funny read but the extra precaution undertaken by the Americans comes into context when seen in tandem with the bomb blasts that killed at least 12 people in India's holiest and pilgrimage city of Varanasi today.

Reuters report no group had claimed responsibility for the blasts. Officials said it was too early to pin blame. But most previous attacks on Hindu temples in India have been blamed on Islamic militants.

Now you understand the reasons for the sniffer dogs? This could have happened during Bush's visit to Gandhi's memorial.

my other blog

Monday, March 06, 2006

How sad for Malaysian Indians…

Don’t we have young, energetic leaders to lead and represent the Malaysian Indian community in the government?

Why is that MIC – the party that politically represent this community – is continued to be led by the same president since 1981?

Malaysian media today reported that S Samy Vellu was returned unopposed as party president for the 10th term after nominations closed yesterday.

And The Star says this indicated that Samy Vellu is “stronger than ever, politically”.

How sad for the Malaysian Indians. While the whole country is talking about changes in political leadership to allow new, younger leaders to come in with newer, fresher ideas, MIC members seem to have turned their backs to such calls.

At this year’s presidential nomination, Samy Vellu, 70, garnered 528 nominations for the post. Seven nominations were rejected for technical reasons. And no one had the guts to challenge him.

How could they? Previous experiences have shown how difficult it has been to unseat Samy Vellu.

Many had hoped that the present deputy S Subramaniam would go for the kill this time around.

After all he had the reasons to do so – he was dropped from retaining his parliamentary seat in the last general election and more recently Samy Vellu has openly endorsed vice president G Palanivel as his next deputy, sidelining the 62-year-old Subramaniam who has been MIC deputy president since 1980.

So with his political future heading to graves, many did expect Subramaniam, 62, to stand up against Samy Vellu.

But maybe the fall out after his last attempt to unseat Samy Vellu in the late 80s still in mind, Subramaniam just wants to hold on to his deputy post. His thinking maybe is to hold on to the number two post and then assume the top spot after Samy Vellu’s retirement.

If that is the case, he is most definitely wrong. For starters, it looks very unlikely that he will retain his deputy post.

At the end of the day, what we will see is Samy Vellu leading the community again, knowing full well that his chosen deputy will not rock the boat or jump the gun.

In the meantime, the victorious Samy Vellu has been singing his same old tune – much needed to be done for the community.

This is how The Star reported him as saying after the victory:

He described his tenure as a journey to help the Indian community and
transform them into a successful race.

“So far, the community has been successful, but we still have a long way to
go.

“I have been elected as a servant to serve you. I want to finish this
journey and for me to do that, the Indian community needs a quantum leap
economically and socially. I won’t give up on this as long as I remain
president,” he said.

How really sad for the community that a new face with most probably better ideas is not given a chance to chart out the future of the community. In fact more interestingly, where are the new, young faces?

my other blog

On a cold and wintry Friday evening

It is no fun to watch football from the terraces in a cold and wintry evening. It is never fun if the game turns out to be a dull, dour goalless stalemate.

On Friday evening I was at Bramall Lane to watch Championship side Sheffield United take on bottom boys Crewe.

And after 90 minutes of cold and chill, I returned home feeling absolutely gutted. Not that I am a fan of the Blades. Just that they have been doing well this season and have cemented their second place in the league.

If they get promoted, the big boys from Premiership will be coming here on every fortnight.

However Sheffield United is not doing quite so well just at the moment. Infact the fans are worried that their team is losing steam and might lose its second automatic spot for promotion.

In the last six games, Sheffield has just won one game - away to local rivals Sheffield Wednesday. They have taken only six points in six games and still have to entertain Leeds and Crystal Palace at home. Both these teams are breathing down the Blades for the coveted second spot.

Sheffield now has 75 points with nine more games to play and lead third-placed Watford by eight points. Not much actually. No wonder the fans are edgy and rightly booed off their team last night.

I just hope the team can get its act together again and do well in the last few remaining matches. I just can't wait to see the big boys play so close to home.

my other blog

Friday, March 03, 2006

Footballer hits back for gay slur

Back in February the News of the World broke an exclusive story about two Premiership footballers being engaged in gay activities. It followed up with another story the following week with more exposes.

Similar stories were then published by its sister publication The Sun. However none of the reports identified the players. In its second publication, the News of the World published a photograph claiming to be two of the men involved in the gay orgy. Again, the photographs were pixilated to conceal their identities.

Ever since, internet website and blogs have been speculating on the identity of the footballers – one of whom is said to be an England international, a household name and enjoys a strong relationship with his girlfriend.

Many names have been bandied about. Some very popular names as well. It is rather sad that in the present open and all-embracing climate where gays are welcomed and encouraged in all walks of life, football stands alone in castigating them.

And yesterday, fearing that his reputation will be soiled by being linked as a gay, England international and Arsenal defender Ashley Cole filed a libel claim against the two newspapers over the gay report.

He claims that he has been wrongly identified and linked to the gay sex allegations.

Many would argue that Cole is right is pursuing his legal right to protect his reputation. However on the other hand, many cynics will say that his legal action was just a pre-emptive strike to stop further allegations being made.

Surely Cole could have called for a press conference to clear his name. Or he could have sued the websites or blogs that identified him as a gay. Why is he targeting the two newspapers? Could it be because there are to be more embarrassing exposes soon?

Was Cole advised by his lawyers that along the suit also comes an injunction order to stop the News of the World from publishing more allegations?

The Times said that Cole has filed claims for harassment, breach of privacy and libel. He is also claiming breach of privacy, or “false privacy”, meaning that although he does not accept that the allegations are true, the claims have still breached his privacy.

Again the question is how can this be when he was not directly or indirectly named in the reports.

Whatever it is, taking the legal step is definitely a big move. It is costly, time consuming and opens up Cole to more potentially damaging allegations.

I can’t wait to see how the newspapers will plead. And neither can I wait to read what the News of the World runs this Sunday.

note: my previous blog entry on this: Who are the gay footballers?
p/s: photo above shows Cole with his girlfriend.

visit my other blog too...

Thursday, March 02, 2006

England unimpressive in win

I went to Anfield yesterday to watch England play Uruguay. Although they managed to win the game, I returned unimpressed with the team which aims to win the World Cup.

If they continue playing like this - without a proper penetration from the midfield and lack of proper crosses from the right (Beckham's area of the field) - they will find it hard to break down teams in Germany.

And their forwards are lacking the killer touch to turn a move into a goal scoring opportunity. And the defenders - sometimes you wonder if Rio Ferdinand is still in the game or not.

However I was impressed with the work rate put in by Steven Gerrard, the goal scored by Peter Crouch and the circus-performer in Joe Cole.

And if Shaun Wright Philips had come in early, maybe we would have seen better crosses from the right.

Below are some photographs that I took at Anfield.





Wednesday, March 01, 2006

US court India and Pak while Iran goes to M'sia

The US is presently engaged in three different wars - in Iraq, Afghanistan and against terrorism. At the same time, this superpower also wants to deter other 'rogue' states from becoming potential enemies in the near future.

In this second category falls countries like North Korea and Iran. A point to note is that both these countries have nuclear capabilities. The US is trying hard to contain the nuclear capabilities of these countries, the result of which is the ongoing momentum to threaten Iran with economic sanction to stop its nuclear programme.

And on another hand, the US also wants to keep close to chest countries which it sees as potential economic rival. And at the moment one country above all falls in this category - India.

Thus in his visit to India this week, President Bush is expected to bring up the Iran nuclear issue. Before that he would have to agree with India on few deals that would allow for the US to supply nuclear technology and fuel desperately needed by India to fuel its booming but energy-starved economy.

In return, India must agree to separate its military and civilian nuclear programs and open up the civilian ones to international inspection.

This is where the deals could collapse as many in India believe there should not be outside interference and meddling in its nuclear programme.

If that is the case then, will India support Bush in limiting Iran's nuclear ambitions?

Why is India's support so vital for Bush in his fight against Iran? Its simple and its economy. India's economy is booming and it has large business deals with Iran. For its economy to continue booming, India will have to be insane to support any economy sanction against Iran.

This is where the other aspects of Bush's visit to India comes in. Also in the bag are few trade deals between India and the US, but will these sweeteners be enough to gain the Indian support?

My guess is that the deciding factor will be the final outcome of the nuclear accord between India and the US. If the US agrees to the Indian request of not allowing international inspectors into its civilian installations and this is coupled with good trade deals, then the other deal is surely clinched - India will back the US against Iran.

But Iran is not just going to stand still and wait for the US to engage more partners. For its part, the Islamic republic is seeking out fellow Muslim countries to support it.

And this week, it is seeking the support of what is possibly the most influential Muslim country of all - Malaysia.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, accompanied by Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, makes a three day trip to Malaysia to explain Tehran's position and drum up support ahead of a March 6 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Malaysia is the current leader of both the 57-member Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the world's biggest grouping of Muslim nations, and the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), a bloc of more than 100 mainly developing nations.

Malaysia has voiced support for Iran's nuclear programme to meet its energy needs and Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar said last year that the world should not put Iran "to the wall" over the issue.

But will Malaysia be able to help Iran at all?

Some diplomats don't think Malaysia can offer Iran a strong support.

A Western diplomat based in KL said:

"NAM and Malaysia find themselves stuck in a difficult position. They might be suspicious of Iran's motives and its nuclear program, but they are tied to defending its right to a civil nuclear program. Malaysia's also quite keen to be seen as a bridge, but not as a mediator because that carries too many risks."

If that is the case and if Malaysia and NAM are not able to drum up support for Iran, then the Islamic republic will have no choice but to seek out other Muslim countries on its own.

And again, this is where President Bush has got an upper hand. His visit to Pakistan immediately after India and his short, surprise stop-over in Afghanistan before Delhi is aimed at gaining the support of these two countries against Iran.

The UN will sit on in the near future to discuss Iran's nuclear programme. Iran and its opponents have until then to do their sales pitch to gain support. Who knows what will happen after that.

One thing is for sure. This time the US will not go to war unless it has STRONG support from EVERYONE. And I think it does not have that yet.

p/s: photo sourced from reuters

my other blog