Condoleezza Rice Says She's `Proud' of Decision to Invade Iraq
By Janine Zacharia

July 3 (Bloomberg) -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she's ``proud'' of the U.S. decision to wage the Iraq war and insisted that the world is not more dangerous than it was when George W. Bush took office.
``We're now beginning to see that perhaps it's not so popular to be a suicide bomber. We're beginning to see that perhaps people are questioning whether Osama Bin Laden ought to really be the face of Islam,'' Rice, 53, said in an interview to be broadcast this weekend on Bloomberg Television's ``Conversations with Judy Woodruff.''
``And I am proud of the decision of this administration to overthrow Saddam Hussein,'' said Rice, who was Bush's national security adviser at the time of the March 2003 invasion. As of yesterday, 4,107 U.S. soldiers died in Iraq and more than 30,000 were wounded. She said the Iraq war has been ``tougher than any of us really dreamed.''
Rice, who backs the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Arizona Senator John McCain, said she ``thought it was great'' when the Democratic race came down to a woman and a black man. ``I didn't think it was surprising,'' she said.
People abroad are ``fascinated'' by Illinois Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, Rice added when asked what effect Obama's candidacy is having around the world.
``But I'll tell you something. Ultimately, whoever is elected president of the United States will represent the United States, not as a black president or as a woman president or as a black secretary of state or as a woman secretary of state, but the United States of America,'' Rice said.
North Korea
Rice, with only seven months left as secretary of state, has a wide diplomatic agenda, trying to make progress toward an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement and a North Korean nuclear disarmament deal while trying to persuade Iran to accept incentives to abandon uranium enrichment, a process, once mastered, that could lead to a nuclear bomb.
While Rice was in Asia last week, North Korea submitted an inventory of nuclear plants and material to China, and the U.S. moved to remove North Korea from its list of state sponsors of terrorism. The Bush administration was hammered by conservative critics, including House Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who called the deal ``cause for profound concern.''
In the interview, Rice cited as progress that the North Koreans were ``putting themselves out of the business of making plutonium'' even as many U.S. sanctions remain in place.
``So with all due respect to those who look at this deal and say somehow North Korea has gotten a great deal, I think one can say that this is a really good step for non-proliferation,'' Rice added.
China
On China, Rice said the Chinese were being ``somewhat more helpful on Darfur.'' Demonstrations over China's support for the Sudanese leadership in Khartoum as it wages war with rebel groups in the Darfur region, as well as China's rule in Tibet and its treatment of the Dalai Lama, could overshadow the Olympic Games, which open in Beijing August 8.
Rice reiterated that Bush plans to attend the games, even as some human rights activists have urged him to boycott the event. ``The president has been very clear that the Olympics is a sporting event and he's going to go to it as a sporting event,'' Rice said. In Beijing earlier this week, she said she'd be keen to watch some Olympic basketball and track-and-field competitions.
Iran, Pakistan
Asked if she thought it would be a mistake for Israel to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran over its nuclear program, Rice said the Israelis have been willing to work with the U.S. on a diplomatic solution.
``They, too, believe that it's possible to deal with this diplomatically. But we better have really robust diplomacy in order to deal with this threat because the Iranians are making progress,'' she said.
Rice said she believed Iran, which the administration has accused of funneling weapons to Shiite militias in Iraq, had ``vulnerabilities'' in Iraq that the U.S. could exploit. She did not specify what they were.
Rice defended the Bush administration's policies when asked about a June 30 New York Times report that al-Qaeda, since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has successfully shifted its base of operations from Afghanistan to Pakistan's tribal areas and has rebuilt much of its ability to attack.
Rice, acknowledging there are policy debates within the administration on how to confront al-Qaeda, said many of the terrorist group's leaders are ``either in custody or they're dead.''
`Certain Strengths'
``Yes, it has certain strengths and continues to have certain strengths in this area that is very difficult for anyone to govern and very difficult for anyone to operate in. But there have been successes there too,'' Rice said.
Rice, who has been suggested as a possible McCain running mate, has said repeatedly that she has no plans to seek elected office and will return to Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, where she was provost, after the end of the administration in January 2009.
She has said may write another book on foreign policy. And in the interview she noted: ``I have been very active in educational causes before, particularly for underprivileged kids. That's what I'll go back and do.''
To contact the reporter on this story: Janine Zacharia in Washington at jzacharia@bloomberg.net.

Guitarist and singer Raul Midon plays "Everybody" and "Peace on Earth" during his 2007 set at TED.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/raul_midon_plays_everybody_and_peace_on_earth.html

Colombia: Looking Ahead After a Wily Rescue
STRATFOR TODAY » July 3, 2008 | 1717 GMT

CESAR CARRION/AFP/Getty Images
Colombian former presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt (L) greets Colombian President Alvaro Uribe Velez in Bogota after her July 2 rescue
Summary
Emboldened by its stunning July 2 rescue of several high-profile captives from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the government will begin looking ahead toward the next step in its security campaign: eliminating the drug trade as a whole.

Analysis
Reports are surfacing that the July 2 Colombian hostage rescue was achieved through a complex plan involving the infiltration of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrilla group, along with signals interference that tricked the FARC into turning over the hostages without a fight.

The U.S. military reportedly had decoded FARC communications and was intercepting its radio traffic. The Colombians then sent a series of coded messages to the FARC saying that the hostages were going to be transported by a friendly nongovernmental organization to the southern part of the country on the orders of FARC leader Alfonso Cano, who was considering a hostage swap. The Colombians then landed their helicopters in the FARC camp, picked up the hostages and flew off. The operation appears to have gone off without a single shot being fired.

Pulled from the FARC jungle hideout after years of captivity were Ingrid Betancourt, a French-Colombian citizen and former presidential candidate, three U.S. hostages and 11 captured Colombian soldiers.

The tactical success of the rescue mission speaks volumes for the progress the Colombian military has made in its operations against the FARC. U.S. forces did play a substantial role in aiding the Colombian forces by developing the signals and human intelligence used to locate the hostages and convince the FARC that the hostage move was legitimate. There are no outward indications that U.S. troops were involved in the mission’s execution, as their presence would have given away the ruse. However, the United States has been heavily involved in training and equipping the Colombian military, and U.S. military personnel have been known to participate in a wide variety of liaison and advisory activities.

Regardless of U.S. participation in the rescue mission, the operation has overwhelmingly beneficial implications for Colombian President Alvaro Uribe Velez. Without these high-level hostages, the FARC has lost its political bargaining chips, and Uribe has achieved a major goal — rescuing the hostages and debilitating the FARC. In achieving these goals, Uribe has gained considerable credibility at home. This will help him with domestic political difficulties and might enable him to push through a legal measure that would eliminate term limits. Halfway through his second four-year term, Uribe has asked for an extension of his leadership so he can continue pursuing his policies. This mission might give him the boost he needs.

The rescue mission might also make it possible for Uribe to negotiate a final settlement with the FARC. The information that will be gained from debriefing the hostages could very well help the Colombians make even greater strides toward neutralizing the rebel group. With its number of fighters greatly reduced and many of its leaders dead or deserted, the FARC is at a severe disadvantage. Cano is considered to be more of a soldier and less of an ideologue, and without a guiding ideological mission, it might be easier for him to come to a negotiated agreement with the government and lay down arms.

It must be remembered, however, that while the FARC is weakening, it is not dead. The group still holds some 700 hostages, and retaliatory strikes against the government and civilians can be expected. It is not out of the question that the FARC could seek to replenish its stock of high-profile hostages.

Nevertheless, the weakening of the FARC has Colombians looking ahead, and hopes are high throughout the country that they might finally be able to move beyond their decades-long war against leftist insurgents and drug traffickers. The demise of the FARC, however, should not be confused with the demise of the drug industry in Colombia.

Although the FARC would not exist without the financial support provided by the drug trade, the opposite is not true. Without the FARC, the drug trade would still flourish, since a host of smaller actors are actually responsible for the production and processing of Colombian cocaine. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency estimates that there might be up to 300 of these groups operating throughout Colombia.

For Uribe, taking down the drug trade is the next step, and the momentum and success he has maintained thus far will give him the political support he needs to push forward. Although Uribe could use such tools as subsidies for coca growers to encourage crop replacement, he will likely rely on a military strategy to regain control of the country.

Russia: Medvedev's Whistle Stop Tour
STRATFOR TODAY » July 3, 2008 | 1946 GMT

DMITRY ASTAKHOV/AFP/Getty Images
Russian President Dmitri Medvedev
Summary
New Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on July 3 began a short tour of Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan on his way to the July 7 G8 summit in Japan. The tour illustrates Moscow’s desire to consolidate its influence over countries that are strategically important to Russia.

Analysis
New Russian President Dmitri Medvedev set out July 3 for a tour of several former Soviet states on his way to the G8 meeting in Japan on July 7. Medvedev will stop off in Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, three countries that have already met with the new president — some more than once — in the two short months since he took office. The tour clearly demonstrates Moscow’s move to consolidate its relationships with countries of strategic importance to Russia.

Just two weeks after taking the helm in Moscow on May 7, Medvedev made his first official foreign trip, heading east to Kazakhstan and China rather than the traditional Russian presidential voyage westward to Europe. Medvedev’s choice was a sign that Russia’s focus was not mostly on the West anymore and that Moscow was in the process of not only consolidating its relationship with Kazakhstan but also showing China that Moscow still considers Central Asia to be Russian turf.

Central Asia and Azerbaijan are strategically important to Russia for several reasons. First, they are part of Russia’s periphery that has many other large and looming powers on the other side — such as China on the other side of Central Asia and Iran on the other side of Azerbaijan. The West has also infiltrated the former Soviet regions interested in their large energy wealth. Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan each have considerable oil and natural gas supplies which are just now being significantly tapped:

Kazakhstan is estimated (on the high end) to have 40 billion barrels of oil reserves and 3 trillion cubic meters of natural gas.
Turkmenistan is estimated to have 3 trillion cubic meters of natural gas and some of the world’s largest natural gas fields, as well as 2-6 billion barrels of oil.
Azerbaijan has an estimated 13 billion barrels of oil reserves and 2 trillion cubic meters of natural gas.
Russia already has Soviet-era connections in place with Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, though these lines are aged and do not tap the greater energy wealth from these countries. Russia also has infrastructure in place with Azerbaijan, though its purpose was to supply Azerbaijan with Russian energy until 2005, since Azerbaijan’s energy reserves were unexploited until recently. But Russia is faced with large competition from the West, Middle East and China for Central Asian and Caucasus energy.

Russia currently relies on supplies from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan to help fill its export orders in Europe. If those supplies get diverted from Russian pipelines, then Russia could not fill its orders. Moreover, Russia is seeing declining oil and natural gas production, so it is looking to Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan to make up the difference in the future. If the supplies from those three countries are diverted to either the West or China, then not only is Russia in an energy crunch, but it will lose some of its ability to use energy policy as a political tool.

This is where Medvedev is stepping in. He is looking to consolidate Moscow’s ties with Baku, Ashgabat and Astana, though each in a different way.

Medvedev has already met with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev twice since becoming president, with energy and Azerbaijan’s security on the table. Azerbaijan has been locked into a tense disagreement with its neighbor Armenia over the secessionist region of Nagorno-Karabakh since the two countries went to war 20 years ago. With Baku’s newfound energy wealth, it has been ramping up its military and defenses — with much help from Russia. Azerbaijan also knows that Armenia is heavily reliant on Russia for political, economic and defense support — something that Baku resents. The Nagorno-Karabakh issue is one that Medvedev could exploit in the future to keep Azerbaijan open to Moscow’s wishes.

Turkmenistan has traditionally held an isolated and independent foreign policy in an attempt to keep from being under Beijing, Washington, Brussels or Moscow’s thumb. But since Ashgabat has started feeling the desire to reap the monetary benefits of its enormous energy wealth, it has been talking to each side about where to send Turkmen oil and natural gas. The problem is that Turkmenistan is signing deals with just about everyone and has not had its reserves developed enough to fill those deals. Two pipelines are already under construction — one going to Kazakhstan and then to China, and the other going to Russia. Both pipelines are expected to be completed in late 2009 without the supplies to fill both of them. Whereas Beijing is ready to front the cash to have its pipeline supplied, Russia is trying a different tactic. Russia has the cash to spend, but is forming a military relationship with its former Soviet state to help consolidate their ties.

Moscow has not yet revealed its plans for getting Kazakhstan’s energy supplies flowing into Russia. Money tends to get Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev’s attention, but Russia has not yet opened its wallet. Kazakhstan and Russia have other economic ties, such as the large Kazakh population living across the border, but Astana is looking for more from Moscow now.

Medvedev’s whistle stop tour to these three countries is imperative to Russia, as Moscow wants to prove its power globally once again. Though Moscow has energy and influence, it depends on these countries to create a buffer between Russia and other world powers. Furthermore, Moscow wants to make sure these countries’ energy supplies flow only where the Kremlin wants them to go

FARGO, N.D. – Senator Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot sustain a long-term military presence in Iraq, but added that he would be open to “refine my policies” about a timeline for withdrawing troops after meeting with American military commanders during a trip to Iraq later this month.

Mr. Obama, whose popularity in the Democratic primary was built upon a sharp opposition to the war and an often-touted 16-month gradual timetable for removing combat troops, dismissed suggestions that he was changing positions in the wake of reductions in violence in Iraq and a general election fight with Senator John McCain.

“I’ve always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed,” he said. “And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.”

As he arrived for a campaign stop in North Dakota, Mr. Obama told reporters on Thursday that he intended to conduct “a thorough assessment” of his Iraq policy during a forthcoming trip to the country. He stressed that he has long called for a careful and responsible withdrawal of American forces, but he declined to offer a fresh endorsement of his plan to remove one to two combat brigades a month.

“My 16-month timeline, if you examine everything that I’ve said, was always premised on making sure that our troops were safe,” he said. “I said that based on the information that we had received from our commanders that one to two brigades a month could be pulled out safely, from a logistical perspective. My guiding approach continues to be that we’ve got to make sure that our troops are safe and that Iraq is stable.”

He added, “I’m going to continue to gather information to find out whether those conditions still hold.”

It’s been more than two years since Mr. Obama has visited Iraq, which Republicans have used as a point of criticism. After dismissing an invitation from Mr. McCain to visit Iraq together this summer as a “political stunt,” Mr. Obama began making preparations for his own trip to Iraq.

Dates of his visit have not been disclosed for security reasons, aides said, but his trip will be part of a Congressional delegation in his capacity as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

“My job is to make sure that the strategic issues that we face, not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan,” Mr. Obama said, “that those are all taken into account and dealt with in a way that enhances America’s national security interests over the long term.”