Rather proving that it's near impossible to gather representatives from 184 nations together in one place for 11 days without tripping over someones important anniversary the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change's (UNFCCC) June meeting in Bonn, Germany broke up promptly on Saturday (14/6/14) evening.
As I said at the time rather then producing a tangible result this meeting was intended to lay the ground work for the COP20 Summit in late 2014. That meeting itself is intended to lay the ground work for the COP21 Summit at the end of 2015. As a result although I have many hours of reading ahead of me before October I may end up with little to say about that reading.
However the fact that the Bonn meeting is now over means that I can say what I like about the corruption scandal regarding the proposed 2022 World Cup in Qatar that has recently engulfed FIFA.
At the time it was announced the news that Qatar was being awarded the 2022 World Cup raised a few eyebrows and more then one allegation of bribery. The main reason for this is that World Cups tend to be held in June/August and in a desert country such as Qatar those months are normally brutally hot. Still having very strong memories of that one time it hit 44C in Seville, Spain forcing even the most hardy locals to give up and have a bit of a cry I think it is hard to convey just how hot Qatar gets in the summer.
However at this 2014 World Cup temperatures are tending to hover around a very pleasant 20-25C but if they go beyond 32C there will be enforced drinks/cool down breaks every 30 minutes or so. In Qatar summer temperatures regularly exceed 50C dropping to around 40C at night. This is roughly the same as temperatures in northern Mali and the rest of the Sahara. When the UN authorised a peacekeeping mission in Mali they did so on the provision that they would not provide advanced communication equipment (radios etc) on the grounds that the plastic components would simply melt in the heat. As such there is a very real risk that players and supporters will die of heat exhaustion during a Qatar World Cup.
Of course in their bid Qatar assured FIFA that by 2022 they would have advanced air conditioning systems in place in the stadiums to reduce the temperature. However since then it has emerged that Qatar in fact won't be doing that and are currently pleading with FIFA to move the World Cup away from the summer period where it has been played since the 1930's to the middle of the winter where most nations are in the midst of their usual, domestic football seasons.
As such it should come as little surprise that recently whistle-blowers/leakers/hackers ( I prefer the term "Heroes") released data revealing pretty much exactly how and how much each FIFA member had been bribed to award the 2022 World Cup to Qatar. The intention was obviously to force a re-vote on the 2022 competition and FIFA have promised to do that if their 'investigation' finds the evidence to be accurate.
What I have a problem with is the decision by The (London) Times newspaper which despite Murdoch ownership is still very much the official mouth-piece of the UK Establishment to publish all this evidence on Sunday June 1st (1/6/14). This was of course intended to ruin the World Cup because the British Establishment prefers it if its subjects are kept unaware of other nations and the host - Brazil - is pretty much mainly rainforest.
However the publication was primarily intended to target the UNFCCC meeting. As I've said many times before the Gulf Monarchies - of which Qatar is one - are very opposed to the entire UNFCCC process and they intend to use their fossil fuel wealth to destroy the process either by bribing or intimidating nations. As such the UK was hoping that the FIFA issue would be used as a metaphor within the Bonn meeting to find out which nations are happy with their bribes, which nations are wavering and which nations are very opposed. The intention being to help identify those who can be considered allies, those who need to be offered more money and those who need to be intimidated.
00:40 on 16/6/14 (UK date).
Sunday, 15 June 2014
Seriously(!) Every Game.
That's not going to get tiresome.
Anyway we are currently at half-time in the second Group E game of the 2014 World Cup. The big scandal so far occurred in roughly the 25th minute when France's Pogba - who sounds like he's escaped from the Teletubbies - was brought down by Honduras' Palacios. In a late, lunging challenge Palacios first smashed Pogba in the knee then as the pair fell to the ground stamped on his ankle. In the English Premier League this would be an instant red card for a dangerous foul. However more generally it would have been a yellow card for the contact with the knee followed by a second yellow card for the stamp on the ankle. Reasonably though the referee can only issue one yellow card per player per incident.
However immediately following the incident Pogba raised his arms in protest. This prompted Palacios to roll around on the ground as if he'd just been knocked out by a champion boxer. This was a clear and deliberate attempt to get Pogba sent off for violent conduct which should have earned Palacios a rarely seen third yellow card for simulating an injury. In the end the referee gave both Palacios and Pogba one yellow card each.
Fortunately justice was served at around 40 minutes where Palacios barged Pogba in Honduras' penalty area prompting him to fall over. In normal circumstances I would have said that Pogba went down a little too easily but on this occasion it seems fair that Palacios was sent off with a straight red card and Benzema put France 1-0 up from the resulting penalty.
20:00 on 15/6/14 (UK date).
Edited at around 22:55 on 15/6/14 (UK date) to add;
Well isn't this turning into a nasty discussion about a rules based system?
Anyway literally moments after I'd finished writing the above (48th minute) Benezema blasted the ball across the Honduran goal. It then hit the inside of the goal-post without crossing the line. The ball then ricocheted across the face of the goal before the Honduran keeper bundled the ball towards the back of the net. After all its trajectory was carrying it there anyway. To the naked eye it looked very much as though Valladeres had carried the whole of the ball across the goal-line fulfilling the technical definition of a goal.
However as part of a long running discussion this World Cup features a German goal-line technology system although as part of a trial the referees are not allowed to consult that technology. However in the computer animations that were broadcast in the stadium the technology declared that when the ball struck the post there was no goal but when Valladeres bundled the ball there was a goal. As such the goal was awarded as a Valladeres own goal.
Having had a look at the slow motion replays though I am still not convinced that 1-2 millimetres of the ball had wholly crossed the goal-line. This though only serves to highlight why I dislike goal-line technology in football because football is a human game and humans make mistakes. For example how do we know that goal-line wasn't 1-2 millimetres too wide?
This game of course gave France the opportunity to exercise the demons of the 2010 World Cup. Basically what happened there is that in a qualification play-off France's Henry blatantly controlled the ball with his hand directly before scoring the winning goal. Unfortunately the referee missed this and France went through to the finals instead Ireland. Despite having some Irish relatives I think France's only mistake was turning up in South Africa as if they didn't have the right to be there. After all it is a simple rule of football that you must support the team that knocks you out.
Proving that they're still rather annoying though the French decided to play around with the idea that perhaps they should apologise for the second goal. For example there was some debate as to whether Evra would permanently go off with an ankle injury voluntarily putting France down to 10 men. Fortunately France and Evra got over it and Benezema went on to score again in the 72 minute meaning that France won 3-0. I think even Valladeres will be happy to agree that Benezema got a hat-trick.
Anyway we are currently at half-time in the second Group E game of the 2014 World Cup. The big scandal so far occurred in roughly the 25th minute when France's Pogba - who sounds like he's escaped from the Teletubbies - was brought down by Honduras' Palacios. In a late, lunging challenge Palacios first smashed Pogba in the knee then as the pair fell to the ground stamped on his ankle. In the English Premier League this would be an instant red card for a dangerous foul. However more generally it would have been a yellow card for the contact with the knee followed by a second yellow card for the stamp on the ankle. Reasonably though the referee can only issue one yellow card per player per incident.
However immediately following the incident Pogba raised his arms in protest. This prompted Palacios to roll around on the ground as if he'd just been knocked out by a champion boxer. This was a clear and deliberate attempt to get Pogba sent off for violent conduct which should have earned Palacios a rarely seen third yellow card for simulating an injury. In the end the referee gave both Palacios and Pogba one yellow card each.
Fortunately justice was served at around 40 minutes where Palacios barged Pogba in Honduras' penalty area prompting him to fall over. In normal circumstances I would have said that Pogba went down a little too easily but on this occasion it seems fair that Palacios was sent off with a straight red card and Benzema put France 1-0 up from the resulting penalty.
20:00 on 15/6/14 (UK date).
Edited at around 22:55 on 15/6/14 (UK date) to add;
Well isn't this turning into a nasty discussion about a rules based system?
Anyway literally moments after I'd finished writing the above (48th minute) Benezema blasted the ball across the Honduran goal. It then hit the inside of the goal-post without crossing the line. The ball then ricocheted across the face of the goal before the Honduran keeper bundled the ball towards the back of the net. After all its trajectory was carrying it there anyway. To the naked eye it looked very much as though Valladeres had carried the whole of the ball across the goal-line fulfilling the technical definition of a goal.
However as part of a long running discussion this World Cup features a German goal-line technology system although as part of a trial the referees are not allowed to consult that technology. However in the computer animations that were broadcast in the stadium the technology declared that when the ball struck the post there was no goal but when Valladeres bundled the ball there was a goal. As such the goal was awarded as a Valladeres own goal.
Having had a look at the slow motion replays though I am still not convinced that 1-2 millimetres of the ball had wholly crossed the goal-line. This though only serves to highlight why I dislike goal-line technology in football because football is a human game and humans make mistakes. For example how do we know that goal-line wasn't 1-2 millimetres too wide?
This game of course gave France the opportunity to exercise the demons of the 2010 World Cup. Basically what happened there is that in a qualification play-off France's Henry blatantly controlled the ball with his hand directly before scoring the winning goal. Unfortunately the referee missed this and France went through to the finals instead Ireland. Despite having some Irish relatives I think France's only mistake was turning up in South Africa as if they didn't have the right to be there. After all it is a simple rule of football that you must support the team that knocks you out.
Proving that they're still rather annoying though the French decided to play around with the idea that perhaps they should apologise for the second goal. For example there was some debate as to whether Evra would permanently go off with an ankle injury voluntarily putting France down to 10 men. Fortunately France and Evra got over it and Benezema went on to score again in the 72 minute meaning that France won 3-0. I think even Valladeres will be happy to agree that Benezema got a hat-trick.
Suddenly it Sounds Like I'm a Switzerland Fan.
Having returning from smoking a cigarette I was all ready to explain how after nine games the 2014 World Cup has provided us with it's first draw with the Switzerland v Ecuador game finishing 1-1.
I would have then gone on to explain that while I was most certainly not making accusations of corruption or match fixing I would have thought that result would have been slightly unfair on the Swiss due to an ever so slight bias on the part of the referee towards Ecuador.
The problem really began around 20 minutes in with the free kick that led to Valenica's goal for Ecuador. Following the protocol the referee got out his foam spray and marked where the foul had taken place and where the free kick should have been taken from. He then marked out the line 10 yards away where the nearest defending player could stand. Whilst he was doing this the Ecuadorian player moved the ball about a foot to his right improving the angle of the cross he was about to deliver. The Swiss players protested this and the referee ignored them. A similar thing happened on a couple of other occasions throughout the match but no goals were scored.
After Switzerland had equalised at the start of the second half things got really bad at around 70 minutes when Switzerland took the lead only for the goal to be wrongly disallowed for off-side. The problem was that the goal scorer was onside when the ball was played forward. However another Swiss player sold the Ecuadorian defender a dummy by making it look like he was going for the ball only for it to pass between his legs. This caused the defender to knock the ball backwards into the path of the goal scorer. As a player can only be off-side from a ball that is being played forward this meant the player was onside and the goal should have stood. On this occasion I think it was technically a mistake by the linesman but Mexico also suffered in their game against Cameroon due this somewhat questionable understanding of the off-side rule.
One thing the referee did get absolutely right though was Switzerland's penalty call in the first half because although the ball did technically strike the Ecuadorian defender on the arm his arms were folded across his chest at the time meaning that if the ball hadn't struck his arms it would have struck his chest instead and the effect would have been the same.
Fortunately this is all something of an academic argument because pretty much at the moment I turned away from the game Seferovic scored Switzerland's winner with the last kick of the game. So I suppose we could discuss why my smoking appears to cause goals to be scored. However I feel the more pressing question is why has it always been the case that all this knowledge and insight into football suddenly disappears the moment I step inside a betting shop.
18:15 on 15/6/14 (UK date).
I would have then gone on to explain that while I was most certainly not making accusations of corruption or match fixing I would have thought that result would have been slightly unfair on the Swiss due to an ever so slight bias on the part of the referee towards Ecuador.
The problem really began around 20 minutes in with the free kick that led to Valenica's goal for Ecuador. Following the protocol the referee got out his foam spray and marked where the foul had taken place and where the free kick should have been taken from. He then marked out the line 10 yards away where the nearest defending player could stand. Whilst he was doing this the Ecuadorian player moved the ball about a foot to his right improving the angle of the cross he was about to deliver. The Swiss players protested this and the referee ignored them. A similar thing happened on a couple of other occasions throughout the match but no goals were scored.
After Switzerland had equalised at the start of the second half things got really bad at around 70 minutes when Switzerland took the lead only for the goal to be wrongly disallowed for off-side. The problem was that the goal scorer was onside when the ball was played forward. However another Swiss player sold the Ecuadorian defender a dummy by making it look like he was going for the ball only for it to pass between his legs. This caused the defender to knock the ball backwards into the path of the goal scorer. As a player can only be off-side from a ball that is being played forward this meant the player was onside and the goal should have stood. On this occasion I think it was technically a mistake by the linesman but Mexico also suffered in their game against Cameroon due this somewhat questionable understanding of the off-side rule.
One thing the referee did get absolutely right though was Switzerland's penalty call in the first half because although the ball did technically strike the Ecuadorian defender on the arm his arms were folded across his chest at the time meaning that if the ball hadn't struck his arms it would have struck his chest instead and the effect would have been the same.
Fortunately this is all something of an academic argument because pretty much at the moment I turned away from the game Seferovic scored Switzerland's winner with the last kick of the game. So I suppose we could discuss why my smoking appears to cause goals to be scored. However I feel the more pressing question is why has it always been the case that all this knowledge and insight into football suddenly disappears the moment I step inside a betting shop.
18:15 on 15/6/14 (UK date).
Friday, 13 June 2014
Is it Too Soon For an England Excuse?
Yes I know, technically England don't play their opening World Cup game until tomorrow but this has been burning a hole in my head ever since England's wondrous 0-0 draw with a 10 man Honduras last Saturday (7/6/14).
I suppose we could argue for hours about the effects of weather delays (there will be many in the rainforest), the virtues of Daniel Sturridge versus Danny Welbeck or even why Glen Johnson is the best right-back the nation has to offer. However I think this is all avoiding the crucial issue which is UEFA's latest guidance on the issue of physical contact whilst tackling.
As this was written by a French striker I don't have the exact translation to hand. However I gather it is something along the lines of; "You must be mindful of your opponent's safety whilst tackling." This rule was brought in primarily to prevent vicious and spiteful lunges against players knees and ankles because injuries in those areas can completely end a players career. Quite a nice example of the type of tackle that is to be avoided was provided in tonight's game between Spain and the Netherlands for which Spain were awarded a penalty.
Unfortunately in the English Premier league this guidance has been interpreted to mean; "All tackling is banned." As a result you get all the nonsense about Chelsea "Parking the bus in mid-field" whenever they attempt to play pretty normal football. This rather strange interpretation of the rules was perhaps most visible during the recent FA Cup final during which Arsenal players seemed to assume that every time they were dispossessed of the ball the referee should immediately award them a free kick and issue the opposing player with a yellow card.
The problem is that no-one else in Europe let alone the wider world of football has interpreted this rule in this way meaning that tackling is still most certainly allowed. As a result all opposing teams need to do is muscle England's prima donna's out of the game and the best they can hope for is a draw.
As a result I think the plan is that England will lose to Italy before drawing with Uruguay and Costa Rica meaning that the winner of Uruguay V Costa Rica is likely to go through at England's expense. The UK will then spend the rest of the tournament bemoaning this "'elf & safety nonsense" in order to lay the groundwork for yet another Conservative Party campaign against "needless red tape" such as the minimum wage and restrictions on zero hours contracts. I believe US actor Harrison Ford was injured on the set of the new "Star Wars" movie to highlight just this point.
So in summary; Seriously, based on their respective FA Cup final performances Arsenal have got a better chance fielding the women's team next season.
21:20 on 13/6/14 (UK date).
Edited at around 00:10 on 15/6/14 (UK date) to add;
England have just finished their opening World Cup game against Italy and they lost 2-1. However with Italy hitting the post twice and having a shot cleared off the line it could have easily been 5-1.The problem was quite simply that England lacked structure meaning that once the heat had blunted the speed of England's youthful team the more experienced Italians were able to sit on them and control the game using a tactic known as "defending."
There remains though the serious question of whether England's manager Roy Hodgson is actually trying to lose by making some downright bizarre tactical choices. For example Wayne Rooney who is widely regarded as England's best striker was stuck out on the left wing while Adam Lallana - a natural left-winger was left sitting on the bench.
So here's a crazy thought for the next game; Play Rooney and Sturridge as strikers in front of midfield made up of Lallana on the left, Gerrard and Henderson in the centre and Sterling on the right because Welbeck, Barkley, Wilshire and Oxlade-Chamberlain are kind of OK players to bring on as substitutes if you need to spice things up a bit. There is of course still the chronic lack of a holding mid-field player because although Gerrard and Lampard have the experience to fill in neither of them are naturals for the role.
I suppose we could argue for hours about the effects of weather delays (there will be many in the rainforest), the virtues of Daniel Sturridge versus Danny Welbeck or even why Glen Johnson is the best right-back the nation has to offer. However I think this is all avoiding the crucial issue which is UEFA's latest guidance on the issue of physical contact whilst tackling.
As this was written by a French striker I don't have the exact translation to hand. However I gather it is something along the lines of; "You must be mindful of your opponent's safety whilst tackling." This rule was brought in primarily to prevent vicious and spiteful lunges against players knees and ankles because injuries in those areas can completely end a players career. Quite a nice example of the type of tackle that is to be avoided was provided in tonight's game between Spain and the Netherlands for which Spain were awarded a penalty.
Unfortunately in the English Premier league this guidance has been interpreted to mean; "All tackling is banned." As a result you get all the nonsense about Chelsea "Parking the bus in mid-field" whenever they attempt to play pretty normal football. This rather strange interpretation of the rules was perhaps most visible during the recent FA Cup final during which Arsenal players seemed to assume that every time they were dispossessed of the ball the referee should immediately award them a free kick and issue the opposing player with a yellow card.
The problem is that no-one else in Europe let alone the wider world of football has interpreted this rule in this way meaning that tackling is still most certainly allowed. As a result all opposing teams need to do is muscle England's prima donna's out of the game and the best they can hope for is a draw.
As a result I think the plan is that England will lose to Italy before drawing with Uruguay and Costa Rica meaning that the winner of Uruguay V Costa Rica is likely to go through at England's expense. The UK will then spend the rest of the tournament bemoaning this "'elf & safety nonsense" in order to lay the groundwork for yet another Conservative Party campaign against "needless red tape" such as the minimum wage and restrictions on zero hours contracts. I believe US actor Harrison Ford was injured on the set of the new "Star Wars" movie to highlight just this point.
So in summary; Seriously, based on their respective FA Cup final performances Arsenal have got a better chance fielding the women's team next season.
21:20 on 13/6/14 (UK date).
Edited at around 00:10 on 15/6/14 (UK date) to add;
England have just finished their opening World Cup game against Italy and they lost 2-1. However with Italy hitting the post twice and having a shot cleared off the line it could have easily been 5-1.The problem was quite simply that England lacked structure meaning that once the heat had blunted the speed of England's youthful team the more experienced Italians were able to sit on them and control the game using a tactic known as "defending."
There remains though the serious question of whether England's manager Roy Hodgson is actually trying to lose by making some downright bizarre tactical choices. For example Wayne Rooney who is widely regarded as England's best striker was stuck out on the left wing while Adam Lallana - a natural left-winger was left sitting on the bench.
So here's a crazy thought for the next game; Play Rooney and Sturridge as strikers in front of midfield made up of Lallana on the left, Gerrard and Henderson in the centre and Sterling on the right because Welbeck, Barkley, Wilshire and Oxlade-Chamberlain are kind of OK players to bring on as substitutes if you need to spice things up a bit. There is of course still the chronic lack of a holding mid-field player because although Gerrard and Lampard have the experience to fill in neither of them are naturals for the role.
Mosul Falls, Obama Collapses.
As I think we all know US President Barack Obama withdrew all US troops from Iraq in October 2012 in the hope it would give him a boost in the 2012 Presidential election. Since then the situation in Iraq has steadily deteriorated.
Things really started going bad in January 2014 when a group called the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) returned from fighting in neighbouring Syria and seized Iraq's western Anbar province which includes major cities such as Ramadi and Fallujah. Having repelled attempts by the Iraqi government to re-take Anbar ISIL have, in the past week, expanded with a lightning offensive which has seen them seize much of the Ninevah and Salah al-Din provinces including the strategically vital oil town of Baiji. ISIL are now poised less then 100km from Iraq's capital Baghdad and have indicated that they intend to attack the city in the coming days.
This advance has got a lot of people speculating what ISIL's objective is but that is hardly a secret. In fact their objective is right there in their name. Put simply ISIL want to re-establish an Islamic state from the seventh century know the Levant (al-Sharm in Arabic). The reason why they want to do this is because according to Sunni Islamic prophecy the Levant is where the Messiah will appear atop of a white minaret in order to lead his followers in the ultimate war of good against evil that will ultimately destroy the world. Worryingly according to Shia Islamic prophecy the Levant is also where the false prophet will raise his army before being crushed by the army of true believers.
Despite all these apocalyptic prophecies I think that the Gulf Monarchies who have been funding, equipping and therefore influencing ISIL as they fought in Syria have some more earth bound objectives to this offensive;
Syria: On the 3rd of June (3/6/14) Syria held its Presidential election which was overwhelmingly won by the incumbent Bashar al-Assad. Rather predictably this prompted a storm of criticism from the nations that have been trying to overthrow the Syrian government. However that criticism was severely muted by the growing acceptance that the balance of power in the conflict has shifted so far in favour of the Syrian government that the insurgency simply cannot win. Having been forced to surrender Homs they are now pinned down in the city of Aleppo and a large area in the north-east of the country which is largely desert. This allows the Syrian government to concentrate its forces on retaking Aleppo meaning that this war could soon, finally be over.
Facing defeat the insurgents have been crying out for more and better weapons including American made shoulder launched anti-aircraft missiles (MANPADS). So far rather then simply saying no the US has been stalling on this request so in response ISIL seem to have launched this offensive to raid Iraq's national armoury. With the situation being so fast moving it is hard to say exactly what ISIL have managed to lay their hands on but they have certainly taken possession of a lot of cash, ammunition, tanks, Humvees and other armoured vehicles along with heavy artillery and Scud-type missile systems. This last item is particularly alarming because even if they are not moved across the border into Syria they can be used to mount large scale attacks against Israeli population centres.
Climate Change: This latest ISIL offensive comes right in the middle of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change's (UNFCCC) June meeting. The sheer instability that the offensive creates is likely to disrupt the meeting as everyone tensely waits to see what happens next. However the impact is intended to be far more reaching because one of the key concerns over introducing a replacement to the Kyoto Protocol is whether or not the US will sign up to it. For example Australia has already strongly indicated that if the US doesn't sign up it won't be.
The main issue over whether the US will sign up is whether it will be given permission to do so by the Gulf Monarchies whose economies are entirely dependent on fossil fuels and therefore very opposed to the UNFCCC process. The main way that the Gulf Monarchies have been able to exert control over the US is through oil with the Obama terrified that a 1970's style oil shock will damage the US economy destroying the Democrats election chances. The cruel joke the Gulf Monarchies have been able to play is that they've used this fear to manipulate the US into doing things that make it even more dependent on Gulf oil. So we've seen Iranian oil taken off the market through sanctions, Libyan oil taken off the market through war and the US even seems to be pressing for Russian oil and gas to be taken off the market through sanctions over Ukraine.
Apart from increasing domestic production which is a strategic folly the only pressure valve left open to the US has been Iraqi oil. This ISIL offensive has very much put Iraqi oil production under threat with the global oil price surging over recent days. So by demonstrating that it can take Iraqi oil off the market the Gulf Monarchies are signalling that it has complete control over the US in an attempt to create a sense of inevitability that the UNFCCC process will fail in the hope that people will simply give up.
Afghanistan: While the ISIL's offensive in Iraq has been going on there has also been a dramatic increase in Taliban related violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan - most notably the assassination attempt on leading Presidential candidate Abdullah Abdullah and the attack on Karachi airport. When Afghanistan's next President is announced following the run-off vote the US will look to them to sign the Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) which will allow US troops to remain in the country following the planned withdrawal at the end of 2014. By showing that the Taliban are still highly capable of mounting attacks particularly against the Afghan government while highlighting that the US has no will to support the Iraq government the intention is to discourage the Afghans from signing the BSA meaning that the US are completely forced out of the region.
So I said it back in January when the ISIL's first offensive began and I'll say it again now. The US needs to intervene militarily in Iraq if only to send the message that it is prepared to stand by its allies and that it's not prepared to be pushed around. Ideally this would take the form of a short Libya-style air campaign that would take out ISIL's new cache of heavy weapons and blunt their advance to the point that the Iraqis can mount a fight back of their own. However for every day that Obama dithers that task becomes more difficult.
12:05 on 13/6/14 (UK date).
Things really started going bad in January 2014 when a group called the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) returned from fighting in neighbouring Syria and seized Iraq's western Anbar province which includes major cities such as Ramadi and Fallujah. Having repelled attempts by the Iraqi government to re-take Anbar ISIL have, in the past week, expanded with a lightning offensive which has seen them seize much of the Ninevah and Salah al-Din provinces including the strategically vital oil town of Baiji. ISIL are now poised less then 100km from Iraq's capital Baghdad and have indicated that they intend to attack the city in the coming days.
This advance has got a lot of people speculating what ISIL's objective is but that is hardly a secret. In fact their objective is right there in their name. Put simply ISIL want to re-establish an Islamic state from the seventh century know the Levant (al-Sharm in Arabic). The reason why they want to do this is because according to Sunni Islamic prophecy the Levant is where the Messiah will appear atop of a white minaret in order to lead his followers in the ultimate war of good against evil that will ultimately destroy the world. Worryingly according to Shia Islamic prophecy the Levant is also where the false prophet will raise his army before being crushed by the army of true believers.
Despite all these apocalyptic prophecies I think that the Gulf Monarchies who have been funding, equipping and therefore influencing ISIL as they fought in Syria have some more earth bound objectives to this offensive;
Syria: On the 3rd of June (3/6/14) Syria held its Presidential election which was overwhelmingly won by the incumbent Bashar al-Assad. Rather predictably this prompted a storm of criticism from the nations that have been trying to overthrow the Syrian government. However that criticism was severely muted by the growing acceptance that the balance of power in the conflict has shifted so far in favour of the Syrian government that the insurgency simply cannot win. Having been forced to surrender Homs they are now pinned down in the city of Aleppo and a large area in the north-east of the country which is largely desert. This allows the Syrian government to concentrate its forces on retaking Aleppo meaning that this war could soon, finally be over.
Facing defeat the insurgents have been crying out for more and better weapons including American made shoulder launched anti-aircraft missiles (MANPADS). So far rather then simply saying no the US has been stalling on this request so in response ISIL seem to have launched this offensive to raid Iraq's national armoury. With the situation being so fast moving it is hard to say exactly what ISIL have managed to lay their hands on but they have certainly taken possession of a lot of cash, ammunition, tanks, Humvees and other armoured vehicles along with heavy artillery and Scud-type missile systems. This last item is particularly alarming because even if they are not moved across the border into Syria they can be used to mount large scale attacks against Israeli population centres.
Climate Change: This latest ISIL offensive comes right in the middle of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change's (UNFCCC) June meeting. The sheer instability that the offensive creates is likely to disrupt the meeting as everyone tensely waits to see what happens next. However the impact is intended to be far more reaching because one of the key concerns over introducing a replacement to the Kyoto Protocol is whether or not the US will sign up to it. For example Australia has already strongly indicated that if the US doesn't sign up it won't be.
The main issue over whether the US will sign up is whether it will be given permission to do so by the Gulf Monarchies whose economies are entirely dependent on fossil fuels and therefore very opposed to the UNFCCC process. The main way that the Gulf Monarchies have been able to exert control over the US is through oil with the Obama terrified that a 1970's style oil shock will damage the US economy destroying the Democrats election chances. The cruel joke the Gulf Monarchies have been able to play is that they've used this fear to manipulate the US into doing things that make it even more dependent on Gulf oil. So we've seen Iranian oil taken off the market through sanctions, Libyan oil taken off the market through war and the US even seems to be pressing for Russian oil and gas to be taken off the market through sanctions over Ukraine.
Apart from increasing domestic production which is a strategic folly the only pressure valve left open to the US has been Iraqi oil. This ISIL offensive has very much put Iraqi oil production under threat with the global oil price surging over recent days. So by demonstrating that it can take Iraqi oil off the market the Gulf Monarchies are signalling that it has complete control over the US in an attempt to create a sense of inevitability that the UNFCCC process will fail in the hope that people will simply give up.
Afghanistan: While the ISIL's offensive in Iraq has been going on there has also been a dramatic increase in Taliban related violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan - most notably the assassination attempt on leading Presidential candidate Abdullah Abdullah and the attack on Karachi airport. When Afghanistan's next President is announced following the run-off vote the US will look to them to sign the Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) which will allow US troops to remain in the country following the planned withdrawal at the end of 2014. By showing that the Taliban are still highly capable of mounting attacks particularly against the Afghan government while highlighting that the US has no will to support the Iraq government the intention is to discourage the Afghans from signing the BSA meaning that the US are completely forced out of the region.
So I said it back in January when the ISIL's first offensive began and I'll say it again now. The US needs to intervene militarily in Iraq if only to send the message that it is prepared to stand by its allies and that it's not prepared to be pushed around. Ideally this would take the form of a short Libya-style air campaign that would take out ISIL's new cache of heavy weapons and blunt their advance to the point that the Iraqis can mount a fight back of their own. However for every day that Obama dithers that task becomes more difficult.
12:05 on 13/6/14 (UK date).
Thursday, 12 June 2014
The 2014 World Cup Opening Ceremony.
With the kick-off of the opening match between Brazil and Croatia taking place in a little over an hour the 2014 Football World Cup has just opened with a short opening ceremony. Unlike the Olympic spectaculars World Cup opening ceremonies only normally last around 30 minutes and are basically just a performance of that year's World Cup song.
The 2014 opening ceremony was no exception and basically just provided a quick introduction to Brazil - the host nation. The first sequence centred on Brazil's vast rainforests which contain a variety of plant and animal life, has a giant river - the Amazon - running through the middle of it and is home to tribes of indigenous Indians.
The second sequence covered Brazil's colonisation by Portugal in 1500 which led to it being heavily involved in the African slave trade. Through different styles of dance the ceremony then demonstrated the effect this had on bringing different influences into Brazil's cultural melting pot. So there was Portuguese Fandango meeting with French Cotillion that was brought in from the US' slave owning south along with the traditionally Brazilian Samba which has its roots in African music along with touches of Latin jazz which has its roots in American jazz which itself has roots in the spiritual music of African slaves in America.
As such the majority of the ceremony seemed to be an insult to the official World Cup Song "We Are One (Ole Ola)." A spectacularly poor choice this song absolutely drips with American arrogance being sung Pitbull (a Cuban American) and Jennifer Lopez (a Puerto Rican American) with only a small contribution by Brazilian singer Claudia Leitte. The song's main problem is that it is sung mainly in Spanish while in Brazil they speak Portuguese rather giving the impression that Americans can't tell the difference. Adding insult to injury the US has been trying to draw comparisons between Jennifer Lopez's rather less then stellar career and personal life and Rihanna since their appearance together at the iHeartRadio awards. Also the US have been using the issue of whether Jennifer Lopez would actually turn up following the recent collapse of yet another short lived romantic relationship to needle the Brazilian hosts over the problems they've had delivering the stadiums and infrastructure in time for the competition.
So I for one am not wholly convinced that the sound problems that meant no-one got to hear the official World Cup song were entirely accidental.
19:20 on 12/6/14 (UK date).
The 2014 opening ceremony was no exception and basically just provided a quick introduction to Brazil - the host nation. The first sequence centred on Brazil's vast rainforests which contain a variety of plant and animal life, has a giant river - the Amazon - running through the middle of it and is home to tribes of indigenous Indians.
The second sequence covered Brazil's colonisation by Portugal in 1500 which led to it being heavily involved in the African slave trade. Through different styles of dance the ceremony then demonstrated the effect this had on bringing different influences into Brazil's cultural melting pot. So there was Portuguese Fandango meeting with French Cotillion that was brought in from the US' slave owning south along with the traditionally Brazilian Samba which has its roots in African music along with touches of Latin jazz which has its roots in American jazz which itself has roots in the spiritual music of African slaves in America.
As such the majority of the ceremony seemed to be an insult to the official World Cup Song "We Are One (Ole Ola)." A spectacularly poor choice this song absolutely drips with American arrogance being sung Pitbull (a Cuban American) and Jennifer Lopez (a Puerto Rican American) with only a small contribution by Brazilian singer Claudia Leitte. The song's main problem is that it is sung mainly in Spanish while in Brazil they speak Portuguese rather giving the impression that Americans can't tell the difference. Adding insult to injury the US has been trying to draw comparisons between Jennifer Lopez's rather less then stellar career and personal life and Rihanna since their appearance together at the iHeartRadio awards. Also the US have been using the issue of whether Jennifer Lopez would actually turn up following the recent collapse of yet another short lived romantic relationship to needle the Brazilian hosts over the problems they've had delivering the stadiums and infrastructure in time for the competition.
So I for one am not wholly convinced that the sound problems that meant no-one got to hear the official World Cup song were entirely accidental.
19:20 on 12/6/14 (UK date).
And I'm Back
Yesterday (11/6/14) my PC experienced a blue screen crash meaning that the screen went blue and it froze. Obviously that made it a little difficult to run a diagnostic on it but based on the way the hard-disc kept failing to engage I suspect that what happened is that six years of heavy use caused the hard-disc to fail.
Anyway I've now got a new, almost identical machine under the service contract while the old one has been sent off for diagnostic examination. The only complaint is that I'm now struggling to to come to terms with Windows new, idiotic operating system which may be great for tablets and smartphones but this is a desktop PC.
18:50 on 12/6/14 (UK date.)
Anyway I've now got a new, almost identical machine under the service contract while the old one has been sent off for diagnostic examination. The only complaint is that I'm now struggling to to come to terms with Windows new, idiotic operating system which may be great for tablets and smartphones but this is a desktop PC.
18:50 on 12/6/14 (UK date.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
