Israel mismanaged Lebanon war, - A report on the way Israel managed last summer`s Second Lebanon War Monday prompted demands that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Amir Peretz resign, but the government is likely to sit tight. An inquiry committee the government appointed issued the report, yet its chairman, retired judge Eliyahu Winograd, minced no words in slamming the way Olmert, Peretz and military Chief of General Staff Dani Halutz went to war and conducted it.

Winograd and his colleagues -- two retired generals, a professor of law and a professor who specializes in policymaking -- gave Olmert and Peretz copies of their top-secret report and then presented an unclassified version to the media.
It covers only the first five days of the war that erupted last July 12 when Hezbollah ambushed an Israeli border patrol and kidnapped two soldiers. Eight other soldiers were killed. Another report is expected later this year to cover the remaining 28 days.

The committee faulted Olmert for having 'made up his mind (to strike Hezbollah) hastily, despite the fact that no detailed military plan was submitted to him and without asking for one.' Olmert is responsible for the fact that 'there was no serious discussion of the relationships' between the war`s goals and the action the army was authorized to take.

Olmert 'made a personal contribution to the fact that the declared goals were over-ambitious and not feasible,' the committee added.
Last week Maj. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, who at the time was chief of operations at GHQ, said that two hours after the kidnapping it became clear a military operation would not bring about the kidnapped soldiers` release.

The committee said the prime minister did not adapt his plans even when 'it became clear that the assumptions and expectations of Israel`s actions were not realistic and were not materializing.'
Peretz 'did not have knowledge or experience in military, political or governmental matters ... (nor) good knowledge of the basic principles of using military force to achieve political goals.' Nevertheless he made decisions without 'consultations with experienced political and professional experts.'

He did not examine the army`s plans, check the army`s preparedness and fitness nor 'the fit between the goals set and the modes of action presented and authorized for achieving them.'
Halutz, the committee said, 'responded impulsively' to the kidnapping. He 'did not alert the political echelon to the serious shortcomings in the preparedness and the fitness of the armed forces for an extensive ground operation.' Nor did he present the political leaders the internal debates within the Israel Defense Forces on 'the fit between the stated goals and the authorized modes of actions.'

The Cabinet consequently 'voted for a vague decision, without understanding and knowing its nature and implications,' the committee added. Some 160 Israelis were killed in that war.
Opposition members promptly demanded the government resign.
Olmert is guilty of 'criminal negligence,' charged former Agriculture Minister Israel Katz of the Likud. Gilad Erdan, a Likud Knesset member, said in a television debate that if the incumbent prime minister and defense minister again had to send soldiers to battle, 'I don`t know with what sort of a feeling they (the soldiers) will go.'

Halutz resigned and is now studying at Harvard University. Peretz already served notice that even if he wins his Labor Party`s May 28 primaries he does not want to remain defense minister. However, he was not going to quit -- yet.
Olmert went on the air, admitting 'mistakes were made.' But he added: 'It would not be right to resign and I do not intend to do so.'
Two public-opinion polls Monday showed that an overwhelming majority wants Olmert and Peretz to quit.
Sixty-five percent of the respondents to a Channel 2 TV poll and 69 percent of the people polled by Israel Radio said Olmert should resign. Three-quarters of the respondents to those two polls said Peretz should go home.

However, there were no significant immediate cracks in the governing coalition. Senior members of Olmert`s Kadima Party argued he should be allowed to carry on.
A new election campaign would delay implementing the Winograd committee`s various recommendations by 'almost a year,' warned Cabinet Secretary Israel Maimon.
Interior Minister Ronnie Bar-On maintained it is the wrong time to delay implementation. 'Neither Hamas, nor Hezbollah nor the Syrians are waiting. We don`t have the luxury of going to elections now,' he argued.

Hebrew University political science professor Avraham Diskin noted in a telephone interview there is no majority for early elections. Only 13 months have passed since the last elections, and Knesset members do not tend to hold elections so soon, he said.
Moreover, the report improved the chances of retired Vice Adm. Ami Ayalon winning the Labor Party primaries, and Ayalon wants to replace Peretz as defense minister, not quit the coalition.
Israelis, continued Diskin, are 'tired and cynical (about the political system). There is a lot of disappointment.' However, there is no enticing alternative to the current leadership. Even former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu of the Likud, who polls show would have won elections if they were held now, or former Prime Minister Ehud Barak of Labor, do not seem impeccable.
'You need a positive motivation when you go to demonstrate,' and whoever is elected now might be worse than Olmert, he suggested.

Gideon Rabat, also of the Hebrew University`s political science department, told United Press International he believed that 'revulsion' towards Netanyahu has helped keep Olmert in power.
But former minister Uzi Baram, who is now an independent political analyst, said he believed Olmert and Peretz`s efforts to cling to power can succeed for only two or three weeks. Their approval ratings have been low for a long time, he noted.

Their political future depends on the public`s opinion and the media that influences it, experts said. A former deputy chief of general staff, Uzi Dayan, is organizing a demonstration Thursday in Tel Aviv, and several groups that want Olmert to resign called supporters to go there. They include soldiers who fought in the war.

A popular move to depose the government got Prime Minister Golda Meir to resign after the 1973 war. Continued demonstrations outside Prime Minister Menachem Begin`s official residence got him to quit after the Sabra and Chatilla Massacre in the 1982 Lebanon War.

Text reveals more ancient secrets, Experts are "lost for words" to have found that a medieval prayer book has yielded yet another key ancient text buried within its parchment.
Works by mathematician Archimedes and the politician Hyperides had already been found buried within the book, known as the Archimedes Palimpsest.

But now advanced imaging technology has revealed a third text - a commentary on the philosopher Aristotle.

Project director William Noel called it a "sensational find".

The prayer book was written in the 13th Century by a scribe called John Myronas.


Just the fact that I could see the words gave me shivers
Professor Roger Easton
But instead of using fresh parchment for his work, he employed pages from five existing books.

Dr Noel, curator of manuscripts at the US-based Walters Art Museum and a co-author of a forthcoming book on the Archimedes Palimpsest, said: "It's a rather brutal process, but it means you can reuse parchment if you are short of it.

"You take books off shelves, you scrub off the text, you cut them up and you make a new book."

In 1906 it came to light that one of the books recycled to form the medieval manuscript contained a unique work by Archimedes.


And in 2002, modern imaging technology not only provided a clearer view of this famous mathematician's words, but it also revealed another text - the only known manuscript of Hyperides, an Athenian politician from the 4th Century BC.

"At this point you start thinking striking one palimpsest is gold, and striking two is utterly astonishing. But then something even more extraordinary happened," Dr Noel told the BBC News website.

One of the recycled books was proving extremely difficult to read, explained Roger Easton, a professor of imaging science at Rochester Institute of Technology, US.

"We were using a technique called multispectral imaging," he said.

This digital imaging technique uses photographs taken at different wavelengths to enhance particular characteristics of the imaged area.

Subtle adjustments of this method, explained Professor Easton, suddenly enabled these hidden words to be revealed.

"Even though I couldn't read Ancient Greek, just the fact that I could see the words gave me shivers," he said.

Foundations of logic

An international team of experts began to scrutinize the ancient words, explained Reviel Netz, professor of ancient science at Stanford University, US, and another co-author of the palimpsest book.


A series of clues, such as spotting a key name in the margin, led the team to its conclusion.

"The philosophical passage in the Archimedes Palimpsest is now definitely identified as a relatively early commentary to Aristotle's Categories," said Professor Netz.

He said that Aristotle's Categories had served as the foundation for the study of logic throughout western history.

Further study has revealed the most likely author of this unique commentary is Alexander of Aphrodisias, Professor Robert Sharples from University College London, UK, told BBC News.

If this is the case, he said, "it gives us part of a commentary previously supposed lost by the most important of those ancient commentators on Aristotle".


I am at a loss for words at what this book has turned out to be
Dr Will Noel
A provisional translation of the commentary is currently being undertaken.

It reveals a debate on some aspects of Aristotle's theory of classification, such as: if the term "footed" is used for animals, can it be used to classify anything else, such as a bed?

The passage reads:

For as "foot" is ambiguous when applied to an animal and to a bed, so are "with feet" and "without feet". So by "in species" here [Aristotle] is saying "in formula".

For if it ever happens that the same name indicates the differentiae of genera that are different and not subordinate one to the other, they are at any rate not the same in formula.

Dr Noel said: "There is no more important philosopher in the world than Aristotle. To have early views in the 2nd and 3rd Century AD of Aristotle's Categories is just fantastic.

"We have one book that contains three texts from the ancient world that are absolutely central to our understanding of mathematics, politics and now philosophy," he said.

He added: "I am at a loss for words at what this book has turned out to be. To make these discoveries in the 21st Century is frankly nutty - it is just so exciting."

Life Less Ordinary, Are humans the only beings capable of thought in the cosmos? It doesn't bear thinking about. Astronomer Frank Drake developed the equation named after him in 1961 as a way to focus on the factors which determine how many intelligent planetary civilisations there are in our galaxy. Even if the most conservative estimate shows the answer to be one — meaning us — that must mean there are billions of sentient civilisations out there since there are more than 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe.

In Drake's time, no planets outside our solar system were known to exist. Currently more than 200 have been catalogued. The latest, discovered earlier this week by the European Southern Observatory's telescope in La Silla, Chile, is the smallest and most Earth-like found so far and raises all kinds of tantalising hopes of perhaps finding ET too one day. As astronomical distances go it's relatively close, being a mere 195 trillion km away, orbiting a dim red star known as Gliese 581.

But it's the first extrasolar planet discovered that orbits within the so-called habitable zone where surface water, the basis of life, could exist in liquid form if other conditions are right. "On the treasure map of the universe, one would be tempted to mark this planet with an X", says a member of the team from Grenoble University in France.

Earlier, the same hallmark had been reserved solely for the likes of Earth because humans considered their planet and themselves to be the focal point of all creation. That idyllic notion took a tumble when Copernicus defied all established doctrines and replaced the Earth with the Sun as the centre of the solar system.

Today, we know that this Sun too is nothing but an average outsider on the fringes of a run-of-the-mill galaxy lost among billions of other similar configurations in the cosmos. However, the fact that one of its tinier subsystems should be able to fund and harbour intelligent life which gropes for other thinking beings elsewhere, is enough to re-invoke the often contentious anthropic principle.

In its simplest form this states that because life exists in the universe, the universe must be so constructed as to allow life to evolve. Or as the Zen philosopher Alan Watts put it: As the ocean waves, so the universe peoples. When we find our fellow cosmic citizens, the Copernican revolution will have come full circle and finally be complete.

War by other means, An era in which diplomacy and espionage serve Israel's nuclear agenda
A new episode of Israel's espionage in Egypt was revealed this week -- the latest in a series of incidents, notwithstanding the 28-year-old "peace" between the two. This time, nuclear technology was the theme in question.

On Tuesday, Egyptian authorities said they had smashed a spy ring working for Israel which included an Egyptian engineer with Cairo's Atomic Energy Commission, an Irishman and a Japanese national.

Officials say, Mohamed Sayed Saber, 35, arrested in February, has been accused of and confessed to supplying information to the Israeli secret service Mossad on "the different activities" of Egypt's atomic energy body.

Yesterday, presidential spokesman Suleiman Awad said the latest Israeli espionage episode "came as no surprise to the Egyptian national security authorities who were very much alerted to the matter". He vowed that Egypt will not remain silent to espionage attempts by any country, including Israel.

In September last year, Egypt announced it was resuming its civilian nuclear programme after a 20-year freeze and said it planned to build at least one nuclear power plant by the year 2020.

The release of the espionage account comes against a backdrop of a new diplomatic confrontation over the shocking imbalance of arms that exists between Israel and Arab states. Ahead of a Middle East tour by US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who was in Cairo yesterday, Washington reaffirmed its commitment to Israel's military supremacy. The upgrading of US-Israeli military cooperation is being matched by two-track diplomatic manoeuvres that seek to ensure that Israel remains exempt from scrutiny of its nuclear programme while at the same time Arab countries that have not joined the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) are being pressured into doing so.

Preparations are already under way for the five yearly review conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). On 30 April in Vienna, the headquarters of the International Agency for Atomic Energy (IAEA), a meeting is scheduled to kick-start a three-year preparatory process of the NPT review conference due to be held in 2010 in New York. Diplomatic sources say the Vienna meeting is confronted with an orchestrated attempt on the part of some Western capitals to eliminate any reference to the need for Israel to join the NPT.

A reference on the need for all countries in the Middle East to join the NPT first appeared in an official document at the end of the 1995 NPT review conference in return for Egypt's agreement to sign an indefinite extension of the NPT. At the end of the 2000 NPT review conference Egypt, in coordination with other like-minded countries, managed to include a direct reference to Israel, alongside Pakistan and India. In 2005 the NPT review conference stalled over whether the Middle East should be included on the agenda. "We faced a clear attempt on the part of the US to remove precisely why we signed up for the indefinite extension in the first place," an Egyptian diplomat told Al-Ahram Weekly. Cairo, he said, was not the least concerned about whether it is blamed for stalling the conference. "What we care for is not to be fooled again."

Egyptian officials complain about the US determination to exempt Israel from nuclear non- proliferation responsibilities. According to one, "we were told to join the NPT in the 1960s to encourage Israel to follow but Israel did not and then we were told to join the Conventional Test Ban Treaty to encourage Israel to join the NPT but again Israel did not. We cannot be fooled again."

Egypt was alarmed when it received a letter sent by the British foreign secretary, in her capacity as the rotating chair of the 2010 NPT review conference, calling for the launch of the preparatory process, and noted it included no reference to the Middle East.

"For us this issue is non-negotiable. We are talking about one of the obvious elements of the NPT -- the universality of the regime," says Assistant Foreign Minister Naila Gabr.

Egypt wants the 2010 conference, which normally lasts for three weeks, to examine specific issues related to the universality of the comprehensive safeguards system, especially since Israeli nuclear facilities have never been inspected by the IAEA. Moreover, Egypt is worried about the guarantees provided to non-nuclear states to ensure they can peacefully use nuclear energy. The hostility expressed by the West, especially the US and Britain, towards Iran over its nuclear research sends a message to states keen to develop nuclear programmes for peaceful uses: whatever programmes they undertake can easily be interrupted if they are deemed too advanced. Meanwhile, Cairo has been sending messages to capitals concerned, including Washington, that it has no plans to join the OPCW unless a serious and sustainable effort is made to address the Israeli nuclear file.

The message was delivered to OPCW Director-General Rogelio Pfirter this week during talks in Cairo. Pfirter was confronted with a wave of objections to the accession of Egypt to the OPCW prior to the dismantling of Israel's nuclear arsenal. Egypt rejected Pfirter's suggestion that by joining the OPCW Egypt would help the cause of peace in the region. It argued instead that the growing military imbalance in the Middle East in favour of Israel is the main reason behind the failure of efforts to establish peace in the region.

Pelosi's recent regional trip signals a new approach to Washington's Middle East,While its alliance with Israel has long been anathema to the Arab public, there is little debate that America's standing in the Arab world has deteriorated since United States President George W Bush assumed office in January 2001. This decline, which accelerated after the US invasion of Iraq, is attributable to US policies and posture. Commentators have endlessly speculated that the image problem has permanently alienated a generation, and could take decades before the US again is seen as a moderating force, if not a beacon of hope in the Arab world. However, the recent regional trip by Representative Nancy Pelosi (Democrat-California), which included stops in Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia, suggests an American recovery could occur more rapidly than predicted.

This is a unique period of history in Arab politics. The last decade has seen the Arab media, thanks largely to satellite television and the internet, grow more assertive and independent. Because there is no longer a monopoly on information, the Arab public is far more informed about current events than ever before. Arab governments are more accountable to their citizens, and unpopular American policies can no longer be sanitised before being consumed by the public.

One positive result of the September 11 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the lingering Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Lebanon, and the US emphasis on promoting Arab reform is the emergence of a serious societal debate about the region's future. This debate is not limited to US-Arab relations, but includes internal discussions about governance, extremism, religion, and foreign policy -- Arab-Israeli, Arab-Iranian, and intra-Arab relations.

Though it is an internal debate in which the US can only play a secondary role, the Bush Administration has wrongly assumed it can shape the debate. Its actions and reactions -- on democracy and reform, public diplomacy, and policy -- have collectively proved either ineffective or lacking credibility.

A decade ago, a decision by the US to focus on promoting democracy and reform would likely have been more warmly received. During the George H W Bush and Clinton Administrations the US enjoyed favourable public opinion and warm relations with most nations in the region. Acting as a selfless agent of change, particularly by promoting economic reform, education, and women's empowerment, the US could have gotten credit for assisting the Arab world as it worked to reform itself. Unfortunately, given the context of the post-9/11 world, the "democracy and reform" program was seen as a self-serving attempt to force Arab governments into compliance with US regional interests. Moreover, the tone adapted by the Bush Administration in pushing reform was perceived as a not so subtle form of neo-imperialism. Individuals working with the Americans were condemned as puppets, discredited by the public even if they had the best of intentions -- which not all did.

The United States belatedly acknowledged the importance of public opinion -- or as they concluded, despite obvious cultural insensitivity, the "Arab street". But in formulating a new, aggressive public diplomacy strategy, the White House made fundamental mistakes. Flashy television commercials, glossy magazines, and a television station dedicated to propaganda may have worked in the past. But given the recent evolution in the Arab media, the strategy was an outdated spin. In essence, it is not the message, but the policies themselves that are problematic. The US would have been better served by increasing "soft diplomacy" -- investing in more programs such as the Middle East Partnership Initiative and USAID -- which have proved to be effective over the long term.

Today the problem ultimately lies in US policies. Despite its scepticism, the Arab public has always been willing to listen to America. But in return, it expects the US to demonstrate, in spite of deeply unpopular positions such as its unwavering support of Israel, that it has the region's best interests at heart. This requires the US to play an active role in resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict and conducting diplomacy throughout the region -- even with nations America views as pariahs.

This is why the Iraq Study Group (ISG) report was well received in the Arab world. Led by respected senior statesmen, James Baker and Lee Hamilton, the ISG provided a plan which required, among other things, for the US to refocus on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and aggressively re- engage in diplomacy -- including with Damascus and Tehran. Notably, the ISG did not call for an immediate withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, nor distancing itself from Tel Aviv, which would be wildly popular with the Arab public.

But the Bush Administration greeted the ISG report coolly, and opted to pursue its own "surge plan". True, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has recently attempted to promote Israeli-Palestinian dialog and re-engage with regional leaders. But given the Bush Administration's weakness at home, lack of credibility abroad, and stubbornness, Rice's efforts to date have not yielded demonstrable results.

Which brings us to Pelosi, who became Speaker of the House of Representatives after Democrats won control of Congress last November. The congressional role in foreign policy has never been clearly defined. Officially, the Congress merely supports or opposes the policies set by the President by utilising its constitutional power to provide or deny funding. But in special circumstances, such as when a president's power is weak, Congress occasionally plays a more direct role in diplomacy.

Pelosi and her fellow Democrats recently passed a legislation that Bush has promised to veto which would require US forces to withdraw from Iraq late next year. Beyond that, Pelosi has embraced the ISG report. The Speaker's decision to visit Damascus deeply angered the president. But her meeting President Assad was cordial and productive, and her very public break with Bush proved enormously popular in the Arab world. Perhaps the president -- or whoever sits in the White House after the 2008 election -- should see her recent foray into the realm of foreign policy as an opportunity rather than a distraction. Pelosi demonstrated that dialog, not necessarily a reversal of policy, can greatly help the US regain its credibility among the Arab leaders and public alike.

Caption: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visits the tomb of John the Baptist inside the Ummayad Mosque
C a p t i o n : House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visits the tomb of John the Baptist inside the Ummayad Mosque