Iran shifts weight on Iraqi elections Iraq's Shiite alliance picked Nouri al Maliki last Friday as its nominee for prime minister, which denotes that Iranian power is the prevailing influence in Iraq, capable of imposing its will on the political process in the country, declared the pan-Arab daily Al Quds al Arabi in its editorial.
This endorsement by the Shiite bloc will enable Mr al Maliki to form a government including his party as well as the Sadrist movement and a number of smaller parties. It is expected however to encounter fierce opposition from the Iraqi bloc led by Iyad Allawi.
This development gives the Kurdish leaders great bargaining power, as winning their bloc would secure the new coalition a needed majority in parliament. The surprise selection of Mr al Maliki by the Shiite bloc was the outcome of an American-Iranian agreement. It is clear that Mr Obama's administration gave in to Iranian prevalence and opted for the lesser of two evils. The US wants to see the formation of an Iraqi government at the earliest possible time to avoid a political vacuum. It also wants a strong Shiite leader who could secure minimum stability and allow it to withdraw the remainder of its forces from Iraq by the end of next year.
Mr al Maliki's victory would certainly put an end to the political crisis and lead to the birth of a new government. This would breathe life into constitutional institutions.
Arab states fail to fix peace talks paralysis
The Arab League's secretary general Amr Moussa said "many alternatives are available to Arabs" when asked about the likelihood of pressing ahead with negotiations despite continued settlement activities, reported the Emirati daily Al Khaleej in its editorial.
Mr Moussa's statement might seem serious at first glance and suggests that Arabs do have a response to Israel's policy to sabotage the negotiations. It implies that they have alternatives that would compel Israel to abide by international law in order to reach a comprehensive and sustainable peace. True, there are choices that the Arabs could opt for as long as they get past the illusion that the current round of negotiations might lead to an equitable settlement. They must stop wagering on US administrations as an honest mediator between them and Israel.
When Arab nations realise this fact, the scene is bound to change for they would be able to make several choices that others would have to reckon with. But, as long as they don't make the effort to materialise their "peace as a strategic choice" slogan, any talk of possible alternatives remains meaningless. Mr Moussa recognises the seriousness of the present phase and Israel's objectives from the talks, but the fact remains that the Arab League is paralysed.
Israel launches start of global cyber war
Is this the start of electronic warfare capable of paralysing nations without any recourse to bombs and missiles? asked the columnist Rajeh al Khouri in an article for the Lebanese daily Annahar.
The Stuxnet "worm" has been making headlines in developed countries where experts are trying to find effective counter-measures to stop its sabotage. Despite Israel's denial, it is believed that the worm was designed in Israel to target Iran's nuclear programme. However, after hitting Iran a few days ago, it reached China damaging more than 1,000 computers at businesses and more than six million personal computers.
The fast dissemination of the worm means that it is now possible to design programmes that could target any operating systems in the world. In the words of electronics expert David Morgan: "An electronic Pearl Harbour is now possible." A comprehensive e-attack on operating systems in any advanced country could cripple it without the need to fire a single bullet. Whole communities could wake up one day to find that their life systems are completely down: electric power, water, telephones, traffic lights and factories.
It is probably for this reason that electronic warfare and its strategic danger will be on the agenda of Nato's next summit in November.
A bankrupt strategy in Afghanistan
In an article for Qatari daily Al Watan, the columnist Mazen Hammad wrote: "Who can believe that US dollars made their way to the pockets of Taliban fighters in Afghanistan?" American international development agency investigators recently revealed that millions of dollars of US taxpayers' money were paid to Taliban militants in south Afghanistan in exchange for security for a US development project underway in that area.
There have been rumours in the past about such bribery cases, but this is the first time the public investigator has ordered a comprehensive investigation into the project in question in a local community near Jalalabad. Investigators discovered that sub-contractors were employed to protect the project, where more than $5 million was paid to local authorities to prevent any possible attacks since the $350 million dollar project was being built in an extremely dangerous war zone.
In addition, evidence of fraud and manipulation were found at the contracting company's bureau in Jalalabad. A revelation of this nature is proof of the state of chaos and confusion among US and western forces operating in Afghanistan. It is yet another proof of the West's inability to achieve victory over the Taliban.
* Digest compiled by Racha Makarem