Executive Coordinator & International Secretariat Search Process

NO BASES NETWORK - COORDINATOR & INTERNATIONAL SECRETARIAT SEARCH PROCESS

The International Coordinating Committee (ICC) of the International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases (No Bases Network) is currently initiating a twin search process for an Executive Coordinator and an International Secretariat for the No Bases Network.

While these searches are distinct, they are also interrelated. The Executive Coordinator is an individual staff position. The search for an International Secretariat is intended to identify a geographical site for the worldwide headquarters of the No Bases Network. A key aspect of the search for the International Secretariat will be identifying an organization or local/national network that can offer support to the global No Bases Network by assisting the Executive Coordinator by providing logistical, administrative and programmatic support to run the office. For details please refer below to the Search Criteria for the International Secretariat of the No Bases Network as well as the job description for Executive Coordinator.

The International Organizing Committee (IOC) of the International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases has coordinated the global work of the No Bases Network in recent years and has taken the initial steps to commence the twin search process. The newly established International Coordinating Committee (ICC) whose membership is comprised by regional representation is taking over the worldwide leadership of the No Bases Network and will continue the search and selection process. Individuals and organizations are encouraged to submit separate and distinct applications in response to both searches. Applications for the Executive Coordinator position may be also be submitted jointly with applications for hosting the International Secretariat.

The Search Process is guided by the following principles:

Participatory Democracy
Transparency
Decision by consensus (if consensus cannot be reached, decisions will take place by vote).

For more information please visit: http://www.nobasesnetwork.org/

US Navy Deploys Around Latin America

By Lamia Oualalou - Le Figaro

Translation By Truthout

French language editor Leslie ThatcherTruthout

28 April 2008

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050208G.shtml

Choosing to confront the rise in power of left-leaning governments in its backyard, the United States is recreating the Fourth Fleet. It's now official: The Pentagon is going to resuscitate its Fourth Fleet, with the mission of patrolling Latin American and Caribbean waters.

Created during the Second World War to protect traffic in theSouth Atlantic, the structure was dissolved in 1950. "By reestablishing the Fourth Fleet, we acknowledge the immense importance of maritime security in this region,"declared Adm. Gary Roughead, head of the Pentagon's naval operations. Based in Mayport, Florida, the fleet will operate under the double orders of the American Navy and the Army's Southern Command, responsible for Latin America and the Caribbean. Vice Adm. Joseph Kernan will command the fleet, which should include a nuclear air craftcarrier. According to Alejandro Sanchez, an analyst at theCouncil on Hemispheric Affairs, a research center on Latin America based in Washington, "the reestablishmentof the Fourth Fleet is more of a political than amilitary gesture, designed to confront the rise in powerof left-leaning governments in the region."

The Pentagon does not trouble to camouflage its intentions: "the message is clear: whether local governments like it ornot, the United States is back after the war in Iraq,"Sanchez explains.

"New Threats" De facto, Washington's military influence in the region has diminished considerably since September 11, 2001, and the launch of the "war against terrorism."Concentrated on the Middle Eastern arc of crisis, the Pentagon did not pay much attention to the political upsets in its own backyard. Leftist governments, now broadly in the majority in Latin America, reproach the United States with the support it gave the dictatorships that reigned over several decades and to the ultra-neo-liberal policies those dictatorships applied. While Washington assures that its sole interest inthe region is combating "new threats" (terrorism, drugtrafficking and the Maras gangs of Central America),Latin American people often see it as the pursuit of"imperialist" interests dictated by energy needs.

The tensions between Washington and the radical presidentsof the sub-continent's main oil and gas producers(Venezuela, Equator and Bolivia) accentuate that perception. As a sign of defiance, almost all Latin American countries have refused to sign the American Serviceman Protection Act, a treaty that prevents legal pursuit of American soldiers for crimes committed abroad. The plan to install a military base in Paraguay, close to Bolivian gas fields, was denounced by Braziland Argentina.

Ecuador has made it known that the American military base installed in Manta until 2009 will not be allowed to renew its mandate. Worse still, Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has relaunched the idea of a South American Defense Council, explicitly excluding all United States intervention. Washington's sidelining comes at a time when new sources of conflict are arising in the region, as, for example, the one that pits Colombia on one side and Ecuador and Venezuela on the other, or that between Bolivia and Chile over sea access. An arms race is underway in the region, where governments have taken advantage of the economic revival to reequip their armies, neglected since the 1970s.

American arms manufacturers are no longer alone in this market: some European countries, but especially China, Russia and Iran, are trying to get a footing in a region that also attracts them for its natural resourceand energy potential.

INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP - NEW REPORT

The Philippines: Counter-insurgency vs. Counter-terrorism in MindanaoJakarta

Brussels, 14 May 2008:

The U.S. and the Philippines need to refocus energies on peace processes in Mindanao or they risk new hostilities between government forces and insurgents.

The Philippines: Counter-insurgency vs. Counter-terrorism in Mindanao,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group, warns that U.S.-backed security operations in the southern Philippines are confusing counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism and risk pushing the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) – their target – into the arms of the broader insurgencies in Mindanao, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF).

“The ‘Mindanao model’ of combining military operations with civic action operations against the ASG has been widely heralded as a success, but the gains could be short-lived”, says Kit Collier, a consultant for Crisis Group. “The model involves using counter- insurgency techniques for counter-terrorism goals, but the only way the Philippines will effectively
manage domestic terrorism is to secure the cooperation of the MILF and MNLF – and that requires concrete progress toward formal peace agreements.”

The urgency of finalizing agreements is even more acute since the Malaysian government announced last month that it was withdrawing from an international monitoring team that has kept the lid on conflict in Mindanao since 2004.The report urges the Philippines government to revive the Ad Hoc Joint Action Group (AHJAG). Designed to facilitate information- sharing between the Philippines government and the MILF, AHJAG was critical to the prevention of conflict escalation in 2005-2007 as the search for terrorists intensified. After a six-month hiatus, its mandate was formally extended in November 2007 but is not yet fully restored.

A similar arrangement should be developed with the MNLF. But the leadership of both insurgencies will only be willing to provide information on terrorists in their midst as part of a political endgame, and the Philippines government is stalling, while the U.S. appears more focused on economic aid than political agreements.“The number of terrorists in the Philippines is small relative to the mass-based insurgencies in which they take cover”, says John Virgoe, Crisis Group’s South East Asia Director. “But the ASG and its allies remain dangerous because of their potential to drag the MILF and MNLF back into war.”

Read the full Crisis Group report on our website: http:// www.crisisgroup.org

The International Crisis Group (Crisis Group) is an independent, non- profit, non-governmental organisation covering some 60 crisis- affected countries and territories across four continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.