* Palestinians pledge era of unity Leaders of the rival Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah have said they are entering a new era of reconciliation, after talks in Cairo.

* Barak: US must limit Iran diplo effort Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Thursday warned that it was critical that the United States limit the time-span of its diplomatic effort to rein in Iran’s nuclear drive.

* U.S. Retains Hidden Grip on Pakistan’s Nukes With Pakistan’s political instability spreading, nervous concern has mounted over the fate of Islamabad’s nuclear arsenal should Taliban sympathizers gain power.

* War crimes charges grow, J’lem silent As various individuals and organizations file petitions abroad against Israel for alleged war crimes, including at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, there is growing criticism in Jerusalem.

* U.S.-Syria talks chart way forward The State Department’s top Middle East official met Thursday with the Syrian ambassador to the United States.

* 40 days after war, Hamas rule of Gaza gaining legitimacy Three rockets fell Thursday in the area around the Gaza Strip, one in the yard of a Sderot home.

* Rice: U.S. will seek to end any ‘illicit’ nuclear ambitions by Iran The Obama administration will work to stop any “illicit” nuclear aspirations by Iran.

* Mitchell, Netanyahu meet on peace efforts US Middle East envoy George Mitchell held a series of talks Thursday in Tel Aviv with the country’s top leaders.

By: Edwin Black – The Jerusalem Post

In recent days, four key developments have clicked in to edge Iran and Israel much closer to a military denouement with profound consequences for American oil that the nation is not prepared to meet.

Three F-16 jets during maneuvers. (Illustrative photo)
Photo: IDF

What has happened?

First, Iran has proven it can successfully launch a satellite into outer space as it did on February 2. Teheran claimed, to the incredulity of Western governments, that the satellite was to monitor earthquakes and enhance communications. Few believe that, especially since America’s own space program continuously launches unpublished military satellite missions. Teheran plans three more satellites this year, creating an easily weaponized space net that worries American military planners.

Second, the International Atomic Energy Agency last week admitted that it had underestimated Iran’s nuclear stockpile by about one-third. The watchdog group now confirms Iran possesses 2,227 lbs. of nuclear material, sufficient to create at least one nuclear bomb. That stockpile includes 1,010 kilograms of low-enriched uranium hexafluoride, or approximately 700 kilograms containing the vital uranium 235 isotope, the stuff needed to weaponize.

Third, Iran has ramped up its enrichment program with thousands of new homegrown, highly advanced centrifuges. As The Cutting Edge News reported in April 2008, Iran wants 6,000 centrifuges to speed the enrichment of weapons-grade material. The number of working centrifuges now exceeds 5,400, including 164 new ones believed to be the faster and more efficient IR-2 and IR-3 models made in Iran. These new Iranian centrifuges are at least as sophisticated as its recently imported P-2 models.

American policymakers are now convinced that Iran, despite all protests and charades, is in a mad dash to create a deliverable nuclear weapon. The Obama administration has almost openly abandoned the assertions of the CIA’s much-questioned 2008 National Intelligence Estimate that concluded Iran was not pursuing nuclear weaponry for the simple reason that its atomic program and military programs were housed in separate buildings.

Fourth, Binyamin Netanyahu has just become prime minister of Israel. He is determined to take action before – not after – Iran achieves its nuclear potential. This creates a volatile, hair-trigger situation that could explode at any moment. Hence, the endgame is now vastly closer than it was in mid-January, when many believed Israel might take action during the lame-duck interregnum.

Israeli countermeasures to date have included a massive international covert program of equipment sabotage, assassination of key nuclear personnel and a vibrant diplomatic offensive. But all these efforts combined amount to nothing more than delaying tactics, as Iran is irrevocably determined to achieve a nuclear weapon as fast as possible. Many believe such a weapon will be used to fulfill its prediction that Israel will soon be wiped off the map.

THE CONSEQUENCES for this confrontation are apocalyptic because Iran’s full partner in this enterprise is Russia. The Russian company Atomstroiexport has provided most if not all of the nuclear material for the 1,000 megawatt Bushehr reactor, along with thousands of technicians to service and operate it.

Following its invasion of Georgia, Moscow forged ahead with final delivery plans for the S-300 advanced air defense system which can track scores of IAF airborne intruders simultaneously, whether low-level drones or high-altitude missiles, and shoot them down. But the S-300, the linchpin of Iran’s defense against Israel, will not be fully operational for several months, creating a narrow window for Israel to act. Indeed, Russia has just announced a pause in missile deliveries for the system in fear that it will accelerate an Israeli response.

Iran, of course, has repeatedly threatened to counter any such attack by closing the Strait of Hormuz, as well as launching missiles against the Ras Tanura Gulf oil terminal and bombarding the indispensable Saudi oil facility at Abqaiq which is responsible for some 65 percent of Saudi production. Any one of these military options, let alone all three, would immediately shut off 40% of all seaborne oil, 18% of global oil, and some 20% of America’s daily consumption.

America’s oil vulnerability has been back-burnered due to the economic crisis and the plunge in gasoline prices. However, the price of gasoline will not mitigate an interruption of oil flow. The price of oil does not impact its ability to flow through blocked or destroyed facilities. Indeed, an interruption would not restore prices to those of last summer – which Russian and Saudi oil officials say is needed – but probably zoom the pump cost to $20 per gallon.

American oil vulnerability in recent months has escalated precisely because of oil’s precipitous drop to $35 to $40 a barrel. At that price, America’s number one supplier, Canada, which supplies some 2 million out of 20 million barrels of oil a day, cannot afford to produce. Canadian oil sand petroleum is not viable below $70 a barrel. Much of Canada’s supply has already been cancelled or indefinitely postponed. America’s strategic petroleum reserve can only keep that country moving for approximately 57 days.

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, like the Bush administration before it, has developed no plan or contingency legislation for an oil interruption, such as a surge in retrofitting America’s 250 million gas guzzling cars and trucks – each with a 10-year life – or a stimulus of the alternate fuel production needed to rapidly get off oil. Ironically, Iran has undertaken such a crash program converting some 20% of its gasoline fleet yearly to compressed natural gas (CNG) as a countermeasure to Western nuclear sanctions against the Teheran regime that could completely block the flow of gasoline to Iran. Iran has no refining capability.

The question of when and how this endgame will play out is not known by anyone. Israeli leaders wish to avoid military preemption at all costs if possible. But many feel the military moment must come; and when that moment does come, it will be swift, highly technologic and in the twinkling of an eye. But as one informed official quipped, “Those who know, don’t talk. Those who talk, don’t know.”

* Barak: Time running out on Iran threat Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Wednesday that immediate diplomatic action must be taken on the Iranian nuclear program.

* Bibi against talks with a Hamas-PA gov’t Prime Minister-designate Binyamin Netanyahu is expected to lobby Secretary of State Hillary Clinton next week.

* Palestinians relaunch unity talks Leaders of the rival Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah have opened reconciliation talks in a renewed effort to create a unity government.

* U.N.: 15,000 flee southern Darfur Fighting has prompted thousands of people in the southern part of Sudan’s Darfur region to seek security and shelter at a refugee camp in the northern part of the war-torn area.

* U.S. envoy, Netanyahu meet on peace efforts The special U.S. envoy tasked with jump-starting flagging peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians huddled Thursday with designated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

* EU trio proposing more sanctions for Iran Three EU members proposed tougher sanctions against Iran to possibly aid the United States in its expected engagement with Iran.

* ‘Reactor highlights world’s failure’ The activation of the Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran demonstrates the international community’s failure to stop the Islamic republic.

* US military weaning Iraq’s army from support There was the time the Iraqis spent millions of dollars on ammunition from Romania, only to discover that it was defective or didn’t fit their U.S.- or Russian-made weapons.

* The Iran-Israel nuclear endgame is now much closer In recent days, four key developments have clicked in to edge Iran and Israel much closer to a military denouement with profound consequences for American oil that the nation is not prepared to meet.

* Financial crisis threatens east-west divide in EU Eastern European member states’ fears that they will be left behind by richer EU members in the economic crisis are growing.

* Israel: Iranian nuclear test ‘bad news’ Iranian and Russian nuclear officials tested Wednesday the first nuclear power plant built in Iran – a move likely to raise concerns among the US and its Western allies.

* Turkish PM: Israel must recognize Palestine Turkish Prime Minsiter Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Tehran has sought Anakara’s help in finding a solution for its diplomatic crisis with the United States.

* Hamas, Fatah to begin talks in Cairo With stakes that have never been higher, Palestinian factions will open talks in Cairo on Wednesday.

* PA official: Peace process dead Israel’s impending new government indicates that the peace process “has died”.

* Quartet planning to meet in Sharm ahead of Gaza donors’ conference Foreign ministers from the four powers heading a Middle East peace process may meet in the Egyptian town of Sharm el-Sheikh on March 1.

* ‘Bombed Syrian reactor now missile base’ Syria has revealed that it has built a missile facility over the ruins of what the US says was a nuclear reactor destroyed by IAF warplanes.

* Iran sees Palestinian issue as test for Obama’s “change” slogan Iran’s Parliament (Majlis) Speaker, Ali Larijani, said on Wednesday the Palestinian issue is a test for U.S. President Barack Obama’s “change” slogan.

* Gaddafi: Foreign forces, including Israel, behind Darfur conflict Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, the current African Union president, on Tuesday said that “foreign forces,” including Israel, were behind the Darfur conflict.

* Hamas Promises to Keep Smuggling in Arms A top Hamas official has declared that his Palestinian terrorist group will continue to smuggle weapons into Gaza, despite international protests.

* Major controversy in Turkish parliament Ahmet Turk, created a major controversy when, on Tuesday, he became only the second person in history to speak Kurdish in the Turkish parliament.

By: Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu – Arutz Sheva

The University of Tel Aviv has awarded Quartet Middle East envoy Tony Blair a $1 million prize for his efforts to make peace in the Middle East, weeks after he said that Hamas must be brought into the solution to the Arab-Israel conflict.

The international Dan David Foundation prize went to the former British prime minister “for his exceptional leadership and steadfast determination in helping to engineer agreements and forge lasting solutions to areas in conflict.”

A spokesman for Blair said that most of the money will be donated to the Tony Blair Faith Foundation for “religious understanding.”

Most of Britain’s newspapers roundly mocked the award, citing Blair as a warmonger for backing the American-led war in Iraq.

As prime minister and Quartet envoy, Blair has been at the forefront in pressuring Israel to make concessions to the Palestinian Authority, and accepts most of the PA’s conditions for a new Arab country on the land of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, including the Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem.

Early last month, Blair stated, “I do think it is important that we find a way of bringing Hamas into this process, but it can only be done if Hamas [is] prepared to do it on the right terms.”

He told the Times of London that “pushing Gaza aside was never going to work and will never work.” Although he maintained that Hamas must recognize Israel and renounce violence, he added that his “basic predisposition is that in a situation like this you talk to everybody.”

Blair, who will be honored by the University of Tel Aviv May 17, was roundly criticized in British newspapers. The Sunday Sun wrote that the father of a soldier whose son was killed in Iraq called on Blair to reject the $1 million prize.

“This is a man who has led us into two wars which have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan and for this he is to be given a million dollars. It really is beyond belief,” John Miller told the newspaper.

London Telegraph columnist Andrew Pierce wrote, “A clue to why he won may be that the Dan David Foundation is based at a university in Tel Aviv. In case you had forgotten, Blair is the Middle East peace envoy. And very good he is at it, too.

“So good that he has yet to set foot in Gaza since he took up the post two years ago. Instead, he is holed up in a suite on several floors of a smart Jerusalem hotel, and when he leaves it is in a bulletproof, bomb-reinforced security convoy.”

By: CNN Bureau Chief Frederik Pleitgen – Cable News Network

BERLIN, Germany (CNN) — The world needs a “global New Deal” to haul it out of the economic crisis it faces, Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the United Kingdom said Sunday.

Gordon Brown addresses a press conference following a G20 preparatory meeting in Berlin, Sunday.

“We need a global New Deal — a grand bargain between the countries and continents of this world — so that the world economy can not only recover but… so the banking system can be based on… best principles,” he said, referring to the 1930s American plan to fight the Great Depression.

Brown was speaking as the leaders of Europe’s biggest economies met to try to forge a common position on the global financial crisis ahead of a major summit in London in April.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said the world’s response to the global financial meltdown had to be profound and long-lasting, not just tinkering around the edges.

“Europe wants to see an overhaul of the system. We all agree on that. We’re not talking about superficial measures now or transitional measures — we’re talking about structural measure, which need to be taken,” he said.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the host of the meeting, urged nations of the world to work together to fight the problem.

“Confidence can only be restored if people in our countries feel that we are pulling in the same direction and have understood that we really must learn lessons from this crisis,” she said.

And she proposed that a new institution grow out of the crisis, “which will take on more responsibility for global [financial] mechanisms.”

The Europeans say they have agreed international financial markets must be regulated more thoroughly. That also means stricter rules for hedge funds and credit-rating agencies.

European and world leaders have been holding frequent summits as they struggle to cope with a financial crisis that has affected banks, homeowners, businesses and employees around the world.

London will host a meeting of the Group of 20 nations in April. The G-20 includes the G-7 leading industrialized nations — Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States — as well as the world’s largest developing economies: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea and Turkey, plus the European Union.

The managing director of the International Monetary Fund and the president of the World Bank, plus the chairs of the International Monetary and Financial Committee and Development Committee of the IMF and World Bank, also participate in G-20 meetings.

By: BBC News

The European Commission says the 27-nation EU must not let the current economic crisis jeopardize the gains of eastward enlargement.

The European Union is now the world’s biggest integrated economic area

A commission report says the accession of 12 states since 2004 – mostly ex-Soviet bloc countries – boosted living standards and business opportunities.

It said enlargement served as an anchor for stability and driver of democracy.

But there are concerns that EU states may be tempted to prop up weak domestic firms at their neighbors’ expense.

The BBC’s Chris Mason in Brussels says the impact of the economic crisis threatens to undermine the single market, a founding tenet of European integration.

‘Peace and prosperity’

The European Union took in 10 mostly ex-communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe in 2004 and two more, Romania and Bulgaria, in 2007.

It is now the world’s biggest integrated economic area, with half a billion people producing 30% of global economic output and 17% of world trade.

In the report on published on Friday, the commission said enlargement had brought about huge economic and political benefits for both sides.

Income per capita in new member states rose from 40% of the old member states’ average in 1999 to 52% in 2008. Economic growth averaged 5.5% per year in 2004-2008, compared to 3.5% in 1999-2003.

The old member states averaged annual growth of around 2.2% in the last four years.

Enlargement also increased trade opportunities. In 2007, almost 80% of exports of the new member states went to the rest of the EU. Old member states also saw their sales to the new members increase to around 7.5% of their total exports in 2007, from 4.75% a decade ago.

Unemployment in new member states declined to levels similar to those across the rest of the EU – around 7% in 2007.

“Enlargement has served as an anchor of stability, and driver of democracy and the rule of law in Europe,” Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said.

“Economically it has benefited both new and old member states, as well as the EU as a whole. It has extended the area of peace and prosperity to almost 500 million people and increased our weight in the world,” he added.

Protectionism fears

But some of the poorer member states fear protectionism is on the rise in richer countries, our correspondent says.

The old member states can afford to spend billions of dollars to shield their banks and industries from the crisis, he adds.

“We should not let the crisis overshadow this uncontested success. United, we can shape the solution to global issues such as climate change or a new international financial governance,” Economic Affairs Commissioner Joaquin Almunia said. “Divided we will achieve nothing.”

An emergency summit will take place in Brussels on 1 March partly to discuss protectionism.

By: Etgar Lefkovits – The Jerusalem Post

More than 40 percent of Israeli Jews, including nearly 80% of the Orthodox, believe Jewish groups should not accept charity from evangelical Christian organizations, a survey released Sunday found.

The study, which highlighted the sharp differences of opinion between secular and religious Jews on Christianity, was published amid growing support for Israel from evangelical Christians, who donate tens of millions of dollars each year.

Fifty-five percent of respondents said Israel should accept charity from Christians missionaries, while 41% were against accepting such funds, according to the survey carried out for the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies and the Jerusalem Center for Jewish-Christian Relations. Seventy-nine percent of Orthodox Israelis said Jewish groups should not accept such charity, compared to 70% of secular Israelis who said they should.

The survey results did not separate responses from haredim – who are more opposed to accepting such money – and modern Orthodox Jews.

“The vast majority of the Israeli public is not mistaken: Twenty-five years of the existence of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews are the unequivocal proof of the unwavering sympathy of the evangelical Christians toward the people of Israel and to their long support for the State of Israel,” said Limor Bar On, a spokeswoman for the Chicago-based Christian charity group.

The organization, which is headed by Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, said it received $87 million from evangelical Christians last year for a variety of immigration and absorption programs, as well as social welfare and defense needs.

“This essential support would not be possible without the generous contribution of hundreds of thousands of evangelical Christians in the US and around the world,” she said.

“The results of the survey show that we have had a lot of success and a lot more work to do to convince Israelis that we are true friends in a world which is becoming more hostile and more anti-Semitic every day,” said Rev. Malcolm Hedding, the executive director of the International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem, a prominent Jerusalem-based evangelical group. “Israelis should recognize who their true friends are by virtue of their track record, and we stand on our proud track record of 30 years.”

Seventy-four percent of Israeli Jews do not regard Christians as “missionaries,” while 76% are not bothered by encountering a Christian wearing a cross, the survey showed.

At the same time, only 50% of Israeli Jews agreed that Jerusalem was central to the Christian faith, and 75% believe the state should not allow Christian groups to buy land to build new churches in the capital, the survey found.

Forty-one percent of Israeli Jews believe that Christianity is the closest religion to Judaism, compared to 32% who cited Islam, according to the survey.

Eighty percent of secular Jews believe they are allowed to enter churches, and 92% of them visited churches when abroad, while 83% of religious Jews said that visiting churches is forbidden by Jewish law.

More than three out of every four religious Jews believe Christianity is “idol worship,” while 66% of secular Jews do not, the survey found. Fifty-six percent of secular Jews believe that Christian soldiers in the IDF should be allowed to use the New Testament for swearing allegiance to the state, but 62% of religious Jews think only the Torah should be used.

The data for the Rafi Smith Institute survey was collected last March among 500 Jews from various streams. The study did not cite a margin of error.

* ‘I won’t wait forever for unity gov’t’ Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu publicly pledged on Monday afternoon to do whatever possible to build a national unity government with Kadima or Labor.

* Saudis replacing Egypt as regional leader A recent U.S. National Intelligence Council report suggests Egypt has lost its superior status among Arab states.

* Peres: Europe must stop Hamas support European leaders must continue to publicly condemn Hamas and its actions rather than express support for dialogue.

* Hamas: We reserve right to bring arms into Gaza Gaza-based Hamas strongman Mahmoud Zahar declared Tuesday that his Islamist militant group reserves the right to bring arms into Gaza.

* Iraq’s National Museum reopened Iraq’s National Museum has reopened nearly six years after it was looted and vandalised in the aftermath of the 2003 US-led invasion.

* Ross named special US envoy on Iran Dennis Ross joined the Obama administration in a coordinating role on policy regarding Iran and its neighbors on Tuesday.

* Jewish Home: Committed to Judea & Samaria As part of its role in any future government, the Jewish Home party says it is committed to promoting Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.

* U.S. to open permanent Jerusalem office for envoy The United States is planning to open a permanent office in Jerusalem for its special envoy to the Middle East.

* Big groups to retain power in EU parliament The balance of power in the European Parliament would stay broadly the same if elections were held today.

* Museum aims to piece together Iraq’s plundered past Iraq’s National Museum will again be home to the country’s treasures.

By: – Col. Bob Maginnis

Last week, a deal between Pakistan’s government and radical Islamists to exchange peace in Pakistan’s ungoverned northwest for the imposition of Sharia (Islamic) law fortunately failed. But the fact that such a deal was even considered indicates that Pakistan is crumbling and the region is at risk of spinning out of control. Such a state of affairs diminishes America’s chances of success in Afghanistan and raises the specter of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal falling into the hands of Islamic extremists.

That’s why President Obama’s soon to be announced strategy for the region is critical. Pakistan is the center of gravity of the global war on terror and radical Islam is the enemy’s ideology. Obama’s plan must help stabilize Pakistan and deny our Islamist enemies sanctuary in that country.

On Feb. 16, the North-West Frontier Province government, after consultation with Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari, announced that it would accept a system of Islamic law in the Swat Valley, a strategic corridor first infiltrated in 2007 by Taliban militants and the scene of a failed army counteroffensive. The parties agreed to a truce, and the government suspended its efforts to crush the insurgents.

This pact is similar to previous government accords with militants in the semi-autonomous tribal areas in North and South Waziristan. Those regions have become mini-states for Taliban and al Qaeda extremists and are used as insurgent launching pads for operations into Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Shortly after the deal was announced, media reports indicated that unnamed American officials in Islamabad privately backed the deal as an attempt to drive a wedge between Swat’s Taliban, which is focused on its demand for Sharia, and the al-Qaeda-linked Taliban that controls the tribal areas along the Afghan border.

A Pakistani official insisted the Obama administration “… showed understanding of our strategy.” That “understanding” must have changed because President Zardari, reportedly under pressure from Washington, has backed away from the controversial agreement without public explanation. Over the weekend the most powerful Taliban leader in the Swat, Maulana Fazlullah, said he had only agreed to a 10-day-truce, not a “permanent cease-fire.”

At this time, the deal appears to be off, but it’s highly likely a similar agreement will resurface and other regions will seek comparable arrangements.

The deal was seen as a desperate effort to stop Taliban abuses against the population, a major military embarrassment. The proposed pact would disarm about 3,000 Taliban fighters who have kept government troops pinned down while terrorizing the Swat region’s population with Islamic justice: it torched nearly 200 schools, banned female education, forced women to stay indoors and executed dozens of government employees, especially policemen.

Pakistani officials insist the deal is urgently needed for peace and as a model for other areas ravaged by Islamic radicals. They argue the switch to Sharia law is consistent with Pakistan’s secular constitution and presented no threat to the integrity of the nation.

Prominent Pakistanis for and against the deal provided plenty of grist for the debate. Those favoring the agreement argue:

• People in Swat are very conservative and have been demanding the implementation of Sharia law because it would expedite justice and reduce legal costs.
• Elements of the religious judicial system have been in the Swat region since 1994 without problems.
• Pakistan’s army was unable to defeat the insurgents and the civilians were suffering. The deal will provide peace.

Opponents argue the deal:

• Shows the government has no coherent plan for combating militancy.
• Demonstrates if you are powerful enough to challenge the writ of the state, it will cave in.
• Provides the Taliban with a launching pad from which to spread anarchy deeper into Pakistan.

America’s chances for success in Afghanistan will diminish if Pakistan further surrenders its sovereignty to regional Sharia-based systems because — predictably — those regions will support the Taliban, their terrorist allies and disrupt our operations against them.

Pakistani ground transportation moves U.S. supplies from the port at Karachi through two crossing points on the Afghan border. Already, militant attacks on that lifeline have increased to the point that Washington is scurrying to find alternative resupply routes. If these transit regions further become Taliban sanctuaries, there is a significant risk that the supply routes could be permanently closed and the area will become base camps for Taliban fighters to launch attacks on allied troops.

So what should President Obama do? His war strategy must address how to stabilize Pakistan and deny our enemies sanctuary in that country.

Pakistan is stressed by extremists on its western border, but its primary strategic focus is on India and Kashmir, a half century old rivalry. Any American strategy that expects Islamabad to concentrate on West Pakistan must first restrain New Dehli and resolve the Kashmir crisis.

The Obama strategy should also recognize that America’s enemy in Afghanistan is primarily the Taliban. Yes, al Qaeda still exists, but its ranks are dwindling rapidly, and it presents more of a psychological than operational threat.

The Taliban has a long history of resilience and enjoys a home turf advantage both in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Working with Islamabad, the Taliban can be dealt with from a couple perspectives.

Many Taliban are poor, uneducated Pashtun mountain men who primarily seek the means to care for their families. A jobs program and schools that teach academics rather than radical Islam might prevent some men from joining the insurgency.

Others may be convinced to join a coalition government where they share power with secular authorities and yes, a government that is influenced by their Islamic beliefs, but not based on radical Sharia code. Of course, any coalition government would have to be relatively corruption free, which will be a challenge in a part of the world where warlords and tribal loyalty prevail.

Even so there will continue to be diehards driven by radical Islamic hatred, and they will only understand the muzzle of a gun.

That means the military option has a legitimate place in the President’s strategy. Obama must seek a close working relationship with Pakistan to protect our supply lines and destroy Taliban base camps. Islamabad is unlikely to support significant numbers of U.S. troops on Pakistani soil, but a few Americans working as “advisors” along side Pakistani soldiers might work.

A parallel and potentially better military option would be to provide Pakistan with the means to deploy more of its own troops into the Islamist infested frontier. This will require further U.S. military equipment and training aid, especially for fighting counterinsurgencies.

The failed deal between Islamabad and the Taliban is a bad omen for U.S. interests in the region. It suggests the Pakistanis may lack a strategy to deal with extremists, preferring accommodation rather than confrontation. That hurts American efforts in Afghanistan, the greater war on terror and could push nuclear-armed Pakistan into the arms of Islamic extremists.