Many scientists, politicians and journalists now agree that climate change and a scarcity of resources could lead to armed conflict. So much so, in fact, that this year's Nobel Prize for Peace went to former U.S. vice president turned environmentalist Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But the argument is far from settled, writes online magazine Science Daily. Notice the term "Climate Change" instead of "Global Warming". Didn't Yasser Arafat get one of them there Peacie thingies?
The link between pressure on natural resources and armed conflicts simply doesn't exist, say researchers at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NUTS) (NTNU).
In their study, Helga Malmin Binningsbø, Indra de Soysa and Nils Petter Gleditsch examined environmental sustainability in 150 countries in the period between 1961 and 1999, by using an internationally recognised method called "Ecological Footprint". In a nutshell, the method examines how many resources a portion of land produces and how much people living there use up.
According to the research, there were no conflicts in the regions where consumption exceeded the production of natural resources. And those parts of the world which were involved in war had sufficient resources.
Some commentators have said the conflicts in Darfur, Rwanda, Haiti and Somalia are essentially battles for increasingly scarce resources. So, is this argument now on shaky ground?
The U.S. tries to shut Russia out of India's defense market. by Reuben F. Johnson
If current rumors in India are true, the United States could end up providing India what its traditional Russian arms supplier has long promised to provide, but so far failed to deliver. In the process the United States could deliver a severe blow to Russia's defense industry, adding another item to the long list of grievances Russian officialdom has lodged against the United States.
During the Cold War, India was famously the largest and most powerful of the "non-aligned" nations that stayed out of the East v. West confrontation. At the same time, however, India enjoyed close relations with the then-Soviet Union that went beyond just the bonds of political convenience and trade ties between the two nations.
Former Indian PM Indira Ghandi was one of Soviet Party Secretary Leonid Brezhnev's favorite foreign leaders, and he loved to make a show of that affection when she traveled to the USSR. Residents in sections of Moscow that straddle the main road leading from Vnukovo airport to the centre of the city can still recount how in those times they were dragooned by their local party officials to line the streets and wave Indian flags (if during the day) or flashlights (if at night) to greet Mrs. Ghandi's motorcade on official state visits.
India took advantage of their favored but non-allied nation status by purchasing from the USSR some of the most advanced weaponry available at the time. In the 1970s and 80s, India's fledgling defense industry benefited from Soviet specialists providing them with numerous current-day weapons platforms and the establishment of production lines to license-build Soviet hardware, such as the Mikoyan MiG-27s that were assembled at the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) plant in Nasik.
The collapse of the Soviet empire only augmented Moscow's weapons trade with India. Russia needed export revenues to keep its defense sector alive, and New Delhi was only too happy to provide them. By the 1990s, Moscow was selling India some of the most advanced weaponry in its arsenal, including the high-powered Sukhoi Su-30MKI, a specialized variant of the heavyweight fighter than was optimized for aerodynamic performance and upgraded with a new-generation radar set, the NIIP N011M Bars model, that not even the Russian Air Force has in service.
In 2004 Russia and India signed a deal to provide the Indian Navy with an aircraft carrier and a navalized version of the MiG-29, designated the MiG-29K, in order to give New Delhi the power projection capability in the Indian Ocean that it had sought for some time.
On the face of it this seemed like the perfect deal for both sides. India was to be given an older-generation aircraft carrier, the Admiral Gorshkov, for free, but would have to pay $700 million for a refit of the vessel, plus they would have to purchase the MiG-29Ks and eight naval helicopters for another $800 million. India was also offered options to purchase an additional 30 MiG-29Ks and upgrades to Indian port facilities in order to dock and service the Gorshkov for a total of another $1.5 billion. But, the program has proven to be overly ambitious and has run into a number of snags that threaten to derail a decades-long symbiotic relationship.
For their part, RSK-MiG, the Moscow-based aircraft firm that is a combination of the old Mikoyan Design Bureau and several associated production facilities, have done a superb job with the MiG-29K. Prototypes of this aircraft first flew and landed successfully on the Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov in the late 1980s, proving that the structure of the basic conventional take-off and landing (CTOL) variant of the MiG-29 could be adapted into a carrier-suitable (CV) design.
Since that time, MiG has made numerous refinements to the configuration using more advanced materials and new-age avionics. So many changes were made that the original MiG-29K-9.31 designation has now been re-labeled the 9.41 configuration, with the changes making for qualitative and performance improvements almost equivalent to the difference between the Boeing F/A-18A/B and C/D models.
But, for all of the success at MiG in making good on their promises to the Indians to build a new-generation carrier airplane--tailhook and all--the progress on the carrier has been abysmal.
When the Russian state arms export agency Rosoboronexport (ROE) made the carrier deal, the vessel was scheduled to be delivered to the Indian Navy in 2008. ROE must not have known what they were getting themselves into and as of last summer the bad news for the Indians could no longer be kept secret. As reported by Russian military analyst Aleksandr Golts, "the money [$1.5 billion] was allocated, but the work was never done."
Another Russian military commentator, Pavel Felgenhauer, stated the situation more bluntly in one of his columns on the carrier entitled "Sold: The $1.5 Billion Lemon."
The Gorshkov is roughly have the size of a U.S. carrier and was originally designed with a flight deck large enough only for a vertical take-off and short landing (VSTOL) airplane like the famous Harrier jump jets operated by the U.S. Marine Corps and the Royal Navy. Russia's Cold War-era answer to the Harrier was the Yakovlev Yak-38, a lackluster performer and an airplane so dangerous that was referred to as "the widowmaker."
In order to accommodate the MiG-29K, the Gorshkov requires an extension to its flight deck to accommodate a CV capable airplane, installation of an arrested landing system like that used on U.S. and French carriers, plus a replacement of its maintenance intensive steam propulsion system with a diesel powerplant. All of this has proven to be too much to do for the original price agreed, so ROE are now demanding an additional $1.2 billion to finish the job. The Indian Navy's chief Admiral, Surreesh Mehta, has obliquely suggested in the local press that this is little more than blackmail given that the Indians have already sunk so much into the program that it is too late to back out now.
Enter the United States. According to numerous sources inside India, when U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates visits New Delhi late in February (provided his Tuesday Potomac Primary Day broken shoulder does not alter his itinerary) he will be carrying a signed letter from U.S. President George W. Bush offering a better deal for India than the one they have been struggling to get out of Moscow for four years now. The Indian Navy will reportedly be offered the soon-to-be decommissioned USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) aircraft carrier for free--provided the Indian Navy will agree to purchase 65 of the newest model Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets to be operated off of it.
If true--and if New Delhi accepts--this can do more than just sink the Russian carrier deal and the MiG-29K contract. The Indian Air Force (IAF) are deep in the throes of a tender to purchase almost 200 new fighter aircraft, with Boeing and RSK-MiG both in the field of six contenders. An order of 200 fighter airplanes is unheard of--larger than any such export sale in more than 20 years. In an era where sales of 12, 20, or 40 fighters are more common, this is the PowerBall Lotto of export competitions.
If the Indian Navy decide to take on the F/A-18E/Fs, it makes logistical sense for the IAF to do the same and the competition for this massive sale would probably be over for all of the other competitors before it gets started. This would be a huge blow to the fortunes of RSK-MiG, who are bidding an advanced, developed MiG-29 model they have now re-labeled the MiG-35. It could make it hard for the famous Russian planemaker to stay in the military aircraft market.
Just last December Boeing placed $1 billion worth of outsourced production with India's HAL. To run for 10 years, this contract will have the Indians building portions of the F/A-18E/F, the Chinook CH-47 helicopter, and other Boeing platforms. This incentive--plus the carrier deal--could make the Boeing Super Hornet the proverbial offer that is too good to pass up.
Moscow's reaction is likely to be less than joyful. Americans in general and President Bush in particular are not very popular with the Russian populace these days and are generally blamed for all of the country's ills in the same way that the Jews were the scapegoats for every misfortune during Soviet times. One Moscow colleague told me recently that this "popular disease of blaming the U.S. for everything has reached almost epidemic proportions. The other day I heard some older, retired people talking about the high prices that we all pay in Moscow and--of course--that it is all the fault of Americans."
The Kremlin is likely to react in tune with the people on the street and take the official line that this is an American conspiracy to rob Russia of its long-time Indian market for defense exports. Boeing--the chief supplier of aircraft to the U.S. Navy--will be accused of giving away a billion dollars in orders and the U.S. Navy of giving away the Kitty Hawk so that the United States can extend its influence and make the Indian Navy an integrated component of the US Naval presence in the Indian Ocean.
"American Imperialism is rising--we must be prepared to counter it," will be the line from Russia's all-but-certain-to-be future President Dmitri Medvedev. Or, it may be ex-President and future designated PM Vladimir Putin who decides to use his new position as a bully pulpit to advance Russian foreign policy objectives.
Either way, Moscow will be most unhappy and looking for what means it can to celebrate this indignation, which means look for relations to take a turn downward and for harassment of U.S. carrier battle groups by long-range Russian Tupolev Tu-95 Bear bombers to be on the upswing. All of which will look just like what it is--a return to Cold War behavior, as well as the thinking that is behind it all.
Reuben F. Johnson is a regular contributor to THE WEEKLY STANDARD online.
Posted by: john frum ||
02/23/2008 11:51 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[12 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
According to one report, the US has proposed equipping the 7 Project-17A warships of the Indian Navy with the AEGIS combat system
Posted by: john frum ||
02/23/2008 12:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
US invites India to join hands for missile defence shield
New Delhi: The American sea-based missile defence system, Aegis, couldn't have got a better marketing push. The system used to shoot down a wayward spy satellite on Wednesday is at the heart of a renewed US invitation to India to join hands in putting together a missile defence shield.
The US has proposed that the Aegis combat management system be installed on seven Indian frigates under a programme code-named Project 17 A.
India's Larsen and Toubro and the Hyundai Heavy Industries have been roped in by American Lockheed Martin to present a joint bid for the Aegis to India.
The shooting down of the satellite was however, the perfect marketing demonstration for the Aegis-based missile defence system.
The flexibility of this system would allow for the integration of Indian missiles on a collective missile defence shield, should New Delhi so decide.
Posted by: john frum ||
02/23/2008 12:07 Comments ||
Top||
#3
There are longstanding Indian news reports that Russia would like to keep the carrier for their navy. Refit using OPM, of course...
#5
Indeed. India may find that its billion dollars went down a black hole.
Posted by: john frum ||
02/23/2008 12:50 Comments ||
Top||
#6
If the Russians wanted the Indians to keep buying, they could have, you know, not screwed them over and kept their word. Russians have always been pretty weak on this point, though.
With missile defense, India turns the thumbscrews on unsettled Pakistan
Scientific American Magazine - March, 2008
The assassination of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, the defiance of militants and public unease with President Pervez Musharrafs government have raised questions about the stability of Pakistan and the security of its nuclear armament. Exacerbating these concerns is a nervous neighbor. In January, weeks after an Indian missile successfully crashed into another missile over the Bay of Bengal, an official announced that India could deploy a defense shield against ballistic missiles by 2011.
By seeking to fend off its tenacious rival, India may have inadvertently increased the risk of a regional nuclear exchange. Furthermore, missile defense will make it likely that greater damage will be inflicted on India if such a war breaks out, argues Theodore Postol, a defense analyst at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Experts have long considered the Indian subcontinent to be the likeliest flash point for the worlds first nuclear exchange [see India, Pakistan and the Bomb, by M. V. Ramana and A. H. Nayyar; Scientific American, December 2001]. Ever since India began the nuclear arms race in 1974, Pakistan has responded tit-for-tat to every development. The effort seems to have paid off for Pakistan: in 1999, when it sent paramilitary forces across the border, India repelled the attackers but did not pursue them home, reportedly because of threats of atomic retaliation.
Indias planners have now decided that a missile defense shield is the answer to their self-inflicted predicament. They have an ally in the Bush administration, which last year forged a deal that will allow India to purchase uranium from international sources for its civilian reactors. If the agreement goes through, India will be able to process all its domestic uranium for the military, adding 60 to 100 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium annually to its current stock (estimated at 600 kilograms). Earlier, in 2005, the U.S. had offered to share military technology, including that of missile defense, with India. Officials and military contractors from around the world have since been thronging to New Delhi in the hope of selling components of a defense system.
Many scientists have pointed out the inherent shortcomings of ballistic-missile defense [see Holes in the Missile Shield, by Richard L. Garwin; Scientific American, November 2004]. Defense systems of this kind cannot, for instance, distinguish decoys from real threats. In South Asia, short distances magnify the problems. Its pretty unlikely that you can expect to reliably intercept anything, opines physicist Zia Mian of Princeton University, who studies nuclear proliferation and global security. Indias Defense Research and Development Organization claims that its planned defense shield will destroy an enemy missile three minutes after the missiles detection by radar.
Early-warning radar, such as one that India has imported from Israel, could detect the missile and determine its course within 110 seconds after its launch. But a ballistic missile launched on a low trajectory from, say, a Pakistani air base could reach New Delhi in as little as five minutes, according to Mian and physicists M. V. Ramana of the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Environment and Development in Bangalore and R. Rajaraman of Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.
That could leave technicians with too little time to figure out if the warning is real. U.S. scientists once spent eight minutes determining that a warning of a Soviet launch was false. Indeed, false alarms are frequent when it comes to early-warning systems. A flight of geese or an incidence of atmospheric turbulence can fool radar, and anomalous reflections of the sun can trick satellite-based infrared detectors. Between 1977 and 1988the only period for which data have been releasedthe U.S. recorded an annual average of 2,600 false alarms of ballistic-missile launches from the Soviet Union. Even if India responds to a false alarm just by launching an interceptor missile, that action could be interpreted by Pakistan as an attack.
Moreover, soon after India acquired early-warning radar Pakistan tested a cruise missile, which Postol believes was reverse-engineered from an American Tomahawk missile that fell in Pakistan during a 1999 attack on terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. Powered throughout its flight, such a missile can hug the ground to evade radar. And in an apparent response to the India-U.S. nuclear deal, Pakistan has begun building a reactor for producing plutonium, which may yield a warhead small enough to fit onto a cruise missile. Pakistan also possesses ballistic missiles fitted with small fins on their forward, payload sections. These structures can add maneuverability, making the warheads exceedingly difficult to catch.
Still, the attacker is always concerned that missile defense might work better than he thinks, Postol points out, and will launch more projectiles than necessary to ensure that at least a few get through. He suggests an alternative way of avoiding a nuclear holocaust. Both nations should disperse and hide their missiles and authorize a designated general in a remote outpost to launch retaliatory strikes should the political leadership be taken out in a first strikeand let the other side know. That way the rulers of both countries can be sure that a nuclear misadventure will lead to their homeland becoming history. Unlike missile defense, mutually assured destruction is at least a time-tested way to keep nuclear weapons in their holsters.
Posted by: john frum ||
02/23/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
a loooong time ago in a galaxy far far away, Sxientific American was a serious magazine. Since then it's become a Glowball Warmening/Leftist/Eco rag. India should not try to protect itself from nutcase Islamist Pakistan? Oh, right, because it would cause insecurity among the nutcase Islamists....What a load of crap
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/23/2008 9:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
A flight of geese or an incidence of atmospheric turbulence can fool radar,
Never saw Geese with afterburners?
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
02/23/2008 13:10 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I used to subscribe to SA before it became Discover magazine with better graphics. Pity. In their defense, a March article was probable written at least 3 months ago - long before the recent shootdown.
mutually assured destruction is at least a time-tested way to keep nuclear weapons in their holsters.
MAD worked for the United States and the fUSSR because they are about 30 minutes apart as the missile flies. This means no one can get in a first strike sucker punch without retaliation. Pakistan and India, however, are only a few minutes apart which means there is great incentive for a massive first strike.
MAD also assumes both opponents are 'rational' which is another way of saying they share the same evaluation function for valuing the outcome of the game. If your oponent is happy with a lose-lose scenario, prepare for incoming!
International bias contributes to 'vicious cycle of violence', says Jaffna MP
The International Community and India, which provide tacit support to Sri Lanka's belligerency, fail to stop or condemn attacks on civilians by Sri Lanka armed forces. But, whenever an attack takes place in the South it gets the prominence of news and International response is prompt. Then, as an occasional passing reference, the antecedents are cited. There is a definite pattern in the international behaviour related to events in Sri Lanka. By such one sided approach, do they encourage retaliations to take place in the South? asks Jaffna district parliamentarian K. Sivanesan.
K. Sivanesan MP
After a little break the Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) has again started attacking civilians. In the latest air strike that deployed 20 bombs, 8 died and 14 injured. All the casualties were civilians, which included a number of children.
Apart from air strikes, every day, a good number of Tamil civilians are either put to death, arrested, kidnapped or disappear in different parts of Sri Lanka.
"The international supporters of Sri Lanka government may perform lip service to uphold human rights in the island, but it has no impact on the surging human rights violations and harassments faced by Tamil civilians," the TNA parliamentarian further said.
The Jaffna district MP Mr. Sivanesan on Thursday raised a privilege issue in Sri Lanka parliament citing his personal encounter with rights violations. The MP was intimidated by the "menacing deployment of dogs" by the security personnel who checked his vehicle at Madawachchi while he was coming to Colombo on Monday.
If you're planning to visit Walid Jumblatt, it's best to make sure you're not in too much of a hurry. And if you're not in a hurry, wait until the weekend and arrange to call on the Lebanese Druze leader in his ancestral home at Mukhtara, deep in the Shouf mountains south of Beirut.
Jumblatt is one of the great survivors of Lebanon's turbulent and political life, a traditional "za'im" or hereditary chieftain of perhaps the most colourful of the country's 18 sects. Now aged 58, he is a key member of the western-backed, Sunni-Christian-Druze government headed by Fouad Siniora. He is also an unrelenting critic of Syria, whose humiliating withdrawal from Lebanon he applauded after the cedar revolution three years ago - and who he continues to attack at every opportunity.
Taken that no less than 21 Lebanese politicians, journalists and soldiers who were considered enemies of Damascus have been murdered since the best-known victim - the former prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri in February 2005 - Jumblatt risks his life whenever he opens his mouth on the matter, which is most days.
The security arrangements at Mukhtara, a honey-coloured 18th century mansion with a mountain spring gushing pastorally beneath it, are a sobering reminder of the dangers he faces. Visitors must pass machine gun-toting guards, metal detectors and body searches before ascending a stone stairway to a huge front door.
WASHINGTON - The embattled executive editor of the New York Times defended its John McCain story Friday with a novel explanation for the flood of critical e-mails the newspaper received: slow-witted readers. The truth dawns.
"Personally, I was surprised by the volume of the reaction," Bill Keller wrote in a Times Web site Q&A forum. Readers posted 2,000 comments and sent in 3,700 questions. "I was surprised by how lopsided the opinion was against our decision, with readers who described themselves as independents and Democrats joining Republicans in defending Mr. McCain from what they saw as a cheap shot," Keller added.
The problem, Keller went on, is that readers didn't get it. "Frankly, I was a little surprised by how few readers saw what was, to us, the larger point of the story."
We readers being the stoopid slackers we are, of course ...
That point, he said, was that McCain, "this man who prizes his honor above all things and who appreciates the importance of appearances, also has a history of being sometimes careless about the appearance of impropriety, about his reputation."
He was a reckless womanizer in his younger days. We knew that already ...
While some press watchers defended the Times, others said the problem wasn't dense readers. "I don't want to fault the journalists," said Columbia University journalism Prof. Todd Gitlin. "But the article as it ran was a mess and not the highest point of journalism."
Gitlin said the story, which ran on Thursday, fell short of establishing that McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman had an improper relationship, or that she won special favors for clients. He suspected the Times actually pulled its punches on the ethics issues for fear of being accused of liberal bias.
Times Managing Editor Jill Abramson defended the part of the article that caused the biggest uproar - the concerns of two unnamed former McCain advisers that the senator was having a romantic relationship with Iseman. "We believed it was vital for the story to accurately reflect the range of concerns shared by our sources," and to not succumb to "possible qualms over 'sexual innuendo,'" Abramson wrote. I agree. If slow-witted metrosexuals didn't try to read the traitorous fishwrap, capitalist robber-barons would quit advertising their worthless products and dubious services in it. It would quickly run out of filthy lucre to pay its depraved staff of fifth columnists and third-rate fiction writers. Lacking any other motivation, these mendacious hophead "journalists" would drift away to work for Mother Jones or High Times, and the NYT would soon be consigned to the dustbin of history.
#1
That point, he said, was that McCain, "this man who prizes his honor above all things and who appreciates the importance of appearances, also has a history of being sometimes careless about the appearance of impropriety, about his reputation."
Fine. Point made. Now Keller - why don't you go after the Obama-Rezko story with as much vigor as this one. Certainly there is much more substance to ongoing connections between Obama and his Syrian-american real estate buddy and his shady foreign friends.
#5
"Personally, I was surprised by the volume of the reaction,"
When a newly hired member of management arrived to occupy his office he meets his predecessor on the way out. The man simply hands three envelopes, consecutively numbered one, two and three, to the new manager with the advice to open them only when the proverbial s**t hit the fan. The new manager slides the envelopes into his desk and gets on to business. Sure enough a couple months down the line, the fan is spinning. Slightly panicked, the manager recalls the envelopes and opens number one. It reads - Blame everything on me. So the manager heads out to his superiors and tries his chance. It works. It buys time. The manager is able to keep the 'boat afloat' for a while longer. However, several more months pass and, sure enough, the manure is in the air again. He quickly retrieves envelope number two. It reads - Reorganize. Without hesitation the new manager presents a plan to do just that and senior management is sated. Of course that only works for so long. And yes, a couple more months later the crisis point is reached yet again. This time the manager digs envelope number three out and opens its to read - Prepare Three Envelopes.
#6
MY VOTE FOR RANT OF THE MONTH:
If slow-witted metrosexuals didn't try to read the traitorous fishwrap, capitalist robber-barons would quit advertising their worthless products and dubious services in it. It would quickly run out of filthy lucre to pay its depraved staff of fifth columnists and third-rate fiction writers. Lacking any other motivation, these mendacious hophead "journalists" would drift away to work for Mother Jones or High Times, and the NYT would soon be consigned to the dustbin of history
#7
Ha! Even my mom was rolling her eyes and snorting with contempt at this pitiful effort to relaunch a decade old political smear. Is this the best you can do? Your sh*t is weak. NYT. Looking forward to reading you in the checkout line at the grocery store.
#8
Well, if the NYSlimes is intellectually so far above the readership, perhaps the dear readers ought to switch allegiance to the NY Sun Or Daily News. That would fix everything. Happiness all around. And, Slimes stock could slip ever lower and maybe soon we could look forward to the day when the dungheap dissappears from the public conscience.
#11
If one of my kids had tried that ploy on me I would have sent them to their rooms without dinner.
It amazes me how the liberal media constantly assumes the general public is a bunch of dolts and when they get caught in some silliness for discounting the intelligence of the readers, they blame it on....the lack of intelligence.
I think this goes to show that the general public has reached the boiling point on leaks, character assassination and liberal sniveling about treatment of terrorists.
The times is caught again. Some one should just close the doors and fire everyone and start over again with some staff that didn't graduate from NYU, Columbia or Berserkley.
#12
The New Yuk Times, Newsweak, Time...During Reagan I got so tired of reading their liberal bovine excrement that I've simply refused to read anything they publish for almost 20 years. The Economist and U.S. News are only slightly better. NRO, the WSJ and occasionally the Daily Telegraph are the only news sources I even halfway trust without fact-checking.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Many scientists, politicians and journalists now agree that climate change and a scarcity of resources could lead to armed conflict. So much so, in fact, that this year's Nobel Prize for Peace went to former U.S. vice president turned environmentalist Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But the argument is far from settled, writes online magazine Science Daily. 
If you're planning to visit Walid Jumblatt, it's best to make sure you're not in too much of a hurry. And if you're not in a hurry, wait until the weekend and arrange to call on the Lebanese Druze leader in his ancestral home at Mukhtara, deep in the Shouf mountains south of Beirut.
