MEXICO CITY, Mexico — Grisly details of the case fill prime-time Mexican television; risque jokes on it are splashed across front pages; gossip about it flows from coffee shops to street corners. And this court case has nothing to do with a drug war that has claimed 34,00 lives and been declared a national security problem. Instead it focuses on what happened — or didn’t happen — in the hotel room of one pop singer. Kalimba Marichal, a 28-year-old Latin crooner, is accused of hitting and raping a 17-year-old girl after a concert in the Caribbean city of Chetumal. Kalimba, as he is commonly known, denies the charges. Assault and rape may not sound like appealing subjects to generate such hot debate. But to Mexicans, the problems of celebrities offer a welcome reprieve from the stories of massacres, extortion and kidnapping by drug cartels, said renowned author Guadalupe Loeza. “We have this provincialism, this morbid fascination with the rich and powerful and what happens in their bedrooms,” Loeza said. “When we are living this wave of very frightening violence — any other story is an escape.” The blanket coverage on the Kalimba case is reminiscent of cases of rape or child molestation in the United States involving such celebrities as Mike Tyson or Michael Jackson. A further similarity is that Kalimba is black — a Mexican of African descent. Black Mexicans are rarely seen in the public light and the Mexican census does not identify people by racial group — only by their Spanish or indigenous language. But activists say there are some million Mexicans with African blood. Kalimba’s race has been played up in several provocative stories. The tabloid La Prensa, for example, opened with a front page headline, “Se Ve Las Negras.” The expression means, “He sees black” — which could mean he foresees gloom, although it could also be taken as meaning that he sees black girls. “Much reporting on this story has used innuendo and suggestion,” Loeza said. “It shows we are still a very racist country.” However, the public is largely defending the popular pop singer. Many see him as a man of the people being attacked by the establishment. “It is conspiracy. He is being framed. Maybe he upset somebody,” says cafe owner Jacobo Suarez as he pours a round of capuchinis. When TV presenter Carlos Loret de Mola grilled Kalimba over the charges, many complained the journalist browbeat the entertainer too much.

YouTube videos have even been released attacking Loret de Mola over the interview.


The case itself revolves around 17-year-old escort Daiana Gomez — sent to accompany Kalimba and his entourage at the nightclub where they played the concert on Dec. 18.

Gomez said in a TV interview that she and another escort aged 16 indeed were invited back to the hotel expecting a party. Back in the hotel, Gomez says she saw the fellow escort go into a room with three naked men and the door being closed. Kalimba then hit her, told her to shut up and raped her, she claims. In his own interview, Kalimba on the verge of tears said Gomez is lying. “I didn’t rape anyone. I didn’t abuse anyone. It was a small hotel. Someone would have heard if I attacked her. How come I have no marks on me?” he said. “I have many women in my family. I would never abuse women.” However, Kalimba did not confirm or deny whether he had sex with the underage girl. He also said that both girls went to see him off at the airport, remarking that would have been strange if Gomez had been raped. State prosecutor Francisco Alor took declarations from both Kalimba and Gomez and ruled there was enough evidence to file preliminary rape charges against the pop singer. If convicted, Kalimba could face up to 50 years in prison.

JERUSALEM, Israel — The role of the United States as the largest single donor to both Israel and the Palestinians was thrown into sharp relief last November when the Israeli government rejected 20 U.S. F35 Joint Strike Fighter jets worth $2.75 billion in return for extending a West Bank settlement freeze by 90 days.
The offer — some called it a “bribe” — of military material equal in value to nearly an entire year’s worth of U.S. aid to Israel, renewed questions about the purpose of U.S. aid in the region and whether it might be more effectively deployed to better serve American strategic interests. Israel receives more U.S. foreign aid than any other country, now around $3 billion every year. It is used only for military purposes — Israel voluntarily gave up U.S. civil aid more than a decade ago. Seventy percent of the aid is earmarked for purchases from U.S. companies. According to the State Department’s latest budget justification for foreign operations, “U.S. assistance will help ensure that Israel maintains its qualitative military edge over potential threats, and prevent a shift in the security balance of the region. U.S. assistance is also aimed at ensuring for Israel the security it requires to make concessions necessary for comprehensive regional peace.” This alliance is expressed in regular joint military training exercises, intelligence-sharing, a free trade agreement between the two countries, regular White House visits by Israeli leaders and frequent top-level consultations at all levels of government and the military. In a secret cable setting the scene for a visit to Israel by Deputy Secretary of State James B. Steinberg in November 2009, published by WikiLeaks, James B. Cunningham, the U.S. Ambassador in Tel Aviv, reported that “Israelis from the prime minister on down to the average citizen are deeply appreciative of the strong security and mil-mil cooperation with the U.S. The U.S.-Israeli security relationship remains strong … The United States remains committed to Israel's Qualitative Military Edge.” The United States, meanwhile, is also the single largest donor to the Palestinian Authority — a point underlined by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she pointed out recently that wealthy Arab states had failed to honor millions of dollars in pledges to the Palestinians made at donor conferences. In 2010 the United States earmarked $500 million in direct assistance and a further $228 million for Palestinian refugees through the United Nations. “U.S. aid is important in terms of size and also in political importance,” a Palestinian Authority official told GlobalPost, speaking on condition of anonymity. “The money that we receive from the U.S. is almost 30 percent of the donor aid that comes to Palestine.” The official welcomed U.S. President Barack Obama’s tougher policy on settlement building and his efforts to push Israel to conclude a peace deal, but said it seemed hampered by the “domestic complications” of being firm with Israel. “The American administration is pushing with all of its strength to try to reach a settlement and basically achieve some progress at the political level. Unfortunately all of these efforts have been unsuccessful so far, but we continue to be hopeful,” the official said. After the F35 debacle in November, Andrew Sullivan suggested in the Huffington Post that it was time to end the aid “because a) Israel doesn't need it and b) we need the money and c) it doesn't seem sensible to me to keep rewarding an ally that refuses to offer minimal cooperation.” “It's time for the U.S. to assert its own interests and goals,” Sullivan argued. Sam Bahour, a Palestinian-American businessman who relocated from Ohio to Ramallah to help build the Palestinian economy, said U.S. aid is simply “underwriting the occupation.” “Instead of putting the burden of cost of being an occupier on the lap of the Israelis, they are underwriting them and allowing the Israelis to perpetuate occupation, almost cost free,” Bahour told GlobalPost. “The U.S. national interest is to end the occupation. They’ve said it’s in the U.S. national interest to have a Palestinian state. So what are they waiting for to use their leverage — financial as well as others — to make that happen?” But New Jersey Congressman Steve Rothman said, “the argument that American military aid to Israel is damaging to the United States is not only erroneous, it hurts the national security interests of this country and threatens the survival of Israel.” Israeli leaders say U.S. aid to Israel should be seen as the most effective part of the U.S. defense budget. “Since Israel is the most dependable and strongest ally of the U.S. here in this very unpredictable region, we save America a lot of troops and material,” Danny Ayalon, Israel’s deputy foreign minister, told GlobalPost, adding that $3 billion was about 2 percent of U.S. military spending in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. “To serve the same interests and objectives of the U.S. in the region without Israel would either have been impossible or it would have taken enormous resources, multiplying U.S. aid to Israel by one hundred times or more. The return on the investment in Israel is very evident and very big,” Ayalon said. Critics of Israel have long argued that it is time the United States used the aid money to greater diplomatic effect. But Gerald Steinberg, professor of politics at Bar-Ilan University, said U.S. presidents since John F. Kennedy — who threatened to stop all financial transfers in 1963 over Israel’s refusal to permit inspection of its nuclear program — have learned that financial threats will not budge Israeli governments on vital policies. “For core issues, the threat to withhold U.S. aid will only make Israel more reluctant to take risks and increase the sense of Israeli isolation,” Steinberg told. “The only way that Israel is going to be convinced to take security risks like withdrawal is by convincing Israel that those risks are offset, that Israel’s security is guaranteed. That will make Israel more willing to take the risks on the ground that will advance the peace process.”

The voting has ended in South Sudan and the counting has begun. It will take weeks before the final result is announced. But there is little doubt among the 4 million registered voters in South Sudan that they voted overwhelmingly for independence. GlobalPost senior correspondent for Africa Tristan McConnell, in this Raw Feed video, describes the celebratory atmosphere that he witnessed this week in southern Sudan. Despite widespread predictions of violence and chaos, the week-long voting took place peacefully. Thousands of southern Sudanese stood in lines for hours, waiting patiently and sometimes singing, to cast their ballots. Voting ended on Saturday and it was quickly confirmed that the threshold of 60 percent of registered voters had cast their ballots to make the election valid. Domestic and international observers praised the orderly voting process. The one area of concern has been the northern region of Abyei, where voting did not take place and which is claimed by both the North and South. Foreign observers widely endorsed the fairness and credibility of the referendum. U.S. President Barack Obama praised the vote. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged political parties in the country to "seize the moment." The atmosphere in the south is jubilant. In the north, however, the feeling appears to be resignation and disappointment, but it seems the Khartoum government and the people of the North are prepared to accept the result, rather than reject it.

SANTO DOMINGO, Dominican Republic — The return of ex-dictator Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier to Haiti after nearly 25 years in exile has prompted another exiled leader to push to come back. Ousted President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, who was flown out of the country in 2004, reminded his supporters — and Haitian and foreign officials — that he’s prepared to come back to Haiti, a country from which he was forced into exile nearly seven years ago. “As far as I am concerned, I am ready,” he wrote in a statement that was distributed to the press Wednesday. “Once again, I express my readiness to leave today, tomorrow, at any time.” Aristide, who has applied for but not received a passport to travel, was still in South Africa, despite rumors of his imminent return, supporters said. Aristide’s statement has added another layer of complexity to an already bizarre week that began with Duvalier’s return. The timing of the controversy could not be worse for the country, observers said, because it has taken attention away from the lingering electoral crisis. Duvalier, who is accused of pilfering the treasury of hundreds of millions and using secret police to torture and murder opponents from 1971 to 1986, returned to Haiti on Sunday. Prosecutors filed charges of corruption and embezzlement on Tuesday. And victims came forward Wednesday to add human rights violations to those charges. An investigating judge is now weighing the case against him. Spokesmen for Duvalier said the former dictator came back to help his country. Indeed, a crowd of supporters welcomed him back and gathered in front of the posh hotel in the Petionville neighborhood of Port-au-Prince where Duvalier had been staying until Thursday. “I think some people think of him and say ‘life was easier when he was here,’” said Yves Destin, who was left unemployed after last year’s earthquake. Destin added that many Haitians are too young to remember the Duvaliers. “People tell stories about how everything worked then and it was cleaner. They don’t know that there were also a lot of problems.” Duvalier and aides canceled press conferences scheduled for Monday and Tuesday. And his public statements have been few, leaving many to wonder why he would return after nearly a quarter-century away. Rumors about his health and presidential aspirations have been denied. But there is speculation that his return was a last-ditch attempt to make a claim for roughly $5.8 million he allegedly robbed that’s still frozen in a Swiss bank account. Duvalier amassed a fortune before fleeing to France, but “he burned through a lot of the money,” said Elizabeth Abbott, who wrote a 1991 book about Duvalier and his father, Francoise “Papa Doc.” “It was incredible how lavishly he lived.” It was a lifestyle that included apartments in Paris, a residence in southern France, sports cars and pricey meals, according to reports. He then lost millions in his 1993 divorce. But the Swiss Return of Illicit Assets Act goes into effect on Feb. 1, and the Swiss government had planned to use it to return that money to Haiti.

“It’s possible that [Duvalier] thought that if he returned to Haiti he could throw a wrench in the process, or at least try to claim some credit for any return of assets to Haiti,” said Mark V. Vlasic, a partner at the Washington law firm Ward & Ward PLLC and a law professor at Georgetown University. Vlasic was head of operations at the World Bank’s Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative when the Swiss law was written. While at the bank, he worked with Swiss officials on the Duvalier case. The law was passed, in part, to help Haiti recover the Duvalier money. Corrupt politicians have been able to hide money in Swiss bank accounts and then live off that money in luxury once in exile.

When it passed it was lauded as a landmark move by the Swiss government to cut down on financial crimes. However, it’s not clear if the law can be utilized if a country has its own opportunity to prosecute the official for financial crimes. It is unlikely Duvalier will get the money back. Swiss courts have already ruled it was taken illegally. Now that Duvalier is in Haiti, human rights groups have said it’s important that he face justice. “It would send a message that we have the capacity and the will to see a case of this magnitude through the system,” said Haitian lawyer Patrice Florvilus of the Bureau des Avocats Internationaux, which is linked to Aristide, a political opponent of Duvalier. “It’s extremely important.” It’s unclear how long the judge will investigate before making a decision about the case and questions have been raised as to how strongly the government will push for the prosecution or if it prefers that Duvalier gets on a plane and leaves. In his statement, Aristide said the purpose of his desire to return “is very clear: To contribute to serving my Haitian sister and brothers as a simple citizen in the field of education.” Aristide’s letter drew a quick reaction from the U.S. State Department. Spokesman P.J. Crowley posted on Twitter that “We do not doubt President Aristide’s desire to help the people of Haiti. But today Haiti needs to focus on its future, not its past.” The country is supposed to seat a new president in a few weeks. But it has not held the second round of elections to elect that leader or announced which two candidates will compete in that round. “I think that the timing [of Duvalier’s return] is a huge distraction from the election, which is the real issue that needs to be addressed,” said Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington. The country’s electoral council certified results from the first round, which would have sent former first lady Mirlande Manigat and government candidate Jude Celestin to a second round. But after an analysis of a sample of votes, election monitors from the Organization of American States released a report that stated singer Michel Martelly should be moved to second place. President Rene Preval has not addressed the report publicly. A Center for Economic and Policy Research analysis of the OAS findings and of the vote totals found numerous problems. “The vote should be run again and open to all candidates,” Weisbrot said. U.S. and U.N. officials today urged Haiti to adopt the OAS findings. U.N. Under-Secretary General for Peacekeeping Operations Alain Le Roy said the electoral commission “must honor its commitment to fully take into account the report’s recommendations.” He said he expected an official decision by Jan. 31 and a second-round vote in mid-February.

PARIS, France — It is the end of an era and, perhaps, a beginning. 
After almost 40 years at the helm of the National Front, far-right politician Jean-Marie Le Pen bid farewell to party members last weekend, handing the reins to his daughter, Marine.
Marine Le Pen, a more moderate version of her father, has dropped some of his most controversial causes, such as anti-Semitism, in favor of an issue more French are getting behind: secularism, specifically special treatment for France’s growing Muslim population. Her father, who has been convicted by several courts for racist and anti-Semitic statements, once said on television, “I do not think all races are equal.” He called Nazi gas chambers “a detail” of history and said the German occupation of France — during which hundreds of thousands of French died, including about 77,000 Jews — “was not particularly inhuman.”
Despite his vitriolic sense of provocation, Jean-Marie Le Pen, 82, has been a prominent political figure in France for almost 40 year..
“Le Pen’s resilience stems from his ability to gather different far-right movements in the 1960s and 1970s, including neo-fascists and colonialists,” said Perrineau. “Then in the 1980s, Le Pen managed to surf on major issues, such as immigration and criminality, issues that were left out by other parties.”
The son of a fisherman who died during World War II, Le Pen began his political career after fighting for France in Indochina and Algeria. At only 27, in 1956, Le Pen was elected to the French Parliament.
Then, in 1972, he co-founded the National Front and was appointed party president.
For years, Le Pen developed a particular political style — a combination of populism, protectionism and racist rhetoric — served by an extraordinary gift for public speech. He climbed from a low of 0.75 percent of the vote in his first presidential run in 1974, to eventually make the runoff in 2002 against Jacques Chirac — the climax of his political career. That 2002 ballot came as a shock to the French, clashing with their ideals of equality and fraternity. Marches and demonstrations against the National Front were organized all over the country and Le Pen fell to Chirac in the second round, winning just under 18 percent of the vote.
While he easily takes his gloves off against his opponents, Le Pen likes to claim he has always been a victim of the political and media elite. “A detail in the history of World War II, the inequality between races, all my statements have been misused to make me a scapegoat, just because I refused to obey the intellectual police,” said Le Pen on Saturday. In the latest presidential election in 2007, Le Pen slight more than 10 of the votes and did not make it to the second round. Le Pen used his final party address to warn members against the dangers of consumerism, the European Union and Islam. “Islamists occupy the streets,” he said, “to try and force public authorities to build new mosques, although there are already more than 2,000 mosques in our national territory. After having forced a ban on pork meat in many schools, Islamists demand that the meat served in cafeterias be prepared according to the Muslim ritual.” “It is a typical far-right strategy to find a scapegoat,” said Perrineau, “whether it is the Jews, freemasons, intellectual elite, or immigrants.”
The strategy led to far-right gains in elections last year in the Netherlands, Hungary and Sweden. Marine Le Pen, more than her father, has the ability to take the National Front mainstream and win gains in next year’s French presidential election. Unlike her father, Marine Le Pen, who garnered over two-thirds of party members’ votes for leader, was born after World War II and the Algerian war for independence.
In an effort to dust her party off, the new leader has let go of the anti-Semitic and conservative Catholic values dear to her father, advocating instead for a more secular society and an anti-Islam agenda.
In her inauguration speech on Sunday, Marine Le Pen insisted France was never and will never be a Muslim country. She also called on party members to “resist modern dictatorships such as radical Islam and globalization.” “The government must forbid special opening hours in swimming pools for Muslim women and a religious ban on certain foods in school cafeterias,” she said. “No one should be forced to eat Muslim halal food against their will.” According to a recent poll conducted by the Viavoice Institute, 20 percent of the French have a positive opinion of Marine Le Pen. But according to Perrineau, “Marine Le Pen still has to prove that she is resilient enough for a national political career.” “For now, she enjoys some popularity,” he said. “Twenty percent of the French have a positive opinion of her, but it does not mean that she will get 20 percent of the vote.” In her farewell speech, Marine Le Pen paid tribute to her father. She evoked “the noble soul, perseverance, vision and boldness with which he led the National Front.” “All these qualities,” she said, “allow us to say that he undeniably is a historical figure.” Just hours before Marine was praising her father’s noble soul, a Jewish journalist with the France 24 television station was reportedly assaulted by National Front security personnel — and Le Pen took the opportunity to sign off with a racist slur. "The person in question believed it was necessary to say that it was because he was Jewish that he was thrown out,” Le Pen said. “That couldn't be seen either on his [press] card or on his nose — if I dare say it.”

TORONTO, Canada — The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council has banned radio stations from playing uncensored versions of “Money for Nothing,” the classic 1980s rock song from the band Dire Straits. The council has judged the word “faggot” — used three times in the song — as offensive and unacceptable for broadcast. The decision, made on Wednesday, has been met with a barrage of dismissive and derisive reactions. Christie Blatchford, one of Canada’s best known columnists, described it as the “triumph of small minds and over-parsed language.” And several radio stations have protested the decision by playing an unedited version of the song. It should be noted that this is not another example of what some might call Canada’s “nanny state.” The broadcast council is not a government body. It’s made up of about 760 radio and TV stations across Canada. It’s an example of a private industry regulating itself.
The song, written by Mark Knopfler and Sting, is from the perspective of two working-class grunts doing back-breaking work delivering and installing kitchens. They’re watching music videos on MTV, a relatively new phenomenon in 1984, and one of them describes “the little faggot with the earring and the makeup” who’s making a fortune as a musician. They then conclude: “That ain’t working / That’s the way you do it / Money for nothing and your chicks for free."


The complaint in Canada came from a single person in the Atlantic province of Newfoundland, a woman identifying herself as “a member of the LGBT community” (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender).
In her complaint about “faggot” to the broadcast council, the unidentified listener wrote: “This word carries an unavoidable connotation of hate. By airing it unapologetically on the radio, this station is indirectly propagating hate. Although I can see the value in a timeless classic rock song in its original form, I cannot help but feel that it does not overshadow the importance of ending discrimination.”
The council agreed. “Like other racially driven words in the English language, “faggot” is one that, even if entirely or marginally acceptable in earlier days, is no longer so,” it ruled. “The Panel finds that it has fallen into the category of unacceptable designations on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, marital status or physical or mental disability.”
In an interview with Rolling Stone magazine, Knopfler once described the character he created as “a real ignoramus ... somebody who sees everything in financial terms.” Noting objections he received from a gay listener, Knopfler made clear he had doubts about whether taking on the voice of an invented character was a good idea. There’s no doubt that “faggot” is a derogatory term, one that is sure to offend. What the council glossed over, however, is the context of the word in the song. Like a novelist or poet, Knopfler was talking in the voice of a character he created. The debate over the song in Canada comes as the power of words is being hotly argued south of the border. There’s the example in early January of an Alabama publisher, NewSouth Books, announcing it would publish new editions of Mark Twain’s "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" and "Tom Sawyer" that replace the word “nigger” with “slave.” The often-repeated defense of these novels is that they are products of their time, and should be read in that context.
More recently, the attempted assassination of Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords unleashed a national argument about whether harsh rhetoric from right-wing politicians and media commentators incites violence. In the context of an all-out political war against U.S.  President Barack Obama, accused of being everything from a closet Muslim to a raving socialist, Sarah Palin responded to the health care reform vote with this tweet: “Don’t Retreat, Instead – RELOAD!” The tweet came a day after vandals smashed Giffords’ office front door. In that context, was the use of the word the same as shouting “RELOAD!” on a firing range? No one will persuade Palin that her words might have helped incite a killer, and few Dire Straits fans will agree that "Money for Nothing" should be censored. But many in these debates will be reminded of the power of words and the importance of context. In these politically charged, internet-fueled times, that can only be good.

President Hu Jintao of China is set to arrive in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday for a four-day state visit to discuss issues ranging from North Korea to Chinese currency and military cooperation.
The visit, billed as the most important by a Chinese leader in 30 years and one of the most important of the Obama presidency, will  likely set the stage for future relations between the United States and China.
However, the visit comes amid concern that Hu lacks the leadership strength within his party and country to make commitments that will have a dramatic impact on the U.S.-China relationship.
"China is far wealthier and more influential, but Mr. Hu also may be the weakest leader of the Communist era," states The New York Times. "He is less able to project authority than his predecessors were — and perhaps less able to keep relations between the world’s two largest economies from becoming more adversarial." Read Mike Moran: Hu calls the shots in China?
The Obama administration has feared that Hu's power is limited by a diffuse ruling party controlled more by generals, ministers and business interests than the president. Significant secrecy surrounding the Chinese government also weakens Hu's role and makes it difficult for the United States and China to smooth bilateral ties, reports the Wall Street Journal. Within the Community Party leadership, Hu is a "mere senior among equals" and cannot act in such a manner that it would appear he is overstepping his bounds.
The secrecy could hinder efforts to humanize the relationship and prevent Americans from gaining a better understanding of the Chinese leader, according to Liu Weidong, a researcher with the Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, a Beijing think tank. Hu will be further limited by his own people, whose strong nationalism will prevent him from making any dramatic policy changes, writes Harvard University professor and author Joseph Nye on the Huffington Post.
Analysts in Washington expressed little hope of any substantial agreement on economics or foreign affairs, but said the importance of the meeting was the opportunity for the two leaders to establish a good personal relationship. In contrast to his last state visit, in April of 2006, when President George W. Bush was in office, Hu — a 67-year-old hydroelectric engineer who has held the top office since 2002 — is to be honored at a lavish state dinner on Wednesday night, a gesture usually reserved for close friends and allies of the United States. However, according to GlobalPost's Jonathan Adams, observers were struggling ahead of Hu's visit to "define a thorny relationship that increasingly defies characterization." "Last year the two countries grappled with a long list of issues that bedeviled relations: How to deal with North Korea, the value of China's currency, a massive trade gap, the South China Sea, U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, climate change and the Dalai Lama, just for starters," Adams wrote.
Relations between the two global powerhouses were further strained this week, when the Chinese military conducted the inaugural flight test of a new stealth warplane, the J-20, just as U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was about to meet with Chinese President Hu Jintao at Beijing’s Great Hall of the People. Gates had traveled to Beijing hoping to ease tensions with the Chinese military, which had reached a nadir since U.S. President Barack Obama took office.
The high-profile test flight created confusion, and much speculation, about the message Gates' hosts were sending. Territorial and human rights issues have also caused much tension, specifically the Dalai Lama's earlier U.S. visit and the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo, as have rows over internet freedom and arms sales to Taiwan. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton addressed U.S. concerns on China's human rights record at length in a major speech on U.S.-Chinese relations on Friday, making the case that "the longer China represses freedoms, the longer . . . empty chairs in Oslo will remain a symbol of a great nation's unrealized potential and unfulfilled promise." Beijing, meanwhile, has long wanted Washington to stop selling arms to Taiwan, a self-governing island that China considers part of its territory.  But these are part of a bigger issue that Beijing and Washington will need to resolve, writes Michael Bristow, Beijing correspondent for the BBC. At issue is how to manage their changing relationship. "China might currently be the junior partner but, as it grows stronger, it will want a greater say in how the world is run, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region," he writes, adding that an example of China's growing assertiveness in territorial matters is the increased rhetoric of China's leaders over claims on the seas around the country. Whatever the political issues, the leaders of both nations say they want to show that the U.S.-China relationship, which was on the skids last year, is back on track and is mutually beneficial, according to The Wall Street Journal. To this aim, the United States is pressing China to buy tens of billions of dollars in U.S. aircraft, auto parts, agricultural goods and beef to build goodwill. And since Hu's last state visit, in 2006, before the global financial crisis that plunged the United States into a deep recession, China has become the world's second-largest economy. And Chinese deal-making is part of nearly all of their state visits abroad — it announced $16 billion in deals in India last month. Myron Brilliant, senior vice president for international affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, suggested that Hu would “come with gifts. He will come with contracts.” In an interview with Forbes, he said that China saw the visit as an opportunity to show that it is open for business and advised keeping an eye out for deals announced on the sidelines Wednesday, and Hu’s remarks at Thursday’s lunch. A U.S. economics team was sent to Beijing to help negotiate agreements to be announced this week, but returned to Washington last Friday reporting a lack of progress. But Chinese and U.S. businesses signed deals worth $600 million in Texas on Monday, Chinese state media reported. The six agreements were signed during a visit to the oil-rich state by a delegation of Chinese businessmen led by vice commerce minister Wang Chao. The value of China's currency is another hot button issue. On Monday, a group of U.S. senators said it was vital that Congress pass legislation to get tough with China over its currency practices, Reuters reported.
"There's no bigger step we can take to preserve the American dream and promote job creation, particularly in the manufacturing sector ... than to confront China's manipulation of its currency," Democratic Senator Charles Schumer said in a conference call on a proposed bill to pressure China to raise the value of its currency, as reported by Reuters.

PECH VALLEY, Afghanistan — Pvt. Kyle “Bobby” Boucher stretched out sorely, groaning away a rough night of sleep out in eastern Afghanistan’s frigid air. Gingerly, he stepped his way through the splayed legs of fellow soldiers who slept heavily or sat smoking. Upon reaching his intended spot, a rock overhanging the burn pit where soldiers relieve themselves, he cast a wary look back at Ranger Rock, the name given by U.S. forces to the ridgeline angling down into the mouth of the Korengal Valley. “Man, I so don’t want to get shot through the back taking a piss on Christmas morning,” he said, to no one in particular. It was the first of five days that the soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division were pulling watch duty up at Observation Post Pride Rock, a compact perch of sandbags, plywood and dirt that stands as mountaintop guardian for Combat Outpost Michigan, in Kunar Province’s Pech Valley. It also happened to be Dec. 25, a fact that the soldiers were acutely aware of, but jokingly nonchalant about. “You know the song ‘It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas’?” one soldier asked. “Well I don’t think that applies here.”

Similar quips were thrown around for the remainder of the day among the 12 U.S. soldiers stationed at the Pride Rock as they carried on with daily chores — scanning ridgelines, cleaning weapons, checking radio frequencies. The reality was clear and left unspoken. On one of the most dangerous and vulnerable vantage points still held by coalition forces in the eastern front of the war, Christmas just didn’t seem all that important. Since U.S. forces established a full-time presence in the Pech Valley in 2006, the area has discerned itself as one of toughest fights that the conflict, approaching a decade in length, has had to offer. Now, in line with the International Security Assistance Force’s wider strategy of focusing attention on areas with greater population centers, the NATO forces manning the four bases in the Pech Valley are now waiting to hear if they will be ordered to withdraw from the area. “Right now if you did a cost-benefit analysis, there’s an argument that the potential to win here is less than in other areas,” said Lt. Col. Joseph Ryan, battalion commander of the 101st Airborne in the Pech Valley. After nine months of heavy fighting and more than a dozen soldiers under his command killed, Ryan understands better than most the difficulties of their mission.

“Peace in the valley is not really something we’re shooting for,” the Colonel said. “Defeating the insurgency here in this valley, that is a condition that is probably beyond our capability.” The insurgents — a loose alliance of domestic and foreign groups including the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Salafi jihadists and local militias — have proven a resolute force in the area. Taking advantage of the mountainous terrain and proximity to the Pakistan border, fighters are able to strike coalition bases and patrols with mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns before retreating into nearby valleys or seeking refuge across the border. At Pride Rock, attacks come frequently and often without warning. Insurgents, firing from opposing valley walls, often escape over the ridges or into villages nestled in the valley floor before soldiers stationed at Pride Rock can receive artillery support from the mortar team at neighboring Combat Outpost Michigan or the howitzers at nearby Forward Operating Base Blessing. “[The insurgents] are not dumb,” said Pvt. Kyle Boucher, speaking from his guard post at Pride Rock. “They’re good fighters, they’ve been doing it for years. They defeated the Russians here, in this same area.” “The best thing about being out here is it’s so often kinetic that you don’t have a choice,” he said. “You know shit’s going to happen so you’re always alert, you’re always ready. Rather than being somewhere where sometime you get shot at, sometime they ambush you, well no … they’re always hitting us.” Since the 101st Airborne took over operations in the Pech, U.S. forces and their Afghan counterparts have seen a spike in enemy activity. Attacks from improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, are on the rise and casualty numbers are mounting. Even in the winter, a traditionally quiet season for the war, there can be an average of five to 10 significant attacks on coalition positions each day.

A launch pad for insurgents
Combat Outpost Michigan and Pride Rock are among the hardest hit. The primary reason for this, according to sources on the ground, lies in the closing of Korengal Outpost in May of last year. The hope at the time of the closure was that the Korengali fighters would quit the fight if coalition forces extricated themselves as a source of commonality for otherwise fractured groups opposed to a foreign force. In reality, the Korengal Valley has since become a blind spot in the area for U.S. operations, military officials said, and a launch pad for insurgents to bring the fight to the bases still open, notably Combat Outpost Michigan, which is about three miles away.

“You’re at a bad crossroads right here for valleys and especially since the closure of the Korengal outpost,” said Lt. Armin Farazdaghi, the outpost’s unit leader during the Christmas rotation. “Contact is pretty daily here and over the summer months it was definitely a few times a day, at least.” A foreseeable concern with the impending Pech withdrawal is the potential of turning the entire valley system that follows the Kunar river into a Korengal-style situation, where the coalition no longer has a presence and, in the void following, the insurgency becomes too hot to handle for Afghan security forces. Already the local police force and the Afghan National Army are showing signs of anxiety at the possibility of losing their U.S. military help. “The situation is getting worse day by day,” said Sgt. Tooryalai Jigarkhoon, the Afghan National Army commander at Pride Rock. “Since U.S. forces withdrew from the Korengal Outpost, things have deteriorated greatly here. Now all the Korengali fighters come to this OP to fight us here.” “If they now leave the Pech, what are we to do? We can’t fight the Taliban by ourselves,” he added. Maj. Mehboob, acting commander of Afghan forces in the valley, echoed the concern. “If coalition forces pull out and we are here alone, it is likely that we will confront big problems and we won’t be as successful as we are right now,” he said. On an operational level, Afghan National Army command has outlined to the coalition two primary requirements before they can hope to take over the fight — air support and artillery. On a battlefield with few roads and terrain that is difficult to traverse on foot or in vehicles, a reliable air force that can provide firepower from above, as well as immediate extraction of casualties, is crucial. To date, Afghans have relied almost solely on American air power.
“We lack some of these things we need from coalition forces,” Mehboob said. “If we’re given those systems, I think one day we’ll be able to carry out any operations by ourselves. But we’re still waiting, that day is coming.” Lt. Col. Ryan is also aware of such fears in the Afghan security forces.
“The concern from an Afghan perspective, and rightfully so, is that that transition will cause a vacuum of power here that they cannot assume,” he said.
Ryan likens the immediate fallout from a full U.S. withdrawal from the area to the peace following the collapse of the Soviet Union, however, the vacuum created by such an exodus would inevitably lead to a rise in tensions between the remaining tribes still competing for influence in the area, he said.
Compared to some other areas of the country, establishment of, and transition to, a centralized government in the Pech has seen a great many hurdles on a local level. U.S. command in the area of operations attributes this to an ingrained isolationist mentality, steeped in tribal traditions going back hundreds of years. One of the few successes U.S. forces lay claim to in the area is building and maintaining the road.

Afghan forces not ready
What is clear to those working daily with Afghan forces is their lack of readiness for a task as great as the one that would be left to them if the U.S. leaves the Pech anytime soon.
Many working side-by-side with the Afghan army out in the field express frustration at the inconsistencies seen from battalion to battalion and many U.S. soldiers are wary of corruption, down to an individual level.

At Pride Rock, the night vision optics the coalition gave to Afghan soldiers disappeared almost immediately. During firefights, Afghan soldiers would go through a far greater amount of ammunition than that of U.S. soldiers, subsequently collecting the brass casings from the spent rounds, which are then used as a tradeable item in the valley bazaars. Eight pieces of this brass, said one soldier, is more than an average daily wage in the district. A level of distrust between foreigners based in the Pech and the Afghans they work with is palpable. According to some U.S. soldiers at Forward Operating Base Blessing, the largest NATO position in the Pech, local Afghans working on the base have a habit of disappearing on days when insurgent rockets hit the base. How they know, or why they do not pass on intelligence to the command, are questions left unanswered. For residents of the valley who are employed by the United States, fear of Taliban reprisal runs high, exacerbated by the rumours of an imminent withdrawal. During an attempt to rebuild the road leading into the Korengal, a number of local contractors were killed. The on-base barber at Blessing was killed by insurgents early in the 101st’s rotation. His headless body was discovered floating down river by U.S. soldiers the following day. "When coalition forces will go from our area, this will be the worst time for us,” said Mohammed Israr, a local from Nangalam district who works with the United States as a cultural adviser. “It was the same when the Russians left, many Afghan nationals working with them were killed after they left.”
Even local elders, many of which have cooperated with coalition forces over the past few years and profited financially from the partnership, are uneasy with the idea of a Pech Valley without U.S. soldiers.
At the end of a routine meeting between soldiers of Charlie Company and Haji Wazir Ghul, an influential elder living in a fortified compound near Forward Operating Base Blessing, the man joked that the Taliban would one day come to castrate him.
 
Troops weigh in
While the decision on whether to pull out of the Pech is mulled over under the lights of Pentagon conference rooms, soldiers that patrol the winding valleys continue on in limbo. Troops on the ground remain conflicted over expectations that they might be given their walking papers at any time.
“Honestly, from my perspective, I don’t think it would be for the best,” said Staff Sgt. Spencer Townsend, one soldier pulling the five day Christmas rotation at Pride Rock. “It’d kind of make me feel like what we’ve been doing here was for nothing.” “Out platoon, we’ve had a lot of rough times,” Pfc. Matthew Morgan added. “I think that if we did leave, those people that got hurt and did pass away, I think they would die in vain. They died for no reason if we were to ever leave.” Whether the withdrawal from the Pech valley does indeed happen in the coming months or not, the coalition’s eventual exit from the valley is an inevitability, as the roll of foreign forces in the future of Afghanistan begins to slowly decrease. What remains uncertain is the future of those that are left behind after U.S. helicopters make their final sweep of the valley, and how the war in this little, isolated pocket of the country will be remembered.

BOSTON — Everyone knows the real reason to watch the Golden Globes. They serve booze, so the stars get good and soused and sometimes say something funny — or do something funny, like when Liz Taylor started to name the best picture winner before she had even listed the nominees.
The Golden Globes have never been taken as seriously as the Oscars, at least not since 1958 when Frank Sinatra and the rest of the Rat Pack hijacked the stage with high-balls in hand and gave everyone a show to remember.  The air of revelry tells us as much about American culture as do any of the films featured at the event. But there is also a global message to be heard. For starters, the event is run by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, which is made up of journalists who cover the U.S. entertainment industry for outlets abroad. It's about bringing Hollywood to the world. It's also about bringing the world to Hollywood. A quick glance at the five films nominated for Best Foreign Language Film takes us from post-World War II Russia ("The Edge") to turn of the millennium in Milan ("I Am Love") to a refugee camp in today's Sudan ("In A Better World.") Before you plunk down this Sunday evening to watch the event itself, hear from GlobalPost correspondents, who give global context to these films (as well as "The King's Speech," up for best drama):
  "The King's Speech" (U.K.): No one is shocked when a British film gets a Golden Globe or Oscar nomination. It's expected there will be British representation among the nominees for Hollywood's big kudos.
Certainly "The King's Speech" fits the bill. Who does costume drama with pithy dialogue and effortlessly elegant performances better than the Brits? The film's star Colin Firth is a probable winner, and Helena Bonham Carter stands a good chance as well in the supporting actress category.

British actor Colin Firth poses with a fan in the Hollywood section of Los Angeles, Jan. 13, 2011. (Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images

Costume dramas and punchy action comedies about London criminals make up the bulk of Britain's film industry, plus serious auteur dramas from a handful of filmmakers: Ken Loach, Mike Leigh and Stephen Frears. But other than that the world tends not to know about British films. Which is a shame because the country is chock full of film talent. Heard of Shane Meadows? Only if you're a real cinephile. Seen "Down Terrace"? Thought not. Local movie theaters are always overflowing with American movies. Homegrown work that doesn't fit into the above categories struggles to get seen. Shared language is the blessing and curse of the British film industry. The blessing is American filmgoers don't like subtitles, so British films have an easy time gaining traction. They aren't consigned to the oblivion of the Best Foreign Language Film category. The curse is that talented British directors, writers, cinematographers, designers as well as actors all can find work in the United States. It often seems that the British film industry's headquarters runs east-west, north of Sunset Boulevard and south of Mullholland Drive. For example, before Tom Hooper, director of The King's Speech, came to Golden Globe attention he had already won Hollywood's notice as the director of the HBO series "John Adams." British brothers Ridley Scott and Tony Scott have offices in London but no one thinks they do their deals here.
The King's Speech is the "British" film expected to win some gold over the next 60 days. But other Brits thought to have a chance at an award this year include Danny Boyle, director of "127 hours," and "Inception" director, Christopher Nolan. Roger Deakins, the Coen brothers regular cinematographer, should get nominated for "True Grit."The list of top-flight talent is too long to go into here but you get the point. This year it is The King's Speech, next year it will be something else. Probably with Helen Mirren or Judi Dench or Ian McKellen, written by Julian Fellowes or Tom Stoppard, directed by Stephen Frears or Ken Loach or Mike Leigh ... etc.
"The Edge" (Russia): To many, World War II ravaged the world in a bygone era. But in Russia, it’s a saga that is very much still alive. Little wonder then that Russia’s entry for Best Foreign Language Film at the 2011 Golden Globes (and likely Oscar candidate) is “The Edge,” a sweeping drama that unfolds in the dark years following the war’s end. Russia is still struggling to come to grips with its past — was World War II the epitome of Russian glory and bravado? Or did the bloody Stalinist era that followed it forever blight the country’s effort? Good and evil aren’t clear, and they certainly aren’t in director Alexei Uchitel’s film either.
The film, released in Russia in September, opened on the big screen with little fanfare — especially when compared to the veritable circus that surrounded the release of "Burnt by the Sun 2," sequel to the film that won director Nikita Mikhalkov an Oscar in 1994. Mikhalkov is best buddies with Vladimir Putin, Russia’s all-powerful prime minister, and was given limitless funds and press attention. But the film was panned by critics, who noted its over-sentimentality, bad acting and factual inaccuracies, among other horrors.
Uchitel’s film is said to succeed where Mikhalkov’s failed — keeping the blockbuster special effects but adding nuance and humility to a dark and complicated subject. As the film’s hero, a former tank driver named Ignat, finds his way through post-war life in a Siberian settlement peopled by so-called “enemies of the state” — those who somehow (or somehow didn’t) offend the Stalinist regime — he stumbles into love affairs that are grim reminders of the recent past. He’s been driven to the edge of the world, and the edge of existence.
It all sounds very depressing — but would it be a true example of Russian culture if it didn’t?
"Biutiful" (Mexico): It’s a world of complicated connections; tragic tears; repressive regimes; pained protagonists; harrowed anti-heroes; struggling souls; and melancholy moments.
Such is the universe that Mexican director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu paints in his first trilogy of feature films — "Amores Perros," "21 Grams" and "Babel" — and this lurid landscape takes on a new vivid form in his fourth movie "Biutiful" (from the Spanish pronunciation of "beautiful.")

Mexican director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu at the London Film Festival on Oct. 26, 2010 in London. (Samir Hussein/Getty Images)

This time his tale is told in Barcelona, Spain, among immigrant workers, poor Spaniards and broken families. At the center of these beautifully shot mean streets is acclaimed actor Javier Bardem, a hustler and single father dying of cancer.
But the issues explored in the drama — of immigration, fatherhood, repentance — could be playing out in Mexico City, Los Angeles or London. It’s a story about the raw human condition.
Gonzalez Inarritu’s uncompromising style provokes a broad variety of reactions. Some (including actor Sean Penn) think he is a genius among the best directors on the planet. Others complain he is just depressing — though perhaps they don’t quite get the optimism in his film’s melancholy conclusions.
In his native Mexico, the 47-year-old Gonzalez Inarritu is celebrated as the most important national director of his generation. Amores Perros in 2000 put new Mexican cinema on the map, signaling a revival of the golden age that the industry enjoyed in the 1940s and 1950s when actors such as Pedro Infante shone on the silver screen. Since that debut filmed in Mexico City, Gonzalez Inarritu has taken his movies to international locations, from Tokyo to San Diego to Morocco and brought in big name stars including Brad Pitt and Benicio del Toro. But his use of the global stage has not undermined his popularity at home. He premiered Biutiful at the Morelia film festival to a hero's welcome. And the movie — which some argue is his best work — sparked renewed hopes that a Mexican cinematic vision could finally gain the top prizes.
"I Am Love" (Italy): It is telling that Luca Gudagnino's haute-bourgeoisie drama, “I Am Love,” grossed much more in the United States — more than $5 million — than it did in his native Italy, where it earned a mere $310,000. The movie, starring Scottish actress Tilda Swinton, who also co-produced it, had a mixed reception at the Venice film festival last March. Both rapturous applause and raucous boos marked the end of the screening. I Am Love went on to receive mostly negative reviews by Italian critics, who said the screenplay didn't live up to the ambition of its direction, and the film passed almost unnoticed in Italian cinemas. Thirty-nine-year-old director Luca Guadagnini is no darling of the Italian film establishment. Apart from two previous works with Swinton, his only major exploit had been “Melissa P.”, the dramatization of a scandalous teen novel that was voted the worst Italian movie of its decade.

Actress Tilda Swinton (right) and Italian director Luca Guadagnino attend the 67th Venice Film Festival on Sept. 8, 2010 in Venice, Italy. (Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images)

But I Am Love, with its decidedly old-European style, appealed to the masses in the United States. For this film set at the turn of the millennium Milan, Guadagnini took his cue from high-society dramas — such as Luchino Visconti's — with glamorous villas, designer clothes and a profusion of rich, elegantly-presented cuisine. But it is perhaps when the story takes a contemporary turn that it strikes its most poignant note of all. When the wealthy Recchi family becomes strained by rivalries after the death of its founder, it risks losing the family business to British investors. Their dilemma is one often faced by Italian companies today that find themselves too small to compete on a global scale.



"The Concert" (France): Given the gravity of topics addressed in "The Concert" — anti-Semitism, censorship, alcoholism and despair — it’s hard to think of the film as a pick-me-up. But the laugh-out-loud moments in this French-Russian gem suggest otherwise. Its dark humor stems from a slew of stereotypes: Russian debauchery, French grumpiness, Jewish greed masquerading as entrepreneurship. But director Radu Mihaileanu — a Jewish Romanian who emigrated from Israel to France, where Jews were not always welcomed and which still struggles with its anti-Semitic past — lends a poignant twist to what would otherwise be cringe-worthy stereotypes. The Concert centers on Andrei Filipov, a despondent former Bolshoi conductor who was disgraced mid-performance for defying orders in Brezhnev’s Soviet Union to dismiss his Jewish musicians. Thirty years later, when the Bolshoi is invited to perform at the prestigious Theatre de Chatelet in Paris, Filipov, now a janitor in the same theater where he was once lauded, devises a scheme to finish the concert cut short all those years before. Nevermind he must first reunite the old gang and pass them off as the real thing.

Director Radu Mihaileanu attends the France Film Festival 2010 Opening Ceremony on March 18, 2010 in Tokyo, Japan. (Koichi Kamoshida/Getty Images)

Fifty-five passports later — doctored by a band of colorful gypsies — this motley crew is in the City of Light experiencing its culture and the freedoms that come with having some spending money in their pockets. In the final sequence, the orchestra finally comes together to play expert Tchaikovsky, accompanied by a French violin soloist with real-life Jewish ancestry, that lasts more than 12 minutes and underscores why the film won Best Original Score and Best Sound at the 2010 Cesar Awards, France’s equivalent of the Oscars. So much about this film is over the top but the emotions it evokes are real. The musicians play the most refined works yet live broken lives of unfulfilled ambition. As they begin to travel in style and shed their old drab clothes in favor of brightly colored ones, we bask in their glory. For these characters — and no doubt for a Jewish immigrant in France — there is triumph in being in on the joke.
"In a Better World" (Denmark): “In a Better World" is a fast-paced mix of family drama and thriller. Anton, a Swedish doctor, splits his time between his work at a Sudanese refugee camp, and his home in Denmark, where his marriage is on the rocks and his son is being picked on at school. In these two very different worlds, he and his family are faced with conflicts that lead them to difficult choices between revenge and forgiveness.  Danish papers praised In A Better World as a major hit, one of two films to have sold more than 400,000 tickets at the cinema in Denmark in 2010. It was also awarded best picture at the 2010 International Film Festival in Rome. But in Sudan, the film was protested as racist and anti-Muslim. Sudan’s Department of Foreign Affairs said the film gives people the wrong idea about the Darfur region. Sudanese authorities said the movie was in the same vein as the Muhammad cartoons that incensed Danish Muslims and were cited as a motivating factor behind Sweden’s first suicide bomber, that struck Stockholm just before Christmas. The difference in reception is mirrored in the contrasts between Africa, where brutal war crimes are committed, and the windy, barren Danish coastline. The orderly, idealistic Scandinavian existence is pitted against horrible war atrocities in Sudan. And yet, issues of forgiveness and revenge unite us all.