An Iraqi girl takes a lantern from the aid distributed by the Iraqi Red Crescent Organization.

Five-year-old Layla Mohammad clings to one memory: her mother combing Layla’s hair. A year and a half ago, a bomb ripped through a market in Sadr City in Baghdad, killing Layla’s mother, father and two-year-old brother.
“After her parents died, Layla became afraid of markets and crowded places. She thinks that someone will blow himself up,“ said her grandmother Bardia Hassun.
Hassun said her late son was the breadwinner of the family, supporting four of his sisters and his mother in addition to his wife and children. Layla and her grandmother are now reduced to begging, the latter concerned that she won’t have enough money to send her granddaughter to school next year.
“When Layla became an orphan, we also became orphans,“ said Hassun. “We have no one to take care of us.“
There are no accurate statistics on how many orphans are in Iraq. Government sources estimate the figure ranges from the hundreds of thousands to upwards of four to five million.
With little support from the government or non-profit organisations, most orphans are taken in by family members, in line with Islamic tradition. Because of Iraq’s weak economy and its high inflation, many of those families barely make ends meet themselves. According to United Nations children’s agency, UNICEF, most Iraqi families are facing additional economic difficulties as they take in other family members.
Abeer Mahdi, head of orphanages at the ministry of social affairs, said that most Iraqis refuse to send orphans to orphanages even if they can better care for them. There are currently 19 orphanages housing about 420 children in Iraq.
“The extended families are usually taking care of the orphans, even if they can’t provide them a suitable environment in terms of food, clothing and education,“ he said.
“It is impossible to create a family-oriented environment“ in an orphanage, said one woman who recently took guardianship of a three-year-old girl.
The woman, who asked not to be named, was standing with the child, waiting for food from an aid organisation.
The problems facing Iraqi orphans came to light in June 2007, when US Marines found children in an orphanage for children with special needs tied to beds and starving.
Three of the orphanage’s staff members are being tried for neglect, said Sameera al-Mussawi, head of the Iraqi parliament’s women, family and children’s committee. Two children died of cholera at the same orphanage in November 2007.
However, not all orphanages are in such poor condition and many provide vital shelter and education for children. Several were built during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, which claimed one million lives on both sides and left many children parentless.
This IWPR reporter visited al-Zuhoor orphanage for girls in Baghdad and found the facilities clean, well-organised and well-maintained. The orphanage had a heating and cooling system and space for the children outside of their rooms, including a study area and televisions.
Zahra Imad, 7, danced in front of the television. She ended up in the orphanage to escape her abusive father, who also beat her mother. Her mother was imprisoned last year for trying to plant a roadside bomb in Baghdad’s Sadr City neighbourhood. She regularly visits her mother in prison.
However, some politicians argue that more must be done to support children like Zahra.
The plight of orphans was the focus of a conference in Baghdad last month in which leaders encouraged the Iraqi government to provide more support for them.
Mussawi said that the government does not have a strategy to deal with Iraq’s orphans, who need everything from financial backing, psychological help to education.
Her committee has asked the government for 4.1 million US dollars to support families caring for orphans. They would also like to hire child care specialists to help the children.
Mussawi said that her committee has repeatedly pushed for the government to prioritise issues such as children’s rights. However, “all government agencies are preoccupied with politics“, she said. “This affects social issues.“
Iraqi leaders expressed concern that the growing number of orphans “could bring serious problems to [Iraqi] society“, said Maissun al-Dmluji, a member of parliament from the Iraqi list.
She said that even orphans living with their families may not have the family structure and stability needed to build strong morals and keep them away from crime.
Dmluji argued that orphans need more support, including “new and modern orphanages that can raise children in a healthy and peaceful environment, where children are taught coexistence, peace and respect“.
MIDDLE-EAST-ONLINE.COM

The world panics whenever Pakistan conducts a missile test capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
A Muslim state with nuclear weapons and extremists is also testing missiles? But this criticism is hardly justified. What should Pakistan do if it has nuclear warheads? It couldn’t possibly carry them by aircraft.
Needless to say, there are some risks for the world in the Pakistani nuclear potential, but they are not much more serious than those involved in the nuclear potentials of India or Israel, the United States or Russia. Everything depends on which capital looks at these risks.
Islamabad has never concealed that its nuclear weapons are meant exclusively for India, or, to be more precise, for deterring its aggression. India is fully aware of this and, judging by all, is not too worried. Moreover, since 2005, the sides have been developing their missile potentials without creating problems for each other.
Early last year, Pakistan and India resumed the discussion of problems in their relations. Last February, they signed an agreement on preventing the risk of accidents with nuclear weapons.
It is aimed at removing the threat of nuclear confrontation and the development of reliable nuclear arms control systems.
Yet, Pakistan’s recent missile test has made the world nervous. On January 25, Pakistan test-launched its medium-range Shaheen-1rail-based ballistic missile, which can hit targets at a distance of up to 700 km (435 miles).
This solid fuel missile is capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Judging by all, it is a modification of the Chinese M9 solid fuel tactical missile. Some sources report that China helped Pakistan develop its Abdali and Shaheen-1 missiles.
This was the second test of tactical missiles in the past month and a half. On December 11, Pakistan test-launched its Babur cruise missile, a land-based liquid fuel missile with a range of up to 700 km.
Pakistan is strictly observing the schedule of tests it has agreed with India. There are no deviations in the type or range of missiles. There is one important detail in this context. In 2007, Pakistan and India tested missiles, having notified each other in advance.
They conducted some test launches almost simultaneously, as if emphasizing their commitment to the principle of parallel testing. This tradition goes back to 1998, when Pakistan tested nuclear weapons after India. But the principle of parallel testing is only limited to time. Comparison of missile systems’ characteristics is obviously not in favor of Pakistan.
Not without help from the great powers, India has gone so far ahead in the sphere of arms that it is pursuing its national interests from the Persian Gulf to the Malacca archipelago.
Islamabad justifiably believes that the United States is ready to support India’s claims to the status of a world power in exchange for its efforts to deter China and Iran.
Early last December, the Pakistani government drafted and adopted its defense policy concept. According to this document, the Pakistani military doctrine is based on the potential of minimally guaranteed deterrence and is aimed at protecting the country’s territorial integrity and securing peace in the region (South Asia).
Pakistan is using its potentialities to the utmost. In the past, its nuclear potential was a major deterrent but today it is no longer playing this role.
A contribution to the change was made by the United States--its nuclear romance with India is more than obvious. Meanwhile, Pakistan still remains the main partner of the United States and Western Europe in the region’s anti-terrorist coalition.
In this situation Pakistan will seek support in its relations with India from other countries with modern weapons, apart from China or the U.S. It may turn to Russia for this purpose.
RIAN.RU

A boy passes pre-election posters showing Serbian ultranationalist Radical Party acting leader Tomislav Nikolic and Serbian nationalist group in Belgrade, January 25.

People in the Balkans face a stark choice this year: their region could either finally resolve its outstanding problems from the wars of the 1990s or fall back into instability and extremes of nationalism. The first option would take them forward towards stability, prosperity and European integration. But many commentators believe the second is inevitable.
I disagree with the prophecies of doom. There is certainly a danger of instability, at the moment when Kosovo’s future status is on the point of being resolved. But the repercussions need not be destabilising if the EU gives a decisive and unified steer to ensure a coordinated response, as foreign ministers meeting today should be aware.
No other international actor will be so directly affected by the outcome--neither Russia nor the United States--and we are ready to carry our responsibility to support stability and progress in the region. The western Balkans has made steady if uneven progress over recent years, and the goal of EU membership remains an important motivation to keep reforms on track. Clearly, the region’s future lies in the EU, and most people would rather get there sooner than later.
In fact, all the countries could make faster progress along the road to Europe. By the end of this year, I hope they will all pass through the gateway towards candidacy for membership, by signing a stabilisation and association agreement with the EU.
Albania and Montenegro have already done so, as has the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, which could soon demonstrate its readiness to begin accession negotiations if it can maintain sufficient political will and cross-party dialogue to drive through serious reforms.
The EU is now waiting for Bosnia and Herzegovina and for Serbia to meet the remaining conditions to sign the agreement. I want to see both countries take a decisive step forward, not only because it would move them closer to the EU, but primarily for the benefit of their own citizens.
The doomsday prophecies for Bosnia and Herzegovina have so far been proven wrong. The country’s leaders made important progress last year on police reform, with the goal of ensuring the rule of law and separating policing from politics. There is much at stake in Serbia.
The EU foreign ministers should today give a strong signal of Serbia’s European future by deciding to sign the stabilisation and association agreement shortly. Serbia is close to full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, which is essential to allow the country to turn the page on one of the darkest periods in its history.
Serbia’s institutional capacity gives it great potential to move faster towards the European Union. It has the chance to draw closer to qualifying for candidate status, maybe even during the course of this year. Seldom have citizens had as clear a choice as the Serbs do now, between a nationalist past and a European future.
The EU is ready to welcome the citizens of Serbia into Europe, not just through a contractual relationship with their state, but also individually. This is demonstrated by the commission’s launch of a dialogue on visa-free travel for Serbs that will start this week.
The future for the Balkans can be far from dark. In the EU, there has never been a stronger political will to support the people of the western Balkans in opting for European values and living standards. But ultimately people in the region have to exercise their democratic choice to determine their countries’ future course.
Olli Rehn
GUARDIAN.CO.UK