President Nursultan Nazarbayev, the leader of Kazakhstan since 1989, won the country's Dec. 4 presidential election hands down. The Central Election Commission reported he got 91 percent of the votes. Gallup and International Republican Institute exit polling says he got only 83.2 percent. Either way, no Orange Revolution there.

To put the Kazakh elections in perspective, it is important to note there were no democratic procedures there during the Russian czarist or the Soviet times. Seen in this light, the Kazakh elections were among most open in Central Asia.

What makes Kazakhstan unique are its real economic achievements, fueled by high oil prices. Kazakhstan today is as one of the more positive available examples of post-Soviet market development, including Western access to oil and gas resources, which Russia increasingly rejects.

Parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan, an oil-rich former Soviet republic on the western shores of the Caspian Sea, are scheduled for this coming November 6.   

They have all the trappings of a James Bond movie. In fact, the Bond film, “The World is not Enough,” which centered on the struggle to control Caspian Sea oil, was shot in Azerbaijan’s capital, Baku, in 1999.   

But now it is life's turn to imitate art. Today's intrigue in Azerbaijan includes power struggles, a clash between geopolitical giants – America, Russia and Iran – an ethnic conflict with neighboring Armenia, and almost one million refugees. Add corruption, lots of oil and gas, and serve hot. What a perfect recipe for a first-rate thriller.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's latest moves show he now clearly understands he has no option but to decisively settle the question of who governs California: the taxpaying middle and entrepreneurial classes, or their nominal servants in state and local government-employee unions.

The stakes in November are enormous for both sides. If voters reject his reform package, Mr. Schwarzenegger is weakened going into 2006, when he grapples again with the unions and the Democrat legislature over the chronic budget deficit while running for re-election.

On the other hand, voter approval of Mr. Schwarzenegger's reform package entails dire consequences for California’s Axis of Evil between the Democrats and public employee unions, because Propositions 75 and 77 pose a very real threat to their suzerainty over state government.

After two weeks of unrestrained violence across the country, France imposed curfews and a state-of-emergency rule on 24 of its provinces. The government certainly hopes that this wartime measure will quickly scale down the riots and it may well do that.

Yet history is more likely to look back on this not as the end of an irrational burst of urban violence, but as the first act in a protracted time of troubles for France and Europe that could ultimately lead to the demise of European civilization as we know it.

None of this is even remotely discernible in French political rhetoric or media coverage surrounding the violent events in the Moslem ghettoes. Yet, shying away from reality by France's ruling class does not change reality – and that stark reality is one of a civilized European nation sliding into barbarism.

While Persian (Farsi) is the official language, half of all Iranians speak a different language at home.¹ The languages and dialects spoken along the southern shore of the Caspian Sea continue to engross linguists and anthropologists.

The minority population is huge. More Azeris live in Iran, for example, than in independent Azerbaijan.² Both Iranian Azerbaijan and Kurdistan have a history of separatism, the latter sparked not only by ethnic discrimination, but also by anti-Sunni religious oppression.

Azeris and Kurds are not alone in exerting regional identities and, on occasion, pursuing separatism. Separatist violence is exploding among Khuzistan Arabs. Violence and lawlessness in Baluchistan is increasingly uncontrollable. Local disdain for Tehran is consistent with the historic pattern in which the periphery slowly spins away from central government control during periods of weakness.

The difference of commitment to sports versus academics by students and parents is striking, but don't believe for a minute that the same bias is not institutional as well. I have taught now at every level of American academia and I have yet to give a test or assign a project that was so important that it caused a game to be canceled or missed.

However, from elementary school to college, I regularly have had class time canceled, projects excused and test times altered to cater to athletics. In fact, it seems any academic activity humbly bows before the holy incantation, “Uh, I'm going to be gone; we've got a game that day.”

This explanation is not the bitter ranting of an egghead who was always picked last in gym class. Rather, I'm a former collegiate athlete and high school coach who is intrigued by what could be accomplished if we would bring our athletic commitment into the classroom.

And, because attitude is not enough, we should also contrast coaching to teaching, so that we might re-learn some valuable lessons about instructional methods. To this end, I see three prime areas for consideration.

When, seven months ago, I finished writing my book, The West's Last Chance, London had not been attacked by Islamist terrorists, the Tate Museum in London had not removed an art exhibit because it offended radical Moslem sensitivities, and France had not yet experienced the explosion of violence from elements of its Moslem population in its "no-go zone" communities.

The fact that I predicted all those events in my book was not the result of clairvoyance. It was merely the result of a normally intelligent person looking at the facts, and their rather obvious implications, without the blinding effect of a politically correct mentality.

This week we introduce a new feature to To The Point: The Members' Forum, selected articles submitted by TTPers themselves. We launch this feature with TTPer Wayne Daniels. Publication of such submissions does not imply To The Point's full agreement with them. ---JW

June 30, 2004 marked the "Official" end of the Iraqi occupation. Yes, we will have troops on the ground there for years. Remember it is 59 years and counting that we have had troops stationed in Germany and Japan; 50 years and counting in Korea, etc.

I will argue that the only US strategic interests in Iraq are (1) that the Iraqi government not fund or otherwise support terrorist groups; (2) we need military bases on the borders of three of the primary state sponsors of terrorist groups - Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia; and (3) that enough oil reaches the world markets to keep the price of crude in the $25 to $40 range. As long as these interest are satisfied, we really don't care who controls the streets or the government.