The United States believes a Chinese firm sold North Korea components for a missile transporter showcased in a recent military parade and will press Beijing to tighten enforcement of a U.N. ban on such military sales, a U.S. official said on Saturday.

The Obama administration suspects the Chinese manufacturer sold the chassis – not the entire vehicle – and may have believed it was for civilian purposes, which means it would not be an intentional violation of U.N. sanctions, the senior official said.

But such a sale – coming to light amid tensions over a failed North Korean rocket launch earlier this month – raises concerns in Washington on whether China is making enough of an effort to abide by the prohibition on weapons sales to Pyongyang.

The New York Times first reported on U.S. findings about the origin of parts of the transporter launcher system – essentially a large truck on top of which a missile is mounted – displayed in a parade in Pyongyang on Sunday.

The newspaper said the administration suspected the Chinese manufacturer involved in the transaction was Hubei Sanjiang. The official, who confirmed details of the administration’s thinking on the matter, said the firm likely sold the part to a front company that was used to mask the buyer’s true identity.

Beijing, reclusive North Korea’s only major ally, has denied it has broken any rules, although a modern, eight-axle missile transporter spotted in the military parade to celebrate the founder of North Korea was said by some western military experts to be of Chinese design and possibly origin.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told U.S. lawmakers on Thursday that China has provided some assistance to North Korea’s missile program, but he said he did not know the “exact extent of that.”

The White House plans to convey its concerns to China and use the incident to ratchet up pressure on Beijing to tighten enforcement of international sanctions on North Korea, the U.S. official said. It was unclear, however, exactly how such a complaint would be lodged.

Under United Nations Security Council resolutions from 2006 and 2009, states including China are banned from helping North Korea with its ballistic missile program, its nuclear activities as well as supplying heavy weapons.

TENSIONS AFTER ROCKET LAUNCH

Pyongyang has said it was ready to retaliate in the face of widespread condemnation of its failed rocket launch, increasing the likelihood the isolated state will go ahead with a third nuclear test.

After last week’s launch, which the United States said was a disguised long-range missile test, the Obama administration responded by suspending a food aid deal with North Korea. Pyongyang insists the launch was meant to put a satellite into orbit.

Obama had pressed Chinese President Hu Jintao at a global nuclear security summit in Seoul last month to use its influence to get Pyongyang to cancel the launch. But administration officials had doubted Beijing, an increasingly assertive U.S. rival in the Asia-Pacific region, would act forcefully enough.

China has called for “dialogue and communication” as tensions with North Korea mount and reiterated its long-standing call for a return to regional denuclearization talks that have been stalled for years.

Panetta was asked during testimony before the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee whether China had been supporting North Korea’s missile program through “trade and technology exchanges.”

He declined to give details but said, “Clearly there’s been assistance along those lines.”

Panetta said there was “no question” North Korea’s efforts to develop long-range missile and nuclear weapon capability were a threat to the United States. “For that reason we take North Korea and their provocative actions very seriously,” he said.

“And China ought to be urging them to engage in those kinds of … diplomatic negotiations. We thought we were making some progress and suddenly we’re back at provocation,” he added.

(Reporting By Matt Spetalnick; Editing by Vicki Allen)

 Na Mwanakijiji wa JamiiForums.com

Kuamua kushiriki mchakato huu wa “mabadiliko ya Katiba” kama ulivyoanzishwa na kusimamiwa na Chama cha Mapinduzi ni kukubali matokeo ya mchakato huo na hivyo kuupa uhalali ambao ninaamini kabisa hauna. Mchakato huu umekubaliwa – kwa bahati mbaya sana – na wanasiasa wa chama tawala na wale wa upinzani na sasa unasubiriwa uanze kufanya kazi baada ya tume ya kusimamia mchakato huo kuteuliwa. Hivi sasa tume hiyo inasubiri kuapishwa. Mchakato huu haufai kwa Katiba Mpya Nimeandika mara kadhaa huko nyuma tangu mswada wa kwanza wa sheria ya kusimamia mchakato huu ulipopendekezwa kuwa mchakato mzima unavunja kanuni ya msingi kabisa ya kuandika Katiba Mpya yaani “Ukuu wa Watu” (Supremacy of the people). Kwa kuangalia mijadala mbalimbali ambayo tumekuwa nayo naweza kusema pasi ya shaka kuwa mojawapo ya dhana ambazo hazijaeleweka sana na ndio msingi wa kuvurugwa kabisa kwa mchakato huu toka mwanzo ni ile ya “sovereignty”. Katika kijitabu changu kidogo cha “An Assault on Popular Sovereignty” nikielezea kukosewa kwa mchakato huu ulioanzishwa na rais Kikwete nimeeleza tu kuwa dhana ya “sovereignty” haijaeleweka vizuri na matokeo yake wananchi hawajui kuwa wao ndio “sovereign”. Mara nyingi tunapozungumzia “sovereignty” watu wanafikiria kwa minajili ya “sovereignty ya nchi” yaani “mamlaka kuu ya nchi huru kujitawala na kujiamualia mambo yake ambapo juu yake hakuna mamlaka nyingine”. Katika nchi ya kidemokrasia maana ya pili na kubwa zaidi ya “sovereignty” au kwa jina la Kiswahili hakimiya ni ule uwezo wa watu kuwa chanzo cha utawala wao na ambao juu yao hakuna mwingine. Kuelewa hili nimeelezea kwenye kijitabu kile kuwa kwenye nchi zenye wafalme (monarchs) hao wafalme ndio mamlaka ya mwisho ya kutawala ambapo juu yake hakuna nyingine. Zipo nchi chache ambazo zina wale wanaitwa “wafalme kabisa” (absolute monarchs) na nyingi ni wafalme ambao wamegawa baadhi ya madaraka yao. King Mswati ni miongoni mwa wafalme wachache ambao wanaukuu katika kila jambo na Malkia Elizabeth II ni mfano wa wale ambao wamegawanya madaraka yao. Hawa utaona wanatambulishwa na kujulikana kuwa ni “Sovereign” na watu wao kwa kweli wanaitwa “Subjects” kwa sababu ni watu walio chini yao. Katika nchi ya kidemokrasia ya mfumo wa kijamhuru (republican democracies) watawala siyo Sovereign! Iwe nchi inaongozwa na Rais au Waziri Mkuu viongozi hao hawawi juu ya wananchi kama wafalme walivyo juu ya watu wao. Katika nchi hii ya kidemokrasia ya mfumo huo wa kijamhuri basi wananchi ndio wenye madaraka ya mwisho ya kutawala. Tanzania ni mfano wa nchi kama hiyo. Watanzania wote ndio wenye “Sovereignty” Watanzania wote kama jamii moja ndio wenye hakimiya yote. Ibara ya 8:1a ya Katiba yetu inasema vizuri sana juu ya hili na bahati mbaya sana kwenye Kiswahili hili linapotea. Tafsiri ya Kiingereza ya Katiba yetu inasema “sovereignity resides in the people and it is from the people that the Government through this Constitution shall derive all its power and authority;” Bahati mbaya kwenye tafsir ya Kiswahili ya kipengele hicho kuna maneno yanapotea na hivyo kuwanyima Watanzania kujielewa wao ni nani hasa mbele ya watawala wao na ndio msingo wa mimi kupinga kabisa mchakato huu ulivyo sasa kwani unavunja msingi wa Ibara hii. Aya hiyo kwenye Kiswahili inasema hivi: “wananchi ndio msingi wa mamlaka yote, na Serikali itapata madaraka na mamlaka yake yote kutoka kwa wananchi kwa mujibu wa Katiba hii”. Kwa mtu yeyote anayejua lugha ya Kiingereza na ile ya Kiswahili ni rahisi kuona kuwa vipengele hivyo viwili haviwezi kuwa vinatafsiriana – “sovereignty resides in the people” siyo sawana “wananchi ndio msingi wa mamlaka yote”. Hili ni jambo la msingi sana kwangu katika kupinga mchakato huu kwani mchakato huu umefanya “sovereignty belongs to the President” na kuwa “Rais ndio msingi wa mamlaka yote”! Ndio maana sheria nzima ilivyoandikwa hata baada ya mabadiliko imemzunguka Rais! Rais anateua, Rais anaapisha, Rais anapewa taarifa n.k.! HILI NI JAMBO LA KWANZA LA KUTUFANYA TUUPINGE MCHAKATO HUU NA NDIO KANUNI AMBAYO HOJA ZINAZOFUATIA ZINASIMAMA. Mchakato usioheshimu ukuu wa wananchi kama ndio wenye hakimiya yote ni mchakato batili haijalishi unaimbiwa nyimbo gani, za namna gani na kina nani za kuusifia. Uteuzi wa Wajumbe wote ni kinyume na kanuni ya hapo juu Kwa vile madaraka na haki zote za kutawala (hakimiya a.k.a sovereignty) basi sheria ya kusimamia wajumbe wa Tume na hata wa Baraza la kutunga sheria ingezingatia ukweli huu. Kwa mfano, inakuwaje wabunge ambao wamechaguliwa kufanya uwakilishi na kutunga sheria wawe wote wajumbe wa baraza la kutunga Katiba? Kimsingi kabisa, kila taasisi ambayo ingetaka kuwa na wawakilishi kwenye baraza la kutunga katiba ingepaswa kupewa uwezekano huo bila kuonesha upendeleo wa wazi. Rais ambacho angeruhusiwa kufanya ni kuunda Sekretariati tu ya Baraza hilo bila kuteua tume au wajumbe wa baraza hilo; hilo lingekuwa kazi ya baraza la kutunga katiba. Binafsi naamini tungekuwa na baraza kwanza la kutunga Katiba na kutoka humo ndani ndio wajumbe wa TUme wangepatikana. Wajumbe hao wangeapishwa mbele ya baraza hilo na wangetakiwa kutoa taarifa zao kwa baraza hilo. Baraza ndilo lingekuwa lina exercise “sovereignty” yetu kama wananchi kwa sababu tunachoandika ni Katiba yetu. Hata kama ingebidi Rais ahusike basi kungeweka utaratibu wenye kuzingatia kanuni hii ya msingi ya “people’s sovereignty” Lingepaswa kuwa baraza kubwa zaidi lenye wajumbe wengi zaidi kuliko hili ambalo limependekezwa na mchakato huu. Lengo ni kulifanya kuwa la kuhusisha watu wengi zaidi (all inclusive). Nitoe mfano wa hili: Baraza la kuandika katiba mpya ya Ghana lilikuwa na wajumbe 2996 wakati Zambia pia lilikuwa na idadi kama hiyo vile vile. Lengo ni wa na wigo mpana zaidi wa uwakilishi kuliko uwakilishi wa Bunge. Prof. Yash Ghai (aliyesimamia mchakato wa Katiba ya Kenya) anaandika hivi kuhusu hili suala: An advantage of a constituent assembly over parliament is that it can truly be the gathering of the nation. The strength and the legitimacy of the constituent assembly will lie in its inclusiveness. While parties would play a major role, membership should also be provided for other groups and interests (women, the disabled, minorities, trade unions, business, civil society and social movements). To some extent these groups and interests would be represented by parties, but there is value in their having direct representation also. It is clear that all these forms of representation have an impact on the process and its outcome. Hivyo, kwa maoni yangu mfumo uliopitishwa na CCM kusimamia mchakato huu kwa kweli kabisa utakuwa na matokeo ambayo ni rahisi kutabirika la kwanza ni kuisimika CCM madarakani kwa miaka mingi ijayo. Ibara ya 22 ya Sheria inayounda Baraza la Kutunga Katiba inatuambia kuwa wajumbe wa baraza hilo watakuwa ni kina nani. a. Wajumbe wote wa baraza la Wawakilishi b. Wajumbe wote wa bunge la Muungano c. Wajumbe 166 kutoka taasisi na makundi mbalimbali. Bahati mbaya sana hakuna kanuni ya jinsi gani wajumbe hao 166 wanapatikana ila kwamba kiwango chao kitazingatia kuwa Zanzibar itakuwa na angalau theluthi moja wa wajumbe hao! Sheria haisemi hizo taasisi zinapata wajumbe wao kutoka wapi na vipi na pia sheria haiweki msisitizo wa usawa wa kijinsia (gender parity). Kiwango cha kura za kupitisha Katiba Mpya ni cha chini mno Baraza hili tunaambiwa litapitisha mambo yao kwa uamuzi wa theluthi 2 ya wajumbe wake kutoka Bara na kutoka Zanzibar (japo haieleweki kama kwa kila jambo kutakuwa na kura mbili au vipi). Na kama zitakuwa kura za siri au vipi vinginevyo watajuaje kura ni watu wa bara na zipi za watu wa visiwani. Lakini kilichofichika hapa ni kuwa CCM kama chama kitakuwa na wajumbe wengi zaidi labda kuliko kikundi kingine chochote: Bunge linawa wajumbe 357 kati yao 254 hii ni sawa na zaidi ya theluthi mbili ya wajumbe wake. Ukijumlisha na wajumbe wa Baraza la Wawakilishi ni wazikuwa CCM itakuwa na wajumbe 274 hivi (sijawaweka wateuliwa wa Rais). Baraza la Wawakilishi lina wajumbe 79 kati ya hawa 26 kutoka majimbo, wakuu wa mikoa 5, wateuliwa wa Rais 10 na wa viti maalum 15. CCM itajiongezea wajumbe wasiopungua 40 kwenye Baraza la Kutunga Katiba hivyo itakuwa kwa kutumia mabaraza hayo mawili tu na wajumbe 294. Hivyo: 357 + 79 + 166 = 602 ndio idadi ya wajumbe wa Baraza la kutunga Katiba. Kati ya hawa 602 nusu yake wanatoka CCM! Na hapa hatujawaweka wale watakaoingia kutoka vya vya siasa ambapo CCM bado itaongeza wajumbe, hatujaingiza wajumbe wa makundi mengine ambao wana maslahi na CCM! Naweza kutabiri (kwa kuangalia takwimu tu) theluthi mbili ya wajumbe wa Baraza la Kutunga Katiba watakuwa ni ama wana CCM au wenye maslahi na CCM na hivyo kuipa CCM kiti cha kuongoza maamuzi ya Baraza hilo! Sitaki kuja kusikia kuna watu wanalalamika kuwa hawakulijua hili! Liipo kwenye sheria kwa yeyote kuliona! Kiwango cha kupitisha katiba mpya ni cha chini mno kukifanya cha kudharaulika Kwa vile watu wamekubali ibara ya 36.1,2 kuwepo maana yake ni kuwa itakapofanyika kura ya maoni hakutakuwa na jitihada ya kupata kura za watu wengi zaidi na badala yake kura za watu wachache zaidi. Ibara hiyo (kifungu 2) inasema kuwa The referendum results shall be decided on the basis of support by more than fifty per cent of the total number of votes cast in Mainland Tanzania and more than fifty per cent of the total number of votes cast in Tanzania Zanzibar. Yaani wataalamu wetu wamefanya ni rahisi zaidi kuandika Katiba Mpya kuliko kubadilisha katiba ya sasa! Katiba ya sasa haiwezi kubadilishwa na wabunge isipokuwa na theluthi 2 ya wabunge wote kwenye Bunge la Muungano na kiasi kama hicho kwenye Baraza la Wawakilishi. Sasa kwenye kuandika Katiba Mpya kiwango ati ni asilimia 50 tu ya wapiga kura na Katiba itakuwa mpya kwa wananchi wote! Huu ni upuuzi wa daraja la kwanza. Katiba Mpya isipaswe kupitishwa isipokuwa kwa siyo chini ya asilimia 70 ya wapiga kura wote! Hii maana yake ni kuwa italazimisha watu wajadiliane, wakubali baadhi ya vitu n.k Kiwango cha asilimia 50 ni kutaka wapiga kura wawe wana CCM tu! Kwani CCM haitahitaji kupata baraka za waatu wengi zaidi (fikiria mgombea wao maarufu uchaguzi uliopata alipata asilimia 61.2 ya shida kweli!). Yawezekana wanaona ugumu huu mapema? Ndugu zangu, mchakato huu ni mbaya toka mwanzo, utatupatia “katiba mpya” lakini siyo katiba yenye mapya! Itakuwa ni mpya kwa maana ya uandishi wake tu lakini siyo wa vitu vyake kwa sababu tayari tunajua mchakato mzima utatawaliwa na kulinda maslahi ya CCM kwanza. Wanajidanganya wale wanaofikiria kwamba wakisema “maslahi ya taifa’ basi wanamaanisha ni kitu kile kile. Kwa wana CCM wengi, maslahi ya “taifa” ni CCM kuendelea kuwa madarakani. Maslahi ya taifa kwao na maslahi ya CCM ni kitu kimoja. Mtu yeyote anayekubali na kuunga mkono mchakato huu au kikundi chochote kinachofanya hivyo kwa sababu ati ya “maslahi ya taifa” wasije kuja mbele ya safari na kuanza kulalamika! Najua wengi wanataka tuwe na ‘pragramatic approach’ lakini kufanya hivyo is a prelude to a disaster. CCM imeuteka mchakato huu na ndio itakuwa mnufaika mkuu. Walichofanya ni kile kinaitwa a strategic manuever ya kufanya watu wote waimbe “ni katiba yetu sote’ ni “kwa maslahi ya taifa’ na hivyo mtu yeyote kuhoji mchakato huu kuendeshwa hivi anaonekana kama hapendi ‘wote’ tufanikiwe. Bila kubadilisha sheria hii ilivyo sasa; na hasa maeneo hayo niliyoyaonesha mchakato huu ni kinyume na wananchi, ni kinyume cha kanuni za haki ya ukuu wa watu na uliivyo sasa ninaamini hauwakilishi matamanio ya wananchi wetu   Amkeni!!! Niandikie: mwanakijiji@jamiiforums.com

    Tunatambua na kuamini kuwa tuna mkataba kuhusu matumizi ya maji ya Ziwa Victoria ambao tunapaswa kuuheshimu japo ulisainiwa na serikali za kikoloni zilizotawala nchi zetu (Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania – na sijui kama Rwanda na Burundi wamo katika huo mkataba wa kikoloni). Mwalimu Nyerere aliwahi kusema kwamba yapo mambo tuliyorithi kwa wakoloni, kama mipaka ya nchi, ambayo hatuna budi kuyakubali japo hatuyapendi. Lakini suala la mkataba wa maji ya ziwa victoria alilipinga hadharani mpaka anatoweka duniani, naamini Kenya na Uganda na walipinga na wanaendelea kupinga kama ilivyo kwa Tanzania. Lakini nadhani kwa hili la maji ya Ziwa Victoria wanasheria wetu wanapaswa kuliangalia upya ikiwa nchi zetu zitakuwa nchi moja iliyo federation (East African Federation). Ziwa Victora kwa wakati huo litakuwa ni “inland water body” ambalo nchi mpya ya East Africa itakuwa na total jurisdiction. Kwa mantiki hiyo, tutakuwa na autonomy juu ya maji yake. Hivyo basi, mkataba mpya juu ya matumizi ya maji ya Ziwa Victoria lazima uanzishwe. Infact, maji haya ya Victoria kwenda mto Nile yatapaswa kuwa ndio mafuta yetu sisi watu wa East Africa, na tutataka mkataba mpya na nchi zinazonufaika na mto Nile wenye basis ya “water for fuel”. After all, East Africa itakuwa na jukumu la kutunza vyanzo vya maji ya Ziwa Victoria, sivyo? Mkataba wa kikoloni ulioasisiwa na muingereza ni wa kinyonyji, unaoipa nchi ya Misri mamlaka ya kuamua matumizi ya maji ya ziwa victoria. Na pia, as a new East African state tunapaswa kuangalia na kusaini upya mikataba yote ya kimataifa – tusikumbali blanket agreement kwamba East African Federation ilithi mikataba yote iliyosainiwa na nchi moja moja wanachama wa Shirikisho, mikataba ya kina Chenge na wengine kama yeye kule Kenya na Uganda.