Tuesday, February 19, 2008

U.S. strikes in Pakistan — without notice

Unilateral attack on al-Qaeda commander called a model for operations
By Joby Warrick and Robin Wright
The Washington Post
updated 11:45 p.m. ET, Mon., Feb. 18, 2008

In the predawn hours of Jan. 29, a CIA Predator aircraft flew in a slow arc above the Pakistani town of Mir Ali. The drone's operator, relying on information secretly passed to the CIA by local informants, clicked a computer mouse and sent the first of two Hellfire missiles hurtling toward a cluster of mud-brick buildings a few miles from the town center.

The missiles killed Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior al-Qaeda commander and a man who had repeatedly eluded the CIA's dragnet. It was the first successful strike against al-Qaeda's core leadership in two years, and it involved, U.S. officials say, an unusual degree of autonomy by the CIA inside Pakistan.

Having requested the Pakistani government's official permission for such strikes on previous occasions, only to be put off or turned down, this time the U.S. spy agency did not seek approval. The government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was notified only as the operation was underway, according to the officials, who insisted on anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.

Model for the future
Officials say the incident was a model of how Washington often scores its rare victories these days in the fight against al-Qaeda inside Pakistan's national borders: It acts with assistance from well-paid sympathizers inside the country, but without getting the government's formal permission beforehand.

It is an approach that some U.S. officials say could be used more frequently this year, particularly if a power vacuum results from yesterday's election and associated political tumult. The administration also feels an increased sense of urgency about undermining al-Qaeda before President Bush leaves office, making it less hesitant, said one official familiar with the incident.

Independent actions by U.S. military forces on another country's sovereign territory are always controversial, and both U.S. and Pakistani officials have repeatedly sought to obscure operational details that would reveal that key decisions are sometimes made in the United States, not in Islamabad. Some Pentagon operations have been undertaken only after intense disputes with the State Department, which has worried that they might inflame Pakistani public resentment; the CIA itself has sometimes sought to put the brakes on because of anxieties about the consequences for its relationship with Pakistani intelligence officials.

Pakistan considered unreliable
U.S. military officials say, however, that the uneven performance of their Pakistani counterparts increasingly requires that Washington pursue the fight however it can, sometimes following an unorthodox path that leaves in the dark Pakistani military and intelligence officials who at best lack commitment and resolve and at worst lack sympathy for U.S. interests.

Top Bush administration policy officials -- who are increasingly worried about al-Qaeda's use of its sanctuary in remote, tribally ruled areas in northern Pakistan to dispatch trained terrorists to the West -- have quietly begun to accept the military's point of view, according to several sources familiar with the context of the Libi strike.

"In the past it required getting approval from the highest levels," said one former intelligence official involved in planning for previous strikes. "You may have information that is valid for only 30 minutes. If you wait, the information is no longer valid."

But when the autonomous U.S. military operations in Pakistan succeed, support for them grows in Washington in probably the same proportion as Pakistani resentments increase. Even as U.S. officials ramp up the pressure on Musharraf to do more, Pakistan's embattled president has taken a harder line in public against cooperation in recent months, the sources said. "The posture that was evident two years ago is not evident," said a senior U.S. official who frequently visits the region.

A U.S. military official familiar with operations in the tribal areas, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about the operations, said: "We'll get these one-off flukes once every eight months or so, but that's still not a strategy -- it's not a plan. Every now and then something will come together. What that serves to do [is] it tamps down discussion about whether there is a better way to do it."

The target is identified
During seven years of searching for Osama bin Laden and his followers, the U.S. government has deployed billions of dollars' worth of surveillance hardware to South Asia, from top-secret spy satellites to sophisticated eavesdropping gear for intercepting text messages and cellphone conversations.

Yet some of the initial clues that led to the Libi strike were decidedly low-tech, according to an account supplied by four officials briefed on the operation. The CIA declined to comment about the strike and neither confirmed nor denied its involvement.

Hours before the attack, multiple sources said, the CIA was alerted to a convoy of vehicles that bore all the signatures of al-Qaeda officers on the move. Local residents -- who two sources said were not connected to the Pakistani army or intelligence service -- began monitoring the cluster of vehicles as it passed through North Waziristan, a rugged, largely lawless province that borders Afghanistan.

Eventually the local sources determined that the convoy carried up to seven al-Qaeda operatives and one individual who appeared to be of high rank. Asked how the local support had been arranged, a U.S. official familiar with the episode said, "All it takes is bags of cash."

Kamran Bokhari, director of Middle East analysis for Strategic Forecasting, a private intelligence group, said the informants could have been recruits from the Afghanistan side of the border, where the U.S. military operates freely.

"People in this region don't recognize the border, which is very porous," Bokhari said. "It is very likely that our people were in contact with intelligence sources who frequent both sides and could provide some kind of targeting information."

Precisely what U.S. officials knew about the "high-value target" in the al-Qaeda convoy is unclear. Libi, a 41-year-old al-Qaeda commander who had slowly climbed to the No. 5 spot on the CIA's most wanted list, was a hulking figure who stood 6 feet 4 inches tall. He spoke Libyan-accented Arabic and learned to be cautious after narrowly escaping a previous CIA strike. U.S. intelligence officials say he directed several deadly attacks, including a bombing at a U.S. military base in Afghanistan last year that killed 23 people.

Observing their prey
Alerted to the suspicious convoy, the CIA used a variety of surveillance techniques to follow its progression through Mir Ali, North Waziristan's second-largest town, and to a walled compound in a village on the town's outskirts.

The stopping place itself was an indication that these were important men: The compound was the home of Abdus Sattar, 45, a local Taliban commander and an associate of Baitullah Mehsud, the man accused by both the CIA and Pakistan of plotting the assassination of Benazir Bhutto on Dec. 27.

With all signs pointing to a unique target, CIA officials ordered the launch of a pilotless MQ-1B Predator aircraft, one of three kept at a secret base that the Pakistani government has allowed to be stationed inside the country. Launches from that base do not require government permission, officials said.

During the early hours of Jan. 29, the slow-moving, 27-foot-long plane circled the village before vectoring in to lock its camera sights on Sattar's compound. Watching intently were CIA and Air Force operators who controlled the aircraft's movements from an operations center at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada.

On orders from CIA officials in McLean, the operators in Nevada released the Predator's two AGM-114 Hellfire missiles, 100-pound, rocket-propelled munitions each tipped with a high-explosive warhead. The missiles tore into the compound's main building and an adjoining guesthouse where the al-Qaeda officers were believed to be staying.

Even when viewed from computer monitors thousands of miles away, the missiles' impact was stunning. The buildings were completely destroyed, and as many as 13 inhabitants were killed, U.S. officials said. The pictures captured after the attack were "not pretty," said one knowledgeable source.

Libi's death was confirmed by al-Qaeda, which announced his "martyrdom" on Feb. 1 in messages posted on the Web sites of sympathetic groups. One message hailed Libi as "the father of many lions who now own the land and mountains of jihadi Afghanistan" and said al-Qaeda's struggle "would not be defeated by the death of one person, no matter how important he may be."

A temporary impact
Publicly, reaction to the strike among U.S. and Pakistani leaders has been muted, with neither side appearing eager to call attention to an awkward, albeit successful, unilateral U.S. military operation. Some Pakistani government spokesmen have even questioned whether the terrorist leader was killed.

"It's not going to overwhelm their network or break anything up definitively," acknowledged a military official briefed on details of the Libi strike. He added: "We're now in a sit-and-wait mode until someone else pops up."

Richard A. Clarke, a former counterterrorism adviser to the Clinton and Bush administrations, said he has been told by those involved that the counterterror effort requires constant pressure on the Pakistani government.

"The United States has gotten into a pattern where it sends a high-level delegation over to beat Musharraf up, and then you find that within a week or two a high-value target has been identified. Then he ignores us for a while until we send over another high-level delegation," Clarke said.

Some officials also emphasized that such airstrikes have a marginal and temporary impact. And they do not yield the kind of intelligence dividends often associated with the live capture of terrorists -- documents, computers, equipment and diaries that could lead to further unraveling the network.

The officials stressed that despite the occasional tactical success against it, such as the Libi strike, the threat posed by al-Qaeda's presence in Pakistan has been growing. As a senior U.S. official briefed on the strike said: "Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then. But overall, we're in worse shape than we were 18 months ago."

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23228197/

Investors Leave Dollar, Seeking Higher Yields

The dollar is weaker against most rival currencies Tuesday afternoon in New York, after aggressive statements from the Reserve Bank of Australia highlighted the greenback's yield disadvantage with other major currencies.

Tuesday afternoon, the euro was at $1.4744 from $1.4659 Monday, while the dollar traded at 107.80 yen from 108.20 yen. The British pound lost some ground against the buck, trading at $1.9484 from $1.9525. The dollar was at 1.0948 Swiss francs from 1.1025 francs.

In yet more strong language from the central bank since it hiked rates to 7.0% earlier this month, the RBA revealed in the minutes from its February meeting it had considered raising the cash rate even higher. Australia is battling higher inflation amid continued-high global prices for commodities, a key driver of its economy.

The RBA statements boosted expectations of more rate hikes in Australia, while other places such as the euro zone have also suggested rate hikes remain a possibility. This comes as the Federal Reserve, in an effort to keep the U.S. economy on track, is likely to continue cutting its benchmark rate, which currently stands at 3.0%.

The relatively low rate has led many investors to sell the dollar and look elsewhere for currencies that pay higher interest rates.

"Despite ongoing, if not rising, fears that the U.S. will/has fallen into recession, commodity markets are taking little notice, keeping the dollar under broad-based downward pressure," said Tom Levinson, currency strategist at ING Wholesale Banking in London.

The dollar fell to its weakest level against the Australian dollar in three months Tuesday, and declined to a two-week low against the euro. The greenback is also trading low versus the yen, the pound and the Swiss franc.

There is no important U.S. data out Tuesday. The NAHB housing market index for February, unveiled at 1 p.m. EST, came in slightly better than expected. Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank President Gary Stern spoke at 9 a.m. EST, but the dollar showed little reaction to his comments. Mr. Stern said the U.S. economy may face slower growth and rising unemployment.

Meanwhile, the dollar is also lower against the yen as Japan's currency benefits from expectations of more interest rate hikes in China. China's inflation rate rose to an 11-year high in January, according to a report Tuesday, fueling speculation that the People's Bank of China may soon need to lift its benchmark interest rate to stem price pressures.

Government Surveillance is not a Mistake

Kurt Nimmo
Truth News
February 18, 2008

How stupid do they think we are? According to Nick Juliano, writing for Raw Story, they think we’re pretty darn stupid. “As President Bush continues to demand legal immunity for telecommunications companies accused of violating customers’ privacy, the government and its private-sector facilitators are reported to ‘regular[ly] foul up’ surveillance orders and filter untold numbers of innocent Americans’ communications into government computers,” writes Juliano.

Because of an “apparent miscommunication” between the FBI and a private internet provider, e-mail messages across an entire computer network were collected by the government, reports the New York Times’s Eric Lichtblau, who first uncovered the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping program.

E-mails from “perhaps hundreds of accounts or more” were sucked into FBI computers, Lichtblau reports, “instead of simply the lone e-mail address that was approved by a secret intelligence court as part of a national security investigation, according to a internal report of the 2006 episode.”

Hundreds? Try millions. And it’s anything but a mistake. It really is getting old, this “oops, our bumbling government screwed up again” propaganda.

According to the New York Times, probably the most successful propaganda sheet in the country — think Judith Miller, aluminum tubes, and a million plus dead Iraqis — these supposed mistakes are the product of miscommunication as the government sharpens its “technological tools.” As if to demonstrate we are indeed considered chumps and clueless bystanders, Eric Lichtblau quotes “an intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity,” and blamelessly declares: “It’s inevitable that these things will happen. It’s not weekly, but it’s common.”

In fact, unrestrained surveillance is almost as old as dirt, spanning back to the beginning of the country but really gaining steam at the turn of the last century when the government vigorously snooped on unions, political radicals, and immigrants before and after World War I. Chances are the average reader of the New York Times has never heard of the American Protective League, an organization that developed a liaison with what would eventually become the FBI. It was the InfraGard of its day, teaming up with business to rat out people deemed anti-American. It wasn’t a bumbling government that organized the Committee on Public Information, not only designed to brainwash Americans into supporting the First World War but also going after antiwar activists of the day. It sure helped when Congress passed the Sedition Act in 1918 to crack down on dissent and anti-war protests. Like the Patriot Act, this law was no mistake.

After the “war to end all wars” — or rather create more wars for more profit — Congress put together a “special” committee, known as the Dies Committee, to track and snoop subversives, that is to say people who opposed militarization and were a bit too energetic in organizing unions. The FBI, hardly fumbling, played a crucial role as the House Un-American Activities Committee convened. Agents snooped, opened mail, read telegrams, and pressured employers not to hire people deemed too radical. All of this furious activity led to the creation of COINTELPRO a few years later. The FBI infiltrated the civil rights and antiwar movements. J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI director, sent informants to church meetings, intercepted mail and phone calls, conducted break-ins, and planted news stories to defame civil rights leaders.

But it wasn’t simply the FBI, assisted by local law enforcement, who surveilled, harassed, and maligned — and some believe even assassinated — activists: the military got in on the action as well. In the 1960s and 1970s, the U.S. Army began secretly and illegally monitoring protests and anti-war groups. Of course, the picture would not be complete without the CIA’s “Operation Chaos,” designed to subvert entirely legal antiwar activity, never mind the CIA’s useless charter prohibited such behavior.

It should be noted that the NSA, now so often in the news, helped out the CIA by feeding it information on U.S. citizens. In 1975, the New York Times reported that the Rockefeller Commission learned that the NSA, “under ‘Project Minaret,’ received ‘watch lists’ of U.S. citizens about whom other agencies such as the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the FBI wanted information…. The legality of the operations is questionable. The committee arranged for Attorney General Edward Levi to appear … to discuss the matter. [Then NSA Director Lew Allen] admitted that the NSA had obtained no warrants for any of the monitoring.” In short, the NSA’s violation of the Fourth Amendment is nothing new or particularly surprising, going back at least thirty years. In fact, as noted above, such violations go back at least a hundred years. Due to advanced computer technology, these violations — virtually an uninterrupted tidal wave of violations — are simply more effective and widespread today.

Finally, since we know so little about the NSA and its technology — and the New York Times admitted they withheld “a number of technical details” about the latest NSA snoop program — we will probably never know if the NSA and FBI are making the sort of “mistakes” Eric Lichtblau insists they make routinely.

It is wise, however, to keep in mind something Franklin D. Roosevelt said: “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”

Ditto surveillance for political reasons.

Henry Kissinger: The Making Of A War Criminal

Google Video
February 19, 2008

Judge Kills Wikileaks in One Fell Swoop

Dan Goodin
The Register
February 18, 2008

The US arm of Wikileaks, a website that makes it easy for whistleblowers to leak documents, has been cut off after hosting evidence that claimed a bank located in the Cayman Islands engaged in money laundering and tax evasion.

Dynadot, the US-based company that hosted Wikileaks’ main site, not only severed wikileaks.org from the net; it also agreed to lock the domain name so it can’t be transferred to another provider. A federal judge in San Francisco signed off on the agreement on Friday (15 Feb).

The agreement came in a lawsuit brought by bank Julius Baer, the parent company of the accused Cayman bank. After trying unsuccessfully to get Wikileaks to remove the documents, Swiss-based Julius Baer went after Dynadot, which according to this copy of the court order, agreed to roll over in exchange for the suit against it being dismissed. Dynadot also agreed to turn over records related to Wikileaks, including "IP addresses and associated data used by any person, other than Dynadot, who accessed the account for the domain name".

Wikileaks allows whistleblowers to post documents anonymously - at least when its webhost isn’t coerced into turning over IP addresses and other information most customers would consider confidential.

According to this piece from Wired News, Wikileaks was unable to argue its position on the matter at a Friday court hearing because it only learned of the hearing a few hours before it started. Astonishingly, US District Judge Jeffrey White of the Northern District of California signed off on the stipulation, anyway.

The episode is another reminder that an organization’s security is only as good as the security of the people who provide its internet connection. Wikileaks claims that it is an "uncensorable Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis". But this is true only if its webhosts can be trusted not to pull the plug on its customers or divulge sensitive client information.

In this case Julius Baer quickly realized it couldn’t silence Wikileaks, so it went after a weaker link in the chain, which evidently was much less willing to put up a fight.

Wikileaks was founded in 2006 by people from a host of countries, including the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa. It has generated headlines by hosting documents exposing several high-profile scandals, including those related to the collapse of the UK’s Northern Rock bank and to prisons in Iraq and and Guantanamo Bay. The site says it has posted more than 1.2 million documents.

According to Julius Baer, a former vice president called Rudolf Elmer posted the documents, which purport to show that the Cayman Islands bank helped customers hide assets and launder funds.

The contested documents remain available on Wikileaks websites hosted in other countries, including in here in Belgium and here in India. The site says here that over the past few days it has also withstood a 500 Mbps denial-of-service attack and a fire to its uninterruptible power supply.

Of course, there’s no evidence that Julius Baer was behind either the attacks or the fire. But it’s clear that Wikileaks hasn’t been silenced, at least for now.

Hey, maybe there really is something to these claims about being uncensorable.

Shreveport Woman: Cops Beat Me When Camera Off

DAVID MUIR, KIRAN KHALID AND IMAEYEN IBANGA
ABC News
February 19, 2008

A Louisiana police officer was fired after a woman, who was pulled over on the suspicion of a DWI, ended up with two black eyes and bruises to her face while in police custody in November.

What makes Angela Garbarino’s injuries and situation more curious is the fact that Shreveport police Officer Wiley Willis turned off the interrogation-room camera after he and Garbarino exchanged words.

The video shows Garbarino requesting a phone call.

“You’re not going to let me call anybody?” she asks on the video. “I have a right to call somebody right now and I know that. Is this on the record?”

The footage documents Wiley attempting to read Garbarino her rights, but he runs out of patience and things get tense. He seems to forcefully put her in a chair.

“Don’t touch me again. Get away from me,” Garbarino says after a scream.

Then, Wiley walks over to the police camera recording the booking and turns it off. What happens next is a mystery, but when the video resumes the handcuffed Garbarino is sprawled on the floor and silently lying in a pool of her blood.

Read entire article

Amtrak riders to see more cops, face random bag searches soon

KATHERINE RUDISH and LEO STANDORA
New York Daily News
February 19th 2008

Cops with automatic weapons and bomb-sniffing dogs will patrol Amtrak trains and randomly search carry-on bags in a dramatic tightening of security to be announced today.

Although some riders were unhappy with the idea of guns on the trains, most welcomed the new security plan.

“I think it’s good,” said Yvette Davis, 23, an assistant shoe store manager from the Bronx, while waiting for a train in Penn Station. “You can never be too protective, especially with some of these crazy people.”

“I think it’s great,” said Manhattan software salesman Dan Hurley, 39. “I’ve often wondered why there is so little security on trains. They could do as much damage as a plane.”

April Holder, 30, from Manhattan, said only, “Just don’t make us late. New Yorkers hate being late.”

Amtrak officials insist the security ramp-up won’t make anyone late.

Read entire article

Banks "quietly" borrow $50 billion from Fed: report

Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:47am EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Banks in the United States have been quietly borrowing "massive amounts" from the U.S. Federal Reserve in recent weeks, using a new measure the Fed introduced two months ago to help ease the credit crunch, according to a report on the web site of The Financial Times.

The newspaper said the use of the Fed's Term Auction Facility (TAF), which allows banks to borrow at relatively attractive rates against a wide range of their assets, saw borrowing of nearly $50 billion of one-month funds from the Fed by mid-February.

The Financial Times said the move has sparked unease among some analysts about the stress developing in opaque corners of the U.S. banking system and the banks' growing reliance on indirect forms of government support.

(Reporting by Mark McSherry; Editing by Valerie Lee)

Amtrak to step up security measures

Random searches of passengers' carry-on bags planned
The Associated Press
updated 7:48 p.m. ET, Mon., Feb. 18, 2008

WASHINGTON - Amtrak will start randomly screening passengers' carry-on bags this week in a new security push that includes officers with automatic weapons and bomb-sniffing dogs patrolling platforms and trains.

The initiative, to be announced by the railroad on Tuesday, is a significant shift for Amtrak. Unlike the airlines, it has had relatively little visible increase in security since the 2001 terrorist attacks, a distinction that has enabled it to attract passengers eager to avoid airport hassles.

Amtrak officials insist their new procedures won't hold up the flow of passengers.

"On-time performance is a key element of Amtrak service. We are fully mindful of that. This is not about train delays," Bill Rooney, the railroad's vice president for security strategy and special operations, told The Associated Press.

Nor will the moves require passengers to arrive at stations far in advance, officials said. Passengers who are selected randomly for the screening will be delayed no more than a couple of minutes, Amtrak chief executive Alex Kummant said.

"We're very conscious of the fact that you're in an environment where commuters have minutes to go from train to train," he said.

Bombings in Spain raised fears
Concern about Amtrak security has been mounting since the 2004 bombings of commuter trains in Madrid that killed 191 people. Trains also have been bombed in London, where 52 people were killed in a series of blasts in 2005, most of them on subway trains, and in Mumbai, India, where 200 people were killed in 2006 on commuter trains. Russia also has had several bombings on subway, commuter and long-distance trains.

The new procedures draw heavily on measures being used in the New York City subways, Rooney said. That model has been upheld in court challenges, he noted.

Amtrak plans to roll out the new "mobile security teams" first on the Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston, the railroad's most heavily used route, before expanding them to the rest of the country.

The teams will show up unannounced at stations and set up baggage screening areas in front of boarding gates. Officers will randomly pull people out of line and wipe their bags with a special swab that is then put through a machine that detects explosives. If the machine detects anything, officers will open the bag for visual inspection.

Anybody who is selected for screening and refuses will not be allowed to board and their ticket will be refunded.

In addition to the screening, counterterrorism officers with bomb-sniffing dogs will patrol platforms and walk through trains, and sometimes will ride the trains, officials said.

Different approach from airport system
Tim Connors, director of the Center for Policing Terrorism at the Manhattan Institute, said rail systems require a completely different approach to security from the one used in aviation.

"Rail moves a lot more people than air does," he said. "It's designed to be an open system that can move a lot of people fast."

One of Congress' biggest advocates for passenger rail, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said the security initiative makes sense as long as it doesn't cause delays.

"Given that terrorists have chosen passenger rail as one of their targets of choice, provided this doesn't slow things down or require additional longer lines and waits, this plan is certainly worth trying," he said in a statement.

Connors said random screening could be effective.

"A random approach is actually more effective than a constant one," he said, adding that when procedures don't change, it's easier for would-be terrorists to find weak spots.

Amtrak hopes the new force can serve as a powerful deterrent to would-be terrorists.

"What we are trying to do is make sure the bad guys know we're out there but don't know where we'll be, or when," Rooney said.

No estimate of searches' cost
Amtrak did not provide figures for the program's cost, but said its total security budget — including police, security strategy and emergency preparedness — is about $60 million. The railroad has about 400 security personnel, including about 300 sworn police officers, Kummant said.

Amtrak's previous passenger screening consisted of sporadic identification checks by train conductors, which the railroad says it plans to continue. Passengers also are required to show ID when buying tickets from station agents, though there is no such requirement from passengers buying tickets from self-serve kiosks.

The Transportation Security Administration is also expected to continue sporadic deployments to stations around the country.

Amtrak has received a number of federal grants aimed at boosting security, but officials said there was no specific mandate to implement the changes.

"There is no new or different specific threat," Kummant said. "This is just the correct step to take."

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23226815/

Castro resigns as Cuba’s leader

Revolutionary icon, not seen in public since 2006, had ruled for 49 years
BREAKING NEWS
MSNBC News Services
updated 6:39 a.m. ET, Tues., Feb. 19, 2008

HAVANA - Ailing leader Fidel Castro resigned as Cuba’s president early Tuesday after nearly a half-century in power, saying in a letter published in online official media that he would not accept a new term when the newly elected parliament meets on Sunday.

“I will not aspire nor accept — I repeat I will not aspire or accept — the post of President of the Council of State and Commander in Chief,” read the letter signed by Castro and published quietly overnight without advance warning in the online edition of the Communist Party daily Granma.

Speaking from Rwanda, President Bush expressed hope that Cuba will now begin a transition to democracy. “The international community should work with the Cuban people to begin to build institutions that are necessary for democracy,” Bush said.

Cuba's new National Assembly is meeting Sunday for first time since January elections to pick the governing Council of State, including the presidency Castro holds. There had been wide speculation about whether he would accept a nomination for re-election to that post or retire.

Brother Raul set to step in
The 81-year-old Castro’s overnight announcement effectively ends his rule of almost 50 years over Cuba, positioning his 76-year-old brother Raul for permanent succession to the presidency.

NBC News' Mary Murray, reporting from Havana, said that although Castro had announced his retirement as president and commander in chief of the military, for the time being he remains head of Cuba's ruling Communist Party.

Over the decades, the fiery guerrilla leader reshaped Cuba into a communist state 90 miles from U.S. shores and survived assassination attempts, a CIA-backed invasion and a missile crisis that brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Since his rise to power on New Year’s Day 1959, Castro resisted attempts by 10 U.S. administrations to topple him, including the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961.

The United States’ discovery of nuclear-armed missiles on the island led to a showdown of the world’s then-superpowers before the Soviet Union agreed to remove them.

A political survivor
Monarchs excepted, Castro was the world’s longest ruling head of state.

His ironclad rule ensured Cuba remained among the world’s last few remaining communist countries, long after the breakup of the Soviet Union and collapse of communism across Eastern Europe.

Castro’s designated successor was his brother Raul, five years younger and No. 2 in Cuba’s power structure as defense minister. Raul Castro had been in his brother’s rebel movements since 1953.

Castro had already temporarily ceded his powers to his brother on July 31, 2006, when he announced that he had undergone intestinal surgery.

More than a year after falling ill, the elder Castro still had not been seen in public, appearing only sporadically in official photographs and videotapes and publishing dense essays about mostly international themes as his younger brother began to consolidate his rule.

No transition?
But the United States, bent on blocking Fidel Castro’s plans for his younger brother to succeed him, built a detailed plan in 2005 for American assistance to ensure a democratic transition on the island of 11.2 million people after his death.

Castro and other Cuban officials long insisted “there will be no transition” and that the island’s socialist political and economic systems will live on long after he is gone.

Castro’s supporters admired his ability to provide a high level of health care and education for citizens while remaining fully independent of the United States.

But his detractors called him a dictator whose totalitarian government systematically denied individual freedoms and civil liberties such as speech, movement and assembly.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23229795/