Almost any media description of Sudan's disputed Abyei region, with North Sudanese troops took control of today, includes the phrase "oil-rich". (Today's Morning Brief was an offender.) But FP contributor Becca Hamilton, writing at the Christian Science Monitor, points out that "water-rich" would actually be the more relevant description:

First, oil production from Heglig, Bamboo, and Diffra has declined across the board. From the 76,600 bpd of 2004, the 2009 estimates for the three fields dropped to 28,300 bpd. Meanwhile, production from outside the area increased. By early 2009, “oil-rich” Abyei only accounted for 5 percent of Sudan’s annual production.[...] Given the possibility that Abyei has more usable oil than we currently know or can verify, one may argue there is no harm in continuing to label Abyei as “oil-rich.” But the problem is that as long as oil remains the primary lens through which Abyei stories are packaged, we miss what else is at stake.

Abyei is extraordinarily fertile, and the significance of the River Kiir (in Dinka)/Barh el-Arab (in Arabic) to the sustenance of life here cannot be overstated.

This river continues to flow throughout the harsh dry season, meaning it is the only place to graze livestock for many months of the year. Without it, the nomadic population could not survive. Even if it turns out there is untapped commercially-viable oil within Abyei’s boundaries, that still only accounts for one strand of what is going on in Abyei.

At the national political level, oil matters.

For the people who live here – who have never seen any benefits from oil and don’t believe they ever will, the talk of oil just feels like a headache they would rather do without. But if you took oil out of the equation you would still have a very big Abyei problem – primarily because of water, but also because of the political manipulation of local actors, and the legacy of war on inter-ethnic relations. None of these issues are getting the coverage they deserve because of the hyped-up focus on oil.

The overattention to oil supplies relative to water tables and food stockpiles isn't unique to Sudan. As Lester Brown points out in his recent FP cover story, "All together, more than half the world's people live in countries where water tables are falling". This fact is increasingly important to understanding where disputed regions will emerge, but it's going to take a while for the headlines to catch up. 

With President Obama forced cut his trip to Ireland short because of fears that the eruption of Icleand's Grimsvotn will disrupt airline travel, ABC's Jake Tapper notes that the President has particularly bad timing with volcanic eruptions:

Last November, President Obama had to cut short his visit to a different nation where he was having something of a homecoming: Indonesia, where he spent four years as a child.

In April 2010, President Obama had to cancel a visit to Poland for the funeral of Polish President Lech Kaczynski, killed in a plane crash with his wife and dozens of other Polish leaders.

Those latter two incidents were the fault of Eyjafjallajokull. That pesky volcano also caused General Stanley McChrystal and his aides to spend more time with a Rolling Stone reporter than they had originally planned, with a whole other set of repercussions.

Can it be a coincidence that the travel schedule of America's first Hawaiian president seems to have a strange effect on global geological activity? I think not.

Here are six other places that may want to reconsider inviting Obama to town. (If the president decides to take a tour of the Yellowstone Caldera, I'm building a bomb shelter.)

In addition to antigovernment protesters, foreign diplomats no longer seem to be safe from pro-regime "demonstrators" in the Yemeni capital:

Yemen's political crisis took a dramatic turn yesterday when armed loyalists of embattled President Ali Abdullah Saleh surrounded an embassy, trapping the American and other ambassadors inside for hours until they apparently were flown out by Yemeni military helicopter.[...]

Saleh supporters massed outside the Emirati embassy, blocking two main entrances and at one point attacking a convoy bringing the GCC's top mediator, Abdullatif bin Rashid al-Zayani, to the compound, news agencies reported. Mobs surrounded other foreign embassies; the Chinese ambassador's convoy also came under attack, according to news reports.

"Everybody is worried. We can't leave the embassy," an unnamed Saudi diplomat told the Associated Press before the apparent helicopter rescue.

Saleh's government will deny that it orchestrated the protests, but taking a look at the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which Yemen signed in 1986, it still appears that Yemen may be in violation:

1.The premises of the mission shall be  inviolable. The agents of  the receiving State may not enter them, except with  the consent of the head of the mission.

2.The  receiving State  is under  a special  duty  to  take  all  appropriate  steps  to protect  the  premises of  the  mission  against  any  intrusion  or  damage  and  to  prevent  any  disturbance  of  the  peace  of  the mission or impairment  of its dignity.

3.The  premises  of  the  mission,  their  furnishings  and  other  property  thereon  and  the  means  of transport of the mission shall be immune  from  search, requisition, attachment or execution.

Even if the Yemeni government didn't specifically order the seige of the Emirati embassy, it would be hard to argue that it took all appropriate steps to "prevent  any  disturbance  of  the  peace  of  the mission or impairment  of its dignity" when it was Saleh's own armed supporters who were doing the disturbing.

GOP candidates like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann who have openly pandered to those doubting Barack Obama's citizenship may come to regret that stance. Two of the party's rising stars, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and Florida Senator Marco Rubio now seem to be in the crosshairs of WorldNetDaily, the site that has pushed the Obama rumors since the election:

The next national election is less than 18 months away, and both rising Republican stars have been touted as potential contenders for either the No. 1 or No. 2 spot on a presidential ticket.

But their eligibility is in doubt since both men's parents were not U.S. citizens at the time their future political children were born, WND can reveal. That factor is important because the Constitution mandates a presidential candidate to be a "natural-born citizen," a requirement that has dogged President Barack Obama since the 2008 campaign.

The authors don't dispute that both men were born in the United States -- Jindal has even released his birth certificate -- so what's the issue? It appears that WordNetDaily is now trying to move the goalposts on what constitutes a "natural-born" citizen:

The fact that Rubio and Jindal were both born in America undoubtedly makes them "native-born" citizens, but does it mean they're "natural-born" citizens?

Some would say no – including legal sources relied upon by America's Founders – based on the foreign births of their parents, an issue many claim disqualifies Obama from holding the presidency, since Obama's father held British citizenship due to his birth in Kenya, which was under British rule at the time.

The Founders' chief concern, as demonstrated in a 1787 letter from John Jay to George Washington, was that the commander-in-chief not have dual loyalties.

Jay, who later became president of the Continental Congress and the first Supreme Court chief justice, wrote: "Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."

The argument relies not on any actual written U.S. law but on Jay's decision, a law from 1790 that was repealed later and -- my personal favorite -- "a 1758 work by Swiss legal philosopher Emmerich de Vattel, was read by many of the American Founders and informed their understanding of law later established in the Constitution." So the founders relied on (gasp) international law?

Somehow I have a feeling this ends with only landholding, Mayflower-descended Freemasons being eligible to run for president. 

Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan

A number of bloggers/tweeters have picked up on this bizarre statement from Pakistani Interior Minsiter Rehman Malik about today's attack on a Pakistani Naval base in Karachi:

In a bizarre analogy, Malik compared the attackers to characters from a Star Wars film, dressed in Western clothes.

"They were wearing black clothes like in Star Wars movies, (one) with (a) suicide vest. They had small beards and two of them were between 20-22 years old while the third who blew himself up was about 25."

The natural question, of course, is what characters he's referring to. Jawas?

Storm Troopers?

Jedis?

Lord Vader?

Jar Jar Binks?

Some have interpreted Malik's comments as evidence that he's gone off his rocker, but perhaps he's just up on the latest internet memes.

NEW YORK, NY - MAY 13: Participants in a movement that is proselytizing that the world will end this May 21, Judgment Day, walk through the streets on May 13, 2011 in New York City. The Christian based movement, which claims thousands of supporters around the country and world, was founded by the Oakland, Calif.-based Harold Camping. Camping is president of Family Stations Inc., a religious broadcasting network that promotes the belief that May 21, 2011 is Judgment Day. Camping claims to have come to this date by a deep and complex study of religious texts. Camping was wrong on his prior end-of-the-world prediction in 1994.

Happy Judgment Day weekend everybody. See you next week, assuming we're all still here. 

As some may know, this is my last day at Foreign Policy. After three great years here, I'm heading back to the field to report from the Middle East. But before I go, it's worth sharing a few of the things that I've learned from being here at FP and seeing how the news is made "behind the curtains."

The world is not a boring place. In case there was any doubt in your mind, we have a lot of fun at FP. Yes, we are serious too; yes, the world is a fraught with countless complex and mind-boggling conflicts and phenomena. But there's always a way to talk about them that isn't mind-bogglingly hard to follow. And usually, when you look for the new insights that reject that over-talked conventional wisdoms, you end up finding the most important angles.

Look for weak signals. Our former editor in chief Moises Naím taught us all something very important about how to read the world: behind the lines. Think of all the major news events of the last several years -- for example the Arab Spring or the financial crisis. Long before these words had any meaning, their origins were boiling up below the surface. It was a rare observer who could put the pieces together and anticipate the trend. It's what the best reporters and analysts should strive for.

Always ask why it matters. We live in busy times. Bandwidths are stretched, crises abound, and there's just no way to absorb it all. Step back from the details -- however compelling or heart-wrenching -- and imagine what you would want to know if you didn't care. I don't mean dumb it down or make it all about the Americans. But think big about how the small stuff threads into the global fabric. They always do. And if you figure out how, those non-carers might start to feel differently.

Say thank you. Ok, ok, I know this isn't a life advice column. But seriously. No matter where you are, who you're with, or what language you are speaking, you'll learn more about this crazy world if you appreciate humanity in one short sentence. And so with that, here's my thank you to FP -- for all I've learned and for all you've taught me. Keep reading!