Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !

Africa Horn

UN approves Darfur 26,000-strong peacekeeping force

2007-08-02

The UN Security Council unanimously approved a 26,000-strong peacekeeping force for Darfur on Tuesday to try to help end four years of fighting that has killed more than 200,000 people in the vast Sudanese region. The force - the first joint peacekeeping mission by the African Union and the United Nations - will replace the beleaguered 7,000-strong AU force now in Darfur no later than Dec. 31. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the resolution will send "a clear and powerful signal" of the UN's commitment to help to the people of Darfur and the surrounding region "and close this tragic chapter in Sudan's history." But Ban, who has made Darfur a top priority since taking over as UN chief on Jan. 1, stressed that "it is only through a political process that we can achieve a sustainable solution to the conflict." The secretary-general said it is crucial that a meeting of the parties to the conflict in Arusha, Tanzania, later this week, "yield positive results so as to pave the way for negotiations and, ultimately, a peace agreement." Sudan's UN ambassador, Abdalmahmood Abdalhaleem Mohamad, told reporters the government would discuss the resolution, which "contained many positive elements, and also it went to considerable extent to satisfy our concerns." He had reacted harshly to earlier versions of the resolution, calling one circulated last week "ugly" and "awful." Britain and France, the key sponsors of the resolution, then stripped some tough language including the threat of sanctions which Sudan and China opposed. US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad warned that if Sudan doesn't comply with the resolution "the United States will move for the swift adoption of unilateral and multilateral measures." "Now Sudan faces a choice. Sudan can choose the path of cooperation or defiance," he said. "We look to its government to do the right thing and pursue the path of peace." Earlier Tuesday, Britain's new prime minister, Gordon Brown, told a U.N. audience that "if any party blocks progress and the killings continue, I and others will redouble our efforts to impose further sanctions." Britain's UN Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said the AU-UN force will be the largest peacekeeping force in the world. The conflict in Darfur began in February 2003, when ethnic African tribes rebelled against what they consider decades of neglect and discrimination by the Arab-dominated government. Sudan's government is accused of retaliating by unleashing a militia of Arab nomads known as the janjaweed - a charge it denies. The poorly equipped and underfunded African Union force has been unable to stop the fighting, and neither has the Darfur Peace Agreement, signed a year ago by the government and one rebel group. Other rebel factions called the deal insufficient, and fighting has continued. The UN and Western governments have pressed Sudan since November to accept a three-stage U.N. plan for a joint force. After stalling for months, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir agreed in April to a "heavy support package" to strengthen the AU force, including 3,000 U.N. troops, police and civilian personnel along with aircraft and other equipment. The resolution calls for its speedy deployment. The resolution authorizes the much larger 26,000-strong hybrid force, which will be called UNAMID and have "a predominantly African character," as Sudan demanded. The force will have up to 19,555 military personnel, including 360 military observers and liaison officers, a civilian component including up to 3,772 international police, and 19 special police units with up to 2,660 officers.

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

U.N. votes for court on murder of Lebanon's Hariri

2007-05-31

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - In a challenge to Syria, the U.N. Security Council voted on Wednesday to set up a special court to prosecute the killing two years ago of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri. After months of deadlock between deeply divided Lebanese politicians over the plan, 10 council members supported a Western-sponsored resolution to set up the tribunal and five abstained. There were no votes against. The murder of Hariri and 22 others in a Beirut bomb blast in February 2005 convulsed Lebanon and forced Syria, held responsible by pro-government Lebanese politicians, to withdraw troops it had kept since the 1970s in its smaller neighbor. Syria, which has denied responsibility, said the Security Council move violated Lebanese sovereignty and could plunge the country into further instability. And no one cares more about Lebanese sovereignty and stability than Syria. They're pals. In pushing through the measure, Western powers are gambling that the boost to Lebanese government authority and to the rule of law will outweigh any violent reaction in Lebanon, whose government is at loggerheads with a Hezbollah-led opposition. "By adopting this resolution, the council has demonstrated its commitment to the principle that there shall be no impunity for political assassinations in Lebanon or elsewhere," said U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. Great, Zalmay. Now follow through. Britain's U.N. envoy, Emyr Jones Parry, told reporters the vote would "send the right political signal" to Lebanon, a country with a long history of political assassinations, many of which have gone unpunished. But the countries that abstained -- Russia, China, Qatar, Indonesia and South Africa -- argued that the council was exceeding its authority and interfering in Lebanese affairs. "It is not appropriate for the Security Council to impose such a tribunal on Lebanon," South African Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo told the council. I'm just amazed Russia didn't veto this. The move responds to a request from Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, but the country's parliament has not approved it because speaker Nabih Berri, an opposition leader who disputes the cabinet's legitimacy, has refused to convene the chamber.

Link

Home Front: Politix

Bill ties climate to national security

2007-04-09

This is gonna clause some problems! The CIA and Pentagon would for the first time be required to assess the national security implications of climate change under proposed legislation intended to a national defense issue. The bipartisan proposal, which its sponsors expect to pass the Congress with wide support, calls for the director of national intelligence to conduct the first-ever "national intelligence estimate" on global warming. The effort would include pinpointing the regions at highest risk of humanitarian suffering and assessing the likelihood of wars erupting over diminishing water and other resources. Not a bad idea, along the same lines of our being prepared for an invasion by Canada. Some staff officer in training will get to write a NIE on global warming as an exercise. The measure also would order the Pentagon to undertake a series of war games to determine how global climate change could affect US security, including "direct physical threats to the United States posed by extreme weather events such as hurricanes." COL: "Okay, people, gather 'round the Big Board. We're going to game the 'global climate change' scenario today." CAP #1: [ whispering to CAP #2 ] "Kee-rist, not this again." COL: "Captain, you got something you want to share with us?" CAP #1: "Umm, no sir, looking forward to the exercise, sir." The growing attention to global warming as a national security issue could open new avenues of support for tougher efforts to limit greenhouse gases, according to specialists. "If you get the intelligence community to apply some of its analytic capabilities to this issue, it could be compelling to whoever is sitting in the White House," said Anne Harrington , director of the committee on international security at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington. "If the White House does not absorb the independent scientific expertise, then maybe something from the intelligence community might have more weight." The measure, sponsored by Senator Chuck Hagel , a Nebraska Republican, and Senator Richard J. Durbin , an Illinois Democrat, comes as other international bodies are taking steps to designate global warming as a high international priority for their budgets and staffing. The United Nations Security Council has put climate change on its agenda for the first time, warning that global warming could be a catalyst for new conflicts around the world. The council said it would hold a high-level meeting on the issue later this month. "The traditional triggers of conflict which exist out there are likely to be exacerbated by the effect of climate change," said Emyr Jones Parry, Britain's UN ambassador. The push in the United States to treat global warming as a national security threat follows the same path as previous efforts to treat the spread of AIDS as a security threat. The disease was long seen as exclusively a health issue until intelligence officials warned that it could ravage military forces across Africa and draw the United States into conflict. Growing concerns about the implications of global warming have also led some Republicans and Democrats to give the issue far more prominence in policy circles. "For years, many of us have examined global warming as an environmental or economic issue," Durbin said in little-noticed remarks last month. "We also need to consider it as a security concern." That's are far as I could stand to read

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

UK Ready for Diplomatic Attack on Iran

2007-04-01

The Security Council "statement" criticizing Iran's continued "detention" of 15 British Royal Navy sailors is only the first step in what may turn into a major diplomatic attack by London, say U.N. diplomats. "Major diplomatic attack"... oh, nevermind. The watered-down statement, unexpectedly accepted by British Ambassador to the U.N. Sir Emyr Jones Parry late Thursday, while criticizing the Iranian move, only demanded immediate access to the soldiers by British consular officials. It did not address the claims and counter-claims about whether the Royal Navy violated Iran's territorial waters. However, on Monday, the UK assumes the monthly rotating presidency of the Security Council, followed by the United States in May. During April, London will be able to control the Council's "program of work," putting itself in a central position to use the U.N. body to exert even more diplomatic pressure on Tehran. The feeling among Council diplomats was that the Thursday statement on Iran was approved by the British not so much for what it said, but more for use as a "springboard" for harsher measures should they be needed while it chairs the U.N. body.

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Envoy: Hezbollah Wants 'Price' for Info

2006-11-03

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Hezbollah is asking "a price" for information about whether two Israeli soldiers kidnapped by the militant group are still alive, Britain's U.N. ambassador said Thursday. Emyr Jones Parry's comment comes two days after Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah revealed that "serious negotiations" were taking place over the soldiers, whose capture provoked a 34-day war between Hezbollah and Israel. "They're asking a price for proof of life," Jones Parry said Thursday. He gave no details on what he meant by "price." Olmert's weak enough he might go for this. I personally would ask Nasty what the price is for not dropping a cluster bomb on him. Nasrallah said in an interview on his group's television channel Al-Manar that a negotiator appointed by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan - who has not been publicly identified - had been mediating between Hezbollah and Israeli officials. Nasrallah would not provide details about the negotiations, but he said: "We have reached a stage of exchanging ideas, proposals or conditions." In Jerusalem on Wednesday, Israeli government spokeswoman Miri Eisin declined to confirm any indirect talks with Hezbollah, which Israel and the United States regard as a terrorist organization. "We don't comment about anything that has to do with the abducted soldiers," Eisin said. "Israel will do all it takes to get their release without hurting Israel's security." In that case, no exchanges and no payments.

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Brit UN envoy calls Iran's response "inadequate"

2006-08-25

UNITED NATIONS, Aug 25, 2006 (AFP) - Britain's UN Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry on Friday dismissed as "inadequate" Iran's response to an international offer of energy and security incentives in exchange for a freeze of its uranium enrichment activities. "Our capitals are working on our response to the inadequate response we've received from Iran," he told reporters. "We need to give a measured consideration to what has been sent to us by Iran, but quite clearly something which is short of what the Council is looking for," he added. Yes, quite.

Link

Africa Horn

Sudan asks UNSC for time to bring peace to Darfur

2006-08-24

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir asked the UN Security Council to give his government time to bring peace to Darfur and delay action on the transfer of peacekeeping in the conflict-wracked region from the African Union to a UN force, according to a letter circulated Wednesday. Al-Bashir stressed the strong opposition of the people and leaders in Darfur to a UN force and warned that the UN's takeover would lead "without a doubt to acts of violence and unmanageable confrontations among all parties in Darfur, including the United Nations forces." With the situation in Darfur worsening and violence escalating, the United States and Britain have introduced a resolution that would transfer peacekeeping from the financially strapped African Union to a much larger and better equipped UN force. Britain's UN Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said he hoped it could be adopted by the end of August.

Link

Africa Horn

Sudan Delays Approval of U.N. Peacekeepers

2006-06-07

KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) - The Sudanese government told a high-level Security Council delegation Tuesday that it would not give immediate approval for a U.N. peacekeeping force in Darfur, but was willing to keep talking about the takeover from African Union troops. Senior representatives of the 15 Security Council nations met Tuesday with Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, Foreign Minister Lam Akol and members of Parliament on a visit to the capital Khartoum. During closed door meetings, they discussed at length the transfer of peacekeeping responsibilities from a 7,000-strong African Union mission that has been unable to quell fighting in Darfur to a more muscular U.N. force. "There has been no agreement and discussions continue," Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, who is leading the U.N. mission, said of a U.N. peacekeeping force for Darfur which the U.S. is strongly in favor of.

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Iran: U.N. Intervention Illegal

2006-05-07

Iranians Say Suspension Of Enrichment Not On Agenda Iran said on Sunday any U.N. action over its nuclear program would be illegal and lead to confrontation. Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi also declared yet again there was nothing the international community could do to prompt Iran to suspend uranium enrichment. Briefing reporters, he also said Iran's antagonists over its nuclear program were driven by "political motivations." "Countries sponsoring the draft resolution (Britain, France and the United States) have political motivations," Asefi said. "It's clear that any action by the U.N. Security Council will leave a negative impact on our cooperation with the IAEA." He was referring to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, which Iran has barred from making snap inspections as the dispute over the program has escalated. "Intervention by the U.N. Security Council would change the path of cooperation to confrontation. We recommend they do not do this," Asefi said. The U.S., Britain and France have expressed concern Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons under cover of its enrichment program and are trying to craft a U.N. resolution that would involve some measure of punishment should Iran fail to cease processing uranium. Russia and China, the other two veto-holding council members, have refused to agree to a draft resolution, calling for further diplomacy. Iran insists the program is designed only to make fuel for reactors to generate electricity, and the IAEA says there is no evidence Iran has a nuclear weapons program. "The U.N. Security Council should not take any action that it cannot later undo. We won't give up our rights and the issue of suspension (of enrichment) is not on our agenda," Asefi said at his weekly briefing. The United States said Saturday it was prepared to bring a U.N. resolution on Iran's nuclear program to a vote — with or without Russia and China's support — but was still seeking to bridge differences and win unanimous Security Council approval. "The optimism expressed Friday at the U.N. appeared to dissipate Saturday when Security Council members could not find common ground on a draft resolution designed to pressure Iran," said CBS News Foreign Affairs Analyst Pamela Falk. "With the foreign ministers from the world powers expected to meet in New York early next week, the pressure is building to find a unified position but threats to call a vote before an agreement is reached, combined with Vice President Dick Cheney's public rebuke of Russia are making the chance of a compromise position less likely." "Either the U.K., France, and the U.S. have to move away from language of the resolution that allows for sanctions and the use of force in the future, or Russia and China as well as Qatar -- which does not have veto power -- will have to fundamentally change their position on that issue," Falk said, "or they walk away from the U.N., diminishing the pressure on Iran. After an informal meeting at Britain's U.N. Mission, council members said they made progress in a paragraph-by-paragraph discussion of the draft resolution. Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry acknowledged, however, that the most contentious issues were not discussed in detail. "We are still working to achieve unanimity ... but we're prepared to go to a vote without it," U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said. "We're not prepared to extend these negotiations endlessly ... I think it's realistic to consider this for a vote next week." The resolution, co-sponsored by Britain and France and backed by the U.S., would make mandatory the previous Security Council demands that Iran suspend uranium enrichment, plutonium reprocessing, and construction of a heavy-water nuclear reactor. The draft states that the "proliferation risk" posed by Iran constitutes a threat to international peace and security, and the resolution would be adopted under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which can be enforced by sanctions — or if necessary — military action. Russia and China, which both have veto power, and some nonpermanent members contend that there is no evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons — as the U.S. and its allies believe — and they object to the call for possible "further measures" to ensure Tehran's compliance. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov discussed "the search for a diplomatic solution of the Iranian nuclear problem" with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement Saturday. "It is too early to say which changes should be made to the draft resolution to satisfy Russia," Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak said in Moscow on Saturday, according to the RIA Novosti, ITAR-Tass and Interfax news agencies. Bolton said he had told the Russians and Chinese four days ago to come up with some creative way to make the resolution mandatory without Chapter 7, and was still waiting for their proposals. "There's no dispute about the basic course of conduct that we want Iran to pursue," he said. But Jones Parry said he did not envision a resolution without Chapter 7. Qatar's U.N. Ambassador Nassir Al-Nasser said after Saturday's meeting that "the text language for some delegations is very unacceptable" and he is waiting for a revised text. Tanzania's U.N. Ambassador Augustine Mahiga said the resolution should strengthen the role of the IAEA, remove the threat of further action, and "incorporate some inducements for Iranians to cooperate." Jones Parry said he and France's U.N. Ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere would now reflect on the suggestions made by council members. "We have no intention of producing a new text at this stage," Jones Parry said, adding that the co-sponsors were still open to consider possible amendments. Neither Jones Parry nor Bolton would predict when a revised text would be introduced. De La Sabliere said the council would meet again on Monday, ahead of a meeting Monday evening of foreign ministers of the six key players on the Iran nuclear issue — the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany. Supporters of the resolution had hoped it would be adopted before that gathering. "We are moving in the right direction," de La Sabliere said. "I think we have made some progress, but there is still a lot of work to do." Bolton said he expects the ministers to talk about "the longer term policy that we need to pursue to stop Iran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability, and I think they could have that discussion on the assumption that this resolution will be adopted next week." In Saudi Arabia, six of Iran's Persian Gulf neighbors urged Tehran on Saturday to be frank with them about its nuclear program. The gathering discussed developments in Iran, Iraq and combatting terrorism, United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Sheik Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan told journalists. "Iran should be transparent in dealing with the region," regarding its nuclear program, Al Nahyan said.

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

US wants quick UN action on Iran

2006-04-28

The United States and Britain said on Friday they would step up pressure on Iran by moving quickly on a U.N. Security Council resolution seeking to curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions, despite objections from China. U.S. Ambassador John Bolton and British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry were responding to a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency that said Iran had ignored a March council statement demanding Tehran suspend uranium enrichment, a process used in making bombs as well as electric power And glow in the dark watches!. "I think it is clear that Iran has done Pretty much whatever the hell it wants nothing to comply with existing IAEA board resolutions or the requests in the Security Council statement" of last month, Bolton said. "The point is to enhance international pressure on Iran, to show just how isolated they are," Bolton said. "There is still time for Iran to reverse the policy it is pursuing." Jones Parry said his delegation would introduce a draft resolution on the IAEA report by the middle of next week. But the initial resolution will not threaten sanctions or hint at military force. Instead it will put directives by the 35-member IAEA board of governors and the March council statement into a U.N. resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which makes it legally binding. The resolution would also say that Iran's nuclear program was a threat to "international peace and security," Bolton said. Ya, that has worked SOOOO well in the past, hasn't it? Rest of drivel at link.

Link

Israel-Palestine-Jordan

Arabs want UNSC to press Israel to end attacks

2006-04-13

Arab nations called on the UN Security Council on Tuesday to put pressure on the Israeli military to end a wave of military strikes on Palestinian targets. Several members of the 15-nation council said a draft statement, which was put forward by Bahrain’s UN ambassador, on behalf of the Arab group at the United Nations, was biased against Israel and needed rewriting. Where's the part about the Paleostinians stopping shelling Israel? The next step was for council diplomats to meet informally to negotiate revisions in the text, they said. “At the moment, what is on the table I don’t think is the basis for agreement,” British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry told reporters. “I think it is very partial in the comments it makes.” Oh, do tell? Sounds pretty balanced, except for the part about no demands being made on the Paleos... To win US backing a council statement would have to be “something that contributes to positive movement in the dispute, not something that creates more heat than light,” US Ambassador John Bolton said. ... stating the obvious. Palestinian UN Observer Riyad Mansour said the Palestinians wanted the council “to ask Israel to stop this aggression against the Palestinian people and to cease these military activities and attacks and killing of civilians immediately”. "We, of course, will continue shelling them, as is our Legitimate Right™." Earlier, Israeli Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz said on Tuesday Israel would intensify its bombardments of Gaza, as Palestinian premier Ismail Haniya accused Israel of trying to bring the Palestinian people to their knees. “As long as calm does not prevail on the Israeli side, neither will it do so on the Palestinian side,” said the defence minister. “Our operations are going to intensify.”

Link

International-UN-NGOs

UN draft on Iran 'Softened'

2006-03-29

Western powers softened a draft U.N. Security Council statement on Tuesday on reining in Iran's nuclear ambitions in hopes of reaching a deal with Russia and China before all their foreign ministers meet this week. Still, the new draft, obtained by Reuters, retains calls on Tehran to suspend uranium-enrichment efforts, a process that can produce fuel necessary for making a nuclear bomb. The text deletes language on several specific demands. Instead it refers only to the number of the resolution that contained them and was adopted by the International Atomic Energy Agency board in Vienna, the U.N. nuclear watchdog. Britain and France, authors of the draft backed by the United States, distributed the document, their third revision, to the full 15-nation U.N. Security Council for discussion on Wednesday, three weeks after talks began. The three Western nations hope to convince Russia and China to agree on the document, a day before foreign ministers of the five permanent members and Germany meet in Berlin on Thursday to map out strategy toward Iran. Ambassadors from the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China, permanent council members with veto power, met three times on Tuesday on the Iran research programs, which Tehran says are for peaceful purposes but the West believes are a cover for atomic-bomb making. U.S. Ambassador John Bolton and British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said there were still one or two issues outstanding. The main one was a provision that referred to weapons of mass destruction as a threat to international peace and security. Russia believes this could be a prelude to harsher punishment, diplomats said. Another unsolved issue, China said, was the how long the director of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei had to report to the council on whether Iran had complied with its demands. The original text said 14 days while the new text refers to 30 days. Russia had proposed until June. China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya told reporters the timeline had not been agreed yet.

Link

Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More