Africa Subsaharan |
Zimbabwe to block western efforts at UNSC |
2008-12-16 |
President Robert Mugabe's government on Monday vowed to thwart western efforts to put Zimbabwe on the UN Security Council agenda, saying it was not a threat to international security. The United States and Britain were expected to lobby the council to turn up the heat on Mugabe, amid mounting international pressure for him to step aside as his country caves in under an economic meltdown and cholera crisis. Information Minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu told the state-owned Herald newspaper it was "improper" for western countries to try and put Zimbabwe on the agenda. "You do not convene a UN Security Council meeting for a sovereign state without consulting that country," he was quoted as saying. "We are not a threat. If they insist, we will work hard to block it with the assistance of our friends." The 15-member Security Council was due Monday to hold a closed-door meeting, and Washington said last week it would pressure members to act against the veteran leader, whom it blames directly for Zimbabwe's woes. US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Washington was talking to Zimbabwe's neighbour South Africa and other security council members about how to "start a process that will bring an end to the tragedy that is unfolding in Zimbabwe." Several world leaders have called on Mugabe to leave office, including US President George W Bush, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. The security body has failed to act against Mugabe in the past amid splits between the western nations and Russia and China. |
Link |
Arabia |
UAE: Draft nuclear accord reached with US |
2008-12-16 |
(AKI) - The United Arab Emirates and the United States have completed negotiations on a draft agreement on nuclear energy. The UAE's state news agency WAM said on Monday that the so-called '123 Agreement' would allow for the transfer of nuclear-related components and materials between both countries. The '123 Agreement' refers to Section 123 of The United States Atomic Energy Act, entitled 'Cooperation with other nations'. "We are confident that the agreement highlights the transparency of the civilian nuclear energy programme the UAE is embarking on and should be lauded as the gold standard of nuclear cooperation agreements," said Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE's Ambassador to the US. "It is the view of the UAE government that the proposed UAE 123 agreement sets a new standard in ensuring the highest standards of safety, security and non-proliferation within the UAE program." However, some US lawmakers have voiced their concern about the UAE's alleged inaction in curbing Iran's nuclear plans and US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the agreement still needs Congressional approval. The UAE and Iran also have strong trade links. Iran has recently become its top trade partner with bilateral trade totalling 14 billion dollars. The US and other western powers suspect Iran may covertly be building atomic weapons. However, Iran has consistently claimed its uranium enrichment programme is entirely peaceful and aimed solely at civilian nuclear power, in line with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The UAE already signed a nuclear cooperation deal with France in January and it was later endorsed in March during a visit by French President Nicolas Sarkozy. French companies Total, Suez and Areva have expressed interest in the development of two nuclear reactors in the country. |
Link |
India-Pakistan |
No question of Pakistan being declared 'terrorist state', says US |
2008-12-14 |
The US State Department denied on Friday that there had been any 'talk of declaring Pakistan a terrorist state'. While welcoming the steps taken by Pakistan following the sanctioning of Jamaatud Dawa (JD), some other organisations and a number of individuals -- including Hafiz Muhammad Saeed -- State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that Pakistan took the step it did "because it saw it in its interest". He said, "As we have said many, many times over, the threat from violent extremists and terrorists in Pakistan is as much a threat to the Pakistani people and the Pakistani government as it is to anybody else. All that said, it's a welcome step that they took. This is a day-by-day process and is something that requires vigilance every single day in fighting terrorism." Asked if Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would be discussing the UN ban on JD in New York next week, McCormack said, "I'm sure that she will touch on the issues related to India and Pakistan." |
Link |
China-Japan-Koreas |
North Korea nuclear talks fail |
2008-12-12 |
![]() "We were not able to get an agreed verification protocol," US negotiator Christopher Hill said at the Beijing airport before leaving China, according to South Korea's Yonhap news agency. Yonhap also cited South Korean delegates as saying that the six nations involved in the talks - North and South Korea, host China, the United States, Japan and Russia - had failed to agree on a draft protocol for verifying its nuclear information. US Assistant Secretary of State Hill added that the six parties would continue to try to set North Korea's verification commitments in writing, according to Japan's Kyodo news agency. The chairman's statement said delegates had agreed to convene the next meeting as soon as possible, without giving further details. Having coaxed North Korea to partly disable its Yongbyon nuclear complex this year in a disarmament-for-aid deal, envoys from five states had been asking the wary and impoverished North to accept a protocol for checking its nuclear declaration. US President George W Bush, who gives way to President-elect Barack Obama in January, had hoped an agreement on verification would have opened the way to dismantling North Korea's nuclear arms capacity. The six-party talks, begun in 2003, took on fresh urgency after Pyongyang held its first nuclear test explosion in October 2006, but have made fitful progress. During his first term in office, Bush denounced North Korea as part of an "axis of evil", alongside Iran and Iraq, but later he strongly backed Hill's efforts to strike a disarmament deal with the North. North Korea has refused proposals to allow inspectors to take nuclear samples to test its declaration, said South Korea's envoy Kim Sook, Kyodo news agency reported. But analysts do not think North Korea, starved of energy and money, plans to quit the talks, at least for now. US terror list: US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack did not rule out putting North Korea back on a list of states accused of sponsoring terrorism. "I suppose these things are always possible," he told a news briefing. "...it's based on behaviour. And we'll see what behaviour North Korea engages in." |
Link |
Africa Subsaharan | ||
African Union rejects tougher steps against Mugabe | ||
2008-12-10 | ||
HARARE The African Union rejected tougher action against Zimbabwe on Tuesday and said only dialogue could solve the deepening crisis, while U.S. President George W. Bush joined calls for President Robert Mugabe to step down. "It is time for Robert Mugabe to go," Bush said in Washington. "Across the continent, African voices are bravely speaking out to say now is the time for him to step down." U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said countries in the region, notably South Africa, should do more to speed Mugabe's departure. "They have unused leverage, at this point, that they could bring to bear. And we would hope, that they, as well as others, would bring to bear whatever leverage, political leverage, that they might have to help the situation," he told reporters in Washington. But the African Union made clear it did not back calls for much tougher action. "Only dialogue between the Zimbabwean parties, supported by the AU and other regional actors, can restore peace and stability to that country," said Salva Rweyemamu, spokesman for AU chairman and Tanzanian President Jakaya Kikwete.
| ||
Link |
Caribbean-Latin America | |
Russian warship to cross Panama Canal | |
2008-12-04 | |
MOSCOW (AP) - A Russian warship will sail through the Panama Canal this week for the first time since World War II, the navy announced Wednesday, pushing ahead with a symbolic projection of Moscow's power in a traditional U.S. zone of influence. The destroyer Admiral Chabanenko will arrive Friday at a former U.S. naval base in Panama's Pacific port of Balboa for a six-day visit after carrying out joint maneuvers with the Venezuelan navy in the Caribbean Sea, navy spokesman Capt. Igor Dygalo said in a telephone interview. The Panama Canal has long been a symbol of U.S. clout in Latin America, and Dygalo said no Soviet or Russian military ship has sailed through it since World War II. The wartime alliance between the U.S. and the Soviet Union swiftly gave way to the mistrust, military buildups and proxy conflicts of the Cold War.
Monday's joint maneuvers with Venezuela, which brought the Admiral Chabanenko and the nuclear-powered missile cruiser Peter the Great across the Atlantic along with two support ships, were widely seen as a show of Kremlin anger over the U.S. use of warships to deliver aid to Georgia after its August war with Russia. Russian warships tailed U.S. ships in the Black Sea, where Russia borders Georgia, on that mission. The Russian squadron's voyage to Venezuela was Russia's first such deployment to the Western Hemisphere since the Cold War era, aimed to showcase the Kremlin's global reach and reassert its claim to great-power status. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is a staunch U.S. foe. The voyage coincided with a trip to Latin America late last month by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who visited four nations in what he acknowledged was an effort to raise Moscow's profile in a region he said it has long neglected. U.S. officials have mocked the Russian show of force, saying that the Russian navy is a shadow of Moscow's Soviet-era fleet and suggesting that the U.S. retains far more influence in the region than Russia. "Are they accompanied by tugboats this time?" U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack joked to reporters in Washington last week ahead of the Russian ships' arrival off Venezuela. Dygalo would not say where the Peter the Great, which led the Russian squadron, would be located while the destroyer visits the Panama base. | |
Link |
Syria-Lebanon-Iran | |||
US, IAEA chief clash over Syria | |||
2008-11-25 | |||
![]() Russia, China and developing nations also back the aid project, said diplomats.
A report circulated last week by ElBaradei confirmed that soil samples taken at the site of a building in Syria bombed last year by Israel revealed a significant number of uranium particles. The report also said that satellite imagery and other information appeared to bear out U.S. intelligence that the building was a nuclear reactor _ one Washington said was nearly completed and almost ready to produce plutonium, a fissile warhead component. Syria denies hiding nuclear activities. But the report strengthened both concerns that it might have something to conceal and arguments from the U.S. and its allies that Damascus should not be offered agency help in planning its civilian reactor.
Those concerns were voiced again Monday, according to diplomats inside the closed meeting of the IAEAs 35-nation board. U.S. delegate Geoff Pyatt was outspoken in opposition to the planned project and received backing from the European Union, France, Britain, Australia and Canada, the diplomats said. Some of the strongest objections came from Australia, said one the diplomats, citing that nations statement. We find it difficult to accept the agency embarking on such an all-encompassing and ill-defined nuclear power project at a time when Syria is evidently withholding cooperation from the agency ... a serious concern, said the statement. But ElBaradei disagreed, saying there was no legal basis to cancel or postpone the program.
ElBaradei cited Tehrans case to emphasize the difference between the two situations and to argue in favor of the Damascus project, diplomats said. Iran and other nonaligned nations also warned against withdrawing the project. Syria or any member state of the IAEA should benefit (from) technical cooperation without any discrimination, Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, Irans chief delegate to the IAEA, told The Associated Press. Separately, he accused those nations opposed to the Syrian project of poisoning the meetings atmosphere. And speaking for the nonaligned countries, Norma M. Goichochea, the chief Cuban delegate said technical aid to members should not be blocked, delayed or otherwise hindered for mere suspicion or unproven allegations. | |||
Link |
Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
Tukey, Iran sign natural gas accord |
2008-11-22 |
Ankara and Tehran signed an accord strengthening agreements on developing Iran's gas fields and transporting Iranian gas to Europe. With the agreement, Turkey secures the operation rights for three offshore gas fields in Iran's South Pars region, off the southern gulf port of Assaluyeh. Under the accord, Turkey will produce some 46 million cubic meters of gas per day and may use half of that amount itself. It is estimated that Turkey will spend $12 billion on developing the project, which envisages the joint construction of a 1,850-kilometer (1,200-mile) pipeline from Assaluyeh to the Bazargan border area with Turkey in northwestern Iran (Hurriyet Daily News, November 20). When asked to comment on the accord, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that the Iranian Government liked to sign such agreements but they did not really came to anything (www.state.gov, November 19). It seems that Turkey's natural gas accord with Iran is a sort of "mehter march" policy, which requires two steps forward and one step back until the final destination is reached. In contrast to McCormack's view, the agreement between the two countries reflects strategic thinking on Turkey's part before taking such controversial steps. The Iranian side was applying pressure on Turkey to sign the recent accord. In June Ahmed Noorani, Iran's economic and trade attaché in the Iranian Embassy in Ankara, said, "Iran is ready to sign the natural gas contract but Turkey wants to work on details." Noorani further urged Turkey to sign the contract; "because the South Pars gas drilling site has been given to Turkey without competitive bidding [although] several problems have occurred on the Iranian side. We are expecting to sign the final agreement" (See EDM, June 24). In October the Iran Daily reported that "Iran and Turkey have resolved problems on a planned investment in the South Pars gas field and they may sign a production accord as early as November" (Iran Daily, October 26). The question is, would Turkey jeopardize its relations with the United States by bowing to Iranian pressure to initiate such project? If not, why then is Turkey maneuvering to sign these accords with Iran? It is in the interest of Turkey to build a pipeline from Iran to Europe, but Turkish policy-makers know that the U.S is opposed to such a project and Ankara would not want to put its relations with the United States at risk for the Iranian gas pipeline. The Turkish motivation for signing the accords might have two aims. |
Link |
Africa North |
US confirms 1st ambassador to Libya in 36 years |
2008-11-22 |
The Senate confirmed the nomination of career diplomat Gene Cretz as the first U.S. ambassador to Libya in 36 years, the State Department said Friday. Cretz's confirmation by the Senate comes after the United States and Libya cleared the last hurdle to a full normalization of ties with Tripoli in the last few weeks compensating U.S. victims of terrorist attacks in the 1980s. "Done deal. Confirmed," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters, adding that the confirmation occurred late Thursday. "We're very pleased." Cretz's appointment by U.S. President George W. Bush had been held up over the compensation issue. The last U.S. ambassador left Tripoli on November 7, 1972 "because of Libya's support for international terrorism and its subversion of moderate Arab and African governments," the State Department said. |
Link |
Africa Horn |
Pentagon says force not the answer to surge in piracy. |
2008-11-21 |
The Pentagon said Wednesday a military approach was not the answer to a surge of piracy off the Horn of Africa and suggested that shipping companies do more on their own to protect their vessels. "You could have all the navies in the world having all their ships out there, you know, it's not going to ever solve this problem," said Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary. "It requires a holistic approach from the international community at sea, ashore, with governance, with economic development," he told reporters. This isn't the first time something like this has ever happened. We've got virtually all the navies in the world on the scene, and their actions are apparently absolutely uncoordinated. We've got a restricted area for ship movements, which is why the pirates are having a heyday. I'm not a navy guy, know nothing about sea tactics, but I suspect the "Pentagon" spokesman who put this out is an Army guy, too. This seems like an occasion for forming convoys at either end of the Gulf and escorting them with warships. The pirates show up, they become a hole in the water. Morrell said at least 18 ships are currently being held for ransom by Somali pirates, along with 330 mariners taken hostage. This year there have been 95 attempted ship seizures by pirates in the Gulf of Aden, 39 of them successful, he said. Not only has the incidence of piracy increased, but pirates are going farther out in the high seas. A US-bound Saudi supertanker carrying two million barrels of crude oil worth 100 million dollars was captured Sunday by pirates some 450 miles off the Kenyan coast. "Trust me, this subject is being dealt with at the highest levels of this government," Morrell said. "It is a real concern. And we are constantly evaluating what the best approach is." The live fire exercise! Put to sea and go KILL THEM! "I'm just trying to get you to think beyond the notion of, 'The answer is strictly kinetics. We've got to board more ships. We've got to fire on more pirates.'" The White House said President George W. Bush had been briefed about the seizure of the Saudi supertanker. "Ensuring the safety and well being of the crew is of paramount importance in preventing or dealing with issues of piracy," said spokeswoman Dana Perino. "And the goal would be to try to help get this ship to safety, secure the crew, and then work with our international partners to try to alleviate the piracy problem, full stop," she told reporters. Perino said Washington was "working with other members of the Security Council right now" to work out how "to more effectively fight against piracy." Double Yawn, no, triple yawn. "It's a very complicated issue. There's a lot of international laws that factor into these efforts," she said. Very much the lawyer answer. Morrell urged that the UN Security Council extend a resolution that authorizes anti-piracy activities. But he said commercial shipping companies also should stick to safer sea lanes away from shore and invest in protective measures, including technical devices and armed guards. You mean like hire their own navies. "The shipping companies, also have an obligation to secure their ships to prevent incidents such that we've been seeing at alarming rates over the past several months," he said. The State Department convened a high level group of officials to examine the issue, but spokesman Sean McCormack called it "an international problem" that the United States was not going to solve alone. Of course the Department of State would want to study it at length, consult with the UN, visit other countries, and shy away from a military role at all costs. |
Link |
Afghanistan | ||
US caught in awkward spot by Karzai's offer | ||
2008-11-18 | ||
![]()
US officials spoke cautiously when asked about a possible negotiation with one of the most wanted men in the world, a day after Afghan President Hamid Karzai's offer of reconciliation. Backing Karzai's proposal would mark an about-face for President George W. Bush's administration, with the Pentagon last month ruling out any reconciliation with a man who has "the blood of thousands of Americans on his hands." But explicitly rejecting such a move would put the US government at odds with one of its staunch allies, Karzai, at a moment when Afghanistan faces mounting violence. "We support Hamid Karzai," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, when asked if the administration endorsed Karzai's offer. "What we have seen from the Taliban, however, and from Mullah Omar -- who we haven't heard from in some time -- is an unwillingness to renounce violence." Karzai said on Sunday he would go to "any length" to protect Omar if the Taliban leader agreed to peace talks, and was willing to risk a rift with his international partners. The Afghan president has for years pushed for peace talks with the Taliban as a way out of a deadly insurgency in which foreign militants, including those from Al-Qaeda, are said to be playing a part. However he has always insisted that his government would only consider talks with "Afghan Taliban" who do not have ties with Al-Qaeda and agree to lay down their weapons and accept the post-Taliban constitution. Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, sidestepped the question of Omar but said that the time would come to hold talks with elements of the Taliban who were willing to reconcile. But the time was not yet right, he said.
At the White House, Perino said US officials "are skeptical about what the Taliban's ultimate intentions are." "But we recognize that, at some point, there might be some Taliban that are willing to reconcile and to renounce violence and to be productive members of the Afghanistan society." State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said "it's hard to imagine" any circumstances under which US forces would offer safe passage to senior Taliban leaders. The Afghan president told reporters he would offer protection to the Taliban leader even if it meant defying Afghanistan's international partners, who could remove him from his job or leave the country in disagreement. "If I hear from him that he is willing to come to Afghanistan or to negotiate for peace ... I, as the president of Afghanistan, will go to any length to provide protection," Karzai said. "If I say I want protection for Mullah Omar, the international community has two choices -- remove me or leave if they disagree," he said. The Taliban, driven from government in a US-led invasion for sheltering Al-Qaeda after the September 2001 attacks, have said they would only agree to negotiations if international troops helping the government pull out. But Karzai reiterated Sunday that his government would accept no preconditions from the group. Saudi Arabia confirmed last month that it had been sponsoring talks between the Afghan government and representatives of the Taliban at the request of Karzai in a bid to restore stability but indicated further talks may be difficult. Omar, who has a 10-million-dollar bounty on his head, headed the 1996-2001 Taliban regime that sheltered Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden and his followers. | ||
Link |
Africa North |
US receives $1.5b in compensation from Libya |
2008-11-01 |
The United States said Friday it has received $1.5 billion from Libya, the entire sum required to compensate the families of victims of terrorist attacks. "The Bush administration will now move expeditiously to arrange for distribution of these funds," a statement by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said. "Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice certified to Congress that the United States has received $1.5 billion pursuant to the U.S.-Libya Claims Settlement Agreement," McCormack said. The sum is to compensate U.S. and other families for the 1988 bombing of a Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people, and for U.S. families of a Berlin disco bombing that killed two Americans and hurt 50 others. Settling the issue of terrorism claims is a key factor in improving ties between the two former foes, which first began warming after Libya gave up its weapons of mass destruction program in 2003. On August 14, Libya and the United States signed the compensation deal in Tripoli for victims of Libyan attacks and Libyan victims of U.S. reprisals, paving the way for full normalization of ties between the two countries. Under the deal, a U.S.-Libya fund of $1.8 billion was set up, with 1.5 billion dollars for Americans and 300 million dollars for Libyans. State Department officials said the families of non-American victims of the Pan Am bombing are covered by the 1.5 billion dollars. The deal prompted a visit to Tripoli in September by Rice, who became the first U.S. secretary of state to visit Libya in more than 50 years. Other diplomatic steps are expected to follow. Libya made a substantial payment earlier this month, but U.S. officials said then that they could not start making payments until they had received the remaining agreed amount. |
Link |