Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia | |
Cold hot spot. The West is trying to oust Russia from the Arctic | |
2024-04-01 | |
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Andrey Musalov [REGNUM] Against the background of a special military operation in Ukraine, many other aspects of the confrontation between Russia and the countries of the collective West remained in the shadows. Meanwhile, one of them has long been the struggle for the Arctic region. ![]() In the 90s, the vacuum that arose in the former Soviet Arctic was quickly filled by numerous countries of the so-called “Arctic Club”: the USA, Canada, Denmark, Norway, etc. Representatives of these countries adhere to the point of view that Russia does not have the right to control its territories of the Arctic and Siberia alone, and propose dividing these riches “fairly.” The reason is obvious: over the past decades, large deposits of natural resources have been discovered in the Arctic region. According to the US Geological Survey, up to 20% of the world's hydrocarbon reserves are located in the Arctic Ocean: potential gas reserves are estimated at 47.3 trillion cubic meters. m, gas condensate - 44 billion barrels, oil - 90 billion barrels. These are decisive factors for a possible geostrategic confrontation between countries laying claim to the Arctic region. LOST POSSESSIONS For a long time, the polar possessions of the USSR were determined by the sectoral principle of dividing the Arctic. In the west, the maritime border of the sector ran from the northern point of the Russian-Norwegian border on the Rybachy Peninsula - a triangulation mark on Cape Kekursky to the North Pole. In the east - from the strait that separated the Soviet Ratmanov Island from the American Kruzenshtern, to the North Pole. This milestone was secured by a resolution of the Presidium of the USSR Central Executive Committee of 1926. Norway, Denmark, Canada and the USA had their own sectors, but the Soviet one was the largest. The situation changed in 1997. The government of Boris Yeltsin ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982, according to which the maritime economic boundaries of states are limited to a 200-mile coastal zone without recognizing priority over the remaining territories of the Arctic sector, which previously belonged to the polar possessions of the USSR. As a result, our country lost the right to own the “Russian Arctic triangle”. Vast areas beyond 200 miles from the coast were declared zones of free navigation, to which Russia no longer had the right to lay claim, as well as to the natural resources located there. It is noteworthy that a number of countries either refused to ratify the Convention on the Law of the Sea or did not sign it at all. First of all, we are talking about the United States, which not only did not sign the document, but also declared that the continental shelf is a continuation of the country’s land territory. Accordingly, they did not recognize waters beyond the 200-mile zone as areas of free navigation. This applied to the Atlantic, Pacific and, of course, the Arctic, where the United States claims an area of 1 million square meters of the Bering Sea. As a result, a number of other countries began to consider the continental shelf as an extension of their lands under water. WHOSE RIDGE? In 2001, Russia submitted an application to the UN to expand its Arctic economic zone on the basis that the Lomonosov Ridge is a continuation of the Russian continental shelf and a direct continuation of the Eurasian continent, and therefore is Russian territory. The Lomonosov Ridge stretches 1,800 kilometers across the entire center of the Arctic Ocean - from the Russian-owned New Siberian Islands to the Canadian Ellesmere Island. Satisfaction of the application would allow Russia to justify its rights to more than 1.2 million square meters. km of ocean shelf - from Chukotka to the Kola Peninsula. The Arctic shelf is rich in oil, gas and other mineral reserves. According to some estimates, from 83 to 110 billion tons of hydrocarbons in oil equivalent are concentrated here (16 billion tons of oil and more than 82 trillion cubic meters of gas). There are also deposits of tin, nickel, lead, manganese, gold, platinum and other valuable metals on the shelf. As ice melts due to global warming, supplies become more accessible every year. It is not surprising that in addition to Russia, Canada, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark are also laying claim to this tidbit of the Arctic. At the same time, most of the countries participating in the Arctic process have territorial claims against Russia. The United States, for example, lays claim to Russia's Wrangel Islands, arguing that they are an extension of the Alaskan continental shelf. In 2002, the UN Commission rejected Russia's application "for lack of evidence." It was noted that the data contained in it requires clarification. The commission recommended that the Russian side conduct more detailed studies. To confirm that the underwater Lomonosov and Mendeleev ridges are a continuation of the Siberian continental platform, a Russian deep-sea research expedition led by oceanographer and polar explorer Artur Chilingarov set off for the Arctic in 2007. On August 2, the expedition made the first ever dive of manned vehicles onto the ocean floor near the North Pole. At the same time, the bathyscaphe "Mir-1" plunged to a depth of 4261 meters, "Mir-2" - to 4302 meters. During the dive, scientists collected samples of bottom sediments and rocks, and also installed a Russian flag made of titanium on the ocean floor, and with it a capsule with a message to future generations. Based on a study of data collected by the Arctic-2007 expedition, Russian scientists confirmed that the Lomonosov Ridge is a continuation of the Siberian continental plate. As one might expect, politicians in competing states reacted with irritation to Russian research. US State Department spokesman Tom Casey said that it does not matter to him “what the Russians left on the ocean floor - a flag or a metal plate.” According to him, Russia's actions had no legal basis. In turn, Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay said that the Russian deep-sea expedition was nothing more than a show, and only in the Middle Ages it was possible to claim rights to the occupied territory after planting the flag. Other countries in the Arctic zone, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, expressed solidarity with the position of the United States and Canada. In response, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that the Russian expedition was carried out in accordance with international maritime law, and its goal - to determine the ownership of the continental shelf - was announced in advance. Commenting on Mackay's statement, the minister noted: “When explorers reach undiscovered territory, they leave flags behind. This is exactly what the Americans did on the Moon." In general, Russia’s desire to solve the problem of the Arctic shelf using evidence-based scientific methods has brought results. In 2014, the UN Commission partially satisfied the Russian application, recognizing the section of the continental shelf in the Sea of Okhotsk as part of the territory of the Russian Federation. We are talking about an area of over 50 thousand square meters. km, which is a continuation of the Siberian continental platform. In response to this, the then Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper said: The North Pole is on primordially Canadian territory, since the Lomonosov Ridge does not come from the Russian shelf, but is an underwater continuation of the northern Canadian Ellesmere Island. Harper was supported by Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq, the first Eskimo woman in the Canadian cabinet. In one of her speeches, she categorically stated: “At the North Pole we define Canada’s last border!” CONFRONTATION AMONG THE ICE Throughout the last decade, despite the desire of the Russian side for a constructive resolution of disputes, some of the states of the “Arctic Club” have been straining relations with Russia. At first, it was about one-time demonstrative actions of non-governmental organizations, such as provocations by Greenpeace activists (an organization recognized as undesirable in the Russian Federation) at the Russian Prirazlomnaya platform. But soon such actions became systemic and reached the state level. Norway has been more active than others, whose coast guard has repeatedly detained and inspected Russian fishing vessels in areas of the Barents Sea, which over the last century were considered joint fishing areas. More than once Russian fishermen were arrested and transported to Norwegian ports. In response to the activity of the states of the collective West in the Arctic, Russia began to strengthen its presence in the region. The Ministry of Defense first announced the need to build up military potential on the Northern Sea Route in March 2011. At the same time, the Russian Security Council adopted the “Fundamentals of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the Arctic for the period until 2020 and beyond.” In December 2014, specifically to protect Russia’s strategic and economic interests in the Arctic, the Northern Fleet Joint Strategic Command (USC) was formed with headquarters in Severomorsk. Its main task is to protect Russia’s economic interests in the Arctic region, from Murmansk to Anadyr. The unified command includes the surface and submarine forces of the Northern Fleet, naval aviation, coastal troops and air defense. In the same year, airfields in Tiksi, Naryan-Mar, Nagurskoye, Anadyr, Rogachevo and other cities were quickly reconstructed. The next step was the creation in 2015 of six military bases, of which the most remote were “Northern Clover” on Kotelny Island (in the center of the Northern Sea Route) and “Arctic Trefoil” on the island of Alexandra Land. These are closed-cycle military camps with a power plant, boiler room and other life support systems. As troops build up, the air defense of the area is also strengthened. The Arctic air defense units are represented today by the 45th Air Force and Air Defense Army, which includes a powerful formation - the 1st Air Defense Division. Also in 2015, the formation of motorized rifle Arctic brigades began to operate in the Far North. The first formation to operate in the Arctic was to be formed on the basis of the 200th motorized rifle brigade, which is stationed in Pechenga. In developing the concept of protecting Russia’s interests in the Arctic region, on March 12, 2020, the State Duma in the first reading adopted the bill “On state support for business activities in the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation.” The document defines the legal regime according to which business activities should be conducted in the Arctic zone, and also spells out state support measures that will be applied to areas of the Russian Arctic shelf that will be determined by the Cabinet of Ministers. Of course, the increase in Russia’s presence in the Arctic region did not go unnoticed by the countries of the collective West. In the American “Strategy for Cooperation on Naval Forces of the 21st Century,” a document that is a conceptual plan for the development of the US Navy, the situation in the Arctic is included in the list of “challenges of a new era.” The US military regularly conducts exercises in the region, often jointly with other members of the North Atlantic Alliance. In mid-February 2020, the head of the Northern Command of the US Armed Forces, Terrence O'Shaughnessy, said that the United States fears the expansion of influence in the Arctic by Russia and China, which intend to “exploit the economic potential” of the region. The Ice Exercise (IceX), a biannual exercise, responded to concerns. As part of the exercises in the Alaska region, the American command demonstrates to Russia and China the operational readiness of the United States and allied countries to operate in the Arctic. At the same time, the US military is creating a Seadragon camp on the ice fields of the Beaufort Sea, and Los Angeles-class submarines of the US Navy are practicing surfacing with breaking through the ice and a subsequent training attack. The last Ice X exercise to date took place on March 8, 2024. FROM WORDS TO DEEDS With the start of the Northern Military District in Ukraine, members of the Arctic Council - the USA, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Finland and Sweden - declared a boycott of Russia. They created the “7+1” format and hold meetings without the participation of Moscow, ignoring its opinion on all issues. At the same time, State Department representative Derek Chollet said that 70% of problems in the Arctic can be solved without the participation of the Russian Federation. The most striking example of the growth of confrontation in the Arctic was the actual blockade in the spring-summer of 2022 of the Russian village of Barentsburg, located on the Spitsbergen archipelago. Then, as part of anti-Russian sanctions, the Norwegian authorities rejected Russia’s application to allow cargo for our citizens to pass through the Storskog checkpoint, the only checkpoint on the Russian-Norwegian border. As a result, 450 miners from the Arktikugol trust and about 50 employees of travel companies were on the verge of starvation. The validity of the Treaty of Paris, signed in 1920, was called into question. According to the document, Norwegian sovereignty was established over the archipelago, but the Soviet Union, and then its successor Russia, could use its natural resources. In response, Russia threatened to denounce the agreement between the Russian Federation and Norway on the delimitation of maritime spaces and cooperation in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean. This had an effect: in order to circumvent its own sanctions, Norway undertook to deliver Russian cargo to Spitsbergen using its own ships. It is difficult to say what scenario the further confrontation in the Arctic will follow. It is important to note that only Russia has a developed icebreaker fleet and large-scale military infrastructure in the region. However, it is obvious that further global warming, the discovery of large mineral deposits in the region and the growing need to use the Northern Sea Route will strengthen the desire of the collective Western countries to push Russia out of the polar regions. And at any cost.
| |
Link |
China-Japan-Koreas |
UN: US ship carrying aid arrives in North Korea |
2008-06-30 |
![]() The U.S. aid was not directly related to the ongoing nuclear talks between Washington and Pyongyang, and U.S. officials have repeatedly claimed they do not use food for diplomatic coercion. But the shipment arrived just days after the North delivered a long-delayed atomic declaration and blew up the cooling tower at its main reactor site, in a sign of its commitment not to make more plutonium for bombs. In exchange, Washington lifted some economic sanctions against the North and said it would remove the country from a U.S. State Department list of state sponsors of terrorism. The North's government agreed to the new aid program Friday, the WFP said, the same day Pyongyang blew up the reactor tower following the U.S. concessions. State Department spokesman Tom Casey told reporters Monday that there was 'zero linkage' between progress on nuclear talks and the timing of the food delivery. He said the U.S. has spent months working with the World Food Program on making sure the delivery of the food could be properly monitored. 'We do not link food assistance, whether that's to North Korea or Zimbabwe or any other country, to political considerations. We do that based on humanitarian concerns,' Casey said. The American food supplies will help the WFP expand its operations to feed more than 5 million people, up from the current 1.2 million North Koreans helped by outside handouts, the organization said in a statement. American relief groups will distribute 100,000 tons of the food in two northwestern provinces, and the WFP the rest. The U.S. is the largest donor to the WFP's current aid program in North Korea, having pledged $38.9 million. The increased aid comes as the WFP and other groups have issued increasingly dire warnings about the food situation in the North. The country's regular annual shortages were expected to worsen this year because of floods last summer that decimated the North's agricultural heartland. The U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization has said North Korea's cereal crop will fall more than 1.5 million tons short this year, the largest food deficit since 2001. Prices at the country's limited marketswhere North Koreans who can afford it shop when public rations fall shorthave skyrocketed due to shortages. U.N. agencies are conducting a food survey expected to be complete mid-July to determine where to distribute the aid, but the WFP said preliminary reports 'indicate a high level of food insecurity.' Jean-Pierre de Margerie, North Korea country director for the WFP, said observers had not yet seen evidence of a renewed famine. The North's food shortages in the 1990safter it lost Soviet aid and poor harvests due to natural disasters and mismanaged farmingare believed to have killed as many as 2 million people. 'Even if the situation is not dramatic right now, it could continue to deteriorate in the months to come so that's why we need to address the situation as quickly as possible,' he told The Associated Press from Pyongyang, the North Korean capital. The WFP hopes to start distributing the U.S.-provided food within two weeks, de Margerie said. The North has long bristled at the monitoring requirements of international donors to make sure that the food reaches the needy. In 2005, the government sharply scaled back what foreign aid it would allow and requested only development assistance, saying there was no longer an emergency situation. The new aid agreement marks a return by the WFP to its earlier levels of assistance, but also with greater access to parts of the country where the agency has not previously worked, de Margerie said. North Korea also has allowed the WFP to send some 50 more international workers to the country for monitoring, its largest staff presence since starting operations there in 1996. |
Link |
Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
Hezbollah Supporters Attack Motorcade of US Envoy in Lebanon |
2008-06-19 |
Security officials in Lebanon say supporters of the militant group Hezbollah have attacked a U.S. envoy's motorcade with stones to protest her visit to southern Lebanon. U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey says a Lebanese security guard was slightly wounded in the attack against U.S. envoy Michele Sison Wednesday in Nabatiyeh. Officials and witnesses say at least 100 Hezbollah supporters also surrounded the house of local official Abdullah Bitar as he met with Sison, throwing stones and shouting anti-U.S. slogans. |
Link |
Africa Subsaharan |
Mugabe blames West for Zimbabwe's economic problems |
2008-06-04 |
Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe defended land policies blamed for devastating his country's agricultural sector, asserting at a U.N. food summit Tuesday that the West was trying to cripple the nation's economy. Mugabe's presence at a summit addressing high global food prices sparked protests from some world leaders. He is blamed for the economic collapse of a country once considered a regional breadbasket and Zimbabweans increasingly are unable to afford food and other essentials. Zimbabwe is not subject to broad sanctions affecting ordinary citizens. Western sanctions are targeted instead at the president and several dozen close associates. Mugabe nonetheless contended that his policies of redistributing land taken from large farmholders were "warmly welcomed by the vast majority of our people" and the sanctions aim to "cripple Zimbabwe's economy and thereby effect illegal regime change in our country." "The United Kingdom has mobilized her friends and allies in Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand to impose illegal economic sanctions against Zimbabwe," he said. U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey criticized Mugabe's attendance at the summit, saying his "misrule" serves as "an example of what not to do in terms of managing agricultural and food policy." Australia's foreign minister decried Mugabe's participation as "obscene". The Dutch ministry for overseas development pledged to ignore the ruler. |
Link |
Africa Subsaharan |
Mugabe blames West for Zimbabwe's food shortages |
2008-06-03 |
![]() Mugabe spoke to world leaders at a U.N. summit on the global food crisis against a backdrop of sharp criticism over his participation. Some delegations, including those of the United States, Britain and the Netherlands, said they wouldn't talk to Mugabe at the three-day summit at the Rome-based U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. Once hailed as a hero of African liberation, Mugabe has come to be widely reviled for presiding over the collapse of Africa's one-time bread basket into a nation where millions go hungry. His government is accused of cracking down on political opposition ahead of a presidential runoff later this month that threatens to unseat him after 28 years in power. And on Tuesday, the aid group Care International announced that it had been ordered to suspend its operations in Zimbabwe after the government accused it of campaigning for the opposition. The group, which provides aid to about 500,000 Zimbabweans, denies that it encourages or tolerates political activity by staff. But at the conference, Mugabe struck a defiant toneaccusing Western powers of maneuvering to bring about "regime change" in Zimbabwe. He contended that while land reform was "warmly welcomed" by most of his people, it has "elicited wrath from our former colonial masters." "The United Kingdom has mobilized her friends and allies in Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand to impose illegal economic sanctions against Zimbabwe," he said. Although Mugabe pins much of his nation's plight on the sanctions, the measures are narrowly targeted at him and his allies. Humanitarian aid, with the Europeans the biggest donors, continues to flow, but is channeled through aid groups instead of the government. "I find it very cynical that someone who has driven people in his country into hunger and the country into ruin dares to show up at such a conference," German Development Minister Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, who is representing her country at the meeting, said on ZDF television Tuesday. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said Mugabe's "misrule" serves as "an example of what not to do in terms of managing agricultural and food policy." Mugabe was staying at a posh hotel near the top of Rome's Via Veneto, an elegant street lined with chic cafes. The summit, which opened Tuesday, is hoping to solve the short-term emergency of hunger caused by soaring prices, and to help poor countries grow enough food to feed their own. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called on nations to minimize export restrictions and import tariffs to help the poor cope with dramatically escalating food prices. He said world food production must rise by 50 percent by 2030 to meet increasing demand. High fuel costs, speculation, increased demand for meat and dairy products in emerging nations like India and China, and the conversion of crops into biofuel have been blamed for skyrocketing food prices. The soaring prices have widened hunger and sparked riots and protests in several countries in Africa and Asia. "Some countries have taken action by limiting exports or by imposing price controls," Ban said. "They only distort markets and force prices even higher." U.N. officials said on Monday that they also intend to request that the United States and other nations phase out subsidies for food-based biofuels, including ethanol. But in his speech Tuesday, Ban only called for "a greater degree of international consensus on biofuels." That, however, could be difficult: Participants do not even agree on how much a role biofuels play in driving up prices. "It offends me to see fingers pointed against clean energy from biofuels, fingers soiled with oil and coal," said Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, whose country's sugar cane has long been used to produce ethanol. He insisted that biofuels "are not the villain menacing food security in poor countries." Silva was alluding to wealthy nation's own farm subsidiaries as a key culprit for food insecurity. U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer told reporters he was "surprised" by Silva's comments. Schafer recently criticized Congress for approving a five-year farm bill generously subsidizing U.S. farmers at a time when much of the world is suffering from high food prices. A previous summit pledge to halve world hunger by 2015 has proven elusive. FAO director-general Jacques Diouf told delegates that at the current rate the target "would not be reached in 2015 but in 2150." The summit also saw Iran's President Mahmoud Ahamadinejad lash out at the West for allegedly profiting from the hikes. Some protesters climbed up the lower tier of the Colosseum and sent down leaflets criticizing the Iranian leader, who repeated calls for the disappearance of Israel. |
Link |
Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
Iran's foreign minister slams US foreign policy |
2008-05-31 |
Iran's foreign minister said Friday that the United States should conduct a "serious review" of its foreign policy after the presidential election a signal that Iran is leaving open the possibility of improved relations with Washington. A serious review that will take several months. Followed by Iran playing footsie with it for another year. And who cares after that. Looks like they are planning on Barack winning, and it looks like they are planning on playing him for a chump. I wonder why. The comments by Manouchehr Mottaki in an interview with The Associated Press extended no clear offer for greater dialogue and included numerous jabs about the U.S. role in the Middle East and its global standing. But the undertones of statements are often just as relevant in the nearly three-decade diplomatic freeze between the two nations. Mottaki's suggestion that the November election could signal a new course for U.S. views on the Middle East could also hint that Tehran may be ready to soften its stance. "We don't want to make a problem for the American presidential candidates, but this election is among a limited number of American presidential elections where foreign policy plays a key role," Mottaki said a day after a U.N. conference on Iraqi reconstruction held outside Stockholm. "The American people need change," he added. Mottaki did not go deeper into Iran's impressions of the remaining candidates seeking the White House. But Barack Obama has expressed a willingness to open new channels with Iran a position that has drawn fire from Republican John McCain and Obama's Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton. Speaking through an interpreter at the Iranian Embassy in Stockholm, Mottaki said Iran was less concerned with "parties and people" than the course of U.S. policies after the election. "The United States of America needs a serious review of its foreign policy toward the Middle East," he said. "These policies in ... Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine and generally speaking the Middle East are mistaken policies." The estrangement between Washington and Tehran stretch back to the seizure of the U.S. Embassy shortly after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. A slight thaw began following the 1997 election of reformist President Mohammad Khatami, who opened the door to greater cultural exchanges and other contacts. But opportunities for greater breakthroughs were dashed after President Bush in 2002 included Iran as an "axis of evil" along with Iraq and North Korea. The 2005 election of hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad further widened the gulf with his biting rhetoric that included vows to wipe out Israel. Recently, however, chances for new outreach appear to be gaining ground in Iran which holds presidential elections next year. On Wednesday, Iran's parliament selected conservative Ali Larijani as speaker, boosting one of Ahmadinejad's likely challengers. Larijani, the nation's former top nuclear negotiator, is perceived as a more moderate leader who could seek less confrontation with the West. But few expect any rapid steps to smooth relations between Washington and Tehran whose interests and ambitions collide on many levels. Washington has led the pressure on Iran over its nuclear program which the West and others worry could be used to make atomic weapons. Iran says it only seeks power-generating reactors. The United States' closest Sunni Arab allies, including Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, also worry about the expanding influence of Shiite Iran in neighboring Iraq. Washington, meanwhile, accuses Iran of backing Shiite militias in Iraq. But Iraq also has opened some room for contact. U.S. and Iranian envoys have held three rounds of talks since last year on efforts to stabilize the country. Mottaki said the next resident of the White House must break with "the mistaken and failed policies" of the Bush administration or risk a further decline of the United States' standing in the Middle East. American politicians, he said, are spending taxpayer money to "buy the hatred of other people in other parts of the world." In Washington, State Department spokesman Tom Casey was dismissive after a reporter described Mottaki's comments. "Gee, an Iranian foreign minister criticizing U.S. policy. There's a real man bites dog story for you, huh?" he said. Casey added that the "Iranian government is pursuing policies that are inimical to the interests of the Iranian people" and isolating the country from the international community by the standoff over its nuclear program. "I would also hope that those in the Iranian government who might wish to have a more responsible leadership might also turn that mirror back up to him to take a very hard look at the unproductive, unhelpful and destabilizing policies that Iran is pursuing," he said. On Thursday, Mottaki was among delegates from more than 90 countries and organizations who gathered to review security and economic progress in Iraq. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Mottaki ignored each other at the meeting. Rice was seen on live television snickering as Mottaki told delegates that the "the occupiers of Iraq" the United States were pursuing "mistaken policies" that are responsible for violence there. |
Link |
-Short Attention Span Theater- |
Amnesia International condemns US, China in report |
2008-05-30 |
I guess AI thinks they have a captive audience in China now, too. I suspect this will continue until after the Olympics are over. The United States is shirking its duty to provide the world with moral leadership and China is letting its business interests trump human rights concerns in Myanmar and Sudan, a human rights group said Wednesday. Amnesty International's annual report on the state of the world's human rights accused the U.S. of failing to provide a moral compass for its international peers, a long-standing complaint the London-based group has against the North American superpower. This year it also criticized the U.S. for supporting Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf last November when he imposed a state of emergency, clamped down on the media and sacked judges. "As the world's most powerful state, the USA sets the standard for government behavior globally," the report said. It charged that the U.S. "had distinguished itself in recent years through its defiance of international law." As in the past, the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay came in for criticism. Irene Khan, Amnesty's secretary-general, appealed for the American president elected in November to announce the jail's closure on Dec. 10, 2008, the 60th anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights. State Department spokesman Tom Casey said the U.S. remains at the forefront of promoting human rights and has made extensive efforts to transfer detainees from Guantanamo Bay to their home countries, having done so in several hundred cases already. But more than 100 countries have refused to take back certain detainees, Casey said. "Many countries that we would want to transfer people back to, I think if you asked an organization like Amnesty International whether they want us to transfer them back to those countries, would have some serious concerns about that," he said. Casey said there is no perfect solution, but said those who think closing Guantanamo Bay is the answer should work with the U.S. to resolve these problems. Emerging power China was also criticized. The report said China had continued shipping weapons to Sudan in defiance of a U.N. arms embargo and traded with abusive governments like Myanmar and Zimbabwe. It said that China's media censorship remains in place and that the government continues to persecute rights activists. The report also accused China of expanding its "re-education through labor" program, which allows the government to arrest people and sentence them to a manual labor without trial. But Amnesty said it detected a shift in China's position: In 2007, China persuaded the Sudanese government to allow U.N. peacekeepers into the Darfur region and pressured Myanmar to accept the visit of a U.N. special envoy. Khan told The Associated Press that it was much easier to grapple with human rights problems when the West and China worked together. "China has the leverage to work with certain governments," she said ahead of the report's release. But she said China needed to use that leverage responsibly. "China is clearly a global power. With that comes global responsibility for human rights. It needs to recognize that economic growth is not enough," Khan said. The Chinese Embassy in London referred a query about the report to Beijing officials. A woman who answered the phone at the Foreign Ministry in Beijing said the ministry would look into the report. She refused to comment further or to give her name or position. China has rejected previous such reports. It says its human rights record has improved in recent years. Amnesty International said people are still tortured or ill-treated in at least 81 countries, face unfair trials in at least 54 and are denied free speech in at least 77. But the report also highlighted an increase in mass demonstrations around the world, citing that as a positive sign of a growing willingness by people to fight for their rights. "Black-suited lawyers in Pakistan, saffron-robed monks in Myanmar, 43.7 million individuals standing up on Oct. 17, 2007, to demand action against poverty, all were vibrant reminders last year of a global citizenry determined to stand up for human rights and hold their leaders to account," it said. |
Link |
Syria-Lebanon-Iran | |
US says will speed up military help to Lebanon | |
2008-05-15 | |
![]()
Casey said there were no current plans for new assistance for Lebanon's military. "There is no new aid, or no new aid program for the Lebanese military. What we have is an ongoing program," Casey told reporters. Since mid-2006, the United States has given Lebanon about $1.3 billion in assistance, of which State Department officials said about $400 million was for military aid. "We have an ongoing military assistance program for Lebanon and that is something that has been active over the past couple of years and has been designed to help the Lebanese military to provide security for the entirety of the country," said Casey. "We intend to give them the kind of help they need to carry out their mission in support of the Lebanese people," he added. | |
Link |
India-Pakistan |
State Department Asks Congress To Keep Quiet About Details of US-India Nuclear Deal |
2008-05-10 |
Washington's civil nuclear deal with India is in such desperate straits that the State Department has imposed unusually strict conditions on the answers it provided to questions posed by members of Congress: Keep them secret. The State Department made the request, even though the answers are not classified, because officials fear that public disclosure would torpedo the deal, sources said. The agreement would give New Delhi access to U.S. nuclear technology for the first time since it conducted a nuclear test in 1974, but leftist parties in the coalition government remain skeptical and view it as a possible infringement on India's sovereignty. Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), the late chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, agreed to the request in February, and the current chairman, Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.), has abided by that commitment, though Berman is not considered a strong supporter of the deal. A group of prominent nonproliferation experts has decried the "virtual 'gag' order," but thus far, the answers have not leaked, in part because only a handful of congressional officials have been able to read them. "The administration's unwillingness to make their answers more widely available suggests they have something to hide from either U.S. or Indian legislators," said Daryl Kimball, director of the Arms Control Association. President Bush's agreement with India, considered a key part of the administration's foreign policy legacy, is designed to solidify Washington's relationship with a fast-emerging economic power. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed to the pact in July 2005, but it has faced many hurdles. If Congress gives the deal final approval, India will be able to engage in civil nuclear trade with the United States, even though it has not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The nearly 50 questions posed by Congress are highly technical, but they were carefully crafted to get to the heart of the balancing act the administration has performed between adhering to the letter of U.S. nonproliferation law and assuaging Indian concerns that it was not being treated like a true nuclear power. Congress passed a law, known as the Hyde Act, to provisionally accept the agreement, but some lawmakers have raised concerns about whether the implementing agreement negotiated by the administration fudges critical details. For instance, one of the questions pertains to whether the United States would terminate nuclear trade if India resumes nuclear testing. This is a sensitive point in India and is required under U.S. law, but the answer is not entirely clear from the text of the U.S.-India agreement. Another series of questions addresses the commitment by the United States to supply India with a "reliable supply of fuel" for its reactors, including a pledge to take steps to "guard against the disruption of fuel supplies." A series of questions asks whether these commitments are legally binding, whether the two governments agree on the definition of a fuel supply disruption and whether the commitments would be affected by a nuclear test. At one point, the lawmakers question whether these commitments in the implementing agreement are consistent with the Hyde Act. Given the pointed nature of the questions, sources said the State Department had little choice but to be candid with lawmakers about the answers, in ways that senior State Department officials had not been in public. Lynne Weil, a spokeswoman for the committee, said the State Department provided a lot of information, but the committee has agreed not to disclose the answers because "some data might be considered diplomatically sensitive." She said the nuclear deal still must come back to Congress for final approval, and, at that point, public hearings will be held and "the questions will come up again." State said it had no plans to make the answers public. "We've handled answers to sensitive questions in an appropriate way that responded to congressional concerns," said State Department spokesman Tom Casey. "We're going to continue with that approach." |
Link |
Syria-Lebanon-Iran | |
Syria, Hezbollah, Amr Moussa decidedly unhappy with USS Cole visit | |
2008-03-02 | |
The planned deployment of at least three warships, announced Thursday, appeared to be aimed at making an American show of strength at a time of increasing international frustration at the volatile political deadlock in Lebanon between the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister Fuad Saniora and the Syria and Iran-backed opposition, led by Hezbollah. State Department spokesman Tom Casey told reporters Friday that the warships are an important sign of U.S. commitment to security in the region. "It should provide comfort to our friends" and, for U.S. adversaries, "a reminder that we are there." | |
Link |
Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
2 gunmen killed, 10 wounded by IDF fire in the Gaza Strip |
2008-03-01 |
Hamas said Malak Karfaneh and three other civilians were killed in an Israeli strike on Beit Hanoun. But local residents said one of those rockets fell short and landed in the area of the baby's house. The IDF, which sent troops, tanks and aircraft after Gaza rocket squads on Friday, said it only attacks rocket-launching operations, but noted that terrorists sometimes operate within civilian areas. Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai told Army Radio that Israel had "no other choice" but to launch a massive military operation in Gaza. "We will use all our strength in every way we deem appropriate, whether in air strikes or on the ground," Vilnai said. Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman, dismissed Vilnai's comments, saying: "We are not afraid of these threats." The IDF has notified the government it is ready to launch a major ground offensive as soon as it is ordered to do so, defense officials said. Nothing is expected for the next week or two, in part because the military prefers to wait for clearer weather, they added. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called on Israel to stop all attacks in Gaza and urged Palestinians to halt the rocket fire. "It is in the interest of the Palestinian people not to give Israel any pretext to continue its aggressions," a statement from his office said. US State Department spokesman Tom Casey denounced Hamas' rocket attacks as "completely unacceptable" and demanded they stop. He also said the US regularly urges Israel to consider the consequences of its actions and to pay careful attention to the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian people. Earlier, A relatively quiet Friday morning in Sderot was shattered at midday when a Kassam rocket fired from Gaza hit a house as a family was eating lunch. Four people were reported suffering from shock after the rocket slammed into a room adjacent to where the family was dining. A total of 16 rockets have been fired at southern Israel since Friday morning. Most landed in open areas, causing no wounded or damage. Hamas's armed wing, Izzadin Kassam, claimed responsibility for firing five rockets at Israel, one of which misfired, injuring five Gazans. In addition, Palestinian medical officials said that nine Palestinians were wounded in four separate IAF strikes in northern Gaza, adding that among the wounded were two young boys, aged five and six. The army said that it targeted rocket launching sites in Beit Lahiya and Jabalya. Overnight Thursday, IDF Givat Brigade troops, backed up by tanks, struck at two terror cells during routine counter-terror operations in northern Gaza. The IDF reported hits on both of the cells. Meanwhile, Egyptian Intelligence chief Omar Suleiman has postponed his upcoming trip to Israel, planned for the middle of next week. Suleiman informed Defense Minister Ehud Barak of his decision on Friday morning. Jerusalem officials estimated that the reason for the postponement was the escalation in the Gaza Strip and also cited Suleiman's concerns that the IDF is about to embark on a large-scale operation in the territory. Cairo is trying to arrange anther date for the trip, Israel Radio reported. Barak explained the state of affairs to Britain, Russia and the US and told their respective foreign ministers that if the Gaza situation deteriorates further, Hamas will be responsible for the consequences. |
Link |
Home Front: Politix |
Palestinians Ask U.S. To Intervene in Suits Over Terrorist Attacks |
2008-02-13 |
...and not in a good way. The State Department is considering supporting the Palestinian Authority in its quest to avoid paying hundreds of millions of dollars in judgments won by American victims of Palestinian terrorist attacks in Israel, according to Palestinian officials and defense lawyers involved in the cases. How about they try to avoid blowing people up so they wouldn't be in this position? Nah. Can't do that. That Resistance thingy, ya know... U.S. officials insist that no decision has been made regarding the complex litigation, which could force the Bush administration to choose between supporting compensation for victims of terrorism and bolstering the Palestinian government as the United States presses for a breakthrough in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. Fuck 'em, George. You're gone in 10 months so whadda you care? And you've got about as much chance of a breakthrough in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks as I've got of hitting Powerball. Screw 'em... Testimony in Israeli courts has connected senior Palestinian leaders -- such as the late Yasser Arafat -- to specific terrorist attacks involved in the lawsuits. But Palestinian officials have argued that it makes no sense for the United States to be providing millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinian Authority while U.S. courts are threatening to bankrupt it. Oh, man! They're right! So don't send them any more money. So we've solved one part of the problem.... In response to a plea for assistance from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice 13 months ago sidestepped the issue, writing that "the United States is not party to these enforcement proceedings." But in December, a U.S. federal judge asked the government whether it would get involved, creating the current dilemma for the administration. "There has been a rethinking in the State Department that I wholeheartedly welcome," said Afif Safieh, head of mission in Washington for the Palestine Liberation Organization. He said the lawsuits were "politically and ideologically motivated to drive the Palestinian Authority into bankruptcy." Geeez, that'd be...a tragedy. Victims, who will meet with top State and Justice Department officials tomorrow, said that a U.S. intervention with the courts would make a mockery of the administration's fight against terrorism. Leslye Knox, a 46-year-old mother of six children and widow of Aharon Ellis, a U.S. citizen who was killed in 2002 while singing at a bar mitzvah in Hadera, Israel, said that she has sued under a law passed by Congress in 1990 after the murder of Leon Klinghoffer by terrorists who seized the Achille Lauro cruise ship. In 2006, a federal judge ordered the PLO and the Palestinian Authority to pay Knox and other Ellis relatives nearly $174 million, but nothing has been paid while Knox has struggled to support her family. The Pali's won't pay up? Ain't that...shocking. "Now here are the wrongdoers, they come to the government, and say, 'Hey, help us,' " Knox said. "It's hard to see why the government listens to them. It makes me feel like, 'Who is on my side?' " Hate to say it, honey, but probably nobody that can do you any good... "If the State Department tips the scales of justice against the victims in order to support adjudicated terrorists, the war on terrorism will be seen throughout the world as a farce," said David J. Strachman, a Rhode Island lawyer who has spearheaded many of the lawsuits. That's pretty much it. But State ould proably see it as "Fair Play for Freedom Fighters" or something like that. The Justice Department will make the final decision, U.S. officials said. "A court has asked the U.S. government to inform it whether it is contemplating filing a statement of interest, but no decision has been made on how the U.S. government will respond," said State Department spokesman Tom Casey. Yep. We'll...let ya know. The Palestinian Authority initially argued that it had sovereign immunity, meaning that as a state it was beyond the reach of the U.S. legal system. Former attorney general Ramsey Clark, who was hired to defend the Palestinians, described in a court hearing how he had to "break my neck climbing over literally rubble" of Arafat's compound in Ramallah in 2003, only to be told to ignore the cases. Ramsey almost broke his neck? Well at least something good came of this... But U.S. courts rejected the Palestinian claim of sovereign immunity, noting that Palestine is not a state. Judgments have been rendered against the Palestinians in the Knox case and a separate case brought by the children of Yaron Ungar, a U.S. citizen killed in Israel in a 1996 terrorist attack. Ungar's relatives were awarded $116 million, which the Palestinian Authority has not paid. Again, I don't think they grasp the "paying" concept... After the Ungar case, about $200,000 in two of the PLO mission's bank accounts were frozen in 2005, a situation that Safieh called a "nightmare." We could't buy hookers! We couldn't move anything to On June 18, 2005, then finance minister (and now prime minister) Salaam Fayyad wrote to Rice, urging State to intervene, saying that the Ungar lawsuit was a "serious obstacle" to effective Palestinian participation in peace talks and was inconsistent with U.S. foreign policy. I get it, Salaam. Blackmail? Right? Well, most Americans could give a damn about Palestinian peace, so why don't you pay up, okay? Abbas also wrote to Rice in November 2006, after another court froze more than $100 million in retirement funds for Palestinian workers that were being managed in the United States. Dammit! Think of how many Gaza retirees were screwed outta their chances to buy cheap Egyptian motorcycles and knockoff cartons of Marlboro's! And cement! Rice responded with a neutral letter. She noted that the Ungar case had gone all the way to the Supreme Court, which declined to review it, so "the judgment is final and enforceable in United States courts." She suggested that the Palestinian Authority explore "out of court solutions so as to avoid enforcement actions." Good luck. Let us know how you make out. Love, Condi... With a new set of lawyers -- Richard A. Hibey and Mark J. Rochon of the Washington firm Miller & Chevalier -- the Palestinian Authority last year said the Knox judgment should be nullified because the authority was now prepared to litigate the case and offer a vigorous defense. So I take it Ramsey's no longer their lawyer? Citing Rice's letter to Abbas, the new legal team urged U.S. District Court Judge Victor Marrero to request a "statement of interest" from State because of the "international ramifications." The primary one being there'll be no chateau in the south of France for these lawyers if they lose this case. Good luck getting paid by the way, boys... "The judgment's potential interference with American foreign policy presents a unique and exceptional circumstance justifying relief from a default judgment," the lawyers argued. Yes, I'm sure interference with American foreign policy is at the forefront of their concerns... Marrero in December issued an order asking whether the United States contemplated issuing a statement of interest in the case. He gave the government 45 days to respond, but at the government's request, he recently extended the deadline until the end of February. I think I know how it's gonna go, but it's nice to see State at least make the scumbags sweat... |
Link |