NEWS,06.08.2013

Israeli-Palestinian Peace: Reasons to Be Optimistic

The Middle East peace process has frequently been more process than peace, but even the slim possibility of success makes it a worthwhile pursuit given the negative repercussions of doing nothing.
It was almost surreal to witness how the recent announcement of the resumption of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, which otherwise should be regarded as a positive development, has been met with so much negativity and cynicism.
Of course, it is easy to see why many observers are not excited about the prospects of such talks: Long years of disappointment and failed negotiations, the ongoing division between the two Palestinian factions of Hamas and Fatah, let alone the fact that Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party's charter still rejects a Palestinian state.
Cynicism: the lazy option
Whilst one may agree with all the fair points presented by the peace-talks critics, it should be remembered that cynicism is the lazy option. It is far too easy to sit back and dismiss the peace talks before they have even begun. The real question is: Do these critics have an alternative?
With unresolved internal political divisions, a tarnished economy, traditional allies being engaged with their own issues and Israel continuing to dictate the situation on the ground, the situation can hardly get any worse for Palestinians.
In fact, one could say that these peace talks are already too late but does that not mean that any more time wasted will imperil any possibility of conflict resolution?
Wasting time is certainly not in the interest of the Palestinian side. Critics of the peace talks should realize a very simple fact: Negotiations may succeed or fail to achieve peace; but the alternative (not having these negotiations) is guaranteed to fail.
Restoring the U.S.' image
As for U.S. involvement in this matter, many critics say that it is driven by self-interest, given the American administration's tarnished credibility since the 2011 Arab Spring.
The U.S. approach in Syria is seen by many as ham-fisted. In Egypt, it is seen as part of a conspiracy by both the supporters and detractors of deposed president Mohammad Mursi.
Also, with the increasing influence of Russia, the EU and even China, the Middle East is no longer America's stomping ground. The $1.5 billion (Dh 5.50 billion) in aid which President Barack Obama was so careful to protect by refusing to label Egypt's military ouster a "coup," pales in comparison to the $12 billion donated to the interim government by Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Kuwait together.
There is a theory that the possibility of a peace deal in the Middle East will restore the U.S.'s image. However, even if this was true and Washington did want to use the peace talks as a way to regain some credibility, what is the big deal? At the end of the day, what really matters is getting the Palestinians and the Israelis to finally sign on that dotted line and put years of hatred, occupation and injustice behind them.
Furthermore, just because the American position on Syria and Egypt is unclear and unpopular, it doesn't mean that they should not engage in an area where they can actually make progress.
If anything, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the one Middle Eastern area that the U.S. has a long experience in dealing with. The Americans were the first to extend diplomatic recognition to Israel in 1948 after pushing for a solution to the conflict. Since then, they have been involved in many iterations of the peace process and although they were never successful, they sure came close to sealing a deal several times. Detractors have suggested that Israel may be in the talks to waste time. Certainly, comments like the recent statement by Amos Yadlin, former head of Israeli military intelligence, are not encouraging.
"We have to submit a proposal to the Palestinians, a decent proposal, a fair proposal," Yadlin told a group of foreign reporters in February. If the Palestinians will accept it, it's a win of peace. If they refuse as we think they will then at least we win the blame game and we can continue to shape our borders by ourselves without the need to wait for the Palestinians to agree."
However, there are those in the political establishment and in the Israeli public, who want to achieve peace. It makes sense to do it now because of instability elsewhere in the Arab world. Of course, the Palestinians' usual allies are distracted. But for Israel, it is also a time of uncertainty given its rapidly changing surroundings since 2011; it must have realized that the Palestinians are at least an 'enemy they know'.
Changing alliance
It also makes sense for Israel to sign a peace pact with the Palestinians given that its alliances in the region are changing.
However, there is also the idea that being more conservative and right-leaning might be a good idea for Netanyahu domestically. Allying with the hardline Jewish Home party was done out of political necessity, and the Israeli public largely no longer cares about a permanent solution because military occupation now appears sustainable. However, status quo is a disaster for Netanyahu's international image. The timing of the peace talks and the EU sanctions against products from Israeli colonies in the West Bank may be a coincidence, but the sanctions are a reminder of the turning tides of international public opinion against Israel. They may be going in with the intention of marking time, but the international community is getting impatient and will no longer let this behavior slide.
Furthermore, many things in the region hang on the Palestinian issue, and this makes it a good time for everyone. The Palestinian issue is often exploited by other Arab leaders like Bashar Al Assad to talk about a greater U.S. Israel conspiracy and to distract from their own failings. It is possible that sorting out Palestine/Israel, as well as the U.S. reasserting itself through the talks, will have a knock-on stabilizing effect in the region.
'More process than peace'
Of course, we shouldn't jump to any conclusions. Certainly, it makes sense for all three parties to have the talks right now, but such talks have happened before. The Middle East peace process has frequently been more process than peace.
Yet, prior dismissal will get us nowhere, and if the slim possibility of success becomes a reality, there will be people pretending that they knew what was going to happen all along. However, as George Mitchell, who brokered the peace deal in Northern Ireland, knows, the path to peace is by its very nature unpredictable.
"Until it happens, you can't predict with certainty... You can't take 'no' for an answer... You just have to keep at it until peace is achieved," he said.

Hassan Rouhani, Iran's New President, Reaches Out To U.S. In First Press Conference

Iran's incoming President Hassan Rouhani used his first press conference on Tuesday to offer an olive branch to the United States in protracted talks on Tehran's disputed nuclear programme, raising hopes of progress after years of stalemate.

Rouhani, seen in the West as a relatively moderate leader, said he was "seriously determined" to resolve the dispute and was ready to enter "serious and substantive" negotiations in order to do so.

Iran's critics say that it has used previous nuclear talks as a delaying tactic while continuing to develop nuclear weapons-related technology - something Tehran denies. Iran says it needs atomic power for energy and medical needs.

Rouhani said Iran would not abandon its nuclear programme, which it would uphold "on the basis of international law".

"We will not do away with the right of the nation," the 64-year-old said. "However, we are for negotiations and interaction. We are prepared, seriously and without wasting time, to enter negotiations which are serious and substantive with the other side."

"If the other party is also prepared like we are, then I am confident that the concerns of both sides will be removed through negotiations within a period which will not be very long."

Hopes for a diplomatic resolution to the nuclear issue have risen with Rouhani's victory over conservative rivals in June, when voters chose him to replace hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A cleric whose watchword is "moderation", Rouhani is however still very much an Islamic Republic insider.


LAST TALKS DEADLOCKED

His words on Tuesday are likely to reinforce that view, although talks over Iran's nuclear programme have long had a habit of frustrating both sides.

The last high-level talks between Iran and world powers - the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany - were held in April and failed to break the deadlock.

Since Rouhani's victory at the polls, the United States has said it would be a "willing partner" if Iran was serious about finding a peaceful solution to the issue.

Adding to a sense of urgency and opportunity, Russia on Tuesday said fresh talks between Iran and world powers must not be delayed and should take place by mid-September.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking during a visit to Italy, said Russia "absolutely agreed" with Rouhani, and criticized moves to tighten sanctions against Iran, saying it was a time for dialogue, not ultimatums.

"Now it is critical to support the constructive approach of the Iranian leadership," he said in comments carried on Russian news agencies.

Russian leader Vladimir Putin is due to meet Rouhani for the first time as president in Kyrgyzstan in September.

In a letter to the new leader on Tuesday, the European Union said Rouhani had "a strong mandate to engage in dialogue" and added that it hoped for a new round of talks "as soon as practicable."

Both the United States and European Union have imposed sanctions on Iran amid suspicions of its nuclear intentions, and Washington and Israel have said all options, including military action, are open to stop Tehran from acquiring nuclear arms.

Rouhani criticised the embargoes, which have had a deepening impact on Iran's economy over the last year and a half as they slashed oil imports, the country's main source of income.

The measures have already cut Iran's oil exports by more than half compared to pre-sanctions levels of about 2.2 million barrels per day, helping to devalue Iran's currency and contributing to a steep rise in inflation.

"The goals of the sanctions in practice are piling pressure on various classes of the people," the president said.

"It is said (that) through sanctions they check Iran's nuclear activities. This is totally unfounded, and they themselves are cognizant of this fact ... It has nothing to do with the nuclear issue. It is pressuring people."

Fukushima Radioactive Water May Overflow Into Sea

The operator of Japan's wrecked Fukushima nuclear power plant said Tuesday it is struggling to stop contaminated underground water from leaking into the sea.
Tokyo Electric Power Co. said some of the water is seeping over or around an underground barrier it created by injecting chemicals into the soil that solidified into a wall.
The latest problem involves underground water which has built up over the last month since the company began creating the chemical walls to stop leaks after it detected radiation spikes in water samples in May.
TEPCO spokesman Yoshikazu Nagai said the company was slow to deal with the underground water leaks because it was focusing on cooling the damaged reactors, which posed greater risks.
Three reactors at the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant suffered meltdowns after a massive March 2011 earthquake and tsunami destroyed power and cooling systems. The plant is still running on makeshift equipment and has been plagued with blackouts and leaks from underground tanks.
TEPCO has been repeatedly criticized for delays in handling and disclosing problems at the plant. Alarmed by the latest problem, a panel of officials from local towns and villages rushed to the plant Tuesday for an inspection, demanding TEPCO limit the impact on the sea.
Japan's nuclear watchdog set up a separate special panel with TEPCO and met Friday to assess the water problem and discuss ways to resolve it. Watchdog officials have urged TEPCO to pump the contaminated water inland and expand underground and seawater sampling. TEPCO is also building more chemical walls around the plant.
TEPCO officials were unable to answer many of the watchdog officials' questions, including ones about the leaks' origin, their routes and how they can be plugged. They also acknowledged that they have neglected large amounts of highly contaminated water that has remained in maintenance trenches since the crisis, a risk also cited by the watchdog.
"It's a race against the clock," said Toyoshi Fuketa, a commissioner of the Nuclear Regulation Authority. "The top priority is to keep the water from escaping into the sea."
Officials acknowledged last month for the first time that the plant has been leaking radioactive water into the ocean for some time. After a major leak a month after the meltdowns, TEPCO said it had contained the problem and denied further underground leaks into the ocean were occurring, although many experts suspected they were.
While the extent of sea contamination remains unknown, TEPCO has estimated that up to 40 trillion becquerels of radioactive tritium, a water soluble element that can affect DNA but is believed to be less dangerous than cesium or strontium, might have leaked into the sea over the past two years. The company says the amount is within legal limits, but is much higher than is released under normal operations.
The amount of contaminated water at the plant increases by 400 tons a day. TEPCO plans to secure storage facilities capable of holding 800,000 tons more water by 2015.
"For the next two to three years, I think water management would be their biggest challenge," said Dale Klein, a former U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman who now oversees TEPCO's reform committee. "But there will be more surprises," he said, citing possible power outages, leaks and other "unknowns."

Izumo, Japanese Warship, Largest Since World War II

Japan on Tuesday unveiled its biggest warship since World War II, a huge flat-top destroyer that has raised eyebrows in China and elsewhere because it bears a strong resemblance to a conventional aircraft carrier.
The ship, which has a flight deck that is nearly 250 meters (820 feet) long, is designed to carry up to 14 helicopters. Japanese officials say it will be used in national defense particularly in anti-submarine warfare and border-area surveillance missions and to bolster the nation's ability to transport personnel and supplies in response to large-scale natural disasters, like the devastating earthquake and tsunami in 2011.
Though the ship dubbed "Izumo" has been in the works since 2009, its unveiling comes as Japan and China are locked in a dispute over several small islands located between southern Japan and Taiwan. For months, ships from both countries have been conducting patrols around the isles, called the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyutai in China.
The tensions over the islands, along with China's heavy spending on defense and military modernization, have heightened calls in Japan for beefed-up naval and air forces. China recently began operating an aircraft carrier that it refurbished after purchasing from Russia, and is reportedly moving forward with the construction of another that is domestically built.
Japan, China and Taiwan all claim the islands.
Though technically a destroyer, some experts believe the new Japanese ship could potentially be used in the future to launch fighter jets or other aircraft that have the ability to take off vertically. That would be a departure for Japan, which has one of the best equipped and best trained naval forces in the Pacific but which has not sought to build aircraft carriers of its own because of constitutional restrictions that limit its military forces to a defensive role.
Japan says it has no plans to use the ship in that manner.
The Izumo does not have catapults for launching fighters, nor does it have a "ski-jump" ramp on its flight deck for fixed-wing aircraft launches.

NEWS,06.07.2013

Two Koreas hold talks on joint zone

North and South Korea started rare talks Saturday on re-opening a joint industrial zone seen as the last remaining symbol of cross-border reconciliation.
The talks delayed by nearly two hours - follow months of friction and threats of war by Pyongyang after its February nuclear test attracted tougher UN sanctions, further squeezing its struggling economy.
Kaesong was the most high-profile casualty of the elevated tensions on the Korean peninsula but neither side has declared the complex officially closed, instead referring to a temporary shut down.
Both nations say they want to reopen the Seoul-funded industrial zone on the North Korean side of the border but blame each other for its suspension.
"We will do our best to have this meeting result in greater trust and co-operation between the two sides", South Korea's chief delegate, Suh Ho, told reporters in Seoul early Saturday before leaving for Panmunjom.
"Three months have passed since Kaesong came to a halt and damages and difficulties facing businesses are growing", the senior unification ministry official said.
Pyongyang, citing military tensions and the South's hostility toward the North, in April withdrew its 53 000 workers from the 123 Seoul-owned factories at the Kaesong park.
Until then the industrial park a valuable source of hard currency for the impoverished North  had proved remarkably resilient to the regular upheavals in inter-Korean relations.
Technical problems delayed the start of the talks at the border truce village of Panmunjom on Saturday as telephone lines to the South needed repairs, the unification ministry in Seoul said.
Want to work
Seoul is expected to call for a written guarantee aimed at preventing a recurrence of the unilateral shut down, a demand which the North would find it hard to accept as it would amount to Pyongyang swallowing its pride and accepting full responsibility for the suspension.
On the agenda are issues of checking on mothballed factory facilities and equipment, moving finished products and raw materials held up at Kaesong to the South and the reopening of the zone.
At an access road to Panmunjom, Suh encountered a group of businessmen with plants in Kaesong. They carried banners expressing hope that the talks would be successful. One read: "We want to work again. Restart Kaesong."
The meeting comes after a surprise move on Wednesday from North Korea, which restored a cross-border hotline and promised to let South Korean businessmen visit the estate and check on their closed factories.
Representatives of the South Korean companies in the zone have repeatedly urged the two sides to open talks to revive the moribund industrial park. The South wants its businessmen to be able to bring back finished goods and raw materials.
But some firms have threatened to withdraw from Kaesong, complaining they have fallen victim to political bickering between the two rivals.
The South's unification ministry responded cautiously by saying it would try to seek internationally accepted safeguards to develop Kaesong as a politically neutral zone.
"We have clarified our position many times that Kaesong must be developed as an area that follows international standards and where common sense prevails," unification ministry spokesperson Kim Hyung-Suk said.
Opposition parties in Seoul urged South Korean negotiators to exercise flexibility in Saturday's talks.
After repeatedly threatening Seoul and Washington with conventional and nuclear attack, Pyongyang has appeared in recent weeks to want to move towards dialogue.
Analysts say North Korea is mindful of a US demand that it improve ties with Seoul before there can be any talks with Washington.
After plans for high-level talks last month on the future of the Kaesong estate collapsed over a protocol dispute, Pyongyang proposed direct, high-level dialogue with the US.

Nicaragua, Venezuela OK Snowden asylum

The presidents of Nicaragua and Venezuela offered Friday to grant asylum to NSA leaker Edward Snowden, one day after leftist South American leaders gathered to denounce the rerouting of Bolivian President Evo Morales' plane over Europe amid reports that the American was aboard.

Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela and Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua made their offers during separate speeches in their home countries Friday afternoon. Snowden, who is being sought by the United States, has asked for asylum in numerous countries, including Nicaragua and Venezuela.
"As head of state, the government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela decided to offer humanitarian asylum to the young American Edward Snowden so that he can live in the homeland" of independence leader Simon Bolivar and the late President Hugo Chavez without "persecution from the empire," Maduro said, referring to the United States.
Chavez often engaged in similar defiance, criticizing US-style capitalism and policies. In a 2006 speech to the UN General Assembly of world leaders, Chavez called President George W Bush the devil, saying the podium reeked of sulphur after the US president's address. He also accused Washington of plotting against him, expelled several diplomats and drug-enforcement agents and threatened to stop sending oil to the US.
Maduro made the offer during a speech marking the anniversary of Venezuela's independence. It was not immediately clear if there were any conditions to Venezuela's offer. He added that several other Latin American governments have also expressed their intention of taking a similar stance by offering asylum for the cause of "dignity".
But his critics said Maduro's decision is nothing but an attempt to veil the current undignified conditions of Venezuela, including one of the world's highest inflation rates and a shortage of basic products like toilet paper.
"The asylum doesn't fix the economic disaster, the record inflation, an upcoming devaluation [of the currency], and the rising crime rate," Venezuelan opposition leader Henrique Capriles said in his Twitter account. Maduro beat Capriles in April's presidential election, but Capriles has not recognised defeat and has called it an electoral fraud.
Asked earlier this week about the possibility that any countries in the region would offer Snowden asylum, Geoff Thale, program director at the Washington Office on Latin America think tank, said that he thought Ortega would be careful not to damage his country's relationship with the US.
"Ortega has been tremendously successful at exploiting both the Alba relationship and the US relationship," Thale said, referring to the Alba leftist trade bloc that provides Nicaragua with petroleum subsidies. Although Ortega is publicly seen as anti-American, "Nicaragua and the US cooperate very closely on drug interdiction and the US and Nicaraguan militaries work very closely, too," Thale said before the asylum offer was made.
If circumstances allow
Ortega said Friday he was willing to make Maduro's same offer "if circumstances allow it," although he didn't say what the right circumstances would be when he spoke during a speech in Managua.
He said the Nicaraguan embassy in Moscow received Snowden's application for asylum and that it is studying the request.
"We have the sovereign right to help a person who felt remorse after finding out how the United States was using technology to spy on the whole world, and especially its European allies," Ortega said.
The offers came one day after Maduro joined other leftist South American presidents Thursday in Cochabamba, Bolivia, to rally behind Morales and denounce the incident involving the plane.
Spain on Friday said it had been warned along with other European countries that Snowden, a former US intelligence worker, was aboard the Bolivian presidential plane, an acknowledgement that the manhunt for the fugitive leaker had something to do with the plane's unexpected diversion to Austria.
It is unclear whether the United States warned Madrid about the Bolivian president's plane. U.S. officials will not detail their conversations with European countries, except to say that they have stated the U.S.'s general position that it wants Snowden back.
President Barack Obama has publicly displayed a relaxed attitude toward Snowden's movements, saying last month that he wouldn't be "scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker."
But the drama surrounding the flight of Morales, whose plane was abruptly rerouted to Vienna after apparently being denied permission to fly over France, suggests that pressure is being applied behind the scenes.
Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo told Spanish National Television that "they told us that the information was clear, that he was inside."
He did not identify who "they" were and declined to say whether he had been in contact with the U.S. But he said that European countries' decisions were based on the tip. France has since sent a letter of apology to the Bolivian government.
Meanwhile, secret-spilling website WikiLeaks said that Snowden, who is still believed to be stuck in a Moscow airport's transit area, had put in asylum applications to six new countries. He had already sought asylum from more than 20 countries. Many have turned him down.
Wikileaks said in a message posted to Twitter on Friday that it wouldn't be identifying the countries involved "due to attempted US interference."
Icelandic lawmakers introduced a proposal in Parliament on Thursday to grant immediate citizenship to Snowden, but the idea received minimal support.
Galeano reported from Managua, Nicaragua. 

US stocks rise on solid jobs report

\US stocks Friday opened higher following a better-than-expected US jobs report, even as US Treasury yields spiked.
Five minutes into trade, the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 73.57 (0.49%) to 15 062.12.
The broad-based S&P 500 rose 7.61 (0.47%) to 1 623.02, while the tech-rich Nasdaq Composite Index advanced 16.81 (0.49%) to 3 460.48.
Analysts expected low volumes Friday with many investors off for the long July 4 Independence Day holiday. US markets were closed Thursday.
Friday's gains came after the Labor Department reported that 195 000 jobs were added in June, above the 166 000 analyst estimate. The unemployment rate held steady at 7.6%.
Briefing.com analyst Patrick O'Hare called the jobs report "stronger than expected, but not undeniably strong." He cited some less propitious details in the report, such as a rise in the number of discouraged workers compared with a year ago.
The rise also came in the wake of Thursday's strong gains in European markets after European Central Bank (ECB) chief Mario Draghi said that ECB monetary policy would remain accommodative for "as long as necessary."
Despite the gains, spiking US Treasury yields were a source of concern. The 10-year Treasury rose to 2.70% compared with 2.50% Wednesday. The yield on the 30-year bond rose to 3.65% from 3.50%.

 

Oil dips as supply concerns ease

Oil slipped from a two-week high above $106 a barrel on Thursday after Egypt's armed forces toppled its president, easing concerns over the threat of supply disruption in the Middle East.
The Suez canal, a vital waterway for oil shipments, was not affected by the unrest, but analysts said real and threatened supply disruptions in the Middle East, which pumps a third of the world's oil, and in other regions would support prices.
"It is too early to say that the situation has calmed down, but the safe operation of the Suez, which is in the interest of both Persian Gulf countries and oil-consuming nations, seems to be guaranteed," Tamas Varga, an analyst at oil brokers PVM, said.
Brent crude fell 82c to $104.94 a barrel by lunchtime on Thursday after rising as high as $106.03 on Wednesday.
US crude slipped 48c to $100.76, falling from a 14-month peak of $102.18 earlier.
Besides the perceived risks to Middle East supply due to tension in Egypt, disruption to exports in Libya and Iraq and relatively scarce supply of Russian crude into the Mediterranean have tightened physical oil flows.
"It is still too early to sound the all-clear," said Carsten Fritsch, an analyst at Commerzbank in Frankfurt.
"Supply risks are likely to lend continued support to oil prices."
In addition to concerns about Middle East supplies, the US benchmark received a boost when a weekly inventory report showed stockpiles fell by more than 10 million barrels, the biggest drop for the time of year since 2000.

NEWS,18. AND 19.05.2013

UK’s Labour moots new company tax plan

Britain's opposition Labour party, tapping into widening public anger over corporate tax avoidance, wants the government to push for new international rules to force companies to report profit and tax payments country-by-country.
Campaigners say the move, which is receiving increased support internationally despite strong opposition from business, will deter companies from shifting profit into tax havens where they have no staff or sales.
Prime Minister David Cameron has said corporate tax avoidance would be discussed at the annual summit of the Group of Eight leading industrial economies, which Britain is hosting in Northern Ireland next month.
He has urged companies to be more transparent but has only proposed voluntary measures.
Companies say country-by-country reporting will impose unreasonable administrative burdens.
But campaigners say firms fear being embarrassed by highlighting how they frequently pay low or no taxes in countries where they have big sales and how they report big profits in tax havens.
The standard could also lead to companies revealing that they earned no money in countries where they told investors they operated profitably.
Tax reform
Coffee chain Starbucks received broad political, media and public criticism in Britain last year after an investigation showed it assured investors the United Kingdom was a profitable market after telling tax authorities its operations lost money.
The European Union agreed earlier this year to force European banks to report profit on a country-by-country basis as part of measures to ensure they hold enough capital.
The US and EU have also agreed measures to force companies in the extractive industries to publish tax and other payments to resource-rich nations, to reduce corruption.
Labour on Sunday issued a new policy document on corporate tax reform which backed forcing companies to publish figures on revenues, profit and taxes in each country that they operate.
Ernst & Young, one of the 'big four' accounting firms which audit most of the big multinational companies, has warned clients that country-by-country reporting may become a global standard unless they come up with an alternative.
Britain's CBI business lobby group has urged businesses to publish "narrative" reports explaining their tax affairs to the public.
A committee of UK lawmakers has accused Google of "unethical behaviour" for avoiding tax by shifting profit from UK sales to an untaxed unit in Bermuda.
Google says it complies with tax rules in every country where it operates.

Cyber experts fear escalation of attacks

Cyber security professionals know a myriad of ways hackers can try to wreak havoc on critical infrastructure or infiltrate corporations to steal or spy, but it is the fear of the unknown that some say keeps them up at night.
US security officials and private sector experts wonder what kinds of time-bombs can be - or have been - embedded by malware into computer networks, just waiting to explode.
Cyber espionage is already "the greatest transfer of wealth in history", National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander, the top US general in charge of cybersecurity, told the Reuters Cybersecurity Summit in Washington this week.
"Disruptive and destructive attacks on our country will get worse," he said. "Mark my words, it will get worse."
Stealing software or money like the $45m lifted from two Middle Eastern banks in a daring global plot revealed this month might pale next to an attack that could, for example, switch off the lights in a major US city.
That was the fear in New Orleans in February when a power outage struck the Super Bowl, the National Football League's championship game, witnessed by tens of millions of viewers. The outage was blamed on an electrical relay device and not a cyber attack.
"The known unknown is what I worry about," US Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano told the Summit.
"For example, we don't have the identity of all the adversaries who are trying to either commit crimes or acts over the cyber networks. The things we know about, we can deal with. It's the known unknown," she added.
The military is a big target, something that Rear Admiral William Leigher, who is in charge of "information dominance" with the US Navy, takes on board.
"Our networks see thousands of intrusion attempts every day...staying up with the threat, making sure that our defensive systems are up to par is probably one of the things that gets most of my attention," Leigher said.
To be sure, the United States has not suffered the kind of destructive cyber attack that damaged some 30 000 computers at Saudi Arabia's oil company, Saudi Aramco, last year. But experts said they were worried about the increasingly sophisticated cyber capabilities of countries such as China, Russia and Iran.
"This new growing trend of nation states engaged in cyber attacks that are designed to be destructive to parts of the US economy is very, very concerning," said Mike Rogers, chairperson of the US House Intelligence Committee.
"The ferociousness of these attacks is increasing and it's something that we better get a handle on," Rogers added.
Dmitri Alperovitch, co-founder of Crowdstrike, a security technology specialist firm that works with governments and private companies, said he is most concerned about Iran, particularly if there is a spike in tensions in the Middle East.
He is watching the attacks that have taken down the websites of more than a dozen US banks in the past nine months. There are no signs that hackers have managed to destroy or modify crucial financial data, but that is the fear.
"Attacks that focus on modifying data in the stealth way, sabotage, integrity attacks - those are the ones that are most insidious and those are the ones we really should worry about," Alperovitch said.
The migration of ever more elements of the economy to the digital world opens the door to malfeasance.
"We keep hooking more and more stuff up to the internet, so the attack surface keeps growing," said Michael Daniel, cyber security policy coordinator at the White House.
"Pretty soon your coffee maker and your refrigerator is going to be an attack vector because it's going to be hooked up to the internet."

More Than 1,000 Unaccompanied Diplomats Face Threats, PTSD As Obama Calls For Increased Embassy Security

When the Yemen-based branch of al Qaeda placed a bounty on her husband's head, Mary Feierstein learned of it from a friend who called and said, "You must be a mess!"

U.S. Ambassador Gerald Feierstein was thousands of miles (km) away at the U.S. Embassy in Sanaa, without his wife and family on what is called an "unaccompanied" posting.

He is one of more than a thousand U.S. diplomats on such tours of duty in danger spots around the world, part of a trend that is changing the definition of being a diplomat.

Over time, his wife has learned to stay calm when the phone rings unexpectedly at her home outside Washington. For nearly five years, she has not lived in the same country as her husband, a career diplomat who specializes in the Middle East and South Asia.

After militants stormed the U.S. Embassy in Yemen last September, breaking through to the inner building and ripping plaques and lettering from the walls, Feierstein called his wife to tell her he was OK.

He had also called her a few years earlier when he was based in Islamabad, Pakistan, and a bomb went off near his residence. He was unhurt in that attack.

But when Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula considered by U.S. officials to be al Qaeda's most dangerous affiliate offered 3 kg of gold last December for the killing of Feierstein, it was Mary's turn to call her husband. He played down the danger.

"He said it was old news. They are constantly under threat, you know," Mary Feierstein said in her first media interview since the threat.

After a police officer came to her home to give her his card and tell her to call him if she needed any help, "that's when I got scared," Feierstein said.

The new perils for foreign service officers were spotlighted last Sept. 11, when militants overran the temporary U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, killing four Americans, including Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens. Two other U.S. diplomats were killed in Afghanistan in the past year.

President Barack Obama, still grappling with controversy over the Benghazi attack, called on Congress on Friday to fully fund his $4 billion embassy security budget request.

In a memorial ceremony earlier this month at the State Department, Vice President Joe Biden said that diplomats "take risks that sometimes exceed those of the women and men in uniform."

Honored along with Stevens were Sean Patrick Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, who died in Benghazi; and foreign service officers Anne Smedinghoff and Ragaei Said Abdelfattah, killed in Afghanistan in 2013 and 2012.


FIVE-FOLD INCREASE IN UNACCOMPANIED DIPLOMATS

The State Department says there are about 1,100 U.S. foreign service officers now at posts abroad where they are unaccompanied or there are limits on who can accompany them - usually meaning no children.

That is a five-fold increase in unaccompanied American diplomats over the past decade, and represents about 14 percent of U.S. foreign service officers serving overseas.

The change began with "civilian surges" into the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan to help with stabilization and reconstruction. Over 400 unaccompanied diplomats are in those countries.

Then, the Arab Spring uprisings starting in 2011 added many unstable countries to the list where the State Department did not want to send families.

The fluctuating list now includes Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya and Tunisia, as well as the new African state of South Sudan, the State Department said.

The U.S. embassies in Algeria, Sudan and Lebanon are in the "limited accompanied" category as is the U.S. Consulate in Mexico's third-largest city, Monterrey, a focal point for drug-related violence.

The risks to diplomats are not all external. A 2007 State Department survey said 17 percent of employees who had served in dangerous posts indicated some symptoms similar to those of post-traumatic stress disorder. The department, following the military's lead, has set up a program to help diagnose and treat PTSD in its employees.

Mary Feierstein realized she was one of an expanding group of left-behind relatives when she started attending the year-end holiday parties the State Department throws for them, and noticed the crowd getting bigger every year.

She also noticed a lot of small children at those parties, and admitted to thinking, "At least my kids are grown." Her children, two daughters and a son, are all in their 20s. Her son has served two tours of duty with the Marines in Iraq.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attended the holiday parties, at which some of the unaccompanied diplomats were Skyped in from abroad. Feierstein said she thought Obama should attend too.

The president did call Gerald Feierstein to thank him for his service after the Yemen embassy was attacked last Sept. 13, two days after the Benghazi assaults.


'NEW NORM'

The United States used to be quicker to evacuate its embassies and consulates when dangers arose, said Susan Johnson, president of the American Foreign Service Association, the official union representing the Foreign Service.

These days, Washington tries to manage risks by building up the physical security of posts and increasing diplomatic security personnel, she said.

"In the process, we seem to have built a new level of tolerance for the amount of risk our diplomats face," Johnson said, adding that unaccompanied tours were increasingly becoming "a new norm."

There is pressure on diplomats to do the dangerous tours in order to advance. It is perceived to be "almost mandatory" to serve at an unaccompanied post and "punch that ticket" during a Foreign Service career, she said.

The State Department said 20 percent of its current employees had served in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan.

The department offers incentives such as danger pay and shorter tours. Unaccompanied posts can be just 12 months, with several breaks, and families can often be left behind at a previous post to minimize disruption.

The State Department has made considerable progress in supporting employees in unaccompanied posts, its inspector general said in a 2010 report. Still, it said, "many returnees experience problems adjusting to their follow-on assignments," and more counseling services may be needed.

Mary Feierstein was born in Pakistan and met her husband on his first tour there in the 1970s. She said he was one of some "really tough people" that the State Department keeps cycling through stressful, dangerous posts.

Gerald Feierstein served in Lebanon unaccompanied in 2003 and 2004, then returned to Washington for a few years and was a senior official in the State Department's counterterrorism office.

He was sent to Pakistan for the third time in his career in 2008, as deputy chief of mission in Islamabad. His family stayed in the United States. In September 2010, Feierstein went to Yemen, again without his family.

"We were planning to go later. ... After the Arab Spring, we haven't been able to go there at all," Mary Feierstein said.

At home, she volunteers for the local Democratic Party and supports causes like gun control. She last saw her husband in March.

While tired of the separation, she said she felt sorrier for her children, even though they are grown. "They miss him so much. They are so happy when he comes home."

New Energy Policies in the Middle East Must Go Hand in Hand With Subsidy Reform

The Middle East has amongst the highest average per capita energy consumption of any region in the world, at twice the global average. Consequently, it also has amongst the highest per capita carbon emissions as well. Furthermore, not only is overall energy use high but the energy mix itself is unusually weighted towards oil compared as compared with other regions, with oil accounting for 50 percent of primary energy demand compared with a global average of 33 percent and an OECD average of 38 percent.
There are three major consequences of the Middle East's high energy intensity and reliance on oil: first, it carries a large implicit economic cost as a result of the value of oil and gas exports foregone and additional gas imports required in some cases; second, such a high degree of energy dependence increases the economy's volatility through its greater exposure to energy supply disruptions or price shifts; and third, it has increased the region's greenhouse gas emissions.
Given the intentions of the region to boost economic growth, reduce economic dependence on volatile energy markets and curtail greenhouse gas emissions growth, the region's high energy intensity is a natural target for reform.
Fortunately, the very fact that the region's energy use is anomalously high and possibly inefficient is a sign that relatively easy gains are possible to bring it under control. There are clear signs that there is significant scope for efficiency improvements. Energy use per unit of GDP is even more dramatically out of step with other regions than per capita statistics, with energy use per unit GDP double the G7 average for example, suggesting that with the right reforms energy demand growth can be slowed or even cut without harming economic growth. Indeed cutting energy demand by increasing energy efficiency would actually boost economic output as for the region's oil producers more crude would be available for export, while for the region's net gas consumers less gas would be need to be imported, improving the balance of trade in both cases.
So the theoretical potential for improvements is clear, but what are the practical steps to achieve it? Governments are currently focused on developing alternative energy options as their primary solution, nuclear and solar power especially. These energy sources will deliver two of the key energy policy aims of the regions' authorities: reducing their economic dependence on oil and cutting greenhouse gas emissions growth. However, to focus solely on these fuels would not fix the Middle East's energy problems.
First of all, the high cost and slow delivery of these new energy sources mean that they cannot deliver all of the energy supply changes needed in a timely manner. That is why policymakers must also put the promotion of natural gas front and center alongside nuclear and solar. Natural gas is the clear choice to complement these alternative energy supplies because the region has reserves in abundance which can be developed quickly, while gas-fired power plants are fast to build, reliable, responsive to demand and emit the least greenhouse gases of any hydrocarbon, at least 50 percent less than coal and 30 percent less than oil in power generation.
Second, and more fundamentally, promoting nuclear and solar, or even natural gas, do not address the problem of energy consumption as previously mentioned. Without addressing this, economic growth will still be affected by demand constantly surpassing supply.
The underlying source of the region's high energy intensity must be addressed and reformed if the region is to deliver a sustainable energy policy with maximum economic benefits: subsidies. Subsidies to oil, gas, water, electricity mean that consumers pay far less than the market rate for these products while producers cannot achieve full value for their output. The United Arab Emirates, for example, has amongst the highest subsidy rates per person in the world, with energy subsidies worth nearly $4,200 per capita per annum in 2011 according to the IEA. While such costs may be internalized by the state and judged to provide worthwhile social benefits, subsidies also always distort market incentives and result in a less efficient energy and economic outcome in the long-term.
Middle East energy use is so high because consumers have little incentive to reduce their energy consumption or make their energy use more efficient since the financial savings from doing so are negligible. Conversely, producers have less incentive to develop new supplies if they cannot sell for above the cost of production. Moreover, as the economy and energy market fundamentals shift, the lack of any market-based price signals means that supply and demand does not respond quickly enough to changing circumstance, slowing the economy down further.
A classic example of the effects of subsidies to constrain the region's economic potential is the role of oil in Saudi Arabia's power sector. In the summer months over a million barrels per day of oil is burnt in power plants to meet peak power demand because there is insufficient non-associated gas production to meet demand. Subsidies exacerbate the problem at every turn: subsidized power prices boost demand; subsidized oil prices make it feasible to burn for power even though it comes at a huge opportunity cost compared to the revenues it would have achieved if exported; at current prices Saudi Arabia there is an opportunity cost of USD 85-95 on every barrel burnt in its power generation sector, and so with oil demand in the power sector in excess of 230 million barrels a year that is $20 billion of lost export revenues. Finally subsidized gas prices create the supply shortfall in the first place because they make it uneconomic to explore for and develop the non-associated gas resources that Saudi Arabia is believed to have in abundance in recent years LUKoil, Eni, Repsol, Shell and Sinopec have all committed to look for natural gas in the country and subsequently exited without success while leading to unconstrained industry demand growth. Moving towards a market based system would address all of these imbalances and make the Saudi or any other Middle East economy healthier and more robust.
The eventual removal of subsidies will create both winners and losers, so a transfer from the current system to a new one must be carefully designed to smooth any disruption and compensate the vulnerable but if a plan is prepared and carried out over a number of years this should not be an insurmountable problem. Ultimately, supply side reforms, to boost alternative energy sources can only ever be half a solution. Demand side reform, via a path to ending energy subsidies in the region, is equally essential to deliver the best economic future for the Middle East and its wider effect on the global economy.