NEWS,07.03.2013

N Korea threatens US with nuclear strike

 

North Korea threatened a "pre-emptive" nuclear strike against the United States and any other aggressors on Thursday as the UN Security Council prepared to vote on new sanctions against the isolated state.A foreign ministry spokesperson also warned that a second Korean war was "unavoidable," with both the United States and South Korea refusing Pyongyang's demands to cancel a large-scale joint military exercise next week."Now that the US is set to light a fuse for a nuclear war, our revolutionary armed forces... will exercise the right to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to destroy the strongholds of the aggressors," the spokesperson said in a statement carried by the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).In the past, the North has threatened attacks on US forces in South Korea and also claims to possess long-range missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead to the continental United States.The latest threat came two days after the North Korean military announced it would rip up the 1953 armistice agreement ending the Korean War - a move that would theoretically pave the way for a resumption of hostilities.Tensions have escalated sharply on the Korean peninsula in recent days, ahead of the UN Security Council vote and the annual US-South Korean military exercise scheduled to begin on Monday.The Security Council is expected to adopt a resolution tightening the UN sanctions screws on North Korea after its widely condemned nuclear bomb test last month.Amounting to one of the toughest sanctions regimes ever ordered by the United Nations, the resolution also threatens "further significant measures" if the North stages a new nuclear test or rocket launch.

New sanctions a punishment for N Korea

The UN Security Council voted unanimously on Thursday for tough new sanctions to punish North Korea for its latest nuclear test, a move that sparked a furious Pyongyang to threaten a nuclear strike against the US. The vote by the UN's most powerful body on a resolution drafted by North Korea's closest ally, China, and the US sends a powerful message that the international community condemns the ballistic missile and nuclear tests - and repeated violation of Security Council resolutions.Immediately before the vote, an unidentified spokesperson for Pyongyang's foreign ministry said the North will exercise its right for "a pre-emptive nuclear attack to destroy the strongholds of the aggressors" because Washington is pushing to start a nuclear war against the North.It appeared to be the most specific open threat of a nuclear strike by any country against another.Although North Korea boasts of nuclear bombs and pre-emptive strikes, it is not thought to have mastered the ability to produce a warhead small enough to put on a missile capable of reaching the US. It is believed to have enough nuclear fuel, however, for several crude nuclear devices.The new sanctions are aimed at reining in North Korea's nuclear and missile programmes by making it more difficult for Pyongyang to finance and obtain material for these programmes, tracking illegal diplomatic activity and intensifying inspections of cargo to and from the country. In a measure targeted at the reclusive nation's ruling elite, the resolution bans all nations from exporting expensive jewellery, yachts, luxury automobiles and racing cars to the North.After the 15-0 vote, US Ambassador Susan Rice told reporters, that "taken together, these sanctions will bite and bite hard”.Responding to Pyongyang's nuclear strike threat, she said, "North Korea will achieve nothing by continued threats and provocation."She urged North Korea's leaders to heed President Barack Obama's call to follow the path of peace. If it doesn't, she said, the Security Council is committed in the resolution to take further measures.China's UN Ambassador Li Bao Dong said the top priority now is to "bring down the heat" and focus on diplomacy and restarting the six-party talks aimed at denuclearizing the Korean peninsula.In North Korea, Army General Kang Pyo Yong told a crowd of tens of thousands that North Korea is ready to fire long-range nuclear-armed missiles at Washington."Intercontinental ballistic missiles and various other missiles, which have already set their striking targets, are now armed with lighter, smaller and diversified nuclear warheads and are placed on a standby status," Kang said. "When we shell [the missiles], Washington, which is the stronghold of evils.... will be engulfed in a sea of fire."AccusationsThe statement by the North Korean foreign ministry spokesperson was carried by the North's official Korean Central News Agency.It accused the US of leading efforts to slap sanctions on North Korea. The statement said the new sanctions would only advance the timing for North Korea to fulfil previous vows to take "powerful second and third countermeasures" against its enemies. It hasn't elaborated on those measures.The statement said North Korea "strongly warns the UN Security Council not to make another big blunder like the one in the past when it earned the inveterate grudge of the Korean nation by acting as a war servant for the US in 1950."North Korea demanded the Security Council immediately dismantle the American-led UN Command that's based in Seoul and move to end the state of war that exists on the Korean Peninsula, which continues six decades after fighting stopped because an armistice, not a peace treaty, ended the war.In anticipation of the resolution's adoption, North Korea earlier in the week threatened to cancel the 1953 cease-fire that ended the Korean War.ThreatsNorth Korean threats have become more common as tensions have escalated following a rocket launch by Pyongyang in December and its third nuclear test on 12 February. Both acts defied three Security Council resolutions that bar North Korea from testing or using nuclear or ballistic missile technology and from importing or exporting material for these programmes.The US and other nations worry that North Korea's third nuclear test pushed it closer to its goal of gaining nuclear missiles that can reach the US. The international community has condemned the regime's nuclear and missile efforts as threats to regional security and a drain on the resources that could go to North Korea's largely destitute people.The UN resolution identifies three individuals, one corporation and one organization that will be added to the UN sanctions list. The targets include top officials at a company that is the country's primary arms dealer and main exporter of ballistic missile-related equipment, and a national organisation responsible for research and development of missiles and probably nuclear weapons.The success of a new round of sanctions could depend on enforcement by China, where most of the companies and banks that North Korea is believed to work with are based.Nuclear test condemnedThe UN resolution condemns the latest nuclear test "in the strongest terms" for violating and flagrantly disregarding council resolutions, bans further ballistic missile launches, nuclear tests "or any other provocation," and demands that North Korea return to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. It also condemns all of North Korea's ongoing nuclear activities, including its uranium enrichment.But the resolution stresses the council's commitment "to a peaceful, diplomatic and political solution" and urged a resumption of six-party talks.According to the resolution, all countries would now be required to freeze financial transactions or services that could contribute to North Korea's nuclear or missile programmes.To get around financial sanctions, North Koreans have been carrying around large suitcases filled with cash to move illicit funds. The resolution expresses concern that these bulk cash transfers may be used to evade sanctions. It clarifies that the freeze on financial transactions and services that could violate sanctions applies to all cash transfers as well as the cash couriers.The resolution also bans all countries from providing public financial support for trade deals, such as granting export credits, guarantees or insurance, if the assistance could contribute to the North's nuclear or missile programmes.It includes what a senior diplomat called unprecedented new travel sanctions that would require countries to expel agents working for sanctioned North Korean companies.The resolution also requires states to inspect suspect cargo on their territory and prevent any vessel that refuses an inspection from entering their ports.And a new aviation measure calls on states to deny aircraft permission to take off, land or fly over their territory if illicit cargo is suspected to be aboard.

US gun safety measures face first votes

President Barack Obama's prospects for winning near-universal background checks for gun purchases seemed shaky on Thursday as Congress faced its first votes on curbing firearms since December's deadly shootings at a Connecticut school. The shootings of 20 children ages 6 and 7 turned gun safety into a leading national issue, though many of Obama's proposals are opposed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and many Republicans who point to the Constitutional guarantee of the right to bear firearms.The Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee had four bills on its agenda on Thursday.Besides expanding background checks, the measures would ban assault weapons and ammunition magazines carrying more than 10 rounds, make gun trafficking and the purchase of firearms for people barred from owning them federal crimes, and provide more money for schools to buy video cameras and other safety equipment.All four measures were expected to pass the committee. But their fate when the full Senate considers them, probably in April, was less certain.In addition, gun safety supporters say the Senate will have to approve legislation with strong bipartisan support to boost their chances of success in the Republican-led House of Representatives. Republican leaders there have said they won't act until the Senate produces legislation.Expanding background checks is the cornerstone and most popular part of Obama's effort to rein gun violence. They are now mandated only for sales by the nation's 55 000 federally licensed gun dealers, not for private sales between individuals, like those at gun shows or online.An AP -GfK poll in January found 84% favoured requiring background checks at gun shows. Other proposed gun curbs were supported by just over half the public.

13-hour speech doesn't stop CIA vote

He spoke for 13 hours straight, but a Republican senator's attempt to block confirmation of President Barack Obama's nominee to lead the CIA over questions about the possible use of unmanned drones against US citizens, ended early on Thursday. Senator Rand Paul, a son of former Libertarian presidential candidate Ron Paul and a possible candidate himself in 2016, started just before midday on Wednesday by demanding that Obama or his attorney general issue a statement assuring that drones would not be used in the US to kill terrorism suspects who are citizens.His marathon performance energised his colleagues, who stepped up to support him by reading tweets and Shakespeare. But Paul finally ceded the floor shortly after midnight.A confirmation vote on the CIA pick, John Brennan, had been pushed for Wednesday before Paul started speaking. Brennan now serves as Obama's top counter-terrorism adviser in the White House.The vote on Brennan is now possible later this week.Paul said he recognised that he can't stop Brennan from being confirmed. But he said the nomination was the right vehicle for a debate over the government's ability to conduct lethal operations against suspected terrorists. Drones have become the centrepiece of the Obama administration's campaign against al-Qaeda suspects."No president has the right to say he is judge, jury and executioner," Paul said.The filibuster, as the rarely used delaying tactic is known, is the latest challenge to Obama's cabinet picks that need confirmation by the Democrat-controlled chamber. So far, only Senator John Kerry's nomination for secretary of state was approved without problem.Not all Republicans were enthusiastic about Paul's performance. Senator Lindsey Graham said the prospect of drones being used to kill people in the US was "ridiculous”.Congressman Mike Rogers, the chairperson of the House Intelligence Committee, said it is unconstitutional for the US military or intelligence agencies to conduct lethal counter-terrorism operations in the US against citizens. Suggesting they can or might, Rogers said, "provokes needless fear and detracts attention from the real threats facing the country”.Expanded use of dronesPaul read from notebooks filled with articles about the expanded use of drones. Senate rules say a senator has to remain on the floor to continue to hold it, even though he can yield to another senator for a question.Paul snacked on candy at the dinner hour while continuing to speak. Well-wishers with privileges to be on the Senate floor shook his hand when he temporarily turned the speaking over to his colleagues.Republican Senator Ted Cruz read Twitter messages from people eager to "Stand With Rand”. As the night went on, Cruz an insurgent Republican with strong backing from the conservative tea party movement, read passages from Shakespeare's "Henry V" and lines from the 1970 movie "Patton," starring George C Scott.The record for the longest individual speech on the Senate floor belongs to former Senator Strom Thurmond, who protested for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957.Paul ended his lengthy speech by saying he was tempted to try to break Thurmond's record, but he needed to use the bathroom."I discovered that there are some limits to filibustering, and I'm going to have to go and take care of one of those in a few minutes," Paul said.Lethal force inappropriateAttorney General Eric Holder, the country's top lawyer, came close to making the statement Paul wanted earlier in the day during an exchange with Cruz at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, according to Paul.Cruz asked Holder if the Constitution allowed the federal government to kill a US citizen on US soil who doesn't pose an imminent threat. Holder said the situation was hypothetical, but he did not think that in that situation the use of a drone or lethal force would be appropriate.Cruz criticised Holder for not simply saying "no" in response.In a letter sent on Tuesday to Paul, Brennan said the CIA does not have authority to conduct lethal operations inside the US.Holder told Paul in a 4 March letter that the federal government has not conducted such operations and has no intention of doing so. But Holder also wrote that he supposed it was possible under an "extraordinary circumstance" that the president would have no choice but to authorise the military to use lethal force inside US borders. Holder cited the attacks at Pearl Harbour in 1941 and on 11 September 2001, as examples.If confirmed, Brennan would replace Michael Morell, the CIA's deputy director who has been acting director since David Petraeus resigned in November after acknowledging an affair with his biographer.

Cuba gives Chavez hero's send-off

Cuba's leaders gave Hugo Chavez a send-off fit for one of their own on Thursday, with huge crowds turning out to pay homage to the late Venezuelan leader in the Revolution Plaza in Havana and Santiago. Cuban President Raul Castro, dressed in military uniform, placed a wreath before an image of Chavez, who died on Tuesday after a long struggle with cancer, in the ceremony in Santiago, 900km southeast of Havana.Cuba's new number two, Miguel Diaz-Canel, led another mass turnout at Havana's vast Revolution Plaza, the iconic public square from which revolutionary leader Fidel Castro used to address the Cuban people.Other events memorialising Chavez were to take place in plazas across Cuba on Thursday, an honour typically reserved for only historic leaders of the Cuban revolution.In this case, tradition was set aside to remember a crucial oil-rich ally whose largesse has kept the communist-ruled island economically afloat during his 14-year-rule.During his illness, Chavez was treated almost exclusively in Cuba where his cancer was first detected in June 2011. He underwent four rounds of surgery, chemo and radiation therapy before returning home for the last time 18 February.After his death in Caracas, the Cuban government declared that "Chavez is also Cuban" and was hailed as a "true son" of Fidel Castro.Cuban flags were lowered to half mast over the colonial fortresses of Morro and La Cabana overlooking Havana's harbour, and the government ordered three days of mourning.On Friday, when Chavez is buried in Venezuela, his passing will be marked here with a 21-gun salute.

Berlusconi sentenced to year in jail

An Italian court on Thursday sentenced former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi to a year in prison over the publication of leaked transcripts from a police wiretap in a newspaper that he owns.Berlusconi, who faces two more verdicts this month for tax fraud and having sex with an underage prostitute, can appeal the conviction which would suspend the sentence under Italian law.Italian sentencing guidelines indicate that people aged over 75 and with sentences of less than two years do not have to actually go to prison.Berlusconi, a billionaire media tycoon, is aged 76."I am disappointed and concerned because I am convinced that the proof was insufficient, contradictory or missing," Berlusconi's lawyer Piero Longo told reporters after the hearing."I was not expecting a conviction," he said.Demonstration plannedFabrizio Cicchitto, a leading member of Berlusconi's People of Freedom party, said: "The plan to eliminate Silvio Berlusconi through the justice system is now so obvious that it is dangerous for democracy.""We will our voices heard loud and strong on democracy and the need for justice that is fair and worthy of a civilised country," he said.The party is preparing a demonstration later this month against a justice system that Berlusconi frequently portrays as left-wing and biased.Berlusconi stood accused of violating secrecy laws after his Il Giornale daily published transcripts in 2005 that were widely seen as an attempt to discredit a senior member of the centre-left Democratic Party ahead of elections in 2006.The leaks were about the attempted takeover of BNL bank by insurance giant Unipol.Berlusconi's brother Paolo, editor of Il Giornale, was sentenced to two years and three months.Verdict expectedBerlusconi also faces a verdict possibly as early as 18 March in a trial in which he is accused of having sex with a then 17-year-old prostitute when he was prime minister and then abusing the power of his office by putting pressure on police to release her from custody.A verdict in his appeal trial against a tax fraud conviction from last year in which he was also sentenced to a year in prison is also expected around 23 March.Italian court dates are often changed at the last minute and Berlusconi's lawyers have tried to slow down all the trials, invoking "legitimate impediment" because of his duties as an MP.

NEWS,09.01.2013

Growth in coal demand to slow in 2013

Prices for seaborne thermal coal will stay above production costs for larger mines this year, while demand and supply of the fossil fuel will slow because of weaker economic growth and falling US exports, Deutsche Bank said in a report on Tuesday.Prices for Australian and South African coal benchmarks will be largely unchanged this year as a forecast 3% growth in demand for seaborne coal, driven mainly from China and India, will be met by a corresponding 3% rise in supply, leaving the market short by 19m tonnes, the German bank said.South African coal delivered into Europe (API 4 FOB Richards Bay) will average $93/tonne this year, unchanged from last year's levels, while Australian exports of coal (Newcastle FOB) are likely to fall to $95 from $97 seen in 2012, meaning most larger producers of coal will still be able to break-even or produce at a profit, the German bank said.Deutsche Bank estimated costs of production to be around $89-93, but only smaller producers are likely to be loss-making this year as wages and equipment costs stabilise and demand from fast-growing developing economies is likely to underpin the market, the report added."There is no single explanation for higher demand. In India, it is a perennial shortage of fuel for power generation amidst a slowly improving price tariff environment," Deutsche Bank coal analyst Michael Hsueh told Reuters."In China, [higher demand] is primarily driven by the need to fill in the gap between demand and domestic production to whatever degree it is beneficial. We do believe that we are seeing a recovery in China and that it will strengthen throughout the year," he added.The report said recent economic indicators suggest that China, the world's second-largest economy, could see growth pick up this year at a slightly faster rate compared with 2012, when the pace of expansion slowed and prompted the cancellation of some orders for coal and the build-up of big stockpiles."We can already observe that the year-on-year (y/y) growth in Chinese power demand has picked up in October and November 2012 to 7.1% and 8.0% respectively," it added.Moreover, demand for coal in the US, the world's second biggest consumer, could pick up slightly this year because gas prices are forecast to be higher, Deutsche Bank said.This would mean more production will be consumed domestically by utilities and less exported to Europe, where cheap US coal has prompted utilities to burn more of the fuel in power stations in 2012."As we forecast that US gas prices will average $3.75/mmBtu in 2013, and then carry on rising through 2015 in our forecasts to $4.00/mmBtu and $4.25/mmBtu, we expect that coal demand in the US will recover further in the next year."Despite some shutdowns of older mines in the US and smaller operations in Indonesia, mainly because of rising production costs and a 20% y/y fall in coal prices, global supply rose 7% in 2012 while demand grew 8% in 2012, Deutsche estimated.In a separate report on Tuesday Deutsche said a steady decline in European coal prices that has coincided with a tight gas market means that coal prices would have to rise by almost $80 per tonne in order to restore competitiveness to gas for power generation.

Turkey holds plane en route to Iran

Turkey has been holding for several days a cargo plane en route from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to Iran after its crew refused to document its load, a customs ministry official told AFP on Wednesday. "The plane owned by a Turkish company had to make an emergency landing at Istanbul's Sabiha Gokcen Airport due to technical reasons," the official said on condition of anonymity. "The company has to document its cargo at our customs until 10:00 [Wednesday], for security purposes otherwise we'll do what's necessary," he added, without elaborating. The official said that Turkish authorities would have the right to check the plane's cargo if the company refused to reveal the items on board. "It is most probably carrying gold," he speculated.An official from the Iranian embassy in Ankara told AFP that they had not been informed by the Turkish foreign ministry of the plane's grounding."Authorities will take necessary steps if there is any irregularity in the conduct of business," another Turkish official said.But officials declined to comment if the cargo of the plane was documented before the given time and if the plane was allowed to resume its journey.The incident comes amid indirect gold trade between Turkey and Iran, with the trade to settle Turkish imports of Iranian natural gas reportedly being done via UAE to bypass US-led sanctions against Tehran.Turkey could have faced recession if it was not for the boom in exports, particularly in gold sales to Iran, Economy Minister Zafer Caglayan said in December."Turkey ships 60% of its gold to Iran and [the] rest to the UAE and other countries. But we are not Iran's only market," the minister added.Turkey sold $6.5bn worth of gold to Iran and another $4.2bn worth to the UAE in the first 11 months of 2012. Ankara is under severe pressure from its Western allies to reduce imports of natural gas from Iran owing to Tehran's disputed nuclear programme. Fearing that Tehran aims to acquire nuclear weapons, the US has led Western powers to impose ever tougher sanctions against Iran which rejects the charge outright, insisting its programme is for peaceful purposes only.Under a law approved last year, Washington threatened to penalise foreign financial institutions over transactions with Iran's central bank, which handles sales of the country's key oil and gas exports.On 30 November, the US Senate unanimously approved new economic sanctions aimed at further crippling Iran's energy, shipping and port sectors.But shortly thereafter, Washington extended exemptions from the sanctions to nine major economic powers, including Turkey, China, Taiwan, India and South Korea.Ankara in return has cut its Iranian oil purchases by 20%. Energy Minister Taner Yildiz said last month Turkey met half of its crude oil needs from Iran in 2011 but was now trying to source more from Libya, Saudi Arabia and Russia.But Turkey expects the latest round of US sanctions against Tehran will not cover natural gas imports.Iran is Turkey's second-biggest natural gas supplier after Russia, and third biggest in oil.Iran's economy is struggling to cope with tightening sanctions imposed by the US and the EU over the past two years.Turkey says it is bound only by UN sanctions against Iran, and Turkish officials insist that Turkey will keep buying natural gas from Iran which supplies up to 20% of the gas it consumes.

Hagel to rein in Israel on Iran strike

Chuck Hagel, the nominee for the next US defence secretary, will seek to rein in Israel over any attempt to carry out a unilateral strike against Iran's nuclear facilities, Israeli observers believe. Hagel's nomination by US President Barack Obama must still be confirmed by the US Senate, but the prospect of the former senator assuming the top Pentagon post has already stirred concern in Israel.Analysts and commentators note that Hagel is known for a non-interventionist approach to foreign policy, and is believed to be strongly opposed to the use of military force to tackle Iran's nuclear programme."The road to Iran stops at Hagel," wrote commentator Bradley Burston in Wednesday's Haaretz newspaper."Obama's message to [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu on Iran is succinct enough to be spelled out in 10 letters: Chuck Hagel."The message to Jerusalem is clear: it won't be easy from now on getting a green light from Washington to embark on an adventure in Iran," commentator Orly Azulai wrote a day earlier in the top-selling Yediot Aharonot daily."That is one of the reasons why top figures in Jewish organisations in the US, as well as high-ranking Israeli political officials, have been spending the part number of weeks engaged in a concerted effort to prevent Hagel from being appointed," Azulai added."They argue that he is bad for Israel because he supports dialogue with Hamas and Hezbollah, and he doesn't think that the solution to the Iranian nuclear programme is war."Nadav Eyal, writing in the Maariv daily, agreed that Hagel favoured a non-military solution to the issue of Iran's nuclear programme, which much of the international community believes masks a weapons drive, despite Tehran's denials."Hagel would like for the US to speak directly with Iran, and no, he does not believe that war is the necessary outcome of the nuclear crisis there. He wants to avoid war at almost any price."Haaretz's Burston said that in selecting Hagel, Obama was sending the message that in his second term, he would not "grant the same flexibility" to Netanyahu."In the hole he dug with his ostentatious contempt for Obama, a hole he cannot afford to deepen, Netanyahu may have stumbled into paving the way for Hagel's nomination and confirmation," he wrote referring to the Israeli leader's open backing for Obama's rival in the presidential elections."Thus, the prime minister may ultimately become the factor that blocked a war with Iran."Speculation about a possible unilateral Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities reached fever pitch last year, but ultimately came to nothing, amid reports of strong US opposition to any such move.

Why the Hagel Battle Made More Sense for Obama Than the Rice Battle

 

Why did President Barack Obama choose a big battle with Republicans over Chuck Hagel rather than Susan Rice?Obama himself, of course, has not said. He never said that UN Ambassador Rice was his first choice for secretary of state. He also never said that former Nebraska Senator Hagel, now co-chair of the president's Intelligence Advisory Board and member of the Defense Policy Board, was his top pick for secretary of defense before announcing it on Monday.But the question is important enough for speculation because, at least from a superficial standpoint, it's such a striking contrast. Why go to war on behalf of a white male conservative Republican (on most issues outside geopolitics) rather than the black female Democrat who was a loyal campaign surrogate before joining his government?I don't think it's a matter of qualification. Both Hagel and Rice are qualified for Defense and State. Nor is it really a matter of confounding the notion of political loyalty. While Rice jumped from the Clinton circle, in which she was part of a pack of potential appointees, to the Obama circle, where she was able to enter at the top, Hagel made the existential leap in 2008 from dropping his old friend John McCain to lending a bipartisan veneer to Obama's famous campaign world tour, beginning in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even if Obama had come up short against Hillary Clinton, Rice was still a Democrat, close to the ascending young senator. Whereas Hagel was literally a man without a party.But it's not a matter of owing Hagel more than Rice, which in my view Obama does, either. Instead, I think it came down to a question of which battle made the most sense for Obama. In terms of promoting his agenda and, especially, in terms of minimizing risk of damage to his administration and maximizing the ability to create more problems for the Republican Party.With Rice, the advantage on the latter lay in emphasizing how Republicans were demonizing a black woman for a problem, the Benghazi disaster, she herself had nothing to do with causing. (Mischaracterizing being another matter.)But that point had been made. To continue to push it from an identity politics standpoint would have ignored the real risk of harm to the administration in making the debate about the appointment a debate about Benghazi. Yes, Rice, in her now famed Sunday chat show PR offensive five days after the terrorist attack which claimed the lives of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans on the anniversary of 9/11, followed talking points asserting that the attack was really the result of a protest gone sour. That there was ample information already available, in classified as well as journalistic form, that was wildly wrong  which it was was a problem for Rice going forward. But she could always try claiming that she was just following a script.The bigger problem for the administration, though not Rice herself, who was clearly doing some political spin work on the shows as she buffed up her own internal candidacy to replace Clinton, is that the talking points were altered as they made their way through the bureaucracy. Why turn Senate confirmation hearings on the secretary of state into an exercise in determining how the talking points changed from accurate to inaccurate? Indeed, why dwell on Benghazi at all? While clearly no Watergate, mistakes were made and a tragedy resulted. Not a very uplifting focus. And clearly no one wants to talk about the CIA's role in all this. CIA had a much bigger presence in Benghazi than State, yet was caught just as unawares as anyone else. Which doesn't make them evil, merely fallible.Some on the left say that Susan Rice was an advocate for the Iraq War and all manner of other military interventions in the Islamic world. (There was also grave concern in environmental circles around her multi-million dollar investments in Canadian fossil fuel stocks, including the Keystone XL pipeline, which the State Department is in charge of sorting out.)Columnist Peter Beinart, a shrewd observer of foreign policy elites and the U.S.-Israel relationship, says the reality is more complex, that the real problem with Rice is that she had no discernible position on the invasion of Iraq for reasons of careerism.Hagel we know supported the invasion of Iraq, then broke dramatically with President Bush, his old compadre John McCain, and the rest of his party, becoming a scourging critic of the Iraq War in particular and of the vastly interventionist neoconservative imperative in general. Even before that he had expressed sympathy for the Palestinians and a desire to avoid war with Iran.So a battle for Rice presented a muddy geopolitical contrast and a likely focus that was very antithecal to Obama's interests. Hagel, on the other hand, presents a very different scenario. With the battle over Hagel,Obama gets to take on what many view as the "Forever War" mindset of the neoconservative faction that seized control of the Republican Party's geopolitics with the election of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. And he gets to do it in a way that emphasizes his own preferred post-partisan positioning. For the neoconservative tendency, resilient as it is despite the debacle of the Iraq War an amnesiac ADD media culture being a prime enabler runs very contrary to major Republican thinking of the not so distant past. Not counting Republican isolationists of the past, internationalist Republicans like Dwight Eisenhower, who famously warned of the "military industrial complex," and the first President Bush saw limits to interventionism, even as they pursued the Cold War. (Eisenhower forced Britain, France, and Israel to give the Suez Canal back to Egypt following their bombing of Cairo and invasion of Egypt in 1956.) That became especially true after the Cold War.Bush I, for example, in the Gulf War, routed Saddam Hussein from his position occupying Kuwait but did not pursue regime change in Iraq, which he could easily have done. He put Saddam back in his box, and kept him there, where he was a useful counterweight to Iran. And while clearly a friend of Israel, the Bush I administration didn't follow everything on the Israeli government checklist. The neoconservative agenda, ever in lockstep with what is already the most right-wing government in Israel's history, has been very different, taking advantage of 9/11 by diligently pursuing regime change in Iraq on spurious grounds, then taking advantage of the resulting edge for Iran, and Iran's suspicious nuclear program, by pushing for war there. How would that work any better than the Iraq War? They don't say. By promoting Hagel, Obama brings all this to the fore. And he does it in a way which emphasizes that Hagel actually has a great many prominent Republican backers and represents an important tradition in Republican thinking prior to the advent of radical conservatism. General Colin Powell, U.S. secretary of state under Bush II and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Bush I, who presided over the success of the Gulf War, on Monday afternoon announced his strong support for Hagel, countering the neoconservatives who bedeviled his tenure during the Bush/Cheney years. As did fellow Vietnam vet former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, U.S. secretary of homeland security under Bush II and a finalist for vice president with John McCain.Hagel, who should be confirmed after a pointed and at times dramatic and entertaining battle, will be the first former enlisted man to serve as defense secretary. He will also be the first Vietnam War veteran to serve as SecDef.With John Kerry at State, the two will form an unprecedented duo of Vietnam War heroes at the top of America's geopolitical cabinet structure. Which is intriguing in itself, as it comes at a time when decreasing numbers in politics and the media have any military experience of their own. This is especially true among Hagel's eagerly interventionist neoconservative opponents, incidentally, as may be pointed out a time or two.Hagel earned two Purple Hearts in Vietnam for his wounds in combat as an infantry sergeant. A favorite of veterans service organizations, Hagel should relate well to rank and file service members as the military downsizes in the post-Iraq/Afghanistan era.It will be his charge to manage the ending of the Afghan War, as well as execute the big geopolitical pivot to the Asia-Pacific region which I write about on a regular basis. ( You can see an archive of my Pivot-related pieces here.)In what is surely not a coincidence, Afghan President Hamid Karzai is on a four-day visit to Washington this week. It's all about the transition away from the Afghan War for the U.S., and potential agreements about a relatively small residual force, almost certainly less than 10,000 troops.But while Hagel is hated by neoconservatives for breaking with them over the Iraq War, the battle lines over his nomination will play out in large measure over his relationship with Israel and his views of Iran and of radicalized Islamic militant organizations pushing for a Palestinian state.Like many of the geopolitical realists around the first President Bush, Hagel sees clear limits on how far America can follow the lead of the Israeli government and its most vociferous allies in the U.S. He's also backed negotiation with Iran and talks with radical Islamic militants.While Obama is in reality a huge supporter of Israel, as just retired Defense Minister Ehud Barak has noted many times, he is clearly no fan of its current government, the most right-wing in Israel's history. And it's a government that is apt to get more right-wing after the January 22 elections there.Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, a longtime conservative who has become more conservative while incorporating far right religious parties in his Likud coalition, is challenged in this election by his charismatic former chief of staff, Naftali Bennett, head of the new Jewish Home party. Bennett, son of two American emigres from, ironically, '60s San Francisco, has seen his support go up dramatically as he pushes far right-wing policies.Netanyahu, who clearly maneuvered during the U.S. presidential elections to help his old friend and business colleague Mitt Romney, looks to enlarge his appeal to coopt that of Bennett, a fellow former special operator in the elite Sayeret Matkal. (Netanyahu may be a warhawk, but you can't say he's a chicken hawk.)On the other side of the inevitable Bill Kristol  has there ever been a cable noise commentator with a poorer forecasting record?  and company in the Hagel confirmation battle is an array of Hagel supporters, including military brass and the new Bipartisan Group, which includes former Republican National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, former Democratic National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, former Republican Defense Secretary Frank Carlucci, former Republican Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering, former Democratic Senator David Boren, former Republican Senator Nancy Kassebaum-Baker, and my old friend and boss, former Senator and Democratic presidential frontrunner Gary Hart.There will be plenty to fight about in the coming debate. Hagel has previously urged talks with Hamas, which the U.S. and Israel have identified as a terrorist group, in order to try to make progress on the Palestinian issue. And he has looked decidedly askance at plans to attack Iran in efforts to derail its nuclear program.But when all is said and done, I expect a new focus to emerge from all the tumult. One in which we see the struggle with jihadism as one calling not for massive interventionism in the Islamic world but for carefully calibrated intelligence and special ops war, police action, and shrewd diplomacy to diminish the well of potential recruits.

NEWS,25.04.2012.

Annan alarmed at Syria military action

 

 New York - International envoy Kofi Annan told the UN Security Council on Tuesday that the situation in Syria is "bleak" and expressed alarm at reports that government troops are still carrying out military operations in towns where the UN observers are not present.He expressed particular concern at media reports that government troops entered the central city of Hama on Monday after the UN observers departed, firing automatic weapons and killing a significant number of people. Activists said more than 30 people were killed."If confirmed, this is totally unacceptable and reprehensible," he said.Annan echoed the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who called the current situation "unacceptable", and urged President al-Bashar Assad's government to immediately implement his six-point peace-plan, which would culminate with Syrian-led talks between the government and opposition aimed at reaching a peace settlement.The joint UN-Arab League envoy said the speedy deployment of the 300-strong UN observer force authorised by the council on Saturday is "crucial" to verify what is happening on the ground and potentially "change the political dynamics". The observer force also would provide the international community with "incontrovertible" information to increase pressure for a cease-fire by the government and opposition, he said.Annan briefed the Security Council by videoconference hours after his spokesperson, Ahmad Fawzi, told the UN Television in Geneva that satellite imagery and other credible reports show that, despite its claims, Syria has failed to withdraw all of its heavy weapons from populated areas as required by the cease-fire deal it accepted. Fawzi also cited credible reports that "people who approach the observers may be approached by security forces or Syrian army and harassed or arrested or even worse, perhaps killed".Annan did not mention either the satellite photos or the harassment and possible killing of people who talked to the observers in the text of his closed briefing, which was obtained by The Associated Press, but he stressed that "the government cannot cease action in one area to resume it in another".He told the council the Syrian foreign minister had informed him in a letter on 21 April of the withdrawal of troops and heavy equipment from populated areas and the handover of responsibility to police for maintaining law and order. He said he replied that this means troops should be back in barracks and weapons placed in storage "rather than operationally deployed," and that civilians should not be endangered by police actions.Annan said the minister's letter is "encouraging" and would make "a real difference ... if it is scrupulously applied". But he added pointedly, "It should be understood that the only promises that count are the promises that are kept."US Ambassador Susan Rice told reporters after the briefing that "several council members expressed their skepticism on the Syrian government's intentions and the veracity of statements contained in the Syrian foreign minister's letter".Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, whose country is Syria's most important ally, noted that some council members said "they have information" that Syria has not withdrawn its troops and heavy weapons."If this is the case, if the promise in the letter has not really been carried out, that would mean it is a breach of the promise they have made on Saturday," Churkin told reporters. "I'm certainly going to bring it to the attention of Moscow that there is an issue that needs to be looked at."US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told reporters in Washington that "the responsibility rests with Assad and with his supporters and his military to demonstrate a commitment to the Annan plan by silencing the guns"."Unfortunately, the Assad regime has broken its commitments time and again," she said. "So even as we work to help deploy the monitors, we are preparing additional steps in case the violence continues or the monitors are prevented from doing their work."Annan said that in addition to the reported military attacks, Syria's implementation of the other points in his peace plan — including unrestricted access for journalists and humanitarian workers and allowing peaceful demonstrations — "remains partial".Annan welcomed the council's initial authorisation of a 30-member advance team of the UN observers, and its approval of a 300-strong UN observer team, stressing the importance of getting "eyes and ears on the ground" with the ability to move freely and swiftly.Rice said the UN peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous told the council that 11 observers are currently in Syria including two in Homs and two in Hama. He predicted 30 observers will be on the ground by April 30 and 100 observers within a month, she said.Ladsous reported that the Syrian government refused at least one observer based on his nationality and stated that it will not accept any observers or civilians for the mission from countries that are members of the Friends of Democratic Syria, Rice said. The group includes more than 70 countries including the US, many European countries and a number of Mideast nations."He underscored that from the UN's point of view, this is entirely unacceptable," Rice said.Annan said available reports suggest the level of violence has decreased since 12 April  with the exception of the spike on Monday.He said the reported events in Hama on Monday "are a reminder of the risks that Syrians face if our effort to create a sustained cessation of violence does not succeed"."But we have also seen events change — at least temporarily — in Homs, where violence has dropped significantly in response to the presence of a very small number of observers," Annan said.