NEWS,21.05.2013

Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's Former President, Barred From Running In May Election

Iran's election overseers removed potential wild-card candidates from the presidential race Tuesday, blocking a top aide of outgoing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and a former president who revived hopes of reformers.
Their exclusion from the June 14 presidential ballot gives establishment-friendly candidates a clear path to succeed Ahmadinejad, who has lost favor with the ruling clerics after years of power struggles. It also pushes moderate and opposition voices further to the margins as Iran's leadership faces critical challenges such as international sanctions and talks with world powers over Tehran's nuclear program.
The official ballot list, announced on state TV, followed a nearly six-hour delay in which the names were kept under wraps. That raised speculation that authorities allowed some time for appeals by the blackballed candidates and their backers to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has final say in all matters.
But the official slate left off two prominent but divisive figures: former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Ahmadinejad protege Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei. The decision also appeared to remove many potential surprise elements in the race, including whether Rafsanjani could revitalize the reform movement or if Ahmadinejad could play a godfather role in the election with his hand-picked political heir.
Instead, the eight men cleared by the candidate-vetting Guardian Council included high-profile figures considered firm and predictable loyalists to the ruling Islamic establishment, such as former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf and Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili.
Just one approved candidate, Mohammad Reza Aref, might draw some moderate appeal because of his role as vice president under former reformist President Mohammad Khatami.
The rest of the choices, at the very least, would create a possibly seamless front between the ruling clerics and presidency after years of political turmoil under Ahmadinejad, who tried to challenge the theocracy's vast powers to make all major decisions and set key policies. Iran's presidency, meanwhile, is expected to convey the ruling clerics' views on the world stage and not set its own diplomatic agenda.
Mashaei called the decision unfair and said he will appeal to Khamenei. "God willing this will be resolved," semiofficial Fars news agency reported late Tuesday.
Rafsanjani did not comment, but his supporters denounced the decision on social media.
While the election is not expected to bring major shifts in Iran's position on its nuclear program which Tehran insists is peaceful despite Western fears it could lead to atomic weapons it could open opportunities to renew stalled talks with a six-nation group that includes the U.S.
On Tuesday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Araqchi said Iran's nuclear stance will "not change either before or after the election."
The ballot rejection of Mashaei brought little shock.
He has been badly tarnished by Ahmadinejad's feuds with the ruling clerics. Hard-liners have denounced Mashaei as part of a "deviant current" that seeks to undermine the country's Islamic system which made ballot approval highly unlikely.
This leaves Ahmadinejad politically orphaned going into the final weeks in office. He still has significant public support and could try to bargain with other candidates or break away and start his own political movement.
Few powerful voices came to Mashaei's defense in a sign of Ahmadinejad's fallen fortunes. But the case for Rafsanjani was more complicated.
His unexpected decision for a comeback bid 16 years after leaving office jolted hard-line foes and was cheered by beleaguered reformists and liberals after years of crackdowns.
Rafsanjani faced a barrage of attacks in the past week from powerful critics who suggested the 78-year-old does not have the stamina for the presidency and is disgraced for criticizing the heavy-handed tactics used to crush protests following Ahmadinejad's disputed re-election in 2009.
Rafsanjani's youngest daughter, Faezeh, was released from jail in March after serving a six-month sentence in connection with the postelection chaos. His middle son, Mahdi, also is to stand trial in coming weeks for his alleged role in the riots.
Late Monday, authorities closed down the Tehran headquarters of Rafsanjani's youth supporters.
But Rafsanjani still carries a legacy with a sweeping reach.
Moderates see him as a pragmatist who can deal deftly with the West and use his skills as patriarch of a family-run business empire to help repair Iran's economy, battered by sanctions and mismanagement. Others, even ideological foes, respect his high-profile role in the 1979 Islamic Revolution as the closest confidant of its spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
In a sign of possible lobbying on Rafsanjani's behalf, he received apparent support from some influential members of the Assembly of Experts the only group with the power to dismiss the supreme leader. Rafsanjani was pushed out as the group's chairman after failing to get enough support to leverage possible concessions from Khamenei on the 2009 postelection clampdowns.
One member, Ayatollah Mohieddin Haeri Shirazi, sent a letter to Khamenei saying "omitting a prominent figure from the election was incompatible" with giving wide choices to voters, the semiofficial ISNA news agency reported.
Another assembly member, Ayatollah Mohammad Vaez Mousavi, told the semiofficial ILNA news agency that Rafsanjani's age is not a weak point and many Iranian leaders "accepted responsibilities when they were quite old."
Prominent political analyst Saeed Leilaz said the "intensified defamation campaign" suggested worry among hard-liners that Rafsanjani had a real potential to rally moderates and others and win the election.
"What matters today is who can save the country's economy," he said, "Who has a plan to take Iran away from isolation and improve living conditions."

North Korea Releases Chinese Fishing Boat; Owner Says Captain Beaten

Gunmen wearing North Korean military uniforms released a Chinese fishing boat Tuesday after holding its crew for two weeks, beating up the captain and stealing the vessel's fuel, the boat's owner said. He added that the hijackers did not get the 600,000 yuan ($100,000) ransom they had demanded.
The seizure May 5 in what boat owner Yu Xuejun said were Chinese waters was the latest irritant in relations between North Korea and a Chinese government increasingly frustrated with its neighboring ally over tests of its nuclear and rocket technologies in defiance of U.N. bans. One of China's North Korea watchers said rogue border guards were probably responsible, rather than the Pyongyang government itself.
Yu said in an interview that the men were allowed to move around the boat while they were held captive, but were locked in a room at night. He said the captain suffered an arm injury when he was beaten, but he has since recovered, and that no other crew member was harmed. They now planned to stay out at sea for another 10 days.
"The North Koreans only left the crew with one sack of rice and one sack of flour. But this shouldn't be a problem as there are a lot of boats in that region now, all from Dalian," he said, referring to the northeast China port where his boat is based. "With their help, the crews will do OK for the next 8 or 10 days."
Yu publicized the boat's capture over the weekend on the Twitter-like Tencent Weibo as a ransom deadline neared. China then publicly demanded that North Korea release the men, though Chinese officials have not said whether they believe the armed captors were operating on their own or under North Korean government authority.
No ransom was paid, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said at a news briefing Tuesday.
"We demand North Korea investigate this case fully and furnish China with details, and take measures to stop such cases repeating themselves," Hong said.
Yu also said he hadn't paid any ransom. "We were working in our country's waters why should I pay them?" he said. He had earlier written online that he couldn't afford it.
He said the captors "looked like soldiers, and the captain said they had guns and used force to take over the boat."
Yu posted coordinates on his microblog indicating the seizure took place about 100 kilometers (60 miles) from the westernmost point of North Korea and about 190 kilometers (120 miles) from Dalian.
That area is outside both countries' territorial waters defined as 12 nautical miles from their shores but within their overlapping Exclusive Economic Zones, which give them rights to resources including fishing. Jurisdictions in overlapping zones are not always clear.
Yu said the North Koreans took about five tons of light diesel oil and six barrels of gasoline and food, but navigation and communication equipment that was initially taken was returned, Yu said.
Yu's pleas for help and his frets that his crew might be mistreated were forwarded thousands of times on the Internet, and a high-ranking Chinese military officer, Maj. Gen. Luo Yuan, wrote on Sina Weibo of his fury over the detention.
"North Korea has gone too far! Even if you are short of money, you can't grab people across the border and blackmail," wrote Luo, who has more than 300,000 followers.
A similar abduction a year ago of Chinese fishermen by armed North Koreans caused an uproar in China. After their release, those fishermen said they had been starved and beaten, and some had been stripped of everything but their underwear.
Hong, the Foreign Ministry spokesman, had declined to answer a question Monday about who exactly China believed was behind the boat seizure, but he made clear that Beijing was looking for the North Korean government to secure the release of the boat and crew.
An expert on North Korea at the Liaoning Academy of Social Sciences in northeast China said he doubted the North Korean government would have had any knowledge of the incident when it happened.
"This incident is purely about a lawless act by the North Korean border police to blackmail our fishermen," said Lu Chao, adding that such things frequently happen to Chinese fishermen working near border waters.
"Sometimes, if the amount they are asking for isn't too high, the boat owner would just pay it," he said. This time, it might be related to spring food shortages, "so they are asking for a huge ransom."

Xi Jinping, China's President, To Meet Obama At California Retreat In June

China's new leader Xi Jinping will confer with President Barack Obama next month in California, months earlier than expected, as both sides seek to stem a drift in relations, troubled by issues from cyberspying to North Korea.
The June 7-8 meeting at a retreat southeast of Los Angeles, announced Monday by the White House, underlines the importance of the relationship between the countries as they work out ways for the U.S.-led world order to make room for a China that is fast accruing global influence and military power.
President Xi has said China wants its rise to be peaceful, but that Beijing will not compromise on issues of sovereignty a stance that has aggravated disputes over contested East and South China Seas islands with several countries, including staunch U.S. allies Japan and the Philippines.
Among the other pressing items on the presidents' agenda: the spotty global economic recovery, U.S. allegations of persistent Chinese cyberattacks and espionage and Washington's desire for China to do more in international efforts to curb North Korea's nuclear program.
Washington has also criticized Beijing, along with Russia, for blocking tougher U.N. Security Council measures aimed at ending the bloodshed in Syria. China, for its part, has repeatedly lashed out at the U.S. military's ongoing strengthening of its presence in Asia, what it considers Washington's support for Japan in its island dispute with Beijing, and the U.S. questioning of China's human rights record and military buildup.
The meeting will be "of great significance to strengthening strategic communications, increasing strategic mutual trust ... properly handling disputes, developing cooperative relations and building a new type of big-power relationship," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.
The issues are so many that the agenda was becoming crowded for any Obama and Xi meeting.
The two leaders have spoken by telephone since Obama was re-elected and Xi elevated to Communist Party chief in November. Xi was named China's head of state in March for the first of what are expected to be two five-year terms.
The two met previously in February 2012, when Xi traveled to the U.S. as vice president and leader-in-waiting.
But before Monday's announcement, their first face-to-face meeting as leaders of their respective nations had not been expected until September in Russia, on the sidelines of the summit of the Group of 20 large economies.
"They needed more than 20 minutes on the sidelines of another meeting," said Bonnie Glaser of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "If they want to see U.S.-China relations on a solid footing, to manage the differences and find issues to cooperate on North Korea, Iran, climate change it has to start at the top. U.S.-China relations are not managed from the bottom up but from the top down."
The White House, in its statement, said the two presidents will "discuss ways to enhance cooperation, while constructively managing our differences, in the years ahead."
The decision to hold a working visit instead of a pomp-filled state summit underscores the government's decision to put protocol aside to focus on substance. Xi will make the stop-off in California after traveling to Trinidad and Tobago, Costa Rica and Mexico.
"The engagement has become more flexible, and that helps keep the contact at the highest levels, which is conducive to understanding each other's viewpoints and taking more effective measures," Zhu Feng, deputy director of the Center for International and Strategic Studies at Peking University.
The Foreign Ministry's Hong pointed to cooperation on issues including climate change, energy security, North Korea, and Iran. Disputes also exist, he said, without offering details, and require "proper handling and active controlling by both sides."
U.S. diplomats have said that Chinese officials had wanted Obama to come to Beijing late this year or early next. His last visit was in 2009. Xi's predecessor as president, Hu Jintao, was given a formal White House welcome in 2011.
To prepare for the California meeting, Obama's national security adviser, Tom Donilon, will go to Beijing on May 26-28, White House press secretary Jay Carney said.

NEWS,16.11.2012

Road closures in Israel indicate military build-up

The Israeli army said today it was closing three roads that lead to, or border the Gaza Strip, in an indication of a probable military build-up in the area.Shortly before, political sources said Defence Minister Ehud Barak was seeking government approval to mobilise up to 75,000 reserve troops for Israel's Gaza campaign, in a sign of preparations for a possible ground offensive.Western governments are watching Egypt's response to the attacks for signs of a more assertive stance towards Israel since an Islamist came to power in the Arab world's most populous nation.President Mohamed Mursi is mindful of anti-Israeli sentiment among Egyptians emboldened by last year's Arab Spring uprising but needs to show Western allies his new government is no threat to Middle East peace.His prime minister, Hisham Kandil, visited Gaza today in a demonstration of solidarity after two days of strikes by Israeli warplanes targeting Gaza militants."We see what is happening in Gaza as blatant aggression against humanity," Mursi said in comments carried by Egypt's state news agency. "I warn and repeat my warning to the aggressors that they will never rule over the people of Gaza."I tell them in the name of all the Egyptian people that Egypt today is not the Egypt of yesterday, and Arabs today are not the Arabs of yesterday."The Egyptian foreign minister also spoke to his counterparts in the US, Jordan, Brazil and Italy on Friday to discuss the situation in Gaza, a statement from the foreign ministry said.Mohamed Kamel Amr spoke to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about the necessity of cooperation between the US and Egypt to end the military confrontations. Amr stressed the necessity of Israel ending attacks on Gaza and a truce being rebuilt between the two sides, the statement said.Mursi's toppled predecessor Hosni Mubarak was a staunch US ally who upheld a cold but stable peace with Israel.The new president has vowed to respect a three-decade peace treaty with the Jewish state. But ties have been strained by protests that forced the evacuation of Israel's ambassador to Cairo last year and cross-border attacks by Islamist militants.More than 1000 people gathered near Cairo's al-Azhar mosque after prayers, many waving Egyptian and Palestinian flags."Gaza Gaza, symbol of pride", they chanted, and "generation after generation, we declare our enmity towards you, Israel"."I cannot as an Egyptian, an Arab and a Muslim just sit back and watch the massacres in Gaza," said protester Abdel Aziz Nagy, 25, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.Protesters were marching from other areas of Cairo towards Tahrir Square, the main rallying point for last year's uprising.

Iran ready to double nuclear work in bunker -IAEA

Iran is set to sharply expand its uranium enrichment in an underground plant after installing all the centrifuges it was built for, a United Nations report said, a move likely to increase Western alarm about Tehran's nuclear course.It also showed Iran's stockpile of its most sensitive nuclear material grown and was getting closer to an amount that could be sufficient for a nuclear weapon.The latest quarterly International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report on Iran came 10 days after the re-election of US President Barack Obama, which raised hopes for a revival of nuclear diplomacy with Iran following speculation that Israel might attack the nuclear facilities of its arch-enemy soon.But the UN watchdog's findings underlined the tough task facing world powers seeking to pressure Iran to curb atomic activity they fear is aimed at developing a nuclear weapons capability, a charge Tehran denies."The report paints the picture of Iran's continued lack of cooperation with the IAEA, and details its continued enrichment and installation of centrifuges in violation of UN Security Council resolutions," a senior Western diplomat said.The Islamic state has put in place the nearly 2800 centrifuges that the Fordow enrichment site was designed for and is poised to double the number of them operating to roughly 1400 from 700 now, according to the confidential IAEA report."They can be started any day. They are ready," a senior diplomat familiar with the IAEA's investigation said.If Iran chose to dedicate the new machines to produce higher-grade uranium, it could significantly shorten the time required for any bid to build an atomic bomb. Iran says it needs to refine uranium to make reactor fuel.In another potentially worrying development for the West, Iran appears to have virtually stopped converting this uranium into making civilian reactor fuel since the previous report.As a result, the stockpile of uranium gas refined to a fissile concentration of 20 percent increased by nearly 50 percent to 135 kg, the latest report said, still below the level of 200-250 kg experts say would be sufficient for an atomic bomb if refined further."This puts added pressure on the West's diplomacy with Iran, which has to operate on a tighter schedule," said research fellow Shashank Joshi at the Royal United Services Institute.Israel has recently signalled that an attack on Iran was not imminent - after months of talk that it might be on the cards soon by pointing to Iran's decision earlier this year to use part of its 20 percent uranium for civilian purposes."As Iran's 20% stockpile approaches around 240 kg, the Israeli sabre-rattling will resume,"

French PM tries to reassure Berlin

France's German-speaking prime minister has offered a worried Berlin reassurances his government would reduce the deficit and prevent France from becoming the next victim of the euro crisis by applying a new economic model.Jean-Marc Ayrault, making his first visit to Berlin since Francois Hollande became president, told German Chancellor Angela Merkel that France would find its own way to reduce spending and boost economic growth and jobs, rather than copying Germany."My challenge, the government's challenge, is to reform what isn't working, to correct what is too weak, but to keep the profound values that make France what it is," he told a joint news conference after talks with the conservative chancellor."The job that is under way is constructing the new French model," said Ayrault, a Socialist.A  report that Merkel's finance minister had asked the German government's economic advisers to consider preparing policy recommendations for France has stirred outrage in Paris.But Merkel said she would never dare to evaluate the decisions of the French government and added diplomatically: "We want a strong France just as France wants a strong Germany, so that together we can become a strong Europe."Ayrault also held a 20-minute meeting with German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble, who emerged saying Germany and France did not "grade" each others' economic policies.But it was clear French pride had been stung. Ayrault told a conference in Berlin organised by the Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper that his host country Germany also had its problems."The German population is ageing quicker than the French, which poses problems for pensions and social security," said the French premier."This sort of understanding for other countries' problems I expect it for my own country too."Paris is under intense pressure to improve French economic competitiveness relative to Germany and southern European countries that have implemented painful reforms to bring down their own debt in the face of a crippling three-year crisis.German officials are worried that without bolder reforms, France could get sucked into the crisis which has forced bailouts of Greece, Portugal and Ireland in what would be a crushing setback for the bloc's efforts to stem the turmoil.In response to calls by industrialist Louis Gallois for cuts in labour charges to reverse decades of industrial decline, the French government has now announced plans to grant companies 20 billion euros in annual tax credits to lower labour costs.Ayrault cited this as one example of the "courage" France's Socialist government was showing on economic reforms.His knowledge of Germany and its language may have been one of the reasons for his appointment. Relations between Merkel and the new president are often contrasted with the close partnership - especially on the euro crisis that she enjoyed with Hollande's conservative predecessor Nicolas Sarkozy.Hollande criticised Merkel's focus on austerity for the euro zone during his election campaign and the new Franco-German leadership couple have not got off to the best start."The main thing is to build a personal relationship," Ayrault said, adding that although the two governments belonged to opposing political factions, their relationship had to be "ueberparteilich" the German word for non-partisan.Ayrault and Merkel both rejected suggestions that the French premier's plans to meet Germany's centre-left opposition Social Democrats on Friday - less than a year before federal elections when Merkel will seek a third term undermined this ideal."The important thing is for us to work together well," said Merkel.

NEWS,05.10.2012

Venezuela's Chavez faces cliffhanger election

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez faces the toughest election of his 14-year rule on Sunday in a vote pitting his charisma and oil-financed largesse against fresh-faced challenger Henrique Capriles' promise of jobs, safer streets and an end to cronyism.Chavez, 58, staged a remarkable comeback from cancer this year and wants a new six-year term to consolidate his self-styled socialist revolution in the OPEC nation.Capriles, a boyish 40-year-old state governor, has run a marathon eight-month campaign of house-by-house visits that have galvanised the historically fractured opposition and set up its best shot at the presidency since Chavez's election in 1998.Defeat for Chavez would defenestrate Latin America's leader of anti-US sentiment while potentially boosting oil companies' access to the world's largest crude reserves.Victory would allow Chavez to continue a wave of nationalisations and consolidate control over the economy, though a recurrence of his cancer would weaken his leadership and possibly give the opposition another chance.In torrential rain, red-shirted supporters of the president filled much of downtown Caracas on Thursday for his final rally."Chavez will not fail the Venezuelan people," the president said, soaked to the skin in a dark raincoat, on a stage before a sea of fans. "You know that my loyalty to the people almost brought me to the point of death. This is my path."The former military officer, who survived a short-lived coup in 2002, has developed a near cult-like following by casting himself as a messianic reincarnation of 19th century liberation hero Simon Bolivar while pushing billions of dollars in oil revenue into social programmes.Most best-known pollsters put Chavez in front. But two have Capriles just ahead, and his numbers have edged up in others.The opposition leader has had more momentum in the final days of the campaign and he is confidently predicting victory."The time has come to leave the past behind," the opposition leader told a cheering crowd on Thursday, wrapping up a grueling months-long series of rallies across the country.The vote is also a cliffhanger for other left-wing governments in the region, from Cuba to Ecuador, who depend on Chavez's discounted oil sales and generous financial assistance.Emotional ties Seamlessly flipping from jocular prankster to blustering anti-capitalist crusader, Chavez's stories of his poor but happy childhood in a small village have helped him create an emotional bond with poor Venezuelans who see him as one of the family.For nearly a decade, he has won over voters with free health clinics, subsidized groceries and new universities.Over the last year he launched programs to give pensions to the elderly, stipends to poor mothers, and tens of thousands of new homes were handed over on live TV to tearful supporters.Everywhere Chavez has gone on the campaign trail, supplicants have shouted to him asking for help getting a home or a job, or thrust hand-written letters at his staff."I work for the state and I'm offended that the loser (Capriles) says we're made to attend and made to wear red!" said Paulo Garralaga, at Thursday's giant rally in Caracas. "I came to support Chavez and to tell him I'm going to vote for him."Yet day-to-day issues are overshadowing ideological fervor.Nationalisations have weakened private enterprise and given party apparatchiks growing control over jobs. Weak law enforcement, dysfunctional courts and plentiful arms have made Venezuela more violent than some war-zones. Frequent blackouts are an annoying reminder of squandered oil income."Each one of you should make a list of the problems that you have, and ask yourself, how many of those problems has this famous revolution solved for you?" the wiry and sports-loving Capriles intoned at one of his final rallies.The business-friendly law graduate easily won an opposition primary election in February and has united anti-Chavez parties like no one before him. His rallies have been notably more energetic and swollen with ecstatic fans in the final weeks.Sporadic violence has dogged the campaign, with three Capriles activists shot dead last weekend, demonstrating the volatile atmosphere and potential for violence around the vote.Capriles has promised to shed Chavez's doctrinaire vision of a state-led economy for a pragmatic balance between social welfare and free enterprise. He calls himself an admirer of Brazil's market-friendly left, which has pulled close to 35 million people into the middle class over a decade.Chavez has made ample use of state resources to bolster his campaign, speaking for hours about the virtues of socialism in "chain" broadcasts that all public access channels are required to run. The electoral authority has demurely declined to regulate such broadcasts, calling them "institutional" messages.Despite complaints of Chavez's advantages, opposition leaders say they see little risk of fraud during the electronic balloting itself. There will be no formal international observation of the vote, though local groups will be present and voting centers will have witnesses from both sides.Chavez's frequent vote victories over the last 14 years have undermined shrill opposition criticism that he is a dictator.But he has never had to hand over power. Though he accepted defeat in a 2007 referendum on his proposed overhaul of the constitution, in less than a year he used special decree powers to make many of the changes that voters had rejected.A win for Chavez could prompt a sell-off of Venezuelan bonds, which have risen steadily since June and jumped in recent weeks as investors bet on a possible Capriles win.Venezuela's heavy borrowing has made its debt among the most actively traded emerging market bonds - creating an odd romance between Wall Street and one of the world's most virulent critics of capital markets.Capriles is promising to improve the country's finances by cutting wasteful expenditures and halting politically motivated gifts to allied left-wing and anti-American nations."President Chavez, I thank you for what you have been able to do," the opposition leader said at his final campaign rally, in Lara state, in a rare direct use of his opponent's name."With the greatest respect: the time has come to move forward, and you will not be able to stop the people's advance."

Washington Doesn't Like Democratic Elections in Venezuela, Because of the Result

On May 30, Dan Rather, one of America's most well-known journalists, announced that Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez would die "in a couple of months at most." Four months later, Chávez is not only alive and campaigning but widely expected to win re-election on Sunday. Such is the state of misrepresentation of Venezuela it is probably the most lied-about country in the world  that a journalist can say almost anything about Chávez or his government and it is unlikely to be challenged, so long as it is negative. Even worse, Rather referred to Chávez as "the dictator"a term that few, if any, political scientists familiar with the country would countenance.Here is what Jimmy Carter said about Venezuela's "dictatorship" a few weeks ago: "As a matter of fact, of the 92 elections that we've monitored, I would say that the election process in Venezuela is the best in the world."Carter won a Nobel Prize for his work through the election-monitoring Carter Center, which has observed and certified past Venezuelan elections. But because Washington has sought for more than a decade to de-legitimize Venezuela's government, his viewpoint is only rarely reported. His latest comments went unreported in almost all of the U.S. media.In Venezuela, voters touch a computer screen to cast their vote and then receive a paper receipt, which they then verify and deposit in a ballot box. Most of the paper ballots are compared with the electronic tally. This system makes vote-rigging nearly impossible: to steal the vote would require hacking the computers and then stuffing the ballot boxes to match the rigged vote.Unlike in the United States, where in a close vote we really have no idea who won (see Bush v. Gore, 2000), Venezuelans can be sure that their vote counts. And also unlike the U.S., where as many as 90 million eligible voters will not vote in November, the government in Venezuela has done everything to increase voter registration (now at a record of about 97 percent) and participation.Yet the U.S. foreign policy establishment (which includes most of the American and Western media) seethes with contempt for Venezuela's democratic process. In a report timed for the elections, the so-called "Committee to Protect Journalists" says that the government controls a "media empire," neglecting to inform its readers that Venezuelan state TV has only about 5-8 percent of the country's television audience. Of course, Chávez can interrupt normal programming with his speeches (under a law that pre-dates his administration), and regularly does so. But the opposition still has most of the media, including radio and print media -- not to mention most of the wealth and income of the country. The opposition will most likely lose this election not because of the government's advantages of incumbency  which are abused throughout the hemisphere, including the United States. If they lose, it will be because the majority of Venezuelans have dramatically improved their living standards under the Chávez government. Since 2004, when the government gained control over the oil industry and the economy had recovered from the devastating, extra-legal attempts to overthrow it (including the 2002 U.S.-backed military coup and oil strike of 2002-2003), poverty has been cut in half and extreme poverty by 70 percent. And this measures only cash income. Millions have access to health care for the first time, and college enrollment has doubled, with free tuition for many students. Inequality has also been considerably reduced. By contrast, the two decades that preceded Chávez were one of the worst economic failures in Latin America, with real income per person actually falling by 14 percent from 1980-1998.In Washington, democracy has a simple definition: does a government do what the State Department wants them to do? And of course here, the idea of politicians actually delivering on what they promised to voters is also an unfamiliar concept. So it is not just Venezuela that regularly comes under fire from the Washington establishment: all of the left and newly independent governments of South America, including Argentina, Ecuador, and Bolivia are in the cross-hairs (although Brazil is considered too big to get the same treatment except from the right). But the State Department tries to keep its eyes on the prize: Venezuela is sitting on 500 billion barrels of oil, and doesn't respect Washington's foreign policy. That is what makes it public enemy number one, and gets it the worst media coverage.But Venezuela is part of a "Latin American Spring" that has produced the most democratic, progressive, and independent group of governments that the region has ever had. They work together, and Venezuela has solid support among its neighbors. This is Lula da Silva last month: "A victory for Chávez (in the upcoming election) is not just a victory for the people of Venezuela but also a victory for all the people of Latin America . . . this victory will strike another blow against imperialism." South America's support is Venezuela's best guarantee against continuing attempts by Washington - which is still spending millions of dollars within the country in addition to unknown covert funds to undermine, de-legitimize, and destabilize democracy in Venezuela.

The Lifeline for Damascus and Tehran Is in Putin's Hands

The collapse of the Iranian currency by one-third of its value over a week will leave an impact on Iran's nuclear and strategic ambitions - especially through the gateway of Syria. Russia may thus find itself in need of salvaging its Iranian ally for numerous reasons, among them, its need for Iran in its battle against the United States in its Muslim neighborhood, in the wake of the American withdrawal from Afghanistan. There are three schools of thought on where things are going in the relationship between the United States and Iran, and what it entails in terms of indications and repercussions in the Middle East and for Russia.The first states that President Barack Obama - who is likely to win a second term  will not bomb Iran no matter what and that the Islamic Republic of Iran will therefore obtain military nuclear capability, and perform a nuclear test within a year or two.The second states that there is no escaping a military confrontation between the United States and Iran, which would start with an Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear sites, followed by Iranian retaliation against economic locations in Arab countries in the Gulf region. Finally, the third states that sanctions are leading Iran to collapse from within, and that the deterioration in the value of the currency and the economy at large will lead to reducing Tehran's ability to fund the regime in Damascus and Hezbollah in Lebanon. At the end of the day, it is purported, Russia will not be able to bankroll Iran and save it at the economic and nuclear levels.Each of those schools of thought advances detailed and noteworthy scenarios. What they have in common is that the Russian-Chinese-Iranian alliance with the regime in Damascus will not be able to maintain President Bashar Al-Assad in power, no matter how long it takes. In addition, prolonging the conflict in Syria will lead to a war of attrition, in a civil war that could lead to dividing Syria in a manner similar to what took place in the former Yugoslavia. Yet opinion is divided over this scenario, with some considering it possible, while others believe otherwise. Another common denominator is the assessment of both US President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin, as both lacking in strategic visions and thinking into long-term interests. Obama is, in the view of some, arrogant and stubborn, as well as an isolationist who lacks the courage to take the initiative and prefers to hide behind the American aversion to further interventions, instead of being a leader who knows where the interest of the United States lies in these times of transitions and new strategic equations. As for Putin, he is, again in the opinion of some, aman of posturing and excessive Russian nationalism, who values himself highly and considers himself to be the leader of a superpower - while Russia remains at the level below. He adopts revenge as a policy in the face of offense, and does not care for the price paid by innocent civilians in return. Vladimir Putin exploited the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) in Afghanistan, then rebelled against it in Libya and is now taking revenge against it over the dead bodies of innocent Syrians. Former US President George W. Bush did favors to both Russia and China in Afghanistan, in his war against terrorism and Islamic extremism. The aim was to eradicate Islamic extremism in Afghanistan before it spreads and reaches the five Muslim republics that surround Russia and come near to China, without Moscow and Beijing participating in covering the exorbitant cost. Barack Obama made the mistake of not satisfying Putin in a so-called "Grand Bargain", including by not granting Russia the port of Tartus. Yet what he is preparing to do in Afghanistan may well unintentionally represent a lethal blow for Vladimir Putin. The withdrawal of the United States within the framework of NATO's withdrawal from Afghanistan may well represent the tipping point for Russia to slip into a war against Islamic extremism on its home soil and in its immediate neighborhood in the five Muslim republics. Vladimir Putin will find himself alone in such a confrontation, of which he has sowed the seeds himself in Syria, when he could have done the opposite if he had not made use of his veto for a third time, committing a major strategic blunder in the process.Vladimir Putin may well be forced to wage his own war on terror as George W. Bush had done in the past - and in fact probably believes himself to be doing just that in Syria. Bush summoned Al-Qaeda and groups like it to Iraq and waged the war there in order to keep terrorism away from American cities, as he said. Similarly, Putin contributed to the arrival of jihadists to Syria through the series of vetoes he made use of at the Security Council, in revenge for what NATO did in Libya. He thus encouraged the rise of extremism in Syria, while demonstrations had at the beginning been secular and only demanded reform in Syria. Bush entered into a war with his troops in Iraq. Putin is gathering a budget of around 70 billion dollars to confront the Muslim extremism arriving at his gates. Bush offered Iraq to Iran and played the Shiite-Sunni card based on the fact that the 9/11 terrorist attacks had been the work of Sunnis. Putin is allying himself with Iran on the same confessional basis, but also for reasons connected to his hatred of the United States on the one hand, and of the Arabs on the other. He respects Iran's arrogance and despises the weakness and fragmentation of the Arabs. He also finds a common denominator between himself and Tehran's mullahs in their absolute hatred of the United States and their need to confront it - yet only through proxy wars. This kind of thinking reveals Vladimir Putin's ignorance of both the Arabs and Iran, and it will lead him to take Russia down a slippery slope to collapse, if he does not correct his course quickly before it is too late. What he is doing in Syria is investing against himself in the Muslim republics and in Chechnya. And if he is to correct his course, Syria is the place to start, as it would improve his relations with the leaderships of the Arab Maghreb and would lead him to partner with them, with the Gulf countries and with the United States to eradicate the Jihadist extremism that is spreading in the Arab Maghreb. The interviews conducted by Al-Hayat last week with Libyan President Mohamed El-Magariaf and Tunisian President Moncef Marzouki, show the extent to which this trend has proliferated. There is no use for Russia to be alone in the forefront, and this is what will happen after the withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan, the stronghold of jihadists, as well as the base from which this new jihadist action will be launched against Russia as a result of the stances taken by Vladimir Putin and of his short-sightedness. He will come to regret it. So will China, if it continues to follow the direction into which Putin is taking it. Indeed, it in turn is exposed to this, particularly in Turkestan (Xinjiang), and will suffer after the Western withdrawal from Afghanistan, which will become the center of Russia and China's entanglement with Jihadistextremism. China in turn will foster enmity with the Arabs because of Syria, and will not benefit from allying itself with the losers in Damascus or perhaps in Tehran. Iran will not be among the losers according to the first scenario, adopted by the school that states that it will obtain nuclear capabilities after performing a military nuclear test some say will take place within a year or two. After the test, it will be too late. Then, an arms race will begin in the Gulf region, and there are indications that serious precautionary preparations are being made by some Gulf countries capable of obtaining nuclear capabilities. Then, it will be too late for the United States and for Israel, as they will not be able to rein in Iran or the nuclear arms race in the Arab region. Yet this will not mean salvation for the regime in Damascus, because Iran moving to the level of a nuclear power will make it, in the opinion of some, more cautious and careful not to get implicated in confrontations. Indeed, it will not make use of nuclear weapons even if it obtains them - it will behave like a nuclear power and will avoid proxy wars because it will have no need for them. Thus, according to those who are of this opinion, Tehran will adopt of policy of neglecting the regime in Syria as well as Hezbollah in Lebanon, because it will stabilize and position itself at the nuclear level, and rein itself in at the regional level.As for Israel, what is referred to as the "weakness" of its Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, will lead Iran to move forward at the nuclear level, according to an opinion held by some, especially as the US President will not let himself be dragged into bombing Iran on behalf of Israel. The second scenario is based on the assumption that Israel will direct a military strike against Iranian sites that would implicate the United States and force Obama to intervene militarily, if Iran were to respond to Israel at the military level. Yet there is information indicating that Iran will not take revenge on Israel directly or on American troops in the region, but will rather respond by striking against vital economic locations in Arab countries in the Gulf. Then too, some deem it likely that the United States will not be able to stand idly by and will be forced to strike against Iran, because directing military strikes against such vital economic locations would represent a blow to interests essential to the United States. Thus, according to this scenario, a war between the United States and Iran will take place either way.It is unlikely for Iran's leadership to remain completely silent in the face of an Israeli strike, because this would represent a national offense and would be perceived as weakness at the domestic level. If it does remain silent, this could be because it would have come very close or even become ready to perform a nuclear test. Matters developing in the direction of a war between the United States and Iran will lead to a quicker collapse of the regime in Damascus. Hezbollah could get implicated by using the Lebanese scene as an arena for Iran's revenge on Israel, and thus in turn quickly collapse. Or it could disassociate itself from the issue and choose to reform its ways.The third scenario is based on economic collapse within Iran, which would start with the sharp devaluation of its currency and would go through an economic crisis that would turn the Iranian interior against the leadership in Tehran. Such decay will lead to Tehran being forced to seriously lower the support it is extending to its ally in Damascus, which in turn has entered the cycle of economic erosion and decay. It will also lead to reducing Iranian funding of Hezbollah in Lebanon as well. Indeed, the three of them are subject to economic sanctions that will become increasingly stifling, even if they have tremendous reserves of weapons. No matter how arrogantly they behave, these sanctions will weaken and besiege them. Their lifeline to salvation rests in Putin's hands alone, but he in turn is besieged, after having allowed himself to commit strategic mistakes he may well sorely regret.

NEWS,22.05.2012.

Deal on probe reached with Iran: UN

Despite some remaining differences, a deal has been reached with Iran that will allow the UN nuclear agency to restart a long-stalled probe into suspicions that Tehran has secretly worked on developing nuclear arms, the UN nuclear chief said on Tuesday.

 

The news from International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Yukiya Amano, who returned from Tehran on Tuesday, comes just a day before Iran and six world powers meet in Baghdad for negotiations and could present a significant turning point in the heated dispute over Iran's nuclear intentions. The six nations hope the talks will result in an agreement by the Islamic Republic to stop enriching uranium to a higher level that could be turned quickly into the fissile core of nuclear arms.Iran denies it seeks nuclear arms and says its reactors are only for power and medical applications.By compromising on the IAEA probe, Iranian negotiators in Baghdad could argue that the onus was now on the other side to show some flexibility and temper its demands. Although Amano's trip and the talks in Baghdad are formally separate, Iran hopes progress with the IAEA can boost its chances on Wednesday in pressing the US and Europe to roll back sanctions that have hit Iran's critical oil exports and blacklisted the country from international banking networks.Differences no obstacleIt was unclear, though, how far the results achieved by Amano would serve that purpose, with him returning without the two sides signing the deal, despite his upbeat comments.After talks in Tehran between Amano and chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili, "the decision was made... to reach agreement" on the mechanics of giving the IAEA access to sites, scientists and documents it seeks to restart its probe", Amano told reporters at Vienna airport after his one-day trip to Tehran.Amano said differences existed on "some details", without elaborating but added that Jalili had assured him that these "will not be an obstacle to reach agreement". He spoke of "an almost clean text" that will be signed soon, although he could not say when.Western diplomats are sceptical of Iran's willingness to open past and present activities to full perusal, believing it would only reveal what they suspect and Tehran denies - that the Islamic Republic has researched and developed components of a nuclear weapons programme. They say that Tehran's readiness to honour any agreement it has signed is the true test of its willingness to co-operateThe United States is among those sceptics. In a statement released soon after Amano's announcement, Robert A Wood, America's chief delegate to the nuclear agency, said Washington appreciated Amano's efforts but remained "concerned by the urgent obligation for Iran to take concrete steps to co-operate fully with the verification efforts of the IAEA, based on IAEA verification practices".Good intentions"We urge Iran to take this opportunity to resolve all outstanding concerns about the nature of its nuclear programme," said the statement. "Full and transparent co-operation with the IAEA is the first logical step."German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle also urged Iran to put professed good intentions into action."Enduring and substantial co-operation by Iran with the International Atomic Energy Agency to clear up the open questions surrounding the Iranian nuclear programme would be an important and at the same time overdue step in the right direction," he said in a statement.
On the Baghdad talks, "the aim is to make progress not just atmospherically but also on substance," he said, reflecting Western views that the feel-good effect achieved at a previous round in Istanbul last month must now be built upon with concrete steps aimed at reducing international concerns over Tehran's nuclear agenda.For the six powers - the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany - a main concern is Iran's production of uranium enriched to 20%, which is far higher than needed for regular energy-producing reactors but used for one Iran says it needs for medical research.The US and its allies fear the higher-enriched uranium could be quickly boosted to warhead-grade material.Israel against concessionsUS officials have said Washington will not backpedal from its stance that Iran must fully halt uranium enrichment. But speculation is increasing that the priorities have shifted to block the 20% enrichment and perhaps allow Iran to maintain lower-level nuclear fuel production - at least for now.Iranian officials could package such a scenario as a victory for their domestic audience. In Israel, it would likely be greeted with dismay and widen rifts between President Barack Obama's US administration and Israeli officials who keep open the threat of military action against Iran's nuclear sites.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned against concessions, saying world powers should make "clear and unequivocal demands" that Iran stop all of its nuclear enrichment activity.
"Iran wants to destroy Israel and it is developing nuclear weapons to fulfil that goal," Netanyahu said at a conference in Jerusalem. "Against this malicious intention, leading world powers need to display determination and not weakness. They should not make any concessions to Iran."Jalili, Iran's top nuclear negotiator who met with Amano and will also be the lead envoy at the Baghdad talks, said his country hopes for a new beginning when the talks start on Wednesday."We hope that the talks in Baghdad will be a kind of dialogue that will give shape to ... co-operation," Jalili said after arriving in Baghdad late on Monday.More inspections As part of any agreement, Amano and his agency are focused on getting Iran to let agency experts to probe various high-profile Iranian sites, including the Parchin military complex southeast of Tehran, where the agency believes Iran in 2003 ran explosive tests needed to set off a nuclear charge. The suspected blasts took place inside a pressure chamber.
Iran has never said whether the chamber existed, but describes Parchin as a conventional military site. Iran, however, has blocked IAEA requests for access to sites, scientists and documents needed for its investigation for more than four years.Amano's talks included Jalili as well as Iran's foreign minister and other officials including the head of Iran's nuclear agency, Fereidoun Abbasi.Iranian lawmaker Heshmatollah Falahtpisheh saids on Monday that Tehran will likely accept more inspections of Parchin "if it feels there is good will within the [IAEA]".But Falahtpisheh warned that this new openness will likely come with expectations that the West would in return ease international sanctions on Iran.Flexibility"In opening up to more inspections, Iran aims at lowering the crisis over its nuclear case," he said. "But if the sanctions continue, Iran would stop this."A political analyst in Tehran, Hamid Reza Shokouhi, said Iran is carefully watching to see if the West shows more "flexibility and pays attention to Iranian demands" during Amano's trip."Then Iran will show flexibility, too," Shokouhi said.
But some Iranian media was critical of Amano and the IAEA, possibly reflecting internal divisions on how far to go compromise on nuclear issues.In a sign of ebbing market worries, oil prices have steadily fallen since Iran and world powers resumed talks in April in Istanbul. Fears of supply disruptions because of military conflict or Iranian shipping blockades helped drive prices above $106 a barrel earlier this year. Oil rose to slightly above $92 per barrel on Monday in New York.