China warns U.S. officials not to meet Dalai Lama

China's Foreign Ministry warned U.S. officials on Thursday not to meet with visiting exiled spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, saying it hoped Washington "appropriately dealt" with Tibet-related issues.


China reviles the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Dalai Lama, saying he supports the use of violence to establish an independent Tibet. He strongly denies either accusation, insisting he seeks only true autonomy for the remote region.

The Dalai Lama is currently visiting the United States and is due to give a public talk in Washington Saturday.

The U.S. State Department said he met on Wednesday with Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs Maria Otero, but that it remained to be decided whether he would have any meetings at higher levels.

On Thursday, House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and other senior U.S. lawmakers also met the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said Beijing's position on the Dalai Lama's foreign visits was clear.

"We oppose the underhand visits of the Dalai Lama which he uses to engage in activities to split the motherland," Hong told a regular news briefing.

"At the same time, we also oppose any foreign government or politicians supporting or abetting in such activities by the Dalai Lama," he added.

"We hope that the United States strictly abide by its promises on the Tibet issue and ... cautiously and appropriately deal with relevant issues," Hong said.

The Dalai Lama met U.S. President Barack Obama last year, drawing strong denunciation from Beijing.

Read More

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/08/us-china-usa-dalailama-idUSTRE7667OI20110708

Lawmakers working on next year's federal finances have taken the ax to the James Webb Space Telescope.

That's right, NASA's next-generation space telescope, the successor to Hubble and the space agency's biggest post-shuttle project, may be killed.

To be clear, there are many more steps in the budget process before this is final -- lawmakers are working on next year's budget despite a stalemate between the White House and Republican leadership, so a lot could change in the next couple weeks. And odds are decent that at least some lawmakers will fight to preserve this enormous technological marvel (and the jobs associated with its construction). But this is not good news for astronomy, to put it mildly.

Read More

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/06/house-subcommittees-budget-bill-puts-most-powerful-space-telescope-on-chopping/?test=faces

US warns Syria over troop movement at Turkey border

The US has expressed concern over reports that Syria is moving troops near the border with Turkey, and warned of a possible escalation of conflict.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the reported Syrian troops movements were "very worrisome".

She said it could increase the risk of a border clash with Turkey and worsen the plight of refugees.

Syrian tanks and snipers reportedly entered the village of Khirbet al-Jouz, forcing resident to flee to Turkey.

More than 1,300 people are said to have been killed since a crackdown on anti-government protests began in March.

Thousands more protesters have been detained, opposition activists say.

Several Syrian cities - including Homs and Hama - have declared a general strike after deadly clashes with security forces and supporters of President Bashar al-Assad earlier this week.

Read More

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13899035

Analysis: U.S. forces face new challenges after drawdown

WASHINGTON — The United States and its allies have made dramatic progress in Afghanistan over the past year, seizing the initiative from the Taliban and driving insurgents from key strongholds in the south.

The challenge for military commanders now will be to consolidate those gains and shift the military main effort to tackle insurgent strongholds in the east — all with fewer troops.

The plan is a "compromise that will be problematic to many of the players," warned David Barno, a retired three-star general who commanded coalition forces in Afghanistan and is now a senior adviser at the Center for a New American Security.

Several commanders in Afghanistan had said reductions should be made so as to not jeopardize gains.

Read More

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2011-06-22-analysis-drawdown-afghanistan-obama_n.htm?csp=34news

China in no mood to listen in U.S. rights talks

China's increasingly tough line against dissent suggests it will be in no mood to bend to U.S. demands to soften its approach when the two begin talks on human rights on Wednesday.

Analysts said the gulf between the two sides looks especially deep ahead of this year's annual U.S.-China human rights dialogue, with Beijing nervous of social unrest and Washington sounding more vocal in its criticism.

"This is the first time that the human rights dialogue will be held in an environment this bad," said Sophie Richardson, China director for Human Rights Watch, a U.S.-based advocacy group.

Washington came out jabbing before the two-day talks began, saying it would use them to press Beijing over a "recent negative trend of forced disappearances, extralegal detention, and arrests and convictions" of dissidents and rights advocates.


Read More

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/27/us-china-usa-rights-idUSTRE73Q0UE20110427

U.S. wants other nations to pitch in on Libya

President Obama has touted his emphasis on multilateralism in the U.S. military intervention in Libya, but — for political, operational and legal reasons — his “coalition of the willing” is smaller than any major multilateral operation since the end of the Cold War.

The Cable compiled a list of the countries that contributed at least some military assets to the five major military operations in which the United States participated in a coalition during the past 20 years: the 1991 Persian Gulf War (32 countries participating), the 1995 Bosnia mission (24 countries), the 1999 Kosovo mission (19 countries), the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan (48 countries) and the 2003 invasion of Iraq (40 countries), at the height of the size of each coalition.

As of today, only 15 countries, including the United States, have committed to a military contribution to the war in Libya.

Experts quickly point out that all of these military interventions happened in different contexts. However, they added that the reason Obama’s Libya war coalition has less international involvement than all the others was also because of his administration’s behavior in the lead-up to the war, its approach to multilateralism, the speed at which it was put together, and the justifications for the war itself.

Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said the administration’s effort to build the coalition was hampered by its stated desire to hand off the leadership of the Libya intervention to NATO.

“Obama, in his deference to [getting out of the lead], has not only wanted other countries to do as much as they could, he has essentially forgone his responsibility to build the coalition,” he said.

The mission in Libya is, by definition, smaller in scale than those in Iraq or Afghanistan, and a no-fly zone doesn’t require as many countries as a full-on invasion, O’Hanlon pointed out. However, the relatively few Arab countries contributing military assets — three so far — could pose a problem for the mission’s legitimacy.

Although the Libya intervention was endorsed by the Arab League, the endorsement doesn’t require any Arab countries to contribute materially to the effort, said David Bosco, an assistant professor at American University.

“At a certain point, the administration is going to have to decide whether just to say this is a coalition of willing countries,” he said. “That’s not the end of the world.”

Read More

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/us-wants-other-nations-to-pitch-in-on-libya/2011/03/30/AFh2IY6B_story.html

Libya suspended from U.N. Human Rights Council

This is the first time that a country has been suspended from the General Assembly of the U.N. Human Rights Council.

The United Nations General Assembly has unanimously voted to suspend Libya from the U.N. Human Rights Council in the wake of continuing attacks on pro-democracy protesters there by Muammar Qadhafi’s regime.

“Expressing deep concern about the human rights situation” in Libya, the General Assembly “decides to suspend the rights of membership in the Human Rights Council” of the African nation, the brief resolution said.

U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice pointed that this is for the first time a country has been suspended by the General Assembly. “This is a harsh rebuke, but one that Libya’s leaders have brought down upon themselves. When the only way a leader can cling to power is by grossly and systematically violating his own people’s human rights, he has lost any legitimacy to rule,” she said. “He (Qadhafi) must go, and he must go now.”

Last week, U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva decided to suspend Libya’s membership from the 47-nation body.

However, this decision was needed to be approved by two-thirds of the 192-member General Assembly.

While it did not vote against the resolution, Venezuela was the only country to express reservations about the suspension.

“A decision such as this one could only take place after a genuine investigation,” Jorge Valero Briceno, Venezuelan envoy for the U.N., told the General Assembly.

On Saturday, the Security Council unanimously passed a resolution ordering an arms embargo, a travel ban and assets freeze against Qadhafi and his supporters. The 15-member body also referred the recent events in Libya to the International Criminal Court.

The United States and European Union have also approved sanctions against Qadhafi.

In his speech, Mr. Briceno accused the U.S. of having “imperialistic” designs in Libya.

“The Security Council resolution, however, has not authorized military intervention,” he said. “Yet an imperialist country is unilaterally and visibly deploying its military and nuclear machinery in order to carry out an armed attack against Libya.”

In response, Ms. Rice called Briceno “delusional.” “The Venezuelan Perm Rep’s comments were ugly and reprehensible and I think I dealt with them emphatically in the chamber,” she told journalists. “And, you know, he can live in the fantasy world that he apparently does.”

Read More

http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article1503043.ece

No specific terror threat to World Cup: US

WASHINGTON: Noting that there is no specific terrorist threat to the ICC World Cup being held in India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, the US has urged its citizens to be alert while travelling to these countries during the tournament as such big events are always a soft targets for the militants.

"The Department of State alerts US citizens traveling to or residing in India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka to safety and security issues related to the ICC Cricket World Cup scheduled to be held in those countries between February 19 and April 2, 2011," said a US travel advisory.

While the US government has no specific threat information regarding the Cricket World Cup, high-profile events of this nature can be targets for terrorist attacks, the State Department said in a statement a day after the mega cricket event was kicked off in Dhaka yesterday.

The State Department reminded its citizens about the worldwide travel alert it had issued about the American nationals on January 31 which also includes South Asian countries.

Observing that local authorities in the country where individual matches are held are responsible for security arrangements for the ICC Cricket World Cup, the State Department said US citizens should monitor local news reports and consider the level of security present when visiting public places, including religious sites, or choosing hotels, restaurants, entertainment, and recreation and sporting venues.

Read More

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/cricket-world-cup-2011/news/No-specific-terror-threat-to-World-Cup-US/articleshow/7519427.cms

US Aid to Egypt Depends on Events

U.S. officials say there are no plans to cut off aid to Egypt. But they caution that aid will be reviewed as events unfold, indicating that the Egyptian government's actions going forward might jeopardize U.S. assistance. The bulk of USAID and State Department aid to Egypt goes toward security spending. A State Department official said Monday that the United States makes no apologies for helping to bolster Egypt's security.

As the crisis in Egypt continues, so, too, do questions about whether the United States will use its financial leverage in the country.

According to U.S. government figures, the State Department and USAID provided $1.5 billion in assistance to Egypt last year. The budget request for 2011 is about the same.

State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters at the State Department that the United States does not want to see a particular outcome in Cairo, but a process that gives Egyptians the ability to determine their own government. He said there are no plans to cut funding to Egypt.

"We continue to provide assistance to Egypt. Based on what we see today, we don't envision taking any immediate action," said P.J. Crowley. "But as [White House Press Secretary] Robert Gibbs said Friday, as events unfold, we, of course, will continue to review our aid."

Washington has repeatedly called on the Egyptian government to allow for peaceful protests. But more than 125 people have died during crackdowns on demonstrations in the past week. Crowley indicated that such violence might jeopardize U.S. assistance and said that American funding comes with stipulations.

"If aid is used in a way that is contrary to our laws, our policies and our values, you know, we'll make adjustments as we need to," he said.

The bulk of U.S. assistance to Egypt is for security.

"We do provide assistance to Egypt, and some of that assistance is in the form of security assistance, and we make no apologies for that," said the U.S. State Department spokesman.

And Crowley said U.S. aid to Egypt has been beneficial to the region.
"Our relationship has been a stabilizing one," he said. "Certainly, the relationship between Egypt and the United States and the support that we, together with others, have provided have been a stabilizing force across the region. Egypt has been a strong supporter of the pursuit of peace in the Middle East."

Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty in 1979 - Israel's first with an Arab nation - and Egypt has played a role in mediating Mideast peace efforts.

But analyst Tawfik Hamid of the Washington-based Potomac Institute for Policy Studies says the Egyptian attitudes in the future depend on the way the United States deals with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

Hamid says the Egyptian people would continue to support U.S. policies in the Middle East on one condition.

"When they know that America is behind the people and behind the military against Mubarak, this can make America the most beloved nation in the eyes of Egyptians," said Hamid. "But if America lets them down with Mubarak, I don't think the problem will end and the country will be lost."

The Egyptian military has vowed not to use force against demonstrators. But analysts say it is unclear whether the military will defy or even remove Mr. Mubarak from office.

Meanwhile, State Department Spokesman Crowley said a former U.S. ambassador to Egypt, Frank Wisner, is in Cairo, not as an official envoy but as a private citizen. But Crowley added that Wisner has long-standing relationships with Egyptian leaders and is in a position to reiterate U.S. policy and to report back to officials in Washington.

Read More

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/US-Aid-to-Egypt-Depends-on-Events--114983219.html

No time to lose in the Middle East peace process

The Jewish settlement of Hashmonaim, dating from the mid 1980s, in the West Bank.


During the last two years, Israelis and Palestinians have not marked an inch of progress towards the hoped for two-state solution. It is high time the international community mobilised serious efforts in that direction.

Israelis and Palestinians spent years negotiating the intertwined core issues of Jerusalem, the holy sites, the refugees, territory, borders and settlements, and security. I believe that we know what a final agreement will ultimately look like. Since President Clinton's parameters were laid down in December 2000, every political initiative to ending the conflict has led to the same fundamental solutions. The recent leak of Palestinian documents proves it.

It seems that there has never been a shortage in ideas, plans and initiatives. Moreover, the convergences between the parties throughout this period have been apparently more substantive than publicly revealed to date.

In Israel, time is running out for those who want to secure a Jewish and democratic state within recognised boundaries alongside a demilitarised Palestinian state. True, polls consistently demonstrate that Israelis overwhelmingly support the two-state solution. But this majority has not been heard politically. Israelis are starting to realise that, and are getting their act together to change this discourse. They say: we are proud to be Israeli, Jewish and Zionist, and refuse to apologise for it. We would like to secure this identity for generations – and, for that purpose, a Palestinian state living side by side with Israel is imperative.

In the absence of a capable leadership in the Middle East, a series of conditions should be considered by the US and its allies in this endeavor in order to reverse the course of the process for the benefit of all parties concerned.

First, there is a need to combine the bilateral approach with a regional one, thus establishing a supportive Arab coalition for a possible Israeli-Palestinian agreement, and providing further opportunities for negotiations and trade-offs. To the detriment of the PLO, Israel's interlocutor since Oslo in 1993, Gaza is governed by Iranian-backed Hamas, a brutal terrorist organisation, dedicated to the destruction of Israel. It is only under a regional framework that the Gaza timebomb could possibly be addressed. The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative represents a significant and strategic shift in the Arab League's approach to resolving the dispute. It should serve as a basis for further negotiations.

Second, it is crucial to win the individual and collective hearts and minds of the peoples in the region. We need to prepare the ground ahead of time for tough decisions to be taken towards peaceful co-existence. It is essential gradually to change the public's mindset by creating a new vocabulary, a fresh discourse, even if that means tackling what were once taboos. Until today, little thought was given to the preparation of public opinion. Media coverage focused on what the respective parties are likely to be giving up, rather than on the benefits of peace. And so mutual hostility continued unchecked.

Third, the architecture of the Oslo process must be reframed. It seems essential to change the "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" paradigm of Camp David, Taba and Annapolis – into "what has been agreed should be implemented". Such an approach would open the way for an agreement on boundaries, security, statehood and the economy. Subsequently, the negotiations over Jerusalem and the refugees will continue in a state-to-state fashion.

Fourth, seeking the end of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be based anymore on falsified grounds, distorted truths and double standards vis-à-vis Israel, thus encouraging anti-Israel terrorism. Pursuing Israeli settlement relocation, within a final territorial agreement, should follow 1967 United Nations security council resolution 242. The resolution was drawn up by Lord Caradon, UK representative at the UN who stated:

"We didn't say there should be a withdrawal to the [19]'67 line; we did not put the 'the' in, we did not say all the territories, deliberately … We did not say that the '67 boundaries must be forever; it would be insanity."

The British foreign secretary at the time, George Brown, said:

"I have been asked over and over again to clarify, modify or improve the wording, but I do not intend to do that … Before we submitted it to the council, we showed it to the Arab leaders. The proposal said 'Israel will withdraw from territories that were occupied', and not from 'the' territories, which means that Israel will not withdraw from all territories."

And finally, tangible coordination on the ground should be promoted, enabling the bottom-up progress to sustain a political dialogue. Since 2007, we have seen in the West Bank a genuine Israeli-Palestinian security cooperation. In that climate, self-interest starts to supersede mistrust between the parties, as has been demonstrated in steady economic growth, rapid institutional development and improved welfare.

It is essential that President Obama should find without delay a mechanism to resume negotiations between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. Yes, all three face a different set of domestic problems, but the US president should insist on maintaining a rigid negotiation framework with a binding agenda from which the parties cannot be allowed to depart. There is a reasonable chance of reaching a partial agreement on territory, security and the establishment of the Palestinian state within the president's remaining effective term.

The two-state solution is not only in the interest of Israel: it is clearly in the interest of the United States, Europe and the moderate Arab world to enhance global peace and stability.

Read More

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/25/palestine-papers-two-state-solution

Clinton: Arab resolution on Israeli settlements submitted to UN not helpful

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks at the State Department in Washington

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict should be resolved through direct peace negotiations, not by submitting resolutions to the UN Security Council condemning Israeli settlements, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday.

The United States has opposed a move by Arab countries to bring a resolution condemning the settlement, but has not said it would use its veto to block passage.

Clinton told reporters the issue needs to be resolved through direct negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians, even as the United States has also condemned continued settlement construction.

"We dont see action in the United Nations or any other forum as being helpful in bringing about that desired outcome," she said, before adding that the United States is "working to keep the focus where we think it needs to be, and thats not in New York."

Early indications are the resolution, tabled on Wednesday had nearly unanimous support, but it likely will not come to a vote for a few weeks.

U.S.-brokered direct talks ended in September - just weeks after they began - when an Israeli moratorium on settlement building expired. The Palestinians have demanded a freeze as a condition for holding the negotiations.

Read More

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/clinton-arab-resolution-on-israeli-settlements-submitted-to-un-not-helpful-1.338303

More Than 1,000 Extra Marines To Be Deployed in Afghanistan

The United States will send more than 1,000 additional Marines to Afghanistan this month to try to solidify progress in the south before troop reductions begin in July, American military officials said Thursday.

The majority of the forces will be sent to Helmand Province, where 20,000 Marines have made gains against the Taliban but where fighting remains intense in insurgent strongholds like Sangin. American commanders are under pressure to quell the violence and sustain their gains in the first six months of 2011, when the White House will assess whether a troop increase for the nearly decade-old war is working.

Officials at the Florida-based United States Central Command, which has responsibility for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, said that the Marines were being sent to take advantage of what is traditionally a winter hiatus for the Taliban and to try to set conditions for the fighting season that begins in the spring.

Maj. Gen. Richard P. Mills, the commander of the 20,000 Marines in Helmand, said in a statement that the intent was to overwhelm the enemy “with an increased operational tempo that he’ll be unable to match.”

The 1,000-plus Marines are part of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, a reserve force currently deployed in the Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea. Central Command officials said the Marines would go to Afghanistan for about three months. The rest of the expeditionary unit will remain aboard ship for other contingencies, military officials said.

Currently there are about 100,000 United States troops in Afghanistan. In December 2009, President Obama announced that he was sending 30,000 additional troops there and at the same time said the United States would begin to withdraw troops from Afghanistan in July 2011.

Since then, the Obama administration has tried to shift focus away from the July 2011 date — military commanders said the deadline was encouraging insurgents to bide their time until the United States withdrew — to a new date of 2014 as the end of American combat operations in Afghanistan.

It is unclear what effect, if any, the additional Marines will have on the debate on the number of forces to be withdrawn in July.

“The coming debate is bigger than this,” said Michael E. O’Hanlon, a military analyst and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “The issue will be, do we reduce in the second half of the year by 1,000, 5,000 or 20,000?”

During a visit to Afghanistan last month, Mr. Obama told American troops that they were “making important progress” and breaking the Taliban’s momentum, but others in Washington and Kabul have been more skeptical about the gains and whether they can be sustained once the Americans leave.

Read More

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/world/asia/07troops.html?src=twrhp

Iran accuses US, Britain, Israel of deadly suicide bomb attack

Iran on Wednesday accused the United States, Britain and Israel of involving in the deadly suicide bomb attack in the country which left 39 killed and more than 50 others wounded.

The attack occurred in front of the Imam Hussein mosque in southeastern port city of Chabahar on Wednesday when people gathered for a mourning ceremony on the religious occasion of Tasua, local satellite Press TV said.

Tasua is commemorated by Shiite Muslims, marking the eve of the day when Hussein ibn Ali, the grandson of Prophet Muhammad, was killed.

According to media, the Pakistan-based Sunni rebel group Jundallah (God' s soldiers) has claimed responsibility for the deadly attack.

Chief of Iran's Parliament National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Alaeddin Boroujerdi accused the United States and Britain of involving in the attack, the semi-official ISNA news agency reported.

"The experience from the past incidents indicate that the U.S. and U.K. intelligent services are behind the crimes like the Wednesday morning bombing in Chabahar," Boroujerdi was quoted as saying.

Meanwhile, Iranian Deputy Interior Minister Ali Abdollahi told official IRNA news agency that the equipment and facilities nabbed on Wednesday revealed that the bombing agents were supported by the intelligent services of the region and the United States.

Iran's Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said Wednesday that such terrorist acts "are funded by the U.S. and Israeli intelligent services," according to local Mehr News agency.

"In the past, the United States recruited some in Afghanistan to create discord among Shiite and Sunni Muslims (by carrying out terrorist acts)," Larijani was quoted as saying.

Chabahar is the Iranian port city on the coast of Oman Sea situated in the southeastern Sistan-Baluchestan province with the majority of ethnic Baluchis and Sunni Muslims.

"Israel and the U.S. intelligent services are behind these terrorist acts and they should know that such behaviors will receive response from the Iranian nation," Larijani said.

According to the official IRNA news agency, Director General of Sistan-Baluchestan provincial Forensic Medicine Office Fariborz Ayati said some women and children were among the victims.

An unidentified police commander of Sistan-Baluchestan province was quoted as saying by ISNA that four policemen were among the victims as well.

According to an earlier report by ISNA, the explosion occurred at 10:30 a.m. local time (0700 GMT) in front of the governor's office building of Chabahar in Sistan-Baluchestan province close to an emergency car of the Red Crescent Society.

Over the past three days, there had been threats of bomb attacks against mourners in Sistan-Baluchestan, and the emergency staff has been on alert, Iranian Red Crescent Society chief Mahmoud Mozaffar was quoted as saying by ISNA, adding that among the injured, six were emergency workers.

Meanwhile, the state IRIN TV said three suicide bombers were involved in the attack. Only one of them succeeded, the second was shot dead, and the last was arrested.

Read More:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-12/16/c_13650701.htm