Iran Starts Mass Production of Advanced Unmanned Bombers

Iran Starts Mass Production of Advanced Unmanned Bombers

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran on Monday inaugurated the production line of two home-made Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) with bombing and reconnaissance capabilities.




The two hi-tech drones named 'Ra'd' (Thunder) and 'Nazir' (Harbinger) are capable of conducting long-range reconnaissance, patrolling, assault and bombing missions with high precision.

Ra'd which is a UAV of choice for assault and bombing missions has the capability to destroy the specified targets with high pinpoint precision.

Experts believe that once the UAV enters the scene of aerial missions, it would enhance the reconnaissance, patrolling and defensive power of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Armed Force.

Iran has recently made good progress in the air industry and has succeeded in gaining the technical know-how for producing stealth aircraft and drones.

Iran successfully tested a home-made radar-evading UAV with bombing capabilities in June. Also in 2008, the country's Defense Industries launched production lines of two well-known home-made fighter jets, namely Saeqeh (Thunderbolt) and Azarakhsh (Lightening) .

Last March, Iran started construction of a plant in the northern province of Mazandaran to mass produce Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs).

Hamed Saeedi, Managing Director of Farnas Aerospace Company in charge of the project, said that his company has been dealing with designing and manufacturing UAVs and reconnaissance and pilot training drones for the last 9 years.

"We plan to manufacture UAVs, including unmanned choppers and drones, at this site" he said, referring to the plant in Mazandaran province.

Regarding specifications of the UAVs to be produced by the plant, Saeedi noted, "Drones will be of the tactical type, with a short range of 400 to 500 meters flying altitude which cannot be detected by radio waves as they will be stealth aircraft."

He singled out detection and control of contraband trafficking on land and in the sea and assistance in firefighting operations, specially in the woods as among other advantages of the UAVs to be manufactured in the plant.

Iranian army officials had announced in June that they have successfully tested a home-made radar-evading Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) with bombing capabilities.

"This airplane is a model drone built on a one-seventh scale for the defense ministry," Commander of the Iranian Army Air Force General Hassan Shah Safi announced in June, adding that the UAV bomber would be produced in actual size and would join the Iranian Air Force fleet in the near future.

He explained that the UAV has been designed and manufactured for reconnaissance and bombing missions, specially considering its radar-evading advantage.

Tehran launched an arms development program during the 1980-88 Iraqi imposed war on Iran, to compensate for a US weapons embargo. Since 1992, Iran has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, missiles and fighter planes.

Yet, Iranian officials have always stressed that the country's military and arms programs serve defensive purposes and should not be perceived as a threat to any other country.

farsnews

Read more...

DM: Iran Ready to Transfer Military Tools, Technology to Regional States

DM: Iran Ready to Transfer Military Tools, Technology to Regional States

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi on Monday announced the country's preparedness to transfer its defensive capabilities to the regional countries.




"We have declared to all regional countries that we are ready to provide them with Iran's defense capabilities, " Vahidi said on the sidelines of a ceremony to unveil a number of Iranian Air Industries' achievements.

He pointed to Iran's progress in defense fields, and reiterated that all Iranian productions are manufactured domestically and that the rate of growth in the production of Iranian defensive tools and equipments is even higher than that of some developed countries.

Meantime, the minister stressed that Iran's military products are made to defend the country and serve as part of the Islamic Republic's doctrine of deterrence.

Iran has recently made good progress in the production of military tools and weapons, specially in the air industry. The country's defense industries announced just days ago that they had succeeded in gaining the technical know-how for producing stealth aircraft and drones.

In the latest event, Iran inaugurated the production line of two home-made Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) with bombing and reconnaissance capabilities just today.

The two hi-tech drones named 'Ra'd' (Thunder) and 'Nazir' (Harbinger) are capable of conducting long-range reconnaissance, patrolling, assault and bombing missions with high precision.

Tehran launched an arms development program during the 1980-88 Iraqi imposed war on Iran, to compensate for a US weapons embargo. Since 1992, Iran has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, missiles and fighter planes.

Yet, Iranian officials have always stressed that the country's military and arms programs serve defensive purposes and should not be perceived as a threat to any other country.

farsnews




Read more...

Iraq war inquiry due to begin public hearings

The Iraq war inquiry is to begin its public hearings later, with top civil servants and a former spy chief giving evidence on the conflict's origins.

The investigation, looking at the whole period from 2001 to 2009, is expected to last months, with a report not out until after the next general election.

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair will be among the future witnesses.

Tuesday's session looks at UK foreign policy towards Iraq in the lead-up to the war, which began in 2003.

The Iraq inquiry will begin with a statement from its chairman, Sir John Chilcot.

It will then hear from figures including Sir Peter Ricketts, who was the chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) - which oversees MI5, MI6 and GCHQ - from 2000 to 2001.

Others giving evidence are former senior Ministry of Defence official Simon Webb and ex-Foreign Office officials Sir Michael Wood and Sir William Patey.

Controversial dossier

The members of the committee were chosen by Downing Street, leading critics to ask whether it can be independent of the government.

But Sir John has promised the inquiry will not produce a "whitewash".

On Wednesday, the panel will hear from former senior Foreign Office staff on the claims that Saddam Hussein's regime possessed "weapons of mass destruction".

Over the coming weeks the inquiry is expected to hear from a succession of diplomats, military officers and politicians, including Mr Blair, who is due to appear early in the new year.

Sir John Scarlett, the former chief of MI6 who - as chairman of the JIC - drew up the Government's controversial dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, is also due to give evidence to the five-strong inquiry panel.

The war resulted in the deaths of 179 UK forces personnel.

Previously, the Butler inquiry looked at intelligence failures before the war, while the Hutton inquiry examined the circumstances leading to the death of former government adviser David Kelly.

Sir John Chilcot has said he hopes to complete his final report by the end of next year, although he has warned it could slip into 2011.


Read more...

Israel moves to expand settlement

http://english.aljazeera.net/mritems/Images//2009/11/17/20091117161024218734_5.jpg


Israel has given the go ahead for the construction of 900 housing units in occupied East Jerusalem, rebuffing a reported US request that it block construction at the Gilo settlement, officials have said.

Israeli officials had earlier on Tuesday declined to comment on a report in the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper that said George Mitchell , the US envoy to the Middle East, had asked an aide to Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, to halt the process.

Gilo sits on land captured by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war and annexed to its Jerusalem municipality.

Under international law, all Israeli settlements built on occupied land are illegal.

A spokesman for Nir Barkat, the Israeli mayor of Jerusalem, issued a statement saying the mayor "strongly objects to the American demand to halt construction in Jerusalem".

But Mark Regev, the Israeli government spokesman, declined comment on the report, which also said Netanyahu's negotiator had rejected Mitchell's request at a meeting in London on Monday.

Washington 'dismayed'

Relations between the US and Israel have been soured by Washington's repeated calls for a freeze on settlement expansion, a move Israel has so far refused.

The US said it was "dismayed" over the approval to expand the Gilo settlement and sharply criticised the ongoing evictions and demolition of Palestinian homes.
Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said in a statement: "At a time when we're working to relaunch negotiations, these actions make it more difficult for our efforts to succeed."

Regev repeated Israel's refusal to include areas it annexed to Jerusalem as part of any accommodation of calls by Barack Obama, the US president, for "restraint" in West Bank settlement growth.

"Prime Minister Netanyahu, in order to get the peace process back on track, is willing to adopt the policy of the greatest possible restraint concerning growth in the West Bank - but this applies to the West Bank," Regev said.

"Jerusalem is Israel's capital and will remain as such," he said, stating an Israeli position not recognised by world powers and contested by Palestinians who want to establish a state with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Al Jazeera's Jacky Rowland in Jerusalem said: "What we are seeing is Israel's strategy of trying to differentiate between East Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied West Bank.

"We have seen the government repeatedly claim that Jerusalem is its so-called united capital and the government said just today that whereas it planned to exercise what it called maximum restraint in the West Bank, it claimed that Jerusalem was a different case."

The plan for the housing units was cleared at a local level in April and passed by a committee of the interior ministry on Tuesday, Rowland said.

"It [Gilo] is one of these Jewish settlements across the green line in occupied Palestinian land which is attached to Jerusalem basically as a way of Israel trying to strengthen its grip on the capital, and literally create 900 more facts on the ground," she said.

'Two-state solution'

Israel rejects the international description of Gilo as a settlement and says it is a neighbourhood of Jerusalem.

Tel Aviv's refusal to halt settlement construction in the Occupied Territories has stalled any hopes of resuming peace talks between the Palestinians and Israelis.

Al Jazeera's Nour Odeh, reporting from the West Bank city of Ramallah, said the announcement would be "very disappointing" for the Palestinians, who have set a complete freeze on settlement expansion as a precondition for resuming peace talks.

"This announcement in many ways validates the Palestinian argument that you have an Israel government that is not committed to the two-state solution; that does not even recognise that East Jerusalem is occupied land," Odeh said.

The Palestinians swiftly condemned the approval of the housing units, saying Israel is "not interested in peace".

Nabil Abu Rudeineh, the spokesperson of the Palestinian president, told Al Jazeera: "We condemn this step as it sends a clear message that Israel is not interested in peace and that it wants to ensure the failure of international efforts to reach peace and protect the two-state solution.

"Israel wants, through its actions, to secure the invalidity of establishing an independent Palestinian state. The international community's continued acceptance of these Israeli measures threatens stability in the region and the foundations of peace we seek."

The West Bank-based Palestinian Authority has expressed frustration at Israel's refusal to concede in order to get peace talks back on track and on Sunday said they would take steps to get the UN to back their right to an independent state.

While calling on Israel to show restraint in settlement expansion as a gesture of goodwill, the US has also urged Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, to drop his demand for a total freeze.

Netanyahu has offered a temporary restriction on projects that have not already started in the West Bank, but Abbas says this is insufficient and that it does not include areas Israel annexed to Jerusalem.


Read more...

Poverty and graft 'fuel Afghan war'

Corruption and poverty are fuelling the war in Afghanistan, a survey by British charity Oxfam and local organisations released a day before Hamid Karzai's inauguration for a second presidential term has said.

In the survey of 704 randomly selected Afghan men and women, which was released on Wednesday, 70 per cent said that unemployment and poverty were the leading reasons why Afghanistan remains so unstable.

Forty-eight per cent of those interviewed said that corruption and ineffectiveness of the Afghan government was a major cause.

"The Afghan government must demonstrate a stronger commitment to addressing corruption, increasing transparency and improving the rule of law," the report concluded.

Karzai, who will be sworn in for a second term on Thursday, has been told by Western governments that he must crack down on corruption among members of the political class and the police.

Violence worsening

Afghans are facing the most deadly period of violence sine 2001, when US-led forces overthrew the Taliban regime, the report said.More than 100,000 Nato and United States troops are in the country to fight against Taliban loyalists who have been resurgent in recent months.

"The past three decades of war and disorder have had a devastating impact on the Afghan people," the report said.

"Millions have been killed, millions more have been forced to flee their homes, and the country's infrastructure and forests have all but been destroyed.

"The social fabric of the country is fractured and state institutions are fragile and weak."

Many of those surveyed said that some warlords holding positions of power had spread insecurity and fuelled a lack of confidence in the government in Kabul.

"All officials and power-holders who are believed to have links to criminal networks must be subject to thorough and independent investigation, including those at the highest levels of government, and prosecuted accordingly," the report said.

Drugs allegations

Farooq Bashar, an Afghan political analyst, said that Karzai has to move quickly on political reforms.

"He has to pick up people who are obedient to the law, who are not corrupt, and who are not involved in human rights violations," he told Al Jazeera.

"We should look at him as a suspicious person, however, we do not need to disregard him. Right now, all of the Nato countries and the United States of America are saying that Karzai must work to remove corruption ... there is pressure from outside."

Mohammad Qasim Fahim, Karzai's choice for vice-president, is alleged by US-based Human Rights Watch and diplomats to have a role in abuses including murder during Afghanistan's 1990s civil war, weapons and drugs smuggling, and corruption.

US media have also accused Ahmad Wali Karzai, the Afghan president's brother, of having links to Afghanistan's drug trade, claims he has denied.

"Now the killers are in power. They are not thinking about what is best for the country and are only thinking about how they can benefit," one un-named Afghan man quoted in Oxfam's report said.

The report said that the international community must do more to counter corruption in Afghanistan, while ensuring that economic development continues.

"Many individuals felt that though much had been promised to the Afghan people, little had actually been delivered - creating frustration and disillusionment and ultimately undermining stability," it said.


Read more...

Iraq VP vetoes new election law

One of Iraq's two vice-presidents has vetoed part of the country's new election law, putting the parliamentary polls scheduled for January in doubt.

Tariq al-Hashemi, a Sunni Arab, revoked Article 1 of the law and called for the representation in parliament of displaced people to increase to 15%.

Most Iraqis who have fled violence since 2003 are thought to be Sunni.

The law, which MPs approved after much delay 10 days ago, will now go back to parliament for further discussion.

The Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq had said the poll would be held on 21 January. Constitutionally, it must be held before the end of that month.

The election is seen as a prerequisite to the US meeting its goal of pulling out combat troops by August.

'Compensatory seats'

The BBC's Jim Muir, in Baghdad, says that at issue for Mr Hashemi are the votes of the four million Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, whom he believes fled the country in the wake of the sectarian conflict triggered by the US-led invasion in 2003.


IRAQI ELECTIONS
2003: US appoints Governing Council
2004: Governing Council elects interim government
Aug 2004: National conference elects interim national assembly
Jan 2005: First general elections for transitional national assembly and provincial councils
Dec 2005: General elections for first full-term government and parliament
Jan 2009: Polls for provincial councils - key test of security gains

Under the election law approved by parliament, the proportion of "compensatory seats" representing the displaced was set at 5% of the total in parliament. Mr Hashemi wants the figure raised to 15%.

Speaking at a news conference in Baghdad, Mr Hashemi said that despite vetoing Article 1 of the law he was neither against the law as a whole nor wanted to see further delays that could prevent elections being held in January.

"I sent a letter to parliament asking for the law to be amended. Parliament said I could veto the contested first article, which is what I have done today," he said.

Mr Hashemi said he believed the issue could be dealt swiftly in one session of parliament, opening the way for its final ratification by Iraq's three-man Presidency Council and allowing campaigning to begin.

But, our correspondent says, that is not the only problem facing the elections - the Kurds in the north of the country have said they could boycott them altogether.

President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, has said he is angry that only three of the 48 extra seats in the new chamber have been allocated to the three mainly Kurdish provinces of Dohuk, Arbil and Sulaimaniya. Many Kurds see it as a move to diminish their voice in Baghdad.

An election without the Kurds is hard to imagine, so much more time will have to be taken up to reach a resolution, our correspondent adds.


Read more...

Palestinian poll delay recommended

The Palestinian Election Commission has recommended the postponement of presidential and parliamentary polls scheduled for January.

Hanna Nassar, the director of the electoral body, said on Thursday that the recommendation had been communicated to Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority.

Abbas, under Palestinian law, is mandated to take the final decision.

The recommendation for postponement was somewhat inevitable after the Palestinian group Hamas said it would not not allow elections to be held in the Gaza Strip.

"We are unable to accomplish the task, we are prepared to hold elections when the situation is ready," Nassar said after a meeting of the Election Commission.

"We have informed the president that due to technical reasons we are not able to hold elections."

Failed pact

Abbas had ordered for the polls to be held on January 24 after a reconciliation pact between his Fatah faction and the Hamas failed to materialise.

in depth

Netanyahu outmanoeuvres Obama?
Netanyahu 'speaks like a conqueror'
Wanted: Middle East statesmen
Settlements strain US-Israel ties
US Jews and Israelis split on Obama
Arab media judge Mitchell tour
In response to the Election Commission announcement, Abbas's spokesman said: "The ban Hamas imposed on the Elections Commission from entering Gaza to undertake the necessary steps to carry out elections is evidence that Hamas does not value the unity of the homeland nor national reconciliation.

"In light of this development, President Mahmoud Abbas will take the necessary decision, after consulting with the [Palestinian] institutions and the basic law," he said.

Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman, said: "The Electoral Commission's recommendation to postpone the upcomming January elections was expected because we lack the right conditions.

"This displays the correct stance that the Hamas movement took by not supporting any election before we reach any solution on national reconciliation.

"Holding an election during a political separation will only increase the separation."

'Unconstitutional'

The election decree stipulated that the polls must be held in the West Bank, including occupied East Jerusalem, and also in Gaza.

But Hamas dubbed the president's decree as unconstitutional because his own mandate had run out in January.

If the polls are not delayed, candidates would have to submit nominations by November 14.

Abbas has already said that he will not run for the presidency again, citing a lack of progress in peace talks with Israel.

Nour Odeh, Al Jazeera's correspondent in the occupied West Bank, said: "Abbas is in a very tough position, but I don't know if it will reflect on him personally. Everyone in the nation knows that this was not going to be easy.

"The hope of course was that the Palestinian factions would sign the Egyptian-brokered reconciliation deal and then there would be no problem."

There is deep hostility between Fatah, that effectively rules the occupied West Bank, and Hamas, which took full control of Gaza after forcing out security forces loyal to Abbas in 2007.


Read more...

Fort Hood shooting suspect charged

The US army psychiatrist accused of a shooting rampage at a Texas military base last week will go on trial for the premeditated murder of 13 people, officials have said.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who is also accused of wounding another 29 people in the incident on the Fort Hood base, will be tried under the military's legal system, an army official said on Thursday.

It has not yet been announced whether Hasan will be charged for the death of an unborn child of a pregnant victim.

Hasan is recovering at a military hospital after being shot by police at the end of the attack.

The suspect was in a coma but has now regained consciousness and has talked to his lawyer.

Review ordered

Barack Obama, the US president, has ordered a review into how intelligence agencies handled information that they had gathered on Hasan before his alleged attack, the White House said on Thursday.

"I directed an immediate review be initiated to determine how any such intelligence was handled, shared, and acted upon within individual departments and agencies and what intelligence was shared with others," Obama said in a statement.

The order to conduct an "immediate inventory" of all intelligence in US government files was issued on November 6, a day after the shooting.

Investigators are trying to establish the motive behind the shootings, in which 12 soldiers and one civilian died.

But according to his family, Hasan, who was known to be against the US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and was supposed to be deployed to Afghanistan this month, was trying to get out of the assignment.

US officials have said that intelligence agencies had previously investigated Hasan last December, reviewing what they believed to be email communications between him and a Muslim cleric in Yemen who was known for his anti-American teachings.

Federal officials ended the investigation after concluding that Hasan's communications were related to research he needed to work as a psychiatrist at the medical centre situated inside the US base.


Read more...

Petraeus urges Nato Afghan boost

The Taliban has recovered from being forced from power in Afghanistan to the extent that it is now ahead of the Nato-led forces fighting them, the commander of US Central Command has said.

General David Petraeus said on Thursday that the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) needs to be built up so that it can tackle the resurgent Taliban fighters more effectively.

Petraeus's comments came as Barack Obama, the US president, considered whether to send up to 40,000 more US troops to Afghanistan, in line with a request from General Stanley McChrystal, the senior commander of US and Nato troops in the country.

Petraeus told Bloomberg News: "The Taliban has, in a sense, regenerated [and] reconnected in these communities where they were dispersed to after being defeated at the end of 2001.

"They gradually came back together ... and then, over time, re-established the infrastructure - they built cells and structures to the point where now 33 or 34 provinces have [a] shadow governor," he said.

"That has outstripped the efforts of Isaf forces being built over time, to the point that we really have to get ahead of that."

Training mission

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Nato secretary-general, said earlier in the day that members of the military alliance needed to support the training of Afghan security forces to prevent the country becoming a haven for Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters.

FROM THE BLOGS

Military by numbers

"Some news agencies still refer to "over 90,000" troops in the country. Actually, the figures have crept up a bit in recent weeks..."
By James Bays in The Asia Blog [Samah El-Shahat]

"We are not in Afghanistan to protect and defend a specific government, but to make sure Afghanistan does not once again become a safe haven for terrorists who could easily spread from Afghanistan through Central Asia and further," he said.

"I urge all allies to provide resources for this training mission so that the Afghans can eventually take over responsibility for the security themselves."

Obama on Wednesday held an meeting of national security advisers to discuss options for Afghanistan, but the following day he left for a nine-day tour of Asia without a decision being announced.

Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, said Obama wanted the announcement on troop levels to "signal resolve and at the same time, signal to the Afghans as well as to the American people that this isn't an open-ended commitment".

While en route to Tokyo on Thursday to kick off a nine-day tour of Asia, Obama stopped at the Elmendorf air base in Alaska and told US troops there that his government would not risk US soldiers' lives unless absolutely necessary.

Troop options

Wednesday's meeting reportedly focused on four possible options for a revised US strategy, and how long each would take to implement.

Afghanistan options

The US currently has nearly 68,000 troops deployed to fight a resurgent Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. As Obama debates a revised strategy in the eight-year war, officials say he is considering four options.

One option is the request put forward by the top US commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, for 40,000 more troops to secure the towns and cities.

Another option, said to be carrying the most favour among officials, is an increase of 30,000. Washington could then try to convince Nato allies to contribute, bringing the number of troops to the 40,000 McChrystal recommended.

Options three and four include significantly lower troop deployments, from 20,000 to 15,000, most of whom would serve as trainers for the Afghan security forces.

But Gates said that deliberations were now focusing on how to "combine some of the best features of several of the options to maximum good effect".

"There is a little more work to do. I do think that we're getting toward the end of this process."

The US defence secretary also said he was "appalled" by the amount of media leaks that had accompanied the decision-making process in the White House.

Media reports on Wednesday said that the US ambassador to Afghanistan had expressed strong reservations about an increased troop deployment.

According to the New York Times and Washington Post, Karl Eikenberry, writing in classified cables to top US officials, expressed worries over the Afghan administration and its ability to tackle widespread corruption that has spurred the Taliban's revival.

Eikenberry was also quoted as saying that additional troop deployments would only increase Afghanistan's reliance on US security forces.

The US already has about 68,000 troops in Afghanistan. About 38,000 of those solidiers are fighting under the mandate of the 71,000-strong multinational Isaf force.


Read more...

Israel, US hold largest ever war games

Israel and the United States have launched a three-week joint air defense exercise, code-named Juniper Cobra 10, in the port city of Haifa.

The military exercises which are described as the largest ever by the two allies are conducted under a media blackout in the West.

About a thousand US troops, from all four branches of service, would work alongside an equal number of Israel Defense Force personnel, taking part in computer-simulated war games.

The air maneuver will include the newly-developed Arrow 2 as well as America's THAAD (Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense) and the ship-based Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System.

Israel's aerial artillery brigade, the US Army Corps' 69th Air Defense Artillery Brigade, and naval destroyer USS Higgins are all taking part in the drill. The US has also sent 17 warships equipped with radar systems. The drill involves the deployment of missile batteries throughout Israel.

The Joint Task Force commander is Rear Admiral John M. Richardson, deputy commander of the US Sixth Fleet. It began October 21 and will last through November 3, 2009.

The US says the war game are aimed at protecting Israel against possible threats.

This is while Tel Aviv has initiated several wars in the region in its 60-year-long history and is considered as a major threat by regional countries given its nuclear weapons capabilities.

The United States is Israel's closest ally, providing it with about 2.2 billion dollars a year in military assistance.


Read more...

IOF Stops work to Bring Electricity to At-Tuwani

IOF Stops work to Bring Electricity to At-Tuwani Date : 30/10/2009 Time : 18:45

HEBRON, October 30, 2009 (WAFA)- Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) forcibly stopped Friday the electrical work of the West Bank village of At-Tuwani, located in the South Hebron hills.

A Christian Peacemaker Teams and Operation Dove Christian Peacemaker Teams and Operation Dove said officers from the Israeli District Coordinating Office (DCO), detained Mohammed Awayesa, a Palestinian worker from Ad-Dhahiriya and confiscated materials and tools being used for the electrical work. The items confiscated included a truck, a mechanized lift, and a large spool of electrical wire. No written orders were produced for the detention, confiscations, or work stoppage.

Even though IOF has given verbal permission to the community leaders to carry on the work, the DCO told the Palestinian workers and villagers that continued work on the electrical lines was illegal without a written permission from the DCO. The DCO took Awayesa and the materials to an Israeli DCO office near Al Fahs, south of Hebron. The DCO released the man but is still holding the confiscated material.

Despite a recent visit by Tony Blair, special middle east envoy of the Quartet, where the former Prime Minister assured villagers from At-Tuwani that the DCO gave oral permission to carry out the electricity construction work, the community struggle to bring electricity to the area has been met with ongoing interruptions by the DCO.

On July 28, 2009, members of the DCO issued a demolition order for six newly constructed electricity pylons in the village of At-Tuwani.

On May 25, 2009, the DCO entered the village of At-Tuwani and ordered villagers to halt construction work on new electricity pylons in the village. No written orders were delivered.


Read more...

Iran ready for 'honest' nuclear cooperation

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Tehran is ready for nuclear cooperation but expects parties to the talks to fulfill their previous obligations.

Addressing crowds in the northeastern city of Mashhad on Thursday, Ahmadinejad said Iran was ready to cooperate with other countries in developing its nuclear energy program as 'conditions for nuclear cooperation on the international level have been provided'.

"We welcome the exchange of fuel, technical cooperation and construction of power plants and reactors and we are prepared to cooperate [in these areas].”

The Iranian president added, however, that Tehran expected those countries that were parties to the talks to 'fulfill their previous obligations.'

"We have nuclear contracts. It has been 30 years. We have paid for them…such agreements must be fulfilled … for technical activities, for reactors and power plants. If we intend to cooperate, such contracts must be addressed and the previous commitments must be fulfilled.”

Ahmadinejad said that obtaining fuel for the Tehran reactor was an opportunity to evaluate the 'honesty' of certain countries and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

He added that Iran has arrived at an important juncture in its nuclear work and that it would not retreat in the least from its nuclear rights.

Due to Iran's resistance, Western countries have changed their stance from that of 'confrontation to interaction', Ahmadinejad said.

"Once they told us to stop [nuclear work]. Now they express readiness to cooperate with us in exchange of fuel, expansion of the technology and construction of power plants and atomic reactors."

The Iranian president also called on the US to change its policy in the Middle East region and stop supporting Israel.

He said the US had to choose between saving its image and supporting the Israeli regime.


Read more...

Dealing with Iran

* A need for change in the Western mindset

In his book “Orientalism”, the late Edward Said wrote that the idea of an "Orient" is a crucial aspect of attempts to define "the West": the former being seen as cruel and despotic, antithetical to the civilized and democratic nature of the latter.

From the time of the crusades to the colonial period, orientalist perceptions have reflected a measure of bigotry and insecurity now assumed by extremist Muslims who see the opposing West as being purely malevolent.

The hugely successful movie “300”, which recalls a notable period in ancient history when the two civilizations clashed, depicts the Persians led by King Xerxes, literally, as monsters. This is indicative of an engrained and condescending disposition towards the East in the Western mind.

For many in intellectual and political circles, the best the East can do is simply to adopt the values, culture and achievements of the West.

It is with this preponderant attitude that the United States and its European allies proceed to engage with Iran, regarding it as a “rogue” and a “pariah” - the Middle East’s problem child that refuses to tow the line and be the obsequious lackey it once was in the region during the Shah’s time.

Indeed, the very name of Iran in the West has become almost synonymous with the export of terror, political repression and egregious abuses of human rights.

Unsurprisingly, Iran sees itself in a different light - namely that of a 7,000-year-old civilization, home to numerous and powerful empires, a land of poets such as the prolific Hafez, and polymaths like Avicenna.

Whereas its enemies draw attention to many of its internal failings and none of its successes, Iran prides itself on its rich heritage, its independence and its enormous and still growing geostrategic importance.

While any reports of violations of human rights in Iran, irrespective of their veracity, are seized upon by the media as examples of a “vile regime”, the West’s own appalling record in the region over the last decade, witnessed in the horrors of Abu Ghraib or the massacres of innocent civilians at Fallujah and Haditha, is seen merely as being incidental and unfortunate, in no way reflective of Western values.

The Muslim world, however, would beg to differ: In his June 19th Friday prayers sermon, Ayatollah Khamenei asked Western leaders a pertinent question: “Do you even believe in human rights?”

Certainly, Iran’s handling of the summer demonstrations and riots was a far less brutal affair than what which was meted out during the 1968 Paris uprising against the Gaullist government.

Iran at least closed down the Kahrizak prison and opened an investigation immediately after reports of torture and the deaths of inmates became known – not so with internment at the Maze prison during the troubles in Northern Ireland.

Moreover, the outrage and vitriol in the West over the “stolen” election in Iran, where not one shred of evidence of fraud was ever uncovered, was followed by a more tempered criticism of the massive cheating involved in the election in Afghanistan, all under the supervision of UN watchdogs.

The West, it seems, cannot countenance perceiving the Islamic Republic of Iran as anything other than a dangerous menace to be firmly dealt with, and not that of a resurgent nation determined to be afforded the respect it believes it deserves.

Indeed, Iran can claim to have earned such respect by cooperating with the international community in trying to stabilise Iraq and Afghanistan, combating drug trafficking, hosting refugees, brokering peace in the Caucasus and many other regional issues, including offering a measure of transparency over its nuclear program.

But for Western supremacists and orientalists alike, it is Iran’s rejection of neo-imperalism in the region together with its implacable anti-Zionism that rankles them the most. President Ahmadinejad may well call Israel a “cancerous entity” that must “vanish from the pages of time”, but let us not forget that Ronald Reagan was equally abrasive when he urged the collapse of the “evil empire” of Soviet communism.

On the issue, Iran has set out a clear vision for a post-Zionist, binational and democratic “state for citizens” in the holy land and not the “state for Jews” that the secular West, ironically, insists on preserving.

Moreover, unfounded and scurrilous accusations that Iran is planning a “second holocaust” against the Jewish people, only serve to illustrate just how deeply the West misunderstands the intentions of Tehran.

More than most other countries, Iran knows the horrors of war and genocide firsthand having lost hundreds of thousands in Saddam’s imposed war that included the extensive use of poison gas against soldiers and civilians alike.

For those of you who cry “Never again!” I would like to know where your voice was when Iranians and Kurds were being gassed to death in the 1980s. And as the recent bombing in Iranian Baluchestan shows, Iran is also a primary victim, and not a perpetrator, of barbaric terrorism. More people died in that blast than in all the summer’s rioting.

As the framework for a possible interim deal on Iran’s enrichment of uranium is prepared, the West has to recognise the reality of Iran’s Islamic civilization, together with its vital interests and security concerns, and not just hope that “regime change” is around the corner and inevitable if enough pressure is applied.

The complete and utter failure of the neoconservative project to reshape the Middle East in America’s image demonstrated a complete ignorance of the realties of the region and Iran’s ethnic and religious ties to both Iraq and Afghanistan

Had the United States accepted Iran’s proposed offer in 2003 for cooperation following the ousting of the Baathist regime in Baghdad, things might have been much less costly. This was a fundamental miscalculation and arrogant misjudgement.

Dealing with Iran in the short and longer terms is going to require mutual respect and understanding. As with China, improved relations with the Middle East’s powerhouse can also offer real benefits for the average American and Westerner.

It can create jobs along with cheaper and more reliable supplies of energy, help realise the prospect of NATO troops coming back from Afghanistan sooner rather than later, and improve measures to fight the war against drugs and narco-terrorism.

Therefore it is imperative that the West furthers its actual, rather than its perceived, interests in Iran for the betterment of its own citizens. If it does, Iran is bound to reciprocate.

-- Reza Esfandiari can be reached at: esfandiarireza@ymail.com.
Source: Middle East Online


Read more...

Losing in Afghanistan and in Europe

* General Sir David Richards speaks

On 22 October the BBC showed a clip of the UK’s new chief of General Staff, General David Richards, who spoke of Afghanistan. General Richards said that in his “very humble opinion”, if the Afghanistan war should be lost, that country will once again become a training ground for Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda will become entrenched in populated areas that cannot be bombed without the effects of “wedding party syndrome”. Losing in Afghanistan will give the message to terrorists in every country of the world that they can do whatever they wish.

It’s altogether depressing. The officers’ mess might think it’s funny when the Americans can’t tell the difference between a wedding party and a Taliban training exercise but if they would apply their minds to what the Americans are doing in Europe they might not think it so amusing. Some of us don’t think that any part of this debacle is amusing.

General Richards said that he had spoken with British soldiers in Afghanistan, who were very happy with what they were doing. Well, it would be very odd if any serviceman, whatever his rank, should tell his chief of General Staff anything else.

* The real terrorist threat comes from the USA

Never mind British soldiers. General Richards should consult the UK security services direct and get some raw reports on what the Americans are doing in Europe, not Afghanistan. As I said here,there’s no good reason whatsoever for any U.S. bases in Europe, much less making them permanent. At this moment, Europe is under armed occupation by the United States and the extra thousand intelligence staff that Anthony Blair said he was going to appoint following the London bombings should get their collective minds working on it. That is, if they exist.

The terrorist threat is from the United States. Anyone can see that from its stream of lies justifying present and future atrocities in the Middle East and U.S. behaviour there. Whatever the Americans are willing to do in the Middle East, they are willing to do in Europe to get their own way. To imagine otherwise is simply stupid.

But despite his class-based view of the world which is an essential requirement for the UK army’s top job, I am inclined to like General Richards. Even despite his 29 September lecture at Chatham House, an establishment think-tank, on which I will dwell in a moment. This contains all the usual guff about new-style warfare, maintaining our relationship with the U.S., proxy warfare is the future, the evils of Al-Qaeda, importance of winning in Afghanistan etc etc. Interestingly, he quotes part of Sun Tzu’s observation:

Generally, in war, the best policy is to take a state intact; to ruin it is inferior to this. To capture the enemy’s entire army is better than to destroy it; to take intact a regiment, a company or a squad is better than to destroy them. For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence... Thus, those skilled in war subdue the enemy’s army without battle. They capture the enemy’s cities without assaulting them and overthrow his state without protracted operations. (Chapter 3 – this translation by General Tao Hanzhang, formerly chief of staff of China’s Kwangzhou Military Zone.)

It is evident that U.S. and NATO operations in the Middle East violate this principle to our cost, as they do every one of Sun Tzu’s principles, but we should not draw the wrong conclusion. We should beware of the common stereotype that Americans are only capable of crude “carpet bomb everything” and “kick the door down” methods. That is by no means the case – and the evidence is before our eyes in the U.S. takeover of NATO and their permanent bases throughout Europe.

* U.S. invasion of Afghanistan a means to take over NATO and Europe

It is a material fact that the United States has occupied Europe without firing a shot or losing a single soldier. The invasion of Afghanistan following the 9/11 attack was a means of taking over NATO and consolidating the U.S. beachhead in Europe. Everything else, serious though it is, is to U.S. strategists merely froth on their cappuccino.

General Richards must consider whether he has been outflanked. He must consider whether subverted politicians have turned the state over to a foreign power while diverting our forces and our attention from an offensive attack by stealth on his own country and on Europe. I suggest that he should order the U.S. intelligence services to prepare an evaluation of that scenario.

He might also speak to David Milliband, our foreign secretary and professional politician about the possibility of treason in high places. This is not a metaphor. I mean treason against the state in its full meaning as it was applied to William Joyce, incidentally born in America, but carrying a British passport and hanged for his actions. The other day, I heard Milliband comment, “We don’t want the world controlled by America and China.” Maybe the Iraq inquiry is getting our pro-Israel, pro-America foreign secretary worried.

* Negotiation with economic development – the only way forward in Afghanistan

But truly, General Richards does not need to ask anyone else in order to satisfy himself of the facts. He knows that most of what he, himself, says publicly about Afghanistan is nonsense. He’s following a political line. But I am inclined to like him because he can think for himself. In this Youtube clip, at point 6.20, we see that in 2006/07 as commander of 35,000 international forces in southern Afghanistan he negotiated a cease-fire with the Taliban at Musa Kala, much to the anger of the Americans.

But it worked. Subsequently he was replaced by an American who resumed kicking down doors and shooting the town up, alleging that the cease-fire merely allowed the Taliban to regroup. It’s clear that peace and reconciliation isn’t what the U.S. intends for Afghanistan. General Richards knows that negotiation with economic development is the way to end the war. He must have wondered why the U.S. will not follow this obvious strategy. At point 17.58 of the clip, Nassima Aliazi, an Afghan politician, says that foreign forces claimed to have come to rebuild Afghanistan, not to occupy or destroy it. More soldiers will have no effect on security. She says that if they wanted to they could rebuild Afghanistan with two soldiers and General Richards knows that she is correct.

America does not want to rebuild Afghanistan. Afghanistan could have been rebuilt within a few years of the initial invasion eight years ago, so why is it not being done? This war is a diversion. The prize to America is the economy, military force and manpower of Europe, secured in Europe through its bases and control of NATO, and in the U.S. through the NATO First Act http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2797/show . Simultaneously, Russia is denied the benefits of closer integration with Europe, its natural cultural and economic partner.

Let us consider the American viewpoint. From this perspective, Europe might well appear to be a potentially unstable part of the world. Europe has a long history of warfare, including two great wars in which many Americans died. It produced the ideologies of communism and fascism with their attendant disasters. In concert with Russia, who knows what might occur in the future? There is something in this viewpoint but its context must be understood.

These European problems were part of the continuation of an effort that commenced many thousands of years ago with contributions from many cultures through Sumer, Babylon, Egypt, Israel, Greece and Rome. It is the effort to define and implement good government.

At present, the European Union is attempting to eliminate warfare by means of negotiated economic integration. That strategy, unique in history, has been very successful to date even if most Europeans have no knowledge of its beginnings. Precisely because of that underlying rationale it is vital to build a partnership with Russia. The EU is under severe stress at present, however, due to American interference both in pressing for fast EU expansion and the expansion of NATO. This can only lead to disaster as do all American interventions. That is their intention.

I mention the roots of this European process, discontinuous and tenuously linked though they might be, in order to emphasize the active, on-going development of European culture and governance, mistakes included. By contrast, the United States considers that process to be at an end. It has embraced the static image of the shining city on the hill, the beacon of hope, the liberator of the downtrodden. The basis? Due to success in its war of independence from the UK it claims the right to be the world liberator, to free other nations, absorb them or reform them in its perfected political and economic image.

Europe does not need lessons from or the presence of the United States from the evidence of its actions in the Middle East for the last eight years and the performance of its key economic institutions.

I hope that General Richards will reflect on his knowledge of American behaviour in Afghanistan and will wonder what the U.S. objective of unnecessary, continuous war there might mean for the UK and Europe.

As I have said before, such a war is a war crime. General Richards would be justified in citing the Nuremberg Principles and withdrawing British troops immediately. I am aware what the profound political implications would be. Such re-alignments are highly desirable. It might also occur to General Richards that the United Kingdom itself might be lost through this war because his army is in the wrong country and unless radical measures are taken he will be humiliatingly defeated without a shot being fired. If so, and he is willing to take action, I for one, would be at his disposal as would all but a few of this country’s citizens.

-- Christopher King is a retired consultant and lecturer. He lives in London, UK. This article appeared in Redress Information & Analysis.
Source: Middle East Online


Read more...

Hamas is not the real problem

Ha’aretz has courageously and repeatedly exposed the deceitfulness of this and previous Israeli governments’ pretense that their goal is to find a viable Palestinian peace partner. It is therefore important to guard against the implication of the question - whether Israel should engage Hamas in peace talks - posed by the paper, namely that Israeli governments have had an interest in holding peace talks if only they could find a willing partner.

Time and again, when presented with a choice between peace and continuing Israel’s expropriation of Palestinian land, Israeli governments have chosen land over peace. Indeed, an American president who shows the slightest signs of taking peacemaking seriously is immediately suspected - not only by Israeli governments but by Israel’s public - of anti-Israel, if not anti-Semitic, motivations.

Israeli governments have avoided dealing with Hamas not because they fear that engaging the organization might not produce a peace agreement, but because they know they could not manipulate Hamas the way they have been able to manipulate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas - namely, by using content-less peace talks as a fig leaf for the continued expansion of the settlement enterprise.

Israeli governments have latched onto Abbas as their peace partner of choice not because of his “moderation” - his conditions for a peace agreement are not much different from those of Hamas (after all, Hamas has agreed to allow Abbas to conduct peace talks on behalf of a unity government) - but because negotiations with Abbas shield them from the need to deal with Hamas while at the same time enabling them to claim that he is incapable of delivering popular support for the compromises he needs to make. It is a classic case of having your cake and eating it too.

If an Israeli government were truly interested in reaching a peace accord that would end the occupation and establish a viable Palestinian state, it could do so only with a government that includes both major Palestinian political parties, Hamas and Fatah. It is precisely because Israeli governments know this that they have consistently incited Fatah to engage in fratricidal conflict with Hamas, and threatened to cut off the perks extended to Abbas and his colleagues should he even think of joining it in a unity government.

Undoubtedly, this view of Israel’s various governments, and particularly of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, may be dismissed by some as overly harsh. After all, didn’t Ariel Sharon seek to reverse his earlier rejectionism by turning Gaza back to the Palestinians, and did not Hamas repay his good intentions with rocket assaults on Israel’s civilian population?

The answer to both of these questions is “No.” No, Sharon did not intend the removal of the Gaza settlements to reverse Israel’s settlement enterprise in the West Bank. Its purpose was the exact opposite: to obtain president George W. Bush’s consent for the deepening and widening of Israel’s hold on the West Bank. And no, Hamas did not send rockets into Sderot - a war crime no matter what their purpose - in order to repay Sharon for his generosity, but in response to the prime minister’s strangling of Gaza, also a war crime.

The man in Israel best qualified to know exactly what Sharon had in mind is Dov Weisglass. He was not only Sharon’s closest confidant, political advisor, personal lawyer, and chief of the Prime Minister’s Bureau, but also the one who negotiated the deal with the United States over the removal of the Gaza settlements on behalf of Sharon. Here is how Weisglass described that deal, in an interview in Ha’aretz:

“What I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements [i.e., the major settlement blocs in the West Bank] would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns.... The significance [of the agreement with the United States] is the freezing of the political process. And when you freeze that process you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and you prevent a discussion about the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package that is called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed from our agenda indefinitely. And all this with [President Bush’s] authority and permission... and the ratification of both houses of Congress.”

That is why the first question should not be, “Should Israel talk to Hamas?” but rather, “Should Israel be allowed by the United States and the international community to continue its settlement enterprise to the point of irreversibility?” Netanyahu has already broken his promise to President Barack Obama regarding a limited moratorium on construction outside the settlement blocs. Construction in those settlements continues stealthily. An appropriate response to this continuing deceit would be an American engagement with Hamas, conditioned on Hamas’ implementation of its promise to allow Abbas to negotiate a peace agreement on behalf of a unity government. This would be a clear indication by the United States and the international community that the answer to that first question is “No.”

-- Henry Siegman is director of the US/Middle East Project and a former national director of the American Jewish Congress and of the Synagogue Council of America. This article appeared in Haaretz.
Source: Middle East Online


Read more...

Israel endorses Iran nuclear plan

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has praised a UN proposal to regulate Iran's uranium enrichment programme.

Speaking before talks with US Middle East envoy George Mitchell, he called it a "positive first step" in stopping Tehran developing a nuclear weapon.

Under the plan, low-enriched fuel would be further processed outside Iran.

On Thursday, the UN's nuclear watchdog confirmed it had received Iran's response to the directive, but its contents have not been released.

Mr Netanyahu said: "I think that the proposal to have Iran withdraw its enriched uranium, or a good portion of it, outside Iran is a positive first step."

He also praised US President Barack Obama's efforts in drawing global attention to the issue of Iran's nuclear programme.

'Old tricks'

But striking a different note in Brussels, European leaders are reported to be preparing a critical draft communique expressing "grave concern" over Iranian nuclear enrichment and its "persistent failure to meet its international obligations".

Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, told the AP that Iran's approach of "back-and-forth talks" were reminiscent of its "same old tricks."

Tehran insists it is enriching uranium for peaceful purposes, fuel and medical research, but the US and its allies have accused it of seeking nuclear weapons.

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei said he was hopeful of reaching an agreement with Tehran when he received Iran's response to the UN draft on Thursday.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had described the IAEA proposal as a move from "confrontation to co-operation" by Western powers, but that Iran would "not retreat even an iota" over its right to develop a civilian nuclear programme.

The plan proposes exporting most of Iran's enriched uranium to Russia and France for conversion into fuel rods before being returned.


Read more...

Middle East

Description

Description

The Middle East (or West Asia) sits where Africa, Asia and Europe meet. The countries of the Middle East are all part of Asia, but for clarity reasons we geographically show them here as a separate landmass.

Opinions vary as to what countries make up the modern definition of the Middle East. Historically, Armenia and Azerbaijan have been long associated with the Middle East, but in recent years, some sources now consider them to be more closely aligned with Europe based on their modern economic and political trends. We have moved in that direction, and the same applies for the island country of Cyprus, as it does for Georgia, the former Russian republic.

The African country of Egypt is still thought (by some) to be in the Middle East, as well as the northern African countries that border the Mediterranean Sea.

We attempt here to show the modern definition, but in world of geography, there are often many answers or (personal or political opinions) to what appears to be a simple question.

Read more...

பாலஸ்தீனத்தில் தண்ணீர் பஞ்சம்

பாலஸ்தீனியர்களுக்கு சுத்தமான தண்ணீர் கிடைப்பது கனவாகிக் கொண்டிருக்கிறது. "பாலஸ்தீனின் பெரும்பகுதியை மக்களுக்கு குடிப்பதற்கு கூட சுத்தமான தண்ணீர் இல்லாமல் செய்த அதே வேளையில், இஸ்ரேல் ஆக்கிரமிப்பாளர்களுக்கு தடையில்லாத தண்ணீர் விநியோகம் செய்து வருகிறது இஸ்ரேல்.

மேலும் இஸ்ரேலின் ஆக்கிரமிப்பாளர்களுக்கு நீச்சல் குளம், நன்றாக தண்ணீர் விடப்பட்ட புல் தரைகள், மேலும் விவசாய நிலங்கள் என்று தண்ணீர் கணக்கில்லாமல் செலவிடப்படும் நிலையில் பாலஸ்தீனியர்களுக்கு தங்கள் அடிப்படை தேவைகளை பூர்த்தி செய்வதற்கு கூட சுத்தமான தண்ணீர் கிடைப்பதில்லை" என்று அம்னெஸ்டி இண்டர்நேஷனல் என்ற மனித உரிமை அமைப்பு கூறுகின்றது.

"மேற்குக் கரையிலுள்ள 180,000 - 200,000 பாலஸ்தீனியர்கள் சுத்தமான தண்ணீர் கிடைக்காமல் கஷ்டப்படுகிறார்கள் என்றும் அந்த பகுதியில் உள்ள குழாய்களும் காய்ந்து கிடக்கின்றன" என்றும் அந்த மனித உரிமை அமைப்பு கூறுகின்றது.

மேற்கு கரை மற்றும் காசா பகுதியில் உள்ள ஒரு பாலஸ்தீனிய குடிமகன் ஒரு நாளைக்கு பயன் படுத்தும் 70 லிட்டர் தண்ணீரை விட ஒரு இஸ்ரேலிய குடிமகன் ஒரு நாளைக்கு பயன்படுத்தும் தண்ணீரின் அளவு நான்கு மடங்கு அதிகம்.

மேலும் மேற்குக்கரையின் பிரதான தண்ணீர் ஆதாரத்திலிருந்து இஸ்ரேல், தான் ஆக்கிரமித்த இடத்தில் குடியமர்த்திய யூதர்களுக்கு 80% தண்ணீரை உறிஞ்சி எடுக்கின்றது. இஸ்ரேலிற்கு இதை தவிர வேறு தண்ணீர் ஆதாரங்கள் இருந்த போதும் மேற்குக் கரையின் இந்த தண்ணீர் ஆதாரத்தை பயன்படுத்துவது அப்பகுதி மக்களுக்கு தண்ணீர் கிடைப்பதில் மிகுந்த சிரமத்தை ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ளது.

காசா பகுதியின் தண்ணீர் சுத்திகரிப்பை சீர்செய்யும் பணி 2007 இல் இஸ்ரேல் விதித்த தடையினால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டது. மேலும் இஸ்ரேல் அந்த சுத்திகரிப்பு பணியை சரி செய்வதற்கு தேவையான பொருட்களை காசாவிற்குள் அனுமதிக்காமல் தடை செய்து வருவது இந்த தண்ணீர் பிரச்னையை இன்னும் அதிகப்படுத்தியுள்ளது.

மேலும் காசா மீது இஸ்ரேல், இந்த வருட தொடக்கத்தில் தொடுத்த போரினால் கிணறுகள், குளங்கள், மற்றும் நீர் ஆதாரங்கள் பழுதடைந்துவிட்டன.

அம்னெஸ்டி இண்டர்நேஷனல் இது பற்றி கூறுகையில், "காசா பகுதியின் நீர் ஆதாரங்கள் 90 - 95 % தூய்மையற்ற நிலையில் உள்ளன" என்று கூறியுள்ளது.

இஸ்ரேல் இந்த குற்றச்சாட்டை வழக்கம் போல் மறுத்துள்ளது.

நன்றி,
அல்ஜசீரா.

Read more...

US jails al-Qaeda sleeper agent

Al-Marri admitted meeting the alleged 9/11 mastermind

An al-Qaeda sleeper agent has been jailed in the US for plotting to provide material support for terrorism.

Ali al-Marri was held two months after the 9/11 attacks. He admitted having regular contact with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind.

Al-Marri, a dual Saudi-Qatari national, pleaded guilty in May, having spent about six years in US custody.

Jailing him for eight years, the judge said he considered it likely al-Marri would attack the US if he could.

US District Judge Michael Mihm said he did not believe al-Marri's contrition.

However, he did not give him the maximum of 15 years in prison, saying he deserved credit for enduring harsh treatment while in custody.

Tearful court appearance

Defence lawyers said al-Marri spent time in isolation, had suffered sensory deprivation and threats to harm his family.

Al-Marri wept in court on Thursday as he said he was sorry he had ever helped al-Qaeda.

He admitted that he trained in al-Qaeda camps and stayed in al-Qaeda safe houses in Pakistan between 1998 and 2001.

He entered the US on 10 September 2001 on a student visa.

While studying, he carried out research into poisons and the location of US dams, waterways and tunnels, prosecutors said.

He was arrested in December 2001 and charged with credit card fraud.

In 2003 the Bush administration labelled him an "enemy combatant" and held him in a military base in South Carolina.

In December 2008 the Supreme Court agreed to review the legality of his detention.

But two months later, after President Barack Obama took office, he was formally charged by a federal court with supporting a foreign terror group.

Read more...

UN hopes for Iran nuclear accord

The IAEA has proposed exporting most of Iran's low-enriched uranium

The UN's nuclear watchdog has said it hopes an agreement with Iran can be reached soon, as Tehran responded to a new offer on uranium refinement.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it received Iran's reply to the UN-backed proposal on Thursday.

Under the plan, most of Iran's enriched uranium would be sent abroad to be turned into fuel rods for research use.

No details of Iran's reply have been given but its president said it was ready to co-operate with the proposal.

Iran says it is enriching uranium for fuel, but the US and its allies have accused it of seeking nuclear weapons.

'Confrontation to co-operation'

The IAEA director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, confirmed it had received Iran's reply.

The IAEA said in a statement: "The director general is engaged in consultations with the government of Iran as well as all relevant parties, with the hope that agreement on his proposal can be reached soon."

NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE Mined uranium ore is purified and reconstituted into solid form known as yellowcake Yellowcake is converted into a gas by heating it to about 64C (147F) Gas is fed through centrifuges, where its isotopes separate and the process is repeated until uranium is enriched Low-level enriched uranium is used for nuclear fuel Highly enriched uranium can be used in nuclear weapons

Although no details have been supplied, Iran's Isna news agency earlier quoted Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, as saying only that Iranian "economic and technical concerns regarding the supply of fuel for the research reactor [in Tehran] should be addressed".

Observers in Tehran say the government is expected to demand significant changes to the IAEA proposal while accepting the overall framework.

The BBC's Bethany Bell in Vienna, where the IAEA is based, says Iranian media reports suggest Tehran may not want to ship out all its enriched uranium in one go - a condition Russia, France and the United States may not want to accept.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad described the IAEA proposal as a move from "confrontation to co-operation" by Western powers.

"We welcome fuel exchange, nuclear co-operation, building of power plants and reactors and we are ready to co-operate," Mr Ahmadinejad said in a televised speech in the city of Mashhad.

However, he also said Iran would "not retreat even an iota" over its right to develop a nuclear programme.

The IAEA has proposed exporting most of Iran's enriched uranium to Russia and France, where it would be converted into fuel before being returned to Iran.

The plan was agreed by the US, Russia and France after talks in Vienna last week, but Iran missed a deadline to respond on Friday.

For Western powers, the proposal would buy time while they press for a definitive solution to the stand-off over Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Meanwhile, a delegation of IAEA inspectors returned after visiting Iran's recently-revealed second uranium enrichment plant at Fordo, near Qom.

"We had a good trip," said delegation head Herman Nackaerts.

He did not answer specific questions about any of the data that was gathered, saying it had yet to be analysed.

Read more...