8 New Messages
Digest #4504
Messages
Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:19 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 28, 2012
Argentina chides Britain for sending warship to disputed islets
BUENOS AIRES: The Argentine Foreign Ministry lashed out at Britain after the kingdom sent a warship to the disputed Malvinas Islands, also called the Falklands by the British.
"This action not only mocks the United Nations, but is also irresponsible, since there is no better way to ensure the tranquility of all the inhabitants of these islands than to resume diplomatic dialog to settle the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and Britain," the ministry said in a statement.
The British government announced Sept. 24 that it had dispatched the Edinburgh warship to visit the disputed region.
Last Tuesday, before the 67th UN General Assembly, Argentine President Cristina Fernandez asked Britain to comply with the UN resolution calling for a discussion on the question of sovereignty.
Britain has said it supported the islanders' right to self-determination and proposed holding a referendum on the issue, but validity of such a vote is in question since the islanders do not represent an indigenous community, but an immigrant British community.
The dispute over the islands led Argentina and the Britain to a 74-day war in 1982. Despite its military defeat, Buenos Aires has not given up its claim to the islands just off its south Atlantic coast.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 28, 2012
Argentina chides Britain for sending warship to disputed islets
BUENOS AIRES: The Argentine Foreign Ministry lashed out at Britain after the kingdom sent a warship to the disputed Malvinas Islands, also called the Falklands by the British.
"This action not only mocks the United Nations, but is also irresponsible, since there is no better way to ensure the tranquility of all the inhabitants of these islands than to resume diplomatic dialog to settle the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and Britain," the ministry said in a statement.
The British government announced Sept. 24 that it had dispatched the Edinburgh warship to visit the disputed region.
Last Tuesday, before the 67th UN General Assembly, Argentine President Cristina Fernandez asked Britain to comply with the UN resolution calling for a discussion on the question of sovereignty.
Britain has said it supported the islanders' right to self-determination and proposed holding a referendum on the issue, but validity of such a vote is in question since the islanders do not represent an indigenous community, but an immigrant British community.
The dispute over the islands led Argentina and the Britain to a 74-day war in 1982. Despite its military defeat, Buenos Aires has not given up its claim to the islands just off its south Atlantic coast.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:19 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.panarmen
PanArmenian.
September 27, 2012
Expert: U.S. trying to shape Armenia into ally for anti-Iranian policy
====
"Armenia borders Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Iran...The U.S. has a significant stake in all five countries, and Armenia is now coming into view as a potentially potent lever to advance American aims...As the US tries to woo Armenia to become a stronger ally in the region, the term 'geostrategic' has never been more apt."
"Through economic and diplomatic incentives, the U.S. is actively trying to shape Armenia into an ally. As President Obama seeks to economically isolate Iran – his sanctions have cut the value of Iran's currency in half – he is trying to regionally isolate the regime, as well. Armenia is key to that strategy."
"Armenia’s two best friends at the moment are arguably the U.S.’s most challenging adversaries: Russia and Iran."
====
In America’s eyes, Armenia might be in the most important position of any US ally to pursue an anti-Iranian policy, the Truman Project’s Daniel Gaynor writes.
In his article, the expert tries to answer the question as to why the U.S. prioritizes cooperation with Armenia.
“Few countries are in a better position to shape US foreign policy than Armenia. Armenia borders Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Iran. As a part of the former Soviet Union, it relies on nearby Russia extensively for trade and military backing. The U.S. has a significant stake in all five countries, and Armenia is now coming into view as a potentially potent lever to advance American aims. That is, if the Armenians can be won over. As the US tries to woo Armenia to become a stronger ally in the region, the term 'geostrategic' has never been more apt.
"Armenia is literally at the center of a number of countries that Washington considers among its top priorities. As President Obama tries to accomplish key foreign policy objectives – like preventing Iran from attaining nuclear bombs or seeing democracy flourish in Russia – he’s got to encourage Armenia to play along. To Armenia’s south, one such issue is unfolding in Iran’s nuclear centrifuges,” the article reads.
“America is racing to develop every diplomatic pressure point it can on Iran, lest Israel launch a preemptive attack and embroil America in a third Middle East war in ten years. One of those pressure points goes straight through Armenia. While the US has cut off formal relations with Iran – Washington talks through Switzerland’s embassy there – it’s no secret that it employs a variety of foreign policy crowbars to influence and destabilize Iran’s ruling regime. Some, like President Obama’s latest round of economic sanctions, are well known. Partnering with Armenia is not, but could have, a major impact. Through economic and diplomatic incentives, the U.S. is actively trying to shape Armenia into an ally. As President Obama seeks to economically isolate Iran – his sanctions have cut the value of Iran's currency in half – he is trying to regionally isolate the regime, as well. Armenia is key to that strategy.
"For Armenia, the game is far less simple. Partnering with the U.S. – with whom it has a good, but not great, relationship – could alienate the few friends Armenia has left in the South Caucasus region. It wants military cooperation with Russia, but economic access to the West. While it has tried to deepen relations with the European Union and the U.S., Armenia’s two best friends at the moment are arguably the U.S.’s most challenging adversaries: Russia and Iran. That’s not necessarily because of shared ideologies, or even shared interests; it’s because Armenia doesn’t have many friends to pick from. Of its four neighbors, two – Turkey and Azerbaijan – have closed off their borders to Armenia,” Mr. Gaynor writes, according to stratrisks.com.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
PanArmenian.
September 27, 2012
Expert: U.S. trying to shape Armenia into ally for anti-Iranian policy
====
"Armenia borders Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Iran...The U.S. has a significant stake in all five countries, and Armenia is now coming into view as a potentially potent lever to advance American aims...As the US tries to woo Armenia to become a stronger ally in the region, the term 'geostrategic' has never been more apt."
"Through economic and diplomatic incentives, the U.S. is actively trying to shape Armenia into an ally. As President Obama seeks to economically isolate Iran – his sanctions have cut the value of Iran's currency in half – he is trying to regionally isolate the regime, as well. Armenia is key to that strategy."
"Armenia’s two best friends at the moment are arguably the U.S.’s most challenging adversaries: Russia and Iran."
====
In America’s eyes, Armenia might be in the most important position of any US ally to pursue an anti-Iranian policy, the Truman Project’s Daniel Gaynor writes.
In his article, the expert tries to answer the question as to why the U.S. prioritizes cooperation with Armenia.
“Few countries are in a better position to shape US foreign policy than Armenia. Armenia borders Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Iran. As a part of the former Soviet Union, it relies on nearby Russia extensively for trade and military backing. The U.S. has a significant stake in all five countries, and Armenia is now coming into view as a potentially potent lever to advance American aims. That is, if the Armenians can be won over. As the US tries to woo Armenia to become a stronger ally in the region, the term 'geostrategic' has never been more apt.
"Armenia is literally at the center of a number of countries that Washington considers among its top priorities. As President Obama tries to accomplish key foreign policy objectives – like preventing Iran from attaining nuclear bombs or seeing democracy flourish in Russia – he’s got to encourage Armenia to play along. To Armenia’s south, one such issue is unfolding in Iran’s nuclear centrifuges,” the article reads.
“America is racing to develop every diplomatic pressure point it can on Iran, lest Israel launch a preemptive attack and embroil America in a third Middle East war in ten years. One of those pressure points goes straight through Armenia. While the US has cut off formal relations with Iran – Washington talks through Switzerland’s embassy there – it’s no secret that it employs a variety of foreign policy crowbars to influence and destabilize Iran’s ruling regime. Some, like President Obama’s latest round of economic sanctions, are well known. Partnering with Armenia is not, but could have, a major impact. Through economic and diplomatic incentives, the U.S. is actively trying to shape Armenia into an ally. As President Obama seeks to economically isolate Iran – his sanctions have cut the value of Iran's currency in half – he is trying to regionally isolate the regime, as well. Armenia is key to that strategy.
"For Armenia, the game is far less simple. Partnering with the U.S. – with whom it has a good, but not great, relationship – could alienate the few friends Armenia has left in the South Caucasus region. It wants military cooperation with Russia, but economic access to the West. While it has tried to deepen relations with the European Union and the U.S., Armenia’s two best friends at the moment are arguably the U.S.’s most challenging adversaries: Russia and Iran. That’s not necessarily because of shared ideologies, or even shared interests; it’s because Armenia doesn’t have many friends to pick from. Of its four neighbors, two – Turkey and Azerbaijan – have closed off their borders to Armenia,” Mr. Gaynor writes, according to stratrisks.com.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:19 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://usa.chinadai
China Daily
September 28, 2012
US cannot read runes in Mideast
By Hua Liming*
Amid the anti-American protests in Muslim countries, US President Barack Obama urged world leaders on Tuesday to strongly oppose violence and extremism, arguing that protecting free speech is a universal responsibility rather than just an American obligation.
It seems that US politicians haven't learned any lesson from the anti-US fury sparked by the film that belittles Prophet Muhammad. The United States also refuses to accept that the Muslim protests will make it even more difficult for it to deal with the "anti-American" regimes in Iran and Syria.
The film first sparked anti-American protests in Egypt and Libya, which soon spread to more than 20 countries across the Middle East and beyond.
Christopher Stevens, the US ambassador to Libya, was killed along with three colleagues in an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi. The violent protests also forced 65 US embassies across the world to issue warnings to Americans to take precautions against violent attacks, and the Pentagon has sent Marines to protect embassies in Yemen and Sudan. Indeed, the range and violent intensity of the present anti-American wave is unprecedented.
In a vain attempt to calm the anti-American sentiments, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the US government "had absolutely nothing to do with" the film. But Washington has to think beyond the immediate impact of the film, because the protests are an outburst of Muslims' longstanding anger at the US.
Washington has remained unrivalled in the Middle East since the end of the Cold War, with its presence enhanced by US-Israeli relations. It also plays a key role in the Israel-Palestine peace talks, even though it is not welcomed by many in the Middle East.
Things, however, could have been different. The US could have been a welcome superpower in the Middle East after the end of World War II, when several countries had gained independence and learned many things from the US' experience. But the US blindly "helped" Israel win the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and deal with other conflicts. Supported by the US, Israel annexed Arab territories beyond the proposed borders of a Jewish state and kept expanding its settlements in occupied land.
Many of the millions of displaced Palestinians are now living in exile, away from the land of their ancestors. Besides, the past few years have seen many Arab countries fall into economic stagnation. These have helped Islamic fundamentalists attract more youths to their camp. As a result, there has been a massive rise in the number of Islamists since the 1960s and 1970s.
The Sept 11, 2001 terrorist attacks deepened Americans' hatred of Muslims which in turn intensified anti-American feelings among Muslims. The US used the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, killing countless civilians and displacing millions. Wartime scandals such as the Abu Ghraib prison abuse and the burning of the Quran by US servicemen added fuel to the fire burning within many Muslims.
Muntadhar al-Zaidi, an Iraqi journalist who threw a shoe at former US president George W. Bush and was jailed for his act, said after his release that he may be free now, but his country is still captive. He said it was humiliating seeing his country suffer, Baghdad burn and Iraqi people killed indiscriminately.
The journalist's words echo the feelings of many Arabs. US-based polling agency Zogby International'
Washington got it wrong in the Middle East in the first place and is now paying a bloody price for that. Taken aback by the violent protests in the Middle East one year after the "Arab Spring", Clinton said "it is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable,
Clinton's remarks suggest Washington has not yet understood why the Muslim world has erupted in anger. The US has always considered its social system and values superior to that of other countries and is still keen on promoting US-style democracy in the Middle East.
Bush tried to impose democracy with the help of the gun. His plan was doomed to fail, and it did. So when people in some Arab countries overthrew their leaders in 2011, the US rejoiced assuming that it would benefit immensely from the regime changes brought about by the "color revolution".
The reality, however, has turned out to be different. Islamist parties and groups have evolved rapidly and come to power in the Middle East countries that have seen regime changes. Western media reports say that Salafism and the Muslim Brotherhood, instead of Western democracy, have burgeoned in the Middle East after the Arab Spring.
The truth is the self-righteous democratic model of the West is rather feeble, and cannot be applied to a region where Islam is the dominating ideology. No wonder, the new leaderships in the Middle East countries cannot and do not want to contain Muslim anger at the US and Israel. In this sense, the anti-American wave is the inevitable result of the Arab Spring.
If Washington calls the anti-American protesters a "mob", it has to take the risk (one of the greatest it has taken) of confronting almost the entire Muslim population in the world.
But the US will not give up on the Middle East - not because the region is no longer a haven for Americans, not even because it is focused on its "pivot to Asia" strategy. Let us hope the US realizes it opened a "Pandora's box" by launching wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and that it would be utterly unwise to open another in the Middle East.
*The author, a former ambassador to Iran, is a researcher at the China Institute of International Studies.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
China Daily
September 28, 2012
US cannot read runes in Mideast
By Hua Liming*
Amid the anti-American protests in Muslim countries, US President Barack Obama urged world leaders on Tuesday to strongly oppose violence and extremism, arguing that protecting free speech is a universal responsibility rather than just an American obligation.
It seems that US politicians haven't learned any lesson from the anti-US fury sparked by the film that belittles Prophet Muhammad. The United States also refuses to accept that the Muslim protests will make it even more difficult for it to deal with the "anti-American" regimes in Iran and Syria.
The film first sparked anti-American protests in Egypt and Libya, which soon spread to more than 20 countries across the Middle East and beyond.
Christopher Stevens, the US ambassador to Libya, was killed along with three colleagues in an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi. The violent protests also forced 65 US embassies across the world to issue warnings to Americans to take precautions against violent attacks, and the Pentagon has sent Marines to protect embassies in Yemen and Sudan. Indeed, the range and violent intensity of the present anti-American wave is unprecedented.
In a vain attempt to calm the anti-American sentiments, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the US government "had absolutely nothing to do with" the film. But Washington has to think beyond the immediate impact of the film, because the protests are an outburst of Muslims' longstanding anger at the US.
Washington has remained unrivalled in the Middle East since the end of the Cold War, with its presence enhanced by US-Israeli relations. It also plays a key role in the Israel-Palestine peace talks, even though it is not welcomed by many in the Middle East.
Things, however, could have been different. The US could have been a welcome superpower in the Middle East after the end of World War II, when several countries had gained independence and learned many things from the US' experience. But the US blindly "helped" Israel win the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and deal with other conflicts. Supported by the US, Israel annexed Arab territories beyond the proposed borders of a Jewish state and kept expanding its settlements in occupied land.
Many of the millions of displaced Palestinians are now living in exile, away from the land of their ancestors. Besides, the past few years have seen many Arab countries fall into economic stagnation. These have helped Islamic fundamentalists attract more youths to their camp. As a result, there has been a massive rise in the number of Islamists since the 1960s and 1970s.
The Sept 11, 2001 terrorist attacks deepened Americans' hatred of Muslims which in turn intensified anti-American feelings among Muslims. The US used the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, killing countless civilians and displacing millions. Wartime scandals such as the Abu Ghraib prison abuse and the burning of the Quran by US servicemen added fuel to the fire burning within many Muslims.
Muntadhar al-Zaidi, an Iraqi journalist who threw a shoe at former US president George W. Bush and was jailed for his act, said after his release that he may be free now, but his country is still captive. He said it was humiliating seeing his country suffer, Baghdad burn and Iraqi people killed indiscriminately.
The journalist's words echo the feelings of many Arabs. US-based polling agency Zogby International'
Washington got it wrong in the Middle East in the first place and is now paying a bloody price for that. Taken aback by the violent protests in the Middle East one year after the "Arab Spring", Clinton said "it is hard for the American people to make sense of that because it is senseless, and it is totally unacceptable,
Clinton's remarks suggest Washington has not yet understood why the Muslim world has erupted in anger. The US has always considered its social system and values superior to that of other countries and is still keen on promoting US-style democracy in the Middle East.
Bush tried to impose democracy with the help of the gun. His plan was doomed to fail, and it did. So when people in some Arab countries overthrew their leaders in 2011, the US rejoiced assuming that it would benefit immensely from the regime changes brought about by the "color revolution".
The reality, however, has turned out to be different. Islamist parties and groups have evolved rapidly and come to power in the Middle East countries that have seen regime changes. Western media reports say that Salafism and the Muslim Brotherhood, instead of Western democracy, have burgeoned in the Middle East after the Arab Spring.
The truth is the self-righteous democratic model of the West is rather feeble, and cannot be applied to a region where Islam is the dominating ideology. No wonder, the new leaderships in the Middle East countries cannot and do not want to contain Muslim anger at the US and Israel. In this sense, the anti-American wave is the inevitable result of the Arab Spring.
If Washington calls the anti-American protesters a "mob", it has to take the risk (one of the greatest it has taken) of confronting almost the entire Muslim population in the world.
But the US will not give up on the Middle East - not because the region is no longer a haven for Americans, not even because it is focused on its "pivot to Asia" strategy. Let us hope the US realizes it opened a "Pandora's box" by launching wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and that it would be utterly unwise to open another in the Middle East.
*The author, a former ambassador to Iran, is a researcher at the China Institute of International Studies.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:49 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
September 28, 2012
Syria crisis can only be solved within U.N.: Russian official
MOSCOW: Attempts to solve the Syria crisis outside the U.N. would have destructive consequences for both Syria and the existing world order, a senior Russian diplomat said Friday.
"The attempts to look for ways out of the crisis in Syria outside the U.N. Security Council would have very destructive and dangerous consequences for Syria itself, for the Middle East region and, eventually, for the current world order as a whole," Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said at a conference of professional diplomats.
He said the only way out is through negotiations and compromise.
"Implementation of the Libyan model, supporting only one side in this confrontation is a way to nowhere," Ryabkov said.
The task of the international community is not to take sides in a domestic conflict or conduct operations to topple a government, but to stop violence and facilitate dialogue so as to find a compromise solution, Ryabkov said.
He also warned that "deep changes" in the Middle East and North Africa will cause repercussions in many other regions of the world for a long time.
------------
http://english.
Itar-Tass
September 28, 2012
UN Resolution on Syria Inadmissible
The resolution on Syria of the United Nations Human Rights Council contains a number of “inadmissible clauses”, Russia’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Maria Khodynskaya-
“One can’t agree with the unilateral conclusions concerning the tragedy in El-Houleh as well as with the fact that these murders are similar to other such incidents in Syria,” she said.
The Russian diplomat says that the investigation should be completed instead of accusing the government of having insufficient proof.
"There are countries that are actually encouraging terrorism in Syria, therefore we have no doubt that the episode in El-Houleh is being intentionally hyped in the media and is being used for the purpose of a forceful scenario regarding that country," Khodynskaya-
The El Houleh Village became known after the mass murder of 116 people there at the end of May.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
September 28, 2012
Syria crisis can only be solved within U.N.: Russian official
MOSCOW: Attempts to solve the Syria crisis outside the U.N. would have destructive consequences for both Syria and the existing world order, a senior Russian diplomat said Friday.
"The attempts to look for ways out of the crisis in Syria outside the U.N. Security Council would have very destructive and dangerous consequences for Syria itself, for the Middle East region and, eventually, for the current world order as a whole," Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said at a conference of professional diplomats.
He said the only way out is through negotiations and compromise.
"Implementation of the Libyan model, supporting only one side in this confrontation is a way to nowhere," Ryabkov said.
The task of the international community is not to take sides in a domestic conflict or conduct operations to topple a government, but to stop violence and facilitate dialogue so as to find a compromise solution, Ryabkov said.
He also warned that "deep changes" in the Middle East and North Africa will cause repercussions in many other regions of the world for a long time.
------------
http://english.
Itar-Tass
September 28, 2012
UN Resolution on Syria Inadmissible
The resolution on Syria of the United Nations Human Rights Council contains a number of “inadmissible clauses”, Russia’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Maria Khodynskaya-
“One can’t agree with the unilateral conclusions concerning the tragedy in El-Houleh as well as with the fact that these murders are similar to other such incidents in Syria,” she said.
The Russian diplomat says that the investigation should be completed instead of accusing the government of having insufficient proof.
"There are countries that are actually encouraging terrorism in Syria, therefore we have no doubt that the episode in El-Houleh is being intentionally hyped in the media and is being used for the purpose of a forceful scenario regarding that country," Khodynskaya-
The El Houleh Village became known after the mass murder of 116 people there at the end of May.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:49 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://cominf.
Republic News Agency
September 28, 2012
Georgian intelligences services are planning to carry out acts of terror in Abkhazia
September 30, on the Independence Day of the Republic of Abkhazia, in the Gali district, the residents of which are mainly Megrelians, Georgian special services are planning to carry out a terrorist attack.
As IA Res has been informed by a competent source in the security services of South Ossetia, "three groups, consisting of 15 people, are being prepared for this purpose. The groups` leaders are Amiran Kvartsheliya, Bakur Bumetskeriya and Dmitri Boiko.
According to information available to local intelligence services, the diversionists are going to carry out explosions at mass festivities and fire upon the FSS Border Control Agency of Russia in the Republic of Abkhazia.
"Once again Georgian authorities are planning to impose the responsibility for the attacks on the Abkhazian authorities and on the Russian military forces," said the official.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Republic News Agency
September 28, 2012
Georgian intelligences services are planning to carry out acts of terror in Abkhazia
September 30, on the Independence Day of the Republic of Abkhazia, in the Gali district, the residents of which are mainly Megrelians, Georgian special services are planning to carry out a terrorist attack.
As IA Res has been informed by a competent source in the security services of South Ossetia, "three groups, consisting of 15 people, are being prepared for this purpose. The groups` leaders are Amiran Kvartsheliya, Bakur Bumetskeriya and Dmitri Boiko.
According to information available to local intelligence services, the diversionists are going to carry out explosions at mass festivities and fire upon the FSS Border Control Agency of Russia in the Republic of Abkhazia.
"Once again Georgian authorities are planning to impose the responsibility for the attacks on the Abkhazian authorities and on the Russian military forces," said the official.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:15 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://rt.com/
RT
September 28, 2012
Rebel support ‘pushes Syria deeper into the abyss of bloody sectarianism’ – Lavrov
14-minute video of Lavrov's address to the United Nations General Assembly at URL above
Those who insist on a ceasefire only by the Syrian government encourage the opposition to intensify its hostilities, and “take upon themselves an enormous responsibility,” Russian FM Sergey Lavrov said in a speech to the UN General Assembly.
The shortest way to stop the loss of life in Syria, Lavrov said, is to adhere to the commitments in the Geneva communique, which were agreed upon by the Action Group as follow-up of the Kofi Annan Plan.
“We proposed to adopt a resolution in the UN Security Council that would endorse the Geneva communique as the basis for negotiations at the beginning of the transitional period, but this proposal had been blocked,” Lavrov noted.
“Those who oppose the implementation of the Geneva communique,” he explained, “in fact push Syria even deeper into the abyss of bloody sectarian strife.”
Lavrov noted that the deepening of internal conflict in Syria is of particular concern because the militarization of the conflict is combined with open calls for foreign intervention.
“We have consistently called for the consolidated efforts of the international community to compel the government and its opponents to immediately cease the violence and come to the negotiating table,” Lavrov said, adding that so far, there has been no progress in reaching unanimity on how to create conditions towards achieving that goal.
The foreign minister also expressed concern about the growing number of war crimes on both sides of the conflict, as recorded in a recent report by the UN Human Rights Council.
“Extremist organizations including al-Qaeda have become more active in Syria – they perpetrate terrorist attacks against innocent civilians and civil infrastructure,” Lavrov said.
The situation in the region requires the international community to use a comprehensive approach, and to reject “simplified and ideology-driven patterns and double standards,” the FM asserted.
He also condemned any unilateral sanctions “imposed by a state or a group of states sidestepping the United Nations to advance their political goals.”
“We have no doubt that such sanctions, especially when they are applied extra-territorially
He urged the UN to discuss the consequences of such actions and to resume discussions on the humanitarian limits of sanctions, a topic that, he said, somehow “faded away” in the UN.
Meanwhile on Friday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Washington would contribute an additional $15 million in “non-lethal gear” to the “civilian opposition” trying to oust Assad. Another $30 million will be sent in humanitarian assistance to help people affected by the continuing conflict, Clinton said at a Friends of Syria meeting on the sidelines of the UNGA.
"It is no secret that our attempts to move forward at the UN Security Council have been blocked repeatedly, but the United States is not waiting," Clinton said.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
RT
September 28, 2012
Rebel support ‘pushes Syria deeper into the abyss of bloody sectarianism’ – Lavrov
14-minute video of Lavrov's address to the United Nations General Assembly at URL above
Those who insist on a ceasefire only by the Syrian government encourage the opposition to intensify its hostilities, and “take upon themselves an enormous responsibility,” Russian FM Sergey Lavrov said in a speech to the UN General Assembly.
The shortest way to stop the loss of life in Syria, Lavrov said, is to adhere to the commitments in the Geneva communique, which were agreed upon by the Action Group as follow-up of the Kofi Annan Plan.
“We proposed to adopt a resolution in the UN Security Council that would endorse the Geneva communique as the basis for negotiations at the beginning of the transitional period, but this proposal had been blocked,” Lavrov noted.
“Those who oppose the implementation of the Geneva communique,” he explained, “in fact push Syria even deeper into the abyss of bloody sectarian strife.”
Lavrov noted that the deepening of internal conflict in Syria is of particular concern because the militarization of the conflict is combined with open calls for foreign intervention.
“We have consistently called for the consolidated efforts of the international community to compel the government and its opponents to immediately cease the violence and come to the negotiating table,” Lavrov said, adding that so far, there has been no progress in reaching unanimity on how to create conditions towards achieving that goal.
The foreign minister also expressed concern about the growing number of war crimes on both sides of the conflict, as recorded in a recent report by the UN Human Rights Council.
“Extremist organizations including al-Qaeda have become more active in Syria – they perpetrate terrorist attacks against innocent civilians and civil infrastructure,” Lavrov said.
The situation in the region requires the international community to use a comprehensive approach, and to reject “simplified and ideology-driven patterns and double standards,” the FM asserted.
He also condemned any unilateral sanctions “imposed by a state or a group of states sidestepping the United Nations to advance their political goals.”
“We have no doubt that such sanctions, especially when they are applied extra-territorially
He urged the UN to discuss the consequences of such actions and to resume discussions on the humanitarian limits of sanctions, a topic that, he said, somehow “faded away” in the UN.
Meanwhile on Friday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Washington would contribute an additional $15 million in “non-lethal gear” to the “civilian opposition” trying to oust Assad. Another $30 million will be sent in humanitarian assistance to help people affected by the continuing conflict, Clinton said at a Friends of Syria meeting on the sidelines of the UNGA.
"It is no secret that our attempts to move forward at the UN Security Council have been blocked repeatedly, but the United States is not waiting," Clinton said.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:24 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.thisisco
Cornish Guardian
September 28, 2012
RAF St Mawgan sprouts tents for NATO exercise
A sea of tents has sprung up at RAF St Mawgan as almost 1,000 extra personnel prepare to descend on the site for a NATO training exercise.
The base is the training hub of the Gloucester-based Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC), as revealed by this newspaper in October 2010.
It hosts real-time training scenarios for a group of highly skilled strategists, commanders and military experts who are in charge of running operations in Afghanistan.
The training programme is due to last up to five weeks and prepares teams for future short-notice deployments in support of NATO's High Readiness Force.
A spokesman for the base said: "Exercises like this are ideal to demonstrate the potential for hosting large defence organisations at the excellent facilities here at RAF St Mawgan."
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Cornish Guardian
September 28, 2012
RAF St Mawgan sprouts tents for NATO exercise
A sea of tents has sprung up at RAF St Mawgan as almost 1,000 extra personnel prepare to descend on the site for a NATO training exercise.
The base is the training hub of the Gloucester-based Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC), as revealed by this newspaper in October 2010.
It hosts real-time training scenarios for a group of highly skilled strategists, commanders and military experts who are in charge of running operations in Afghanistan.
The training programme is due to last up to five weeks and prepares teams for future short-notice deployments in support of NATO's High Readiness Force.
A spokesman for the base said: "Exercises like this are ideal to demonstrate the potential for hosting large defence organisations at the excellent facilities here at RAF St Mawgan."
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:51 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.thenews.
The News International
September 29, 2012
Pak-Russia ties
====
In the final analysis, as the Central and South Asian configuration of states undergoes a new transformation, Russia and Pakistan need to reach out to each other to reap the full and positive benefits of a real relationship, including the tempting energy and economic objectives that could lead to advantageous geopolitical outcomes for all involved.
====
A flurry of high-level visits by Russian officials to Islamabad in the recent past and the much-anticipated trip by Russian President Vladimir Putin have been reported both as highlighting Russia’s efforts to augment strategic relations with Pakistan and Pakistan’s attempt to find new friends given the growing impasse with the United States.
While there has been much talk of a quiet and inconspicuous Russo-Pak rapprochement evolving, what do we make of Putin calling off his visit to Pakistan at the eleventh hour this Thursday? This has also meant the deferment of a planned quadrilateral summit between Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan that was to be held in Islamabad on Oct 2.
For now, there is no word on new dates either for the summit or for Putin’s visit. The reasons for the deferral are also unclear. There is speculation that Putin’s decision was the result of Pakistan’s reluctance to award, without bidding, the contract for building its section of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline to Russian energy giant Gazprom. The other view is that Russia may have pulled out of the trip due to Indian pressure. Hopefully, the Russians will provide a fuller explanation soon – it is certainly being read as a setback for Pakistan’s attempt to cultivate new relationships and create negotiating space vis-à-vis the US.
Russia and Pakistan have been working, quietly and out of sight, on a rapprochement after decades of bitterness and misgivings. The reorientation of ties has been particularly spurred by developments in Afghanistan.
President Zardari and Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev have met six times in the last three years. On Russia’s end, it realises that, given the US-Nato exit from Afghanistan in the near future, power in the region will shift.
It is, thus, trying to improve economic ties and secure its southern borders against the spread of terrorism by reaching out to both Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Russia sees Pakistan as a gateway for energy trade to the entire Subcontinent. On the other hand, Pakistan desires better ties with Russia not just on the economic front but also as an alternate source of military supplies, especially given Washington’s growing foot-dragging and China’s continued inability to meet all of Pakistan’s requests.
The question remains: given extenuating reasons on both sides to push for enhanced ties and a recent display of all the right gestures and statements, how then do we explain the cancellation of Putin’s visit, which is clearly a step back in the relationship? Before jumping to conclusions, it is important to take into account the long-standing foundation of mistrust that will undergird any future relationship between Pakistan and Russia. In light of a deeply acrimonious past, hiccups along the way are to be expected. Let us then look at Putin’s decision as just one of these hiccups that will hopefully be ironed out in time. In the final analysis, as the Central and South Asian configuration of states undergoes a new transformation, Russia and Pakistan need to reach out to each other to reap the full and positive benefits of a real relationship, including the tempting energy and economic objectives that could lead to advantageous geopolitical outcomes
for all involved.
The News International
September 29, 2012
Pak-Russia ties
====
In the final analysis, as the Central and South Asian configuration of states undergoes a new transformation, Russia and Pakistan need to reach out to each other to reap the full and positive benefits of a real relationship, including the tempting energy and economic objectives that could lead to advantageous geopolitical outcomes for all involved.
====
A flurry of high-level visits by Russian officials to Islamabad in the recent past and the much-anticipated trip by Russian President Vladimir Putin have been reported both as highlighting Russia’s efforts to augment strategic relations with Pakistan and Pakistan’s attempt to find new friends given the growing impasse with the United States.
While there has been much talk of a quiet and inconspicuous Russo-Pak rapprochement evolving, what do we make of Putin calling off his visit to Pakistan at the eleventh hour this Thursday? This has also meant the deferment of a planned quadrilateral summit between Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan that was to be held in Islamabad on Oct 2.
For now, there is no word on new dates either for the summit or for Putin’s visit. The reasons for the deferral are also unclear. There is speculation that Putin’s decision was the result of Pakistan’s reluctance to award, without bidding, the contract for building its section of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline to Russian energy giant Gazprom. The other view is that Russia may have pulled out of the trip due to Indian pressure. Hopefully, the Russians will provide a fuller explanation soon – it is certainly being read as a setback for Pakistan’s attempt to cultivate new relationships and create negotiating space vis-à-vis the US.
Russia and Pakistan have been working, quietly and out of sight, on a rapprochement after decades of bitterness and misgivings. The reorientation of ties has been particularly spurred by developments in Afghanistan.
President Zardari and Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev have met six times in the last three years. On Russia’s end, it realises that, given the US-Nato exit from Afghanistan in the near future, power in the region will shift.
It is, thus, trying to improve economic ties and secure its southern borders against the spread of terrorism by reaching out to both Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Russia sees Pakistan as a gateway for energy trade to the entire Subcontinent. On the other hand, Pakistan desires better ties with Russia not just on the economic front but also as an alternate source of military supplies, especially given Washington’s growing foot-dragging and China’s continued inability to meet all of Pakistan’s requests.
The question remains: given extenuating reasons on both sides to push for enhanced ties and a recent display of all the right gestures and statements, how then do we explain the cancellation of Putin’s visit, which is clearly a step back in the relationship? Before jumping to conclusions, it is important to take into account the long-standing foundation of mistrust that will undergird any future relationship between Pakistan and Russia. In light of a deeply acrimonious past, hiccups along the way are to be expected. Let us then look at Putin’s decision as just one of these hiccups that will hopefully be ironed out in time. In the final analysis, as the Central and South Asian configuration of states undergoes a new transformation, Russia and Pakistan need to reach out to each other to reap the full and positive benefits of a real relationship, including the tempting energy and economic objectives that could lead to advantageous geopolitical outcomes
for all involved.
