Showing posts with label Diplomatic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Diplomatic. Show all posts

Friday, January 17, 2014

At least 14 killed in suicide attack on restaurant in Kabul diplomatic quarter

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



At least 14 killed in suicide attack on restaurant in Kabul diplomatic quarter

Thursday, January 9, 2014

Indian envoy leaves U.S. in deal to calm diplomatic row




NEW YORK/WASHINGTON D.C. Thu Jan 9, 2014 7:13pm EST



India

India’s Deputy Consul General in New York, Devyani Khobragade, attends a Rutgers University event at India’s Consulate General in New York, June 19, 2013.


Credit: Reuters/Mohammed Jaffer/SnapsIndia




NEW YORK/WASHINGTON D.C. (Reuters) – The Indian diplomat whose arrest and strip-searching in New York caused a major rift between India and the United States was indicted for visa fraud on Thursday, and the U.S. government immediately asked her to leave the country.


A U.S. government official said Washington accepted a request by India to accredit the diplomat, Devyani Khobragade, at the United Nations and then asked New Delhi to waive the diplomatic immunity that status conferred. India denied the request, leading Washington to ask for her departure, the official said.


In a letter accompanying her indictment on Thursday, the prosecutor in the case, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan, initially said Khobragade had left the country.


Shortly afterwards, a spokesman for Bharara said in a statement that she had not left.


A lawyer for Khobragade confirmed this.


“Despite Preet Bharara’s reports to the contrary, Devyani Khobragade has not left the country,” Daniel Arshack, her lawyer, said in a statement. “She is at home with her children.”


There was no immediate comment from the Indian embassy in Washington or its mission to the United Nations.


Khobragade, who was deputy consul-general in New York, was arrested December 12 and charged with one count of visa fraud and another of making false statements about how much she paid her housekeeper.


Her arrest set off protests in India amid disclosures that she was strip searched on the day of her arrest. It also soured the broader U.S.-India bilateral relationship, leading to the postponement of two visits to India by senior U.S. officials and another by a U.S. business delegation.


Furious at Kobragade’s treatment, India has curtailed privileges offered to U.S. diplomats and ordered the U.S. Embassy to close a club for expatriate Americans in New Delhi.


The arresting authority, the U.S. Marshals Service, characterized the strip search as a routine procedure imposed on any new arrestee.


UNDERLYING PROBLEMS


Khobragade’s departure would remove the focus of current friction between New Delhi and Washington, but it is unclear how long it will take the anger to subside in the run up to national elections in India in May.


The case has exposed underlying problems in a bilateral relationship that has failed to live up to its billing by President Barack Obama in 2010 as “a defining partnership for the 21st Century.”


Critics accuse Obama of failing to pay sufficient attention to ties with a country viewed as a key strategic counterbalance to China and as an engine to boost the U.S. economy, while U.S. hopes of building a more robust business relationship with India have run into bureaucratic hurdles.


Frustration has grown among the U.S. corporate lobby. Indian sourcing rules for retail, information technology, medicine and clean energy products are contentious and U.S. firms complain about “unfair” imports from India of everything from shrimp to steel pipes. In June, more than 170 U.S. lawmakers signed a letter to Obama about Indian policies they said threatened U.S. jobs.


Daniel Markey, senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the Khobragade case made it appear the Obama administration had taken its eye off the ball on the relationship with India.


“The question is why this wasn’t managed in a more sophisticated or subtle way, because things can be managed more effectively. This was always going to be an issue, but it could have been resolved more rapidly with less fanfare.”


Speaking at a seminar on Thursday, Ron Somers, president of the U.S.-India Business Council blamed “bumbling on both sides” for the Khobragade affair.


“We have to do some thinking on this side as to what has there been in the way of frustration that allowed this incident to provoke and spill over as it has,” he said.


“We really need now to be building trust and taking an introspective look at whether we really mean what we say when we talk about strategic partnership and how do we get there.”


(Reporting by Nate Raymond in New York, David Brunnstrom in Washington, and Louis Charbonneau at the U.N.; editing by Clive McKeef)






Reuters: Politics



Indian envoy leaves U.S. in deal to calm diplomatic row

Saturday, October 5, 2013

Iran"s Khamenei says part of diplomatic opening in New York "not proper"

DUBAI (Reuters) – Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Saturday he supported moderate President Hassan Rouhani’s diplomatic opening to the United States at the U.N. General Assembly last week but some aspects of it were “not proper”.






Reuters: Top News



Iran"s Khamenei says part of diplomatic opening in New York "not proper"

Friday, October 4, 2013

Saudi black op team behind Damascus chem weapons attack – diplomatic sources


RT
October 4, 2013


The August chemical weapons attack in the Syrian capital’s suburbs was done by a Saudi Arabian black operations team, Russian diplomatic sources have told a Russian news agency.


“Based on data from a number of sources a picture can be pieced together. The criminal provocation in Eastern Ghouta was done by a black op team that the Saudi’s sent through Jordan and which acted with support of the Liwa Al-Islam group,” a source in the diplomatic circles told Interfax.


The attack and its consequences had a huge impact on the Syrian situation, another source said.


“Syrians of various political views, including some opposition fighters, are seeking to inform diplomats and members of international organizations working in Syria what they know about the crime and the forces which inspired it,” he told the agency.


Liwa Al-Islam is an Islamist armed group operating near Damascus headed by the son of a Saudi-based Salafi cleric. The group claimed responsibility for the bombing of a secret governmental meeting in Damascus in July 2012 that killed a number of top Syrian officials, including Defense Minister Dawoud Rajiha, his deputy Asef Shawkat, and Assistant Vice President Hassan Turkmani.


The allegations mirror a number of earlier reports, which pointed to Saudi Arabia as the mastermind behind the sarin gas attack, which almost led to US military action against Syrian government. Proponents of this scenario say intelligence services in Riyadh needed a false flag operation to provoke an American attack in Syria, which would tip the balance in favor of the armed opposition supported by Saudi Arabia.


While the majority of Western countries say they are certain that the Syrian government carries the blame for the attack, Damascus maintains that the rebel forces must be behind it. Russia shares this conviction too, calling the incident a provocation.


Back in March US President Barack Obama said the use of chemical weapons would be a ‘red line’ for the Syrian government, crossing which would prompt America’s intervention into the bloody Syrian conflict. After the August attack, which the US believes has claimed some 1,400 lives, the president was called on his words by many supporters of the Syrian opposition both at home and outside of the US.


The plan for military action was put on pause after a Russia-brokered deal with Damascus, which agreed to join the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and destroy its stockpile of chemical weapons. Experts from OPCW are currently in Syria preparing for the disarmament.


This article was posted: Friday, October 4, 2013 at 10:37 am









Prison Planet.com



Saudi black op team behind Damascus chem weapons attack – diplomatic sources

Saudi black op team behind Damascus chem weapons attack – diplomatic sources


RT
October 4, 2013


The August chemical weapons attack in the Syrian capital’s suburbs was done by a Saudi Arabian black operations team, Russian diplomatic sources have told a Russian news agency.


“Based on data from a number of sources a picture can be pieced together. The criminal provocation in Eastern Ghouta was done by a black op team that the Saudi’s sent through Jordan and which acted with support of the Liwa Al-Islam group,” a source in the diplomatic circles told Interfax.


The attack and its consequences had a huge impact on the Syrian situation, another source said.


“Syrians of various political views, including some opposition fighters, are seeking to inform diplomats and members of international organizations working in Syria what they know about the crime and the forces which inspired it,” he told the agency.


Liwa Al-Islam is an Islamist armed group operating near Damascus headed by the son of a Saudi-based Salafi cleric. The group claimed responsibility for the bombing of a secret governmental meeting in Damascus in July 2012 that killed a number of top Syrian officials, including Defense Minister Dawoud Rajiha, his deputy Asef Shawkat, and Assistant Vice President Hassan Turkmani.


The allegations mirror a number of earlier reports, which pointed to Saudi Arabia as the mastermind behind the sarin gas attack, which almost led to US military action against Syrian government. Proponents of this scenario say intelligence services in Riyadh needed a false flag operation to provoke an American attack in Syria, which would tip the balance in favor of the armed opposition supported by Saudi Arabia.


While the majority of Western countries say they are certain that the Syrian government carries the blame for the attack, Damascus maintains that the rebel forces must be behind it. Russia shares this conviction too, calling the incident a provocation.


Back in March US President Barack Obama said the use of chemical weapons would be a ‘red line’ for the Syrian government, crossing which would prompt America’s intervention into the bloody Syrian conflict. After the August attack, which the US believes has claimed some 1,400 lives, the president was called on his words by many supporters of the Syrian opposition both at home and outside of the US.


The plan for military action was put on pause after a Russia-brokered deal with Damascus, which agreed to join the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and destroy its stockpile of chemical weapons. Experts from OPCW are currently in Syria preparing for the disarmament.


This article was posted: Friday, October 4, 2013 at 10:37 am









Prison Planet.com



Saudi black op team behind Damascus chem weapons attack – diplomatic sources

Monday, September 23, 2013

Obama opens UN talks with diplomatic opportunities







In this Sept. 20, 2013, photo, President Barack Obama gestures as he speaks to workers at the Ford Kansas City Stamping Plant in Liberty, Mo. Obama arrives at the United Nations on Monday, Sept. 23, with diplomatic openings, the result of help from unexpected partners, on three fronts: Iran, Syria, and elusive peace between Israel and the Palestinians. All three pathways are fraught with potential pitfalls and hinge on cooperation from often unreliable nations. (AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)





In this Sept. 20, 2013, photo, President Barack Obama gestures as he speaks to workers at the Ford Kansas City Stamping Plant in Liberty, Mo. Obama arrives at the United Nations on Monday, Sept. 23, with diplomatic openings, the result of help from unexpected partners, on three fronts: Iran, Syria, and elusive peace between Israel and the Palestinians. All three pathways are fraught with potential pitfalls and hinge on cooperation from often unreliable nations. (AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)













Buy AP Photo Reprints







(AP) — President Barack Obama opens meetings at the United Nations with diplomatic opportunities on three vexing issues: Iran’s disputed nuclear program, Syria’s chemical weapons use, and elusive peace between Israel and the Palestinians.


All three pathways are fraught with potential pitfalls and hinge on cooperation from often unreliable nations. Obama also risks being branded as naive and misguided if the efforts fail, particularly in Syria, where he’s used the prospect of diplomacy to put off a military strike in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack.


Still, the recent developments mark a significant shift on a trio of issues that have long proved problematic for Obama at the United Nations. His former Iranian counterpart used the annual U.N. General Assembly meetings as a venue for fiery, anti-American speeches. Failed Middle East peace talks led the Palestinians to seek statehood recognition at the U.N. despite staunch American objections. And the Obama administration has been stymied on Syria at the U.N. Security Council due to intractable Russian opposition.


But this year, Iran has a new leader who is making friendly overtures toward Obama, raising the prospect of a meeting at the United Nations. U.S.-brokered peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians have resumed — though on an uncertain course. And Russia has joined with the U.S. on a diplomatic deal to strip Syria of its chemical weapons.


Joel Rubin, a former State Department official who now works at the nonproliferation organization Ploughshares, said the confluence of events underscores an often frustrating aspect of diplomacy.


“You never know when it’s going to break,” said Rubin. He said Obama’s biggest test now is to recognize if opportunities morph into stalling tactics.


Obama’s advisers cast the sudden signs of progress as an outgrowth of the president’s long-standing preference for resolving disputes through diplomacy and, in the case of Iran and Syria, with pressure built up through economic sanctions and the threat of military action.


“He said we’d be open to diplomacy, we’d pursue engagement, but that there would be pressure if Iran failed to take that opportunity,” said Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser. And on Syria, Rhodes said it was the credible threat of a U.S. military strike “that opened the door for this diplomacy.”


Obama was due to arrive in New York Monday afternoon. He will address the U.N. on Tuesday, a speech aides say will touch on developments in Iran, Syria and Middle East peace. The issues will also be at the forefront of some of the president’s bilateral meetings with world leaders, including a sit-down with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Lebanese President Michel Suleiman, whose country is burdened by the flow of refugees from neighboring Syria.


But Obama’s most closely watched meeting may end up being with Iranian President Hasan Rouhani. No encounter is scheduled, but U.S. officials have left open the possibility the two men might talk on the sidelines of the international gathering.


If they do, it would mark the first meeting of U.S. and Iranian leaders in more than 30 years. A meeting could also be a precursor to renewed talks on Tehran’s disputed nuclear program — though bridging differences over Iran’s right to enrich uranium and maintain those stockpiles will be a far tougher task than arranging a handshake.


The election of Rouhani, a moderate cleric, signaled frustration among many Iranians with their country’s international isolation and the crippling impact of Western sanctions. Obama and Rouhani have already exchanged letters. And the new Iranian president’s rhetoric has so far been more palatable to the U.S. than former leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who would threaten Israel as well as lambast the U.S. in his annual remarks at the U.N.


Trita Parsi, the president of the National Iranian American Council, said Rouhani shares with Obama a need to prove to a domestic audience that diplomacy can produce concrete results.


“If he can’t show that his diplomatic approach will pay more dividends for Iran that Ahmadinejad’s theatrics, then it’s back to the conservatives being in the driver’s seat. And the flexibility that Rouhani currently has will be lost,” Parsi said.


As Rouhani considers re-engaging with the U.S., he’s closely watching diplomatic developments in Syria, an Iranian ally.


A chemical weapons attack near Damascus in August brought the U.S. to the brink of a military strike. But an idea floated by Secretary of State John Kerry turned into a last-minute overture from Russia — another backer of Syrian President Bashar Assad — and resulted in a deal to turn Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles over to the international community.


The breakthrough was particularly unexpected given that Russia has thwarted U.S. efforts to punish Assad through the U.N. Security Council. When Obama was on the verge of launching a strike against Assad’s regime, he said the U.N. had an “incapacity” to address Syria’s violation of international agreements banning the deployment of deadly gases.


Now the U.S. once again sees a role for the Security Council. The U.S. wants the panel to approve a resolution making the U.S.-Russian agreement legally binding in a way that is verifiable and enforceable. But a key obstacle remains, given U.S. and Russian disagreement over whether to put the resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter.


Chapter 7 deals with threats to international peace and security and has provisions for enforcement by military or nonmilitary means, such as sanctions. Russia is sure to veto a resolution that includes a mandate for military action.


The prospect of diplomacy in Iran and Syria has overshadowed tenuous progress in recent months in restarting direct talks between the Israelis and Palestinians. Talks resumed this summer after months of prodding by Kerry, but the prospect of a resolution on issues that have long had the Israelis and Palestinians at odds remain as slim as ever.


Palestinian leaders, frustrated by the stalemate, have taken their case in recent years to the United Nations, where there is broad support for their bid for statehood. While the U.S. supports Palestinian statehood, it says that status can only be achieved through direct negotiations with the Israelis.


That’s put Obama in the awkward position of arguing against Palestinian efforts during his previous trips to the U.N. American opposition stymied Palestinian efforts to become full U.N. members in 2011, but the Palestinians succeeded in a bid to gain implicit statehood recognition last year.


The 2012 measure passed overwhelmingly, with the U.S. and just a handful of other nations voting no.


___


Follow Julie Pace at http://twitter.com/jpaceDC


Associated Press




Politics Headlines



Obama opens UN talks with diplomatic opportunities

Sunday, September 22, 2013

For Obama, diplomatic openings on 3 fronts







In this Sept. 20, 2013, photo, President Barack Obama gestures as he speaks to workers at the Ford Kansas City Stamping Plant in Liberty, Mo. Obama arrives at the United Nations on Monday, Sept. 23, with diplomatic openings, the result of help from unexpected partners, on three fronts: Iran, Syria, and elusive peace between Israel and the Palestinians. All three pathways are fraught with potential pitfalls and hinge on cooperation from often unreliable nations. (AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)





In this Sept. 20, 2013, photo, President Barack Obama gestures as he speaks to workers at the Ford Kansas City Stamping Plant in Liberty, Mo. Obama arrives at the United Nations on Monday, Sept. 23, with diplomatic openings, the result of help from unexpected partners, on three fronts: Iran, Syria, and elusive peace between Israel and the Palestinians. All three pathways are fraught with potential pitfalls and hinge on cooperation from often unreliable nations. (AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)





This combination made with file photos shows, from left, President Barack Obama, Iranian President Hasan Rouhani, Syrian President Bashar Assad, and Russian President Vladimir Putin. After years of estrangement, the United States and Russia are joined as partners in a bold plan to rid Syria of chemical weapons. More surprising yet, American and Iranian leaders _ after an exchange of courteous letters _ may meet in New York for the first time since the Islamic revolution swept Iran nearly 35 years ago. (AP File Photos)













Buy AP Photo Reprints







(AP) — President Barack Obama arrives at the United Nations on Monday with diplomatic openings, the result of help from unexpected partners, on three fronts: Iran, Syria, and elusive peace between Israel and the Palestinians.


All three pathways are fraught with potential pitfalls and hinge on cooperation from often unreliable nations. Obama also risks being branded as naive and misguided if the efforts fail, particularly in Syria, where he’s used the prospect of diplomacy to put off a military strike in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack.


Still, the recent developments mark a significant shift on a trio of issues that have long proved problematic for Obama at the United Nations. His former Iranian counterpart used the annual U.N. General Assembly meetings, which open Monday, as a venue for fiery, anti-American speeches. Failed Middle East peace talks led the Palestinians to seek statehood recognition at the U.N. despite staunch American objections. And the Obama administration has been stymied on Syria at the U.N. Security Council due to intractable Russian opposition.


But this year, Iran has a new leader who is making friendly overtures toward Obama, raising the prospect of a meeting at the United Nations. U.S.-brokered peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians have resumed — though on an uncertain course. And Russia has joined with the U.S. on a diplomatic deal to strip Syria of its chemical weapons.


Joel Rubin, a former State Department official who now works at the nonproliferation organization Ploughshares, said the confluence of events underscores an often frustrating aspect of diplomacy.


“You never know when it’s going to break,” said Rubin. He said Obama’s biggest test now is to recognize if opportunities morph into stalling tactics.


Obama’s advisers cast the sudden signs of progress as an outgrowth of the president’s long-standing preference for resolving disputes through diplomacy and, in the case of Iran and Syria, with pressure built up through economic sanctions and the threat of military action.


“He said we’d be open to diplomacy, we’d pursue engagement, but that there would be pressure if Iran failed to take that opportunity,” said Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser. And on Syria, Rhodes said it was the credible threat of a U.S. military strike “that opened the door for this diplomacy.”


Aides say Obama will address developments on Iran, Syria and Middle East peace in his speech to the U.N. on Tuesday. The issues will also be at the forefront of some of the president’s bilateral meetings with world leaders, including a sit-down with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Lebanese President Michel Suleiman, whose country is burdened by the flow of refugees from neighboring Syria.


But Obama’s most closely watched meeting may end up being with Iranian President Hasan Rouhani. No encounter is scheduled, but U.S. officials have left open the possibility the two men might talk on the sidelines of the international gathering.


If they do, it would mark the first meeting of U.S. and Iranian leaders in more than 30 years. A meeting could also be a precursor to renewed talks on Tehran’s disputed nuclear program — though bridging differences over Iran’s right to enrich uranium and maintain those stockpiles will be a far tougher task than arranging a handshake.


The election of Rouhani, a moderate cleric, signaled frustration among many Iranians with their country’s international isolation and the crippling impact of Western sanctions. Obama and Rouhani have already exchanged letters. And the new Iranian president’s rhetoric has so far been more palatable to the U.S. than former leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who would threaten Israel as well as lambast the U.S. in his annual remarks at the U.N.


Trita Parsi, the president of the National Iranian American Council, said Rouhani shares with Obama a need to prove to a domestic audience that diplomacy can garner concrete results.


“If he can’t show that his diplomatic approach will pay more dividends for Iran that Ahmadinejad’s theatrics, then it’s back to the conservatives being in the driver’s seat. And the flexibility that Rouhani currently has will be lost,” Parsi said.


As Rouhani considers re-engaging with the U.S., he’s closely watching diplomatic developments in Syria, an Iranian ally.


A chemical weapons attack near Damascus in August brought the U.S. to the brink of a military strike. But an idea floated by Secretary of State John Kerry turned into a last-minute overture from Russia — another backer of Syrian President Bashar Assad — and resulted in a deal to turn Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles over to the international community.


The breakthrough was particularly unexpected given that Russia has thwarted U.S. efforts to punish Assad through the U.N. Security Council. When Obama was on the verge of launching a strike against Assad’s regime, he said the U.N. had an “incapacity” to address Syria’s violation of international agreements banning the deployment of deadly gases.


Now the U.S. once again sees a role for the Security Council. The U.S. wants the panel to approve a resolution making the U.S.-Russian agreement legally binding in a way that is verifiable and enforceable. But a key obstacle remains, given U.S. and Russian disagreement over whether to put the resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter.


Chapter 7 deals with threats to international peace and security and has provisions for enforcement by military or nonmilitary means, such as sanctions. Russia is sure to veto a resolution that includes a mandate for military action.


The prospect of diplomacy in Iran and Syria has overshadowed tenuous progress in recent months in restarting direct talks between the Israelis and Palestinians. Talks resumed this summer after months of prodding by Kerry, but the prospect of a resolution on issues that have long had the Israelis and Palestinians at odds remain as slim as ever.


Palestinian leaders, frustrated by the stalemate, have taken their case in recent years to the United Nations, where there is broad support for their bid for statehood. While the U.S. supports Palestinian statehood, it says that status can only be achieved through direct negotiations with the Israelis.


That’s put Obama in the awkward position of arguing against Palestinian efforts during his previous trips to the U.N. American opposition stymied Palestinian efforts to become full U.N. members in 2011, but the Palestinians succeeded in a bid to gain implicit statehood recognition last year.


The 2012 measure passed overwhelmingly, with the U.S. and just a handful of other nations voting no.


___


Follow Julie Pace at http://twitter.com/jpaceDC


___


Online:


United Nations General Assembly: http://www.un.org/en/ga/


Associated Press




U.S. Headlines



For Obama, diplomatic openings on 3 fronts

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Post/ABC Poll: Americans Back Diplomatic Agreement on Syria

An overwhelming majority of Americans are in favor of the U.S.-Russia diplomatic deal on Syria’s chemical weapons, even though most still doubt that the Syrian President Bashar Assad will fully comply, a new poll has found.

According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll conducted Sept. 12-15, the public also has a dim view of the way President Barack Obama has handled the U.S. response to the Syrian crisis, although it seems to be split evenly over his overall performance in office.


Roughly four in five of the 1,004 adults surveyed said they back the diplomatic initiative agreed to last Saturday to place Assad’s chemical arsenal under international control, although two in three people voiced skepticism that Syria will give up all of its weapons.


While 61 percent of respondents said they are against the U.S. using military strikes in response to Syria’s reported use of chemical weapons on its own people, 44 percent said they would support a congressional resolution authorizing force if Syria does not fulfill the terms of the agreement. Forty-eight percent, however, say they would not.


Nevertheless, 47 percent of those surveyed said they think the threat of U.S. military strikes, as outlined in the president’s nationally-televised speech last week, helped pressure Syria into agreeing to give up control of its chemical weapons. Another 40 percent, however, said the threat hurt diplomacy.


The poll also showed that a majority of 53 percent disapproved of the president’s handling of the situation in Syria compared to just 36 percent who approved. Still, the survey found that the American public trusts Obama to handle the Syrian crisis better than Republican in Congress by a margin of 42 percent to 34 percent.


Overall, the survey found the public to be evenly divided on the president’s overall job performance, with 47 percent having a positive view and 47 percent holding a negative view.


© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.




Newsmax – America



Post/ABC Poll: Americans Back Diplomatic Agreement on Syria

Saturday, September 14, 2013

Analysis: Putin scores diplomatic win




  • Obama and Putin in high-stakes diplomatic wrangling over Syria

  • Putin gets upper hand by giving Obama way out of military strike for now

  • Syria chemical weapons issue now at UN, just where Russian leader wants it

  • White House tries to throw the ball back to Putin, saying he must deliver



Moscow (CNN) — Russians and Americans have been duking it out in the Twitter world over who’s scoring more points in high-stakes diplomatic wrangling over Syria, U.S. President Barack Obama or Russian President Vladimir Putin.


Samantha Power, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, tweeted Thursday: “Three days ago there seemed no diplomatic way to hold Assad accountable. Threat of U.S. action finally brought Russia to the table.”


In her tweet, Margarita Simonyan, head of Russia’s English-language television network RT, quipped: “If the Russian proposal on Syria works, Obama, as an honest man, has to give his Nobel Prize to Putin.”


Taking Syria’s chemical weapons out of government control and preventing another horrendous attack on civilians is too serious an issue to reduce to political one-upmanship.





Amanpour weighs in on Putin open letter





Can Vladimir Putin be trusted?





Vladimir Putin’s call for peace


But after Putin’s bombshell opinion piece in the New York Times in which, among other things, he takes America to task for an “alarming” pattern of intervening in the internal conflicts of foreign countries, it’s obvious something has shifted.


“It absolutely is a diplomatic win by Putin right now,” said Fiona Hill, expert on Putin and director of the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution.


“If we think about this as judo, which is of course Mr. Putin’s favorite sport, this is just one set of moves,” she said. “And right now, he’s managed to get Obama off the mat, at least, and get the terms set down that play to his advantage.”


Putin’s comments cause a fuss


Putin stopped Obama’s drive for military action against Syria in its tracks this week as Russia’s plan to put Syria’s chemical weapons under international control pushes the action to the United Nations, just where Putin wants it.


Russia has veto power in the U.N. Security Council, and as Hill noted, it’s an “arena that they’re really very skilled at, which is usually blocking other people from getting resolutions or moving forward.”


Putin’s op-ed is not going down lightly in Washington. Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez said the piece made him almost want to throw up.


“Mr. Putin’s personality has been widely demonized in the Western world, so anything that comes from Mr. Putin will be met not only with skepticism but a lot of people will reject just out of hand anything that Mr. Putin will say,” said Dmitri Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center.


“However, in this particular situation, when so many people are confused in the United States, in Europe, including in the political classes of Western countries, the arguments that Putin is making so clearly could be used in the domestic debate,” he added.


Analysis: Is Obama a winner or loser on Syria?


Trenin thinks Putin “is trying to insert himself and the Russian position into the debate that’s now ongoing on Capitol Hill, within the U.S. more broadly, in the European countries. He does not want to leave the field to Westerners alone. He wants to have a voice in that discussion.”


Arguments Putin presents in his op-ed struck a chord with some in Washington, even if they dislike him.


One example: “Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multi-religious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government.”


Other points, like his swipe at Obama’s comment this week trumpeting American “exceptionalism,” are bound to irritate some of the Americans Putin is trying to sway.


Sen. James Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma, said Thursday that “Putin was lecturing to the United States, and I could hear (Ronald) Reagan turning over in his grave as this was going on.”


Some Russians claim that Obama “owes” Putin for getting him out of a bind. Alexey Pushkov, chairman of the Russian State Duma Foreign Affairs Committee, tweeted tartly: “Obama should be ‘for’ Russia’s plan with two hands. It gives him a chance not to start a new war, not lose in the Congress, and not become another Bush,” referring to his predecessor.


Hill said Putin did do Obama a favor.


“For Putin, being the old KGB guy, having someone owe him something is always to his advantage,” she said.


“But this is more about a win for Russia here. Russia gets an imminent U.S. strike off the table for a while,” Hill said.


The White House is trying to throw the ball back to Putin, cautioning that his chemical weapons proposal will boomerang if it doesn’t work.


Putin “now owns this. He has fully asserted ownership of it, and he needs to deliver,” a senior White House official told CNN.


Strobe Talbott, president of the Brookings Institution and former deputy secretary of state in the Clinton administration, tweeted: “If Kerry-Lavrov meeting exposes Russian proposal as sham, it will strengthen Obama’s hand with Congress, assuring what Putin hopes to stop.”


Keep up with key developments in the Syrian crisis




CNN.com – Politics



Analysis: Putin scores diplomatic win

Thursday, September 12, 2013

U.S. warns diplomatic solution for Syria will take time


A Free Syrian Army fighter peeks through a hole in a wall in Aleppo

A Free Syrian Army fighter peeks through a hole in a wall in Aleppo’s Qastal al-Harami neighbourhood September 11, 2013.


Credit: Reuters/Nour Kelze






WASHINGTON | Wed Sep 11, 2013 8:21pm EDT



WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The White House warned on Wednesday that a diplomatic solution over Syria would take “some time” and pledged to pursue talks despite skepticism from U.S. lawmakers that Damascus would make good on a Russian plan to surrender its chemical weapons.


A day after President Barack Obama urged Americans to support his call for military strikes if diplomacy failed, officials warned of a long process ahead.


The diplomatic initiative, kicked off by Syria’s close ally Russia as a way to avert U.S. military strikes, was scheduled to move forward on Thursday when U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry meets in Geneva with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.


The State Department said those talks would last two days or more. At the heart of the talks will be Russia’s opposition to a continued threat of military action that Washington says is needed to ensure Syria complies.


“We are doing the responsible thing here, which is testing the potential there for success,” White House spokesman Jay Carney told a briefing, referring to a diplomatic push.


“I suspect this will take some time.”


A senior State Department official said Kerry and Lavrov had spoken about their desire while in Geneva to have “a substantive discussion about the mechanics of identifying, verifying and ultimately destroying Assad’s chemical weapons stockpile so they can never be used again,” referring to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.


Russia’s proposal for Syria to surrender its chemical weapons to international control, which has been agreed by Damascus, was seen by Obama as a possible way to avoid a military strike opposed by most Americans.


There has also been stiff opposition in Congress to military intervention. Obama conceded on Monday that he was not confident he had the votes for congressional authorization.


Obama wants to hold Assad accountable for a suspected chemical weapons attack in a Damascus neighborhood on August 21 that U.S. officials say killed about 1,400 people including 400 children. Syria denies it instigated such an attack.


U.S. lawmakers expressed skepticism about Russia’s plan.


Bob Corker, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said on CNBC he was “1,000 percent supportive of us figuring out the right solution here diplomatically” but that he had “zero trust” in Russia.


Senator John McCain, a Republican who has been one of the most vocal proponents of a military strike, told a Wall Street Journal breakfast roundtable with reporters that he was not optimistic that diplomacy would succeed.


“Put me down as extremely skeptical,” said McCain, who is among a bipartisan group of nine senators seeking to draft a resolution that would be presented to Congress for a vote if a diplomatic agreement is reached.


Under that proposal, U.S. action would depend on a U.N. resolution demanding Assad put his chemical weapons under U.N. international control by a certain date. If he failed to do so, Obama would be authorized to use force.


DEFENSE CHIEF CALLS WARSHIP


Obama said on Tuesday he ordered the military to maintain its current posture in case diplomacy fails.


To that end, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on Wednesday called the commanding officer of the USS Barry, a guided missile destroyer that is one of the ships standing at a heightened state of readiness in the eastern Mediterranean Sea.


Hagel commended the Barry and other ships in its group for “ensuring that the United States military can carry out the orders of the commander-in-chief, if called upon,” the Pentagon said.


Some members of Congress said it was vital to maintain the threat of force. Damascus had previously denied it had used such weapons and refused to admit it even had a chemical weapons program.


“Assad and the Russian backers would not have raised that possibility (of scrapping the weapons) if they did not face the threat of military force, and they are unlikely to follow through if the threat does not remain credible,” Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told a meeting of defense reporters.


He backed a provision in the French draft of a U.N. Security Council resolution that would open the way for military action if Syria fails to act on the weapons.


“America must be vigilant and be willing to use force if necessary and Congress should not take the threat of military force off the table,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat.


“If there’s any indication these (talks) are not serious, if it’s a ploy to delay, to obstruct, to divert, then I think we have to again give the president the authority to hold the Assad regime accountable,” he said.


U.S. lawmakers said the Senate could start voting next week on a resolution to authorize the use of military force if diplomatic efforts fell short.


The Obama administration kept up its drive to win support for its approach.


Vice President Joe Biden held two classified briefings at the White House for groups of Republicans from the House of Representatives, and deputy national security adviser Tony Blinken held a classified briefing for all House Democrats, an administration official said.


McCain questioned the decision to have Kerry meet with Lavrov, saying the United States needs to press ahead with more forceful action. “I feel badly, very badly for my friends in the Free Syrian Army today,” he told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program.


“There is nothing more that will drive Syrians into the hands of the extremists than to feel that they have been abandoned by the West.”


The rebel Syrian National Coalition has decried the diplomatic proposal as a “cheap trick” that would allow Assad more time to kill Syrians.


Kerry also intends to meet with U.N.-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi while in Geneva, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.


(Additional reporting by Richard Cowan, Thomas Ferraro, Paul Eckert, Tabassum Zakaria, Jeff Mason and Phil Stewart; Editing by Karey Van Hall, David Storey, Jim Loney and Mohammad Zargham)






Reuters: Politics



U.S. warns diplomatic solution for Syria will take time

Friday, August 9, 2013

US, Russia diplomatic and defense chiefs to meet








White House press secretary Jay Carney listens to a question from a reporter during his daily news briefing at the White House in Washington, Thursday, Aug. 8, 2013. At the briefing Carney answered questions about NSA leaker Edward Snowden and Russia. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)





White House press secretary Jay Carney listens to a question from a reporter during his daily news briefing at the White House in Washington, Thursday, Aug. 8, 2013. At the briefing Carney answered questions about NSA leaker Edward Snowden and Russia. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)





FILE – In this June 17, 2013 file photo, President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin get up to leave after their meeting in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland. President Barack Obama said he was “disappointed” that Russia had granted temporary asylum to National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden, defying administration demands that the former government contractor be sent back to the U.S. to face espionage charges. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)





Russian President Vladimir Putin listens during a meeting at the Novo-Ogaryovo residence outside Moscow on Wednesday, Aug. 7, 2013. The White House announced Wednesday that President Barack Obama has canceled plans to meet with Putin in Moscow next month. The rare diplomatic snub is retribution for Russia’s decision to grant temporary asylum to National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden. It also reflects growing U.S. frustration with Russia on several other issues, including missile defense and human rights. (AP Photo/RIA Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service)













Buy AP Photo Reprints







(AP) — The crisis in Syria, arms control and missile defense headline what are expected to be chilly talks between top U.S. and Russian foreign and defense chiefs, a sit-down tainted by the case of National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden, which led President Barack Obama to cancel his upcoming meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.


Russia’s decision last week to grant temporary asylum to Snowden put a damper on U.S.-Russia relations, which were already on a slide. Then, on Wednesday, Obama canceled his summit with Putin, planned for early September in Moscow, because of what the White House called a lack of “significant progress” on a wide array of critical issues.


“Summits of leaders are, tend to be designed around making progress on significant issues,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said Thursday. “And we had not seen that progress sufficiently on a range of issues to merit a summit.”


The scuttled summit means that talks scheduled Friday at the State Department between Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu will be awkward at best.


U.S.-Russia discord had been simmering since Putin regained the Russian presidency more than a year ago.


On returning to power, he adopted a deeply nationalistic and more openly confrontational stance toward the United States than the man he had chosen to succeed him as president in 2008, Dmitry Medvedev, whose tenure roughly overlapped Obama’s first term in the White House.


The U.S. is upset about Moscow’s backing of President Bashar Assad in Syria’s civil war. The two nations also have been at odds over Russia’s domestic crackdown on civil rights, a U.S. missile defense plan for Europe, trade, global security, human rights and American adoptions of Russian children.


The Kremlin expressed disappointment that the White House canceled the summit and blamed it on Washington’s inability to develop relations with Moscow on an “equal basis.” Putin’s foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, added that the decision was “clearly linked” to the Snowden case, a situation that he said wasn’t of Russia’s making.


Carney said Snowden was a factor in canceling the summit, but not the only one. Carney said the U.S. would continue to press Russia to return Snowden to the United States to face charges for the unauthorized public release of classified information.


“We have a lot of fish to fry, if you will, with the Russians. We have a lot of issues to engage with the Russians over,” Carney said, emphasizing that Snowden was not the main focus of U.S. engagement with Russia.


“But it is not something that we’re dropping, by any means, and, you know, it remains our position that there is ample legal justification to return Mr. Snowden to the United States,” he said.


Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Russia “a diminished power” and said that Obama was right to cancel the summit with Putin after the “slap in the face” over Snowden.


“On any given day, it’s the 16th economic power” in the world, Rice said on “CBS This Morning” Friday.


Asked how the United States could explain dropping the Obama-Putin summit, she said, “You have to start with the fact that we have very few overlapping interests any more with Russia.” Rice, who was secretary of state under President George W. Bush, said, ‘You say to Putin, ‘Look, we are not going to sacrifice our national interests to court you.”


Meanwhile, three meetings among the U.S. and Russian top defense and diplomatic officials were scheduled for Friday.


Hagel and the Russian defense minister were to meet separately in the morning, followed by the meeting of the foursome. In the afternoon, Kerry and his counterpart were to hold a bilateral meeting.


State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the meetings were aimed at making progress on key issues, and not focused specifically on setting the groundwork for a Putin-Obama summit.


“I think there’s an openness to doing that in an appropriate time where there’s an opportunity to make progress,” she said. “But I don’t expect that’s going to be a major part of the focus” of the meetings.


Associated Press




Top Headlines



US, Russia diplomatic and defense chiefs to meet

US, Russia diplomatic and defense chiefs to meet







White House press secretary Jay Carney listens to a question from a reporter during his daily news briefing at the White House in Washington, Thursday, Aug. 8, 2013. At the briefing Carney answered questions about NSA leaker Edward Snowden and Russia. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)





White House press secretary Jay Carney listens to a question from a reporter during his daily news briefing at the White House in Washington, Thursday, Aug. 8, 2013. At the briefing Carney answered questions about NSA leaker Edward Snowden and Russia. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)





FILE – In this June 17, 2013 file photo, President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin get up to leave after their meeting in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland. President Barack Obama said he was “disappointed” that Russia had granted temporary asylum to National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden, defying administration demands that the former government contractor be sent back to the U.S. to face espionage charges. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)





Russian President Vladimir Putin listens during a meeting at the Novo-Ogaryovo residence outside Moscow on Wednesday, Aug. 7, 2013. The White House announced Wednesday that President Barack Obama has canceled plans to meet with Putin in Moscow next month. The rare diplomatic snub is retribution for Russia’s decision to grant temporary asylum to National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden. It also reflects growing U.S. frustration with Russia on several other issues, including missile defense and human rights. (AP Photo/RIA Novosti, Alexei Nikolsky, Presidential Press Service)













Buy AP Photo Reprints







(AP) — The crisis in Syria, arms control and missile defense headline what are expected to be chilly talks between top U.S. and Russian foreign and defense chiefs, a sit-down tainted by the case of National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden, which led President Barack Obama to cancel his upcoming meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.


Russia’s decision last week to grant temporary asylum to Snowden put a damper on U.S.-Russia relations, which were already on a slide. Then, on Wednesday, Obama canceled his summit with Putin, planned for early September in Moscow, because of what the White House called a lack of “significant progress” on a wide array of critical issues.


“Summits of leaders are, tend to be designed around making progress on significant issues,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said Thursday. “And we had not seen that progress sufficiently on a range of issues to merit a summit.”


The scuttled summit means that talks scheduled Friday at the State Department between Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu will be awkward at best.


U.S.-Russia discord had been simmering since Putin regained the Russian presidency more than a year ago.


On returning to power, he adopted a deeply nationalistic and more openly confrontational stance toward the United States than the man he had chosen to succeed him as president in 2008, Dmitry Medvedev, whose tenure roughly overlapped Obama’s first term in the White House.


The U.S. is upset about Moscow’s backing of President Bashar Assad in Syria’s civil war. The two nations also have been at odds over Russia’s domestic crackdown on civil rights, a U.S. missile defense plan for Europe, trade, global security, human rights and American adoptions of Russian children.


The Kremlin expressed disappointment that the White House canceled the summit and blamed it on Washington’s inability to develop relations with Moscow on an “equal basis.” Putin’s foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, added that the decision was “clearly linked” to the Snowden case, a situation that he said wasn’t of Russia’s making.


Carney said Snowden was a factor in canceling the summit, but not the only one. Carney said the U.S. would continue to press Russia to return Snowden to the United States to face charges for the unauthorized public release of classified information.


“We have a lot of fish to fry, if you will, with the Russians. We have a lot of issues to engage with the Russians over,” Carney said, emphasizing that Snowden was not the main focus of U.S. engagement with Russia.


“But it is not something that we’re dropping, by any means, and, you know, it remains our position that there is ample legal justification to return Mr. Snowden to the United States,” he said.


Three meetings were scheduled for Friday.


Hagel and the Russian defense minister were to meet separately in the morning, followed by the meeting of the foursome. In the afternoon, Kerry and his counterpart were to hold a bilateral meeting.


State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the meetings were aimed at making progress on key issues, and not focused specifically on setting the groundwork for a Putin-Obama summit.


“I think there’s an openness to doing that in an appropriate time where there’s an opportunity to make progress,” she said. “But I don’t expect that’s going to be a major part of the focus” of the meetings.


Associated Press




Politics Headlines



US, Russia diplomatic and defense chiefs to meet