Showing posts with label agreement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label agreement. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

China & Russia refuse nuclear agreement: Obama staff passed out drunk in hotel hallway

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.



China & Russia refuse nuclear agreement: Obama staff passed out drunk in hotel hallway

Friday, February 21, 2014

Ukraine president, opposition sign EU-brokered agreement on ending crisis

At Alternate Viewpoint, 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 Alternate Viewpoint and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Alternate Viewpoint 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


Alternate Viewpoint 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 Alternate Viewpoint.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Alternate Viewpoint 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 Alternate Viewpoint 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.


Alternate Viewpoint 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. Alternate Viewpoint"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.



Ukraine president, opposition sign EU-brokered agreement on ending crisis

Saturday, February 1, 2014

The world at war: The mind, journalism, freedoms... Israel-Palestine: Kerry’s One-sided “Framework Agreement”



This week, Martin Indyk and Thomas Friedman released details of John Kerry’s unacceptable acquiescence to Israeli demands in his soon to be released “framework agreement”. 


The framework is dead-on-arrival if these details are correct.  Kerry is demanding that the Palestinians declare that Israel is a Jewish state.  Is the U.S. officially a Christian nation?  No.  What happens to the 20% of Israeli citizens who are Palestinian Arabs [Muslims and Christians] in a “Jewish state”? John Kerry AIPAC 480 x 360


John Kerry’s Zionist credentials on display at an AIPAC conference (right)


John Kerry also is demanding that the Palestinians agree to give up the Right of Return.  For all this, what is John Kerry asking the Israelis to concede?  One tiny “concession” already laid out in international law: that the Palestinians can have their capital in East Jerusalem.


Pressure must be maintained on Mahmoud Abbas who does not have the authority from the Palestinian people to concede to Kerry’s demands.


See Thomas Friedman in the NYT.


and Martin Indyk in the New Republic


Copyright Veterans News Now 2014


http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2014/02/01/kerrys-ridiculously-one-sided-framework-agreement-is-doa/





Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Center of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]


www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


For media inquiries: [email protected]





Global Research



The world at war: The mind, journalism, freedoms...

Israel-Palestine: Kerry’s One-sided “Framework Agreement”

Monday, December 2, 2013

Why Karzai Is Stonewalling A Security Agreement With US


Karzai


Afghan President Hamid Karzai is being depicted in the media as an obstinate spoiler who is sabotaging America’s plans for a decade or more of continued U.S. military occupation of Afghanistan by refusing to sign a status of forces agreement (SOFA) governing future troop presence. Who knows, maybe he is an obstinate saboteur. But his stated reasons for thwarting a security deal in the lead up to the scheduled 2014 drawdown are substantive.


I’ve written before about how ironic it is that the sticking point on a SOFA is whether U.S. troops will be granted legal immunity from Afghan law, since it kind of implies expectations on both sides that U.S. soldiers will continue to commit crimes. And yes, the security deal does hinge on this question of legal jurisdiction, but there is a more literal reason to stall the agreement.


This ably reported piece in the Los Angeles Times puts Karzai’s reluctance to sign a deal in the context of continued civilian casualties caused by U.S. troops. A September drone strike, the article explains, killed 14 people who residents say were civilians and U.S. officials say were Taliban.


“There were pieces of my family all over the road,” said Jan, recalling the deadly Sept. 7 late afternoon incident in an interview last week. “I picked up those pieces from the road and from the truck and wrapped them in a sheet to bury them.


“Do the American people want to spend their money this way, on drones that kill our women and children?” he asked.


The repercussions of such strikes are felt far beyond the dark escarpments of Kunar province. The grief and rage of Jan and his relatives help explain the approval among some Afghans of President Hamid Karzai’s thus far non-negotiable demand that civilian casualties cease if he is to sign a proposed 10-year security agreement with the United States.


Karzai responded to the Kunar attack by accusing the United States of recklessness and callous disregard for innocent Afghans. After a child died in a drone strike Thursday in southern Afghanistan, Karzai suggested that the attack had ended any chance of an accord.


Civilian deaths at the hands of U.S. forces have long poisoned Karzai’s relationship with the United States. That antagonism has hardened this month into a vise that could abruptly end America’s 12-year, multibillion-dollar investment in Afghanistan, despite a decline in civilian casualties due to new safeguards by foreign forces.



Under current agreements, U.S. forces operate under the legal jurisdiction of the U.S. military, which makes it next to impossible for Afghans to seek recourse for operations that scatter their family’s body parts all over the road. And as the last decade of occupation has indisputably demonstrated, the U.S. typically has a rather blasé attitude about investigating and prosecuting crimes committed by American soldiers.


This has led the Obama administration to, once again, threaten a “zero option,” in which all U.S. troops are pulled out in 2014 as they were in Iraq in 2011. The administration quite clearly wants to avoid this, but they aren’t about to leave U.S. troops to the Afghan legal system. So, the zero option is a real possibility – a good thing for everyone, including Afghan civilians.


“The possibility of a military presence into 2024 is unacceptable,” says Representative Barbara Lee (D-CA). “There is no military solution in Afghanistan. After 13 years and more than $ 778 billion invested in an unstable country and the corrupt Karzai government, it’s time to bring our troops and tax dollars home.”






Antiwar.com Blog



Why Karzai Is Stonewalling A Security Agreement With US

Sunday, November 24, 2013

Nuclear Agreement May Result in Israel and Saudi Arabia Attacking Iran


Mossad worked closely with Saudi royals on war preparations


Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
November 24, 2013


Israel and Saudi Arabia may cooperate in an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities following the announcement of a six-month interim agreement between the P5+1 and Iran on Sunday in Geneva. Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister, characterized the agreement as a major success. He said Iran will cooperate with the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Iran’s recently elected president, Hassan Rouhani, said the agreement is evidence the world now recognizes Iran has nuclear rights.


“While today’s announcement is just a first step, it achieves a great deal,” the Obama administration said in a statement. “For the first time in nearly a decade, we have halted the progress of the Iranian nuclear program, and key parts of the program will be rolled back.” Obama added a caveat. He said the United States will “ratchet up” sanctions if Iran fails to follow the agreement. Secretary of State John Kerry, who represented the United States at the conference in Geneva, said Iran has yet to demonstrate that it is not seeking to build a nuclear weapon.


The agreement stipulates that Iran will stop enriching uranium over 5% and dismantle its stockpile of 20% enriched uranium. A nuclear weapon requires uranium enriched over 90%. In addition to IAEA inspections, Iran has also agreed to stop construction on its heavy water reactor at Arak.


Officials in Israel reacted predictably after the deal was reached. “What was concluded in Geneva last night is not a historic agreement, it’s a historic mistake,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned. “It’s not made the world a safer place. Like the agreement with North Korea in 2005, this agreement has made the world a much more dangerous place.” The Saudi royals also expressed outrage.


Israel Working With Saudis On Attack Plan


Earlier this month, the Sunday Times reported that Saudi Arabia agreed to allow Israel use of its air space. The Saudis said they would provide drones, tanker planes and helicopters for an Israeli attack on Iran. The newspaper said Mossad was working closely with Saudi intelligence and they were making preparations in the event a deal was reached in Switzerland. “Once the Geneva agreement is signed, the military option will be back on the table. The Saudis are furious and are willing to give Israel all the help it needs,” a source said.


Netanyahu and Israeli officials attempted to persuade the United States to reject a compromise. The Israeli president said any agreement would directly threaten the existence of his country.


“It is highly unlikely that the Saudis and Israelis would want to attack Iran because at the end of the day both countries would be losers, they would be seen as aggressors and obviously the Iranians would retaliate,” Iranian political analyst Seyed Mohammad Marandi said after the Sunday Times published its report. “It would create an economic catastrophe for the world and only the Saudis and the Israelis would be to blame.”


Egyptian officials, according to WorldNetDaily reporter and blogger Aaron Klein, confirmed that Israeli personnel recently visited Saudi Arabia and inspected military bases. “The officials said Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan and other Arab and Persian Gulf countries have been discussing the next steps toward possible strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites,” Klein writes today.


Klein also notes the United States told Israel and the Saudis it controls radar capabilities over Iran and that no strike should be launched without permission from the Obama administration.


Hezbollah May Respond If Attack Unfolds


In October, it was reported that Israel was considering attacking Hezbollah positions in southern Lebanon to take out its missile capability. The Shia military organization has “more than 200,000 missiles capable of hitting any house in Israel,” according to Israeli Home Front Minister Gilad Erdan. Military experts, however, put the number closer to 45,000 missiles and rockets. IDF Deputy Chief of Staff Yair Naveh claims Hezbollah has at around 60,000 rockets and missiles in its arsenal, or about ten times the number it had during Israel’s 34-day invasion of Lebanon in 2006.


Hezbollah Secretary-General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah met with Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Arab and African Affairs Hossein Amir-Abdollahian last week after the Iranian embassy was attacked in Beirut. Iranian Ambassador to Lebanon Ghazanfar Roknabadi told Hezbollah’s al-Manar TV station “the Zionist entity” was responsible for the attack.


The Abdullah Azzam brigades, an al-Qaeda-linked group, claimed responsibility for the blast that killed at least 23 people and wounded more than 150 others.


This article was posted: Sunday, November 24, 2013 at 12:48 pm









Infowars



Nuclear Agreement May Result in Israel and Saudi Arabia Attacking Iran

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

US-Russia reach agreement on Syria weapons







U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, left, speaks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, right, during a news conference in Geneva, Switzerland, Saturday Sept. 14, 2013. U.S. Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said Saturday they have reached an agreement on a framework for Syria to destroy all of its chemical weapons, and would seek a U.N. Security Council resolution that could authorize sanctions, short of military action, if Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government fails to comply. (AP Photo/Keystone,Martial Trezzini)





U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, left, speaks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, right, during a news conference in Geneva, Switzerland, Saturday Sept. 14, 2013. U.S. Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said Saturday they have reached an agreement on a framework for Syria to destroy all of its chemical weapons, and would seek a U.N. Security Council resolution that could authorize sanctions, short of military action, if Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government fails to comply. (AP Photo/Keystone,Martial Trezzini)





Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov pauses while making statements to the media following meetings regarding Syria, at a news conference in Geneva, Switzerland, Saturday Sept. 14, 2013. U.S. Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said Saturday they have reached an agreement on a framework for Syria to destroy all of its chemical weapons, and would seek a U.N. Security Council resolution that could authorize sanctions, short of military action, if Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government fails to comply. (AP Photo / Larry Downing)





U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, attends a news conference in Geneva, Switzerland, Saturday Sept. 14, 2013. U.S. Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Saturday they have reached an agreement on a framework for Syria to destroy all of its chemical weapons, and would seek a U.N. Security Council resolution that could authorize sanctions, short of military action, if Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government fails to comply. (AP Photo/Keystone,Martial Trezzini)





U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, left, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, right, deliver statements in Geneva, Switzerland, Saturday Sept. 14, 2013. U.S. Secretary of State Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said Saturday they have reached an agreement on a framework for Syria to destroy all of its chemical weapons, and would seek a U.N. Security Council resolution that could authorize sanctions, short of military action, if Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government fails to comply. (AP Photo/Keystone,Martial Trezzini)













Buy AP Photo Reprints







(AP) — After days of intense negotiations, the United States and Russia reached agreement Saturday on a framework to secure and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons by mid-2014 and impose U.N. penalties if the Assad government fails to comply.


The deal, announced by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva, includes what Kerry called “a shared assessment” of the weapons stockpile, and a timetable and measures for Syrian President Bashar Assad to follow so that the full inventory can be identified and seized.


The U.S. and Russia agreed to immediately press for a U.N. Security Council resolution that enshrines the chemical weapons agreement under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which can authorize both the use of force and nonmilitary measures.


President Barack Obama made clear that “if diplomacy fails, the United States remains prepared to act.”


Russia, which already has rejected three resolutions on Syria, would be sure to veto a U.N. move toward military action, and U.S. officials said they did not contemplate seeking such an authorization.


“The world will now expect the Assad regime to live up to its public commitments,” Kerry told a packed news conference at the hotel where negotiations were conducted since Thursday night. “There can be no games, no room for avoidance or anything less than full compliance by the Assad regime.”


It was not immediately clear whether Syria had signed onto the agreement, which requires Damascus to submit a full inventory of its stocks within the next week. Russia does have a close relationship with Syria and holds influence over its Mideast ally.


Kerry and Lavrov emphasized that the deal sends a strong message not just to Syria but to the world, too, that the use of chemical weapons will not be tolerated.


Lavrov added, cautiously, “We understand that the decisions we have reached today are only the beginning of the road.”


The deal is considered critical to breaking the international stalemate blocking a resumption of peace talks to end the Syrian civil war, now in its third year.


Under the framework agreement, international inspectors are to be on the ground in Syria by November. During that month, they are to complete their initial assessment and all mixing and filling equipment for chemical weapons is to be destroyed.


The deal calls for all components of the chemical weapons program to be removed from the country or destroyed by mid-2014.


“Ensuring that a dictator’s wanton use of chemical weapons never again comes to pass, we believe is worth pursuing and achieving,” Kerry said.


Noncompliance by the Assad government or any other party would be referred to the 15-nation Security Council by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. That group oversees the Chemical Weapons Convention, which Syria this week agreed to join.


The group’s director-general, Ahmet Uzumcu, spoke of adopting “necessary measures” to put in place “an accelerated program to verify the complete destruction” of Syria’s chemical weapons, production facilities and “other relevant capabilities.”


The U.S. and Russia are two of the five permanent Security Council members with a veto. The others are Britain, China, and France.


“There is an agreement between Russia and the United States that non-compliance is going to be held accountable within the Security Council under Chapter 7,” Kerry said. “What remedy is chosen is subject to the debate within the council, which is always true. But there’s a commitment to impose measures.”


Lavrov indicated there would be limits to using such a resolution.


“Any violations of procedures … would be looked at by the Security Council and if they are approved, the Security Council would take the required measures, concrete measures,” Lavrov said. “Nothing is said about the use of force or about any automatic sanctions.”


Kerry spoke of a commitment, in the event of Syrian noncompliance, to “impose measures commensurate with whatever is needed in terms of the accountability.”


The agreement offers no specific penalties. Given that a thorough investigation of any allegation of noncompliance is required before any possible action, Moscow could drag out the process or veto measures it deems too harsh.


Kerry stressed that the U.S. believes the threat of force is necessary to back the diplomacy, and U.S. officials have Obama retains the right to launch military strikes without U.N. approval to protect American national security interests.


“I have no doubt that the combination of the threat of force and the willingness to pursue diplomacy helped to bring us to this moment,” Kerry said.


But a leading U.S. senator expressed concerns that without the threat of force, it’s not clear “how Syrian compliance will be possible under the terms of any agreement.”


Republican lawmaker Bob Corker of Tennessee said Syria’s “willingness to follow through is very much an open question” and he did not want the negotiations to signal a “retreat from our broader national interests,” including support for “moderate” opposition forces in Syria.


Under the deal, the U.S. and Russia are giving Syria just one week, until Sept. 21, to submit “a comprehensive listing, including names, types and quantities of its chemical weapons agents, types of munitions, and location and form of storage, production, and research and development facilities.”


International inspectors, the U.S. and Russia agreed, should be on the ground in Syria by November and complete their initial work by the end of the month. They must be given “immediate and unfettered” access to inspect all sites.


Kerry said the two sides had come to agreement on the exact size of Syria’s weapons stockpile, a sticking point.


U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss details of the negotiations, said the U.S. and Russia agreed that Syria had roughly 1,000 metric tons of chemical weapons agents and precursors, including blister agents, such as sulfur and mustard gas and nerve agents like sarin.


These officials said the two sides did not agree on the number of chemical weapons sites in Syria.


U.S. intelligence believes Syria has about 45 sites associated with chemicals weapons, half of which have “exploitable quantities” of material that could be used in munitions. The Russian estimate is considerably lower; the officials would not say by how much.


U.S. intelligence agencies believe all the stocks remain in government control, the officials said.


U.N. inspectors are preparing to submit their own report this weekend. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Friday that he expected “an overwhelming report” that chemical weapons were indeed used on the outskirts of Damascus on Aug. 21.


A U.N. statement said Ban hoped the agreement will prevent further use of such weapons and “help pave the path for a political solution to stop the appalling suffering inflicted on the Syrian people.”


Britain’s foreign secretary, William Hague, said Saturday’s development was “a significant step forward.” Germany said that “if deeds now follow the words, the chances of a political solution will rise significantly,” Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said.


Obama called for a limited military strike against Assad’s forces in response, then deferred seeking congressional approval to consider the Russian proposal.


The commander of the Free Syrian Army rebel group, Gen. Salim Idris, told a news conference in Turkey that the Russian initiative would “buy time” and that rebels will continue “fighting the regime and work for bringing it down.”


He said that if international inspectors come to Syria in order to inspect chemical weapons, “we will facilitate their passages but there will be no cease-fire.” The FSA will not block the work of U.N. inspectors, he said, and the “inspectors will not be subjected to rebel fire when they are in regime-controlled areas.”


Idris said Kerry told him by telephone that “the alternative of military strikes is still on the table.”


Associated Press




Politics Headlines



US-Russia reach agreement on Syria weapons

Monday, August 12, 2013

Moscow, Tehran to sign agreement on building new nuclear power plant – Iranian FM


The reactor building at the Russian-built Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran, 1200 kms south of Tehran. (Reuters/Mehr News Agency/Majid Asgaripour)
The reactor building at the Russian-built Bushehr nuclear power plant in southern Iran, 1200 kms south of Tehran. (Reuters/Mehr News Agency/Majid Asgaripour)


Moscow and Tehran will soon sign an agreement on the construction of a new nuclear power plant in the Islamic Republic, Iran’s Foreign Minister announced.


“Iran has held consultations with the Russian side and soon an agreement of mutual understanding will be signed on the construction of a new nuclear power plant,” Ali Akbar Salehi, Iranian foreign minister and former nuclear chief, said on Sunday.


He reiterated that Iran’s nuclear program is purely peaceful, as the country needs nuclear power for electricity generation and medicine.


The statement comes ahead of the first meeting between Iran’s newly elected President Hassan Rouhani and Russian President Vladimir Putin on September 13. The talks are part of a Eurasian summit taking place in Kyrgyzstan’s capital of Bishkek, a Russian presidential aide said Friday.


“After Rouhani’s election as president, the Iranian government sent us a proposal to hold a Rouhani-Putin meeting within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Bishkek,” Yury Ushakov said.


Last month, Russian business daily Kommersant cited anonymous sources which said that Vladimir Putin may visit Tehran to meet Hassan Rouhani in mid-August.


Rouhani was sworn in on August 4 and replaced Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as head of Iranian government.


During his first press conference on Tuesday, Rouhani said that Iran would continue negotiations with Russia on nuclear power development in the country.


“We need to get 20,000 megawatts of nuclear power. We have been negotiating on this. I hope that everything will develop according to schedule, and Iran will be able to continue to build nuclear power plants and continue to cooperate. The Iranian government will continue to negotiate with neighboring countries, one of which is Russia, to develop peaceful nuclear energy,” he said.


Russian parliament speaker Sergey Naryshkin said during his visit to Iran on August 4 that Russia intends to expand cooperation in civilian nuclear power after Iran’s nuclear power plant at Bushehr is fully commissioned in September.


The construction of Bushehr – the first civilian nuclear plant in the Middle East – was started in 1975 by German companies, but the work was stopped in 1979 after the Islamic revolution of Iran. A contract for finishing the plant was signed between Iran and the Russian Ministry for Atomic Energy in 1995.


Bushehr nuclear power plant launched in 2011 has no link to nuclear weapons production and cannot be used to develop such technology.


The US and its allies have long accused Iran of seeking to develop a nuclear weapons capability – a claim which Tehran has repeatedly denied.


Several rounds of talks between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany have failed to resolve the dispute. Iran’s critics claim the country has used nuclear negotiations as a delaying tactic while continuing to develop nuclear weapons technology behind closed doors. Tehran insists its nuclear program is for entirely peaceful purposes.


Source: RT


Top Search Terms Used to Find This Page:





End the Lie – Independent News



Moscow, Tehran to sign agreement on building new nuclear power plant – Iranian FM

Monday, February 4, 2013

Prenuptial Agreement as well as the Advantages

With all the high separation and divorce rate at this time, it\’s best to plan your own future. This is the point of developing a prenuptial agreement. It is a method of protecting yourself monetarily, that is particularly important when you have children. Nevertheless there are more good things about having a prenuptial agreement.

Keep Possessions within Your Family

Whenever you sign a prenuptial agreement, you actually acknowledge that virtually any debts and also possessions that you had just before the marriage will still be your own later. In fact, you should make a list of the things you already have before getting married, given that usually it might be mixed up with all the possessions you gained during marriage.

In case you have precious items that are traditionally passed down from one family member to another, you need to list them so that your particular children get them in case you get divorce or even pass away, not your partner. In fact, in case you pass away without having written a will or even signed a prenuptial agreement before marriage, your partner will get your entire assets.

Know Your own Spouse\’s Financial Situations

If you choose to get a prenuptial agreement, you can definitely find that it\’s useful even if separation and divorce never happens. This is because this pushes you to talk about your finances with your spouse, because you have to disclose virtually any financial obligations and also assets you have. Having financial difficulties is definitely among the most typical causes of separation and divorce. Since many partners fight about this so much, they may avoid talking about the problem . When you get a prenuptial agreement, you don\’t have an option, allowing you to discover everything there is to know about your partner\’s finances. This may really bring you closer as you approach your wedding.

Protect Yourself In case you are coming on the marriage with more money than your partner, you have the most to lose, which means a prenuptial agreement needs to be a good thing. However, even though you have the least amount of cash in the romantic relationship, this document can easily protect you.

With the above advantages, it should be clear that a prenuptial agreement may benefit both you and your partner. If you are interested, you should speak to a lawyer so you get it done the right way.

Pay a visit to prenuptial agreements cost and premarital agreement by clicking here!


Prenuptial Agreement as well as the Advantages