U.S. President George W. Bush prevented a review earlier this year by Justice Department lawyers of his warrantless domestic spying program, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified on July 18.
Gonzales told the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, however, that he was confident the program’s constitutionality would be upheld by a proposed review of it by a secret federal court.
Gonzales said Bush refused to give the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility access to the classified program begun shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks and disclosed in December by The New York Times.
The office announced in May it was unable to conduct an investigation into the role department lawyers had in developing the National Security Agency’s eavesdropping program, which targets overseas telephone calls and e-mails of Americans with suspected terrorist ties.
Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, asked Gonzales why Bush declined access, saying, "Many other lawyers in the Department of Justice had clearance. Why not OPR?"
Noting the importance of the program, Gonzales said: "The president of the United States makes decisions about who is ultimately given access."
Specter and other lawmakers have questioned the legality of the program, and have pushed for a court review of it.
The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act requires warrants from the court for intelligence-related eavesdropping inside the United States. Bush has defended the program, saying he had the power in wartime to protect the nation.
Specter announced last week he had negotiated a deal with the White House to clear the way for the FISA court review.
He said Bush has promised to submit the program to the court for such an overall review, provided the U.S. Congress approves a bill to update electronic surveillance laws.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, asked Gonzales if the proposed review was adequate without a case-by-case review.
Gonzales said, "We have confidence that the court will find that, in fact, this is a program that is constitutional."
The administration is also working with Congress on how to try terrorism suspects after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month that struck down its military tribunals.
Gonzales, in a prepared statement, said "We all have a common goal: to provide flexible but fair procedures that will enable us to try al-Qaida terrorists ... without compromising our nation’s values or the safety of the American people."
Gonzales told the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, however, that he was confident the program’s constitutionality would be upheld by a proposed review of it by a secret federal court.
Gonzales said Bush refused to give the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility access to the classified program begun shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks and disclosed in December by The New York Times.
The office announced in May it was unable to conduct an investigation into the role department lawyers had in developing the National Security Agency’s eavesdropping program, which targets overseas telephone calls and e-mails of Americans with suspected terrorist ties.
Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, asked Gonzales why Bush declined access, saying, "Many other lawyers in the Department of Justice had clearance. Why not OPR?"
Noting the importance of the program, Gonzales said: "The president of the United States makes decisions about who is ultimately given access."
Specter and other lawmakers have questioned the legality of the program, and have pushed for a court review of it.
The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act requires warrants from the court for intelligence-related eavesdropping inside the United States. Bush has defended the program, saying he had the power in wartime to protect the nation.
Specter announced last week he had negotiated a deal with the White House to clear the way for the FISA court review.
He said Bush has promised to submit the program to the court for such an overall review, provided the U.S. Congress approves a bill to update electronic surveillance laws.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, asked Gonzales if the proposed review was adequate without a case-by-case review.
Gonzales said, "We have confidence that the court will find that, in fact, this is a program that is constitutional."
The administration is also working with Congress on how to try terrorism suspects after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month that struck down its military tribunals.
Gonzales, in a prepared statement, said "We all have a common goal: to provide flexible but fair procedures that will enable us to try al-Qaida terrorists ... without compromising our nation’s values or the safety of the American people."
Aircraft and airmen from the U.S. Air Force 352nd Special Operations Group are headed to Cyprus to help with the evacuation of Americans from Lebanon.
Lt. Gen. Michael Wooley, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, said that two MH-53 Pave Low helicopters that were already in the eastern Mediterranean region had been dispatched to join the evacuation operation.
The 352nd, home based in England at RAF Mildenhall, may send additional aircraft, Wooley added.
The U.S. Air Force teams will be joining an American military effort that includes the U.S. Navy’s Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike group and the U.S. 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit.
Around 25,000 Americans are thought to be living in or visiting Lebanon, according to the U.S. State Department. About 5,000 of them have asked to be evacuated.
Lt. Gen. Michael Wooley, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, said that two MH-53 Pave Low helicopters that were already in the eastern Mediterranean region had been dispatched to join the evacuation operation.
The 352nd, home based in England at RAF Mildenhall, may send additional aircraft, Wooley added.
The U.S. Air Force teams will be joining an American military effort that includes the U.S. Navy’s Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike group and the U.S. 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit.
Around 25,000 Americans are thought to be living in or visiting Lebanon, according to the U.S. State Department. About 5,000 of them have asked to be evacuated.
Major powers began work on July 18 on a U.N. Security Council resolution that would demand Iran suspend uranium enrichment as well as temporarily halt construction on a reactor that can produce plutonium.
The draft under consideration is an updated version of one introduced by the United States, Britain and France in early May but never adopted. It includes threats of sanctions to curb Iran’s nuclear program, which the West fears is a prelude to bomb-making.
The text will also set a date, not yet determined but possibly within 30 days, for Iran to comply, according to one Western participant in the closed-door talks.
Tuesday’s meeting included Germany and the five Security Council members with veto power -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China, the main negotiators on Iran.
U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said the session sort of "fizzled" because the Russia and China were not "prepared to discuss the substance." Participants at the meeting said envoys from both nations said they had not yet received instructions.
Another round of consultations was scheduled for July 19, "so we are starting to work on a resolution," said French U.N. Ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere, this month’s Security Council president.
At a July 12 meeting in Paris, all six countries agreed Iran had given no indication it would engage seriously on a commercial and technological incentive package offered to Tehran if it were willing to suspend its nuclear programs.
The six agreed to adopt a Security Council resolution that would make the suspension mandatory.
If Iran still refused, they said, "we will work for adoption of measures under Article 41 of Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter," which calls for sanctions.
But the Paris text leaves open whether Russia and China will agree to eventually adopt punitive measures.
Bolton told reporters after the meeting he hoped for adoption of the resolution this week "and we don’t see that there should be major objections to that."
He said the draft would require Iran to suspend "uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing activities."
Iran is building a heavy-water nuclear reactor at Arak, 120 miles (190 kilometers) southwest of Tehran. Western nations are concerned the plant’s plutonium by-product could be used to produce nuclear warheads.
Spent fuel can be reprocessed to extract weapons-grade plutonium. The plutonium can also be mixed with enriched uranium to produce fuel for a special type of nuclear reactor.
Iran, which maintains its program is to produce energy only, on July 18 showed no sign of suspending its nuclear activities.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that "having a nuclear fuel cycle is the Iranian nation’s obvious right," according to the official IRNA news agency.
The incentive package offered to Iran says the six nations would help Tehran build an unspecified number of light water nuclear reactors and give Iran assurances of a reliable supply of nuclear fuel, among other measures.
However, Iran has said it would not reply to the offer until Aug. 22, precipitating calls for U.N. action
The draft under consideration is an updated version of one introduced by the United States, Britain and France in early May but never adopted. It includes threats of sanctions to curb Iran’s nuclear program, which the West fears is a prelude to bomb-making.
The text will also set a date, not yet determined but possibly within 30 days, for Iran to comply, according to one Western participant in the closed-door talks.
Tuesday’s meeting included Germany and the five Security Council members with veto power -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China, the main negotiators on Iran.
U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said the session sort of "fizzled" because the Russia and China were not "prepared to discuss the substance." Participants at the meeting said envoys from both nations said they had not yet received instructions.
Another round of consultations was scheduled for July 19, "so we are starting to work on a resolution," said French U.N. Ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere, this month’s Security Council president.
At a July 12 meeting in Paris, all six countries agreed Iran had given no indication it would engage seriously on a commercial and technological incentive package offered to Tehran if it were willing to suspend its nuclear programs.
The six agreed to adopt a Security Council resolution that would make the suspension mandatory.
If Iran still refused, they said, "we will work for adoption of measures under Article 41 of Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter," which calls for sanctions.
But the Paris text leaves open whether Russia and China will agree to eventually adopt punitive measures.
Bolton told reporters after the meeting he hoped for adoption of the resolution this week "and we don’t see that there should be major objections to that."
He said the draft would require Iran to suspend "uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing activities."
Iran is building a heavy-water nuclear reactor at Arak, 120 miles (190 kilometers) southwest of Tehran. Western nations are concerned the plant’s plutonium by-product could be used to produce nuclear warheads.
Spent fuel can be reprocessed to extract weapons-grade plutonium. The plutonium can also be mixed with enriched uranium to produce fuel for a special type of nuclear reactor.
Iran, which maintains its program is to produce energy only, on July 18 showed no sign of suspending its nuclear activities.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that "having a nuclear fuel cycle is the Iranian nation’s obvious right," according to the official IRNA news agency.
The incentive package offered to Iran says the six nations would help Tehran build an unspecified number of light water nuclear reactors and give Iran assurances of a reliable supply of nuclear fuel, among other measures.
However, Iran has said it would not reply to the offer until Aug. 22, precipitating calls for U.N. action
The FBI is trying to ferret out possible Hizbollah agents in the United States amid concerns that rising U.S.-Iranian tensions could trigger attacks on American soil, FBI officials said.
Relations between Washington and Tehran, which soured after the 1979 Islamic revolution, have deteriorated further recently over Iran’s nuclear program and its support for Hizbollah, the militant Islamic group whose capture of two Israeli soldiers last week prompted Israel to launch retaliatory strikes in Lebanon.
American law enforcement officials are concerned the Lebanon-based Hizbollah, which has so far focused on fund-raising and other support activities inside the United States, could turn to violence in solidarity with Iran.
"If the situation escalates, will Hizbollah take the gloves off, so to speak, and attack here in the United States, which they’ve been reluctant to do until now?" said William Kowalski, Assistant Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Detroit.
Detroit is home to one of the largest Muslim communities in the United States.
"Because of the heightened difficulties surrounding U.S.-Iranian relations, the FBI has increased its focus on Hizbollah," said FBI spokesman Paul Bresson in Washington.
"Those investigations relate particularly to the potential presence of Hizbollah members on U.S. soil."
There is no specific or credible intelligence pointing to an imminent U.S. attack by Hizbollah, which the United States considers a terrorist group, Bresson added.
But Iran’s Hizbollah -- which claims links to the Lebanese group -- said on July 18 it stood ready to attack U.S. and Israeli interests worldwide.
FBI Director Robert Mueller told reporters in Toronto that agents were keeping a close eye on Hizbollah, especially "when the international situation heats up."
AMERICAN MUSLIMS WORRY
Muslim American groups worry that fear of Hizbollah violence in the United States could again cast an unwelcome spotlight on their community, which has often felt a target of surveillance or discrimination since the Sept. 11 attacks.
Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Washington, said his advocacy group fielded almost daily complaints from Muslims who felt singled out or intimidated by government officials.
Muslim American groups say that while they support fighting against terrorism, they are concerned the focus is unfairly on them.
"There are individual concerns that the government does interviews with individuals, with kind of subtle threats that they could be arrested or deported if they don’t cooperate. That is really the concern for a lot of these groups right now," said Salam al-Marayati, head of the Los Angeles-based Muslim Public Affairs Council.
"That fact in itself will alienate, frustrate and perhaps even push these young people further to the margins, which creates a very problematic situation for all of us," he said. "In a way, this is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy."
Marayati, who consults regularly with government officials, said they were listening to his concerns, but should do more to show Americans that their Muslim compatriots are just as determined as they are to fight terrorism.
"Since the relationship is not publicized, people think we’re not contributing and Muslims continue to be seen as a problem in our society as opposed to part of the solution," he said.
Relations between Washington and Tehran, which soured after the 1979 Islamic revolution, have deteriorated further recently over Iran’s nuclear program and its support for Hizbollah, the militant Islamic group whose capture of two Israeli soldiers last week prompted Israel to launch retaliatory strikes in Lebanon.
American law enforcement officials are concerned the Lebanon-based Hizbollah, which has so far focused on fund-raising and other support activities inside the United States, could turn to violence in solidarity with Iran.
"If the situation escalates, will Hizbollah take the gloves off, so to speak, and attack here in the United States, which they’ve been reluctant to do until now?" said William Kowalski, Assistant Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Detroit.
Detroit is home to one of the largest Muslim communities in the United States.
"Because of the heightened difficulties surrounding U.S.-Iranian relations, the FBI has increased its focus on Hizbollah," said FBI spokesman Paul Bresson in Washington.
"Those investigations relate particularly to the potential presence of Hizbollah members on U.S. soil."
There is no specific or credible intelligence pointing to an imminent U.S. attack by Hizbollah, which the United States considers a terrorist group, Bresson added.
But Iran’s Hizbollah -- which claims links to the Lebanese group -- said on July 18 it stood ready to attack U.S. and Israeli interests worldwide.
FBI Director Robert Mueller told reporters in Toronto that agents were keeping a close eye on Hizbollah, especially "when the international situation heats up."
AMERICAN MUSLIMS WORRY
Muslim American groups worry that fear of Hizbollah violence in the United States could again cast an unwelcome spotlight on their community, which has often felt a target of surveillance or discrimination since the Sept. 11 attacks.
Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Washington, said his advocacy group fielded almost daily complaints from Muslims who felt singled out or intimidated by government officials.
Muslim American groups say that while they support fighting against terrorism, they are concerned the focus is unfairly on them.
"There are individual concerns that the government does interviews with individuals, with kind of subtle threats that they could be arrested or deported if they don’t cooperate. That is really the concern for a lot of these groups right now," said Salam al-Marayati, head of the Los Angeles-based Muslim Public Affairs Council.
"That fact in itself will alienate, frustrate and perhaps even push these young people further to the margins, which creates a very problematic situation for all of us," he said. "In a way, this is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy."
Marayati, who consults regularly with government officials, said they were listening to his concerns, but should do more to show Americans that their Muslim compatriots are just as determined as they are to fight terrorism.
"Since the relationship is not publicized, people think we’re not contributing and Muslims continue to be seen as a problem in our society as opposed to part of the solution," he said.
Sharp differences emerged on July 17 between Sudan and the international community over the purpose of an upcoming conference at which world powers are set to push for a United Nations peacekeeping mission in Darfur.
In a pre-conference declaration adopted on July 17, the European Union urged Sudan to allow a U.N. mission into Darfur to replace an African Union (AU) force that has been unable to stem the violence Washington called genocide.
"A U.N. operation is the only viable and realistic option in Darfur in the long term," the declaration said.
A senior EU official said the Brussels meeting on July 18, with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the United States, would also seek money for the under-funded AU mission until it is replaced by U.N. troops.
But Sudanese officials said that for them the sole aim of the meeting is to secure more money for the AU peacekeeping mission in its sprawling west, where tens of thousands of people have been killed in three years of fighting.
"The delegation which left today is going to discuss with the EU what support is needed for AU forces ... (a U.N. force) is not the issue of the meeting," Sudanese Foreign Ministry spokesman Jamal Ibrahim told Reuters.
Omar Adam Rahama, a member of Sudan’s negotiation and implementation team for the Darfur peace deal reached in May with one rebel faction, was optimistic the country could get more AU funding without any concessions that would increase the likelihood of a future U.N. deployment.
But the senior EU official stressed that "all support to AMIS (the AU’s mission) is of course in the perspective of a transfer to the U.N. later."
UNDER-EQUIPPED MISSION
The under-equipped 7,000-strong AU force is struggling to keep the peace in Darfur, an area the size of France, and has complained of escalating attacks against its troops.
The AU had wanted to hand over to the United Nations at the end of September but its leaders decided earlier this month to extend its mission for three more months because of Sudan’s opposition to any U.N. deployment.
Sudan has likened a U.N. military presence to a Western invasion. Analysts say Khartoum fears U.N. soldiers would arrest any official or militia leader likely to be indicted for war crimes by the International Criminal Court.
Ibrahim said Sudan’s stance on U.N. troops had not changed since Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir again ruled-out U.N. troops at an AU summit earlier in July. U.N. forces cannot be deployed without his consent and diplomats say little leverage is available to persuade him.
Violence erupted in Darfur in 2003 when non-Arab rebels took up arms against the Arab dominated Khartoum government, accusing it of neglect and monopolizing power.
Khartoum responded by arming a mostly Arab militia locally known as the Janjaweed, who stand accused of a campaign of rape, murder and looting. Tens of thousands of people have been killed in the fighting and 2.5 million forced into squalid camps.
Sudanese Foreign Minister Lam Akol will attend the July 18 conference, but Sudan asked that rebel leaders, who have repeatedly demanded U.N. peacekeepers, not be invited.
A May peace deal signed by the government and one of three negotiating rebel factions has been widely ignored.
In a pre-conference declaration adopted on July 17, the European Union urged Sudan to allow a U.N. mission into Darfur to replace an African Union (AU) force that has been unable to stem the violence Washington called genocide.
"A U.N. operation is the only viable and realistic option in Darfur in the long term," the declaration said.
A senior EU official said the Brussels meeting on July 18, with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the United States, would also seek money for the under-funded AU mission until it is replaced by U.N. troops.
But Sudanese officials said that for them the sole aim of the meeting is to secure more money for the AU peacekeeping mission in its sprawling west, where tens of thousands of people have been killed in three years of fighting.
"The delegation which left today is going to discuss with the EU what support is needed for AU forces ... (a U.N. force) is not the issue of the meeting," Sudanese Foreign Ministry spokesman Jamal Ibrahim told Reuters.
Omar Adam Rahama, a member of Sudan’s negotiation and implementation team for the Darfur peace deal reached in May with one rebel faction, was optimistic the country could get more AU funding without any concessions that would increase the likelihood of a future U.N. deployment.
But the senior EU official stressed that "all support to AMIS (the AU’s mission) is of course in the perspective of a transfer to the U.N. later."
UNDER-EQUIPPED MISSION
The under-equipped 7,000-strong AU force is struggling to keep the peace in Darfur, an area the size of France, and has complained of escalating attacks against its troops.
The AU had wanted to hand over to the United Nations at the end of September but its leaders decided earlier this month to extend its mission for three more months because of Sudan’s opposition to any U.N. deployment.
Sudan has likened a U.N. military presence to a Western invasion. Analysts say Khartoum fears U.N. soldiers would arrest any official or militia leader likely to be indicted for war crimes by the International Criminal Court.
Ibrahim said Sudan’s stance on U.N. troops had not changed since Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir again ruled-out U.N. troops at an AU summit earlier in July. U.N. forces cannot be deployed without his consent and diplomats say little leverage is available to persuade him.
Violence erupted in Darfur in 2003 when non-Arab rebels took up arms against the Arab dominated Khartoum government, accusing it of neglect and monopolizing power.
Khartoum responded by arming a mostly Arab militia locally known as the Janjaweed, who stand accused of a campaign of rape, murder and looting. Tens of thousands of people have been killed in the fighting and 2.5 million forced into squalid camps.
Sudanese Foreign Minister Lam Akol will attend the July 18 conference, but Sudan asked that rebel leaders, who have repeatedly demanded U.N. peacekeepers, not be invited.
A May peace deal signed by the government and one of three negotiating rebel factions has been widely ignored.
Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said on July 17 he was satisfied that the United Nations and Group of Eight had spelled out clearly to North Korea that its missile launches were unacceptable.
"The message sent by the U.N. Security Council and G8 is quite important. A very clear message was sent to North Korea," said Koizumi, speaking after a G8 summit of the world’s top industrialized states in Russia.
On July 15, the U.N. Security Council unanimously passed a Japan-initiated resolution that imposes weapons-related sanctions on North Korea.
The resolution, rejected by North Korea, demanded that Pyongyang suspend all missile activities and return to stalled six-country talks aimed at ending its nuclear weapons programs. "The door is not closed (to talks)," said Koizumi.
"We agreed that it is essential for the world to be united to solve the problem of the missiles, the nuclear program and abductions," said Koizumi.
Tokyo believes the question of Japanese citizens abducted by North Korean agents decades ago to help train spies must be included in international efforts to resolve North Korean issues.
The G8 final statement condemned North Korea’s July 5 missile test-launch as a serious threat to peace, urged Pyongyang to abandon nuclear weapons and to return to six-party peace talks.
In an apparent reference to North Korea’s calls for a security guarantee from the United States, Koizumi said: "North Korea’s best security guarantee is to become a responsible member of international society, one with sincerity."
"The message sent by the U.N. Security Council and G8 is quite important. A very clear message was sent to North Korea," said Koizumi, speaking after a G8 summit of the world’s top industrialized states in Russia.
On July 15, the U.N. Security Council unanimously passed a Japan-initiated resolution that imposes weapons-related sanctions on North Korea.
The resolution, rejected by North Korea, demanded that Pyongyang suspend all missile activities and return to stalled six-country talks aimed at ending its nuclear weapons programs. "The door is not closed (to talks)," said Koizumi.
"We agreed that it is essential for the world to be united to solve the problem of the missiles, the nuclear program and abductions," said Koizumi.
Tokyo believes the question of Japanese citizens abducted by North Korean agents decades ago to help train spies must be included in international efforts to resolve North Korean issues.
The G8 final statement condemned North Korea’s July 5 missile test-launch as a serious threat to peace, urged Pyongyang to abandon nuclear weapons and to return to six-party peace talks.
In an apparent reference to North Korea’s calls for a security guarantee from the United States, Koizumi said: "North Korea’s best security guarantee is to become a responsible member of international society, one with sincerity."
Russian President Vladimir Putin said on July 17 talk of sanctions on Iran was premature, setting Russia at odds with Western powers ahead of a U.N. Security Council discussion this week.
"To talk about sanctions against Iran is premature ... It has not reached that point," Putin told a news briefing at the Group of Eight summit he chaired in St. Petersburg.
World powers have agreed to discuss at the Security Council this week Iran’s failure to respond to a package of incentives to stop uranium enrichment.
While permanent Council members Britain, France and the United States support economic sanctions if Iran fails to cooperate, such measures are not backed by veto-wielding Russia and China.
Putin did say that he shared the impatience of the European Union and the United States that Tehran has not responded to the incentives package more than a month after it was submitted.
"We want the Iranian leadership to respond as soon as possible to the six-power proposal and for negotiations to start as soon as possible on the basis of that proposal," he said.
Putin said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had told him earlier this summer that talks on the proposal -- submitted by Britain, France, Germany, the United States, Russia and China -- would start in July.
"Now we hear there is a new timetable and it is August," said Putin.
Russia and China could use their power of veto in the Security Council to block attempts this week to make suspension of Iran’s enrichment program mandatory.
The West believes the uranium Iran is working to enrich could be used to make weapons, but Tehran insists it is purely to generate electricity.
"To talk about sanctions against Iran is premature ... It has not reached that point," Putin told a news briefing at the Group of Eight summit he chaired in St. Petersburg.
World powers have agreed to discuss at the Security Council this week Iran’s failure to respond to a package of incentives to stop uranium enrichment.
While permanent Council members Britain, France and the United States support economic sanctions if Iran fails to cooperate, such measures are not backed by veto-wielding Russia and China.
Putin did say that he shared the impatience of the European Union and the United States that Tehran has not responded to the incentives package more than a month after it was submitted.
"We want the Iranian leadership to respond as soon as possible to the six-power proposal and for negotiations to start as soon as possible on the basis of that proposal," he said.
Putin said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had told him earlier this summer that talks on the proposal -- submitted by Britain, France, Germany, the United States, Russia and China -- would start in July.
"Now we hear there is a new timetable and it is August," said Putin.
Russia and China could use their power of veto in the Security Council to block attempts this week to make suspension of Iran’s enrichment program mandatory.
The West believes the uranium Iran is working to enrich could be used to make weapons, but Tehran insists it is purely to generate electricity.
Pakistan expressed dismay on July 17 over India’s decision to put off talks due to start this week, saying the peace process should not be linked to bomb attacks in Mumbai last week.
The foreign secretaries of the two south Asian rivals had been due to meet in New Delhi on July 20 to review a 2 ½ year-old peace process, but India decided the timing was wrong after blasts on commuter trains killed 181 people and wounded hundreds in its financial capital last week.
"We look at this postponement as a negative development and the linkage between this postponement and the terrorist attacks in Mumbai as incongruous and out of place," Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan told a news conference.
Khan said talks between the two countries, which have fought three wars since independence from British colonial rule in 1947, "must be sustained".
Although there has been no breakthrough yet in investigations into the Mumbai attacks, Indian suspicions have fallen on Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group fighting Indian rule in Kashmir, and the Pakistani military spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence.
Pakistan has condemned the attacks on Mumbai and offered full cooperation with any Indian investigation.
Khan said India had not yet provided any information about the involvement of any Pakistani group in the attacks, despite Pakistan’s offer to cooperate.
"There ought to be no room for unsubstantiated allegations. If there is any solid information, if there is any concrete evidence, it should be shared with us," Khan said.
The foreign secretaries of the two south Asian rivals had been due to meet in New Delhi on July 20 to review a 2 ½ year-old peace process, but India decided the timing was wrong after blasts on commuter trains killed 181 people and wounded hundreds in its financial capital last week.
"We look at this postponement as a negative development and the linkage between this postponement and the terrorist attacks in Mumbai as incongruous and out of place," Pakistan’s Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan told a news conference.
Khan said talks between the two countries, which have fought three wars since independence from British colonial rule in 1947, "must be sustained".
Although there has been no breakthrough yet in investigations into the Mumbai attacks, Indian suspicions have fallen on Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group fighting Indian rule in Kashmir, and the Pakistani military spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence.
Pakistan has condemned the attacks on Mumbai and offered full cooperation with any Indian investigation.
Khan said India had not yet provided any information about the involvement of any Pakistani group in the attacks, despite Pakistan’s offer to cooperate.
"There ought to be no room for unsubstantiated allegations. If there is any solid information, if there is any concrete evidence, it should be shared with us," Khan said.
The Greek defense ministry on July 14 said it had approved an offset package worth $250 million (196 million euros) for a purchase of 30 F-16 fighter aircraft from U.S.-based Lockheed Martin.
The deal includes manufacturing projects for Greece’s state and private defense industry, the ministry said in a statement.
According to U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin, the total value of Greece’s December 2005 order for the 30 F-16 Block 52+ planes — which rank among the company’s most advanced — is approximately $1.99 billion.
The aircraft are expected to be delivered in 2009.
Greece had an option to purchase an additional 10 F-16s but ultimately decided against it, leading to speculation that the NATO member may be abandoning a recent trend of preference for American military equipment.
Instead, the Greek defense ministry is now considering an order of another 30 combat aircraft this year, enticing interest from various European aerospace groups.
Among the aircraft that experts say fit Greece’s requirements are the French-built Rafale by Dassault, the Eurofighter — built by a consortium involving the French-Spanish-German group European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS), BAE Systems of Britain and Alenia of Italy — and the Gripen, made by Saab of Sweden.
The Greek state council of foreign affairs and defense (KYSEA) is expected to take a decision on the matter in the closing days of July, according to the ministry.
The deal includes manufacturing projects for Greece’s state and private defense industry, the ministry said in a statement.
According to U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin, the total value of Greece’s December 2005 order for the 30 F-16 Block 52+ planes — which rank among the company’s most advanced — is approximately $1.99 billion.
The aircraft are expected to be delivered in 2009.
Greece had an option to purchase an additional 10 F-16s but ultimately decided against it, leading to speculation that the NATO member may be abandoning a recent trend of preference for American military equipment.
Instead, the Greek defense ministry is now considering an order of another 30 combat aircraft this year, enticing interest from various European aerospace groups.
Among the aircraft that experts say fit Greece’s requirements are the French-built Rafale by Dassault, the Eurofighter — built by a consortium involving the French-Spanish-German group European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS), BAE Systems of Britain and Alenia of Italy — and the Gripen, made by Saab of Sweden.
The Greek state council of foreign affairs and defense (KYSEA) is expected to take a decision on the matter in the closing days of July, according to the ministry.
14/07: MTU Group Announces New Name
Germany’s heavy engineering company, MTU Group, is tossing out its 100-year-old name for a new one: Tognum. All of the group’s brands and companies will operate under the new moniker, it announced July 12.
The move affects MTU, Detroit Diesel, L’Orange, MDE, CFC Solutions and MTU’s Drive Shafts division, all part of the new Tognum GmbH holding company.
The new artificial name combines a Germanic root, — tog, which means to pull with strength — and a Latin one, um, which signifies an important object or monument, such as the Colosseum.
Tognum Chief Executive Volker Heuer said the new name “expresses the tradition and strength” of the group’s brands while “safeguarding their market presence.” The individual companies will continue operating independently in their respective markets. Heuer will continue as president and chief executive of MTU Friedrichshafen.
Tognum is among the world’s leading suppliers of diesel engines and propulsion systems for ships, heavy vehicles and trains, and decentralized power supply. It generated revenues of more than 2 billion euros ($2.5 billion) in 2005 and has a payroll of 7,000.
Based in Friedrichshafen, Tognum will oversee all groupwide functions, including corporate strategy, finance, communication, planning and organization, and information technology. Heuer said the company’s management emphasis will be on lean structures to achieve product leadership in propulsion systems and power systems.
The move affects MTU, Detroit Diesel, L’Orange, MDE, CFC Solutions and MTU’s Drive Shafts division, all part of the new Tognum GmbH holding company.
The new artificial name combines a Germanic root, — tog, which means to pull with strength — and a Latin one, um, which signifies an important object or monument, such as the Colosseum.
Tognum Chief Executive Volker Heuer said the new name “expresses the tradition and strength” of the group’s brands while “safeguarding their market presence.” The individual companies will continue operating independently in their respective markets. Heuer will continue as president and chief executive of MTU Friedrichshafen.
Tognum is among the world’s leading suppliers of diesel engines and propulsion systems for ships, heavy vehicles and trains, and decentralized power supply. It generated revenues of more than 2 billion euros ($2.5 billion) in 2005 and has a payroll of 7,000.
Based in Friedrichshafen, Tognum will oversee all groupwide functions, including corporate strategy, finance, communication, planning and organization, and information technology. Heuer said the company’s management emphasis will be on lean structures to achieve product leadership in propulsion systems and power systems.
