MEMBER INFO
View My Profile Photos (16)
View More Photos Of curioso

Username: curiosocasanova
Name: curioso
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Age: 49
Gender: Male

Member Since:
Monday, Feb 5 2007
Last Visit:
Friday, Jul 25 2008

Go to My Homepage
View My Profile
Add to My Friends
Send Private Message
Add to Subscription
 
 

SITE FEED
 

curiosocasanova's Journals


Page 1 of 2 - 1 2 Next >

U.S diplomat in direct negotiations with Iran.


Wednesday,Jul 16 2008, 08:36:50 AM (Last updated: Wednesday,Jul 16 2008, 09:17:39 AM)

Yahoo News 

US official to attend meeting with Iran's nuclear negotiator

53 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A senior US diplomat will attend international nuclear talks with Iran on Saturday, marking a shift in US policy on negotiations with Tehran, a State Department official said.

Undersecretary of State William Burns will attend the weekend meeting in GenevaJavier Solana and Tehran's nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili. between EU foreign policy chief

The United States has no official contact with Iran and until now has refused to even participate in preliminary discussions with Iranian officials unless Tehran first suspends its nuclear enrichment activities.

Burns, the State Department's third-ranking official, would be in Geneva "to receive the Iranian response to the latest offer of the P5 plus 1," said the official, requesting anonymity.

The meeting was planned as the five permanent members of the UN security council plus Germany seek to reach an agreement with Tehran over its atomic program, which the West believes is aimed at developing nuclear weapons.

The decision came after Washington insisted for months that it was ready to talk to Iran only if it abandons its sensitive nuclear activities, which Tehran has refused to do.

A State Department official told the Washington Post that Burns will not negotiate and will not hold separate meetings with the Iranians.

Instead, he will reiterate Washington's insistence that Iran stop its uranium enrichment operations before the US can enter into any serious negotiations.

"This is a one-time deal," the official told the Post.

The US move comes amid speculation sanctions have started to have an effect and that Iran's leadership was locked in debate about how to respond to the international offer.

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Monday that Jalili and Solana were to discuss a "timetable" for future negotiations to break the deadlock between the two sides.

"In these talks, the framework of talks and timetable of talks" will be discussed, Ahmadinejad told state television.

He also hinted at US-Iran talks without explanation: "It is possible that in the near future talks in different fields will take place with the United States."

Washington broke off relations with Tehran in 1980 in the wake of the Islamic revolution and the seizure of the US embassy. Ties have remained severed ever since amid increasing acrimony over Iran's disputed nuclear programme.

Last year, US and Iranian ambassadors broke with years of isolation and held talks focused on security in Iraq, with the nuclear issue excluded from the agenda.

There have also been reports of a possible diplomatic initiative from Washington with President George W. Bush's administration considering opening a US interests section in Tehran.

Last month the P5 plus 1 -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- presented Iran with an offer of technological incentives in exchange for suspending sensitive uranium enrichment work.

Reports say Solana is proposing to Tehran that world powers would refrain from new sanctions provided Iran did not start operating any additional centrifuges to enrich uranium.

Iran has countered with a proposal which it says will go toward solving some of the major security problems of the world, and which diplomats have described as complex.

Iran test fired a broadside of missiles in recent days -- including one whose range includes Israel -- in war games that provoked international concern.

Washington's approach towards Iran has been a major issue in the US presidential election. Democrat Barack Obama has blasted Bush for refusing to engage directly with Tehran and urged robust diplomacy while his Republican rival John McCain has branded Obama naive.

Breaking News


Saturday,Jul 12 2008, 06:13:01 PM

 

 Yahoo News

PARIS (AP) French president says that Syria and Lebanon will open embassies in each other's countries.



Breaking News


Thursday,Jul 10 2008, 09:30:22 AM (Last updated: Thursday,Jul 10 2008, 09:34:17 AM)

Yahoo Breaking News  

Breaking News Thursday, July 10, 2008, 1:41 AM PDT
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) State television says Iran test-fires more missiles in Persian Gulf
Breaking News Alerts may be sent before a story is available on Yahoo! News. A story should be published shortly. Search for related news on Yahoo! News Search. 

Israel could strike Iran after U.S. election


Friday,Jun 27 2008, 10:04:13 AM (Last updated: Friday,Jun 27 2008, 10:07:16 AM)

Interfax's Interview



More Interfax’s interviews...

John Bolton: Israel could strike Iran after U.S. presidential election

The chances that Israel will strike Iran after the U.S. presidential election are quite high, said John Bolton, a prominent U.S. security expert.

            I think that if it does happen, it will not be before November, but before the U.S. president's inauguration, he said in an interview with Interfax.

            I do not know what is the decision of Israel about using military force, he said.

            However, if Israel decides to use force against Iran, it will not do so before the U.S. presidential election, said Bolton, who is a former U.S. undersecretary of state and ambassador to the United Nations.

            The Israelis do not want to do anything that could affect the outcome of the U.S. presidential election either way, he said.

            It is clear that they will know at that time who is going to be the next president. However, the Israelis will feel more secure at the time when President Bush is still in the White House. But my point of view does not mean that Israel has made any particular decision, Bolton said.

            It is hard to evaluate the consequences, because the event is going to be quite dramatic, he said.

            Bolton said also that the U.S. recognition of Kosovo's independent was a serious mistake.

            The recognition could escalate tensions in the Balkans, rather than normalize the situation, he said.

            Bosnian Serbs would wonder why not secede from Bosnia if Kosovo could secede from Serbia, while Belgrade democrats would wonder why their aspirations for European integration and defense of democratic values was rewarded in that way (with the recognition of Kosovo), Bolton said.

            Hopefully, instability in the Balkans would not deepen, alongside the risk of violence, said the prominent Republican, who currently works for the American Enterprise Institute.

            The policy on Kosovo has been unaltered since the time Slobodan Milosevic led Yugoslavia, Bolton said. The opposition to Milosevic was so strong that the United States gave support to anyone in opposition, he said.

           However, the situation changed drastically when a democratic government took office in Belgrade, and support for Kosovo is now atavistic, Bolton said. He said he believed that such support might have made sense 15 years ago, but not now.

            As for the opinion of the American people about events in Kosovo, he said, the Americans have no viewpoint on Kosovo. He said everything had been done by the State Department, while others paid little attention.

U.S will debate the law that Sweden already has ...


Friday,Jun 20 2008, 09:27:16 AM (Last updated: Friday,Jun 20 2008, 09:33:31 AM)

House prepares to debate new surveillance law

By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 28 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - For months the debate over whether telecommunications companies should face lawsuits for cooperating with the government's warrantless wiretapping program has been the sticking point for updating a surveillance law.

With a compromise at hand, the House prepared Friday to vote on a measure that effectively protects telecoms from civil lawsuits but also sets out steps for investigating the wiretapping program to determine its scope and legality.

The update to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was expected to pass the House, potentially ending the standoff between Democrats and Republicans about the rules for government wiretapping inside the United States. The Senate was expected to pass the bill with a large margin, perhaps as soon as next week.

Warrantless wiretapping, which went on for almost six years after the Sept. 11 attacks, was revealed publicly in late 2005 by The New York Times and then discontinued in January 2007. Some 40 lawsuits have been filed against the companies by groups and individuals who think the Bush administration illegally monitored their phone calls or e-mails.

The White House had threatened to veto any bill that did not shield the companies, which tapped lines at the behest of the president and attorney general but without permission from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the special panel established for that purpose under the 1978 law.

The compromise bill would have a federal district court review certifications from the attorney general saying the telecommunications companies received presidential orders telling them wiretaps were needed to detect or prevent a terrorist attack. If the paperwork were deemed in order, the judge would dismiss the lawsuit.

It would also require the inspectors general of the Justice Department, Pentagon and intelligence agencies to investigate the wiretapping program, with a report due in a year.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendment bill also would:

_Require FISA court permission to wiretap Americans who are overseas.

_Prohibit targeting a foreigner to secretly eavesdrop on an American's calls or e-mails without court approval.

_Allow the FISA court 30 days to review existing but expiring surveillance orders before renewing them.

_Allow eavesdropping in emergencies without court approval, provided the government files required papers within a week.

_Prohibit the government from invoking war powers or other authorities to supersede surveillance rules in the future.

   


Page 1 of 2 - 1 2 Next >