Representatives of the European Union, the United States, Ukraine and the Russian Federation issued today the following statement:

“The Geneva meeting on the situation in Ukraine agreed on initial concrete steps to de- escalate tensions and restore security for all citizens.

All sides must refrain from any violence, intimidation or provocative actions. The participants strongly condemned and rejected all expressions of extremism, racism and religious intolerance, including anti-semitism.

All illegal armed groups must be disarmed; all illegally seized buildings must be returned to legitimate owners; all illegally occupied streets, squares and other public places in Ukrainian cities and towns must be vacated.

Amnesty will be granted to protestors and to those who have left buildings and other public places and surrendered weapons, with the exception of those found guilty of capital crimes.

It was agreed that the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission should play a leading role in assisting Ukrainian authorities and local communities in the immediate implementation of these deescalation measures wherever they are needed most, beginning in the coming days. The US, EU and Russia commit to support this mission, including by providing monitors.

The announced constitutional process will be inclusive, transparent and accountable. It will include the immediate establishment of a broad national dialogue, with outreach to all of Ukraine’s regions and political constituencies, and allow for the consideration of public comments and proposed amendments.

The participants underlined the importance of economic and financial stability in Ukraine and would be ready to discuss additional support as the above steps are implemented.”

A wide-ranging interview with Grete Lochen, Ambassador for Norway in Sri Lanka on women’s contribution to national development and political participation, engagement in peace processes and the United Nations

Q: The Norwegian Embassy in Colombo recently celebrated Norway’s 100th year anniversary of women’s enfranchisement in politics at an event to coincide with International Women’s Day 2014. The role of women in national development and growth together with a remarkable representation of political participation and contribution in the labour force that Norway has achieved are worthy of consideration. What are your perspectives on the subject given that you are a female ambassador of a country that is now seeking to increase the number of women ambassadors in the Norwegian Foreign Service?

The Norwegian experience must be traced back to where we began. In the 1970s we had a very low participation of women in the labour force but today we have one of the highest – if not the highest – in Europe, amounting to 70% of women in between the ages of 16-70 participating in the workforce. Therefore, it is apparent that the past 40 years have been a crucial time for the country.

Q: What does such an achievement and statistics mean in practical terms?

In practical terms, it means that the contribution of women has been recognised and proven as paramount to economic growth and development. Research shows that if the labour participation of Norwegian women had been the same as the average participation of women in OECD countries that would equal the income from the oil sector. In other words, women’s participation in the labour market is more important than the oil for Norway. Thus, I would like to urge all countries to consider the role of women to national economies and development by realising that the converse would be a lost opportunity of untapped potential.

Q: What would you say is the secret of this success story which can be studied by other countries too?

It must be said that the Norwegian experience on women’s emancipation is not a unique one. It has been a fight and it continues to be a struggle. It has benefited from the modern women’s movement, affirmative policies and laws and intense lobbying and awareness-raising of both men and women.

Q: Moving on from the aspect of women’s contribution to national development and the economy, how has the significant and meaningful participation of women in politics in Norway been achieved, particularly the commendable 50 per cent representation of women in the Norwegian Cabinet?

The political movement came of age in Norway when it realised that excluding women from political parties was a weakness of the party, both in perception and reality. Hence, in the 1970s and 1980s all the major political parties themselves came to adopt a quota for female candidates. What is remarkable is that this resolve was not made as a consequence of a national law or associated legal penalties but borne solely out of conviction.

Today, five of the six major Norwegian political parties apply a quota system on a voluntary basis in the electoral lists, ensuring that representation is 50/50 on the lists. These voluntarily applied quotas do not however, necessarily lead to a 50/50 representation in politics, neither on a national nor on a local level, but women have become entrenched in the system to an extent that now if not followed, receives instantaneous criticism in the public space. It has simply become the norm. In addition to the 50 per cent in Cabinet that you very rightly pointed out, the current Prime Minister, Defence Minister and Finance Minister are women. You will see by the key positions held by women that the political participation has not been mere tokenism but rather a meaningful experience.

Q: Despite the resounding political participation and contribution to the national economy as discussed above the representation of women in corporate boards in the Norwegian private sector corporations seem to be lagging behind. What is the reason for the dichotomy?

You’re right. This used to be the case but it all changed in 2005 when Norway introduced a law which stated that 40% of board members in all limited liability companies must be women. The law has been so successful that it has been taken up as an initiative in Spain as well as in France, and is now under discussion on the EU level in order to crack the glass ceiling which prevents women in the EU from reaching the top.

The World Bank concept of ‘smart economics’ is worth recalling at this juncture. The case of Rwanda is striking. With 63 per cent elected women in the Parliament and currently being the World Bank’s ninth fastest-expanding country as according to the World Bank, it shows that countries with more gender justice have better economic growth. It is however important to remember that it is not just about sending women into the work force but rather creating enabling conditions like laws and roles in society that will foster changing attitudes towards women.

Q: What are your impressions of the women’s movement in Sri Lanka?

From what I see, Sri Lanka has many strong women who operate effectively individually but organisationally there is fragmentation and probably lack of coordination. Thus the visibility as an organised movement is not forthcoming. Moreover, the movement could benefit from engaging more men in speaking out on the subject of women’s empowerment.

Q: Norway and Sri Lanka have a common denominator when it comes to international relations – both being small-countries. In your opinion, has the approach to international relations by both countries been similar?

In an interlinked world, having a strong United Nations is not only important but extremely beneficial and useful to small countries. Therefore, Norway is one of the top donors to the UN system. In 2012 the total contribution amounted to USD 1.2 billion. A key priority of the Norwegian foreign policy has been to strengthen the UN, in order to ensure the world is run by rule of law, not rule of force. We cannot act out of might but out of right regulated in multilateral bodies such as the UN. Respect for international norms and regulations are the best protection for small nations. A clear example in the Norwegian context is where the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea has helped to secure our maritime borders and natural resources in our waters.

Q: Norway has been engaged in peace efforts internationally. Sri Lanka is an example. What are your impressions of the role that Norway played in the Sri Lankan peace process?

Norway has always seen a well-organised world as being in our national interest. Therefore much of our international peace and security efforts are channelled through the UN system. As mentioned earlier, contributions to strengthening the role and functioning of the United Nations is a key strategy for engagement in peace efforts. As a principle, Norway has not joined any international peace operation without it being UN-led or having a UN mandate. For instance, Norway has contributed with troops to the ISAF operation in Afghanistan because it is mandated by the Security Council but refrained from sending troops to Iraq because it lacked a UN mandate, the latter being a coalition of the willing instead.

Moving onto direct bilateral engagement in peace processes, it must be stated that Norway does not seek with eagerness to get involved as facilitators. In the cases that Norway has been involved, it has always been on the basis of requests by both or all parties to a conflict. This is the case even in Sri Lanka. Norway was invited by both parties to the conflict and did not seek to impose solutions of any form.

A second basis for involvement has been when we believe that we can play a useful and productive role through facilitation. There have been numerous instances where Norway has turned down requests to facilitate. In today’s context of multi-party conflicts, the situation is even more complex. Norway has thus become wearier of a direct role in peace processes and prefers extending support instead through regional bodies that can play a more constructive function as has been the case with African countries through the good offices of the African Union.

Presently, Norway is performing a facilitating role with Cuba in Columbia between the Columbian government and rebels to find solutions to existing conflicts. Here again, the involvement is based upon the request of both the Columbian government and the rebels.

Q: The chief criticism that was levelled against Norway during the peace process in Sri Lanka was its conflicting role as both facilitator and monitor. Do you agree?

An external evaluation was commissioned by the Norwegian government following its role in Sri Lanka’s peace process to help with Norway’s future work in peace processes. The evaluation team was headed by Gunnar Sørbø from the Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI) and Jonathan Goodhand from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). It tells the story of the peace process in Sri Lanka and draws lessons from the process that can be used in other peace processes. Norway was one of the first countries to evaluate its own efforts in a peace process in another country. The evaluation gave a pass mark for the work that was done, while at the same time a number of points were highlighted for Norway to learn from.

Both the evaluation report and the LLRC report criticised the Norwegian dual role as facilitators and head of the Sri Lankan Monitoring Mission (SLMM). It was the parties themselves who asked Norway to take on this double role but for the future I think we all agree that another solution would have been desirable. Ultimately, the responsibility to find a peaceful solution to a conflict and to invest in a peace process lies with the parties to the conflict but it’s important to keep in mind that the international community is still genuinely interested in assisting Sri Lanka in finding a national political solution and promote reconciliation.

The decision to abrogate the ceasefire agreement was the decision of the parties and in no way the prerogative of Norway. The importance of inclusivity in the peace process was highlighted in the report. Further, on the specific aspect of a conflict of interests as facilitator and monitor, the report concluded that such was not a viable solution to be adopted and was a key learning from the Sri Lankan experience.

Q: What are Norway’s current interests in Sri Lanka at the level of peace and reconciliation and other engagements?

Sri Lanka has been a significant partner for Norwegian development cooperation since the 1970s. Over the years we have supported rural development in the South, peace-building activities, improvement of living standards in the plantation areas, vocational training around the country, the chambers of commerce and a range of other projects .Our role in the peace process in many ways came into being based on the close cooperation we had in the development field. Since the war ended, we have given priority to supporting de-mining activities, resettlement of people who lost everything during the war and reconciliation and recovery efforts in the conflict affected areas. Norway is still very much committed to contributing to positive development in Sri Lanka. However, with the growth of the economy, impressive progress in infrastructure, resettlement and recovery and Sri Lanka moving into the middle income country category, our traditional development cooperation is decreasing. Gradually, it is being replaced by focus on areas of mutual interest like technical cooperation within fisheries and disaster management, livelihood and economic development targeting vulnerable groups, cultural cooperation by bringing people from different parts of the country together through music, such as the Galle and Jaffna Music Festivals. In addition we see great potential in enhancing business cooperation.

salmayusuf@gmail.com

This article was published at the Daily Mirror and is reprinted with permission.

By Daniyar Mukhtarov

Oil, gas condensate and gas production decreased in Kazakhstan in the first quarter of 2014, the Kazakh Statistics Agency said .

Kazakhstan extracted 20.188 million tons of oil, including gas condensate in the first quarter of 2014, which is two percent less than in the same period of 2013, according to the report.

Crude oil production amounted to 17.003 million tons (a 1.9 percent decrease), condensate – 3.185 million tons (a 2.6 percent decrease) in Kazakhstan in January – March 2014.

Gas production amounted to 10.790 billion cubic meters in the country in the first quarter of this year, which is 0.7 percent less than in the same period of last year, the report said.

The production of natural gas (gasiform) amounted to 5.411 billion cubic meters (a 0.3 percent increase), associated petroleum gas – 5.380 billion cubic meters (a 1.6 percent decrease) during this period, according to the report.

The parliament of Transdniestria, a de-facto independent former autonomous republic of Moldova, passed on Wednesday an address to the parliament and president of the Russian Federation to initiate the procedure for the recognition of the republic’s independence, the ITAR-TASS reports with reference to the press-service of Transdniestria’s Supreme Soviet.

The decision is based on the results of the 2006 republican-wide referendum during which 97 percent of voters supported Transdniestria’s independence and its subsequent unification with Russia, the press-service said.

Transdniestria has repeatedly applied for recognition before. This time, its hopes fly high after Crimea returned under Russia’s jurisdiction a month ago.

“From a legal point of view, Transdniestria doesn’t differ from Crimea in any way. The process of its reunification with Russia should follow the Crimean scenario,” Transdniestrian MP Vyacheslav Tobukh told ITAR-TASS.

A delegation of Transdniestrian lawmakers led by Speaker Mikhail Burla will leave for Moscow on Thursday for talks with Russian State Duma Speaker Sergei Naryshkin.

Peruvian authorities have ordered the preventative evacuation of 4,000 people living near the Ubinas volcano, which has been spouting ash clouds up to 2 miles (nearly 4 kilometers) high.

The Andina state news agency quotes Agriculture Minister Juan Benites as saying it will take three days beginning Thursday, April 17, to move the residents of two southern districts and their 30,000 sheep, cows, horses, burros and other animals.

Peru’s health ministry says about 40 people have complained of eye inflammation and stomach problems from ash that has been falling from Ubinas since March 29.

The 18,609-foot (5,672-meter) Ubinas is Peru’s most active volcano. It most recent strong eruption period occurred from 2006-2009.

The vast ignorance of American history by far too many Americans is perhaps demonstrated in the failure to understand that it was the free practice of their interpretation of Christianity by the pilgrims that led to the creation of America. Plymouth colony, established in 1620, put the Atlantic Ocean between them and hostilities they had encountered in England.

To understand the role of religion in America, the First Amendment begins with a prohibition that the states shall make no law “respecting an establishment of religion…” The Founders wanted to make sure that neither the federal, nor state governments designated a particular religion as the only one. We can thank James Madison for that and the other enumerated freedoms.

Religious tolerance, which took some time to become fully established in the colonies and the new nation, has been a significant part of life in America—a nation that has always been predominantly Christian. Easter should remind us of that.

As 2012 came to a close, the Pew Research Religion and Public Life Project offered the following numbers regarding the global population of Christians. They were determined to be approximately 2.2 billion worldwide. That’s about one-in-three (32%).

About half of all Christians are Catholic (50%) while an estimated 37% belong to the Protestant tradition. The Orthodox Communion, including the Greek and Russian Orthodox, make up 12% of Christians while those who belong to other branches such as Mormons, Christian Scientists, and Jehovah Witnesses, make up about 1% of the global population.

Though Christianity took root in the Middle East, less than 1% of Christians are found these days either there or in North Africa. The largest concentration is in Europe (26%), followed closely by Latin American and the Caribbean (24%), and sub-Saharan Africa (24%). Most Christians (87%) live in countries where Christians are in the majority. Of the 232 countries and territories in the Pew study, 157 had majorities, but most had relatively small populations.

What surely has to be a cause for concern in America are the results of a Harris poll released in December 2013. While a strong majority (74%) of U.S. adults said they believe in God, the figure was down from 82% in earlier years. Belief in miracles, heaven, and other religious teachings were all in decline.

For Christians, 68% expressed a belief that Jesus is God or the Son of God, down from 72%. Belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (65%) was down from 72% ten years earlier.

Ranging across various faith groups and other demographics, absolute certainty that there is a God was expressed by 54%, a decline from 66%.

Only 19% described themselves as “very” religious, while 40% described themselves as “somewhat” religious, a decline from 49% in 2007. Nearly one-fourth of Americans (23%) said they were “not at all” religious, a figure that has nearly doubled since 2007 when it was only 12%.

A campaign against the free practice of religion and respect for individual religious values has been in place since the election of President Obama in 2008. It has been particularly evident in the U.S. military, affecting its chaplains and those to whom they minister. There are nearly a hundred cases in U.S. courts resisting the demands of Obamacare and other actions by the administration and those in various states and cities that affect religious beliefs and values.

The introduction and support of same-sex marriage in the United States is a direct attack on a tradition that pre-dates Christianity, Judaism and other faiths. It is fundamentally anti-religious.

Beyond our shores the slaughter of Christians by Muslims in Middle Eastern and nations like Nigeria continues to pose a threat to them and those of other faiths. Islam is the greatest threat to civilization that has existed since its rise began in 632 A.D.

All Americans owe a debt of gratitude to those early pilgrims and to the Founders who understood the value of religion and its free expression. Those who demand that crosses be removed from public lands or that Christmas carols not be sung in our schools do not understand what America is all about. Christians, in particular, must vocally resist such demands and should be joined by those of other faiths.

By Casey Hynes

Two Phuketwan journalists were charged today with defaming the Thai Navy, and face seven years in prison and a $3,000 fine if convicted.  A Thai Navy captain brought charges against Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian after they republished a paragraph from a Reuters story accusing Thai officials of being involved in a human trafficking operation that exploits Rohingya refugees from Burma. Morison, who is Australian, is Phuketwan’s editor and Chutima is a reporter. The Reuters story was part of a series that won journalists Jason Szep and Andrew R.C. Marshall a Pulitzer Prize earlier this week.

The morning of their court appearance, Human Rights Watch released a statement from Brad Adams, director of the organization’s Asia division, saying:

The trial of these two journalists is unjustified and constitutes a dark stain on Thailand’s record for respecting media freedom. The Thai Navy should have debated these journalists publicly if they had concerns with the story rather than insisting on their prosecution under the draconian Computer Crimes Act and criminal libel statutes. It’s now time for Thailand’s leaders to step in and order prosecutors to drop this case, and end this blatant violation of media freedoms once and for all.

Morison expressed disappointment on behalf of himself and Chutima that Reuters has not been in contact with either of them and has not taken a stronger stand on their case. “Chutima is surprised and shocked that nothing has been said in defence of media freedom and Phuketwan by the organisation she helped, with her usual generosity, to win the Pulitzer. I am deeply disappointed, and I expect many others will be, too,” said Morrison, according to a piece on andrew-drummond.com.

When asked for comment, a Reuters spokesperson reiterated the organization’s statement that, “We oppose the use of criminal laws to sanction the press – large or small, local or international – for publication on matters of public interest, like the Rohingya.”

The Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand issued a statement congratulating Szep and Marshall for a series that exposes “the systematic abuse of Rohingyas in Myanmar [Burma] and in Thailand.” The statement went on to say that “while a large media organization is being feted for its reporting, two poorly-funded local journalists are facing prosecution for their reporting of the same issue – and indeed for publishing material from a Thomson Reuters report.”

“These two journalists have done more than most to report accurately from Thailand the plight of Rohingyas,” the statement read. “They have also rendered invaluable assistance to journalists at Thomson Reuters and other local and foreign media organizations attempting to report this humanitarian crisis.”

Asked about Chutima’s contribution to the reporting effort on the winning stories, a Reuters spokesperson responded, “We retained Khun Chutima, a Phuketwan local journalist, in a very limited role to help us make appointments. She was not a member of the team of Reuters journalists who reported and investigated on these stories, nor did we report any information that should have been credited or otherwise attributed to Ms. Chutima.”

Although other news outlets republished the Reuters story, only Phuketwan has been targeted with criminal charges. Morison has said he believes Phuketwan is being targeted because of its long-standing reporting efforts to expose the criminal treatment of Rohingya refugees. He has called the navy’s case “an outrageous attempt to the muzzle the media,” and affirmed that he and Chutima are willing to go to jail to defend press freedom.

The Phuketwan journalists’ situation has drawn international attention and criticism of the Thai government. Media outlets including The Guardian, CNN, Huffington Post, and Al-Jazeera have reported on the case, and Human Rights Watch and the UN have insisted that the government drop the case and focus on investigating the allegations of abuse. Reporters Without Borders issued a statement that ran on both Phuketwan and a Thomson Reuters Foundation site.

“Taking Phuketwan’s journalists to court is absurd,” said Benjamin Ismaïl, the head of the Reporters Without Borders Asia-Pacific desk, in the statement. “If the navy want to dispute the Reuters special report, which has just won a Pulitzer Prize, it can publicly give its version of events and demand the right of reply.” Ismaïl emphasized that Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act urgently needs reform, as it “is responsible for frequent violations of freedom of information by the authorities.”

He added that it is “essential that the international media operating in Thailand should give this trial extensive coverage despite government pressure to ignore it.”

By Mahmoud Reza Golshanpazhooh

On the last day of March 2014, the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs released a draft resolution entitled the “European Union’s Strategy towards Iran,” and put the text of the draft resolution on the website of the European Union (EU). The contents and tone of the resolution and its coincidence with the measures taken by the Iranian government to improve relations with the European Union, frequent visits to the Islamic Republic of Iran by representatives of various European countries, and the fragile atmosphere of optimism resulting from the aforesaid developments caused the draft resolution, unlike previous resolutions adopted by the European Parliament (EP), to draw serious attention from all quarters while eliciting negative reactions both among high-ranking Iranian officials and the country’s mass media. However, in parallel to the critical views, there has been another different viewpoint in Iran whose proponents argue that the EP resolution should be taken lightly and considered as an ordinary issue in order to control domestic reactions to it. Of course, the latter viewpoint has drawn far less attention in comparison with the first one.

Although the entire text of the draft resolution drawn up by the EP’s Committee on Foreign Affairs consisted of about 49 opening and executive paragraphs, two paragraphs in this document were especially instrumental in eliciting the strong reaction of the Iranian officials. Those two specific paragraphs underlined that “presidential elections in Iran were not held in accordance with the democratic standards valued by the EU,” and that “EP delegations to Iran should be committed to meeting members of the political opposition and civil society activists.” Of course, the public opinion in Iran is generally and naturally unaware of the entire content and text of such resolutions as many people are not willing to read them. Given the fact that the overall course and results of Iran’s presidential elections last year were generally hailed as a cause of pride for all Iranians, such baseless claims, which aim to cast doubt on the credibility of presidential elections in Iran, has convinced the Iranian nation that these resolutions actually aim to pave the way for the Europeans to interfere in the country’s internal affairs.

In view of the above facts, there are three short notes on this resolution which should be mentioned here:

1. In Iranian mentality, and perhaps on a larger scale in the general mentality that is rife throughout the Middle East and the Eastern countries, allegations made by the European states or the United States in apparent defense of human rights are considered ridiculous, untrustworthy, and incorrect. Even in the most optimistic state, such allegations are looked upon with extreme doubt and suspicion. It would suffice to simply talk to an Iranian, Egyptian, Afghan, Iraqi, Bahraini, Pakistani or any citizen from other Eastern countries and ask them about their viewpoint about the European Union’s allegations on the situation of human rights in their respective countries. The possibility that you may hear those people lauding and admiring EU’s claims is quite low. Perhaps there are many activists and advocates of human rights in those countries who are working round the clock to improve human rights standards in their countries. However, the bitter memories of colonialism in the past and the double standards that are currently being applied to human rights issue by the United States and the European countries, especially when it comes to oil and energy exports as well as arms sales, constitute the main obstacles which prevent citizens of these countries from believing the West’s claims on defending human rights as truthful and honest. Therefore, most human rights activists in the aforesaid countries prefer to go on with their own human rights activities without any affiliation to Western individuals, nongovernmental organizations and state institutions which claim to be human rights advocates.

2. From 2009 up to the present time, at least, seven human rights-related resolutions have been adopted by the European Parliament against the Islamic Republic. The tone and contents of almost all of them were stronger, and in other words, more interventionist than the new resolution. However, none of them evoked such a sharp reaction from Iranian officials and people. Perhaps the worst damage which was done by the new resolution was to do away with the general atmosphere of optimism that had taken shape within the Iranian public opinion toward Europe. At any rate, maybe such an apparently negative development would be followed by positive consequences in that it can make Iranians take more cautious steps in the face of the real conditions which govern international relations.

3. It is almost certain that the latest EP resolution will have no negative impact on the nuclear talks [between Iran and the six world powers]. Both sides are fully aware that if they actually aim to find a final solution to Iran’s nuclear issue, they have to focus on this issue and do not pay undue attention to unrelated developments. On the other hand, it is clear that the overall tone of the latest EP resolution on Iran is, in many cases, inclined to intervention in the country’s internal affairs and it would have been better if the resolution had been formulated using more respectful literature. However, if at the end of the day, it prompts the Islamic Republic and the European Union to resume their human rights dialogue, it will be worth consideration. This request has been included in the text of the resolution by the European Parliament. Therefore, if the Iranians – including academic and nongovernmental institutions as well as official and governmental ones – enter into a human rights dialogue with the European Union, it will certainly reduce the possibility of political manipulation of human rights concept in interactions between the two sides. As a human rights researcher, I am quite certain of the reality that many viewpoints held both in Iran and Europe about the other side’s approach to human rights are based on misunderstanding, unfamiliarity with the philosophy of human rights concept cherished by either side, as well as unawareness of how the principles of human rights are enforced by either side and the real method used for this purpose. At any rate, Iran and Europe had a preliminary experience in this regard during the 1990s and the early 2000s by engaging first in “critical dialogue” and then in “constructive dialogue,” which was an even better experience. However, due to politicization of the whole process, that dialog failed to reach its ultimate goal. Initiation of the second round of the human rights dialogue on the basis of mutual respect can be a good beginning for the two sides to usher in a new era of scientific cooperation pivoted around the concept of human rights.

Mahmoud Reza Golshanpazhooh
Executive Editor of Iran Review

Nepali legislators should reject problematic provisions of the proposed Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) bill introduced in parliament on April 9, 2014, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the International Commission of Jurists said today. Despite a January 2 directive from the Nepali Supreme Court that the law must meet international legal standards, the bill contains provisions for amnesty that violate international law.

In particular, the bill retains language from a 2012 executive ordinance that permitted amnesty for crimes under international law committed during Nepal’s civil war. A landmark Supreme Court ruling rejected the ordinance, and explicitly directed the government to introduce a new bill in compliance with Nepal’s obligations under international law. Amnesty for gross human rights violations, such as those enumerated in the bill, is prohibited by international law.

“The Nepali government seems to have simply tabled a mildly reworked version of the 2012 ordinance despite the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment on transitional justice,” said Sam Zarifi, Asia-Pacific regional director at the International Commission of Jurists. “This deliberately undermines the judiciary, and raises serious concerns over the government’s respect for the rule of law in Nepal.”

On March 25, 2014, the Nepali government announced it would present draft laws to establish the TRC and a commission of inquiry into disappearances within 15 days. An expert task force established by the government proposed revised language, but this text was not incorporated into the draft.

The current bill enumerates the serious human rights violations that would fall within the jurisdiction of the commission. These include murder, abduction, rape and sexual violence, forced evictions, and mental and physical torture. However, section 26 contains vague language that does not completely reject amnesty, leaving open the possibility that perpetrators of these crimes might instead benefit from an amnesty.

Although section 26(2) contains a specific exception from amnesty for rape, the bill does not address the 35-day statute of limitation period on reporting rape under the Nepali criminal code, which precludes victims from accessing justice. The provision on amnesty is identical to section 23 of the 2012 ordinance, which had been explicitly rejected by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional and in breach of Nepal’s international legal obligations.

“It is baffling why the Nepali government would propose a bill that contains exactly the same troubling provision allowing those responsible for the most heinous crimes to go scot free,” said Brad Adams, Asia director. “The government’s obligation is to ensure justice for the victims, not amnesty for the victimizers.”

The Supreme Court ruled that any mechanism for transitional justice must conform to international standards, lead to accountability for serious human rights violations, and ensure victims their right to remedy and reparation, which includes the right to truth, justice, and guarantees of non-repetition.

“Nepali legislators should unequivocally reject the problematic provisions of the bill and amend it to be consistent with the Supreme Court’s directive,” said Richard Bennett, Asia director at Amnesty International. “The bill as drafted makes a mockery of promises on justice and accountability made to victims as part of the peace agreement. Those who have suffered serious human rights abuses will effectively be stripped of their chance of redress.”

The human rights organizations reiterated their calls to the Nepali government to implement the Supreme Court’s ruling to:

·         Establish a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” and a “Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappeared Persons”;

·         Criminalize the act of enforced disappearance in accordance with the definition set out in the International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and ensure that it is punishable with penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime;

·         Ensure that other serious crimes are made criminal under domestic law, including crimes under international law such as crimes against humanity, in a manner that is consistent with international law;

·         Prohibit amnesty for gross human rights violations or crimes under international law;

·         Ensure there are no time limits on the prosecution of serious crimes, including all crimes under international law such as enforced disappearance, torture, war crimes, and crimes against humanity;

·         Ensure that the composition and structure of the commissions comply with international standards. In particular, there should be a fair vetting system that aims to ensure the impartiality of the commission members;

·         Require that necessary legal and institutional measures be taken to enable and ensure the establishment, adequate resourcing, and maintenance of effective victim and witness protection mechanisms; and

·         Establish and require other necessary legal, administrative, institutional, or other arrangements for an effective reparation program.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel discussed regional and defense cooperation issues in a phone call with United Arab Emirates Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed al Nahyan, Pentagon Press Secretary Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby said in a statement issued yesterday.

In a statement summarizing the call, Kirby said Hagel “reiterated the steadfast U.S. commitment to its strategic partnership with the UAE and affirmed the importance of maintaining strong bilateral defense cooperation to ensure a stable and secure Middle East, a common objective of both countries.”

Hagel also noted that new forms of multilateral cooperation were required to address the evolving challenges of the Middle East, Kirby said, and the secretary lauded UAE’s efforts to work with the United States and the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council to expand regional collaboration.

The conversation ended with a discussion on regional issues, including Syria, Egypt, and Libya, Kirby said.

By Monzurul Huq

The mere fact that the two-day foreign ministerial meeting of the 12-nation coalition of non-nuclear states took place in the Japanese city of Hiroshima, gives the clue to its symbolic significance. Being the first city in the world to witness the horrors of atomic destruction, Hiroshima, from that very fateful day almost 70 years ago, remains at the forefront of global efforts to learn about the devastating impact weapons of mass destruction can cause and also serves as a reminder of the necessity of eliminating nuclear weapons. That symbolic gesture of holding the meeting in Hiroshima on April 11-12, 2014 received added value as the ministers listened to the stories of atomic bomb survivors before starting their formal discussion.

The Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Initiative (NPDI) is a coalition of states that came into being in 2010 with the aim of leading the international efforts in nuclear disarmament. Composed of Australia, Canada, Chile, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Nigeria, the Philippines, Poland, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, the NPDI, through its regular meetings and declarations and statements, focuses on ways to accelerate the process of nuclear disarmament. The Hiroshima conference was the eighth NPDI meeting since the group was formed.

All of it sounds pretty good

Prior to the start of the Hiroshima conference, Fumio Kishida, the Japanese Foreign Minister, published an opinion article in the Wall Street Journal Asia where he stressed the importance of adopting a multilateral approach to nuclear disarmament and also outlined the priorities that the global community needs to work out for achieving the desired goal of a nuclear free world. He expressed concern over North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs and reiterated Japan’s commitment in tackling the Iranian nuclear issue.

Japanese Foreign Minister also did not fail to mention about the lessons his country had learned from the accident at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station in March 2011. Since nuclear power generation is an issue linked closely to nuclear safety, Kishida pledged Japan’s continued support for countries that are building up their capacities in the field of nuclear security, and vowed to share the lessons learned from Fukushima nuclear accident.

The Hiroshima conference touched upon most of the issues that the Japanese foreign minister raised in his Wall Street Journal article and a joint statement issued at the end of the meeting outlined the priorities and actions that the global community needs to take for fostering further momentum for achieving a world free of nuclear weapons. The statement underlined the need of extending forever the nearly 69 years record of non-use of nuclear weapons and encouraged all states to contribute actively and constructively to pursue practical and effective measures that will strengthen the international nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime based on NPT.

While condemning strongly North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs by mentioning that they “undermine NPT and the global non-proliferation regime as well as pose a great threat to regional and global peace and stability”, the statement also welcomed the start of the implementation in Iran of the first-steps under the Joint Plan of Action and expressed hope that the on-going negotiations with the country will lead to the final and comprehensive resolution of Iran’s nuclear issue. It further said that to remove international concerns regarding Iran’s nuclear activities, Iran needs to implement swiftly and steadily measures such as the ratification, and implementation of its Additional Protocol.

The NPDI member states also recognized the importance of the role played by the civil society and underlined the need to enhance disarmament and non-proliferation education. The joint statement welcomed the opportunity to engage with civil society, including NGOs, students, academics and the media.

The loopholes

However, the International Campaign to abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), which is a coalition of NGOs and civil society organizations advocating for the abolition of nuclear weapons, expressed disappointment with the outcome of Hiroshima meeting. In a statement issued immediately after the ministerial meeting, ICAN pointed out that “the foreign ministers were unable to agree that the world needs to close the legal loopholes on weapons of mass destruction, and outlaw nuclear weapons.”

ICAN is strongly in favor of starting a negotiation process that would lead to a framework for a legal prohibition of nuclear weapons and the organisation feels that an absence of any binding prohibition would not bring any tangible outcome. The anti-nuclear group suggests that a legal prohibition “would fulfill and strengthen the NPT and create conditions for disarmament by establishing a clear room against possession of nuclear weapons; challenge the assertion that nuclear weapons provide security; and provide a strong moral incentive for nuclear possessor States to eliminate their arsenals; and reinforce non-proliferation efforts worldwide.”

The group has also pointed out a few conflicting positions on nuclear issues being pursued by the 12 NPDI states. As seven of the twelve NPDI governments rely on nuclear weapons in their security strategies, ICAN feels that they bear a particular responsibility in removing the threat to the world posed by nuclear weapons. A more convincing step taken by those governments would rationally be the one that would first address the conflicting position by revising their security strategies to bring them in line with the NPDI’s declared position on nuclear weapons.

Moreover, Japan and Australia, the two leading countries of the NPDI, are also taking a number of steps that run contrary to what NPDI policy statements are calling for. Japan now looks set for continuing the process that would result in accumulating large quantities of weapons-grade plutonium; and Australia sells uranium, the raw material for nuclear weapons, to all the NPT nuclear weapons states.

Which way to go now?

Despite such criticisms and drawbacks; discussions that had taken place at the Hiroshima meeting clearly point out the significance of such initiatives at a time when the community of nations is getting ready for the next round of NPT Review Conference in 2015. As the Hiroshima joint statement rightfully mentions that with the 2015 NPT Review Conference fast approaching, it is necessary that all the state parties fully comply with the obligations and commitments, particularly with the full and prompt implementation of all the actions in the 2010 Action Plan. It should be noted that the nuclear-weapons states made an unequivocal undertaking in the 2000 NPT Review Conference to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals, a pledge that was reconfirmed at the 2010 conference. However, the world has moved no further in achieving that long cherished desire of the majority of human being.

“Declarations and statements being issued periodically by the NPDI concerning the pace of NPT negotiations and the need to move swiftly on non-proliferation and disarmament reminds us not only of the necessity of taking steps towards the right direction, but also warns us of the serious consequences the global community might face in case we fail to take timely action,” noted an informed observer.

“So, to end with, we can once again go back to what the Japanese foreign minister said in his Wall Street Journal article, which is: ‘increased cooperation, transparency, rule of law and other cornerstones of 21^st century diplomacy led global stockpiles (of nuclear weapons) to fall around 17,000 (from the Cold War era height of 70,000). While this is a significant decrease, our progress must not stop there’.”

Monzurul Huq is a Bangladesh journalist, who has authored three books in Bengali on Japan and other subjects. He moved to Japan in 1994 after working at the United Nations Information Center in Dhaka and BBC World Service in London. He represents two leading national dailies of Bangladesh – Prothom Alo and the Daily Star – and contributes regularly to a number of other important publications in Bangladesh. He has written extensively both in English and Bengali on matters related to Japan and East Asia. He is also a visiting professor at the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Yokohama National University and Keisen University, teaching subjects related to Japanese politics, Japanese media, the developing world and world affairs. He also works as a radio broadcaster for NHK. A member of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan since 2000, he has served at the Board of Directors of the Club for two consecutive terms before being elected president of the Club.

By Horace G. Campbell

When the Constitutive Act of the African Union was written to implement the Sirte Declaration, there were three financial institutions that were established to facilitate interAfrican trade. These were: the African Investment Bank (AIB), the African Monetary Fund (AMF) and the African Central Bank (ACB). It was agreed that it would be necessary to establish a single common currency in Africa in order to speed economic integration. The planning for the African Monetary Fund and for the African Central Bank was supposed to be a phased process alongside the process of the full unification of Africa, leading towards the Union Government of Africa.

When the Constitutive Act was written, there was no sense among the leaders of Africa that the capitalist crisis would bring down governments in Europe, spawn a Eurozone crisis along with the current currency war that is being waged against the poorer nations. Since the start of 2014 the world has witnessed a new battle ground as currency speculators put the reserves of poorer countries under pressure. The attacks on the currencies of societies such as Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, Turkey, India, and others have reached the front pages of international news beyond the financial pages. What is clear is the predators on Wall Street are now attacking the currencies of the exploited world and nations with the smallest reserves have to dig into their reserves to fend off currency speculators as we are continuing to see the exchange rates of Africa under pressure. What is less clear in many countries in Africa and other parts of the Third World, though, is the ways in which this currency war is inextricably linked to the volatility of Wall Street. Neo-liberal interpretations of the world allow policy makers to promote prescriptions that exacerbate capital flight from Africa. The belief in markets is one myth that has suborned technicians in Africa to continue to support the political and military power of the USA. The assertion that the United States has a comparative advantage as an originator of high value quality financial assets can now be dismissed as the justification for supporting the military power of the USA.

It is within this context that it is urgent that Africa begins to work toward a single currency. One of the prior steps would be to establish the African Currency unit with strict benchmarks for the integration of Africa towards the adoption of a single currency.

STEMMING CAPITAL FLIGHT FROM AFRICA

Progressives in all parts of the world must have clarity on the phases of the Union government and the building of transparent and democratic leaders to stop the plunder of Africa alongside the massive capital flight from the continent. There is enough research to clarify the reality that there is a massive capital drain from Africa and that Africa is a net creditor to the states of Europe and North America. In short without the establishment of the African Central Bank that functions under democratic control, and a credible African currency the drain of resources will continue. The amount of documented evidence is well known. Research from the African Development Bank (AfDB) revealed in May 2013 that in the three decades from 1980 to 2009, African countries lost up to $1.4trn in illicit financial flows, known as capital flight. These figures from the African Development Bank are repeating the scholarly findings of James K. Boyce and Léonce Ndikumana that has been around for about twenty years. [1]

Since this kind of scholarship has been done, international financial institutions continue to preach about Millennium Development Goals without the necessary attention to the return of the illicit funds plundered from Africa. While African universities continue to focus attention on the so-called MDGs there is a conscious effort to divert attention from the Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative (StAR). The ending of exploitation, the enhancement of the rights of African workers and farmers and popular democratic relations are all linked up with African control over her resources. In this context one of the most urgent political matters for the progressive forces is to end the capital flight from Africa and the seizure of African resources for external forces in alliance with African militarists. Capital flight from Africa ensures that there are no resources for infrastructure, for social development and programs and to provide for the needs of the majority of the African peoples.

Progressives and those working for the full unification of Africa should be promoting the process of establishing a common currency in Africa so that Africans no longer keep their foreign currency reserves in the US dollar, Euro or the pound sterling. Recently the Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) Carlos Lopes stated that Africans had over $200 billion reserves overseas. This is obviously a small amount and we do not have the figures for the amount of money that African oligarchs have stored in banks in Switzerland, Hong Kong, London, New York, Malaysia, Singapore and the offshore banks in the Caribbean.

WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM ASIA?

Carlos Lopes and the UNECA need to go to the next step for mandating think tanks, universities and policy makers and forces within the global African family to set up the political and technical stages for the convergence of currencies so that Africa establishes its own common currency moving in tandem in working towards a Union government. The process must begin right away with the establishment African Currency Unit. There would also be a clear path and date for the integration where there would be a single currency for Africa.

Africans can learn a lot from what is being done in the ASEAN societies where the first step of monetary integration has been placed on the table in the form of the Chiang Mai Initiative. This Initiative has laid the basis for a number of ventures such as bilateral swaps to protect the societies of East Asia from the Wall Street foreign exchange traders and to enhance regional trade. The planning for the Asian Currency Unit is following the lines of creating a firewall in Asia to protect the societies from the currency wars being waged by currency traders. Within Asean states bilateral pacts to swap and repurchase central-bank reserves have prevented the kind of raiding that went on at the time of the Asian financial crisis 1997-1998. These societies in Asia do not agree politically and have many differences but they are all agreed to establish various initiatives to ensure that their societies are not bullied by the IMF or the World Bank. Moreover, they have learnt the harsh lessons from 1997 when George Soros and other derivative traders undermined their currencies. The establishment of the Asian Monetary Fund and the Asian Bond Fund have been supported to escape the surveillance and strictures of the International Monetary Fund. Thus, the Asian Bond Market, the Asian Monetary Fund and the Chiang Mai Initiative are all steps on the road towards the single currency in Asia. In order to seal this pathway, they have now launched the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) which is to be concluded by 2015. In short, the citizens of Asia are now waiting for the collapse of the dollar to disengage from the International Monetary Fund and the raiding of currencies by Wall Street Traders.

AFRICAN CURRENCY UNIT NOW LONG OVERDUE

Despite the clear planning for Free Trade Areas in Asia, the levels of integration in Africa at the level of the people are in many ways more advanced than Asia. Traders in differing parts of Africa, especially women traders from West Africa, have demonstrated a certain ease in traversing the continent and doing business. The customs and immigration laws across Africa continue to hinder the free flow of goods, services and people. International capital and international capitalist can move freely across the lines drawn in Africa as borders, but the so called leaders continue to try to enforce laws that prevent the freedom of movement while they and their family illicitly export needed reserves from Africa.

The majority of African governments keep their reserves in dollars. Their membership of the IMF dictates the terms of their financial engagement with the international capitalist system. The US devalues the dollar by printing US $65 billion every month.Africans are losing in a number of ways but two are most blatant.

First, many African states keep their reserves in dollars and these are devalued under the Quantitative Easing of the USA dollar which permits the Federal Reserve of the USA to simply offload dollars on the world. In the past three years the US government has been printing over a trillion dollars every year. Second, foreign exchange reserves have to be used as a shock absorber during times of volatility when Central Banks have to use their reserves to buffer their currencies against sharp decline by buying even more US dollars to support their currency.

Another hidden side of the super exploitation of Africa emerges in the form of those central banks that are hedging against the dollar. Many of the oil producing states of the Middle East are hoarding gold because of the currency wars and the devaluation of the dollar. These societies support front persons in Africa that abet the flow of gold and diamonds out of Africa.

POLITICAL WILL AND THE INTEGRATION OF AFRICA

When one reads the statements of the economic planners one does not get a sense of urgency for the full integration of Africa and the building of a common currency. Hence, we have vision statements from countries stating that they will reach targets by 2030 or 2040 without reference to the current Eurozone crisis or the rigged stock market in the USA. Only recently Michael Lewis brought out another book about how the financial markets in the United States are rigged in favour of high-speed electronic trading firms, which use their advantages to extract billions from investors. [2] It is also well known that the real value of US stocks are overvalued because the Wall Street barons have been buying back their own stocks to make the US financial markets seem far more healthier than they are. It has been estimated that in the past 9 years, the barons of Wall Street have bought back over $4.21 trillion of their own stocks. [3] Over the last four years Matt Taibbi has been writing on the fraudulent operations of the Wall Street bankers and wonders out loud why these gangster bankers are not arrested. In penetrating, the mantra of Too Big to fail as Too Big to Jail, Taibbi has exposed the nature of the LIBOR scandal, the money laundering and other corrupt practices, Taibbi exposed how Wall Street killed financial reforms in the United States. [4]

In the present global crisis of capitalism, the Wall Street bankers are enjoying the support of the US military to prop up this currency so that the gangster bankers can carry out fraud while the currency traders raid those countries that have not established a firewall against the predators. When African leaders open discussions about the creation of the African monetary system and the African central bank, the think tanks and the US strategic planners descend on Africa to divert attention from real planning for the integration of Africa. However, what is uncontroversial is that the printing of dollars under the so called Quantitative Easing has placed the international monetary system in an even more precarious condition. The US capitalists are trapped by this QE policy. By printing dollars, the stock prices surge and Wall Street makes trillions in dollars. At the same time countries that have to keep their reserves in dollars are looking for alternatives.

The African peoples and societies have the economic resources for the establishment of a common currency. What is missing is the political will. We have to place this unification of Africa at the top of the agenda for Africa. It will not be necessary for all 54 countries to be part of this currency unit at the start. Because France dominates those countries that are in the CFA Franc zone, France remains opposed to the establishment of the African Central Bank and the Common Currency for Africa.

In this present capitalist crisis there are three alternatives for Africa:
1 Continue the fragmentation and disunity and Go down with the dollar and be the battleground for US finance capital.
2. Be the backstop for a dying EURO or
3. Unite the currencies of Africa to create one common currency and one government.

Serious African planners are working for the third alternative. Those with the political will have to take the lead to hasten the studies by the governors of the Central bank for the convergence process for the African Currency Unit.

There are so many institutions in Eastern, West and Southern Africa that can undertake these tasks.

A PHASED PROCESS

What we may have to do is to create the African Currency Unit for the regions of Eastern Africa, Southern Africa, and those in ECOWAS who will join. Ultimately, the puppet states that are in the CFA franc Zone will be pressured to join. After the revolutionary process exhaust itself in Egypt, it will also join. At this moment the political will to create the common currency cannot wait on consensus. The foreign reserves of Africa are being devalued by Quantitative Easing and Africans have to work hard to break the Exorbitant Privilege of the dollar. [5]

It is in the interest of all to work for the new multipolar currency regime.

In Latin America, the peoples have on the agenda a common currency. The Europeans have created a common currency –the Euro- to break from the dollar. The Chinese are working for the convertibility of the RMB. The ASEAN countries are working for the creation of the ASEAN currency. Oil producers in the Middle East are looking for an exit from the dollar. What are Africans waiting for?

The Abuja Treaty was signed more than thirty years ago on June 3, 1991 in Abuja, Nigeria, to create the African Economic Community, and called for an African Central Bank to follow by 2028. The current plan is to establish an African Economic Community with a single currency by 2023. The global capitalist crisis has demonstrated that long before 2023 Africa will have to create a common currency to withstand the current vicissitudes of the US financial markets.

END NOTES
[1] James K. Boyce and Léonce Ndikumana, Is Africa a Net Creditor? New Estimates of Capital Flight from Severely Indebted Sub-Saharan African Countries, 1970-1996, publication (Amherst: University of Massachusetts, 2000
[2] Michael Lewis, Flash Boys: A Wall Street Revolt, W. W. Norton, 2014
[3] Jason Zweig, Will Stocks Buy back bite Back, Wall Street Journal, March 21, 2014, http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/03/21/will-stock-buybacks-bite-back/
[4] Matt Taibbi, “gangster Banksters: Too Big to Jail, http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/gangster-bankers-too-big-to-jail-20130214
[5] Barry Eichengreen, Exorbitant Privilege: The Rise and Fall of the Dollar and the Future of the International Monetary System, Oxford University Press, new York 2012

Horace G. Campbell is Professor of African American Studies and Political Science at Syracuse University. He is also a Special invited Professor at Tsinghua University, Beijing. He is the author of, ‘Global NATO and the catastrophic failure in Libya’.

* THE VIEWS OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR/S AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORIAL TEAM

The sun emitted a mid-level solar flare, peaking at 9:03 a.m. EDT on April 18, 2014, and NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory captured images of the event. Solar flares are powerful bursts of radiation.

Harmful radiation from a flare cannot pass through Earth’s atmosphere to physically affect humans on the ground, however — when intense enough — they can disturb the atmosphere in the layer where GPS and communications signals travel.

This flare is classified as an M7-class flare. M-class flares are one step below the most intense flares, which are designated as X-class.

By Glenn Kates

(RFE/RL) — The origins of an anti-Semitic flyer distributed in eastern Ukraine this week are still unclear.

But the international controversy it provoked may point to evidence that Ukraine’s Jews have become unwilling political tools in the battle for the country’s future.

The most recent incident allegedly happened on April 15, but it took two days to bubble into the full-blown international scandal it has become.

On the first night of Passover, as congregants were leaving synagogue in Donetsk, three masked men reportedly distributed leaflets supposedly stamped and signed by the “governor” of the self-proclaimed and pro-Moscow “People’s Republic of Donetsk.” The document demanded that all Jews over the age of 16 register and pay a fee or risk being deported as punishment for their “support” of the government in Kyiv.

Denis Pushilin, the man named in the letter and a leader of pro-Moscow separatists who have been occupying a Donetsk administration building for 11 days, says his organization had nothing to do with the missive. Many are now calling it a provocation.

A picture of the letter spread on social media, after being published on an Israeli website on April 16.

On April 17, U.S. officials weighed in. Geoffrey Pyatt, the American Ambassador to Ukraine tweeted about it throughout the day – including retweets that directly implicated the separatists — and went on CNN to declare that the letter was “the real deal.”

And in Geneva, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said the leaflet was “intolerable” and “grotesque.”

Pinkhas Vishedski, the region’s chief rabbi — who was originally reported to be “shocked and hysterical” about the letter — had a different message.

“Whoever was behind this is an open question,” he told a local TV station. “But inasmuch as it is a simple provocation it should be treated accordingly. Full stop and end of discussion.”

Yehuda Kelerman, a Jewish community leader in Donetsk, says the anti-Semitic leaflet may have been a provocation.

Vishedski’s sentiment may be a reflection of a growing weariness of charges of “anti-Semitism” taking on the appearance of political maneuvering in the battle for Ukraine.

Since antigovernment protests began in December and eventually led to Ukraine’s pro-Moscow government being replaced, charges of “anti-Semitism” and “fascism” have largely been levelled by Russia. Moscow has claimed that both the ultranationalist Right Sector group and the nationalist Svoboda party have an outsized role in the new government.

When Vladimir Putin warned in March about anti-Semitic bandits roaming Kyiv, a group of Jewish community leaders published an open letter to the Russian president asking him to stop speaking in the name of Ukrainian Jews.

Over the past two months, there have been a series of attacks on Jewish sites and often it has been unclear whether they have come from Ukrainian nationalists or from proponents of Moscow attempting to foment evidence of a fascist threat.

In late February, as a movement to join Crimea with Russia was taking shape, an RFE/RL correspondent photographed a synagogue in Simferopol, the peninsula’s capital city, that said “death to Yids,” a derogatory term for Jews.

The head of the Crimea’s Jewish community told RFE/RL he suspected a provocation by pro-Russian forces meant to imitate Right Sector.

In April, a Holocaust memorial in the southern Ukrainian city of Odesa was desecrated with Swastikas and “Right Sector” symbols.

Russian media was quick to pick up on the story, but again Right Sector leaders denied a role and claimed it was a provocation. A leader of the group travelled from Kyiv to help clean up anti-Jewish graffiti and reportedly offered the Jewish community there “protection.”

It is not clear, however, if “protection” with political undertones is something Ukraine’s Jewish community wants.

The most recent attack in Donetsk prompted condemnation from the U.S.-based Anti-Defamation League. But a statement from the organization’s director, Abraham Foxman, also included a request to political leaders.

“We have seen a series of cynical and politically manipulative uses and accusations of anti-Semitism in Ukraine over the past year,” he said. “The perpetrators and their targets are opposing politicians and political movements, but the true victims are the Jewish communities.”

Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, 77, in power since 1999, was confirmed for a fourth term in office with 81.53% of votes. Thre results of yesterday’s presidential election were announced by Inerior minister Tayeb Belaïz in a news conference. His nearest rival, Ali Benflis, obtained 12.18%.

The other four candidates came in far behind: Abdelaziz Belaïd (3.36%), Louisa Hanoun (1.37%), Ali Fawzi Rebaine (0.99%) and Moussa Touati (0.56%). The results do not take into account votes of Algerians abroad.

The national turnout was 51.7 percent on over 23-million voters, the lowest since the 1995 presidential vote. The election was marred by unrest in Cabilia, leaving some sixty injured, in a region where the turnout was only 25%. The turnout was a low 37% also in the capital Algiers.

While the supporters of the elderly and ill Hea of State began to celebrate the victory without waiting for the final results, Benflis denounced fraud on an “industrial” scale, pledging to “use all peaceful means to impose the will of the people”. Also Moussa Touati announced he will file a complaint witn the Constitutional Council.

A powerful magnitude 7.5 earthquake hit central Mexico at 9:27a.m local time, also shaking the capital Mexico City, where power went down and people fled from their homes.

The epicenter of the quake was 265km south-west of the capital, in Guerrero state, at a depth of about 48km, according to the US Geological Survey. No toll has been released yet on eventual victims or extent of the damages.

Mexico City emergency services are activated for those in need of assistance, though somewhat reduced for the Easter holidays.

Russia is beefing up military presence in the Far East and Pacific coast, a senior defense official said Friday.

“Today one of the key tasks is development of defense infrastructure on the Pacific coast and islands at Russian (Far) East,” commander of the Eastern military district Sergei Surovikin told a conference in the city of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, capital of the insular Sakhalin region.

Among the most urgent actions to be undertaken by the Defense Ministry in that region, the Colonel General mentioned building of more military garrisons in two out of the four disputed islands between Russia and Japan.

According to the official, the total number of defense-related facilities to be built in the Southern Kurils, or known as the Northern Territories in Japan, until 2016 will be over 150. Even more garrisons will be modernized and erected by 2020, Surovikin added.

This fall, Russia plans to conduct strategic drills code-named Vostok-2014.

In July 2013, President Vladimir Putin ordered Eastern military district to hold large-scale snap drills. During 2013, Russian armed forces have conducted in total 131 exercises in the Far East.

In February, Russian Defense Ministry said the facilities for new Borey-class strategic missile submarines in Pacific coast will be completed by the end of 2014.

The Obama administration said Friday that it is giving federal agencies more time to assess a proposed trans-national pipeline, likely keeping a decision about the controversial Keystone XL project from being made anytime soon.

Both the Associated Press and Reuters reported that the decision to further delay any announcement about the project is expected to keep the Keystone pipeline’s future uncertain until after November, when several United States government positions will go up for grabs at mid-term elections.

The news came on Friday courtesy of the US Department of State, which has jurisdiction over the decision because the 1,200-mile pipeline, if completed, will cross America’s international boundary with Canada.

If the project is approved, the pipeline is expected to transport crude tar sands from Canada down towards the Gulf of Mexico. Environmentalists and other activists have largely opposed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, however, while President Barack Obama has been criticized by opponents for not already approving a project that’s expected to create thousands of new jobs.

In the midst of a years-long debate, the State Dept. said that more time is required so that the agencies involved can sufficiently analyze the trove of submitted comments and evidence and make the best decision possible. So far, the project has been waiting on a permit from US officials for five years.

“On April 18, 2014, the Department of State notified the eight federal agencies specified in Executive Order 13337 we will provide more time for the submission of their views on the proposed Keystone Pipeline Project,” the department said in a statement. “Agencies need additional time based on the uncertainty created by the on-going litigation in the Nebraska Supreme Court which could ultimately affect the pipeline route in that state. In addition, during this time we will review and appropriately consider the unprecedented number of new public comments, approximately 2.5 million, received during the public comment period that closed on March 7, 2014.”

The court ruling cited by the State Dept. was made this past February in the District Court of Lancaster County, where Judge Stephanie Stacy said that the governor’s decision to let the $5.4 billion pipeline pass through Nebraska was “unconstitutional and void.”

“The Permit process will conclude once factors that have a significant impact on determining the national interest of the proposed project have been evaluated and appropriately reflected in the decision documents,” the State Department said on Friday.

The latest news comes only weeks after a group of 11 democratic senators wrote the White House urging Pres. Obama to make a final decision by May 31. Now just six weeks away, that deadline is believed to be all but impossible to meet.

“It is crystal clear that the Obama administration is simply not serious about American energy and American jobs,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) said in a statement on Friday. “I guess he wasn’t serious about having a pen and a phone, either. At a time of high unemployment in the Obama economy, it’s a shame that the administration has delayed the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline for years. Here’s the single greatest shovel-ready project in America – one that could create thousands of jobs right away – but the president simply isn’t interested.”

“Apparently radical activists carry more weight than Americans desperate to get back on the job,” added McConnell. “More jobs left behind in the Obama economy.”

By Daria Chernyshova

The Geneva deal on Ukraine demanding an immediate halt to violence in the country has recast poachers as gamekeepers, Finian Cunningham, an international affairs expert, author and media commentator told RIA Novosti.

“In the so-called Geneva deal, where are the demands for accountability on Washington and the European Union? The poachers have been reinvented as the gamekeepers,” Cunningham said.

The four-party meeting was attended by top diplomats from Russia, the US, the EU and Ukraine’s interim government. During the seven-hours talks in Geneva the sides tried to find a solution to the crisis in Ukraine.

“The communique adopted today has a provision calling on the immediate start of a broad national dialogue in the context of a constitutional reform so that all regions could voice their wishes,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, commenting on the results of the meeting. “It’s up to Kiev authorities now to ensure an all-inclusive, transparent and accountable constitutional process,” he added.

“US-led NATO continues to build up military forces in the Baltic, Eastern Europe, the east Mediterranean and the Black Sea,” Cunningham believes. “This Geneva arrangement is not a genuine address to the problem. It obfuscates the real cause of the problem and in my view will only lead to more confrontation, not less,” he added.

“On the surface, it’s a welcome development to see the US, EU, Russia, and Ukraine’s ‘governing authorities’ reach an agreement on the disarmament of armed groups, the freeing of occupied buildings all across the country, and amnesty for the non-violent protesters,” said Andrew Korybko, a Moscow-based foreign affairs commentator.

“In reality, even though the governing entity in Kiev and Moscow have a shared interest in disarming Right Sector, how likely is it that this will succeed, and will Kiev, if need be, send its armed forces to do this?” he added.

Following the conclusion of the talks, US President Barack Obama announced his administration was prepared to impose further sanctions against Russia if the agreement reached in Geneva fails to materialize.

“Obama continues to use threatening and provocative language calling for further sanctions on Russia if the latter does not comply with irrational Western demands on Moscow to de-escalate a crisis that Washington has engendered in Ukraine,” Finian Cunningham said.

Kiev has no plans of halting special operations in eastern Ukraine and their intensity will depend on how the Geneva agreements are being fulfilled, including vacating occupied administrative buildings and laying down arms, acting Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Deshchitsia said on Friday.

By Jim W. Dean

Expectations were not high for Thursday’s four-party Ukraine talks, and we were not denied. While the illegal, violent coup-meisters were represented by themselves and their two major benefactors, the US and EU, the East Ukrainians were not invited. Imagine that.

They were bootstrapped onto the Russians having to represent them, which gave a paper thin cover to the US’s unproven charges that Moscow has been running the whole regional protest. This also let Kerry set the Russians up for holding them responsible for the East Ukrainians complying with the deescalation agreement. But I have not seen a word yet about the West being held responsible for anything the Kiev coup did to take power, or has done since. We all know why.

John Kerry could not even leave town without threatening more sanctions on Russia if significant deescalation progress was not made over the weekend. I smelled rat. No Russian visitors, all men between 16 and 60, are allowed into the country now…Kiev’s defensive plan. The Russians have no troops or agents on the ground, because if they did, Kiev would certainly have caught a few by now and put them on display.

And if they could not catch them, the US State Department’s paramilitary people certainly could have, or the CIA’s “snatch” people. And how about the NSA? Have they been on strike? We have not had one YouTube of Putin giving cell phone orders to his invisible army in the Don Bass protest region.

With all the beating up that the US has been doing on Putin, with John McCain and even Hillary Clinton whacking him with the Hitler club, I thought surely the NSA would have come to the rescue with a smoking gun. Are they afraid that their Russian intercept counterparts would release more goodies on them if they did?

We have not heard much about the “foreign contractors” rumored to be missing. Having such people disappear is not unusual, but CIA directors are not known to pay state visits when the vice president is coming a few days later. And if Brennan had brought “proof” of the Russian stealth army in East Ukraine to give to Kiev’s Intel people to let them have credit for making the find, why then did they not use it? It would have backed up what little credibility they still had. Jokes are already being made that Saddam’s Baghdad Bob was reincarnated in Kiev.

The best example of that all week was their response to reports that some of the initial troops first sent into the Eastern cities were going over to the protestors with their equipment. Kiev said they had been specially trained to make believe they were surrendering so they would be taken right into the heart of the city. This had us falling off our chairs with laughter, as all the YouTube videos which were widely available told a different story.

Where the Kiev coup-meisters are now viewed as the new Theater of the Absurd poster boys, with the West we are beginning to see a much darker side… psychological operations on a grand scale. The Israeli Lobby people are on the scene, playing both sides. Israel would not formally vote for the Russian sanctions, but their big time supporters in the US, the mega rich ones, have cranked up major “let’s get a war going with Russia campaign.”

Over the weekend an isolated but strange event happened. “Pro-Russian” protestors showed up at a synagogue handing out fliers that Jews were required to register with the protestor’s Donetsk Regional Administration, and of course those folks knew nothing about them. This seemed a bit fishy to the locals, as there have not been the nationalist issues with Jews in Eastern Ukraine like in the West. The savvy Easterners figured out it was a psyops creation to spin back on Putin. But what happened next surprised us.

Within 24 hours the “Jews being forced to register in East Ukraine” story was being passed down the neo-con and Christian Zionist email chains to start conditioning minds back here of a potential “Putin Pogrom.” This flier incident was of course a completely fabricated event, done by professionals with experience in these kinds of Cold War psyops games.

By Thursday the mainstream press was picking it up as they have turned into dependable conveyor belts for such things. From USA Today:

“World leaders and Jewish groups condemned a leaflet handed out in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk in which Jews were told to “register” with the pro-Russian[s] … who have taken over a government office in an attempt to make Ukraine part of Russia, according to Ukrainian and Israeli media.”

But what really surprised us is what we saw in the four party talks agreement coverage today in the New York Times. “It calls on all sides in Ukraine to refrain from violence or provocative behavior and rejects all forms of intolerance, including anti-Semitism, which Mr. Kerry said had emerged as a worry in eastern Ukraine.”

But it gets better. Here is more from this USA Today psyop story, which even a rookie Intel analyst would have waived his higher up bosses away from as a trap.

“Jews emerging from a synagogue say they were handed leaflets that ordered the city’s Jews to provide a list of property they own and pay a registration fee, or else have their citizenship revoked, face deportation and see their assets confiscated,” reported Ynet News, Israel’s largest news website, and Ukraine’s Donbass news agency.”
Secretary of State John Kerry said the language of the leaflets “is beyond unacceptable” and condemned whomever is responsible. The US ambassador in Kiev was quick to make a comment also.

Left out of the predictable sanctimonious State Department comments was any reference to the Donetsk Jewish community describing the incident as a provocation and the chief rabbi, Shmuel Kaminezki, wanting to catch the perpetrators.

As expected in a carefully orchestrated scam like this, the usual suspects in the Jewish Lobby community got their bull horns out to play their assigned role of focusing attention once again on you know who, and away from the East Ukrainian victims of the Kiev coup.

Would anyone want to bet how much coverage was given to the coup-government’s Right Sector thugs beating up opposition presidential candidates last week, including one right in Kiev? Do you think the US ambassador, John Kerry, or Victoria Nuland has denounced these strong arm intimidation tactics?

What has taken place here folks is a classic high-level psyops with coordination on several continents, dozens of media and internet platforms, the top Jewish Lobby groups and even snaring the State Department, by hook or by crook.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch in DC, Obama is putting cold water on this initial de-escalation agreement when the ink is hardly dry. Kerry moves fast with new threats and warnings that if the Russians don’t make the East Ukraine protestors comply with serious progress over the weekend, new sanctions were ready to go. I smell a rat there… that the whole effort was just a charade and the leaflets part of it.

This was a desperate attempt to try to reverse the diplomatic credibility black hole the US has put itself in, and in my opinion, has just dug themselves in deeper. They did not fool us here at VT and the team we put on this for a few days. Catching the spin-meisters with their pants down on a scam like this is a bit of a sport for us, one we enjoy immensely.

But in all seriousness, the effort that went into this makes us wonder how much Obama was in the loop on it, and how much he was being played as a chump in a game to put him and Putin in a head-to-head fight. Good gosh, who can you think of that would benefit from that? We have one suspect in mind. How about you?