Monday, March 26, 2012
U.S. warns North Korea on launch
From The Hindu
The U.S. has reacted angrily to reports of North Korea's plan to launch a rocket-mounted satellite to mark the birth centenary of its former President, the late Kim Il-sung, with the State Department describing the move as “highly provocative”.
Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said North Korea's announcement was in direct violation of its international obligations, specifically United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874, which “clearly and unequivocally prohibit North Korea from conducting launches that use ballistic missile technology”.
Diplomatic ties were strained significantly following similar launches by Pyongyang in 2009. North Korea at the time had said it was only engaged in a peaceful space programme.
However then, as now, experts were quoted in the media as saying, “The launch technology for missiles and satellites is near-identical.”
Unsurprisingly South Korea reacted with alarm. Referring to the UNSC resolutions Cho Byung-jae, spokesman of the South Korean Foreign Ministry was quoted as saying, “This will be a clear violation... It will constitute a highly provocative action threatening peace and security on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia.”
Going by the U.S.' reaction, the launch may lead to the U.S. considering backing out of its February agreement with North Korea — that the North would halt nuclear tests and activities and implement a moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile tests in exchange for package of 240,000 tonnes of food aid. On this subject Ms Nuland said the missile launch would be “inconsistent with North Korea's recent undertaking to refrain from long-range missile launches.”
The agreement came after a U.S. delegation returned from Beijing following a third exploratory round of talks with North Korea. Then the State Department had said it still had “profound concerns regarding North Korean behaviour across a wide range of areas”, but the agreement reflected “important, if limited, progress” in addressing some of these concerns.
Its reaction to the satellite launch this week notwithstanding, the State Department had reaffirmed in February that it “does not have hostile intent toward the DPRK and is prepared to take steps to improve our bilateral relationship in the spirit of mutual respect for sovereignty and equality”.
The U.S. has reacted angrily to reports of North Korea's plan to launch a rocket-mounted satellite to mark the birth centenary of its former President, the late Kim Il-sung, with the State Department describing the move as “highly provocative”.
Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said North Korea's announcement was in direct violation of its international obligations, specifically United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874, which “clearly and unequivocally prohibit North Korea from conducting launches that use ballistic missile technology”.
Diplomatic ties were strained significantly following similar launches by Pyongyang in 2009. North Korea at the time had said it was only engaged in a peaceful space programme.
However then, as now, experts were quoted in the media as saying, “The launch technology for missiles and satellites is near-identical.”
Unsurprisingly South Korea reacted with alarm. Referring to the UNSC resolutions Cho Byung-jae, spokesman of the South Korean Foreign Ministry was quoted as saying, “This will be a clear violation... It will constitute a highly provocative action threatening peace and security on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia.”
Going by the U.S.' reaction, the launch may lead to the U.S. considering backing out of its February agreement with North Korea — that the North would halt nuclear tests and activities and implement a moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile tests in exchange for package of 240,000 tonnes of food aid. On this subject Ms Nuland said the missile launch would be “inconsistent with North Korea's recent undertaking to refrain from long-range missile launches.”
The agreement came after a U.S. delegation returned from Beijing following a third exploratory round of talks with North Korea. Then the State Department had said it still had “profound concerns regarding North Korean behaviour across a wide range of areas”, but the agreement reflected “important, if limited, progress” in addressing some of these concerns.
Its reaction to the satellite launch this week notwithstanding, the State Department had reaffirmed in February that it “does not have hostile intent toward the DPRK and is prepared to take steps to improve our bilateral relationship in the spirit of mutual respect for sovereignty and equality”.
Labels: missile testing, North Korea, United States
Friday, November 18, 2011
Enough is enough, Obama tells Beijing
In a surprising bout of candour, United States President Barack Obama lashed out at Chinese authorities over the alleged undervaluation of the Yuan, saying most economists estimated it was devalued by 20 to 25 per cent and that it was time for China to move towards a market-based system for their currency.
Speaking at the end of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation organisation meeting in Hawaii, Mr. Obama poured scorn over China for breaking some rules and implied that it was trying to game the system.
“The problem is, is that you've got a bunch of export producers in China who like the system as it is, and making changes are difficult for them politically. I get it. But the U.S. and other countries, I think understandably, feel that enough is enough,” said Mr. Obama.
“Play by the rules”
He underscored his intention to ensure that China played by the rules of the game, especially since, in addition to the currency valuation issue, intellectual property rights and protections for U.S. companies in China were also proving problematic.
“We are going to continue to be firm in insisting that they operate by the same rules that everybody else operates under. We do not want them taking advantage of the U.S. or U.S. businesses,” he said.
While the U.S. has made its concerns about the alleged undervaluation of the Yuan known for several years now, China has repeatedly said the issue is a red herring and that the U.S. economic woes stem from deeper, domestic causes.
Senate bill
The U.S. Senate last month passed a bill, the “Currency Exchange Rate Oversight Reform Act of 2011”, aimed at punishing China for allegedly manipulating its currency and holding it at an artificially low level.
Yet that bill came under fire even from Republican Party leaders, who are often on the front foot when it comes to critiquing Chinese monetary policies. John Boehner, the Speaker of the House, denounced the bill a day after it passed the Senate, saying it posed a “very severe risk” of starting a trade war between the world's two biggest economies.
Earlier this year Chinese President Hu Jintao deflected criticism away from China's currency, suggesting instead that efforts by the U.S. Federal Reserve to stimulate growth through huge bond purchases were fuelling inflation in emerging economies.
Labels: China, Chinese Yuan, currency manipulation, currency valuation, United States
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
U.S.-China military discussions reveal frictions
From The Hindu
In comments to media made in Beijing, United States Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Chinese Minister of National Defence General Liang Guanglie suggested that they had broad agreement on the need for stronger bilateral military ties. Yet they respectively hinted that China’s development of a stealth aircraft and the U.S.’ arms sales to Taiwan last year were points of disagreement.
Following a series of meetings between top defence officials from the two countries this week, a precursor to Chinese President Hu Jintao’s visit to Washington on January 19, Mr. Gates said that “In order to reduce the chances of miscommunication, misunderstanding or miscalculation, it is important that our military-to-military ties are solid, consistent and not subject to shifting political winds.”
Regarding China’s development of a new, fifth-generation stealth fighter, which was said to have demonstrated anti-satellite and anti-ship ballistic missile capability, the American Forces Press Services quoted a U.S. defence official saying, “China must defend itself, but... the Chinese should be clear about their strategy and doctrine. That would go a long way toward dispelling concerns about the Chinese military.”
At a press briefing, Mr. Liang responded to the issue arguing that the gap between the Chinese military and more advanced countries was “at least two or three decades,” and that the military improvements were not targeting any one nation.
Touching upon the U.S.’ arms sales to Taiwan last year, following which Beijing broke off military-to-military contact with Washington, Minister Liang noted, “On that our position has been clear and consistent: We are against it, because the U.S. arms sales to Taiwan seriously damaged China's core interests.”
Mr. Liang added, “We do not want to see that happen again. Neither do we want the U.S. arms sales to Taiwan [to] again and further disrupt the development of our military-to-military relationship.”
Yet both leaders noted that the high-level meetings this week laid down a “very solid foundation for the settlement of our differences and the future progress of our relations.”
In particular they expressed solidarity regarding discussions on North Korea and the crisis in the Korean peninsula. Mr. Gates said the U.S. and China could “work to maintain peace and security on the Korean peninsula by facilitating engagement between the two Koreas and working toward the de-nuclearisation of the Korean peninsula.”
The AFPS also reported that Mr. Gates assured Chinese military officials that “American exercises off the Korean coast are not in any way directed at the Chinese, but rather are driven by growing concern over North Korea.”
He was quoted as saying “Our efforts have been directed at deterring further provocations on the part of North Korea... This is an area where the U.S. and China have worked together cooperatively, and we acknowledge and appreciate China's constructive actions late last fall in terms of trying to tamp down tensions on the peninsula.”
Labels: China, U.S.-China ties, United States
U.S. to further enhance funding to Pakistan
From The Hindu
The United States’ supply of military, intelligence and economic support to Pakistan is likely to increase significantly despite frustrations that Pakistan “is not doing enough to combat terrorist groups in the country,” according to government officials here.
In a report The Washington Post quoted unnamed officials in the Obama administration saying that Vice President Joe Biden would announce further measures to boost U.S. support to Pakistan when he travels there next week for meetings with Pakistani Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Kayani and other top government leaders.
While Mr. Biden is expected to ask for a long-term strategy for the region in exchange, any promised increase in U.S. support will be over and above the $7.5 billion funding already sanctioned for Pakistan under the Kerry-Lugar bill and a recent announcement of over $2 billion to be directly given to the Pakistani army.
While the latest round of support may be calibrated to the level of assistance needed for Pakistan to launch an offensive against Taliban sanctuaries in areas bordering Afghanistan, administration
officials were also quoted in the Post as saying that moves to deepen the U.S.’ intelligence cooperation with Pakistan would be “a way of assuaging Pakistan’s fears that India... is building its own influence in Afghanistan.”
Administration officials also admitted that the steps to enhance U.S. aid to Pakistan even more would be consistent with President Barack Obama’s recent Afghanistan war review, according to which the U.S. would “redouble... efforts to look for political approaches to ending the war, including a recognition that Pakistan must play an important role if not a dominant one, in reconciliation talks with the Taliban.”
However, according to anonymous official sources, Pakistan understood that its region had become the “single most important foreign policy issue to the U.S. and... their cachet has gone up.”
Yet officials said that Pakistan had also realised that it had reached the point of maximum leverage and, “Things about their region are going to change one way or the other in the near future,” as the American public had become increasingly disillusioned with the war.
The United States’ supply of military, intelligence and economic support to Pakistan is likely to increase significantly despite frustrations that Pakistan “is not doing enough to combat terrorist groups in the country,” according to government officials here.
In a report The Washington Post quoted unnamed officials in the Obama administration saying that Vice President Joe Biden would announce further measures to boost U.S. support to Pakistan when he travels there next week for meetings with Pakistani Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Kayani and other top government leaders.
While Mr. Biden is expected to ask for a long-term strategy for the region in exchange, any promised increase in U.S. support will be over and above the $7.5 billion funding already sanctioned for Pakistan under the Kerry-Lugar bill and a recent announcement of over $2 billion to be directly given to the Pakistani army.
While the latest round of support may be calibrated to the level of assistance needed for Pakistan to launch an offensive against Taliban sanctuaries in areas bordering Afghanistan, administration
officials were also quoted in the Post as saying that moves to deepen the U.S.’ intelligence cooperation with Pakistan would be “a way of assuaging Pakistan’s fears that India... is building its own influence in Afghanistan.”
Administration officials also admitted that the steps to enhance U.S. aid to Pakistan even more would be consistent with President Barack Obama’s recent Afghanistan war review, according to which the U.S. would “redouble... efforts to look for political approaches to ending the war, including a recognition that Pakistan must play an important role if not a dominant one, in reconciliation talks with the Taliban.”
However, according to anonymous official sources, Pakistan understood that its region had become the “single most important foreign policy issue to the U.S. and... their cachet has gone up.”
Yet officials said that Pakistan had also realised that it had reached the point of maximum leverage and, “Things about their region are going to change one way or the other in the near future,” as the American public had become increasingly disillusioned with the war.
Labels: Pakistan, U.S.-Pak. ties, United States
Hillary, Yang discuss Hu Jintao's visit
From The Hindu
Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi met United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this week to lay the ground for Chinese President Hu Jintao's visit to Washington on January 19 and to advance their discussions on the North Korean crisis.
Mr. Yang, who also met U.S. National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, said in joint remarks with Ms. Clinton on Wednesday that Mr. Hu's visit would occur against the backdrop of an “ever-evolving international situation”.
The remarks were said to be a reference to tensions between North and South Korea, which escalated after an exchange of artillery fire in November led to civilian casualties on Yeonpyeong Island near the countries' shared border.
Ms. Clinton said during the briefing that she felt “a great sense of responsibility to ensure that it continues the positive, cooperative, comprehensive relationship between our two countries”.
Trade imbalance
Regarding the meeting between Mr. Yang and Mr. Donilon, the White House said Mr. Donilon had “stressed the importance of effective efforts to reduce imbalances in both the global economy as well as in U.S.-China trade”.
The two officials also touched upon ways to advance non-proliferation objectives, including issues relating to Iran and North Korea. They also agreed on the importance of ensuring that the referendum on southern Sudan proceeds peacefully.
State Department spokesman, Philip Crowley, was quoted in media as expressing hope that China and the U.S. would “reach agreement on addressing the crisis”, during Mr. Hu's visit to Washington.
Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi met United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this week to lay the ground for Chinese President Hu Jintao's visit to Washington on January 19 and to advance their discussions on the North Korean crisis.
Mr. Yang, who also met U.S. National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, said in joint remarks with Ms. Clinton on Wednesday that Mr. Hu's visit would occur against the backdrop of an “ever-evolving international situation”.
The remarks were said to be a reference to tensions between North and South Korea, which escalated after an exchange of artillery fire in November led to civilian casualties on Yeonpyeong Island near the countries' shared border.
Ms. Clinton said during the briefing that she felt “a great sense of responsibility to ensure that it continues the positive, cooperative, comprehensive relationship between our two countries”.
Trade imbalance
Regarding the meeting between Mr. Yang and Mr. Donilon, the White House said Mr. Donilon had “stressed the importance of effective efforts to reduce imbalances in both the global economy as well as in U.S.-China trade”.
The two officials also touched upon ways to advance non-proliferation objectives, including issues relating to Iran and North Korea. They also agreed on the importance of ensuring that the referendum on southern Sudan proceeds peacefully.
State Department spokesman, Philip Crowley, was quoted in media as expressing hope that China and the U.S. would “reach agreement on addressing the crisis”, during Mr. Hu's visit to Washington.
Labels: China, U.S.-China ties, United States
Chavez proposes envoy names to U.S.
From The Hindu
After weeks of diplomatic standoff between Venezuela and the United States, during which both countries rejected the appointment of the other’s Ambassador, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez showed a way out of the stalemate by proposing that the U.S. appoint either former President Bill Clinton, a Hollywood celebrity such as Sean Penn or Oliver Stone, or liberal intellectual Noam Chomsky as Venezuelan Ambassador.
Washington’s fracas with Caracas began when U.S. Ambassador-designate to Venezuela, Larry Palmer, made critical comments to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about low morale in the Venezuelan military and concerns regarding Colombian FARC rebels finding refuge on Venezuelan soil.
In August Mr. Chavez announced that he would not be willing accept Mr. Palmer’s appointment, describing his Senate remarks about Venezuela as “blatantly disrespectful.” In retaliatory action at the end of last month the U.S. revoked the visa of the Venezuelan Ambassador to Washington, Bernardo Alvarez.
Yet media reported on Tuesday that Mr. Chavez said in a televised speech that he had come up with a solution, hinting, “I hope they name Oliver Stone. I'll suggest a candidate ... Sean Penn or [Noam] Chomsky. We have a lot of friends there. Bill Clinton.”
Reports also indicated that Mr. Chavez interacted with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, during the inauguration of Brazil’s new President, Dilma Rouseff, on New Years’ Day.
He described his conversation with Ms. Clinton to media, saying, “I said to Señora Clinton 'How is your husband?' But I made a mistake because I speak very bad English and I said 'How is your wife?' She laughed, then I said husband.”
The U.S. has been wary of President Chavez’s rise, since 1999, as a major leader in Latin America, especially given his unabashed criticism U.S. foreign policy.
However Washington’s dependence on oil imports from Venezuela, close to a million barrels of crude per day, is a key factor in preserving longer-term stability in the relationship between the two nations.
Labels: U.S.-Venezuela row, United States, Venezuela
Monday, December 06, 2010
Uptick in U.S. jobless rate
From The Hindu
The U.S. economy's unemployment rate climbed to 9.8 per cent in November, according to the Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS) monthly report, made available on Friday. It was hovering at 9.6 per cent in each of the prior three months, the BLS cautioned.
In a development that is almost certain to increase pressure on the Obama administration to intensify its job-creation efforts, the BLS also noted that nonfarm payroll employment barely changed, adding a mere 39,000 jobs. This marks the worst month for the U.S. job market, since September.
Worryingly one of the main sectors that added jobs was temporary help services — reflecting a shortfall in permanent job creation. The only other sector to add significantly to the jobs total was healthcare. Employment in retail trade, however, fell and in most major industries it changed little over the month.
Reflecting continuing weakness in job markets across sectors, the BLS data suggested that the number of job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs rose by 390,000 to 9.5 million in November.
The number of people who were looking for permanent jobs but not finding them remained more or less unchanged at 9 million.
Many of the workers in this category were employed part time for economic reasons, that is, because their hours had been cut-back or because they were unable to find a full-time job, the BLS said.
The numbers of those who were not in the labour force but wanted and were available for work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months, rose from 2.3 million a year earlier. The November joblessness figures did not include such individuals as they had not searched for work in the four weeks preceding the survey.
In the professional and business services sectors, employment in temporary help services continued to increase in November, with 40,000 jobs added, the BLS report said.
It also noted that employment in mining continued to trend up over the month and support activities for mining added 6,000 jobs in November.
The U.S. economy's unemployment rate climbed to 9.8 per cent in November, according to the Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS) monthly report, made available on Friday. It was hovering at 9.6 per cent in each of the prior three months, the BLS cautioned.
In a development that is almost certain to increase pressure on the Obama administration to intensify its job-creation efforts, the BLS also noted that nonfarm payroll employment barely changed, adding a mere 39,000 jobs. This marks the worst month for the U.S. job market, since September.
Worryingly one of the main sectors that added jobs was temporary help services — reflecting a shortfall in permanent job creation. The only other sector to add significantly to the jobs total was healthcare. Employment in retail trade, however, fell and in most major industries it changed little over the month.
Reflecting continuing weakness in job markets across sectors, the BLS data suggested that the number of job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs rose by 390,000 to 9.5 million in November.
The number of people who were looking for permanent jobs but not finding them remained more or less unchanged at 9 million.
Many of the workers in this category were employed part time for economic reasons, that is, because their hours had been cut-back or because they were unable to find a full-time job, the BLS said.
The numbers of those who were not in the labour force but wanted and were available for work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months, rose from 2.3 million a year earlier. The November joblessness figures did not include such individuals as they had not searched for work in the four weeks preceding the survey.
In the professional and business services sectors, employment in temporary help services continued to increase in November, with 40,000 jobs added, the BLS report said.
It also noted that employment in mining continued to trend up over the month and support activities for mining added 6,000 jobs in November.
Labels: Bureau of Labour Statistics, unemployment, United States
Thursday, December 02, 2010
Survey finds support for repeal of U.S. gay ban
From The Hindu
An official survey has found that more than two-thirds of the armed forces in the United States “do not object to gays and lesbians serving openly in uniform,” according to a working group tasked with looking into issues associated with implementing a repeal of the so-called “Don't Ask, Don't Tell,” law banning gays from serving openly in the military.
Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen unveiled the recommendations of the working group Pentagon news conference on Tuesday.
Commenting on the findings of the survey, President Barack Obama, who has consistently backed the repeal of the law, said, “Today's report confirms that a strong majority of our military men and women and their families... are prepared to serve alongside Americans who are openly gay and lesbian.”
However echoing statements by Mr. Gates and other senior military officials, Mr. Obama added that the aim was to “transition to a new policy in a responsible manner that ensures our military strength and national security.” A court order mandating changes to the law earlier this year came under fire from the Obama administration for seeking to push through reform too abruptly.
Yet the President struck a more optimistic note for a change in law following the announcement of the survey results, and he said,
“For the first time since this law was enacted 17 years ago today, both the Secretary of Defence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have publicly endorsed ending this policy.”
Attention
Drawing attention to his preferred channel for ending the ban on openly gay persons serving in the military, Mr. Obama said certainty for Americans serving on the front lines of battles would only come “when an act of Congress ends this discriminatory policy once and for all. The House of Representatives has already passed the necessary legislation. Today I call on the Senate to act as soon as possible so I can sign this repeal into law this year...”
Speaking to media Mr. Gates reiterated his concern about minimising any disruptions coming out of a change in the law. “I am determined to see that if the law is repealed the changes are implemented in such a way as to minimize any negative impact on the morale, cohesion and effectiveness of combat units that are deployed, or about to deploy to the front lines,” he said.
Mr. Gates further noted that service members in combat arms specialties, especially in the Army and Marine Corps, but also in the special operations from the Navy and Air Force, had a higher level of discomfort and resistance to changing the current policy.
However, he assured, “In my view, the concerns of combat troops as expressed in the survey do not present an insurmountable barrier to successful repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.”
An official survey has found that more than two-thirds of the armed forces in the United States “do not object to gays and lesbians serving openly in uniform,” according to a working group tasked with looking into issues associated with implementing a repeal of the so-called “Don't Ask, Don't Tell,” law banning gays from serving openly in the military.
Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen unveiled the recommendations of the working group Pentagon news conference on Tuesday.
Commenting on the findings of the survey, President Barack Obama, who has consistently backed the repeal of the law, said, “Today's report confirms that a strong majority of our military men and women and their families... are prepared to serve alongside Americans who are openly gay and lesbian.”
However echoing statements by Mr. Gates and other senior military officials, Mr. Obama added that the aim was to “transition to a new policy in a responsible manner that ensures our military strength and national security.” A court order mandating changes to the law earlier this year came under fire from the Obama administration for seeking to push through reform too abruptly.
Yet the President struck a more optimistic note for a change in law following the announcement of the survey results, and he said,
“For the first time since this law was enacted 17 years ago today, both the Secretary of Defence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have publicly endorsed ending this policy.”
Attention
Drawing attention to his preferred channel for ending the ban on openly gay persons serving in the military, Mr. Obama said certainty for Americans serving on the front lines of battles would only come “when an act of Congress ends this discriminatory policy once and for all. The House of Representatives has already passed the necessary legislation. Today I call on the Senate to act as soon as possible so I can sign this repeal into law this year...”
Speaking to media Mr. Gates reiterated his concern about minimising any disruptions coming out of a change in the law. “I am determined to see that if the law is repealed the changes are implemented in such a way as to minimize any negative impact on the morale, cohesion and effectiveness of combat units that are deployed, or about to deploy to the front lines,” he said.
Mr. Gates further noted that service members in combat arms specialties, especially in the Army and Marine Corps, but also in the special operations from the Navy and Air Force, had a higher level of discomfort and resistance to changing the current policy.
However, he assured, “In my view, the concerns of combat troops as expressed in the survey do not present an insurmountable barrier to successful repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.”
Labels: Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, gays in millitary, homosexuality, United States
Friday, October 15, 2010
U.S. plans appeal on gay law ruling
From The Hindu
The Obama administration has said it would appeal a decision by federal judge in California that struck down the infamous “don't ask, don't tell law,” banning gays from serving in the military if they revealed their sexual orientation. Under the law the military cannot, however, ask its recruits about their sexual orientation.
Though President Barack Obama and officials including Defence Secretary Robert Gates support the ultimate repeal of the 1993 law that sought to create a compromise solution, their intention is for the law to be repealed by Congress rather than the courts.
On Tuesday, Judge Virginia Phillips of Federal District Court of California issued a ruling on the case of Log Cabin Republicans — a gay Republican group — vs. the United States of America, arguing that “don't ask, don't tell” was unconstitutional. She further issued an injunction requiring an immediate halt to its enforcement.
Speaking to youth at a town-hall meeting here in Washington, Mr. Obama clarified the government view on Thursday, saying, “I agree with the basic principle that anybody who wants to serve in our armed forces and make sacrifices on our behalf, on behalf of our national security, anybody should be able to serve. And they shouldn't have to lie about who they are in order to serve.”
However, he said while his government was moving towards ending this policy, it had to be done in an “orderly” way given the U.S.' involvement in a war. Yet, he assured, this was not a question of whether the policy would end: “It will end on my watch,” Mr. Obama assured.
In Congress, the House of Representatives has already passed the repeal of the law, yet an attempt to get it passed in the Senate failed earlier last month on the floor, in the face of Republican opposition. While litigants such as the Log Cabin Republicans have turned to the courts in the face of such partisan opposition, the Obama government has preferred to proceed with the law's repeal more cautiously.
In particular, Mr. Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen were reported to have requested Congress not to take action until a Pentagon report on how to implement a repeal came out in December. In the lead-up to that report Mr. Gates noted that a military review panel was considering results of an extensive survey of active duty and reserve-component service members.
“This is a very complex business,” Mr. Gates said, adding, “It has enormous consequences for our troops. And as I have said from the very beginning, I think there should be legislation, and that legislation should be informed by the review we have under way.”
Labels: gays in military, United States
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Donilon has a wealth of experience: Obama
From The Hindu
General James Jones will step down from his role as the National Security Advisor of the United States and will be replaced by his deputy, Thomas Donilon, President Barack Obama announced.
Speaking at the Rose Garden on Friday, Mr. Obama said that when he had offered General Jones the job shortly after the 2008 election, it had been a "difficult decision" for the General. "He had just retired from the military, had a wide range of family obligations," Mr. Obama said, adding, “But because of his patriotism, his dedication to keeping America safe, we were able to agree that he would serve... for about two years."
General Jones, a decorated military veteran and former Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, said that he had enjoyed his assignment "immensely", in particular because Mr. Obama was "willing to take on the hard issues of our time at a very, very difficult moment in our nation’s history".
During his tenure, General Jones made several visits to India and met with top Indian officials including Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao, Indian NSA Shiv Shankar Menon and Defence Minister A.K. Antony.
The President also commented on the appointment of Mr. Donilon as General Jones’ replacement, saying, he brought to the office a wealth of experience, having served three Presidents and having been immersed in national security issues for decades.
"Over the last two years, there is not a single critical national security issue that has not crossed Tom’s desk," Mr. Obama said, noting that Mr. Donilon had helped manage both the national security team and the policymaking process.
Praise from senior officials
Numerous senior officials, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Vice President Joseph Biden and U.S. Representative to the United Nations Susan Rice praised General Jones’ work during his time as NSA.
Ms. Clinton said that the General had brought "a steady hand and clear vision to an unforgiving agenda", in particular, playing a "crucial" leadership role in winding down the combat mission in Iraq and refocusing the war in Afghanistan.
Ms. Rice also commented on General Jones’ accomplishments with regard to resetting the U.S.’ relations with Russia and in making economic development an integral part of the country’s national security strategy.
Labels: National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon, United States
Thursday, September 09, 2010
Obama condemns pastor's "stunt"
From The Hindu
Joining the widespread condemnation of Florida pastor Terry Jones, for his extreme views against Islam, President Barack Obama on Wednesday said that Mr. Jones’ plans to attack the religion would be a "recruitment bonanza for al-Qaeda".
In an interview with ABC News, Mr. Obama said, there could be serious violence in Pakistan or Afghanistan as a result of such religious intolerance and "this could increase the recruitment of individuals who'd be willing to blow themselves up in American cities, or European cities".
Mr. Obama’s comments join a growing backlash against Mr. Jones, whose plans were earlier sharply criticised by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and commander of United States forces in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus.
Touching upon the contradiction between Mr. Jones’ views and American values, Mr. Obama said, "I just hope he understands that what he's proposing to do is completely contrary to our values of Americans [and] that this country has been built on the notions of religious freedom and religious tolerance."
Could affect U.S. armed forces
Reflecting prior concerns voiced by General Petraeus Mr. Obama added that as a practical matter, he wanted Mr. Jones to understand that the “stunt” planned to pull could greatly endanger U.S. armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. "We're already seeing protests against Americans just by the mere threat that he's making," Mr. Obama added.
In a speech on Wednesday Ms. Clinton had said, Clinton lamented that Mr. Jones’ Dove World Outreach Centre congregation in Gainesville had received much attention for a "distrustful and disgraceful' means of marking the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks. She added that it was regrettable that the pastor, with a church of no more than 50 people, could get the world's attention with his plan. "It is not who we are," she said.
General Petraeus had also attacked the pastor’s plans earlier, saying that it would endanger U.S. troops and the overall military effort. "It is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here, but everywhere in the world, we are engaged with the Islamic community," the General added.
Labels: 9/11 attacks, al Qaeda, Quran burning controversy, Reverend Terry Jones, United States
Monday, April 26, 2010
Furore over Arizona immigration bill
From The Hindu
When Jan Brewer, Governor of Arizona, signed into law a new immigration bill last Friday she could have had little doubt that she would be courting controversy. The Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act, now better known as SB 1070, would make the failure to carry immigration documents a punishable offence; it also gives police sweeping powers to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.
While the Ms. Brewer's administration has argued the law will help identify, prosecute and deport illegal immigrants, critics including representatives of the Latin American immigrant communities — who would be most affected by the changes — have condemned the legislation as excessively stringent.
The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund said it “strongly condemns” the action of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. It said the law was “an unconstitutional and costly measure that will violate the civil rights of all Arizonans. It will jeopardise public safety and subject Arizona's Latinos and newcomers to discrimination and racial profiling.”
President Obama also criticised the bill ahead of it being signed into law. In a televised address, he called the law “irresponsible” and that it threatened to undermine basic notions of fairness that Americans cherished, including the trust between police and local communities.
He said, “I have instructed members of my administration to closely monitor the situation and examine the civil rights and other implications of this legislation. But if we continue to fail to act at a federal level, we will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country.”
As per the new law, a law enforcement officer, without a warrant, may arrest a person if the officer has “probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States.”
The significant shift in the discretionary power that such wording would give Arizona police to target immigrant communities is exacerbated by other clauses of the bill too: “Where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.”
The NALEO Educational Fund said that it would join state-wide efforts “to challenge this unconstitutional measure in court.” It argued that the enactment of SB 1070 highlighted the urgent need for federal legislation to fix the nation's broken immigration system, calling on the President and Congress to make comprehensive immigration reform a reality in 2010.
When Jan Brewer, Governor of Arizona, signed into law a new immigration bill last Friday she could have had little doubt that she would be courting controversy. The Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act, now better known as SB 1070, would make the failure to carry immigration documents a punishable offence; it also gives police sweeping powers to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.
While the Ms. Brewer's administration has argued the law will help identify, prosecute and deport illegal immigrants, critics including representatives of the Latin American immigrant communities — who would be most affected by the changes — have condemned the legislation as excessively stringent.
The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund said it “strongly condemns” the action of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. It said the law was “an unconstitutional and costly measure that will violate the civil rights of all Arizonans. It will jeopardise public safety and subject Arizona's Latinos and newcomers to discrimination and racial profiling.”
President Obama also criticised the bill ahead of it being signed into law. In a televised address, he called the law “irresponsible” and that it threatened to undermine basic notions of fairness that Americans cherished, including the trust between police and local communities.
He said, “I have instructed members of my administration to closely monitor the situation and examine the civil rights and other implications of this legislation. But if we continue to fail to act at a federal level, we will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country.”
As per the new law, a law enforcement officer, without a warrant, may arrest a person if the officer has “probable cause to believe that the person has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States.”
The significant shift in the discretionary power that such wording would give Arizona police to target immigrant communities is exacerbated by other clauses of the bill too: “Where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.”
The NALEO Educational Fund said that it would join state-wide efforts “to challenge this unconstitutional measure in court.” It argued that the enactment of SB 1070 highlighted the urgent need for federal legislation to fix the nation's broken immigration system, calling on the President and Congress to make comprehensive immigration reform a reality in 2010.
Labels: Arizonia, immigration laws, United States
Monday, April 12, 2010
Iran not yet nuclear capable: Gates
From The Hindu
Iran is “not yet... nuclear capable,” admitted Robert Gates, Secretary of Defence, in a media interview released on Monday. Speaking during a pre-recorded interview on the NBC program “Meet the Press,” Mr. Gates said that Iran’s present position was as dangerous as it being a nuclear state given the ambiguities of differentiating between the degree to which nuclear weapons development was achieved in that country.
Alluding that it may not be clear exactly how far Iran has gone with its alleged nuclear weapons programme, he said, “If their policy is to go to the threshold but not assemble a nuclear weapon, how do you tell that they have not assembled? So it becomes a serious verification question, and I do not actually know how you would verify that,” he argued.
During the interview Secretary of State Hillary Clinton however avoided a direct question on whether Iran was nuclear capable or not. In response she said, “That's an issue upon which intelligence services still differ. But our goal is to prevent them from having nuclear weapons.”
NPR strengthens Iran deterrent
Mr. Gates further argued that the power of the U.S. nuclear capability implied by the Nuclear Posture Review would continue to serve as the policy tool and source of deterrence against Iran, rather than nuclear disarmament under the new START deal between the U.S. and Russia.
He said the NPR would put the U.S. in a much stronger position in terms of going to other countries and getting their support for putting pressure on the Iranians and the North Koreans. “I think it also has, potentially, a deterrent effect on other countries who might be potential proliferators as they look at North Korea and, and Iran,” he added.
Emphasising that the U.S. hoped to influence the calculus of Iran’s incentives for nuclear weaponisation, Mr. Gates stated that the U.S. hoped that the Iranian government would decide that “its own security is better served by not having nuclear weapons than by having them,” a position that could be achieved via a combination of economic pressure and “more missile defence and cooperation in the Gulf to show them that… we can defend against [any attack].”
Pushing for Security Council resolution
From the comments of Mr. Gates and Ms. Clinton it would appear that the Obama administration is convinced that a key goal for the U.S. is to halt any progress in Iran’s nuclear weapons development plans. Mr. Gates argued that the U.S. would probably… get another UN Security Council resolution passed. This would also serve as a legal platform for organizations like the European Union and individual countries to take even more stringent actions against Iran.
Ms. Clinton explicitly favoured the turning the tide of diplomatic pressure against Iran through the UN Security Council. She said, a Security Council resolution would send a “really powerful message”, and Iran has been “beating down the doors of every country in the world “ to try to avoid a Security Council resolution.
However, she said, due to the U.S.’s strategic patience and willingness to keep on this issue, other countries were realising that Iran had failed to cooperate and were in fact responsible for shutting the door.
Iran is “not yet... nuclear capable,” admitted Robert Gates, Secretary of Defence, in a media interview released on Monday. Speaking during a pre-recorded interview on the NBC program “Meet the Press,” Mr. Gates said that Iran’s present position was as dangerous as it being a nuclear state given the ambiguities of differentiating between the degree to which nuclear weapons development was achieved in that country.
Alluding that it may not be clear exactly how far Iran has gone with its alleged nuclear weapons programme, he said, “If their policy is to go to the threshold but not assemble a nuclear weapon, how do you tell that they have not assembled? So it becomes a serious verification question, and I do not actually know how you would verify that,” he argued.
During the interview Secretary of State Hillary Clinton however avoided a direct question on whether Iran was nuclear capable or not. In response she said, “That's an issue upon which intelligence services still differ. But our goal is to prevent them from having nuclear weapons.”
NPR strengthens Iran deterrent
Mr. Gates further argued that the power of the U.S. nuclear capability implied by the Nuclear Posture Review would continue to serve as the policy tool and source of deterrence against Iran, rather than nuclear disarmament under the new START deal between the U.S. and Russia.
He said the NPR would put the U.S. in a much stronger position in terms of going to other countries and getting their support for putting pressure on the Iranians and the North Koreans. “I think it also has, potentially, a deterrent effect on other countries who might be potential proliferators as they look at North Korea and, and Iran,” he added.
Emphasising that the U.S. hoped to influence the calculus of Iran’s incentives for nuclear weaponisation, Mr. Gates stated that the U.S. hoped that the Iranian government would decide that “its own security is better served by not having nuclear weapons than by having them,” a position that could be achieved via a combination of economic pressure and “more missile defence and cooperation in the Gulf to show them that… we can defend against [any attack].”
Pushing for Security Council resolution
From the comments of Mr. Gates and Ms. Clinton it would appear that the Obama administration is convinced that a key goal for the U.S. is to halt any progress in Iran’s nuclear weapons development plans. Mr. Gates argued that the U.S. would probably… get another UN Security Council resolution passed. This would also serve as a legal platform for organizations like the European Union and individual countries to take even more stringent actions against Iran.
Ms. Clinton explicitly favoured the turning the tide of diplomatic pressure against Iran through the UN Security Council. She said, a Security Council resolution would send a “really powerful message”, and Iran has been “beating down the doors of every country in the world “ to try to avoid a Security Council resolution.
However, she said, due to the U.S.’s strategic patience and willingness to keep on this issue, other countries were realising that Iran had failed to cooperate and were in fact responsible for shutting the door.
Labels: EU, Iran nuclear issue, sanctions, United States, UNSC
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Major Economies Forum to meet on April 18
From The Hindu
The State Department on Thursday announced that the Major Economies Forum, focused on energy and climate would be held here on April 18-9, 2010 and Todd Stern, United States Special Envoy for climate change will lead U.S. participation in the event.
Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs Michael Froman would serve as chair and the meeting will take place at the level of leaders’ representatives, the State Department said.
Launched on March 28, 2009, the Major Economies Forum on energy and climate is “intended to facilitate a candid dialogue among major developed and developing economies to make progress in meeting the climate change and clean energy challenge, and advance the exploration of concrete initiatives and joint ventures that increase the supply of clean energy while cutting greenhouse gas emissions,” according to an official statement.
The Forum has held five meetings at the leaders’ representatives’ level and one leaders meeting in July 2009 at L’Aquila in Italy. The declaration following the leaders’ meeting agreed on various goals including undertaking nationally appropriate mitigation actions, adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change, a global partnership to drive transformational low-carbon, climate-friendly technologies, scaling up of financial resources for mitigation and adaptation and a continuing schedule meetings to coordinate the fight against climate change.
The 17 major-economy members of the Forum are: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the U.S..
The State Department on Thursday announced that the Major Economies Forum, focused on energy and climate would be held here on April 18-9, 2010 and Todd Stern, United States Special Envoy for climate change will lead U.S. participation in the event.
Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs Michael Froman would serve as chair and the meeting will take place at the level of leaders’ representatives, the State Department said.
Launched on March 28, 2009, the Major Economies Forum on energy and climate is “intended to facilitate a candid dialogue among major developed and developing economies to make progress in meeting the climate change and clean energy challenge, and advance the exploration of concrete initiatives and joint ventures that increase the supply of clean energy while cutting greenhouse gas emissions,” according to an official statement.
The Forum has held five meetings at the leaders’ representatives’ level and one leaders meeting in July 2009 at L’Aquila in Italy. The declaration following the leaders’ meeting agreed on various goals including undertaking nationally appropriate mitigation actions, adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change, a global partnership to drive transformational low-carbon, climate-friendly technologies, scaling up of financial resources for mitigation and adaptation and a continuing schedule meetings to coordinate the fight against climate change.
The 17 major-economy members of the Forum are: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the U.S..
Labels: clean energy, emission reduction, Major Economies Forum, United States
Maximum penalty against Toyota sought
From The Hindu
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will seek the maximum civil penalty of $16.375 million against Toyota Motor Corporation for failing to notify the agency about the “sticky pedal” defect in its cars, United States Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced.
Noting that Toyota knew of the “dangerous” defect and the potential risk to consumers for at least four months prior to revealing this knowledge, an NHTSA release said that the penalty being sought against Toyota would be the largest civil penalty ever assessed against an auto manufacturer by NHTSA.
Manufacturers are legally obligated to notify NHTSA within five business days if they determine that a safety defect exists.
“We now have proof that Toyota failed to live up to its legal obligations,” Mr. LaHood said. “Worse yet, they knowingly hid a dangerous defect for months from U.S. officials and did not take action to protect millions of drivers and their families. For those reasons, we are seeking the maximum penalty possible under current laws.”
The NHTSA statement said that the agency learned, through documents obtained from Toyota, that the company knew of the sticky pedal defect since at least September 29, 2009.
That day, Toyota issued repair procedures to their distributors in 31 European countries and Canada to address complaints of sticky accelerator pedals, sudden increases in engine RPM, and sudden vehicle acceleration, the NHTSA said. The documents also show that Toyota was aware that consumers in the U.S. were experiencing the same problems.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will seek the maximum civil penalty of $16.375 million against Toyota Motor Corporation for failing to notify the agency about the “sticky pedal” defect in its cars, United States Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced.
Noting that Toyota knew of the “dangerous” defect and the potential risk to consumers for at least four months prior to revealing this knowledge, an NHTSA release said that the penalty being sought against Toyota would be the largest civil penalty ever assessed against an auto manufacturer by NHTSA.
Manufacturers are legally obligated to notify NHTSA within five business days if they determine that a safety defect exists.
“We now have proof that Toyota failed to live up to its legal obligations,” Mr. LaHood said. “Worse yet, they knowingly hid a dangerous defect for months from U.S. officials and did not take action to protect millions of drivers and their families. For those reasons, we are seeking the maximum penalty possible under current laws.”
The NHTSA statement said that the agency learned, through documents obtained from Toyota, that the company knew of the sticky pedal defect since at least September 29, 2009.
That day, Toyota issued repair procedures to their distributors in 31 European countries and Canada to address complaints of sticky accelerator pedals, sudden increases in engine RPM, and sudden vehicle acceleration, the NHTSA said. The documents also show that Toyota was aware that consumers in the U.S. were experiencing the same problems.
Labels: Toyota Motor Corporation, Traffic Safety, United States
Saturday, April 03, 2010
U.S. announces new automobile emission standards
From The Hindu
New standards for carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles were announced by the Obama administration on Thursday, even as President Barack Obama came in for criticism from environmental groups for authorising a major offshore oil-and-gas drilling expansion.
At the announcement of the drilling project Mr. Obama said, “After decades in which we have done little to increase auto efficiency, those new standards will be completed, which will reduce our dependence on oil while helping folks spend a little less at the pump.” Canada joined the U.S. in mandating that cars and trucks deliver on average 35.5 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2016.
According to the administration, the new emission standards would ultimately save 1.8 billion barrels of oil, as they aim to boost the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE). The current economy limit is 25 miles per gallon.
Combined with the mandated greenhouse gas requirements, the new rules would raise mileage standards closer to 35.5 mpg, more quickly than a 2007 law that would achieve this level only by 2020.
According to reports, mileage standards for model year 2011 vehicles are 27.3 mpg; however the new vehicle emissions standards will be phased in starting with the 2012 model year.
On the administration’s attempt to build broad support around the new standards Mr. Obama said, “Just a few months after taking office, I also gathered the leaders of the world's largest automakers, the heads of labour unions, environmental advocates and public officials from California and across the country to reach a historic agreement to raise fuel economy standards in cars and trucks.”
New standards for carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles were announced by the Obama administration on Thursday, even as President Barack Obama came in for criticism from environmental groups for authorising a major offshore oil-and-gas drilling expansion.
At the announcement of the drilling project Mr. Obama said, “After decades in which we have done little to increase auto efficiency, those new standards will be completed, which will reduce our dependence on oil while helping folks spend a little less at the pump.” Canada joined the U.S. in mandating that cars and trucks deliver on average 35.5 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2016.
According to the administration, the new emission standards would ultimately save 1.8 billion barrels of oil, as they aim to boost the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE). The current economy limit is 25 miles per gallon.
Combined with the mandated greenhouse gas requirements, the new rules would raise mileage standards closer to 35.5 mpg, more quickly than a 2007 law that would achieve this level only by 2020.
According to reports, mileage standards for model year 2011 vehicles are 27.3 mpg; however the new vehicle emissions standards will be phased in starting with the 2012 model year.
On the administration’s attempt to build broad support around the new standards Mr. Obama said, “Just a few months after taking office, I also gathered the leaders of the world's largest automakers, the heads of labour unions, environmental advocates and public officials from California and across the country to reach a historic agreement to raise fuel economy standards in cars and trucks.”
Labels: automobile, emission standards, United States
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Accord to cancel Afghan debt
From The Hindu
The United States and other countries belonging to the Paris Club of creditors on Wednesday agreed to cancel debt owed by Afghanistan to its members. “Today's decision represents a great achievement for Afghanistan and reflects the international community's acknowledgment of the great strides the country has made in strengthening its economy”, said the U.S. State Department.
While the U.S. said lifting the debt burden inherited by the Afghan government marked a crucial step on Afghanistan's road to economic sustainability, the Paris Club added that Afghanistan had committed to allocate the resources freed by the present debt relief to priority areas identified in the country's poverty reduction strategy and to achieve Millennium Development Goals.
With the accord signed, Afghanistan, a member of the enhanced Heavily-Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, would see the implementation of “completion point treatment,” said the State Department. This implies the cancellation of an estimated $1.6 billion in debt from the Paris Club, as well as the IMF, World Bank and other creditors. As per the debt relief plan, this process will ultimately result in a “96 per cent reduction of the debt inherited by Afghanistan's government,” which was estimated at $11.6 billion in 2006.
After the debt cancellation, the Paris Club said it welcomed Afghanistan's commitment “to seek comparable treatment from all their other external creditors including other creditor countries”. Afghanistan further won praise from the Paris Club for its performance under an International Monetary Fund programme and its progress on implementing economic reforms in a “tremendously challenging” environment.
The breakthrough for Afghanistan comes after years of careful debt and macroeconomic management — since 2002 technical advisors worked with the Afghan Ministry of Finance to streamline the budget process, improve the payment system for government employees, restructure Afghanistan's debt, and establish a Debt Management Unit within the Ministry of Finance, according to official reports.
The Paris Club was formed in 1956. It is an informal group of creditor governments from major industrialized countries. The members of the Paris Club that participated in the restructuring of Afghanistan's debt were Germany, Russia and the U.S.
The United States and other countries belonging to the Paris Club of creditors on Wednesday agreed to cancel debt owed by Afghanistan to its members. “Today's decision represents a great achievement for Afghanistan and reflects the international community's acknowledgment of the great strides the country has made in strengthening its economy”, said the U.S. State Department.
While the U.S. said lifting the debt burden inherited by the Afghan government marked a crucial step on Afghanistan's road to economic sustainability, the Paris Club added that Afghanistan had committed to allocate the resources freed by the present debt relief to priority areas identified in the country's poverty reduction strategy and to achieve Millennium Development Goals.
With the accord signed, Afghanistan, a member of the enhanced Heavily-Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, would see the implementation of “completion point treatment,” said the State Department. This implies the cancellation of an estimated $1.6 billion in debt from the Paris Club, as well as the IMF, World Bank and other creditors. As per the debt relief plan, this process will ultimately result in a “96 per cent reduction of the debt inherited by Afghanistan's government,” which was estimated at $11.6 billion in 2006.
After the debt cancellation, the Paris Club said it welcomed Afghanistan's commitment “to seek comparable treatment from all their other external creditors including other creditor countries”. Afghanistan further won praise from the Paris Club for its performance under an International Monetary Fund programme and its progress on implementing economic reforms in a “tremendously challenging” environment.
The breakthrough for Afghanistan comes after years of careful debt and macroeconomic management — since 2002 technical advisors worked with the Afghan Ministry of Finance to streamline the budget process, improve the payment system for government employees, restructure Afghanistan's debt, and establish a Debt Management Unit within the Ministry of Finance, according to official reports.
The Paris Club was formed in 1956. It is an informal group of creditor governments from major industrialized countries. The members of the Paris Club that participated in the restructuring of Afghanistan's debt were Germany, Russia and the U.S.
Labels: Afghanistan, debt, Paris Club, United States
U.S., Pakistan to hold dialogue
From The Hindu
The United States and Pakistan will hold their first strategic dialogue at the ministerial level in Washington DC on March 24, it was announced here. The talks will be co-chaired by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Pakistani Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi.
According to a release, the main topics of discussion will be economic development, water and energy, education, communications and public diplomacy, agriculture, and security.
Additionally, deputy spokesman at the State Department Mark Toner, said: “Obviously, we're talking about … Afghanistan, the situation there, the spill-over into the FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas] and how to really better engage. And in fact, we've seen some successes on that front in recent weeks on terrorism.”
The State Department confirmed that both governments will come to the table to discuss issues of common concern and shared responsibility.
The United States and Pakistan will hold their first strategic dialogue at the ministerial level in Washington DC on March 24, it was announced here. The talks will be co-chaired by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Pakistani Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi.
According to a release, the main topics of discussion will be economic development, water and energy, education, communications and public diplomacy, agriculture, and security.
Additionally, deputy spokesman at the State Department Mark Toner, said: “Obviously, we're talking about … Afghanistan, the situation there, the spill-over into the FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas] and how to really better engage. And in fact, we've seen some successes on that front in recent weeks on terrorism.”
The State Department confirmed that both governments will come to the table to discuss issues of common concern and shared responsibility.
Labels: Hillary Clinton, Pakistan, Strategic Dialogue, United States
U.S. visit successful: Sharma
From The Hindu
Touching upon the outcome of a wide range of trade and investment related interactions between India and the United States Industry Minister Anand Sharma, on Thursday said, “I believe through these meetings we have been able to build the groundwork of an excellent trade and commercial outcome for the forthcoming visit of President Obama to India.”
A key achievement that came during this visit to the U.S. was the “Framework for Cooperation on Trade and Investment,” which was signed by Mr. Sharma and the U.S. Trade Representative Ronald Kirk on Wednesday. The agreement aims to strengthen bilateral cooperation between India and the U.S., building on rapid growth between the two countries in recent years, according to an official statement.
The signing of the Framework and the announcement of the Bilateral Cooperation on Small- and Medium-Enterprise Development came during the meeting of the Private Sector Advisory Group (PSAG) which was convened in Washington this week.
Addressing the press in Washington Mr. Sharma said “My meetings have been useful, I can term it as a successful visit because we have taken forward what we had discussed at the Indo-U.S. Trade Policy Forum which had met in New Delhi in the third week of October 2009.”
India and the U.S. had then agreed to negotiate and finalise the Framework and undertake a number of initiatives for increasing opportunities for private sector partnerships “in infrastructure, green technologies, geo-technologies, innovation, creating awareness on IPR; also for bilateral cooperation in energy, in information technology, environmental services industries and working empower women and disadvantaged groups, and small and medium enterprise development,” Mr. Sharma said.
Underscoring the focus on Small and Medium Enterprises, he added, “Ron Kirk and I have also announced the launch of an Indo-U.S. initiative integrating U.S. and Indian small businesses into the global supply chain. This initiative aims to expand trade and job creating opportunities for the U.S. and Indian small and medium sized companies.”
Industrialist and President of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) Venu Srinivasan said to The Hindu that at the outset it may be preferable that this initiative focus on medium-sized enterprises only, given the high transactions costs of international joint ventures, something that “smaller companies may not have the wherewithal for”.
Mr. Sharma also emphasised India’s position on the need to take forward the ongoing Doha Round of the WTO. He said that he had impressed upon the officials he met in the U.S. the need to “enhance global trade by putting in place an ambitious but also fair and equitable multilateral trade regime which would strengthen global commerce at a time when the world was challenged by severe economic crises.” Even the most conservative studies of trade place the annual addition to GDP that would result from the creation of a WTO-based trade regime at $600 bullion”, he added.
Agriculture also featured prominently in Mr. Sharma’s meetings in Washington, wherein he said India considered “agricultural cooperation and food security… important for our bilateral engagement and significantly important for the world considering the fact that in the first decade of the 21{+s}{+t} century there is hunger, there are more people globally who have been pushed into the net of hunger because of what has happened in the last two years.”
Touching upon the outcome of a wide range of trade and investment related interactions between India and the United States Industry Minister Anand Sharma, on Thursday said, “I believe through these meetings we have been able to build the groundwork of an excellent trade and commercial outcome for the forthcoming visit of President Obama to India.”
A key achievement that came during this visit to the U.S. was the “Framework for Cooperation on Trade and Investment,” which was signed by Mr. Sharma and the U.S. Trade Representative Ronald Kirk on Wednesday. The agreement aims to strengthen bilateral cooperation between India and the U.S., building on rapid growth between the two countries in recent years, according to an official statement.
The signing of the Framework and the announcement of the Bilateral Cooperation on Small- and Medium-Enterprise Development came during the meeting of the Private Sector Advisory Group (PSAG) which was convened in Washington this week.
Addressing the press in Washington Mr. Sharma said “My meetings have been useful, I can term it as a successful visit because we have taken forward what we had discussed at the Indo-U.S. Trade Policy Forum which had met in New Delhi in the third week of October 2009.”
India and the U.S. had then agreed to negotiate and finalise the Framework and undertake a number of initiatives for increasing opportunities for private sector partnerships “in infrastructure, green technologies, geo-technologies, innovation, creating awareness on IPR; also for bilateral cooperation in energy, in information technology, environmental services industries and working empower women and disadvantaged groups, and small and medium enterprise development,” Mr. Sharma said.
Underscoring the focus on Small and Medium Enterprises, he added, “Ron Kirk and I have also announced the launch of an Indo-U.S. initiative integrating U.S. and Indian small businesses into the global supply chain. This initiative aims to expand trade and job creating opportunities for the U.S. and Indian small and medium sized companies.”
Industrialist and President of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) Venu Srinivasan said to The Hindu that at the outset it may be preferable that this initiative focus on medium-sized enterprises only, given the high transactions costs of international joint ventures, something that “smaller companies may not have the wherewithal for”.
Mr. Sharma also emphasised India’s position on the need to take forward the ongoing Doha Round of the WTO. He said that he had impressed upon the officials he met in the U.S. the need to “enhance global trade by putting in place an ambitious but also fair and equitable multilateral trade regime which would strengthen global commerce at a time when the world was challenged by severe economic crises.” Even the most conservative studies of trade place the annual addition to GDP that would result from the creation of a WTO-based trade regime at $600 bullion”, he added.
Agriculture also featured prominently in Mr. Sharma’s meetings in Washington, wherein he said India considered “agricultural cooperation and food security… important for our bilateral engagement and significantly important for the world considering the fact that in the first decade of the 21{+s}{+t} century there is hunger, there are more people globally who have been pushed into the net of hunger because of what has happened in the last two years.”
Labels: "Framework for Cooperation on Trade and Investment, Anand Sharma, India, United States
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Obama to propose overhaul of education
From The Hindu
Stressing the urgent need for education reform in the United States, President Barack Obama said he would send Congress a blueprint on Monday for an updated Elementary and Secondary Education Act to overhaul the 'No Child Left Behind' programme.
“What this plan recognises is that while the federal government can play a leading role in encouraging the reforms and high standards we need, the impetus for that change will come from states, and from local schools and school districts,” he said. This formulation of the policy sets a high bar and also provides educators the flexibility to reach it, he added.
The President’s comments came even as the school education sector was dogged by multiple controversies in recent days.
First Kansas City, Missouri, announced that it would be shutting down almost half the schools in its inner city district – 28 out of 61 state schools – by the summer, owing to its inability to deal with a $50 million annual deficit. According to a report “angry parents repeatedly disrupted the vote at the school board meeting on Wednesday night demanding to know where their children will go.” The move would also leave almost 300 teachers and 400 other staff jobless.
Rewriting American history
Meanwhile in Texas, the State Board of Education literally rewrote American history earlier this week. Revealing a partisan political split, the Republican-controlled Board pushed through a 10-5 vote to adopt the new 10-year curriculum for 4.7 million students that would teach a more conservative version of U.S. history.
Texas, one of the biggest and most influential markets for textbook publishers, will now replace the word “democratic” in reference to the U.S. government with “constitutional republic”. It will also add references to “laws of nature and nature’s God”, reject lessons teaching the United States’ founding on the principle of religious freedom and remove references to “capitalism”, “capitalist” and “free market”, as they were said to have a “negative connotation”, instead, using “free enterprise” when referring to the U.S. economic system.
Indicating that many nations were passing the U.S. in education, Mr. Obama said, “Our competitors understand that the nation that out-educates us today will out-compete us tomorrow. Yet, too often we have failed to make inroads in reforming and strengthening our public education system — the debate mired in worn arguments hurled across entrenched divides.” This both risks our leadership as a nation and consigns millions of Americans to a lesser future, he warned.
Continuous improvement
Under the guidelines of the reformed No Child Left Behind policy, schools that achieved excellence or show real progress will be rewarded, and local districts will be encouraged to commit to change in schools that are clearly letting their students down. “For the majority of schools that fall in between — schools that do well but could do better — we will encourage continuous improvement to help keep our young people on track for a bright future: prepared for the jobs of the 21st century,” Mr. Obama said.
He explained that his plans for education reform would set an ambitious goal and that “all students should graduate from high school and be prepared for college and a career — no matter who you are or where you come from.”
Stressing the urgent need for education reform in the United States, President Barack Obama said he would send Congress a blueprint on Monday for an updated Elementary and Secondary Education Act to overhaul the 'No Child Left Behind' programme.
“What this plan recognises is that while the federal government can play a leading role in encouraging the reforms and high standards we need, the impetus for that change will come from states, and from local schools and school districts,” he said. This formulation of the policy sets a high bar and also provides educators the flexibility to reach it, he added.
The President’s comments came even as the school education sector was dogged by multiple controversies in recent days.
First Kansas City, Missouri, announced that it would be shutting down almost half the schools in its inner city district – 28 out of 61 state schools – by the summer, owing to its inability to deal with a $50 million annual deficit. According to a report “angry parents repeatedly disrupted the vote at the school board meeting on Wednesday night demanding to know where their children will go.” The move would also leave almost 300 teachers and 400 other staff jobless.
Rewriting American history
Meanwhile in Texas, the State Board of Education literally rewrote American history earlier this week. Revealing a partisan political split, the Republican-controlled Board pushed through a 10-5 vote to adopt the new 10-year curriculum for 4.7 million students that would teach a more conservative version of U.S. history.
Texas, one of the biggest and most influential markets for textbook publishers, will now replace the word “democratic” in reference to the U.S. government with “constitutional republic”. It will also add references to “laws of nature and nature’s God”, reject lessons teaching the United States’ founding on the principle of religious freedom and remove references to “capitalism”, “capitalist” and “free market”, as they were said to have a “negative connotation”, instead, using “free enterprise” when referring to the U.S. economic system.
Indicating that many nations were passing the U.S. in education, Mr. Obama said, “Our competitors understand that the nation that out-educates us today will out-compete us tomorrow. Yet, too often we have failed to make inroads in reforming and strengthening our public education system — the debate mired in worn arguments hurled across entrenched divides.” This both risks our leadership as a nation and consigns millions of Americans to a lesser future, he warned.
Continuous improvement
Under the guidelines of the reformed No Child Left Behind policy, schools that achieved excellence or show real progress will be rewarded, and local districts will be encouraged to commit to change in schools that are clearly letting their students down. “For the majority of schools that fall in between — schools that do well but could do better — we will encourage continuous improvement to help keep our young people on track for a bright future: prepared for the jobs of the 21st century,” Mr. Obama said.
He explained that his plans for education reform would set an ambitious goal and that “all students should graduate from high school and be prepared for college and a career — no matter who you are or where you come from.”
Labels: Barack Obama, education reform, United States
Subscribe to Comments [Atom]
