Man Claiming To Be Taliban Spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid Denies Responsibility for Rabbani Murder

[SEE:  Zabihullah Mujahid Claimed Responsibility for Killing Peace/Reconciliation Talks]

Taliban deny assassination of Burhanuddin Rabbani

KHAAMA PRESS | Afghan Online


Taliban group in Afghanistan following an statement denied being involved in assassination of former Afghan president and Head of Afghan High Peace Council Burhanuddin Rabbani.

Zabiullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the Taliban group in the statement said, the Taliban group is not aware of the assassination of former Afghan president Burhanuddin Rabbani.

High ranking Afghan officials including Afghan president Hamid Karzai condemned the assassination of Burhanuddin Rabbani and regarded the assassination to the enemies of Afghanistan and Afghan people.

No other group has so far claimed responsibility behind the assassination of former Afghan president and Head of Afghan High Peace Council, Burhanuddin.

Obama U.N. speech transcript

Obama U.N. speech transcript: Full text (as delivered)

New York, New York

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, fellow delegates, ladies and gentlemen: It is a great honor for me to be here today. I would like to talk to you about a subject that is at the heart of the United Nations — the pursuit of peace in an imperfect world.

War and conflict have been with us since the beginning of civilizations. But in the first part of the 20th century, the advance of modern weaponry led to death on a staggering scale. It was this killing that compelled the founders of this body to build an institution that was focused not just on ending one war, but on averting others; a union of sovereign states that would seek to prevent conflict, while also addressing its causes.

No American did more to pursue this objective than President Franklin Roosevelt. He knew that a victory in war was not enough. As he said at one of the very first meetings on the founding of the United Nations, “We have got to make, not merely peace, but a peace that will last.”

The men and women who built this institution understood that peace is more than just the absence of war. A lasting peace — for nations and for individuals — depends on a sense of justice and opportunity, of dignity and freedom. It depends on struggle and sacrifice, on compromise, and on a sense of common humanity.

One delegate to the San Francisco Conference that led to the creation of the United Nations put it well: “Many people,” she said, “have talked as if all that has to be done to get peace was to say loudly and frequently that we loved peace and we hated war. Now we have learned that no matter how much we love peace and hate war, we cannot avoid having war brought upon us if there are convulsions in other parts of the world.”

The fact is peace is hard. But our people demand it. Over nearly seven decades, even as the United Nations helped avert a third world war, we still live in a world scarred by conflict and plagued by poverty. Even as we proclaim our love for peace and our hatred of war, there are still convulsions in our world that endanger us all.

I took office at a time of two wars for the United States. Moreover, the violent extremists who drew us into war in the first place — Osama bin Laden, and his al Qaeda organization — remained at large. Today, we’ve set a new direction.

At the end of this year, America’s military operation in Iraq will be over. We will have a normal relationship with a sovereign nation that is a member of the community of nations. That equal partnership will be strengthened by our support for Iraq — for its government and for its security forces, for its people and for their aspirations.

As we end the war in Iraq, the United States and our coalition partners have begun a transition in Afghanistan. Between now and 2014, an increasingly capable Afghan government and security forces will step forward to take responsibility for the future of their country. As they do, we are drawing down our own forces, while building an enduring partnership with the Afghan people.

So let there be no doubt: The tide of war is receding. When I took office, roughly 180,000 Americans were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. By the end of this year, that number will be cut in half, and it will continue to decline. This is critical for the sovereignty of Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s also critical to the strength of the United States as we build our nation at home.

Moreover, we are poised to end these wars from a position of strength. Ten years ago, there was an open wound and twisted steel, a broken heart in the center of this city. Today, as a new tower is rising at Ground Zero, it symbolizes New York’s renewal, even as al Qaeda is under more pressure than ever before. Its leadership has been degraded. And Osama bin Laden, a man who murdered thousands of people from dozens of countries, will never endanger the peace of the world again.

So, yes, this has been a difficult decade. But today, we stand at a crossroads of history with the chance to move decisively in the direction of peace. To do so, we must return to the wisdom of those who created this institution. The United Nations’ Founding Charter calls upon us, “to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security.” And Article 1 of this General Assembly’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights reminds us that, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and in rights.” Those bedrock beliefs — in the responsibility of states, and the rights of men and women — must be our guide.

And in that effort, we have reason to hope. This year has been a time of extraordinary transformation. More nations have stepped forward to maintain international peace and security. And more individuals are claiming their universal right to live in freedom and dignity.

Think about it: One year ago, when we met here in New York, the prospect of a successful referendum in South Sudan was in doubt. But the international community overcame old divisions to support the agreement that had been negotiated to give South Sudan self-determination. And last summer, as a new flag went up in Juba, former soldiers laid down their arms, men and women wept with joy, and children finally knew the promise of looking to a future that they will shape.

One year ago, the people of Côte D’Ivoire approached a landmark election. And when the incumbent lost, and refused to respect the results, the world refused to look the other way. U.N. peacekeepers were harassed, but they did not leave their posts. The Security Council, led by the United States and Nigeria and France, came together to support the will of the people. And Côte D’Ivoire is now governed by the man who was elected to lead.

One year ago, the hopes of the people of Tunisia were suppressed. But they chose the dignity of peaceful protest over the rule of an iron fist. A vendor lit a spark that took his own life, but he ignited a movement. In a face of a crackdown, students spelled out the word, “freedom.” The balance of fear shifted from the ruler to those that he ruled. And now the people of Tunisia are preparing for elections that will move them one step closer to the democracy that they deserve.

One year ago, Egypt had known one President for nearly 30 years. But for 18 days, the eyes of the world were glued to Tahrir Square, where Egyptians from all walks of life — men and women, young and old, Muslim and Christian — demanded their universal rights. We saw in those protesters the moral force of non-violence that has lit the world from Delhi to Warsaw, from Selma to South Africa — and we knew that change had come to Egypt and to the Arab world.

One year ago, the people of Libya were ruled by the world’s longest-serving dictator. But faced with bullets and bombs and a dictator who threatened to hunt them down like rats, they showed relentless bravery. We will never forget the words of the Libyan who stood up in those early days of the revolution and said, “Our words are free now.” It’s a feeling you can’t explain. Day after day, in the face of bullets and bombs, the Libyan people refused to give back that freedom. And when they were threatened by the kind of mass atrocity that often went unchallenged in the last century, the United Nations lived up to its charter. The Security Council authorized all necessary measures to prevent a massacre. The Arab League called for this effort; Arab nations joined a NATO-led coalition that halted Qaddafi’s forces in their tracks.

In the months that followed, the will of the coalition proved unbreakable, and the will of the Libyan people could not be denied. Forty-two years of tyranny was ended in six months. From Tripoli to Misurata to Benghazi — today, Libya is free. Yesterday, the leaders of a new Libya took their rightful place beside us, and this week, the United States is reopening our embassy in Tripoli.

This is how the international community is supposed to work — nations standing together for the sake of peace and security, and individuals claiming their rights. Now, all of us have a responsibility to support the new Libya — the new Libyan government as they confront the challenge of turning this moment of promise into a just and lasting peace for all Libyans.

So this has been a remarkable year. The Qaddafi regime is over. Gbagbo, Ben Ali, Mubarak are no longer in power. Osama bin Laden is gone, and the idea that change could only come through violence has been buried with him. Something is happening in our world. The way things have been is not the way that they will be. The humiliating grip of corruption and tyranny is being pried open. Dictators are on notice. Technology is putting power into the hands of the people. The youth are delivering a powerful rebuke to dictatorship, and rejecting the lie that some races, some peoples, some religions, some ethnicities do not desire democracy. The promise written down on paper — “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” — is closer at hand.

But let us remember: Peace is hard. Peace is hard. Progress can be reversed. Prosperity comes slowly. Societies can split apart. The measure of our success must be whether people can live in sustained freedom, dignity, and security. And the United Nations and its member states must do their part to support those basic aspirations. And we have more work to do.

In Iran, we’ve seen a government that refuses to recognize the rights of its own people. As we meet here today, men and women and children are being tortured, detained and murdered by the Syrian regime. Thousands have been killed, many during the holy time of Ramadan. Thousands more have poured across Syria’s borders. The Syrian people have shown dignity and courage in their pursuit of justice — protesting peacefully, standing silently in the streets, dying for the same values that this institution is supposed to stand for. And the question for us is clear: Will we stand with the Syrian people, or with their oppressors?

Already, the United States has imposed strong sanctions on Syria’s leaders. We supported a transfer of power that is responsive to the Syrian people. And many of our allies have joined in this effort. But for the sake of Syria — and the peace and security of the world — we must speak with one voice. There’s no excuse for inaction. Now is the time for the United Nations Security Council to sanction the Syrian regime, and to stand with the Syrian people.

Throughout the region, we will have to respond to the calls for change. In Yemen, men, women and children gather by the thousands in towns and city squares every day with the hope that their determination and spilled blood will prevail over a corrupt system. America supports those aspirations. We must work with Yemen’s neighbors and our partners around the world to seek a path that allows for a peaceful transition of power from President Saleh, and a movement to free and fair elections as soon as possible.

In Bahrain, steps have been taken toward reform and accountability. We’re pleased with that, but more is required. America is a close friend of Bahrain, and we will continue to call on the government and the main opposition bloc — the Wifaq — to pursue a meaningful dialogue that brings peaceful change that is responsive to the people. We believe the patriotism that binds Bahrainis together must be more powerful than the sectarian forces that would tear them apart. It will be hard, but it is possible.

We believe that each nation must chart its own course to fulfill the aspirations of its people, and America does not expect to agree with every party or person who expresses themselves politically. But we will always stand up for the universal rights that were embraced by this Assembly. Those rights depend on elections that are free and fair; on governance that is transparent and accountable; respect for the rights of women and minorities; justice that is equal and fair. That is what our people deserve. Those are the elements of peace that can last.

Moreover, the United States will continue to support those nations that transition to democracy — with greater trade and investment — so that freedom is followed by opportunity. We will pursue a deeper engagement with governments, but also with civil society — students and entrepreneurs, political parties and the press. We have banned those who abuse human rights from traveling to our country. And we’ve sanctioned those who trample on human rights abroad. And we will always serve as a voice for those who’ve been silenced.

Now, I know, particularly this week, that for many in this hall, there’s one issue that stands as a test for these principles and a test for American foreign policy, and that is the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

One year ago, I stood at this podium and I called for an independent Palestine. I believed then, and I believe now, that the Palestinian people deserve a state of their own. But what I also said is that a genuine peace can only be realized between the Israelis and the Palestinians themselves. One year later, despite extensive efforts by America and others, the parties have not bridged their differences. Faced with this stalemate, I put forward a new basis for negotiations in May of this year. That basis is clear. It’s well known to all of us here. Israelis must know that any agreement provides assurances for their security. Palestinians deserve to know the territorial basis of their state.

Now, I know that many are frustrated by the lack of progress. I assure you, so am I. But the question isn’t the goal that we seek — the question is how do we reach that goal. And I am convinced that there is no short cut to the end of a conflict that has endured for decades. Peace is hard work. Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations — if it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians — not us –- who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them: on borders and on security, on refugees and Jerusalem.

Ultimately, peace depends upon compromise among people who must live together long after our speeches are over, long after our votes have been tallied. That’s the lesson of Northern Ireland, where ancient antagonists bridged their differences. That’s the lesson of Sudan, where a negotiated settlement led to an independent state. And that is and will be the path to a Palestinian state — negotiations between the parties.

We seek a future where Palestinians live in a sovereign state of their own, with no limit to what they can achieve. There’s no question that the Palestinians have seen that vision delayed for too long. It is precisely because we believe so strongly in the aspirations of the Palestinian people that America has invested so much time and so much effort in the building of a Palestinian state, and the negotiations that can deliver a Palestinian state.

But understand this as well: America’s commitment to Israel’s security is unshakeable. Our friendship with Israel is deep and enduring. And so we believe that any lasting peace must acknowledge the very real security concerns that Israel faces every single day.

Let us be honest with ourselves: Israel is surrounded by neighbors that have waged repeated wars against it. Israel’s citizens have been killed by rockets fired at their houses and suicide bombs on their buses. Israel’s children come of age knowing that throughout the region, other children are taught to hate them. Israel, a small country of less than eight million people, look out at a world where leaders of much larger nations threaten to wipe it off of the map. The Jewish people carry the burden of centuries of exile and persecution, and fresh memories of knowing that six million people were killed simply because of who they are. Those are facts. They cannot be denied.

The Jewish people have forged a successful state in their historic homeland. Israel deserves recognition. It deserves normal relations with its neighbors. And friends of the Palestinians do them no favors by ignoring this truth, just as friends of Israel must recognize the need to pursue a two-state solution with a secure Israel next to an independent Palestine.

That is the truth — each side has legitimate aspirations — and that’s part of what makes peace so hard. And the deadlock will only be broken when each side learns to stand in the other’s shoes; each side can see the world through the other’s eyes. That’s what we should be encouraging. That’s what we should be promoting.

This body — founded, as it was, out of the ashes of war and genocide, dedicated, as it is, to the dignity of every single person — must recognize the reality that is lived by both the Palestinians and the Israelis. The measure of our actions must always be whether they advance the right of Israeli and Palestinian children to live lives of peace and security and dignity and opportunity. And we will only succeed in that effort if we can encourage the parties to sit down, to listen to each other, and to understand each other’s hopes and each other’s fears. That is the project to which America is committed. There are no shortcuts. And that is what the United Nations should be focused on in the weeks and months to come.

Now, even as we confront these challenges of conflict and revolution, we must also recognize — we must also remind ourselves — that peace is not just the absence of war. True peace depends on creating the opportunity that makes life worth living. And to do that, we must confront the common enemies of humanity: nuclear weapons and poverty, ignorance and disease. These forces corrode the possibility of lasting peace and together we’re called upon to confront them.

To lift the specter of mass destruction, we must come together to pursue the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. Over the last two years, we’ve begun to walk down that path. Since our Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, nearly 50 nations have taken steps to secure nuclear materials from terrorists and smugglers. Next March, a summit in Seoul will advance our efforts to lock down all of them. The New START Treaty between the United States and Russia will cut our deployed arsenals to the lowest level in half a century, and our nations are pursuing talks on how to achieve even deeper reductions. America will continue to work for a ban on the testing of nuclear weapons and the production of fissile material needed to make them.

And so we have begun to move in the right direction. And the United States is committed to meeting our obligations. But even as we meet our obligations, we’ve strengthened the treaties and institutions that help stop the spread of these weapons. And to do so, we must continue to hold accountable those nations that flout them.

The Iranian government cannot demonstrate that its program is peaceful. It has not met its obligations and it rejects offers that would provide it with peaceful nuclear power. North Korea has yet to take concrete steps towards abandoning its weapons and continues belligerent action against the South. There’s a future of greater opportunity for the people of these nations if their governments meet their international obligations. But if they continue down a path that is outside international law, they must be met with greater pressure and isolation. That is what our commitment to peace and security demands.

To bring prosperity to our people, we must promote the growth that creates opportunity. In this effort, let us not forget that we’ve made enormous progress over the last several decades. Closed societies gave way to open markets. Innovation and entrepreneurship has transformed the way we live and the things that we do. Emerging economies from Asia to the Americas have lifted hundreds of millions of people from poverty. It’s an extraordinary achievement. And yet, three years ago, we were confronted with the worst financial crisis in eight decades. And that crisis proved a fact that has become clearer with each passing year — our fates are interconnected. In a global economy, nations will rise, or fall, together.

And today, we confront the challenges that have followed on the heels of that crisis. Around the world recovery is still fragile. Markets remain volatile. Too many people are out of work. Too many others are struggling just to get by. We acted together to avert a depression in 2009. We must take urgent and coordinated action once more. Here in the United States, I’ve announced a plan to put Americans back to work and jumpstart our economy, at the same time as I’m committed to substantially reducing our deficits over time.

We stand with our European allies as they reshape their institutions and address their own fiscal challenges. For other countries, leaders face a different challenge as they shift their economy towards more self-reliance, boosting domestic demand while slowing inflation. So we will work with emerging economies that have rebounded strongly, so that rising standards of living create new markets that promote global growth. That’s what our commitment to prosperity demands.

To combat the poverty that punishes our children, we must act on the belief that freedom from want is a basic human right. The United States has made it a focus of our engagement abroad to help people to feed themselves. And today, as drought and conflict have brought famine to the Horn of Africa, our conscience calls on us to act. Together, we must continue to provide assistance, and support organizations that can reach those in need. And together, we must insist on unrestricted humanitarian access so that we can save the lives of thousands of men and women and children. Our common humanity is at stake. Let us show that the life of a child in Somalia is as precious as any other. That is what our commitment to our fellow human beings demand.

To stop disease that spreads across borders, we must strengthen our system of public health. We will continue the fight against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. We will focus on the health of mothers and of children. And we must come together to prevent, and detect, and fight every kind of biological danger — whether it’s a pandemic like H1N1, or a terrorist threat, or a treatable disease.

This week, America signed an agreement with the World Health Organization to affirm our commitment to meet this challenge. And today, I urge all nations to join us in meeting the HWO’s [sic] goal of making sure all nations have core capacities to address public health emergencies in place by 2012. That is what our commitment to the health of our people demands.

To preserve our planet, we must not put off action that climate change demands. We have to tap the power of science to save those resources that are scarce. And together, we must continue our work to build on the progress made in Copenhagen and Cancun, so that all the major economies here today follow through on the commitments that were made. Together, we must work to transform the energy that powers our economies, and support others as they move down that path. That is what our commitment to the next generation demands.

And to make sure our societies reach their potential, we must allow our citizens to reach theirs. No country can afford the corruption that plagues the world like a cancer. Together, we must harness the power of open societies and open economies. That’s why we’ve partnered with countries from across the globe to launch a new partnership on open government that helps ensure accountability and helps to empower citizens. No country should deny people their rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion, but also no country should deny people their rights because of who they love, which is why we must stand up for the rights of gays and lesbians everywhere.

And no country can realize its potential if half its population cannot reach theirs. This week, the United States signed a new Declaration on Women’s Participation. Next year, we should each announce the steps we are taking to break down the economic and political barriers that stand in the way of women and girls. This is what our commitment to human progress demands.

I know there’s no straight line to that progress, no single path to success. We come from different cultures, and carry with us different histories. But let us never forget that even as we gather here as heads of different governments, we represent citizens who share the same basic aspirations — to live with dignity and freedom; to get an education and pursue opportunity; to love our families, and love and worship our God; to live in the kind of peace that makes life worth living.

It is the nature of our imperfect world that we are forced to learn these lessons over and over again. Conflict and repression will endure so long as some people refuse to do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Yet that is precisely why we have built institutions like this — to bind our fates together, to help us recognize ourselves in each other — because those who came before us believed that peace is preferable to war, and freedom is preferable to suppression, and prosperity is preferable to poverty. That’s the message that comes not from capitals, but from citizens, from our people.

And when the cornerstone of this very building was put in place, President Truman came here to New York and said, “The United Nations is essentially an expression of the moral nature of man’s aspirations.” The moral nature of man’s aspirations. As we live in a world that is changing at a breathtaking pace, that’s a lesson that we must never forget.

Peace is hard, but we know that it is possible. So, together, let us be resolved to see that it is defined by our hopes and not by our fears. Together, let us make peace, but a peace, most importantly, that will last.

Thank you very much.

Obama UN speech sparks angry Palestinian protests

Obama UN speech sparks angry Palestinian protests

Palestinians burn signs against US President Barack Obama during a protest in the West Bank city of Ramallah . (AFP Photo/Abbas Momani)

Palestinians burn signs against US President Barack Obama during a protest in the West Bank city of Ramallah . (AFP Photo/Abbas Momani)

RAMALLAH, Palestinian Territories: Angry Palestinians on Thursday protested in the streets of Ramallah and Gaza after a UN speech by US President Barack Obama which was seen as unashamedly pro-Israel.

More than 1,000 Palestinians carrying signs denouncing Obama gathered outside the West Bank headquarters of Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas before marching into the city centre shouting: “It’s shameful for America to support the occupation.”

And in Gaza City, around 300 women held a protest outside the UN headquarters, shouting anti-Obama slogans as Hamas security forces watched them without intervening.

Obama’s address to the UN General Assembly, in which he reiterated his opposition to the Palestinian bid for UN membership, and empathised with Israel’s struggle in a hostile region without mentioning the occupation or Jewish settlements, has sparked almost unanimous condemnation across the Palestinian territories.

“America is the head of the snake,” bellowed demonstrators in Ramallah as they held up signs deriding Obama for his address, in which he warned the Palestinians there would be “no shortcuts” to peace.

“Shame on those who pretend to be democratic,” read one placard as the throng marched to the city centre, where on Wednesday more than 15,000 people had gathered for a festival of support for the UN membership campaign.

The Palestinian workers union said it would call for rallies outside US embassies across the Arab world on Friday.

Commentators, politicians and ordinary people alike said Obama’s speech, which came just two days before Abbas formally requests UN membership for a Palestinian state, proved Washington was incapable of serving as an impartial broker in matters related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“Obama’s speech reflects the American bias towards the Israeli occupation and it proves that the continuing Arab and Palestinian bet on the Americans is wrong,” said Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for Gaza’s Hamas rulers.

“We call for the adoption of a national Palestinian strategy based on self reliance and the Arab and Muslim world in light of this American and Israeli arrogance.”

Commentators in the three main Palestinian newspapers all took the same angry and disappointed tone over the US president’s remarks.

“Obama’s speech… was a disappointment to those who had been waiting for something new from him, provoking extreme outrage and anger,” wrote Talal Okal in the Al-Ayyam daily, accusing the US leader of “deepening the bias towards Israel’s narrative, positions and policies”.

“What he offered in his speech goes so far as to show compliance with, and full acceptance of, the policies and narrative and desires of Israel,” he said.

“He put the Jews and Israelis in the position of victims who are surrounded by hatred and wars against them by Arab countries, but this speech of his contained nothing of the suffering of the Palestinians.”

Al-Ayyam newspaper carried a cartoon showing Obama delivering his address with a speech bubble in the shape of a Star of David coming from his mouth.

Writing in Al-Quds, the biggest-selling Palestinian newspaper, Arab Israeli MP Ahmed Tibi said Obama’s speech had tried to cosy up to the wave of uprisings sweeping the region while completely ignoring the plight of the Palestinians.

“In the same speech in which Obama praised the uprisings and revolutions by the Arab people against tyranny and oppression, he declined to even mention Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land,” he wrote.

Similar complaints could be heard on the Palestinian street.

“When Obama came into the White House as president, his positions and aspirations gave us hope,” said Mohammed Zeidan, a school director in Ramallah, who accused the US president of being “fair to every Arab country except the Palestinian people.”

“But Obama showed the whole world yesterday that America cannot be anywhere but by Israel’s side always and he is no different from the American heads of state who came before him.”

Kyrgyzstan To Stop Russian TV Broadcasts Until October Presidential Election

In Kyrgyzstan, from September 25 to stop the broadcasting of Russian TV channels


On September 25 in Kyrgyzstan will be stopped rebroadcasting Russian First TV Channel and “Russia”. This measure is being undertaken by operators of cable television and JSC “Kyrgyztelecom” during the campaign to meet the requirements of the law “On elections of President of the KR and Jogorku Kenesh [parliament] KR”.

Paragraph 16 of Article 22 of the Act, in effect, imposes on the operators responsible for censorship, but companies are not repeaters, they do not know the criteria for censorship, and they see a way out only in the complete cessation of broadcasting foreign TV channels, clarified on September 22 at press conference in Bishkek, the head of the Public Foundation “Civil Initiative on Internet Policy” Tattoo Mambetalieva.

Director of Cable Television “Al TV” Vasily Goncharov underlined that the law does not consider the specifics of the cable TV. “First of all, we do not have equipment for recording and editing programs. Secondly, we have no qualified staff to monitor content. Third, according to the contracts with foreign TV channels, we have no right to make changes in the television signals. We do not know what and how we cut out, so we are cheaper and easier to disable the broadcasting of foreign channels, “- said Goncharov.

Answering the question “Fergana”, indicating that the CEC, which is still posted in the September 12th Parliament inquiry to clarify how to run rule of law, press conference participants reported that the response is still awaited.

Telecom operators not exclude the likelihood of claims against foreign media, since treaties have the status of the international relay, and the requirements of the new law, in effect, forced to violate international law. Repeaters sent to the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court petition that the provision of the law unconstitutional.

“First, it violates the rights of citizens. Second, it can be seen as censorship. Perhaps for these elections, we do not have time to answer the petition, but the public should know that we do not accept this position, “- said the head of the Association of operators of Kyrgyzstan Jyrgalbek Kasymov.

While it is known that from September 25 to completely stop retransmission of the two main Russian TV channels, the question for the rest of the foreign media still being decided as a question about the license fee recalculation.

Recall the presidential elections in Kyrgyzstan set for October 30, 2011.

EA Ivashchenko

The international news agency “Fergana”

Russia dominates ‘great game’ with fresh moves

Ali Kayalar
ISTANBUL- Hürriyet Daily News
Moscow is gaining more influence through new deals to provide natural gas for Europe and might become the sole supplier in the continent soon, experts say.
Russia, which has constructed pipelines, and knows how to play the game, Necdet Pamir says.
Russia, which has constructed pipelines, and knows how to play the game, Necdet Pamir says.

Russia’s Gazprom has taken another step forward in a fierce competition to carry natural gas to the European Union after a hot week of deals, share transfers and critical decisions.

The EU’s decision last week to “directly” negotiate a treaty with Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan was a move that weakened Turkey’s position in both buying and transferring natural gas to Europe, according to Necdet Pamir, a board member at the World Energy Council Turkish National Committee.

Turkey has already signed “unbeneficial” accords regarding Nabucco, the languishing project to carry Caspian gas to Europe, according to Pamir. “Nabucco is an important project for both Europe and Turkey in terms of supply security,” he told the Hürriyet Daily News, adding that current contracts are not in Turkey’s favor.

“The state-owned Turkish Pipeline Company, or BOTAŞ, correctly insisted on better transfer prices and the right to sell the gas in a bid to turn the country into an energy hub,” Pamir said. “Unfortunately, the government could not achieve these benefits.”

Azerbaijani Industry and Energy Minister Natig Aliyev said last week that the remaining conflicts between Turkey and his country about a supply deal are over costs.

Stronger Moscow

Russia meanwhile reacted harshly to the EU’s decision to negotiate directly with Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. “Outside attempts to meddle in affairs in the Caspian … could very seriously complicate the situation in this region [and] negatively affect the ongoing five-party negotiations on the Caspian Sea’s legal status,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said on its website.

In another development, Russian behemoth Gazprom strengthened Moscow’s hand by adding France’s EDF and Germany’s Wintershall to its South Stream, and launching the Nord Stream. Russia announced that the first unit of Nord Stream, which will transfer gas to Germany via the Baltic Sea, bypassing Ukraine, will be finished by the end of this year. The project is expected to cut gas carried over Ukraine by 50 percent.

An energy market professional close to the issue said that with Nord Stream, which is a more concrete project than either South Stream or Nabucco, Russia is nearing its goal to become almost the sole natural gas supplier for Europe.

“Domestic production in Europe is falling since the resource in Norway is old,” the source told the Daily News, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Europe will have to meet 74 percent of its natural gas [needs] from Russia by 2030.”

Regarding possible suppliers of gas for the Nabucco pipeline, Pamir said Iranian resources can scarcely meet domestic demand of 137 billion cubic meters annually. “Iraq, another possible supplier, is facing political problems,” Pamir added.

Commenting on other handicaps of Nabucco, Pamir said the project’s initial cost was calculated at 4.6 million euros. “Today it is estimated at more than 12 billion euros,” he said.

“Russia has constructed pipelines and knows how to play this game,” Pamir said. “The U.S. is rising with shale gas, but Russia has the potential to become the main actor once again.”

Erdogan says Cyprus drilling is madness

Erdogan says Cyprus drilling is madness

By George Psyllides
Tayyip Erdogan said Cyprus’ drilling for gas in the mediterranean is madness

TURKEY signed an agreement delineating its maritime boundaries with the breakaway Turkish Cypriot state yesterday, paving the way for Turkey to start its own offshore oil exploration in the eastern Mediterranean.

On the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, Turkish Prime Minister Tayip Erdogan announced the deal with the Turkish Cypriots, reported by the Turkish press as a “continental shelf agreement”.

“We are protesting Greek Cypriots’ irresponsible, provocative and unilateral step,” Erdogan was quoted saying.

The hawkish Turkish leader also sent out a warning to international companies working with Cyprus, threatening a blanket ban on energy projects and possible sanctions.

“We want to warn international oil and natural gas companies working with the Greek Cypriots. The Turkish Energy Ministry has begun work to not accept these companies in the various energy projects in Turkey and also to have some sanctions,” said Erdogan.

On a calmer note, the Turkish PM said Turkey would act wisely and not give ammunition “to those hoping for tension and crisis”.

Government spokesman Stefanos Stefanou yesterday accused Turkey of committing “yet another unlawful act” with an “illegal entity, the pseudostate, which has been condemned by UN resolutions”.

Speaking from New York, he said: “With this violation, Turkey is trying to obstruct the Cyprus Republic from exercising a self-evident right, recognised by the whole of the international community.”

While the international community calls on Turkey to respect international law, unfortunately, Turkey continues to violate it, he added.

Before the signing of the pact, Erdogan met with US President Barack Obama for an hour and a half. Obama reportedly called on Erdogan to reduce tensions in the eastern Mediterranean.

Speaking after the meeting, Erdogan was quoted by Turkish state news agency Anatolian saying: “The Greek Cypriot administration and Israel are engaging in oil exploration madness in the Mediterranean.

“Actually, the Greek Cypriot administration’s drilling activity is nothing but sabotage of the negotiation process between Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots,” he added.

Israel and Cyprus are exploring for gas in the eastern Mediterranean, and Israel has laid claim to a massive deepwater gas field discovered in 2009.

Turkey has said it would carry out its own energy surveys with the breakaway Turkish Cypriot state — under escort by its war ships if necessary – if Cyprus pressed ahead with drilling.

And Erdogan again emphasised Turkish military prowess: “Our assault boats and frigates are already in the region,” Anatolian quoted him as saying.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was due to meet with Erdogan last night in New York. President Demetris Christofias has asked Ban to raise the issue of Turkish threats against Cyprus during their meeting.

British High Commissioner Matthew Kidd told the state broadcaster yesterday that Britain sees “Cyprus’ legal right to conduct drilling in its exclusive economic zone as unquestioned”, adding that he hoped “the issue can be handled in a way that helps to lead towards the intercommunal settlement that we all want to see rather than away from it”.

As Turkey continued to launch threats, exploratory offshore gas drilling in Cyprus’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) was yesterday expected to go deeper.

“We have passed the first stage … tonight (yesterday) they will proceed with the second stage, to 900 metres,” Solon Kassinis, the energy service chief, told London Greek Radio (LGR) “Everything is proceeding well and we hope to have positive results in finding hydrocarbon deposits.”

Texas-based Noble Energy which is carrying out the drilling operations for Cyprus, has been conducting offshore drills in the eastern Mediterranean for Israel since 1998.

Kassinis said it could take as many as 73 days for the first results to be known.

He reiterated that any natural resources found in Cyprus’ EEZ would benefit all legitimate citizens of the Republic of Cyprus.

“Nobody questions the fact that this wealth would be to the benefit of all legitimate inhabitants of Cyprus. We have expressed this position several times,” Kassinis said, in reference to Turkish Cypriots.

But the government’s pledges that the island’s two communities will share any potential wealth after a solution of the Cyprus problem do not seem to persuade Turkey.

At the same time, reports yesterday suggested Lebanon is also irked by the developments.

Lebanon accused Israel in January of breaking international law by allowing energy firms to explore for offshore gas in the absence of an agreement between the two countries on their maritime border.

A similar agreement signed with Cyprus has not yet been ratified by the Lebanese parliament.

In July, Israel outlined maritime economic borders that challenged what it said were boundaries submitted by Lebanon to the United Nations in a dispute fuelled by the massive gas finds in the region.

The map conflicts with a Lebanese submission from 2010 that gives Israel less maritime space, including areas that touch on recently discovered untapped gas reserves.

Both sides point to the United Nations for arbitration, but UN officials have been sceptical about the world body’s options.

Repuglicans Replay Favorite Gambit, Threatening Govt. Shutdown, Once Again

House rejects temporary funding measure, raising shutdown risk

House Republican leadershipMembers of the House Republican leadership talk with reporters after a party conference meeting.(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)
By Lisa Mascaro
The threat of a government shutdown intensified as the GOP-led House failed to muster a majority to approve legislation to fund the government after Republicans insisted that federal disaster aid be paid for with spending cuts elsewhere.

In a surprise defeat, the legislation was narrowly rejected Wednesday after a tense afternoon of vote counting. House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) had hoped to avoid another budget battle after the summer’s debt ceiling fight and an earlier threat of government shutdown left voters sour on both Republicans and Democrats in Congress.

But the annual spending bill ran into trouble on two fronts, as conservatives rejected the spending level as too high and Democrats opposed the GOP approach to FEMA aid. Democratic leaders urged their rank-and-file to vote no.

Congress has just days to resolve the impasse, as lawmakers are expected to recess Friday for next week’s Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashana. The new fiscal year begins Oct. 1.

The House bill was already on a collisions course with the Senate, where the Democratic majority rejected the requirement that federal disaster aid be offset with spending cuts elsewhere — namely, an alternative-energy vehicle manufacturing program.

After a year of floods, tornadoes and recent hurricanes and wildfires, the Federal Emergency Management Agency is about to run out of funds — as soon as Monday.