Russia halts Kaliningrad missile deployment :report

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russia has suspended the deployment of its Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad due to a change in U.S. missile defense policy in Europe, Interfax news agency quoted a military official as saying on Wednesday.

"The implementation of these plans has been halted in connection with the fact that the new U.S. administration is not rushing through plans to deploy" elements of its missile defense shield in eastern Europe, Interfax quoted the unnamed official in the Russian military's general staff as saying.

President Dmitry Medvedev said in November that Russia would deploy the missiles in its western outpost of Kaliningrad, which borders European Union member Poland, in response to the U.S. missile shield plans.

Washington says the plans, to deploy interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic, are intended to avert potential strikes from Iran and North Korea. Russia says the deployment is targeted against it.

The spat has helped to drive diplomatic ties to their lowest point since the Cold War.

But Russian officials have said they are encouraged by early signals from the new administration of U.S. President Barack Obama and hopeful of a fresh start in their relations.

A nominee for a top Pentagon post in the Obama administration said earlier this month the missile shield plan would be reviewed as part of a regular broad look at policy.

CIA Algeria station chief faces sex assault probe

WASHINGTON, (AFP) – Federal investigators have launched a probe of the CIA's former station chief in Algeria, the State Department said after US media reported allegations that he drugged and raped two women.

The station chief, a 41-year-old convert to Islam who was in his post since September 2007, was ordered home in October after two women came forward last year with separate allegations they were raped in the official's residence in Algiers, ABC News reported.

It said both women had provided sworn statements to federal prosecutors in preparation for a possible criminal case against the officer, with a grand jury likely to consider an indictment on sexual assault charges as early as next month.

"The US takes very seriously any accusations of misconduct involving any US personnel abroad," State Department acting spokesman Robert Wood said in a statement.

"The individual in question has returned to Washington and the US government is looking into the matter," Wood said, referring further media inquiries to the Justice Department.

A Central Intelligence Agency spokesperson would not name the agent, and refused to confirm to AFP that a Justice Department investigation of the station chief had been launched. Both the Justice Department and FBI declined to comment.

But in a statement, CIA director of public affairs Mark Mansfield said: "I can assure you that the Agency would take seriously, and follow up on, any allegations of impropriety."

The explosive allegations could potentially deal a major blow to the US image abroad at a time when President Barack Obama has called for "a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect" with the Muslim world.

Algeria in particular is seen as a hotspot because of the presence of Al-Qaeda's North African branch there. A suicide bombing in August in Issers, 37 miles (60 kilometers) east of Algiers, left 48 people dead.

The case "will be seen as the typical ugly American," former CIA officer Bob Baer told ABC News. "My question is how the CIA would not have picked up on this in their own regular reviews of CIA officers overseas."

According to an affidavit filed in federal court by the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service, a copy of which was posted on the Web by ABC News, the first alleged victim said she was raped by the officer in September 2007 after being invited to a party with US embassy employees at his residence.

She said that while there, she was served mixed drinks of cola and whiskey that were prepared out of her sight.

Later in the evening, after the final drink served by the officer, she suddenly felt ill and vomited, and woke up in the officer's house the next morning nude after being apparently raped, according to the affidavit. She said she had no recollection of having intercourse.

The second alleged victim described a similar incident that occurred in February 2008, according to the affidavit.

CNN said pills and other evidence, including about a dozen videotapes showing the officer engaged in sexual acts with women, some of whom are believed to have been in a semi-conscious state on the videos, turned up when a search warrant was executed on the officer's residence.

Officials told ABC that prosecutors have broadened the investigation to Egypt because the date on some tapes matched the time when the officer was posted in Cairo.

The affidavit said Valium and Xanax, drugs FBI toxicologists described as "commonly used to facilitate sexual assault," were found in the officer's home in Algiers.

"Drugs commonly referred to as date rape drugs are difficult to detect because the body rapidly metabolizes them," former FBI agent Brad Garrett told ABC News. "Many times women are not aware they were even assaulted until the next day."

When interviewed by diplomatic security investigators, the officer claimed he had "engaged in consensual sexual intercourse," according to the affidavit.

Algerian ambassador to the United Nations Mourad Benmehidi told ABC News that the US had not notified his government of the rape allegations or the criminal investigation.

George Mitchell and the Middle East

The senator will need all the skill and patience he brought to the Northern Irish peace process. But Hamas must be at the table

In the crowds of Washington's Union Station last week, I bumped into George Mitchell. We were both in the city for Barack Obama's inauguration, but at that point there was only speculation that George might be made US special envoy for the Middle East – it wasn't until I returned to Ireland that the appointment was confirmed.

President Obama in his inaugural address signaled a new direction for US foreign policy. The posting of George Mitchell and the referencing of his very significant role in the Irish peace process hint at a more focused engagement by the US in seeking to secure a peace settlement between Israel and the Palestinian people.

But as George and I both know from our separate but related experience in Northern Ireland, making peace is a difficult, exhausting and, at times, hugely frustrating process.

George Mitchell had been a very successful and influential Senate majority leader for the Democrats. He was known as someone who could broker a deal between opposing groups.

In January 1995, he became President Clinton's secretary of state on economic initiatives in Ireland and, later that year, he was appointed to chair the International Body on Arms Decommissioning. The report produced by this group in January 1996 contained six broad principles of democracy and non-violence, which became known as the Mitchell Principles.

But it is as the chair of the all-party negotiations that led to the Good Friday Agreement that George is best known in Ireland and elsewhere. Initially, the Unionists and the British government opposed his appointment. Neither wanted an independent person holding down such a key position.

When eventually George Mitchell made it to Castle Buildings in Belfast where the negotiations were to take place, the Unionists kept him waiting in a side room for two days while they debated whether he should be allowed into the room. And thereafter, they embarked on a constant campaign of challenging the ground rules and structure of the talks as a way of undermining him.

There was more to come. In late 1996, several London and Dublin newspapers carried headline stories alleging that Martha Pope, George Mitchell's chief aide, was having an affair with one of our senior negotiators, Gerry Kelly. The story was rubbish, but it had been deliberately planted by anonymous "security sources" to damage George Mitchell.

So, between interminable negotiations, almost weekly crises, dirty-tricks efforts from British securocrats and endless filibustering by the Unionists; not to mention the mindnumbing detail of a peace agreement, George Mitchell had his work cut out.

He patiently plotted a course through all of this. He brought to the process a legislative and judicial experience that saw the negotiations format changed from one of large cumbersome meetings to one of smaller groups of negotiators, usually involving the leader and deputy leader of the parties. This provided for a greater focus on the detail of the issues, and it facilitated a more workable and productive arrangement.

It also suited his particular style of getting things done. George spent a great deal of his time in side meetings with the parties. Throughout these, I found him to be goodnatured, humorous and tolerant. It is this experience that will stand him to good stead as he embarks on his journey to the Middle East.

Of course, a lot will depend on the terms of reference he has been given. Ultimately, however, no matter how good he might be, George Mitchell will not produce a negotiated agreement in the Middle East. That is for the Israeli government and the Palestinians. But to have any hope of achieving that goal, the US and the international community have to engage with this issue in a concentrated way and treat the participants on the basis of equality.

In the Irish peace process, the US involvement was generally seen as a good thing. That may not be so in the Middle East. That could be a complicating factor facing George Mitchell.

Moreover, if any renewed effort in the Middle East to reach an agreement is reduced by either side to a tactical game of winners and losers, in which the object is to use the negotiation process to inflict defeats, then it will not work. It will simply be a repeat of past mistakes and lost opportunities.

In a peace process, the goal must be an inclusive agreement that is acceptable to all sides, is doable, deliverable and sustainable. That means enemies and opponents creating space for each other. It means engaging in real conversations and seeking real solutions. It means accepting that dialogue is crucial and that means recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to choose their own leaders, their own representatives.

The Israeli government and other governments have to talk to Hamas.

The recent assault on Gaza is a brutal reminder of the destructive power of war and of the human cost of failure. It is time all of this was brought to an end.

But breaking the cycle of conflict will mean political leaders – Israeli and Palestinian – taking real risks for peace. They will need help and a real and unrelenting international effort to construct a durable peace settlement that provides for two states, but in particular, for a Palestinian state that is sustainable and viable.

Hamas officials signal willingness to negotiate

By STEVEN GUTKIN, Associated Press Writer

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – Senior officials in the Islamic group Hamas are indicating a willingness to negotiate a long-term truce with Israel as long as the borders of Gaza are opened to the rest of the world.

"We want to be part of the international community," Hamas leader Ghazi Hamad told The Associated Press at the Gaza-Egypt border, where he was coordinating Arab aid shipments. "I think Hamas has no interest now to increase the number of crises in Gaza or to challenge the world."

Hamas is trying hard to flex its muscles in the aftermath of Israel's punishing onslaught in the Gaza Strip, doling out cash, vowing revenge and declaring victory over Zionist aggression. But AP interviews with Hamad and two other Hamas leaders in the war-ravaged territory they rule suggest some of that might be more bluster than reality — and the group may be ready for some serious deal making.

That raises the question of whether Hamas, which receives much of its funding and weapons from Tehran, can be coaxed out of Iran's orbit. That question looks less preposterous than it did before President Barack Obama began extending olive branches to the Muslim world and Israel's Gaza offensive reshuffled Mideast politics.

Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas prime minister in Gaza, said in comments aired Thursday that the Palestinians must heal their internal rifts and he welcomed aid for Gaza from any source. He also seemed to leave a door open for better relations with the U.S.

"I think it is not in America's interest to stay in conflict with the Arab and Muslim world, considering its interests in the region," Haniyeh, who remains in hiding after Israel's onslaught, said on Al-Jazeera television. "We hope that the new American President revises all the policies of his predecessor."

The militants appear to be in the throes of an internal power struggle between hard-liners and pragmatists. Which group comes out on top will likely depend on who is able to garner the most benefits in postwar Gaza.

With hawks urging more violence, the window of opportunity to boost the voices of relative moderation is likely to be short.

"We won this war," said Hamas politician Mushir Al-Masri. "Why should we give in to pressure from anyone?"

Al-Masri spoke to the AP while standing next to a chair that used to serve as his seat in the Palestinian parliament, now reduced to rubble by Israeli bombing. Surrounding him were cracked cement, broken bricks, shattered glass and microphones covered in ash.

Yet even Al-Masri, a staunch hard-liner, sounded a conciliatory note.

"We have our hands open to any country ... to open a dialogue without conditions," he said — clarifying that does not include Israel.

Hamas' pragmatists may have emerged from Israel's offensive slightly stronger, perhaps because of a perception among some Gazans that the organization's hawks overplayed their hand by provoking the wrath of Israel.

Obama has repeatedly reached out to Muslims since becoming president. He assured hard-liners in his inaugural address that "we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist." He dispatched special envoy George J. Mitchell to the Middle East on a "listening tour." And on Tuesday he chose the Arab satellite network Al-Arabiya for his first televised interview, declaring "Americans are not your enemy."

It's unlikely Obama would talk directly to Hamas, which the U.S. lists as a terrorist organization. However, if reconciliation talks between Hamas and its pro-Western Fatah rivals in Egypt bear fruit, Obama, unlike his predecessor, may accept a Palestinian unity government that includes the militants.

It's true Hamas has yet to renounce violence and Israel's assault has hardened many hearts in Gaza. But with the territory in desperate need of recovery, the group is promising not to interfere with aid efforts and appears keen to reconcile with Fatah.

No one expects the international community to drop all of its reservations about Hamas, an organization that made its name by strapping explosives onto young people and sending them to blow themselves up in crowded Israeli markets and buses.

But rebuilding Gaza after Israel's onslaught is going to require open borders and a large inflow of money and material — things that Iran, whose aid to Hamas is strictly surreptitious because of Israeli restrictions, cannot provide.

Hamas says it wants international recognition as much as an end to the blockade of Gaza — but it won't get either for free. For Hamas, the price may include allowing Fatah back into Gaza 20 months after it violently ousted them, along with halting its rocket fire and weapons smuggling.

The notion of engaging Hamas is anathema to Israel.

"A dialogue with Hamas as a terror organization would be a strategic mistake, because Israel advocates dialogue with the moderates and displaying toughness against the extremists," Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told the Maariv daily this week.

Israel's position is based on the fact that Hamas refuses to recognize its right to exist. However, the three Hamas leaders interviewed said they would accept statehood in just the West Bank and Gaza and would give up their "resistance" against Israel if that were achieved.

"We accept a state in the '67 borders," said Hamad. "We are not talking about the destruction of Israel."

Hamas' takeover of Gaza left Fatah in charge of just the West Bank. The two territories, captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war and located on opposite sides of Israel, are together supposed to make up a future Palestinian state.

Hamas leaders in the past have spoken about a long-term "hudna," or truce, with Israel. But the Jewish state sees the offer as a non-starter because it falls short of full recognition.

Even so, Israel and the West appear to have leverage to get Hamas to moderate its stance. The group's demand for an open border with Egypt, for instance, could be conditioned on allowing Fatah to help monitor it. And bringing funds and materials to begin repairing the estimated $2 billion in damage caused by Israel's offensive could be conditioned on Hamas agreeing to stop its violence.

One hardline Hamas politician, Yehiel El Abadsa, said his group should not reconcile with Fatah and that Hamas "will be the ones to rebuild Gaza."

That position may well put him at odds with the majority of Gaza's 1.4 million inhabitants, who seem to be clamoring for an end to the divisions that are distancing their dreams for a state of their own.

"Even if money falls from the sky and we are still divided like this, we'll never accomplish anything," said 55-year-old Mohammed Abed Rabbo, sitting outside his bombed-out house in northern Gaza.

Syria-based Palestinian groups demand end to Gaza blockade

DAMASCUS (AFP) – Hamas and other Syria-based Palestinian groups on Wednesday rejected any truce with Israel that would not lift the crippling blockade imposed by the Jewish state on the Gaza Strip.

"Factions of the resistance reject the signing of a truce agreement before the opening of all crossing points, the lifting of the blockade and the arrival of supplies," Hamas and seven other groups said in a statement.

The statement came as Egypt holds separate talks with Israeli and Hamas officials to secure a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, where a truce went into effect on January 18 ending a 22-day war that devastated Gaza.

About 1,300 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed in the conflict.

A meeting of Syria-based factions also rejected "any regional or security arrangement that would compromise the security of our people and of the resistance," against Israel, the statement said.

Representatives of the radical Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, which along with Hamas is opposed to the moderate Fatah faction of Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas, also attended the meeting.

Syria approves first Lebanese ambassador to Damascus

BEIRUT (AFP) – Syria has approved the nomination of Michel el-Khoury as Lebanon's first ever ambassador to Damascus, Lebanon's foreign minister announced on Tuesday.

"I have received a letter from Syria's interim charge d'affaires in Beirut indicating that Syrian authorities have agreed to Khoury's nomination as Lebanese ambassador to Syria," Fawzi Salloukh told reporters.

He said Damascus has yet to submit the name of its candidate as ambassador to Beirut.

Three Syrian diplomats have been stationed at their country's embassy in Lebanon since last December but the mission is not yet fully operational.

Khoury, 59, a career diplomat, is currently Lebanon's ambassador to Cyprus. He was previously ambassador to The Hague and held top diplomatic posts in several countries including Britain, Brazil, and Mexico.

Syria and Lebanon in October formally established diplomatic ties for the first time since both became independent 60 years ago.

The thaw between the two neighbors came following a joint pledge by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his Lebanese opposite number Michel Sleiman in Paris.

It turned a page in relations between Lebanon and Syria, which dominated its smaller neighbor for nearly three decades until it pulled its troops out in April 2005.

The withdrawal came two months after the Beirut killing of Lebanon's former premier Rafiq Hariri. Damascus was widely blamed for the assassination as well as that of other anti-Syrian politicians, but has denied any involvement.

Since 1991, a year after the end of Lebanon's 15-year civil war, Damascus and Beirut have been tied by a treaty of friendship and cooperation.

But the anti-Syrian camp which forms the majority in Lebanon's parliament has long been critical of the treaty, saying it sacrifices Beirut's interests, and is pressing for it to be revoked.

Another sore point between the two countries that has yet to be resolved is the fate of Lebanese prisoners in Syrian jails. The demarcation of their common border has also yet to be settled.

Iraq sends Syria first ambassador in decades

BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Iraq will send Syria its first ambassador since around the time Saddam Hussein became president in 1979, a government official said Wednesday.

Alaa al-Jawadi would leave Wednesday to become Iraq's new envoy in Damascus, Mohammed al-Haj Hamoud, Iraq's deputy foreign minister, told Reuters.

Last October Damascus posted its first ambassador to Iraq since Saddam's takeover in Iraq strained ties with Syria, which for decades has been governed by a rival branch of the pan-Arab Baath party.

The Shi'ite-led government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has been steadily upgrading its diplomatic ties with mostly Sunni-led fellow Arab nations after years of complaining that other Arab states had given post-Saddam Iraq the cold shoulder.

A few weeks after the Syrian envoy arrived in Baghdad last year, bilateral ties were frayed by a U.S. raid inside Syria's border with Iraq, which Damascus said killed eight civilians.

Repsol announces gas finds in Algeria

ALGIERS, Algeria, Jan. 27 (UPI) -- Spanish integrated oil and gas company Repsol announced new gas discoveries in the Sahara desert in Algeria with 813 million cubic feet of net reserves.

Repsol said in a news release on its Web site that it confirmed significant discoveries in the Reggane, Ahnet and Berkine basins in western Algeria.

Initial testing of the fields showed a preliminary output of 35.3 million cubic feet per day, indicating a high potential, the company said.

The region in the western portion of Algeria is one of Repsol's areas of greatest potential growth, as outlined in the company's 2008-2012 strategic planning documents.

The Algerian government in 2002 and 2003 awarded the Spanish company the rights to explore the fields along with its consortium partners, Algeria's state-owned Sonatrach, Germany's RWE DEA and Italy's Edison S.p.A.

Source: United Press International (UPI).
Link: http://www.upi.com/Energy_Resources/2009/01/27/Repsol_announces_gas_finds_in_Algeria/UPI-13191233074874/.

Hamas threatens response to Israeli strikes

Cairo - Palestinian militant groups on Thursday said they plan to respond in kind to recent Israeli military strikes within the Gaza Strip. "These strikes represent an escalating offensive of the Zionists that targets the Palestinian people. This reflects that the enemy has no interest in peace in the region," Fawzi Barhoum, Hamas spokesman in the Gaza Strip, told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

"The military branch of Hamas has a right to respond to the strikes. The leaders of our military branch are devising that response now," Barhoum said.

The Israeli Air Force on Thursday injured eight Palestinians in a rocket attack on a motorcyclist. The Israeli military said the target took part in a bombing that killed an Israeli soldier near the Gaza border on Tuesday. It was the fifth Israeli airstrike on Gaza since Israel declared a ceasefire 12 days ago.

Barhoum said Hamas was calling "independent Palestinian figures" to form a new coalition because "the Palestinian Liberation Organization does not represent the Palestinian people." He did not elaborate on which figures Hamas had been calling.

Daoud Shehab, a Damascus-based spokesman for the Palestinian militant group Islamic Jihad, echoed Barhoum's position.

"Israel is striking at Egyptian efforts to establish a peace," Shehab told dpa. "The resistance has the right to respond to this offensive against its people."

Shehab set February 5 as the date Islamic Jihad would give its reply to Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman's proposals for reconciling Palestinian factions.

"We deal with Fatah openly and without any restrictions," Shehab said, "But we have some reservations about (Palestinian President) Mahmoud Abbas. Before a reconciliation can be achieved, he must cut all his relations with Israel, release all our prisoners in the West Bank, and accept our right to resist."

"We do not want to reconcile with an authority that is controlled by Israel," Shehab told dpa.

Will Kashmir Be an Obama Foreign Policy Focus?

Indian officials may be celebrating what they believe to be their thwarting of Richard Holbrooke, the new U.S. Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, but they may want to hold off on the champagne. Despite the fact that India's behind-the-scenes lobbying may have helped ensure that the country was left out of Holbrooke's official mandate, the Obama Administration is unlikely to ease up efforts to pressure India to come to terms with Pakistan over their long, bitter dispute over Kashmir.

New Delhi views its success in avoiding becoming part of Holbrooke's diplomatic portfolio as proof of India's growing clout in Washington. Appearing on Al Jazeera, India's foreign minister, Pranab Mukherjee, evaded questions about the lobbying effort, saying only that relations between New Delhi and Washington had "increased substantially." But an official in his ministry told TIME that New Delhi is "feeling vindicated, because finally the U.S. has given us the respect we deserve."

The official, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the subject, said the campaign to keep Holbrooke out was "not personal...we just objected to being lumped into a category with two of the world's most dangerous countries." Besides, he added, "there was no way we were going to allow Holbrooke, or anybody else, become a broker on Kashmir."

The Indians were alarmed when, during the Presidential campaign, Obama repeatedly said that ending Indo-Pakistani differences over Kashmir was one of the keys to calming tensions in South Asia and winning the war on terror. New Delhi views Kashmir as a bilateral issue, and has long resisted what it regards as third-party interference. In recent years, India has sought to isolate the Kashmir issue even further, by seeking to keep it out of other negotiations (over trade and travel, for instance) with Pakistan. "The Indians are allergic to any indication of outside mediation," says Bruce Riedel, a South Asia expert at the Brookings Institution who served as an Obama campaign foreign policy adviser.

Pakistan, on the other hand, is keen to get Holbrooke involved in the Kashmir dispute, which it has traditionally held is central to its differences with India . President Asif Zardari, in an Op-Ed for the Washington Post, wrote that he hoped the Special Envoy would "work with India and Pakistan...to bring a just and reasonable resolution to [the Kashmir issue]."

Islamabad has long argued that the disputed territory inflames Pakistani sentiment and feeds terrorist groups. More recently, Pakistan has played the terrorism card in other disputes with India. Zardari's Op-Ed noted that the two countries are currently arguing about water from rivers that flow through both countries; Pakistan says it is denied a rightful share of the water by Indian dams. Failure to resolve the water dispute, Zardari warned, "could fuel the fires of discontent that lead to extremism and terrorism."

For the moment, the Obama Administration is being careful to publicly distance the Special Envoy from the region's most intractable problem. State Department spokesman Robert Wood told reporters on Tuesday that "it's not in [Holbrooke's] mandate...to deal with the subject of Kashmir." And the White House has also been careful to deny that India's lobbying played any role in the formation of Holbrooke's diplomatic charge; not only has it insisted that it held no meetings with foreign governments or their representatives with respect to the assignment, but it has also claimed that Obama never actually intended the South-Asian portfolio to include India in the first place.

None of that is to say, however, that the Administration is going to buy India's line that the U.S. should butt out of Kashmir. The President himself plainly believes there's a role for the U.S. to play. In an interview with TIME's Joe Klein in October, Obama said that "working with Pakistan and India to try to resolve the Kashmir crisis in a serious way" would be a critical task. The key, he said, was to "make the argument to the Indians, 'You guys are on the brink of being an economic superpower, why do you want to keep on messing with this?'" Obama added that he would have to "make the argument to the Pakistanis, 'Look at India and what they are doing, why do you want to keep on being bogged down with this, particularly at a time where the biggest threat now is coming from the Afghan border?'"

So it's probably safe to say that after the euphoria of their lobbying victory has died down, Indian officials will probably feel Holbrooke's breath on their neck. Some Indian analysts are already predicting this. C. Raja Mohan writes in the Indian Express that "reworking the India-Pakistan relationship will be an inevitable and important component" of Holbrooke's plans. "Whether India likes it or not, Washington will devote substantive diplomatic energies towards the subcontinent, and New Delhi will be drawn into this dynamic."

Pakistan police say three Indian agents arrested

LAHORE, Pakistan (Reuters) – Pakistani police said on Thursday they had arrested three suspected Indian agents planning to attack prominent people and installations, including offices of a militant group blamed for November's attacks in Mumbai.

The men, all Pakistani, were arrested on Thursday in a village close to the Indian border in eastern Pakistan.

"They had plans to destroy important buildings and to kill important personalities," Pervez Rathore, police chief of the eastern city of Lahore, told reporters.

He said the men also planned to attack offices linked to the Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group as well as "important religious personalities".

He did not elaborate.

India blamed the banned Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba group for the attacks in Mumbai in which 179 people were killed and said it must have had support from Pakistani security agencies.

Pakistan, which has a history of using militant groups to further foreign policy objectives, has denied any involvement in the attacks by state agencies and offered to cooperate in the investigation of the Mumbai violence.

Rathore said the men were trained in bomb-making in New Delhi by agents of India's Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) security agency before being sent to Pakistan.

Tension has been running high between nuclear-armed Pakistan and India since the coordinated attacks in India's financial hub, raising fear of conflict between the neighbors which have fought three wars since 1947.

Pakistan detained scores of people after the Mumbai attack, including the founder of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, after U.N. Security Council added him and a group charity, Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), to a list of personalities and organization linked to al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Pakistan has also arrested two suspected planners of the Mumbai attacks, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi and Zarar Shah, and sealed scores of offices of JuD across the country.

India, however, has shown frustration over what it sees as Pakistan's slow response to a dossier of information it handed to Pakistan and said linked the Mumbai attack to Pakistani militants.

Pakistani Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani told Reuters on Wednesday that Pakistan would release details of its investigation into the attack "very soon".

UN to organize effort to help stabilize Pakistan

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Pakistan says the United Nations will help organize an international effort to overcome the country's massive security and economic problems.

Pakistan faces a dangerous combination of rising Taliban militancy and slowing economic growth, raising concern about the security of its nuclear weapons.

Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said Thursday that the U.N. has agreed to help organize programs to be funded by countries including the United States and Germany.

Donors formed a group called the Friends of Pakistan last year to boost Pakistan's security, economic and social development and energy supplies. Pakistan also took a $7.6 billion bailout last year from the International Monetary Fund.

Qureshi said a donors' conference may take place in Tokyo, but announced no date.

Russia's space agency plans to build own orbital station

MOSCOW, January 29 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) will propose to the government the construction of a low-orbit space station to support future exploration of the Moon and Mars, an agency official said Thursday.

"We will soon propose to our government a project to construct a low-orbit complex, which could serve as a foundation for the implementation of the lunar program and later on - the Mars program," Alexei Krasnov, director of manned flight programs at Roscosmos, told a news conference in Moscow.

Krasnov said that Russia, as well as other countries, "is looking at the Moon in a mid-term perspective, and would want not only to go there and come back, but to establish a lunar base, which would allow us to start exploring Mars in the future."

"These are our intentions, but we are working hard to ensure that these plans get adequate financial and legislative support from the government," the official said.

Russia, a pioneer in robotic lunar research, abandoned its lunar exploration program with the end of the Moon race in the mid-1970s, but the idea of exploring the Earth's natural satellite has been revisited recently, due to ambitious international projects to develop the Moon's resources and to use it as a stepping-stone for further space exploration.

Roscosmos earlier said its first unmanned flight to the Moon would include a lunar orbiter to fire 12 penetrators across diverse regions to create a seismic network. These will be used to research the origins of the Moon.

Krasnov also said Roscosmos would propose extending the use of the International Space Station (ISS) until 2020.

The orbital assembly of the ISS began with the launch of the U.S.-funded and Russian-built Zarya module from Kazakhstan on November 20, 1998. Zarya, which means 'dawn,' was the ISS's first component.

The project has taken longer than the planned five years, and as of July 2008 the station was approximately 76% complete.

"We are considering the extension of ISS service life at least until 2020, but this decision must be adopted by the governments of all 15 countries participating in the project," Krasnov said.

The project currently involves NASA, Roscosmos, the Canadian Space Agency, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), and 11 members of the European Space Agency (ESA).

Spanish judge probes Israel's attack on Hamas

By DANIEL WOOLLS, Associated Press Writer

MADRID, Spain – A Spanish judge on Thursday began an investigation into seven current or former Israeli officials over a 2002 bombing in Gaza that killed a Hamas militant and 14 other people, including nine children.

Judge Fernando Andreu said he sees a possible crime against humanity in Israel's attack targeting Salah Shehadeh with a one-ton bomb dropped from an F-16 warplane in densely populated Gaza City.

The judge is acting under a doctrine that allows prosecution in Spain of crimes against humanity or crimes like terrorism or genocide, even if they are alleged to have been committed in another country.

Spanish magistrates have used the doctrine to go after a number of current or former government leaders and terror suspects, even indicting Osama bin Laden over the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States. But convictions or extraditions have been rare.

The latest suit was brought by a group of Palestinians.

The people named in it include Dan Halutz, who the suit says commanded Israel's air force at the time; and Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, then defense minister and now the minister of infrastructure.

There was no immediate comment from the Israeli government.

The Israeli military began carrying out targeted killings of Palestinian militants after the breakdown of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and the subsequent outbreak of violence in 2000, saying the tactic was the most effective way to stop Palestinian bombers targeting Israeli population centers.

Shehadeh was a top Hamas operative wanted for masterminding suicide bombings. Also killed in the July 2002 bombing were his bodyguard and 13 bystanders, including nine children.

The Shehadeh killing led some international human rights groups to call for criminal charges against Israeli officers, including Halutz, who is no longer in the Israeli military.

Judge Andreu said one of the reasons he has agreed to open an investigation is that Israel has not responded to his request for information about the bombing, nor started legal proceedings itself against the seven.

"In effect, we are faced with an attack on the civilian population," he wrote.

Andreu called the bombing "clearly disproportionate and excessive" and said that if his probe determines the goal from the outset was to target innocent civilians in addition to Shehadeh, he might consider bringing "even more serious" charges.

The judge asked Israel to make the seven former or current officials available for questioning.

Besides Halutz and Ben-Elieser, the other five were identified as Doron Almog, who at the time was a senior air force commander; Giora Eiland, a national security chief; Michael Herzog, with the defense ministry; Moshe Ya'alon, then chief of staff of the Israeli military; and Abraham Dichter, then director of the General Security Service.

UN: 500,000 Iraqi refugees may return in 2009

BY SLOBODAN LEKIC, Associated Press Writer

BRUSSELS, Belgium – If the security situation in Iraq continues to improve, the number of refugees and displaced people returning to their homes could more than double this year to 500,000, the U.N. refugee agency said Thursday.

After years of extreme violence Iraq is now experiencing markedly improved security, said Daniel Endres, Baghdad representative of the Geneva-based agency.

"Although this security remains fragile, last year we saw a significant return as a result," he told journalists in Brussels.

More than 220,000 Iraqis who fled abroad or were displaced within the country after the U.S.-led invasion returned home in 2008, according to U.N. statistics.

Still, nearly two million remain outside the country, mostly in Syria and Jordan, and an additional 1.6 million, forced from their homes by sectarian and ethnic violence, are displaced inside Iraq.

Iraqis currently make up the biggest group of asylum seekers in industrialized countries.

But international refugee organizations have been encouraged by the government's recent moves to normalize the situation and encourage returns. This includes setting up a special army unit charged with evicting militia members and others who moved illegally into homes owned by people forced to flee the violence.

Provincial elections for the ruling councils in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces will be held on Saturday. They are seen as a dress rehearsal for national elections later this year.

"If everything continues to go well, including elections, property restitution and stability, it's possible that 500,000 people could return in 2009," Endres said.

Despite the drop in violence in 2008, the number of daily attacks remains high, he said.

Many refugees are also reluctant to return because standards of living in places such as Syria and Jordan are much better than in Iraq. Issues such as the lack of basic utilities and services, including perennial electricity shortages and problems with sewage, sanitation and other services, also hinder returns, Endres said.

Iraq bars Blackwater, tarnished by civilian deaths

By SINAN SALAHEDDIN, Associated Press writer

BAGHDAD – Iraq said Thursday it will bar Blackwater Worldwide from providing security protection for U.S. diplomats because its contractors used excessive force, sanctioning a company whose image was irrevocably tarnished by the 2007 killings of 17 Iraqi civilians.

The move will deprive American diplomats of their main protection force in Iraq.

The decision not to issue Blackwater an operating license was due to "improper conduct and excessive use of force," said Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf.

Iraqis are bitter over the September 2007 killing of 17 Iraqi civilians in Baghdad's Nisoor Square. Five former Blackwater guards pleaded not guilty Jan. 6 in federal court in Washington to manslaughter and gun charges in that shooting. A sixth is cooperating with the government.

The Iraqi government has labeled the guards "criminals" and is closely watching the case.

But even before the shooting, Blackwater had a reputation for aggressive operations and using excessive force in protecting American officials, an allegation the company has disputed.

Neither Khalaf nor a U.S. Embassy official gave a date for Blackwater personnel to leave the country and neither said whether they would be allowed to continue guarding U.S. diplomats during the interim.

Anne Tyrrell, a spokeswoman for the North Carolina-based company, said the company had not yet been notified of the Iraqi decision.

"I can tell you that we have received no official communications from the government of Iraq on this matter," she said.

The Iraq decision came just months after a U.S.-Iraqi security agreement approved in November gave the government the authority to determine which Western security companies operate in Iraq.

A joint U.S.-Iraqi committee is drawing up procedures for licensing and regulating security companies under the security agreement and it is unclear when it will finish the process.

"We have followed the procedures to apply for and secure operating licenses in Iraq," said Tyrrell, the Blackwater spokeswoman. "Any further questions about that the licensing process should be directed to our customer."

Khalaf said Blackwater employees who have not been implicated in the 2007 shooting have the right to work in Iraq but must find a different employer.

"We sent our decision to the U.S. Embassy last Friday," Khalaf told The Associated Press in a phone interview. "They have to find a new security company."

When President Barack Obama was campaigning in 2007, he announced a plan to force Iraq war contractors to follow federal law.

"We cannot win a fight for hearts and minds when we outsource critical missions to unaccountable contractors," he said at the time.

The State Department relies heavily in Blackwater because it is the largest and best-equipped security company in Iraq. The U.S. extended Blackwater's contract for a year last spring, despite widespread calls for the company to be expelled because of the Nisoor Square shooting.

But the company has become a lightning rod for Iraqi complaints about the behavior of Western security companies, whose employees were immune from prosecution under Iraqi law until the security agreement took effect this month.

The U.S. Embassy official confirmed it received the government's decision, saying that U.S. officials were working with the Iraqi government and its contractors to address the "implications of this decision."

The official made the statement on condition of anonymity under embassy regulations.

In the Sept. 16, 2007 shooting, Blackwater maintains its guards opened fire after coming under attack after a car in a State Department convoy broke down.

The shooting took place around noon in a crowded traffic circle in west Baghdad where U.S. prosecutors said civilians were running errands, getting lunch and otherwise going about their lives.

Prosecutors said the guards unleashed a gruesome attack on unarmed Iraqis, with the dead including young children, women, people fleeing in cars and a man whose arms were raised in surrender as he was shot in the chest.

Twenty others were wounded, including one injured by a grenade launched into a nearby girls' school. Another 18 Iraqis were assaulted but not wounded, prosecutors said.

Iraqi witnesses said the contractors opened fire unprovoked and left the square littered with blown-out cars.

But the Blackwater guards insist they were ambushed by insurgents. One of the trucks in the convoy was disabled in the ensuing firefight, the guards say.

Blackwater radio logs made available to The Associated Press by a defense attorney in the case last month raised questions about prosecutors' claims that the guards' shooting was unprovoked. The log transcripts describe a hectic eight minutes in which the guards repeatedly reported incoming gunfire from insurgents and Iraqi police.

The Blackwater guard cooperating with the government in the case, Jeremy Ridgeway of California, pleaded guilty to one count each of manslaughter, attempted manslaughter, and aiding and abetting.

In his plea agreement with prosecutors, Ridgeway admitted there was no threat from a white Kia sedan whose driver, a medical student, was killed and his mother, in the front passenger seat, was injured.

Is an "Asian NATO" on US Agenda?

By José Miguel Alonso Trabanco

URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12077

Global Research, January 28, 2009

There has been some talk concerning American intentions to forge an Asian NATO, i.e. a US led military alliance meant to advance its members' geopolitical interests in the region. During the Cold War, the US created the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) which also encompassed France and the UK as well as regional pro-Western States such as Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Pakistan and the Philippines. However, such organization was dissolved in 1977.

Moreover, we also need to take into account the existence of the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty, better known to all as ANZUS. Both American allies fought together during the Vietnam War, the Gulf War and Operation Enduring Freedom (in Afghanistan). Canberra also supported and participated in the 2003 Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. Furthermore, Australia is an important contributor to the National Missile Defense System. Therefore, one can practically take for granted that any potential Asian or Pacific version of NATO will include these two staunch American allies. Japan has become even closer to the US and an increased level of NATO-Japan dialog indicates that both parties have agreed to strengthen its political and military links.

In order to assess if Washington is indeed attempting to establish an alliance in the Asia-Pacific region (more or less analogous to its Atlantic counterpart) one must examine what the American motivation could be. Some top American politicians have been promoting such plans. For example, Rudolph Giuliani proposed that NATO should accept Australia, Israel, India, Japan and Singapore. Perhaps it is also what Senator John McCain had in mind when he recommended the establishment of an American-led League of Democracies, an euphemism which means that non European US allies had to be included in a global military coalition (against whom? One could add).

As we will see, there is plenty of reasons the United States will be interested in creating any such organization. American senior geostrategists must have paid a great of attention to:

*
North Korea's nuclear program.
*
The meteoric rise of China as an economic powerhouse. Or, as the US National Intelligence Council terms it, "the unprecedented transfer of wealth from West to East". China has already overtaken Germany as the world's third largest GDP. Beijing possesses the largest foreign currency reserves and the fact that most of them denominated in US dollars gives the People's Republic of China considerable leverage.
*
Other regional economies have grown impressively, namely South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Taiwan and Kong Kong. This means that Asia has been and will continue playing an increasingly important role in international politics.
*
The emergence of China has also expanded the 'Middle Kingdom's military, geopolitical, diplomatic and technological power. China is arguably the greatest power in East Asia. Beijing is improving and modernizing its military hardware and it seeks to develop competitive sea power projection capabilities in the long run.
*
China and Russia have become closer cooperative partners through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Both powers have agreed to share their influence in Central Asia and prevent American influence from reaching further into the Great Turkestan. Moreover, both have carried out joint military exercises.
*
Beijing has courted several regimes openly hostile to American power. In fact China is the primary destination of Iranian oil exports and the idea of building an oil pipeline connecting both has been explored. Furthermore, Myanmar has become one of closest Chinese allies. The 'Middle Kingdom' is large importer of Myanmarese resources (fossil fuels, gems, timber and so on) and Myanmar's ruling junta has allowed the Chinese to open and operate intelligence facilities there. The PRC, in order to ensure supplies of raw materials has become a key trading partner of many African countries as well.
*
The resurgence of Russia as a great power is an important. The Kremlin has shown some interest in projects concerning the development of energy resources. For instance, in order to diversify its trading partners, Russia has seriously thought about providing fossil fuels to East Asia's largest economies (China, Japan and South Korea). Additionally, the Russian Federation plans to increase its share in East and Southeast Asia's arms markets.
*
Even though South Korea still hosts a large number of US military personnel, Seoul (unlike Tokyo) has implemented a foreign policy which has been careful enough not to annoy Beijing.
*
Although some American masterminded Color Revolutions were first successful in inciting regime change, it seems both the Chinese and the Russians have meticulously studied this Modus Operandi and Beijing was able to counter such methodology in Myanmar's Saffron Revolution and during the 2008 Tibet riots.

US top planners therefore have decided that the America has to augment its presence in Asia if Washington is indeed committed to achieve American hegemony (a.k.a. 'The New American Century'). Washington has stationed troops in South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Diego Garcia, Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Guam and Australia. Such military deployments, US policymakers seem to think, must be amplified through an Asian version of NATO.

The ultimate goal of an Asian NATO would be to prevent China from becoming a formidable challenging power. As a result, US strategists have concluded that America needs to preserve its position as the world's top sea power so that it retains the ability to control strategic sea lanes (like the Malacca Strait and the South China Sea) and to enforce a naval blockade in case war breaks out. The aforementioned means that Asian economies would have to make meaningful concessions to the US if they want to keep their flows of seaborne foreign trade uninterrupted.

As a result of the Iraqi and Afghan quagmires, it is arguably that the US has understood that even if America is the world's leading power, it is still unable to unilaterally make its interests prevail. Thus, Washington has realized that it will need several allies to maintain its position unrivaled. So the Americans have been busy trying to deepen their strategic cooperation with traditional allies (Japan, Australia, New Zealand and so on). Moreover, the US has been attempting to seduce India and embed it into an Asian NATO, something that would dramatically alter the whole balance of power in Eurasia.

For the British Empire, India was its most prized possession because it was hugely profitable and, more importantly, its geographic position was strategically significant. According to the CIA Would Factbook, India became the world's twelfth largest economy in 2008 thanks to its GDP growth. Moreover, India is strategically located in the southernmost part of the Eurasian landmass and its territory is considerably large. Furthermore Indian population is an important asset because the country has an internationally competitive professional class. Last but not least, it must not be forgotten that India has a stockpile of nuclear weapons.

It seems that India has abandoned its Cold War foreign policy of non alignment. Indeed, it looks like Delhi has been slowly moving toward the Anglo-American orbit and its allies. Some members of Indian political establishment are openly hostile toward China. For example, then Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes claimed China was "India's enemy No. 1", such statement confirms that at least some senior politicians in Delhi truly believe the People's Republic of China is some sort of strategic rival even though most of them do not openly express that viewpoint because of diplomatic repercussions.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is an Indian political force which, among other things, advocates for a more aggressive foreign policy and it also supports a strongly nationalist agenda. If the 2008 Mumbai attacks were indeed a covert operation run by the CIA franchise called ISI (which has been resorted to in Chechnya, Afghanistan, the Balkans or wherever plausible denial is needed) one of its objectives would be the political empowerment of Indian forces (like the BJP) much more willing to accept an Indo-American alliance than the current Congress-led administration.

It is revealing that the Dalai Lama (who is still probably a CIA asset) keeps operating unimpeded from Dharamsala (nicknamed 'little Lhasa'), India, which demonstrates that Delhi is politically eager to check China's rising power. Moreover, India is also interested in gaining access to Tibet's abundant deposits of natural resources, particularly fresh water and uranium.

A few years ago, India was willing to engage Iran in negotiations in order to enhance its own energy security. Nonetheless, it seems Washington was successful in undermining those talks. One can only wonder what Delhi was promised or given in return. It is also remarkable that the US plans a transfer of nuclear technology to India.

Furthermore, India has also sought closer ties with other American allies. For instance, Delhi has become a large buyer of Israeli-made arms and defense systems.

On the other hand, India is an observer State in the SCO. Yet, Delhi has not requested full membership allegedly as a result of American diplomatic pressure. India is an important purchaser of Russian-manufactured military hardware, including aircraft and tanks. Besides, Russia and India are collaborating in the development of a fifth-generation stealth fighter.

Russia and India had a close relation during the Cold War. The Kremlin knows that both powers do not have mutually exclusive national interests, which is not something that can be said when one examines Sino-Indian relations. Moscow and Delhi share a desire to counter Islamic unrest in Central Asia. President Medvedev recently announced that the Russian Government will consider sharing nuclear technology with India to boost bilateral ties, an effort clearly meant to outbid the Americans.

In short, the Americans are very much interested in creating an 'Asian NATO'; nevertheless, such organization would be meaningless unless India could be included. That explains why the US has demonstrated a certain willingness to make several concessions to India in order to gain the latter's geopolitical and strategic loyalty. It is unknown at this point if Delhi will join such alliance. Perhaps India's political elites are still deciding weather they will align with the Atlanticists (the Americans and the Europeans), with the Eurasians (the Russians plus the Chinese) or with neither. After all, Delhi can just play them off against one another in order to extract as many concessions as possible from both without having to take sides. However, if India opts to side with any of those bands, that will send strong geopolitical shockwaves throughout Eurasia.

Source: Global Research.
Link: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12077.

Meet the New Boss; Same as the Old Boss

"And so, to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and we are ready to lead once more."
- Barack Obama, Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 2009

Well, it didn't long to break that promise. On Tuesday, Jan. 20, President Barack Obama said that America, by which we can assume he meant the U.S. government, is a friend of every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity. But just three days later, the U.S. government used drones to attack and kill at least 20 people in Pakistan, a country with which the U.S. government isn't even at war. Of course, President Obama could argue that the attacks were on "foreign militants." But some locals in Pakistan claim that four of the dead were children. If that's true, there goes the "child" part of Obama's pledge.

Obama could argue that we shouldn't be surprised. After all, during the presidential campaign, he did say that he would be willing to attack Pakistan. But then he shouldn't have made such a pledge in his inaugural address.

The simple fact is that, although Obama wants to wind down the war in Iraq, he wants to escalate the war in Afghanistan and, as he has already shown, is even willing to continue the undeclared war on Pakistan.

In his inaugural address, Obama also stated, "And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders." Yet, according to the AP wire, "Obama has not commented on the missile strike policy." This seems to me like indifference to suffering. Most Americans, I suspect, are indifferent to this suffering. But Obama is worse than indifferent: He could have prevented the attacks and chose not to.

Is it just possible that President Obama is a smarter, smoother, more eloquent version of pro-war George Bush? As The Who said in one of their famous songs, "Meet the new boss; same as the old boss."

And remember the name of the song from which that line comes: "Won't Get Fooled Again." During the 2000 presidential campaign, I was fooled by George W. Bush's line that he wanted America to have a humble foreign policy. I wasn't fooled enough to vote for him, but I was fooled, nevertheless. In my view, to paraphrase Yogi Bear, George W. Bush had a lot to be humble about. We're stuck with President Obama until Jan. 20, 2013. Let's at least not be fooled by him. Let's give him credit for his steps to shut down the prison at Guantanamo Bay and to end torture. Also, his choice of Dawn Johnsen for the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel was first-rate. But let's not kid ourselves into believing that he wants to have peaceful relations with peaceful people in other parts of the world.

Assad stopped Hezbollah action over Gaza war: French envoy

BEIRUT (AFP) – Syrian President Bashar al-Assad used his influence with Hezbollah to prevent the Lebanese militant group from taking action during Israel's deadly onslaught on the Gaza Strip, a French envoy said on Wednesday.

"President Assad told me he exerted his influence to ensure Hezbollah adopted a responsible attitude and showed restraint during the events in Gaza," President Nicolas Sarkozy's envoy Senator Philippe Marini told reporters in Beirut.

"Syria's role has been positive," Marini said after a visit to Damascus, noting that the Gaza conflict had not spread across the region.

Israel fought a brutal 34-day war with Hezbollah in the summer of 2006 and there were fears of renewed conflict triggered by Israel's deadly three-week offensive in Gaza that ended on January 18 with more than 1,300 Palestinians dead.

Damascus and its regional ally Tehran are the main backers of the Shiite Muslim fundamentalist Hezbollah or "Party of God" which continues to resist Israel.

Croatia, Albania expect NATO membership at April summit

Croatia and Albania expect to become full members of NATO at its summit in April, the defense ministers of the two countries said in the Croatian capital Zagrebon Wednesday.

The two Western Balkan countries expect the process of ratification of the protocols on their accession to NATO to be completed in March in all NATO member states, since they were invited to join the alliance at the Bucharest summit in April 2008,the official Croatian news agency HINA reported.

Croatian Defense Minister Branko Vukelic and his Albanian counterpart Gazmend Oketa said they were pleased with the cooperation within the U.S.-Adriatic Charter, during which Albania and Croatia were preparing for NATO membership, and that their countries were ready to convey their experiences to Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro, which had joined the initiative now known as A5.

"It is necessary to continue our cooperation and include all our neighbors in the region. It is in our interest that those countries follow the path of Croatia and Albania for the sake of security and stability of the whole region," Vukelic was quoted assaying.

Vukelic said that a meeting of defense ministers of A5 countries, neighboring countries and representatives of the EU, the U.S. and NATO would be held in Zagreb in early March to discuss security processes in the region ahead of NATO's summit in Strasbourg and Kehl.

Oketa said he was confident that Croatia and Albania would continue "in the same spirit of cooperation" after joining NATO and would convey their experiences to other countries in the region.

Oketa and Vukelic also discussed the defense cooperation between their countries, focusing in particular on equipment and modernization projects.

Earlier on Wednesday, Croatian President Stjepan Mesic met with Oketa, who arrived in Zagreb for a two-day official visit.

Jordan king calls for joint Arab-EU-US action for peace

AMMAN (AFP) – Jordan's King Abdullah II called on Wednesday for Arab states, Brussels and Washington to join forces in Middle East peace efforts, in talks with visiting EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana.

He stressed "the need to launch joint Arab, European and US action to hold serious negotiations leading to a settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict on the basis of two states," the palace said in a statement.

"We should unite the efforts of the international community ... as stipulated in the Arab peace plan, avoiding the launch of a new peace initiative," the king said.

He was referring to international support for a two-state solution and an Arab initiative offering normal ties with the Jewish state in exchange for its withdrawal from occupied land.

"The international community must assume its responsibilities by quickly resolving the roots of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict," King Abdullah told Solana.

The European Union envoy said the priority was to reach a long-term ceasefire in the Gaza Strip between Israel and the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas.

"What we want to achieve is to have a ceasefire which produces calm for a period of time which is long and is respected by everybody. I hope that we can move in that direction," he said.

"The situation is still very fragile and therefore to make a ceasefire solid is very important for the people who suffer and very important for the distribution of humanitarian aid."

Solana held talks earlier on Wednesday with Israeli Social Affairs Minister Izaac Herzog on the humanitarian situation in Gaza, where more than 1,300 Palestinians died in a 22-day war launched on December 27.