Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president, is in "good physical condition" after surgeons in Cuba removed a lesion from his pelvic area, authorities say.
The latest operation followed Chavez's surgery to remove a cancerous tumour, also in the pelvic area, last year.
"The diagnosed pelvic lesion was totally extracted," said Elias Jaua, the country's vice-president, in a speech broadcast to the public on Tuesday, adding that surrounding tissue was also removed and there were "no complications" with nearby organs.
Cuban state TV said Chavez, 57, was operated on successfully on Monday at the Centre for Medical-Surgical Research (CIMEQ), which is considered Cuba's most modern hospital.
Venezuelan officials have not specified the kind of cancer Chavez has, but they have denied the disease has spread to other organs.
Jaua said doctors would study the results of the latest operation to determine "the optimum way to treat the lesion".
Henry Rangel, the Venezuelan defence minister, speaking on official television, said the news was received "with extraordinary pleasure" by the armed forces.
Chavez announced that he was cancer-free last October. On February 21, however, he said that a small lesion had been discovered in the same area as his initial tumour.
Presidential elections
Chavez's health has become a source of open debate among both supporters and critics of the controversial socialist leader as the South American country builds up towards presidential elections in October in which Chavez looks set to face the sternest electoral challenge to his rule since coming to power in 1999.
He faces a strong challenge from 39-year-old Henrique Capriles, who was chosen as the sole opposition candidate in a primary election earlier this month.
WikiLeaks published emails on Sunday from Texas-based intelligence firm Stratfor, including one from a Venezuelan source who said that Cuban doctors gave Chavez two years to live, while Russian sources suggested he could have less than a year, due to improper medical equipment.
As during his initial cancer care in Havana last year, Chavez did not delegate power to Jaua as some opposition members sought.
Chavez has used Venezuela's vast oil wealth to fund popular social programmes and to help his communist ally Cuba, as well as courting anti-US allies including Iran and Muammar Gaddafi's Libya.
ALjazeera
27.2.12
Tempos Difíceis, no Reino Unido
More than nine million households will be living in fuel poverty within four years unless the Government directs £4bn a year from carbon taxes to families in greatest need, campaigners warn.
More Britons die every year from living in a cold home than on the roads, they said, with the situation expected to worsen sharply because of soaring utility bills.
A new study has revealed that there are a million more households already living in fuel poverty compared with previous estimates, taking the total to 6.4 million. The study, by energy efficiency experts Camco, suggests that the total will hit 9.1 million by 2016.
Mike O'Connor, chief executive of Consumer Focus, said: "It is a harsh truth that an effective strategy to transform the energy efficiency of our homes and to tackle growing numbers in fuel poverty will need far greater ambition and resources. Billions of pounds will go directly from our energy bills to the Exchequer as part of schemes to cut carbon emissions. That money could reap a double benefit if it was directed to reduce massively our wasteful consumption of energy."
The campaign, called the Energy Bill Revolution, was created by Transform UK, a not-for-profit organisation.
Ed Matthew, of Transform UK, said: "More people die every year in the UK from living in a cold home than die on our roads. Millions more struggle to make ends meet in the face of high energy bills. This is a national scandal."
Camco reckons that if the Government's annual £4bn revenue were recycled to households to spend on energy efficiency measures, it would be enough to bring nine out of 10 households out of fuel poverty. It could also be used to create 200,000 jobs and quadruple carbon emission cuts compared to the Government's new energy efficiency schemes, it claims.
Mr Matthew said that if carbon revenue – from the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and Carbon Floor Price – were recycled back to households to spend on energy efficiency measures, it could be used to help all households or used to support the most vulnerable.
"It could provide, for example, an average grant of £6,500 to make 600,000 fuel-poor homes highly energy efficient every year," he said.
"This would bring down their energy bills each year by £310 and remove nine out of 10 homes from fuel poverty in 15 years. The rest would have their homes brought up to the energy efficiency standard of a home built today."
A petition is being launched today at www.energybillrevolution.org to raise support for the Energy Bill Revolution campaign. It is already backed by more than 50 charities, unions, consumer groups and businesses, including Save the Children, the National Pensioners' Convention, Consumer Focus and the Co-operative Group.
Paul Monaghan, head of social goals at the Co-operative, said: "The UK can get to grips with fuel poverty and not only keep carbon emissions reducing, but secure increased buy-in from the general public. Right now the elderly and poor suffer the most, but left unchecked this is going to become an issue for everyday families."
Last week the children's charity Barnardo's said rising energy prices have left the poorest families £450 short of being able to adequately heat their homes. Barnardo's chief executive Anne Marie Carrie said: "We need to get serious about tackling fuel poverty. Families should never have to choose between whether to heat their homes or put food on the table for children."
She said poorer families are most hit by energy companies because they use pre-payment meters to pay off debt and to pay for gas and electricity.
"Effectively these families are being penalised by their payment method at a time when they need the most financial help," she said. "Energy companies have a moral duty to behave responsibly by ensuring that the poorest families are on the lowest tariffs available and that prices for pre-payment meters are brought down to the same rates as online tariffs."
She urged the Government to tackle fuel poverty by bringing forward the requirement on landlords to make their properties energy efficient for tenants.
The Independent
More Britons die every year from living in a cold home than on the roads, they said, with the situation expected to worsen sharply because of soaring utility bills.
A new study has revealed that there are a million more households already living in fuel poverty compared with previous estimates, taking the total to 6.4 million. The study, by energy efficiency experts Camco, suggests that the total will hit 9.1 million by 2016.
Mike O'Connor, chief executive of Consumer Focus, said: "It is a harsh truth that an effective strategy to transform the energy efficiency of our homes and to tackle growing numbers in fuel poverty will need far greater ambition and resources. Billions of pounds will go directly from our energy bills to the Exchequer as part of schemes to cut carbon emissions. That money could reap a double benefit if it was directed to reduce massively our wasteful consumption of energy."
The campaign, called the Energy Bill Revolution, was created by Transform UK, a not-for-profit organisation.
Ed Matthew, of Transform UK, said: "More people die every year in the UK from living in a cold home than die on our roads. Millions more struggle to make ends meet in the face of high energy bills. This is a national scandal."
Camco reckons that if the Government's annual £4bn revenue were recycled to households to spend on energy efficiency measures, it would be enough to bring nine out of 10 households out of fuel poverty. It could also be used to create 200,000 jobs and quadruple carbon emission cuts compared to the Government's new energy efficiency schemes, it claims.
Mr Matthew said that if carbon revenue – from the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and Carbon Floor Price – were recycled back to households to spend on energy efficiency measures, it could be used to help all households or used to support the most vulnerable.
"It could provide, for example, an average grant of £6,500 to make 600,000 fuel-poor homes highly energy efficient every year," he said.
"This would bring down their energy bills each year by £310 and remove nine out of 10 homes from fuel poverty in 15 years. The rest would have their homes brought up to the energy efficiency standard of a home built today."
A petition is being launched today at www.energybillrevolution.org to raise support for the Energy Bill Revolution campaign. It is already backed by more than 50 charities, unions, consumer groups and businesses, including Save the Children, the National Pensioners' Convention, Consumer Focus and the Co-operative Group.
Paul Monaghan, head of social goals at the Co-operative, said: "The UK can get to grips with fuel poverty and not only keep carbon emissions reducing, but secure increased buy-in from the general public. Right now the elderly and poor suffer the most, but left unchecked this is going to become an issue for everyday families."
Last week the children's charity Barnardo's said rising energy prices have left the poorest families £450 short of being able to adequately heat their homes. Barnardo's chief executive Anne Marie Carrie said: "We need to get serious about tackling fuel poverty. Families should never have to choose between whether to heat their homes or put food on the table for children."
She said poorer families are most hit by energy companies because they use pre-payment meters to pay off debt and to pay for gas and electricity.
"Effectively these families are being penalised by their payment method at a time when they need the most financial help," she said. "Energy companies have a moral duty to behave responsibly by ensuring that the poorest families are on the lowest tariffs available and that prices for pre-payment meters are brought down to the same rates as online tariffs."
She urged the Government to tackle fuel poverty by bringing forward the requirement on landlords to make their properties energy efficient for tenants.
The Independent
26.2.12
Espiral de violência na Síria
Júlio de Magalhães, em Lisboa (www.expresso.pt)
Domingo, 26 de fevereiro de 2012
Realizou-se no passado dia 24, em Tunis, uma conferência internacional auto-intitulada "Os Amigos da Síria", com a participação de cerca de 60 países, registando-se a ausência, óbvia, da Rússia e da China.
A conferência foi apadrinhada pelo novo poder político tunisino, pertencente ao partido islâmico Ennahda, o que não obstou a que centenas de tunisinos e de sírios residentes na Tunísia manifestassem a sua oposição à iniciativa, tentando invadir o hotel onde se realizava a reunião, e que foram dispersos pela polícia.
Os grandes corifeus deste encontro foram a secretária de Estado norte-americana, Hillary Clinton e o ministro saudita dos Negócios Estrangeiros, Saud Al-Faisal, bem como o presidente do principal grupo de oposição sírio, o Conselho Nacional Sírio (CNS), Burham Ghallioun. Existem vários grupos de oposição na Síria, que não se entendem uns com os outros.
Tendo as Nações Unidas e a Liga Árabe concordado em designar o ex-secretário-geral da ONU, Kofi Annan, como enviado especial a Damasco, com a missão de tentar encontrar uma solução que ponha termo aos confrontos, foi principal preocupação desta reunião a ajuda humanitária e a elaboração de um pedido da Liga Árabe ao Conselho de Segurança no sentido deste aprovar o envio para o terreno de uma força de paz conjunta ONU/Liga Árabe, já que o mesmo Conselho chumbou há dias, com o veto da Rússia e da China, a proposta de Resolução apresentada pelos Estados Unidos, pela Liga Árabe e por alguns países ocidentais, que, com "propósitos humanitários", preconizava a invasão da Síria, a deposição do presidente Bashar Al-Assad e a queda do regime. O "pequeno" óbice do veto sino-russo determinou que os propósitos desta conferência dos "amigos da Síria" fossem agora mais modestos, o que desiludiu o representante do CNS e também alguns países mais impetuosos, mesmo entre os árabes, como a Tunísia, a Líbia, a Arábia Saudita, o Qatar, o Bahrein, o Kuwait, o Oman e os Emirados Árabes Unidos, que pretendiam, para já, uma intervenção armada. O ministro saudita dos Negócios Estrangeiros declarou mesmo que o seu país tem estado a fornecer armamento à oposição síria, o que já se sabia, tal como os outros países do Golfo e também a Turquia, sendo que parte dessas armas é de proveniência americana ou doutros países ocidentais. A entrada das armas está a fazer-se pelas fronteiras da Jordânia e da Turquia, sendo que, por ironia, as armas turcas apreendidas pelos soldados regulares sírios estão a ser entregues aos curdos do PKK, inimigos do governo de Ankara.
A situação na Síria pode resumir-se, grosso modo, nos seguintes pontos:
1) Havia na Síria uma parcela minoritária da população descontente com o regime alauita da família Assad;
2) As revoluções da "Primavera Árabe" levaram esses descontentes, entusiasmados com o sucesso das insurreições na Tunísia e no Egipto (na Líbia houve uma intervenção armada estrangeira e no Bahrein as manifestações foram esmagadas pelas tropas sauditas) a promover manifestações de desagrado contra o governo sírio, a partir da cidade de Deraa;
3) Tendo as manifestações alastrado a outras cidades, o governo sírio procedeu a uma repressão quiçá desproporcionada, iniciando-se uma espiral de violência;
4) O "mundo ocidental" e também as monarquias do Golfo estimularam e apoiaram a contestação ao regime, com dinheiro, armas e mesmo soldados. Muitos dos combatentes anti-regime são árabes mas não são sírios;
5) Não é segredo para ninguém que existe um plano americano e ocidental para derrubar o regime sírio, o último regime laico de um país árabe, substituí-lo por um regime pró-ocidental e assim proporcionar um mais fácil ataque ao Irão;
6) A "comunidade internacional", porém, avaliou mal o volume de contestação da população síria. Muito mais de metade da população síria apoia o regime de Assad, não tanto por simpatizar especialmente com ele (há todavia muita gente que simpatiza), mas porque a sua queda desencadeará, como aconteceu e continua a verificar-se no Iraque, uma interminável guerra civil, com o caos inevitável.
7) Sendo a população síria composta por cerca de 20 confissões religiosas, de que são naturalmente indissociáveis vários interesses económicos, apenas um regime laico é susceptível de manter a ordem e a segurança no país. Os principais opositores de Assad são muçulmanos fundamentalistas, a começar pela própria Al-Qaeda e pelos sunitas patrocinados pelas monarquias do Golfo. Os alauitas, a que pertencem Assad e as principais figuras do regime, são minoritários, e existem, em percentagens distintas, sunitas, xiitas, drusos, católicos, protestantes diversos, ortodoxos gregos e outros, arménios, coptas, maronitas, melkitas, e até judeus;
8) Como a violência gera violência, têm aumentado as atrocidades de parte a parte, num conflito que dura já há cerca de um ano. Esta espiral de violência é francamente favorável aos apologistas de uma intervenção armada no país;
9) É curioso verificar-se o apoio que os fundamentalistas islâmicos que estão já no poder (Tunísia e Líbia; o Egipto é um caso em suspenso, apesar da recente eleição para a Assembleia Nacional ter registado uma votação de 70% nos partidos islamistas) prestam aos Estados Unidos e países da NATO. As monarquias da Península Arábica, que sempre foram pró-americanas, não causam admiração. Mas esta estranha aliança do "mundo ocidental" com o fundamentalismo islâmico não pode deixar de causar perplexidade, já que o ex-presidente Bush convocara o mundo "livre" para uma luta contra a Al-Qaeda e o extremismo islâmico, uma Cruzada contra o Mal, em nome da qual invadiu o Afeganistão e o Iraque. Como diria Fernando Pessoa, "Malhas que o Império tece".
Que mais surpresas nos reservará o futuro?
http://aeiou.expresso.pt/maghreb--machrek=s25484#ixzz1nUFCVhZO
Domingo, 26 de fevereiro de 2012
Realizou-se no passado dia 24, em Tunis, uma conferência internacional auto-intitulada "Os Amigos da Síria", com a participação de cerca de 60 países, registando-se a ausência, óbvia, da Rússia e da China.
A conferência foi apadrinhada pelo novo poder político tunisino, pertencente ao partido islâmico Ennahda, o que não obstou a que centenas de tunisinos e de sírios residentes na Tunísia manifestassem a sua oposição à iniciativa, tentando invadir o hotel onde se realizava a reunião, e que foram dispersos pela polícia.
Os grandes corifeus deste encontro foram a secretária de Estado norte-americana, Hillary Clinton e o ministro saudita dos Negócios Estrangeiros, Saud Al-Faisal, bem como o presidente do principal grupo de oposição sírio, o Conselho Nacional Sírio (CNS), Burham Ghallioun. Existem vários grupos de oposição na Síria, que não se entendem uns com os outros.
Tendo as Nações Unidas e a Liga Árabe concordado em designar o ex-secretário-geral da ONU, Kofi Annan, como enviado especial a Damasco, com a missão de tentar encontrar uma solução que ponha termo aos confrontos, foi principal preocupação desta reunião a ajuda humanitária e a elaboração de um pedido da Liga Árabe ao Conselho de Segurança no sentido deste aprovar o envio para o terreno de uma força de paz conjunta ONU/Liga Árabe, já que o mesmo Conselho chumbou há dias, com o veto da Rússia e da China, a proposta de Resolução apresentada pelos Estados Unidos, pela Liga Árabe e por alguns países ocidentais, que, com "propósitos humanitários", preconizava a invasão da Síria, a deposição do presidente Bashar Al-Assad e a queda do regime. O "pequeno" óbice do veto sino-russo determinou que os propósitos desta conferência dos "amigos da Síria" fossem agora mais modestos, o que desiludiu o representante do CNS e também alguns países mais impetuosos, mesmo entre os árabes, como a Tunísia, a Líbia, a Arábia Saudita, o Qatar, o Bahrein, o Kuwait, o Oman e os Emirados Árabes Unidos, que pretendiam, para já, uma intervenção armada. O ministro saudita dos Negócios Estrangeiros declarou mesmo que o seu país tem estado a fornecer armamento à oposição síria, o que já se sabia, tal como os outros países do Golfo e também a Turquia, sendo que parte dessas armas é de proveniência americana ou doutros países ocidentais. A entrada das armas está a fazer-se pelas fronteiras da Jordânia e da Turquia, sendo que, por ironia, as armas turcas apreendidas pelos soldados regulares sírios estão a ser entregues aos curdos do PKK, inimigos do governo de Ankara.
A situação na Síria pode resumir-se, grosso modo, nos seguintes pontos:
1) Havia na Síria uma parcela minoritária da população descontente com o regime alauita da família Assad;
2) As revoluções da "Primavera Árabe" levaram esses descontentes, entusiasmados com o sucesso das insurreições na Tunísia e no Egipto (na Líbia houve uma intervenção armada estrangeira e no Bahrein as manifestações foram esmagadas pelas tropas sauditas) a promover manifestações de desagrado contra o governo sírio, a partir da cidade de Deraa;
3) Tendo as manifestações alastrado a outras cidades, o governo sírio procedeu a uma repressão quiçá desproporcionada, iniciando-se uma espiral de violência;
4) O "mundo ocidental" e também as monarquias do Golfo estimularam e apoiaram a contestação ao regime, com dinheiro, armas e mesmo soldados. Muitos dos combatentes anti-regime são árabes mas não são sírios;
5) Não é segredo para ninguém que existe um plano americano e ocidental para derrubar o regime sírio, o último regime laico de um país árabe, substituí-lo por um regime pró-ocidental e assim proporcionar um mais fácil ataque ao Irão;
6) A "comunidade internacional", porém, avaliou mal o volume de contestação da população síria. Muito mais de metade da população síria apoia o regime de Assad, não tanto por simpatizar especialmente com ele (há todavia muita gente que simpatiza), mas porque a sua queda desencadeará, como aconteceu e continua a verificar-se no Iraque, uma interminável guerra civil, com o caos inevitável.
7) Sendo a população síria composta por cerca de 20 confissões religiosas, de que são naturalmente indissociáveis vários interesses económicos, apenas um regime laico é susceptível de manter a ordem e a segurança no país. Os principais opositores de Assad são muçulmanos fundamentalistas, a começar pela própria Al-Qaeda e pelos sunitas patrocinados pelas monarquias do Golfo. Os alauitas, a que pertencem Assad e as principais figuras do regime, são minoritários, e existem, em percentagens distintas, sunitas, xiitas, drusos, católicos, protestantes diversos, ortodoxos gregos e outros, arménios, coptas, maronitas, melkitas, e até judeus;
8) Como a violência gera violência, têm aumentado as atrocidades de parte a parte, num conflito que dura já há cerca de um ano. Esta espiral de violência é francamente favorável aos apologistas de uma intervenção armada no país;
9) É curioso verificar-se o apoio que os fundamentalistas islâmicos que estão já no poder (Tunísia e Líbia; o Egipto é um caso em suspenso, apesar da recente eleição para a Assembleia Nacional ter registado uma votação de 70% nos partidos islamistas) prestam aos Estados Unidos e países da NATO. As monarquias da Península Arábica, que sempre foram pró-americanas, não causam admiração. Mas esta estranha aliança do "mundo ocidental" com o fundamentalismo islâmico não pode deixar de causar perplexidade, já que o ex-presidente Bush convocara o mundo "livre" para uma luta contra a Al-Qaeda e o extremismo islâmico, uma Cruzada contra o Mal, em nome da qual invadiu o Afeganistão e o Iraque. Como diria Fernando Pessoa, "Malhas que o Império tece".
Que mais surpresas nos reservará o futuro?
http://aeiou.expresso.pt/maghreb--machrek=s25484#ixzz1nUFCVhZO
24.2.12
Sequelas da reviravolta na Líbia
Nearly 130,000 people have been displaced by fighting between Tuareg rebels and government forces since mid-January in Mali, the UN has warned.
The clashes had displaced an estimated 60,000 people inside Mali, and a further 69,000 had fled to neighbouring countries, a spokesman told the BBC.
Adrian Edwards warned that basic supplies were urgently needed, as those displaced "don't have anything".
Dozens are feared to have died, but independent information is scarce.
The Azawad National Liberation Movement (MNLA), which wants independence for the northern region of Mali, took up arms last month and has launched attacks on northern towns and army bases.
It came after many Tuareg fighters returned from Libya, where they had fought alongside Col Muammar Gaddafi's forces.
Rights groups have urged the government, meanwhile, not to bomb civilians.
The resurgence in fighting follows two years of relative peace between the government and the Tuareg.
'Critical' needs
"Over a space of a few weeks we have seen literally tens of thousands of people being displaced to at least four countries surrounding Mali, plus smaller numbers in Togo, Guinea as well," Mr Edwards said.
He said there were an estimated 60,000 inside Mali, as well as some 29,000 in Niger, 22,000 in Mauritania and 18,000 in Burkina Faso.
The estimated 130,000 people displaced by the fighting is about 0.8% of the entire Malian population, which was estimated at 15.8m in 2011 - and a far greater proportion of the harsh, arid north part of the country.
Mr Edwards warned that there were "quite critical" needs for basic supplies - including shelter, food, water and medicines.
As well as that, many displaced were in a region chronically affected by food insecurity already, he said.
BBC
The clashes had displaced an estimated 60,000 people inside Mali, and a further 69,000 had fled to neighbouring countries, a spokesman told the BBC.
Adrian Edwards warned that basic supplies were urgently needed, as those displaced "don't have anything".
Dozens are feared to have died, but independent information is scarce.
The Azawad National Liberation Movement (MNLA), which wants independence for the northern region of Mali, took up arms last month and has launched attacks on northern towns and army bases.
It came after many Tuareg fighters returned from Libya, where they had fought alongside Col Muammar Gaddafi's forces.
Rights groups have urged the government, meanwhile, not to bomb civilians.
The resurgence in fighting follows two years of relative peace between the government and the Tuareg.
'Critical' needs
"Over a space of a few weeks we have seen literally tens of thousands of people being displaced to at least four countries surrounding Mali, plus smaller numbers in Togo, Guinea as well," Mr Edwards said.
He said there were an estimated 60,000 inside Mali, as well as some 29,000 in Niger, 22,000 in Mauritania and 18,000 in Burkina Faso.
The estimated 130,000 people displaced by the fighting is about 0.8% of the entire Malian population, which was estimated at 15.8m in 2011 - and a far greater proportion of the harsh, arid north part of the country.
Mr Edwards warned that there were "quite critical" needs for basic supplies - including shelter, food, water and medicines.
As well as that, many displaced were in a region chronically affected by food insecurity already, he said.
BBC
21.2.12
A agitação no Norte do Mali
Mali has rapidly moved from peaceful political campaigning to bloody military confrontation and inter-communal strife
Battle-hardened fighters of the Mouvement national pour la libération de l’Azawad – equipped with heavy weapons they brought back from Libya – are confronting the Malian army in hard combat for the control of key towns. Well-led and highly experienced, the Tuareg MNLA launched its offensive in January, having returned to Mali late in 2011 from the defence of Bani Walid, the last stronghold of forces loyal to the late Libyan leader, Colonel Moammar el Gadaffi. Africa Confidential
Battle-hardened fighters of the Mouvement national pour la libération de l’Azawad – equipped with heavy weapons they brought back from Libya – are confronting the Malian army in hard combat for the control of key towns. Well-led and highly experienced, the Tuareg MNLA launched its offensive in January, having returned to Mali late in 2011 from the defence of Bani Walid, the last stronghold of forces loyal to the late Libyan leader, Colonel Moammar el Gadaffi. Africa Confidential
19.2.12
É arriscado atacar o Irão (ou a Síria)
William Hague has warned Israel that military action against Iran would not be "a wise thing".
Amid rumours that the Israeli government is considering strikes against Iran within months, Hague insisted economic sanctions and negotiations had to be given a real chance to convince Tehran to abandon its nuclear ambitions.
In an interview on BBC1's Andrew Marr Show, the foreign secretary repeated his warning that a nuclear-armed Iran would result in another cold war in the Middle East.
"They would either be attacked and there would be a war, or there would be a cold war in which Iran for the long term would be subject to these very intense economic sanctions and they would find that other nations in their region developed nuclear weapons," he said.
Hague cautioned against military action, although he said it was not ruled out as an option. "I don't think a wise thing at this moment is for Israel to launch a military attack on Iran," he said. "I think Israel like everyone else in the world should be giving a real chance to the approach we have adopted on very serious economic sanctions and economic pressure and the readiness to negotiate with Iran. That's what we need to make a success of."
Hague said Israel did not share its plans with Britain. "We do not take any options off the table, we don't know how the situation will develop, it would be unwise to do that," he said. "But our approach is 100% diplomatically and economically focused to bring Iran to the negotiating table."
Hague said there was "no specific information" about a threat to the London Olympics from any Tehran-backed terrorists. But he acknowledged: "Clearly Iran has been involved increasingly in illegal and potentially terrorist activity in other parts of the world.
"I think Iran has increased its willingness to contemplate utterly illegal activities in other parts of the world. This is part of the danger that Iran is presenting to the peace of the world."
The Guardian
Amid rumours that the Israeli government is considering strikes against Iran within months, Hague insisted economic sanctions and negotiations had to be given a real chance to convince Tehran to abandon its nuclear ambitions.
In an interview on BBC1's Andrew Marr Show, the foreign secretary repeated his warning that a nuclear-armed Iran would result in another cold war in the Middle East.
"They would either be attacked and there would be a war, or there would be a cold war in which Iran for the long term would be subject to these very intense economic sanctions and they would find that other nations in their region developed nuclear weapons," he said.
Hague cautioned against military action, although he said it was not ruled out as an option. "I don't think a wise thing at this moment is for Israel to launch a military attack on Iran," he said. "I think Israel like everyone else in the world should be giving a real chance to the approach we have adopted on very serious economic sanctions and economic pressure and the readiness to negotiate with Iran. That's what we need to make a success of."
Hague said Israel did not share its plans with Britain. "We do not take any options off the table, we don't know how the situation will develop, it would be unwise to do that," he said. "But our approach is 100% diplomatically and economically focused to bring Iran to the negotiating table."
Hague said there was "no specific information" about a threat to the London Olympics from any Tehran-backed terrorists. But he acknowledged: "Clearly Iran has been involved increasingly in illegal and potentially terrorist activity in other parts of the world.
"I think Iran has increased its willingness to contemplate utterly illegal activities in other parts of the world. This is part of the danger that Iran is presenting to the peace of the world."
The Guardian
Irão solidário com a Síria
Iranian warships have crossed the Suez Canal and docked in Syria's port city of Tartous, Iranian state media has reported.
The Mehr news agency said on Sunday that Tehran's show of support has caused "extreme worry for zionist forces".
Youcef Bouandel, professor of international affairs at Qatar University, told Al Jazeear that Iran's deployment has to be viewed as part of a "broader picture" - that it to say that the Iranian government feels that "Syria is the first step towards putting Iran in the corner".
"Iran has been having a few standoffs with the West in general over its nuclear programme and over its oil emabrgo," said Bouandel, who said that the docking of the ships on the Syrian coast had two largely symbolic meanings.
"Iran has been threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz and has been a strong ally of Syria over the last year in particular ... the two ships ... crossed the Suez Canal without being stopped or searched [which] suggests that they do not carry any weapons," he said.
Tensions over the nature of Iran's nuclear programme have lead to ever-tightening sanctions on the country's oil exports, prompting Iran to threaten to close the strait, the world's most important chokepoint for oil transport.
Move a 'provocation'
Reacting to the news on Saturday, Israel's foreign ministry denounced the deployment as a "provocation" and a "power play."
Israel said it will be watching the ships' movements closely to ensure they do not approach its coast.
Tom Donilon, the US national security advisor is due to meet Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, in Jerusalam on Sunday where the deployment is expected to be discussed.
"The strategic navy of the Islamic Republic of Iran has passed through the Suez Canal for the second time since the [1979] Islamic Revolution," Admiral Habibollah Sayari said in remarks quoted by the official IRNA news agency.
Sayari did not say how many vessels had crossed the canal, or what missions they were planning to carry out in the Mediterranean, but said the flotilla had previously docked in the Saudi port city of Jeddah.
Two Iranian ships, the destroyer Shahid Qandi and supply vessel Kharg, had docked in the Red Sea port on February 4, according to Iranian media.
Al Jazeera
The Mehr news agency said on Sunday that Tehran's show of support has caused "extreme worry for zionist forces".
Youcef Bouandel, professor of international affairs at Qatar University, told Al Jazeear that Iran's deployment has to be viewed as part of a "broader picture" - that it to say that the Iranian government feels that "Syria is the first step towards putting Iran in the corner".
"Iran has been having a few standoffs with the West in general over its nuclear programme and over its oil emabrgo," said Bouandel, who said that the docking of the ships on the Syrian coast had two largely symbolic meanings.
"Iran has been threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz and has been a strong ally of Syria over the last year in particular ... the two ships ... crossed the Suez Canal without being stopped or searched [which] suggests that they do not carry any weapons," he said.
Tensions over the nature of Iran's nuclear programme have lead to ever-tightening sanctions on the country's oil exports, prompting Iran to threaten to close the strait, the world's most important chokepoint for oil transport.
Move a 'provocation'
Reacting to the news on Saturday, Israel's foreign ministry denounced the deployment as a "provocation" and a "power play."
Israel said it will be watching the ships' movements closely to ensure they do not approach its coast.
Tom Donilon, the US national security advisor is due to meet Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, in Jerusalam on Sunday where the deployment is expected to be discussed.
"The strategic navy of the Islamic Republic of Iran has passed through the Suez Canal for the second time since the [1979] Islamic Revolution," Admiral Habibollah Sayari said in remarks quoted by the official IRNA news agency.
Sayari did not say how many vessels had crossed the canal, or what missions they were planning to carry out in the Mediterranean, but said the flotilla had previously docked in the Saudi port city of Jeddah.
Two Iranian ships, the destroyer Shahid Qandi and supply vessel Kharg, had docked in the Red Sea port on February 4, according to Iranian media.
Al Jazeera
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)
