View previous stories
	UN Secretary-General welcomes Moscow talks on Iran’s uranium enrichment by UN News / AP / Tribune Media Services Iran   17 February 2006   UN Secretary-General welcomes Moscow talks on Iran’s uranium enrichment. (UN News)   Secretary-General Kofi Annan today welcomed reports confirming that Iran will hold talks in Moscow on 20 February on a Russian proposal on uranium enrichment, according to a statement released by his spokesman today.   “As a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, Russia’s contribution to bringing all sides back to the negotiating table is vital,” said the spokesman, Stephane Dujarric.   Mr. Dujarric said that the Secretary-General trusts that Iran will use the talks in Moscow and the period between now and early March to take the necessary steps to rebuild confidence that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively for peaceful purposes.   “He hopes that Iran will respond positively to the resolutions adopted by the IAEA Board of Governors on the implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he said.   “It is time for all those Governments who support and rely on this regime for their own and our collective security to help resolve this crisis in a way that maintains the regime’s integrity and effectiveness,” concluded Mr. Dujarric’s statement.   January 20, 2006   Iran ready to talk about proposal, Russia says. (Associated Press)   Moscow — The head of Russia"s atomic energy agency said Friday that Iran is ready for detailed discussions on the proposal to conduct Iran"s uranium enrichment in Russia.   The proposal, under which uranium would be enriched in Russia for use in Iranian reactors, is aimed at eliminating concerns that Iran could enrich its own uranium to higher levels for use in nuclear weapons.   The United States and the European Union have backed the Russian proposal as a way out of the deadlock over Iran"s nuclear program. International pressure on Iran has mounted sharply over the past two weeks since Iran removed United Nations seals on its uranium-enrichment facility in Natanz.   Western countries are pushing for Iran to be referred to the UN Security Council, a move that could bring sanctions. Russia and China have held back from supporting the referral, although the Kremlin has said it is concerned over Iran"s defiance of the international community.   Iran “considers our proposal extremely interesting and is prepared for detailed discussions,” Sergei Kiriyenko, the head of the Russian atomic energy agency, told President Vladimir Putin in televised remarks. “Our Iranian partners should come here in the near future and talks will take place constantly,” Mr. Kiriyenko said.   Tehran, 19 Jan. 2006   Link the Nuclear Program to Human Rights, by Shirin Ebadi and Muhammad Sahimi. (Tribune Media Services)   Lost in the international fury over Iran"s partial restart of its nuclear energy program and the deplorable statements by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regarding Israel is the fact that respect for human rights and democracy are the most effective deterrent against the threat that any aspiring nuclear power, including Iran, may pose to the world.   When the United States and its allies encouraged the shah to start Iran"s nuclear energy program in the 1970s, at a time when it had no economic justification, they helped create the Frankenstein that ultimately became Iran"s current nuclear program.   If, instead, they had pressed the shah to undertake political reforms, respect human rights and release Iran"s political prisoners, history could have been very different.   Since the 1970s, India, South Africa, North Korea, Israel and Pakistan have joined the nuclear club. South Africa subsequently dismantled its bombs under the democratic government of Nelson Mandela. Nobody perceives India, the world"s largest democracy, as a threat to the world. Israel is not likely to be the first nation in the Middle East to use nuclear weapons in a conflict.   But North Korea"s nuclear program is a threat because its regime is secretive and its leader a recluse. The nuclear arsenal of Pakistan is dangerous because Pakistan"s military, which runs the country and is populated by Islamic extremists, helped create the Taliban and allowed Abdul Qadeer Khan, the founder of Pakistan"s nuclear supermarket, to operate freely but secretly for so long.   Iran"s nuclear program began accelerating around 1997, when Mohammad Khatami was elected president. But the world started paying much closer attention to it in 2003.   That was because the first few years of Khatami"s presidency witnessed the development of an independent and vocal press and the election in 2000 of a reformist Parliament.   The reformists, while supporting the nuclear program, demanded that it be fully transparent and in compliance with Iran"s international obligations. These were all reassurances that Iran"s nuclear program would not get out of control.   But instead of backing Iran"s fledgling democratic movement, which would have led to nuclear transparency, the United States undercut it by demonizing Iran.   Whereas Khatami proposed people-to-people dialogue with the United States, Washington every year blocks a large number of Iranian scholars, artists and authors from visiting America.   In return for Khatami"s assistance in the war in Afghanistan, President George W. Bush designated Iran a member of the "axis of evil."   In response to the overwhelming victory of reformists in the 2000 elections to the Iranian Parliament, the United States lifted sanctions on importing Iranian pistachios and carpets - which hardly made a dent in Iran"s troubled economy.   Then by 2003, when it became clear that Khatami"s reforms had stalled and Iran"s independent press had been crushed by the hard-liners, the world started paying closer attention to Iran"s nuclear program.   So what has demonizing Iran achieved?   Addressing Iran"s nuclear program should entail neither threatening Iran with military strikes nor dragging it before the United Nations Security Council.   While a vast majority of Iranians despise the ruling hard-liners and wish for their downfall, they also support Iran"s nuclear program because, aside from being economically justified, it has become a source of national pride in an ancient nation with a glorious history.   Moreover, the driving force behind the nuclear program are hard-liners who currently control the Parliament and the presidency through rigged elections. They fiercely oppose Iran"s democratic movement and will use any threat of military attack as an excuse to crush the democratic movement.   In fact, a military attack would only inflame nationalist sentiments. Iranians remember the U.S. help to Iraq during its war with Iran. They see the double standards when the United States offers security guarantees and aid to North Korea and advanced nuclear technology to India, but nothing but sanctions and threats to Iran.   Iran is not Iraq: Given the Iranians" fierce nationalism and the Shiites" trandition of martyrdom, any military move on Iran would receive a response that would engulf the entire region in fire.   Taking Iran to the UN Security Council and imposing sanctions on it would prompt the hard-liners to leave the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and its Additional Protocol. Is the world ready to live with such terrifying prospects?   But the West does have leverage to move Iran toward democracy without interferring in its internal affairs.   The hard-liners need continued commerce with the European Union and would like the same with the United States. But in all their dialogue with Iran, the Europeans have been paying only lip service to the cause of democracy and human rights in Iran.   So, what can the West do?   First, Western nations with clean human rights records should urge the United Nations to appoint a special human rights monitor for Iran, to raise Iran"s human rights record annually at General Assembly, and to condemn it if the record keeps deteriorating.   Contrary to the general perception, Iran"s clerics are sensitive to outside criticism. There has been tangible improvement in Iran"s human rights record whenever it has been criticized at the United Nations.   Second, the World Bank should stop providing Iran with loans. Instead, it should try to work with nongovernmental organizations and the private sector in Iran to strengthen institutions of civil society.   The West should support Iran"s human rights and democracy advocates, nominate their jailed leaders for international awards and keep them and their cause in the public eyes.   Third, if the hardliners continue violating the basic human rights, the West should downgrade its diplomatic relationships with Iran.   Fourth, the EU must declare unequivocally, backed by practical steps, that new investments - which Iran badly needs - will be provided only if Iran takes practical steps towards establishing a democratic political system.   As a signatory of the nonproliferation treaty, Iran is entitled to the peaceful use of nuclear technology - including uranium enrichment, the main source of concern in its nuclear program. So demanding that Iran set aside its enrichment program forever is a non-starter.   No Iranian government, regardless of its ideology or democratic credentials, would dare stop Iran"s nuclear energy program.   The Russian proposal, to enrich uranium for Iran in Russia, is also not acceptable, since it implies that Iran should give up its rights under the nonproliferation treaty.   The fact is that Iran does not need enriched uranium for at least a decade. The latest U.S. National Intelligence Estimate indicates that Iran is at least six to 10 years away from making a nuclear bomb. So there is ample time for political reforms in Iran before it ever develops the bomb.   So the West should insist that Iran can start a limited uranium enrichment program, strictly safeguarded by the International Atomic Energy Agency in the framework of Iran"s proposal to the EU in March 2005, but only if it undertakes meaningful and lasting reforms - including the freeing of political prisoners, allowing true freedom of speech, the development of an independent press and the participation of all political groups in the political process.   Finally, the United States and Iran should enter direct negotiations. It is absurd for the United States and the most important nation in the Middle East not to have direct talks.   The Bush administration should not allow itself to be seduced by exile groups that have no support in Iran. Development of democracy is an internal affair of Iranians in Iran. The West should support them, but not try to decide for them who should run their country.   Ahmadinejad recently said, "If we abandon our enrichment program, the West will bring up our human rights record." This was a recognition that the hard-liners consider their Achilles" heel to be violation of human rights, and not violation of Iran"s international nuclear obligations.   Given a young and educated population in Iran that yearns for democracy, the steps described above would be far more effective than any other means for alleviating and even eliminating concerns about Iran"s nuclear program.   Democracy would provide the ultimate safeguards, since a truly democratic government in Iran, backed by a great majority of Iranians, could well feel secure enough not to pursue dangerous nuclear adventures.   (Shirin Ebadi, a lawyer human rights advocate, was awarded the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize. Muhammad Sahimi is professor of chemical engineering at the University of Southern California)
	Africa"s first-ever elected Female Leader takes power in Liberia by Ebba Kalondo Mail & Guardian Online - South Africa   Monrovia, Liberia. 16 January 2006 (Mail & Guardian)   Thousands of women from all over the continent travelled to celebrate not only the inauguration on Monday of Liberia"s 23rd president, but also, more importantly, to witness the installation of Africa"s first-ever elected female leader, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf.   Johnson-Sirleaf"s inauguration ends a two-year transitional period that saw an interim government led by Gyude Bryant take over in October 2003 after former president Charles Taylor was forced into exile in neighbouring Nigeria in August of the same year.   The 67-year-old economist and former top United Nations official defeated former football star George Weah in a surprisingly orderly and peaceful election campaign last November to win the presidency in a country that is only starting to emerge from 15 years of a brutal civil war that left the mineral-rich nation"s economy in tatters.   But the ranks of the more than 85% of Liberians who are unemployed have now also been swollen by thousands of former combatants, many of them illiterate children who have committed atrocities against their own villagers.   While Liberians are impatient for quick and visible changes to their daily lives, reintegrating the indisciplined former fighters back into their traumatised society remains a hard but necessary task for the new government.   Expected to announce her Cabinet later this week, Johnson-Sirleaf is almost certain to include former warlords to help her negotiate the dismantling of the remaining militias. It will take all her formidable political experience to stop the plunder of the country"s mineral resources, a process that is believed to be led by former rebels turned politicians.   Donors will also want assurance that the new president will curb rampant government corruption in order to disburse crucial aid to help Liberia rebuild basic services where electricity, running water and hospitals remain a luxury.   Yet despite the immense task ahead, the atmosphere in Monrovia on Monday was festive and the main street newly spruced up by former combatants paid $10 a day for their efforts to welcome a host of international dignitaries.   No less than five African presidents and UN Deputy Secretary General Louise Frechette were present at the inauguration ceremony. United States First Lady Laura Bush and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice were also among the many high-level visitors in Monrovia.   Analysts say apart from the many expectations of Johnson-Sirleaf"s new and as-yet-untested government, Liberians also expect concrete and enduring assistance from the US to keep the fragile peace in Liberia, on which many states in the West African sub-region rely for their own stability.   A clear change of guard was under way on Monday as the pounding of drums replaced the traditional 21-gun salute during the open-air inauguration ceremony. Liberians dearly hope they never have to hear the sounds of gunfire in their country again.   16 January 2006   Annan hails inauguration of Ellen Johnson Sirleaf as Liberia’s new president. (UN News)   United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan today hailed the inauguration of Liberia’s new president, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the first woman elected to lead an African nation.   “I also congratulate the people of Liberia who, through a peaceful and transparent electoral process, have given Mrs. Johnson Sirleaf an historic mandate to lead the nation towards a future of lasting peace and stability,” Mr. Annan said in a message on the inauguration, which was held in Monrovia with numerous dignitaries in attendance, including the UN Deputy Secretary-General.   The establishment of a democratically elected Government in Liberia culminates the peace process envisaged in the Accra Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 18 August 2003. During this period, the UN peacekeeping mission in Liberia (UNMIL) supported national efforts to achieve the transition to democracy by providing a secure environment, disarming more than 100,000 ex-combatants, facilitating the return of tens of thousands of displaced persons and refugees, and helping organize the recent free and fair elections.   The Secretary-General acknowledged that Ms. Johnson Sirleaf''s administration faces a number of pressing challenges in a country still reeling from the effects of war, including restructuring the security sector, strengthening economic governance, stimulating economic growth, strengthening the rule of law, protecting human rights, consolidating State authority and reestablishing basic services.   “In the face of these challenges, the people of Liberia are being given a unique opportunity to join together, to build a just and inclusive society, which assures the participation of all people, irrespective of political or ethnic affiliation,” he observed.   Mr. Annan called on the international community to assist the new Government in these endeavours and pledged the UN''s continued support “as Liberia lays the foundation for a better future built on peace, stability, democracy and rule of law.”   Dakar/Brussels, 13 January 2006   Liberia: Staying Focused. (International Crisis Group)   2006 is a decisive year for Liberia and with it West Africa. Just as Liberia once dragged its neighbours into a horrific war, it could now – with good policy and strong donor support – become an anchor for stability in Sierra Leone, Guinea and Côte d’Ivoire.   Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf’s inauguration as president on 16 January 2006 completes a credible election process, the first of the country’s four major peacebuilding challenges. Economic governance and security sector reform, the second and third challenges, are being addressed and must remain priorities: getting them right will give Liberia an excellent chance at long-term success. But inadequate follow-through on the Governance and Economic Management Assistance Plan (GEMAP) and the training of the new army will endanger the entire reconstruction and peacebuilding process.   Donors imposed the intrusive GEMAP regime on the transitional government because of their acute concern at the lack of accountability for reconstruction funds: accepting GEMAP is a heavy price for any government to pay, and donors have as a result some further responsibilities of their own. They must now put money on the table, including funding slowed or frozen in 2005, and channel as much of this as possible through government ministries. The urgent need is to repair decimated infrastructure as soon as possible: there is no electricity, piped water, telephone lines, or sewage system, and many roads are often or always impassable. There also needs to be established quickly an IMF Staff Monitoring Program and an accelerated path for forgiving the country’s $2.9 billion debt.   The fourth challenge, judicial reform, needs much more attention. Very little has yet been done: the new government will have to find creative solutions, and donors will need to provide significant funding.
	View more stories