Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Angola denies reports on banning Islam

           

 

 
Angola's oil boom has attracted large west and north African Muslim expatriates [EPA]
Angola's government has denied it had banned Islam and closed mosques in the country, after media speculation that sparked outrage among Muslims worldwide.
"There is no war in Angola against Islam or any other religion," said Manuel Fernando, director of the National Institute for Religious Affairs, part of the ministry of culture,  onTuesday.
"There is no official position that targets the destruction or closure of places of worship, whichever they are."
David Ja, a spokesman for local Muslims, challenged the government's account and said that a number of mosques had already been closed.
But according to the ministry of culture, those closures were related to a lack of necessary land titles, building licenses or other official documents.
A witness in the province of Uige (Carmona) told Al Jazeera that the closed mosques were hastility built by expatriate communities from west and north Africa who needed a place to perform Friday prayers.
“It’s true that several mosques have been destroyed and others simply shut down in the last few months. Most of the mosques that were destroyed were built without government permission. Two authorised mosques in Luanda are still operating without a problem. I have not heard of any official decision to ban Islam or prohibit Muslim prayers in mosques.” Ahmed ould Taher told Al Jazeera.
Worldwide media coverage
Reports that Angola, a traditionally devout Catholic nation, would crack down on Muslims had drawn condemnation from the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and others.
In Egypt, mufti Shawqi Allam said such a move would be "a provocation not only to Angolan Muslims but to more than 1.5 billion Muslims all over the world".
The issue, which was first reported late last week, attracted huge media coverage worldwide and generated strong reactions on social media.
The controversy was further fueled by the government's poor communication on the issue. 
The oil-rich southern African nation has a population of about 18 million people, several hundred thousand of whom are Muslims.
Religious organisations are required to apply for accreditation in Angola, which currently recognises 83, all of them Christian.
In October the justice ministry rejected the applications of 194 organisations, including one from an umbrella Islamic community group.
Angola's oil boom has attracted large expatriate communities from across the world.

Nine killed in clashes between army, Islamist group in Benghazi, Libya

 

 Heavy fighting continued Monday in Benghazi between Libyan army forces and an Islamist militant group the United States blames for the attack last year on its diplomatic mission that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
LANA, Libya's state news agency, reported that at least six soldiers and one civilian were killed and 39 people were injured, most of them soldiers, in the clashes Sunday between the military and the group Ansar al-Sharia. On Monday, the Libyan government said that at least nine people were killed and 49 injured.
A senior Libyan military official in the city, speaking to CNN on condition of anonymity for security reasons, said heavy fighting continued Monday morning as troops engaged members of the group in different parts of Benghazi.
At midday, residents and state media reported a tense calm in the city.
Schools in Benghazi were closed, and security forces, through alerts on state media, asked residents to remain indoors Monday morning as troops worked to secure the city.
The fighting was not a planned operation but a "reaction" to an attack on the army by members of the group Sunday night, the official said. He said members of a military special forces group called Thunderbolt, with support from local residents, responded with raids on Ansar al-Sharia locations in Benghazi.
The official said the fighting Monday morning was intense, with Ansar al-Sharia fighters using mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons. He described the situation as very tense after reports that Ansar al-Sharia might be receiving reinforcements from the eastern city of Derna, where jihadist groups are active.
Libyan state media reported that military forces were securing all main roads and entrances to the city.
A Benghazi resident told CNN that heavy clashes broke out Sunday night, and gunfire and explosions intensified Monday morning across the city.
"This is really the heaviest fighting I have heard in Benghazi since the revolution" he said "Ansar al-Sharia versus the army, this has been a long time coming."
Militant group returns
After the assault on the U.S. Consulate last year, Benghazi residents attacked the headquarters of Islamist militias in the city, including Ansar al-Sharia's base. The group left the base but later returned.
During a visit to Benghazi this year, a CNN team confirmed that Ansar al-Sharia was back at its base and the group had a checkpoint at a western entrance to the city.
The government has been struggling to control the hundreds of militia groups that operate freely across the country, including some radical militant groups with ties to al Qaeda in eastern Libya.
 
Over the past year, there has been a significant deterioration in the security situation in Benghazi, which is Libya's second-largest city and the cradle of the 2011 revolution.
After an uptick in violence in the city, most notably in an assassination campaign that has primarily targeted security force members, most of whom held positions under the former regime, the government announced a security plan to secure the city.
This month, Benghazi residents reported an increased Libyan army presence, most notably the Thunderbolt forces working to secure the city.
Bombings and shootings have targeted army checkpoints and patrols, and a senior military official escaped an assassination attempt when a bomb targeted his car in Benghazi this month.
The violence is blamed on Islamist extremist groups in the city.

China says it monitored U.S. B-52s that flew through its new air zone

 


Japan, China in dispute over claimed space

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • The Chinese military says it identified the U.S. military aircraft
  • U.S. official: B-52s didn't tell Beijing about flights over China's new air defense zone
  • Washington and Tokyo have criticized Beijing's declaration of the new zone
  • They say it increases tensions and raises risks of an incident
Hong Kong (CNN) -- China monitored two unarmed U.S. military aircraft that flew through its newly declared air defense zone on Monday without identifying themselves, the Ministry of National Defense said Wednesday.
"The Chinese military conducted monitoring during the entire course and identified the type of U.S. aircraft," said Col. Geng Yansheng, a spokesman for the ministry.
The U.S. Air Force B-52 planes, which were on a training mission, set off Monday from Guam and returned there without incident after spending about an hour in China's claimed air defense identification zone in the East China Sea, according to a U.S. official, who declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the situation.
 
U.S. defies China with B-52 flight
The flights came two days after China unilaterally announced the creation of the air zone over a large area of the sea including several islands over which Beijing and Tokyo both claim sovereignty. The two Asian countries have been sharply at odds over those small, remote isles, which are believed to be near large reserves of natural resources.
The United States and Japan have criticized the Chinese air zone declaration, saying it escalates tensions in the region and raises the risk of an incident.
China has hit back at both countries, calling the U.S. comments "completely unreasonable" and the Japanese remarks "utterly groundless."
The United States has said it won't recognize the new zone or China's request that aircraft entering it identify themselves and file flight plans. The flights of the B-52s on Monday demonstrated that stance.
The Chinese defense ministry's statement Wednesday appeared cautious, omitting any criticism of the U.S. action.
"China has the capabilities to conduct effective control over relevant airspace," Geng said in comments posted on the ministry's website.

Monday, November 25, 2013

Iran deal may define Barack Obama's legacy, for better or worse

 

Watch this videoObama reacts to Iran nuclear deal
 
 President Obama's record on foreign policy has changed dramatically since taking office -- he now has one.
What was arguably candidate Barack Obama's biggest weakness in 2008 may become President Obama's biggest strength with the announcement of an interim deal with Iran to slow that country's nuclear program.
Since taking office in 2009, the President can boast successes including ending the war in Iraq, winding down the war in Afghanistan and killing al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
But unlike the other events, the Iran deal brings a tremendous amount of risk that could yield high reward or total catastrophe: It could end in either a more peaceful world or a nuclear Iran.
State of play
The President has had a rough go of it in the past two months, largely due to the disastrous rollout of HealthCare.gov. The latest CNN/ORC poll, which was released last week, has his approval rating at 41% -- the lowest of his presidency.
However, the same poll found that 56% of Americans said they would favor the kind of interim deal with Iran that was reached Saturday.
Republican strategist Alex Castellanos said on CNN's State of the Union Sunday that the deal could help the President's public perception.
Implications of the Iran nuclear deal
"We may have encouraged more violence"
Political panel debates Iran deal & more
 
"Any time you see the President on the world stage, captain of the ship of state, you see him as the father figure for the country," Castellanos said. "That's a good thing for the President politically."
Domestic impact
But that picture could get clouded if he doesn't have the support of Congress.
The deal between Iran and the six negotiating nations -- the United Kingdom, the United States, France, China, Russia and Germany -- has been met with staunch opposition, even from members of Obama's own party.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, an important Democratic voice on Iran, said the deal disproportionately favors the Islamic republic, and he predicted bipartisan support in Congress for new sanctions.
"This disproportionality of this agreement makes it more likely that Democrats and Republicans will join together and pass additional sanctions when we return in December. I intend to discuss that possibility with my colleagues," the senator from New York said.
And on State of the Union, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-New York, said the deal makes it "very difficult" to continue sanctions that are considered effective at hobbling Iran's nuclear capabilities.
Congress could choose to try to circumvent the deal and impose new sanctions on Iran, starting another battle between the President and the Congress.
Such an action would be a huge embarrassment for Obama internationally if Congress successfully undermines him.
"Weakness invites the wolves," Castellanos said. "When you are in a weak position politically as leader of the United States ... you're a little more open to things you shouldn't be open to."
With trust between the executive and legislative branches extremely low, the Iran deal could drive a bigger wedge between the two sides.
International impact
Also at stake is the United States' relationship with its allies in the Middle East.
On Sunday, Israel and Saudi Arabia slammed the deal, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calling it a "historic mistake."
"They're afraid this deal is the start between the United States and Iran that will take us off Saudi Arabia's side and put us on Iran's side," Ken Pollack of the Brookings Institution said on CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS.
While allies worry that the deal might weaken their relationship with the United States or put their security at risk, CNN's Zakaria said the alternative could be worse.
"Had the Geneva talks broken down this week, Iran would have continued to expand its nuclear program," he said, adding that Iran has increased the number of centrifuges from 160 to 19,000 in the past decade.
Russia and China, two countries that have tenuous relationships with the United States and have closer ties to Iran, support the deal.
Retreat or redefine?
While he has received bipartisan praise for some of his foreign policy initiatives, Obama has been criticized by opponents for acquiescing American leadership.
Castellanos said some might look at this deal as another example of the President "retreating from the world."
"It's our presence and strength that keeps the world peaceful," he said. "As we approach a more global kind of perspective, we're just one of many countries that is working to make the world a better place, the world is more uncertain."
His supporters, however, have praised his foreign policy philosophy.
Bill Burton, a former adviser and deputy press secretary for Obama, said the deal shows "a significant shift in American foreign policy" that includes consensus-building and diplomatic engagement.
While the interim deal is only the first stage of multistep negotiations that could unravel at any time, only time will tell how it will be remembered by future historians examining Obama's legacy.
 

Zimbabwe gives foreign shops 30-day ultimatum

             
 
Foreigners in retail businesses must abide by a 30-day deadline to relinquish them or face prosecution [EPA]
Foreigners operating retail and wholesale businesses in Zimbabwe risk being arrested if they continue doing business after a deadline for them to relinquish their businesses to Zimbabweans, state media has reported.
The state-controlled Herald newspaper said on Friday that the move was in line with the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Act.
It added barbershops, hairdressings, beauty salons, bakeries, employment agencies and grain milling to the list of those who may be prosecuted if they fail to comply.
The Herald said the threat was made by George Magosvongwe, the Secretary for Youth, Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment, while appearing before a parliamentary committee in Harare, the capital.
The Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Act also lists agriculture, transportation, estate agencies, tobacco grading and packaging, advertising agencies, milk processing and provision of local arts and crafts as reserved sectors of the economy.
"I confirm that some non-indigenous entities are still operating in the reserved sectors and there is a deadline for January 1 for them to comply with the requirement to relinquish their holdings in that sector," Magosvongwe was quoted by the paper as saying.
Magosvongwe said the government was in the process of identifying indigenous Zimbabweans who would take over ownership of the businesses, the Herald reported.

Chinese retailers
This, he said, was meant to avoid creating shortages when the foreigners leave.
"There is need to ensure that we don’t create shortages in the economy, but certainly the ministry is going to enforce the reserved sectors rule," he said.
"And we will bring in the enforcement agencies from right across the Government departments and the local authorities to ensure that enforcement happens."
The paper said Nigerians and the Chinese who flooded the country in recent years were likely to be the biggest casualties as they set up shops dealing in various wares in almost every town.
Last August Robert Mugabe, the Zimbabwean president, threatened to expel foreign-owned firms over what he said was the West's interference in the politics of the country since 1980, when the country gained independence from the UK.
That threat came nearly a month after he won elections that the European Union and the United States refused to recognise, saying they were marred by irregularities.
One of the longest-serving presidents in Africa, Mugabe embarked on land reform more than a decade ago, seizing commercial farms owned by white Zimbabweans and giving them to landless people in a move that was widely criticised by Western governments and the media.
The 89-year-old leader has said he needs no "ideas from London or Washington" both of which imposed sanctions on senior figures in his ruling ZANU-PF over human rights violations.

20 questions about the Iran nuclear deal: What it says, what's at stake, what's next

 
EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius share a hug while German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov talk.
EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius share a hug while German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov talk.
 
When it comes to Iran and the West, the relationship has been convoluted for decades. And this deal is no different. After days of negotiations, six world powers and Tehran reached an agreement that calls on Iran to limit its nuclear activities in return for lighter sanctions. It's complicated politics coupled with complicated science.
Here's a quick primer to get you up to speed.
How did Iran's nuclear program start?
The United States launched a nuclear program with Iran in 1957. Back then, the Shah ruled Iran and the two countries were still friends. With backing from the United States, Iran started developing its nuclear power program in the 1970s. But the U.S. pulled its support when the Shah was overthrown during the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
Who are these 'six world powers'?
 
Diplomacy leads to Iran nuclear deal
The talks involved the P5+1 group comprising diplomats from the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council: U.S., UK, France, Russia and China, plus Germany -- and of course Iran. The group has been meeting in Geneva for days in hopes of reaching a diplomatic solution.
 
Reaction to deal in Tehran
Is Iran the only nation with a nuclear program?
Iran deal 'important step forward'
No.
Eight nations are known to have nuclear weapons, including all the P5 countries. Nearby Israel has always declined to confirm whether it has any, although the Federation of American Scientists estimates it has about 80 atomic weapons. But since the 1979 revolution, concerns have escalated that Iran could enrich uranium and make atomic weapons. Iran has maintained its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes.
Why have the other nations not faced as much scrutiny?
For nations such as India and Pakistan, no action was taken partly because they never signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. "There was very little that the U.S. could've done to stop Pakistan," says Mark Hibbs, a nuclear policy expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Iran, on the other hand, signed the treaty. And as a result, its program was put under the spotlight. In addition, the International Atomic Energy Agency had information suggesting Iran conducted activities it hasn't declared in the past.
Why is Iran's nuclear program considered such a threat?
Since its revolution, the West has worried Iran could use its nuclear program to produce atomic weapons using highly-enriched uranium. A decade ago, nuclear inspectors from the international agency announced they had found traces of highly-enriched uranium at a plant in Natanz. Iran temporarily halted enrichment, but resumed enriching again in 2006, insisting enrichment was allowed under its agreement with the IAEA.
Enough with the background. Let's talk about the deal that was reached.
It's more of an interim agreement before the deal. Described as an initial, six-month deal, the White House says it includes "substantial limitations that will help prevent Iran from creating a nuclear weapon." In short, it slows the country's nuclear development program in exchange for lifting some sanctions while a more formal agreement is worked out.
It's not permanent, so why is it a big deal?
For years, Iran and Western powers have left negotiating tables in disagreement, frustration and open animosity. But the diplomatic tone changed after Iran's election this year, which saw President Hassan Rouhani take over. "For the first time in nearly a decade, we have halted the progress of the Iranian nuclear program," U.S. President Barack Obama says.
Iran happy with 'first step'
What about the stockpiles Iran already has?
As part of the deal, Iran will be required to dilute its stockpile of uranium that had been enriched to 20%. While uranium isn't bomb-grade until it's enriched to 90% purity, "once you're at 20%, you're about 80% of the way there," Hibbs says. The deal also mandates Iran halt all enrichment above 5% and dismantle the technical equipment required to do that. Before the end of the initial phase of the deal, all its stockpiles should be diluted below 5% or converted to a form not suitable for further enrichment, the deal states.
Why 5%?
Iran consistently says it's enriching uranium and building nuclear reactors only for peaceful civilian energy needs. Nuclear power plants use uranium that is enriched to 5%. It's the fuel that the plants use to generate electricity.
What else will Iran have to do?
Iran would also have to cut back on constructing new centrifuges and enrichment facilities, and freeze essential work on its heavy-water reactor under development at Arak. That facility could be used as a source of plutonium -- a second pathway to a nuclear bomb. The reactor under construction southwest of Tehran had been a sticking point in earlier negotiations.
What's a centrifuge?
It's a mechanism used to enrich uranium.
How will we know Iran is living up to its end of the deal?
Iran is expected to provide daily access to inspectors from the international agency, IAEA. The inspectors will be expected to visit centrifuge assembly and storage facilities, uranium mills and the Arak reactor, among others. The P5+1 and Iran will also form a joint task force on the issue.
What if it doesn't fulfill its commitment?
The international community will add more sanctions -- and pressure.
What's in it for Iran?
Billions of dollars.
As part of preliminary steps, the world powers involved in the talks will provide "limited, temporary, targeted, and reversible relief to Iran."
The deal calls for no new nuclear-related sanctions in the six-month period if Iran keeps its end of the bargain. The world powers will also suspend sanctions on various items, including gold and petrochemical exports. That suspension will provide Iran with about $1.5 billion in revenue, according to the White House. Sanctions relief will also target other areas, including government funds from restricted Iranian accounts for its students in other countries.
But the White House says the $7 billion in total relief is just a small fraction. "The vast majority of Iran's approximately $100 billion in foreign exchange holdings are inaccessible or restricted by sanctions," it says.
What's not in the deal?
A better deal would have included Iranians shipping out their highly enriched uranium to be converted elsewhere, says Aaron David Miller, vice president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "It would have been better ... if Iran had much more of their nuclear infrastructure put out of use. But that's the deal they got."
How did the sanctions come to be?
Seven years ago, the U.N. Security Council passed sanctions against Iran for failing to suspend its nuclear program. Sanctions that initially targeted Iran's nuclear capability expanded to include bans on arms sales, Iranian oil and certain financial institutions, including the country's central bank. This has crippled its economy and made Iran a pariah in the international community. Oil revenues have plummeted, and the local currency had dropped 80% in value by 2012. Iranians have faced spiraling inflation and layoffs.
Why isn't Israel applauding the deal?
The two nearby countries and archrivals have been at each other's throats for years. Israel says it has the most to lose if Iran develops a nuclear bomb. It has repeatedly warned the West to tread warily when dealing with Tehran. And Israeli lawmakers are not happy that their greatest ally, the United States, has disregarded their warning and struck an interim deal with Iran. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the agreement a "historic mistake" that his country isn't bound by.
So much tension between Iran and Israel, why?
It wasn't always this way. After the birth of Israel in 1948, the two nations enjoyed a "honeymoon" that lasted until just before the 1979 revolution, says David Menashri, professor emeritus of Tel Aviv University. Israel even supplied weapons to Iran to help it fight their common enemy, Iraq. But the Islamic revolution that overthrew the Shah marked a turning point. The Islamic republic, led by Shiite clerics in the predominantly Shiite nation, saw Israel as an illegitimate state with no right to exist, certainly not amid Muslim nations. Years later, Israel began to regard Iran and its support of global terror as a chief threat. Those concerns escalated when international inspectors found traces of highly enriched uranium at a power plant in Iran.
Who else is unhappy?
Saudi Arabia. It's a majority Sunni country. Iran is majority Shiite. Saudi Arabia, like Israel, is troubled by Iran's growing clout in the Middle East. "The Saudi government has been very concerned about these negotiations with Iran and unhappy at the prospect of a deal with Iran," a Saudi government official who is not authorized to speak to the media told CNN.
So, will this interim deal work?
There are no perfect agreements. And the success of any interim deal will be measured "in months and years, not in minutes," says Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment. Whether Iran is serious about mothballing its nuclear ambitions remains to be seen. There may be sizable obstacles that aren't yet apparent. There are certainly aspects where the deal stopped short. For now, Miller says, don't break open the champagne bottles just yet.

Armenia Releases All Imprisoned Jehovah’s Witnesses

 
YEREVAN, Armenia—On November 12, 2013, Armenia released the remaining 14 Jehovah’s Witnesses imprisoned for their refusal to join the military. In total, 28 imprisoned conscientious objectors who are Jehovah’s Witnesses have been released since October 8, 2013. This signals a change in Armenia’s pattern of disregarding the right of conscientious objection, a policy that led to the imprisonment of over 450 young Witness men over the past 20 years. Now, for the first time since 1993, there are no Jehovah’s Witnesses imprisoned in Armenia for their conscientious objection to military service.
Before the November 12 release, Armenia released eight Witnesses on October 8 and 9, based on an amnesty that reduced their prison sentences by six months. Six others were released on October 24. These six were the first to benefit from amendments adopted on June 8, 2013, to Armenia’s existing law on alternative civilian service. These amendments allow conscientious objectors to apply to perform alternative service that is not under military control and supervision instead of being imprisoned.
Over 90 Witnesses have applied for this new program. On October 23 and November 12, 2013, the Republican Commission reviewed and approved the applications of 71 of these young men. The Commission announced its intention to hear the remaining cases shortly.
David A. Semonian, a spokesman for Jehovah’s Witnesses at their world headquarters in New York, states: “We are pleased that the Armenian government has released these young men and that this long-standing issue appears to be resolved.”
 
culled from www.jw.org