Eisläuferin is part of an outstanding collection of postwar German art to be sold at Sotheby’s One of Gerhard Richter’s earliest paintings, which the artist thought had been destroyed long ago, has emerged in the most significant collection of recent German art ever to come on the market. Richter’s paintings over the past 50 years are all in his catalogue raisonné – a comprehensive list of his works. Eisläuferin, “skater”, holds a special place at No 2, but until now the only version available has been a poor-quality mono illustration on Richter’s website. The original is expected to fetch up to £3m Sotheby’s is to auction Eisläuferin along with other works from the 1960s and 1970s. The sale, in June, will include canvases by Georg Baselitz and Sigmar Polke, all assembled by German industrialist Count Christian Duerckheim. Cheyenne Westphal, Sotheby’s head of contemporary art in Europe, said of Eisläuferin: “It is a special painting last exhibited in 1963 in a very, very early group show that Richter was part of and then the artist lost sight of the piece. Basically Richter and everyone around him thought that the work was destroyed.” “We are working very closely with Richter’s archive and the team around the artist are very excited,” she said. The work is one of 59 in the sale, with a total estimated value in excess of £33m. “It is a truly outstanding collection. We’ve never seen anything like it on the market,” said Westphal, describing the paintings as a “portrait of a generation of artists”. She added: “To have a collection of this quality, depth and unbelievable freshness has never happened before.” Richter, who will have a retrospective at Tate Modern this autumn to mark his 80th birthday, is also represented by works such as Telefonierender, an early photo-painting, and 1024 Farben, a vivid colour chart. Many of the works have not been seen publicly since they were exhibited in the early 1960s. One of the auction’s highlights is Baselitz’s The Big Night Down the Drain, which Sotheby’s believes is “the most important German work of art of the postwar period to come to the market”. The canvas – showing a short, ugly man holding his outsized erect penis – was inspired by a newspaper story about Irish poet Brendan Behan reading his work on stage, drunk and with his flies open. In 1963 it was confiscated by the German authorities for “infringement of public morality”. Baselitz got the painting back only after several years, and several court cases. The Big Night Down the Drain has a sale estimate of £2m-£3m. During a 2007 retrospective in London, curator Norman Rosenthal wrote: “The artist recently stated in public that perhaps he never has and never will make a finer painting.” Duerckheim has other important examples of the artist’s work including Spekulatius, from the Hero series. One of the Polke works is Jungle, the largest of the artist’s dot paintings, estimated to be worth £3m-£4m. “We all thought it was a much smaller work than it is,” said Westphal. “When I finally got to see the painting I nearly fainted. It was so amazing and such a discovery.” Duerckheim says he is selling because he feels the collection is complete and it is time to start something new. It will be shown publicly in London before the sale. Gerhard Richter Germany Europe Mark Brown guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
As government forces try to crush dissent in a wave of raids and arrests, influential intellectuals are fleeing their homes Scores of Syria’s most prominent intellectuals and activists have gone into hiding as government forces try to crush dissent by carrying out raids and arrests in towns and cities across the country. Influential political figures including the lawyer Haitham al-Maleh and doctor Walid al-Bunni, whose prominence has until now protected them, have joined younger activists in fleeing their homes. Security forces rounded up more than 70 people in Zabadani and Idleb on Monday and dozens more in Kafer Nabul, 200 miles north of Damascus, activists said. At least three women were arrested at a protest in Hamra street, in the centre of the capital as all-female groups increasingly take to the streets to protest against the violence and arrests, the brunt of which has been borne by men. One of those held was named as Dana al-Jawabra. The arrests continued in a wave in Deraa on Sunday, with residents saying security forces backed by soldiers marched from house to house methodically selecting people and carrying them away in buses and trucks. Kurdish sources also said seven people had been arrested in the north-eastern towns of Qamischli and Amouda, where large protests have been held. The state news agency, Sana, gave a different version of arrests in Deraa, saying army units had arrested 499 members of “terrorist groups” and killed 10 of their members. The authorities also set a deadline of 15 days for people who had committed “unlawful acts” to give themselves up. Seeking to increase pressure, security forces are increasingly targeting the families of known activists. Human rights monitors said the 22-year-old nephew of the political activist Ayman al-Aswad, Osama, had been arrested in Deraa. Razan Zeitouneh, a lawyer who has been in hiding since the end of March, said her husband had also gone underground after security forces raided their house and arrested her 20-year-old brother-in-law over the weekend. “It is not easy but we have no choice if we want to work,” said Zeitouneh, adding that she believed she would be found and arrested at some point. Foreigners appear no longer immune from arrest as al-Jazeera announced it had not heard from journalist Dorothy Parvaz since she landed in Damascus last Friday. Human rights organisations estimate the Syrian authorities have detained more than 7,000 people since protests calling for the regime to go began in mid-March. About 600 have also been killed. Those emerged report tales of torture and the confiscation of personal belongings including money. One man recently released told the Guardian that he had been badly beaten and prodded with electric tasers. Despite the arrests and violent clampdown, protests posing the biggest challenge to over 40 years of Assad family rule have continued, with violence leaving a trail of devastation across parts of the country. Rastan, a town close to Homs where 13 were killed on Friday, is described by witnesses as a “war zone” littered with tanks, sandbagged checkpoints and burned-out cars. On Monday a humanitarian aid convoy was due to depart from the Jordanian border for the besieged southern city of Deraa from where accounts of devastation continue to emerge. Katherine Marsh is a pseudonym for a journalist living in Damascus Syria Arab and Middle East unrest Middle East Protest Katherine Marsh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Nick Clegg appeals to Labour supporters to vote for AV and signals greater distance from Tories after the vote Nick Clegg has made a last-minute appeal to Labour supporters to set aside their desire to “poke him in the eye” and recognise that the alternative vote is an unambiguously progressive reform. He has also vowed that his party will be more independent of the Conservatives after the referendum, saying the first phase of unanimity in public had been necessary due to the need to tackle the economic crisis. In a Guardian interview, Clegg said: “For Labour party supporters thinking about how they should vote, Labour has always been at its best a progressive movement for reform. It always has been and always will be. This is a progressive change, an unambiguously progressive change. “Yes, I understand people want to poke me in the eye and signal their displeasure. I understand all of that – I do not want to belittle that – but this is a fork of the road for progressives which is much bigger than me. This is not about Nick Clegg or the coalition government, it is about whether you take the progressive fork in the road, or do you stick with the status quo.” With polls showing that only a late swing by Labour voters to AV can rescue the yes campaign, Clegg – who is viewed with intense dislike by some on the left – praised Ed Miliband for the way he has led his party in the issue, contrasting him with the “old warhorses” of John Reid and David Blunkett, opposed to reform. He also expressed his frustration at what some see as the duplicity of his Tory colleagues in government when they claim they are not responsible for the literature put out by the no campaign attacking his “broken promises”. He said: “I take what people say at face value. I do not try to second guess them, but it seems to be an established fact that this no campaign has transformed itself into a Conservative party campaign in all but name. It was transformed by a commitment from Conservative party high command. It is a pity that old warhorses like John Reid and David Blunkett have turned themselves into mouthpieces for what is in effect a Conservative party campaign. “To be fair to George Osborne and David Cameron, they have been overt about the fact that they are going to do absolutely everything they can to stop a change that is inimical to their interests.” Echoing business secretary Vince Cable, he said the current electoral system had locked out progressive forces. “The last century, as Vince has quite rightly said, has been dominated by one party – the Conservative party – on a minority of the vote. That is an incontrovertible fact. The whole Roy Jenkins thesis is that if you look at the last century, the left wing parties did not get a look in because they were splitting the difference.” He admits it is not immutable but argued that the trend has been for Labour and Lib Dems to vote tactically for one another. “Clearly, there has been affinity historically, ideologically between the two progressive parties. I am a progressive politician. I lead a progressive party I always have and always will do.”. “I cannot for the life of me understand how intelligent, sophisticated folk in the Conservative party think it is defensible in the 21st century to have a system that ends up with hundreds of MPs with jobs for life – and they do not even deign to get 50% of the vote every few years.” Clegg is dismissive of critics who attack his record. “To use the challenges of coalition, compromise politics as a stick to beat us with is turning facts on its head to put it mildly. I don’t indulge in anger, I think anger is a slightly useless emotion, but I reject this idea that I wilfully went back on my word. People that accuse me of doing a U-turn think I can behave as if I had won a landslide. I didn’t. I will never apologise for the wider benefit of the country making those compromises. I accept that people want to shout me down simply to ignore argument and not to engage in rational debate, but that is the fact.” But he predicts his party from now on will be more independent inside the coalition. “If this referendum campaign, in a slightly gloves-off manner, has dramatised the fact that the Liberal Democrats are the progressive voice of this coalition, then it is not a bad thing in the long run. “As we chalk up more progressive successes, I think people will see a pattern of progressive advance, and if people look out for that, or it is more obvious, or we are more articulate in explaining it, that would be a good thing. I always felt that the early stages were the most disciplined stages of the coalition because we were grappling with tricky fiscal issues, but inevitably over time you get those differences of identity to re-emerge.” But he urges his party not to think in terms of retreat if the referendum is lost or the local elections go badly. “Do I think it would be sensible for Liberal Democrats to bail out of a five-year plan at the very hardest point after a year? I think it would be an act of spectacular political masochism and it is something I am not going to do.” Nick Clegg Alternative vote AV referendum Electoral reform Liberal Democrats Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Al-Qaida leader’s death on its soil leaves Pakistan facing awkward questions The Obama administration is demanding an explanation from Pakistan on how Osama bin Laden was able to hide in the country for so long before he was killed by US special forces. Bin Laden was staying in a prominent million dollar, high-security residence in an area full of soldiers and close to the country’s premier military academy. John Brennan, a counter-terrorism adviser to Barack Obama, told journalists at the White House: “People have been referring to this as hiding in plain sight. We are looking right how he was able to hide out there for so long.” He added it was “inconceivable” that Bin Laden did not enjoy a “support system” in Pakistan. The al-Qaida leader was killed by US special forces who attacked the compound in Abbottabad, about 30 miles from Islamabad on Sunday, according to US officials. His body was taken by helicopter to a US aircraft carrier in the Arabian Gulf and buried at sea. One of his adult sons was also killed, as was one of his four wives, whom the White House claimed had been used by Bin Laden as a shield. Obama said: “The world is safer. It is a better place because of the death of Osama bin Laden.” Although Obama, Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state and Brennan all expressed the importance of Pakistan in helping to fight al-Qaida, the presence of Bin Laden so close to the capital and just streets away from the principal training ground for the country’s officer corps threatened to create a fresh rift in already-strained US-Pakistan relations. Such was the American distrust of the notoriously leaky Pakistan government that it did not even inform it of the raid in its own territory until after US helicopters had cleared Pakistani airspace. Members of Congress threatened to withhold economic aid to Pakistan over the affair. Carl Levin, a Democrat who heads the powerful Senate armed services committee, reflected scepticism in the US about Bin Laden’s ability to remain hidden in Pakistan.”I think the Pakistani army and intelligence have a lot of questions to answer given the location, the length of time and the apparent fact that this facility was actually built for Bin Laden and its closeness to the central location of the Pakistani army,” he told a press conference. The US will step up pressure on Pakistan to hand over the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar and Bin Laden’s deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, if they are in Pakistan. The death of Bin Laden could also lead to a rethink of the scale of the US involvement in Afghanistan. Embassies, airports and defence bases were placed on high alert for possible retaliation by al-Qaida sympathisers. David Cameron warned the world still faced a threat from “extremist terrorism” but hailed a “massive step forward”. The mood in the US was one of celebration as Americans gathered at New York’s Ground Zero, pleased finally to have retribution. Obama called it “a good day for America” that had made the world a safer place. The White House and Pentagon provided fresh details of the mission by Navy Seals. Bin Laden was killed with a shot to the head, according to US officials. Brennan denied that the special forces had been told not to capture him, only kill him. “If we had the opportunity to take him alive, we would have done that,” he said. Clinton, anxious not to alienate a partner that may yet be needed for actions against al-Qaida and the Taliban, emphasised America’s “close co-operation” with Pakistan. She said: “In fact, co-operation with Pakistan helped lead us to Bin Laden and the compound in which he was hiding.” The Pakistan government welcomed the killing as “a major setback to terrorist organisations around the world”. But the former Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf reflected his country’s unease over a breach of sovereignty. “America coming to our territory and taking action is a violation of our sovereignty,” Musharraf told CNN. “Handling and execution of the operation [by US forces] is not correct. The Pakistani government should have been kept in the loop.” Clinton suggested that US policy on Afghanistan would not shift but other officials hinted that the dynamics may have changed. The Pentagon only wants to see a token force of a few thousand withdrawn beginning in the summer but Obama may want a more significant reduction. A senior Afghan government official said he feared the death would give “justification for US premature disengagement from the region”. It was a view echoed by Ahmed Wali Massoud, an Afghan politician and brother of Ahmed Shah Massoud, the legendary resistance fighter who was assassinated just two days before the September 11 attacks in 2001 on the orders of Bin Laden. “Obviously this is a huge relief for our family that justice has been done, but it also raises other concerns,” Massoud said. “Already the US has been thinking about shifting its policy on the war on terror and there is a risk that the American public will continue to question why their troops are still fighting there,” he said. One of the most senior American officers serving in Afghanistan, General William Caldwell, told the Guardian the death might encourage moderate elements within the Taliban to give up. Osama bin Laden al-Qaida Global terrorism Pakistan United States Ewen MacAskill Declan Walsh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Announcing the U.S. operation that killed Osama Bin Laden , President Obama reminded Americans and the world, “Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where bin Laden was.” But when candidate Barack Obama declared in 2007 “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will,” he was blasted by Republicans and their amen corner in the media. Now with Obama’s campaign promise kept, an apology is in order. On August 1, 2007 , Senator Barack Obama delivered a major speech on foreign policy. In addition to pledging to unilaterally launch strikes against Bin Laden and other high-value targets in Pakistan, Obama promised he would ramp up the U.S. effort in the under-resourced effort across the border in Afghanistan. In July 2008 , Obama explained: “The greatest threat to that security lies in the tribal regions of Pakistan, where terrorists train and insurgents strike into Afghanistan. We cannot tolerate a terrorist sanctuary, and as President, I won’t. We need a stronger and sustained partnership between Afghanistan, Pakistan and NATO to secure the border, to take out terrorist camps, and to crack down on cross-border insurgents. We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones in the Afghan border region. And we must make it clear that if Pakistan cannot or will not act, we will take out high-level terrorist targets like bin Laden if we have them in our sights.” Then in an October 2008 presidential debat e with John McCain, Obama declared simply: “We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority.” And at every step of the way, Republican leaders and conservative commentators mocked him for it. In February 2008, on the same day the Washington Post reported on the Bush administration’s accelerated use of drones to target terrorist targets within Pakistan, John McCain blasted Obama’s hard line on AL Qaeda’s safe havens: “Will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested invading our ally, Pakistan?” (As Media Matters noted, USA Today dutifully reported that McCain was “ridiculing comments Obama has made” without adding the correction that Obama had said no such thing about “invading” Pakistan.) For his part, John McCain in July 2008 suggested that his record on Iraq and expertise on the geography of the Iraq-Pakistan border region would allow him to succeed where George W. Bush failed in capturing the Al Qaeda chieftain: “I’m not going to telegraph a lot of the things that I’m going to do because then it might compromise our ability to do so. But, look, I know the area, I have been there, I know wars, I know how to win wars, and I know how to improve our capabilities so that we will capture Osama bin Laden — or put it this way, bring him to justice…We will do it, I know how to do it.” McCain repeated his boast during that same October presidential debate : “I know how to get bin Laden… but I’m not going to telegraph it.” (It’s worth remembering how John McCain planned to get Bin Laden. McCain repeatedly declared he would follow Bin Laden “to the gates of hell.” And as he told an audience at a small weapons factory in New Hampshire in October 2007, “”I will follow Osama Bin Laden to the gates of hell and I will shoot him with your products.”) It is also worth remembering how candidate Obama’s aggressive posture towards eradicating the safe havens in Pakistan came to become the policy of the United States even before President Obama took the oath of office. In 2005, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called off a special forces operation in Pakistan designed to “snatch and grab” Ayman Al Zawahiri and other senior Al Qaeda leaders.” But even as White House press secretary Tony Snow was claiming in early 2008 “We think that our approach to Pakistan is not only one that respects the sovereignty of Pakistan, but also is designed so that we are working in cooperation,” his boss was ordering unilateral drone strikes there. As for President Bush himself, he like John McCain scoffed at Barack Obama’s policy towards Pakistan and the Al Qaeda safe havens there. Asked by Chris Wallace of Fox News in February 2008 if “voters know enough about him,” Bush replied: “I certainly don’t know what he believes in. The only foreign policy thing I remember he said was he’s going to attack Pakistan.” Ironically, for George W. Bush the threat posed by Bin Laden was always directly proportional to the threat to the President’s political standing. Trying to fight back the growing public outcry over his illegal domestic wiretapping program in January 2006, President Bush used the Bin Laden bogeyman during remarks at the National Security Agency: “All I would ask them to do is listen to the words of Osama bin Laden and take him seriously. When he says he’s going to hurt the American people again, or try to, he means it. I take it seriously, and the people of NSA take it seriously.” Bush, of course, did not take Bin Laden so seriously four years earlier. Questioned about his silence regarding Bin Laden in the months following the failure to capture the Al Qaeda chieftain in Tora Bora , a nonchalant Bush on March 13, 2002 downplayed his significance: “So I don’t know where he is. You know, I just don’t spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you…I’ll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him.” Bush may have been embarrassed by his failure to capture Bin Laden in 2002, but by the fall of 2004, he faced the prospect of American voters who seemed to recall the murder of 3,000 of their countrymen. In the third presidential debate with John Kerry, a childlike Bush on October 13, 2004 tried for a “do over” of his statement two and a half years earlier: “Gosh, I just don’t think I ever said I’m not worried about Osama bin Laden. It’s kind of one of those exaggerations. Of course we’re worried about Osama bin Laden.” Which brings us full circle. In the aftermath of 9/11, President Bush used the specter of Osama Bin Laden to rally what had been a faltering presidency. In a show of frontier bravado, Bush talked tough about Bin Laden just days after the 9/11 attacks: “There’s an old poster out west, as I recall, that said, ‘Wanted: Dead or Alive.’” Well, Osama Bin Laden is dead now, thanks to the incredible skill and bravery of the American military personnel who executed a daring operation into Pakistan and to the President who had the courage to order it. As for Barack Obama’s Republican opponents still reticent about giving credit where credit is due, their message to him should be a simple one. Thank you. (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)
Continue reading …
Bunting, barbecues and bin-liners fly off the shelves for the spring party season The nation’s celebrations for the royal wedding and the long bank holiday weekend prompted a splurge in sales of picnic food, bunting, champagne, wine and barbecues. Waitrose reported a 23% rise in sales in the week to last Saturday, compared with the week following Easter last year. Bunting, union flags, paper plates and cups quickly sold out before Kate and William’s big day. The upmarket grocer’s royal trifle, created by celebrity chef Heston Blumenthal, also sold out. Meanwhile many customers made their own and sales of trifle sponges were up 370%. Post-party clean-ups prompted soaring sales of bin liners, foil and cling film. “The weather, the royal wedding and extra bank holiday combined mean that it’s been a good weekend for food and DIY retailers,” said Sarah Cordey of the British Retail Consortium. “There was a lot of promotional activity.” The unusually hot Easter weekend also provided a big boost, “not just in terms of people eating out but also new seasonal fashion,” she added. The BRC releases its latest retail sales figures next Tuesday. On the day before the wedding, Waitrose enjoyed its strongest sales on a Thursday outside the Christmas and new year period. This follows a record pre-Easter week, when sales climbed by 10.6% compared with the week before Easter last year. “The celebratory mood that swept the nation drove another week of strong sales, with the mid-week days showing particularly impressive uplifts as people got ready for royal wedding parties and the long weekend,” said Waitrose’s managing director Mark Price. “We’ve seen a wave of entertaining across the country, which would only be rivalled by the Christmas and new year period.” Retail industry Royal wedding DIY Supermarkets Julia Kollewe guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Bunting, barbecues and bin-liners fly off the shelves for the spring party season The nation’s celebrations for the royal wedding and the long bank holiday weekend prompted a splurge in sales of picnic food, bunting, champagne, wine and barbecues. Waitrose reported a 23% rise in sales in the week to last Saturday, compared with the week following Easter last year. Bunting, union flags, paper plates and cups quickly sold out before Kate and William’s big day. The upmarket grocer’s royal trifle, created by celebrity chef Heston Blumenthal, also sold out. Meanwhile many customers made their own and sales of trifle sponges were up 370%. Post-party clean-ups prompted soaring sales of bin liners, foil and cling film. “The weather, the royal wedding and extra bank holiday combined mean that it’s been a good weekend for food and DIY retailers,” said Sarah Cordey of the British Retail Consortium. “There was a lot of promotional activity.” The unusually hot Easter weekend also provided a big boost, “not just in terms of people eating out but also new seasonal fashion,” she added. The BRC releases its latest retail sales figures next Tuesday. On the day before the wedding, Waitrose enjoyed its strongest sales on a Thursday outside the Christmas and new year period. This follows a record pre-Easter week, when sales climbed by 10.6% compared with the week before Easter last year. “The celebratory mood that swept the nation drove another week of strong sales, with the mid-week days showing particularly impressive uplifts as people got ready for royal wedding parties and the long weekend,” said Waitrose’s managing director Mark Price. “We’ve seen a wave of entertaining across the country, which would only be rivalled by the Christmas and new year period.” Retail industry Royal wedding DIY Supermarkets Julia Kollewe guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Bin Laden dead after shoot-out in Abbottabad compound then buried at sea as US tells al-Qaida: ‘You cannot defeat us’ America’s war with al-Qaida will not stop with the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, Hillary Clinton has warned, telling the terrorist network: “You cannot wait us out; you cannot defeat us.” Bin Laden, the world’s most wanted man, was killed in a helicopter raid by US special forces on a fortified compound in a well-off suburb of Islamabad around 1am local time on Monday. The al-Qaida leader resisted arrest and was killed by a gunshot to the head, US officials said. A US national security official said the special forces team had orders to kill rather than capture the fugitive. He was buried at sea shortly afterwards , the US said, in part to conform to Islamic demands for burial within 24 hours, in part to avoid his grave site becoming a shrine. “There are some who doubted that this day would ever come,” said Clinton, the US secretary of state. “[But] the fight continues and we will never waiver.” She thanked the US armed forces for “tirelessly and relentlessly” working to bring Bin Laden to justice, praising a “broad, deep and very impressive effort”. Jubilant crowds chanting “USA! USA!” gathered outside the White House and at Ground Zero in New York after the announcement of Bin Laden’s death, which ended a decade-long manhunt. But the fact that the terrorist was found not in a cave in the wild tribal regions of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border but in a conspicuously fortified compound close to the Pakistani capital represents a considerable embarrassment for the Pakistani government . The compound, in the comfortable garrison town of Abbottabad, is less than a mile from the Pakistani military’s main training academy. A senior US administration official said: “When we saw the compound, we were shocked by what we saw: an extraordinarily unique compound.”. The building, about eight times the size of other nearby houses, had walls 4-6 metres (12-18ft) high, topped with barbed wire. US officials said the Pakistani government was not informed in advance of the raid, and that President Asif Ali Zardari had been informed of it in a telephone call from Obama only once the operation was over. Abdullah Abdullah, Afghanistan’s top opposition leader, told the Guardian: “It is very worrying that after 10 years this man could only be captured in an operation that was kept secret from the Pakistani intelligence service. Just a few weeks ago, the Pakistanis were insisting that the US military and intelligence operations should be stopped in Pakistan and their agents should leave the country.” The 40-minute raid reportedly involved elite members of the US Navy Seals Team Six, a top counter-terrorism unit. Three other men, including one of Bin Laden’s adult sons, were also killed, along with a woman who had been used as a shield by one of the terrorist leader’s associates, according to the officials. Footage purportedly taken inside the compound after the raid showed bloodstained carpets in one of its bedrooms. Eyewitnesses said a number of unidentified males were removed from the compound by helicopter, while two women and four children were arrested and driven away in an ambulance. The al-Qaida leader’s death was announced by Obama in an address to the nation late on Sunday. Bin Laden had been killed by “a small team of Americans” after a “targeted operation”, he said. “On nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to al-Qaida’s terror: justice has been done.”. The raid had followed an eight-month intelligence operation, Obama said. His predecessor, George W Bush, whose presidency was defined by the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and by his failure to capture or kill Bin Laden, said: “This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11 2001. The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: no matter how long it takes, justice will be done.” While the death of Bin Laden has immeasurable symbolic significance, questions have been raised over the extent to which his removal will affect the activities of the al-Qaida network, of which, according to experts on Islamist terrorism, he has for some years been no more than a figurehead. The director of the CIA warned that al-Qaida will “almost certainly” try to avenge his killing. “Though Bin Laden is dead, al-Qaida is not,” said Leon Panetta, who personally directed the raid. “The terrorists almost certainly will attempt to avenge him, and we must – and will – remain vigilant and resolute.” US embassies and military bases around the world have been put on high alert against possible reprisal attacks. The British foreign secretary, William Hague, said British embassies had also been advised to adopt heightened security measures “for some time to come”. “This is a very serious blow to al-Qaida but, like any organisation that has suffered a serious blow, they will want to show in some way that they are still able to operate,” he said. David Cameron hailed the death of Bin Laden as a “massive step forward” in the fight against terrorism. In a statement, the prime minister said: “The news that Osama bin Laden is dead will bring great relief to people across the world.” al-Qaida Global terrorism United States Pakistan Barack Obama Esther Addley Ewen MacAskill Jon Boone guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Bin Laden dead after shoot-out in Abbottabad compound then buried at sea as US tells al-Qaida: ‘You cannot defeat us’ America’s war with al-Qaida will not stop with the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, Hillary Clinton has warned, telling the terrorist network: “You cannot wait us out; you cannot defeat us.” Bin Laden, the world’s most wanted man, was killed in a helicopter raid by US special forces on a fortified compound in a well-off suburb of Islamabad around 1am local time on Monday. The al-Qaida leader resisted arrest and was killed by a gunshot to the head, US officials said. A US national security official said the special forces team had orders to kill rather than capture the fugitive. He was buried at sea shortly afterwards , the US said, in part to conform to Islamic demands for burial within 24 hours, in part to avoid his grave site becoming a shrine. “There are some who doubted that this day would ever come,” said Clinton, the US secretary of state. “[But] the fight continues and we will never waiver.” She thanked the US armed forces for “tirelessly and relentlessly” working to bring Bin Laden to justice, praising a “broad, deep and very impressive effort”. Jubilant crowds chanting “USA! USA!” gathered outside the White House and at Ground Zero in New York after the announcement of Bin Laden’s death, which ended a decade-long manhunt. But the fact that the terrorist was found not in a cave in the wild tribal regions of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border but in a conspicuously fortified compound close to the Pakistani capital represents a considerable embarrassment for the Pakistani government . The compound, in the comfortable garrison town of Abbottabad, is less than a mile from the Pakistani military’s main training academy. A senior US administration official said: “When we saw the compound, we were shocked by what we saw: an extraordinarily unique compound.”. The building, about eight times the size of other nearby houses, had walls 4-6 metres (12-18ft) high, topped with barbed wire. US officials said the Pakistani government was not informed in advance of the raid, and that President Asif Ali Zardari had been informed of it in a telephone call from Obama only once the operation was over. Abdullah Abdullah, Afghanistan’s top opposition leader, told the Guardian: “It is very worrying that after 10 years this man could only be captured in an operation that was kept secret from the Pakistani intelligence service. Just a few weeks ago, the Pakistanis were insisting that the US military and intelligence operations should be stopped in Pakistan and their agents should leave the country.” The 40-minute raid reportedly involved elite members of the US Navy Seals Team Six, a top counter-terrorism unit. Three other men, including one of Bin Laden’s adult sons, were also killed, along with a woman who had been used as a shield by one of the terrorist leader’s associates, according to the officials. Footage purportedly taken inside the compound after the raid showed bloodstained carpets in one of its bedrooms. Eyewitnesses said a number of unidentified males were removed from the compound by helicopter, while two women and four children were arrested and driven away in an ambulance. The al-Qaida leader’s death was announced by Obama in an address to the nation late on Sunday. Bin Laden had been killed by “a small team of Americans” after a “targeted operation”, he said. “On nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to al-Qaida’s terror: justice has been done.”. The raid had followed an eight-month intelligence operation, Obama said. His predecessor, George W Bush, whose presidency was defined by the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and by his failure to capture or kill Bin Laden, said: “This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11 2001. The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: no matter how long it takes, justice will be done.” While the death of Bin Laden has immeasurable symbolic significance, questions have been raised over the extent to which his removal will affect the activities of the al-Qaida network, of which, according to experts on Islamist terrorism, he has for some years been no more than a figurehead. The director of the CIA warned that al-Qaida will “almost certainly” try to avenge his killing. “Though Bin Laden is dead, al-Qaida is not,” said Leon Panetta, who personally directed the raid. “The terrorists almost certainly will attempt to avenge him, and we must – and will – remain vigilant and resolute.” US embassies and military bases around the world have been put on high alert against possible reprisal attacks. The British foreign secretary, William Hague, said British embassies had also been advised to adopt heightened security measures “for some time to come”. “This is a very serious blow to al-Qaida but, like any organisation that has suffered a serious blow, they will want to show in some way that they are still able to operate,” he said. David Cameron hailed the death of Bin Laden as a “massive step forward” in the fight against terrorism. In a statement, the prime minister said: “The news that Osama bin Laden is dead will bring great relief to people across the world.” al-Qaida Global terrorism United States Pakistan Barack Obama Esther Addley Ewen MacAskill Jon Boone guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Furious Fukushima parents dump school playground earth that may have radiation levels well above the old safety level Furious Fukushima parents have delivered a bag of radioactive playground dirt to education officials in protest at government moves to weaken nuclear safety standards in schools. The new regulations say that children can be exposed to 20 times more radiation than was previously permissible. They have prompted outcry, the resignation of a senior adviser and a verbal attack on the prime minister, Naoto Kan, by lawmakers from his own party. Ministers have defended the increase in the acceptable safety level from 1 to 20 millisieverts as a necessary measure to guarantee the education of hundreds of thousands of children in Fukushima prefecture, location of the nuclear plant that suffered a partial meltdown and several explosions after the earthquake and tsunami on 11 March. It is estimated that 75% of Fukushima’s schools may have radiation levels above the old safety level of 1 millisievert. The local authorities in Koriyama have tried to ease the problem by digging up the top layer of soil in school and day centre playgrounds, but residents near the proposed dump site have objected. The new standard of 20 millisieverts – equivalent to the annual maximum dose for German nuclear workers – will mean those schools remain open, but parents and nuclear opponents are angry that safety concerns are being ignored. A group claiming to represent 250 parents in Fukushima visited the upper house of parliament and presented government officials with a bag of radioactive dirt from the playground of one of the affected schools. A geiger counter clicked over it with a reading of 38 millisieverts. “How dare they tell us it is safe for our children,” said Sachiko Satou of the Protect Fukushima Children from Radiation Association. “This is disgusting. They can’t play outside with such risks. If the government won’t remove the radioactive dirt then we’ll do it ourselves and dump it outside the headquarters of Tokyo Electric.” Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and other environment and anti-nuclear groups submitted a petition against the regulations. They accused the Nuclear Safety Commission of meekly accepting the new safety limit after just two hours of closed-door discussions with government officials. However, representatives of the commission denied agreeing that 20 millisieverts was safe. Education ministry officials fudged demands for an explanation. “I think 20 millisieverts is safe but I don’t think it’s good,” said Itaru Watanabe of the education ministry, drawing howls of derision from the audience of participants. He promised the government would carefully monitor the situation and do all it could to get radioactivity down to 1 millisievert. The health impacts are disputed. Physicians for Social Responsibility – a US-based Nobel prize winning organisation that opposes nuclear power – said children were more vulnerable than adults. It said the new acceptable limit exposed children to a one in 200 risk of getting cancer, compared with a one in 500 risk for adults. “It is unconscionable to increase the allowable dose for children to 20 millisieverts,” the group said in a statement. “There is no way this level of exposure can be considered safe.” This is not the first time the government has shifted safety baselines since the start of the crisis. Permissible levels of radiation exposure for nuclear workers were amended soon after the disaster struck to allow emergency operations at the stricken Fukushima reactor. Several weeks later the cabinet allowed the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric, to violate regulations by dumping 11,500 tonnes of contaminated water into the Pacific. The radioactivity of the discharge was 100 times higher than the acceptable limit. The government says it has to take unprecedented measures to deal with an unprecedented disaster. Kan has lost one of his chief scientific advisers over the latest decision. Toshiso Kosako – a Tokyo University professor who was called in to help deal with the crisis – walked out on Friday and has since accused the government of ad hoc policy making and contravening internationally accepted norms for the sake of political expediency. Kan has also come under fire from lawmakers in his ruling Democratic party. Mori Yuko, an upper house member, said she was disgusted by the decision to loosen the safety limit. “Would politicians and bureaucrats allow their own children to go to a contaminated school,” she said. “This makes me furious.” She called for more rigorous and widespread health monitoring of children and criticised an earlier government policy to withhold data about radiation levels and wind direction. After a public outcry these figures are now published daily in newspapers, but the allegations of cover-ups and shifting safety baselines are taking a heavy political toll. A mere 1.3% of respondents in a weekend poll by the Kyodo news agency thought Kan was exercising sufficient leadership. But many people also criticise the main opposition Liberal Democratic party for lax nuclear regulation while it was in power. Japan Nuclear power Nuclear waste Jonathan Watts guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …