Initial findings from black box recorder reveal flight 447 fell 10,000ft per minute after Airbus jet hit heavy Atlantic storm An Air France jet that crashed into the Atlantic claiming 228 lives dropped 38,000 feet (11,600 metres) in three and a half minutes before slamming belly first into the ocean, according to investigators. French air accident experts published a chilling chronology of events that showed the three Air France pilots battling to regain control on flight 447 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris in a heavy thunderstorm on the morning of 1 June 2009. Air France acknowledged that the disaster was triggered by faulty speed sensors, with one of the pilots exclaiming “we have no valid indications” as the Airbus A330 fell at 10,000ft a minute. Air safety specialists have been baffled by the loss of AF447, but the causes have become clearer since its black boxes were discovered two-and-a-half miles underwater this month. According to the BEA, the French air accident investigation agency, one of the pilots called the cabin crew two hours and six minutes into the flight to tell them: “In two minutes we should enter an area where it’ll move about a bit more than at the moment, you should watch out.” Just over eight minutes later everyone on board was dead following a descent that, according to experts, none of the passengers would have noticed. “The aeroplane probably felt more or less under control. The passengers probably would have felt their ears popping as it descended but the plane was held in a consistent pattern until it hit the sea,” said Guy Gratton of Brunel University and a member of the Royal Aeronautical Society. The report states that the experienced captain, Marc Dubois, 58, was resting when the Airbus began encountering difficulties, but had been present at a briefing with co-pilots David Robert, 37, and Pierre-Cedric Bonin, 32, shortly beforehand, when they discussed the turbulence ahead. The plane was flying towards a large storm system, a common obstacle on that route. The pilot flying the plane at the time, who was not identified by the BEA, said: “The little bit of turbulence that you just saw […] we should find the same ahead.” Two hours and 10 minutes into the flight, the computers controlling the flight switched off the autopilot after becoming confused by conflicting speed readings, caused by the icing up of pitot tubes monitoring the plane’s velocity. “There was an inconsistency between the speeds displayed on the left side and the integrated standby instrument system (ISIS). This lasted for less than one minute,” the BEA document said. Unable to calculate speed because monitors were showing an impossible drop from 275 knots to 60 knots, one of the pilots appeared to make a fatal assumption that the plane was flying too fast and was in danger of breaching “coffin corner”: the narrow aerodynamic envelope that keeps a plane flying at cruise altitude. JU the 37-year-old co-pilot, Robert, then suggested the plane perform a slight turn to the left, which resulted in an increase in turbulence. Two minutes later the plane’s serious difficulties became clear as the report describes a flight deck that would have sounded with scores of warning signals as AF447, buffeted by stormclouds and confused by contradictory speed readings, went out of control. The autopilot disengaged and the pilot took over the controls, uIn the middle of the night over the Atlantic and Buffeted by turbulence, he tried to lift up the plane’s nose, in an apparent attempt to slow it down. The A330′s stall warning sounded twice, signalling the aerodynamics were not generating enough lift and that AF447 was in danger of losing control, although its twin engines were working normally. Experts said the pilot was receiving erroneous speed readings although one aviation source said he appeared to contravene standard procedure for a stall which is to pitch the nose down and increase engine thrust. “You cannot call it pilot error because it may have been caused by reactions to data that was wrong,” said Chris Yates, an aviation industry consultant. At this point the co-pilot was heard saying “we’ve lost the speeds” and “alternate law”, which signals the autopilot has been disengaged. Seconds later the co-pilot decided to seek the help of Dubois and “tried several times to call the captain back” as another stall warning was issued. To add to the confusion, the speed readings returned to normal but the pilot kept the plane in a nose-up position, slowing it down and keeping the plane in a position where it was not generating enough lift. By the time the Dubois appeared, just over a minute later, and as the plane began its fatal descent, another stall warning had been issued. With the plane now rocking and falling at 10,000ft a minute, the pilot acknowledged the terrifying speed of the descent, saying “we’re going to arrive at level 100″, meaning 10,000ft. At that point, just over a minute before the recordings stopped, the control sticks were used simultaneously, indicating the battle to control the plane had reached a frantic pitch. The pilot handed control to an unnamed colleague, presumed to be Dubois. By now the “angle of attack”, a critical indication of airflow over the wings, was at more than 35 degrees – nearly triple the outer limits for safe flight. The BEA said the plane remained stalled throughout its three-and-a-half-minute descent, with the last recorded measurement showing the plane plummeting at 10,912ft per minute. Only 51 bodies were found in the immediate aftermath. Among the dead were five Britons and three young Irish doctors. Air France said on Fridaythe investigators should be allowed to get on with their inquiry and said its thoughts were with the families of the victims. In a statement the airline said: “It appears that the crew followed the evolving weather conditions and had changed their route, that the failure of the speed sensors is the initial event that caused the automatic pilot to fail and a loss of the associated flying tools, that the aircraft stalled at high altitude. “It also appears that the commander on board quickly interrupted his rest to return to the cockpit. The crew fought right to the end to control the plane which is proof of their professionalism and Air France would like to pay its respects to them.” France Air transport Airbus Airline industry Europe Brazil Dan Milmo Kim Willsher guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Baby P ‘scapegoat’ in line for £500,000 payout as judges criticise former minister Sharon Shoesmith has said it was “justice, not money” that motivated her during a two-year legal challenge over her controversial sacking in the wake of the Baby Peter tragedy. The former Haringey director of children’s services is potentially in line for compensation of more than £500,000 after the appeal court ruled on Friday that her dismissal by the former children’s secretary Ed Balls was “intrinsically unfair and unlawful”. In an interview with the Guardian , she said she was still angry at her treatment at the hands of Balls and the tabloid media, and blamed him for triggering a crisis in child protection. “I’m still staggered by how irresponsible the secretary of state was. He almost demonstrated his lack of knowledge and understanding of children’s social care, loud and clear.” Although much attention will be paid to the compensation awarded to her, Shoesmith said this was never what drove her on. “I was never in it for the money. People will want to put noughts on it and all the rest of it but I was never in it for the money. I never discussed money. I wanted to win the case, I wanted the truth to be told.” The court was severely critical of Balls’s handling of the case, and sent out a clear message that politicians could not ignore “elementary fairness” when dealing with public servants at the centre of controversy, even when they felt they were acting legitimately in the public interest. Balls, now shadow chancellor, said he disagreed with the ruling and believed he had followed the “right and responsible course of action” in removing Shoesmith. The current government also said it would appeal against the ruling in a case which has become a battle between those who argue for greater public accountability and those who feel that making officials scapegoats is counter-productive and unfair. David Cameron said the government would take the Shoesmith case to the supreme court because ministers want to uphold the principle that they – and not the courts, through judicial review – should be responsible for their decisions. “It does seem to me important that governments are able to manage their organisations and provide accountability when things go wrong,” the prime minister said at the G8 summit in Deauville. The Labour MP Diane Abbott also joined the criticism in a piece for guardian.co.uk : “Shoesmith appears to believe that feeling sorry is enough. And, in her triumphalism, she has overlooked the fact the court has upheld the damning Ofsted report that formed the basis of her sacking. “I believe that it is no coincidence that the Victoria Climbié tragedy was followed within a very few years by the Baby P tragedy and in the very same local authority. As long as six-figure-salary social services bosses feel that they will suffer no penalty when these tragedies happen on their watch, these tragedies will continue to recur.” Speaking at the court after the judgment, Shoesmith said: “I am relieved to have won my appeal and for the recognition that I was treated unfairly and unlawfully. Having spent a lifetime protecting, caring and educating children, my sorrow about the death of Peter Connelly in Haringey when I was director is something which will stay with me for the rest of my life. But as the judges have said, making a ‘public sacrifice’ of an individual will not prevent further tragedies.” The ruling, by the master of the rolls, Lord Neuburger, Lord Justice Kay and Lord Justice Stanley Burton, said the issue of compensation should be referred back to the high court. But in effect it reinstates Shoesmith, who earned £133,000 a year, as an employee of Haringey council, liable for back pay and pension contributions dating back to her dismissal in December 2008. Compensation and legal costs in the two-year case could cost the council and the government more than £1m, although ministers have said they will seek approval from the supreme court to appeal. Although the ruling said compensation was a matter for Shoesmith and the council, it added that “it would be entirely appropriate for Haringey to seek a voluntary contribution from the secretary for state whose unlawful directions gave rise to the problems”. Kay said he felt Shoesmith had been made a “public sacrifice” by politicians to divert public and press attention, and noted that social workers and health workers were “particularly vulnerable to such treatment”. He added: “This is not to say that I consider Ms Shoesmith to be blameless or that I have a view as to the extent of her or anyone else’s blameworthiness. That is not the business of this court. However, it is our task to adjudicate upon the application and fairness of procedures adopted by public authorities when legitimate causes for concern arise, as they plainly did in this case. … Whatever her shortcomings may have been (and, I repeat, I cannot say), she was entitled to be treated lawfully and fairly and not simply and summarily scapegoated.” Cameron said he supported an appeal against the ruling: “We all remember the absolutely appalling case of Baby P and how, as a country, we’ve got to do right and make sure we are accountable for the terrible mistakes and errors that were made. Obviously, we can’t bring Baby P back and we have to make sure justice is done.” Haringey also came in for criticism over its sacking of Shoesmith less than three weeks after her removal by Balls. The judges said that although Balls’s action had put the council “in a very difficult position” there was no urgent reason to have rushed to a decision to terminate her employment, a process the judges said was “tainted by unfairness”. Balls said: “My actions on receiving that report were, at all times, guided by detailed advice from department experts and lawyers on the proper and fair way to proceed. It was my responsibility, as secretary of state, and on the basis of that independent report, to do what was necessary to protect the interests of children in Haringey and protect wider public confidence in child protection. That is why I acted as I did.” He added: “Having thought long and hard about this decision over the last two years – and having read the appeal court judgement today – I know that faced with the same circumstances I would make the same decisions again.” Shoesmith failed in her attempt to quash the findings of an Ofsted report commissioned by Balls into safeguarding in Haringey, which was critical of her department. Ofsted chief inspector Christine Gilbert welcomed the ruling, saying: “I am pleased that Ofsted has comprehensively won this case and that the original judicial review judgement in our favour has been upheld in every aspect on appeal.” Unison general secretary Dave Prentis said: “This ruling will give a much-needed boost to social workers up and down the country who protect daily thousands of vulnerable children and adults. It should serve as a lesson that whipping up a campaign of vilification and hatred will never save a single child’s life.” Peter Connelly, known as Baby P during initial investigations into his death, was on Haringey’s child protection register when he died violently at the hands of his mother, Tracey Connelly, her lover Steven Barker, and Barker’s brother Jason Owen in August 2007. After his killers were convicted in November 2008, a media and political furore broke out over why safeguarding agencies had failed to spot that Peter was in danger. Balls announced at a live televised press conference on 1 December 2008 that he had used special powers to remove Shoesmith after studying the findings of an Ofsted report which reported management failings in her department. Balls declared that Shoesmith was “not fit for office”. But it turned out Shoesmith had not been given a chance to discuss or respond to the report before it was published, in contravention of procedures. She was unaware of Balls’s plans to remove her, and learned of her dismissal while watching the press conference live on TV. During a judicial review hearing brought by Shoesmith last year, Balls defended his actions on the grounds that the political circumstances meant he had to act quickly and decisively, and that Shoesmith as the accountable officer in Haringey should bear the responsibility for the failures. Even had Shoesmith been given a chance to respond it would not have changed his decision that she should go. But the appeal court said that simply because Shoesmith, as director of children’s services (DCS), was ultimately accountable for child protection matters in her borough, it did not mean that either the secretary of state or Haringey could ignore due process, regardless of the public and media outcry. In his ruling, Kay writes: “The fact that the 2004 act, in creating the singular post of DCS, identified as a matter of policy one individual with ultimate responsibility and accountability in relation to children’s services does not mean that that person is to be denied the protections that have long been accorded to responsible and accountable office-holders. Nor does the fact that the secretary of state is not the employer of a DCS relieve him of the obligation to be fair.” He adds: “I find it a deeply unattractive proposition that the mere juxtaposition of a state of affairs and a person who is ‘accountable’ should mean that there is nothing that that person might say which could conceivably explain, excuse or mitigate her predicament. ‘Accountability’ is not synonymous with ‘Heads must roll’.” Philip Henson, head of employment at City law firm Bargate Murray, said: “Ms Shoesmith’s case has a wider lesson for all employers of the need to ensure that they carry out a fair investigation and procedure, affording staff the opportunity to put their case forward, rather than pandering to public and media pressure and making a kneejerk decision to fire members of staff. “Although the court of appeal judges did not make a ruling on compensation, instead referring the case back to the high court for ‘further consideration’, Ms Shoesmith is likely to receive compensation approaching, or hitting, the £1m mark, taking into consideration reinstatement of her pension rights.” Baby P Child protection Ed Balls Patrick Butler Nicholas Watt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …The chairwoman of the DNC—who slammed Republican 2012 hopefuls for putting the US auto industry at risk by favoring foreign automakers—herself owns a foreign car, the Hill reports. “If it were up to the candidates for president on the Republican side, we would be driving foreign cars; they…
Continue reading …EBay and its PayPal subsidiary have filed a lawsuit accusing Google of stealing its trade secrets in the creation of its Google Wallet product . The suit names two executives—Osama Bedier and Stephanie Tilenius—who jumped ship to Google after long stints working at PayPal and eBay respectively, Reuters reports….
Continue reading …
TweetDeck acquisition puts Britain’s web entrepreneurs on map, along with Shoreditch’s ‘Silicon Roundabout’ It was once famed for its art scene and residents with daft haircuts. But the area around Old Street, on the fringes of the City of London, has emerged as a magnet for internet startups to rival those in the US, earning it the nickname Silicon Roundabout after its famously unlovely traffic system. Iain Dodsworth, a 36-year-old Sheffield-educated computer programmer, this week became the poster boy for the area when he sold his three-year-old firm , TweetDeck, to social network company Twitter in a deal thought to be worth about $40m (£25m) – making the once-unemployed developer an overnight millionaire. The big-money deal is the clearest sign yet that the firms clustered in the area are capable of attracting talent that could match those of California’s Silicon Valley, the heartland of technology firms such as Facebook and Google. “It feels like a really big win for London,” says Dodsworth. “It feels like there’s something meaningful there. It’s quite a big deal that we were even bought in the first place. We are now Twitter, and we happen to be in London – it’s significant that Twitter understands the benefit of having something outside of San Francisco.” The term Silicon Roundabout was – in typically British self-deprecating style – coined two years ago as a riposte to accusations that London could never foster an environment to rival San Francisco. While the Old Street landmark does not host offices for Apple or Yahoo – and its gritty urban surrounds compare unfavourably with the rolling Californian landscape – Silicon Valley tech titans are increasingly looking to Shoreditch for their next acquisition. “We weren’t bought for £2.50 – we have shown that it’s not just a little acquisition and I think that’s quite meaningful,” Dodsworth says, the confetti still fresh around his desk from Wednesday’s announcement. “[The deal shows that] if a company is looking at acquiring smaller companies, they don’t just have to look at the US. Perhaps if we were just around the corner in Silicon Valley they’d have just snapped up the team, moved them in and that’s it.” Like many of east London’s digital firms, Dodsworth shares a large open-plan office with about a dozen other small internet companies, including SoundCloud and MobileRoadie . The office erupted with champagne and confetti when the deal was announced, and newspaper clippings – “Twitter buys TweetDeck”, “TweetDeck tycoon: I’ll stay at Silicon Roundabout” – are proudly displayed across their shiny Apple computers. The effect of “seeing this success rather than reading about it on [technology news site] TechCrunch” is something not to be underestimated – and is an integral part of Silicon Valley’s history of achievement, says Dodsworth. Richard Moross, founder of digital printing business Moo.com , moved his company to Shoreditch five years ago – long before what he calls its “ridiculous” new name was coined. The office space he leases to TweetDeck and others has a waiting list of more than 20 companies. “The reason why the Silicon Valley success story rolls on is because the people in those companies have success, share success, other people see it, they start new companies and the thing snowballs,” he says. “By having people in the same area – the same physical location – that is like an amplifying device. It’s a successful formula, and that’s why people want to move here.” Similar clusters of technology firms have sprung up outside London. Cambridge has Silicon Fen, home to a number of hi-tech outfits including chipmaker Arm Holdings and semiconductor manufacturer Cambridge Silicon Radio (CSR). The predictably named Silicon Glen is the triangle stretching from Glasgow to Edinburgh and Dundee that includes multinationals such as IBM, Semtech and National Semiconductor. However, web-based startups and aspirant social networks have tended to gravitate towards east London. The capital, and its resurgent tech scene, has a natural allure for twentysomething founders touting unproven business models – no doubt bolstered by the sky-high valuations being attached to US rivals such as LinkedIn and Zynga . And just as California’s techies shifted from military technology to transistors, computers and eventually the internet, so too is Shoreditch, still a heartland for traditional printing, changing its spots. To work in the same vicinity as TweetDeck inspires Nick Casey, the founder of the yet-to-launch sports social network Squadify . “Two desks over there’s a serial entrepreneur who has had multiple startups and gone through the whole funding process. To chat with these people over a cup of tea or a beer is gold dust – you can’t find that stuff on the internet.” Casey and fellow co-founder Andy Davey occupy a £275-a-month desk at TechHub, an expansive workspace-cum-common room just yards from Old Street roundabout. Only 11 months old, TechHub has already won sponsorship from Google. Instead of renting garage space from a friend of a friend – as Sergey Brin and Larry Page did 13 years ago when setting up Google – fledgling companies can get space at cheap rates and on flexible contracts. Just don’t ask TechHub co-founder Elizabeth Varley whether she’s attempting to recreate the famous San Francisco scene. “The holy grail of Silicon Valley – that it’s more a state of mind than a place – is true. It’s about the way you work and the approach you take,” she says. “What we did was to look at some of the success factors over there and see what we could do better – connecting people, connecting VCs [venture capitalists] with startups, large tech companies with startups – that’s something [the UK] hasn’t been particularly good at. While we’re a workspace, that’s just a basic need – the most important thing is the community of different elements of the startup ecosystem that help those young companies flourish.” Like the offices run by Moross, TechHub is full to bursting with fresh-faced entrepreneurs “sick of doing the Starbucks shuffle”, as Varley puts it. A new “entrepreneur visa” for foreign businesspeople who want to invest in the UK, unveiled as part of the government’s plans to create an “East London Tech City” in November, means the roundabout’s summer party – which has grown from 200 revellers to 1,000 in three years – could soon be overrun by digital aspirants. But for now the UK’s leading entrepreneurs are staying sober. Varley says: “Silicon Valley has had 60 years of investment in silicon and chips … It has two amazing universities, and it’s had a lot going on in the past, which means it has been able to spawn this internet boom over there – it hasn’t happened overnight. “Sometimes it takes a little more, but we’re on the way.” UK’s network success stories • TweetDeck Built by Iain Dodsworth while he was unemployed and looking for a way to organise his Twitter feeds, TweetDeck has been downloaded by more than 20
Continue reading …
Mail on Sunday and Daily Mail may have been targeted by News of the World investigator Glenn Mulcaire Six journalists who worked for the Mail on Sunday and its sister title the Daily Mail are set to be shown evidence by Scotland Yard which suggests their voicemail messages were intercepted by Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator who worked at the News of the World. The fact that journalists from rival titles, several of whom are still employed by the Mail titles’ owner Associated Newspapers, are being warned by the Met they were being targeted by Mulcaire signals that Operation Weeting, the Met’s phone hacking investigation which began in January, is about to enter a dramatic phase. It follows news that Dennis Rice, a Fleet Street veteran who works for the Mail on Sunday as a freelance, is suing the News of the World’s owner News Group for alleged breach of privacy, joining public figures who have already launched civil actions action against the title at the high court. The four remaining Mail on Sunday journalists also have separate appointments scheduled with the Met, along with a Daily Mail reporter. The Guardian understands that several of them are preparing to follow Rice’s example by bringing their own legal proceedings against News Group. The latest development could threaten the uneasy Fleet Street alliance between tabloid titles, which have been slow to report revelations about the true extent of phone hacking because they fear it will damage public perception of their trade. Rival titles are also reluctant to cover the story because the majority have also used private investigators in the past. A 2007 report by the information commissioner titled, What Price Privacy, found that the Daily Mail commissioned another private investigator, Steve Whittamore, on more occasions than any other newspaper. The same report found that 31 titles used Whittamore, including the Guardian’s sister title the Observer, which is also published by Guardian Media Group. Rice, who was investigations editor at the Mail on Sunday in 2005 and 2006, is thought to have been shocked by the evidence he was shown by the Met prior to launching his action. It is believed to include recordings Mulcaire made of messages left on Rice’s mobile phone, including several from friends and families. News Group has conceded that Mulcaire was acting on the instructions of News of the World journalists in some cases, but it is contesting other claims. It is understood that detectives warned the Mail on Sunday’s owner Associated Newspapers in 2006 to improve its security systems. The fact that a group of journalists at the Mail titles are apparently intent on discovering whether they were hacked by Mulcaire makes it more likely that the tactics employed by sections of Fleet Street in their search for stories will be exposed. Journalists frequently attempted to land exclusives by using underhand methods, including trying to access news lists held by competitors. But it now appears that some of them may have been habitually hacking into one another’s voicemail message in the hope of obtaining stories, leads and contacts. The original police inquiry, which led to Mulcaire being jailed in 2007, also discovered evidence that he has successfully intercepted voicemail messages belonging to Rebekah Brooks, who was editor of the Sun when Mulcaire was working exclusively for its Sunday stablemate. The current investigation is believed to have found evidence that another former Sun editor, Kelvin Mackenzie, also had his phone hacked. News International declined to comment. Phone hacking Newspapers & magazines National newspapers Newspapers Mail on Sunday Associated Newspapers Daily Mail & General Trust News of the World James Robinson guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Defence insists Bosnian Serb general is ill but court approves transfer to The Hague and officials say he is in robust form Ratko Mladic, the former Bosnian Serb general charged with orchestrating the murder of tens of thousands of Balkan Muslims, has been ruled fit for extradition to face international justice after the capture that ended his 16 years as a fugitive. Brought before a special Belgrade court a day after being arrested in a dawn raid on a country cottage north-east of the Serbian capital, Mladic dismissed the 15 counts of genocide and war crimes against him, while his lawyer and family insisted he was too ill to be extradited for trial at the UN war crimes tribunal in the Hague. They asked for him to be hospitalised in Belgrade and treated by a team of Russian doctors. Following a medical examination, however, the Belgrade judge ruled that the 69-year-old was fit to be transferred to the Yugoslav tribunal in The Hague. The judge gave Mladic three days to appeal. Bruno Vekaric, a Serbian war crimes prosecutor, said the extradition could be completed within a week. A panel of judges is expected to hear the appeal on Monday before the Serbian justice minister decides whether to put Mladic on a flight to the Netherlands. Doctors, family, lawyers and a Serbian government minister went on Friday to the detention unit where Mladic. They talked to the genocide suspect, who is said to have been in robust form when questioned on Thursday. Brusquely rejecting the charges against him, he turned on Vekaric, made rude remarks about his beard and refused to sign a statement. Mladic was put on suicide watch and had medicines and his spectacles taken away. “Are you frightened I’m going to kill myself? Mladic won’t do Mladic,” he told his guards, according to the Belgrade newspaper Blic quoting court sources. His son, Darko Mladic, said after visiting the suspect twice on Friday: “His stand is that he’s not guilty of what he’s being accused of. “He has received a medical examination and is under medical observation, but we think that’s not enough because of his condition. From what we saw his state of health is worrying. We are demanding that he be transferred to hospital and we want a team of doctors from Russia.” His son added that the doctors had evidence of two strokes. The court spokesman, Maja Kovacevic, agreed Mladic was ill but said he was capable of understanding the proceedings and was fit to go to The Hague, where medical treatment would be available. As details began to emerge of the operation to seize Mladic, questions were being asked about why the Serbian authorities, under intense international pressure, had taken so long to locate him. Ivica Dacic, the Serbian interior minister, said Mladic had been living for years in the small Vojvodina village of Lazarevo, north-east of Belgrade. Dacic said that when a special police unit seized Mladic early on Thursday and asked him to identify himself, he replied: “Congratulations, you’ve found who you are looking for.” On Friday in the Serbian half of Bosnia, protests at the arrest began to multiply. Posters of Mladic with the slogan “Serbs arise” appeared across Banja Luka, the Bosnian Serb capital, and demonstrations were announced in Pale and Han Pijesak, the wartime political and military headquarters of Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, also being tried on genocide charges. The Mladic arrest is seen as a coup for Serbia’s President Boris Tadic, who pressed the European Union to reward him by naming a date for starting talks on Serbia’s membership. But in what is seen as a missed opportunity, Tadic is boycotting a summit of east European leaders with Barack Obama because the president of Kosovo, which Belgrade refuses to recognise as independent, will be there. Ratko Mladic Serbia Bosnia and Herzegovina War crimes Europe United Nations Ian Traynor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Nations united over Libya as Cameron says pressure on Libyan regime beginning to tell – but rift remains over Syria Colonel Gaddafi has beenleft diplomatically deserted after Russia, his sole international interlocutor joined the rest of the G8 rich nations in declaring the Libyan leader had lost all legitimacy and had to go. But continuing differences between Russia and the west prevented agreement on how to pressurise the Syrian regime to end its oppression; a planned reference to take the issue to the UN security council was removed from the G8 communique. On Libya, David Cameron claimed there would be no attempt to reach a compromise deal saying the only message to the Libyan leader was that he had to give up power. Cameron, who held a council of war with Barack Obama and Nicholas Sarkozy on Thursday night, claimed the war against Gaddafi was entering a second phase and the pressure on the regime was beginning to tell. There had been suggestions the Russians would act as some kind of mediator in trying to secure a peace deal with Gaddafi, but Cameron said the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, had not made this suggestion in the discussions he had had with them. Cameron said: “The most important thing is to send the same message down the pipe when one of these offers appears and the message is that Gaddafi has to go. All sorts of things can happen after that. All offers of mediation should be met with that pretty clear response.” He said the Tripoli regime was beginning to feel the heat, revealing: “There is a whole string of contacts taking place, of phone calls and faxes coming out saying ‘how do we get out of this, what do we about this?’ to which I say there is one clear response: Gaddafi has to go.” Sarkozy revealed he had been discussing a joint visit with Cameron to the rebel stronghold of Benghazi, but Cameron’s aides played down the prospect of an imminent trip. Sarkozy also highlighted the terms of the communique saying: “There is unanimous support for this objective and the terms used against Gaddafi are particularly clear and hard and accepted by all the G8 countries including Russia.” In unusually simple language for a G8 communique, the leaders of the industrialised west said: “Gaddafi and the Libyan government have failed to fulfil their responsibility to protect the Libyan population and have lost all legitimacy. He has no future in a free, democratic Libya. He must go. “We welcome the work of the international criminal court in investigating crimes in Libya and note the chief prosecutor’s request on 16 May for three arrest warrants.” The Russians said they would send a delegation to Benghazi, but would not accept Gaddafi into exile. The communique was less clear, Cameron conceded, on Syria, admitting that the Arab world was divided as to whether President Assad might yet take the fork in the road towards reconciliation. Sarkozy was more blunt: “The situation is perfectly unacceptable and the attitude of the powers in the country is shocking. We have done everything we can to bring Syria into the international community. We have tried to help, to advise, to understand … sadly the leaders are going firmly backwards and we have withdrawn our confidence and criticised what has to be criticised.” The shift in the communique language to a vaguer threat of “further measures” appeared to be driven by Russia, which has a security council veto and has been upset by the way in which the west has interpreted its right to bomb Gaddafi following an earlier UN resolution giving Nato all necessary powers to protect civilians. “There are no grounds to consider this issue [Syria] in the UN security council,” Russia’s deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, told reporters. He said a draft resolution circulated to the 15-nation council on Wednesday by Britain, France, Germany and Portugal was “untimely and damaging”, adding: “We will not even read the text.” The draft resolution could also face a Chinese veto. The language on Libya by contrast at the G8 will be seen as a victory for Sarkozy, suggesting he managed to persuade a reluctant Russian delegation to bury their doubts about the scale of the military offensive, including the decision by the French and British to provide ground attack helicopters for use by Nato. In other parts of the communique the language on Libya is less robust, stating: “We are committed to supporting a political transition that reflects the will of the Libyan people. We recall our strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Libya.” Elsewhere in the communique, the leaders of the biggest industrialised countries also claim “the world economy is recovering”, even if more needs to be done to reduce global imbalances and deficits. G8 Muammar Gaddafi Libya Syria France Middle East Dmitry Medvedev Africa Foreign policy David Cameron Nato Europe Patrick Wintour Kim Willsher guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …After a long day of fundraising yesterday in Chicago, Mitt Romney was ready for some of the city’s famous deep-dish pizza. But what to do with the leftovers? Seeing as how Chicago is also the home of President Obama’s reelection headquarters, the GOP hopeful decided to be generous and send…
Continue reading …North Korea is set to release an American held since last November, state media reported after a US diplomat visited Pyongyang. The American envoy for human rights in North Korea, Robert King, headed to the country to examine its request that the US resume food aid, which Pyongyang halted in…
Continue reading …