Confusion over planned US-Taliban talks

US denies talks planned with Taliban

The US has not scheduled talks with the Taliban, the State Department has said, after reports that discussions with the Afghan group could begin this week in the Qatari capital, Doha.

“Reports of a meeting scheduled are inaccurate,” spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters on Wednesday, saying that Washington had “never confirmed” any specific meeting.

“We are now in consultations with the Afghan leadership and the High Peace Council on how to move forward.”

Psaki confirmed that US special envoy James Dobbins had not left Washington on Tuesday as planned for the talks.

“Right now, Ambassador Dobbins is in Washington. I don’t have any planned travel for you to announce,” she said.

The comments come one day after the US announced it would engage in direct negotiations with the Taliban as the armed group’s political wing opened an office in the Qatari capital.

Earlier on Wednesday, Afghan President Hamid Karzai had said he would boycott any talks unless they were led by his government.

“As long as the peace process is not Afghan-led, the High Peace Council will not participate in the talks in Qatar,” President Karzai said in a statement, referring to a body he set up in 2010 to seek a negotiated peace with the Taliban.

US-Afghan talks suspended

Afghans sceptical over peace talks with Taliban

The Afghan president, who has headed the US-backed Afghan government since the US-led invasion in the wake of the September 11 attacks brought down the Taliban, opposes bilateral US-Taliban talks.

And on Wednesday he broke off separate ongoing Afghan-US talks on an agreement to allow Washington to maintain soldiers in Afghanistan after a NATO combat mission ends next year over what it called the US’ “inconsistent statement and action” over the peace process.

The row centered on the Taliban office calling itself the “Islamic Emirate Of Afghanistan” – the formal name of its 1996-2001 government – and portraying itself as a state in exile, officials said.

Psaki insisted that “we do not recognise the name Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan,” adding that US Secretary of State John Kerry had made that clear in two phone calls in the past 24 hours with Karzai.

433

Afghanistan suspends security talks with US

The Afghan government has announced that it is suspending security negotiations with Washington because of the United States’ “inconsistent statement and action” over the Taliban peace process.

The move on Wednesday came a day after the US said that it would engage in direct negotiations with the Taliban, who officially opened a political office in Doha, Qatar, a day earlier.

“The president suspended the BSA [Bilateral Security Agreement] talks with the US this morning,” Aimal Faizi, President Hamid Karzai’s spokesman, said.

“There is a contradiction between what the US government says and what it does regarding Afghanistan peace talks,” Faizi told AFP.

The BSA is meant to provide a strategic framework for US troops to remain in the country after its troop formally exit Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

Faizi said that Karzai particularly objected to “the name of the [Taliban's] office” in the Qatari capital.

Al Jazeera speaks to Shukria Barakzai, an Afghan MP, about the suspension of talks with the US

“The president is not happy with the name of the office. We oppose the title the ‘Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan’ because such a thing doesn’t exist,” Faizi said. “The US was aware of the president’s stance.”

Meanwhile, the Taliban said it would continue to target the US military in Afghanistan, undeterred by US moves to hold direct negotiations with it.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Zabihullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesperson, said his group will not change their tactics or objectives.

The Taliban threat rang true as the armed group claimed responsibility for an attack on the Bagram air base, that killed four US soldiers on Tuesday.

The air base, a sprawling centre about 47km north of Kabul, serves as a major hub for US aircraft.

‘Two-pronged approach’

Al Jazeera’s Jane Feguson said the Taliban threat to continue with its attacks reflected that the armed group had been emboldened by its perceived successes on the battlefield.

“Zabihullah said it was those attacks in the first place that forced parties on the ground to the negotiation table. It shows a real confidence on the side of the Taliban when they say that,” she said.

“They see themselves in the driving seat of these peace negotiations rather than having to make any military concessions on the ground,” she said.

The US is cautiously optimistic of the Taliban peace talks

“It seems that the Taliban are trying to push for a two-pronged approach to what they would see as a victory: The diplomatic approach in Doha as well as the military approach.”

The US military presence in Afghanistan is roughly 66,000 troops, after having reached a peak of about 100,000 forces.

US officials cautioned that the peace process would likely be messy and has no guarantee of success.

“It’s going to be a long, hard process if indeed it advances significantly at all,” a senior US official said.

Meanwhile, the NATO command in Kabul on Tuesday completed handing over lead security responsibility to Afghan government forces across the country.

NATO plans to end all combat operations in Afghanistan by December 2014.

593

US to hold direct peace talks with Taliban

The United States will engage in direct peace negotiations with the Taliban in Qatar next week, aimed at achieving peace in Afghanistan, senior White House officials have said.

Tuesday’s announcement came as the Taliban opened a political office in the Qatari capital, Doha, to help start talks on ending the 12-year-old conflict, saying it wanted a political solution that would bring about a just government and end foreign occupation.

Taliban representative Mohammed Naeem told a news conference at the office in Doha that the armed group wanted good relations with Afghanistan’s neighbouring countries.

US President Barack Obama said the opening of the Taliban office was an important first step toward reconciliation between the Taliban and Afghanistan’s government.

He also praised Afghan President Hamid Karzai for taking a courageous step by sending representatives to Qatar to discuss peace with the Taliban.

He warned, however, that the process would be lengthy and insisted that the Taliban break ties with al-Qaeda and end violence.

Secret discussions

A senior representative of the Afghan government confirmed that talks were scheduled with the Taliban and said the progress was made after secret discussions with the group.

“Peace talks will certainly take place between the Taliban and the High Peace Council,” said the senior official, referring to the body created by Karzai in 2010 to negotiate peace with the group.

The Taliban has until now said it would not countenance peace talks with the Karzai government, which it calls a “stooge” of the United States and other Western nations.

The peace talks, if they go ahead, could also lead to a reduction in fighting across Afghanistan, the official said.

“We hope that the attacks carried out by the Taliban in Afghanistan will reduce while we talk peace; there is no point in talking if the bombs continue to kill civilians,” he said.

The announcement came on the same day that the Taliban opened their long-delayed office in the Qatari capital.

In a move that may anger the Afghan government, the white Taliban flag was at his side, and a large sign behind him proclaimed the office of the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan”, the name the Taliban used during their brief national rule in the 1990s.

Both events may have been timed to coincide with a ceremony on Tuesday to mark the beginning of the final phase of security transition from the US-led coalition to the Afghan state.

Concern in Kabul

Al Jazeera’s Jane Ferguson, reporting from Kabul, said that many poeple were saying they would resist what they percieved as the rise in power of the Taliban

“The people here in Kabul are extremely concerned about the developments in Doha today,” our correspondent said.

“The Taliban said they would reject any internaitonal terrorist presence here, so from one perspective the Americans will have acieved a huge objective.

“What people here are asking is what about the other objectives that were sold to Afghans in 2001? Women’s rights, universal human rights, democracy. Are those objectives to be sacrificed for the skae of a quick american withdrawal?

“If the Taliban were to have widespread political influence here, does that mean a lot of the things that they have worked for over the past 12 years could be lost?”

553

EU, U.S. Launch Trade Talks

The United States and the European Union are launching talks on a sweeping new free trade agreement.

U.S. President Barack Obama and European Union leaders, speaking at a G8 summit in Northern Ireland, have announced that the talks will begin next month in Washington.

The agreement would lower tariffs that hinder trade in goods and services and is seen as a way to create jobs and fuel economic growth.

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said the deal could offer “huge economic benefits” for both sides.

Obama said the deal would “support hundreds of thousands of jobs on both sides of the [Atlantic] ocean.”

British Prime Minister David Cameron, the host of the G8 summit, said the trade pact could be “the biggest bilateral deal in history.”

Based on reporting by AP and AFP

North Korea offers ‘high-level talks’ with US

North Korea has proposed high-level talks with the US aimed at discussing the countries’ nuclear weapons programmes and easing tension on the peninsula, state media has said.

“We propose high-level talks between the North and the US to secure peace and stability in the region and ease tension on the Korean peninsula,” the North’s National Defence Commission said in a statement on Sunday, carried by the Korean Central News Agency.

The North is willing to have “serious discussions on a wide range of issues, including the US goal to achieve the world free of nuclear arsenal”, it said, urging the US to set the time and venue for the talks.

There was no immediate response from Washington, but President Barack Obama’s envoy on North Korea said on Friday that while the US is not averse to talking with Pyongyang, the bar for resuming engagement is higher in the wake of repeated threats and provocations.

Subsiding tensions

The invite comes days after the North reportedly called off talks with South Korea.

But overall, the rare proposal comes amid subsiding tensions, which softened in May and June, as Pyongyang made overtures to re-establish dialogue with South Korea and the US.

In a notable shift in propaganda in Pyongyang, posters and billboards calling on North Koreans to “wipe away the American imperialist aggressors” have been taken down in recent weeks.

Al Jazeera talks to N Korea expert Robert Kelly

Foreign analysts say impoverished North Korea often expresses interest in talks after raising tensions with provocative behaviour in order to win outside concessions.

The Korean Peninsula remains divided by a heavily fortified border.

North Korea is expected to draw attention to Korea’s division in the weeks leading up to the 60th anniversary in July marking the close of the Korean conflict, which ended in an armistice.

A peace treaty has never been signed formally ending the war.

Nuclear woes

Washington’s biggest worry is North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme. Pyongyang is estimated to have a handful of crude nuclear devices and has been working toward building a bomb it can mount on a missile capable of striking the US.

Earlier this year, Kim Jong Un, North Korea’s leader, enshrined the drive to build a nuclear arsenal, as well as growing the economy, as national goals.

Follow coverage of escalating threats in Northeast Asia

Pyongyang claims the need to build atomic weapons to defend the country against what it sees as a US nuclear threat in Korea and the region.

North Korea will not give up its nuclear ambitions until the entire Korean Peninsula is free of nuclear weapons, a spokesman from the North’s National Defence Commission said in a statement carried by the Korean Central News Agency.

“The denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula does not only mean dismantling the nuclear weapons of the North,” the spokesman said, but also should involve “denuclearising the whole peninsula, including South Korea, and aims at totally ending the US nuclear threats” to North Korea.

After blaming Washington for raising tensions, he called on the US to set the venue and date for talks.

542

North Korea offers ‘high-level talks’ with US

North Korea has proposed high-level talks with the United States aimed at discussing nuclear weapons programmes and easing of tension on the peninsula, state media said.

109

Ryan Crocker: ‘U.S. Should Engage In Wide-Ranging Talks With The Iranians’

Ahead of Iran’s presidential election on June 14, RFE/RL asked top U.S. observers to weigh in on the effectiveness of sanctions, the end goal of nuclear negotiations, and the possible benefits of taking a more diplomatic approach toward Tehran.

RFE/RL correspondent Golnaz Esfandiari spoke to Ryan Crocker, a career U.S. diplomat who has served in ambassadorial posts throughout the Middle East and South Asia, including Afghanistan and Pakistan, and was assigned to the U.S. Consulate in Khorramshahr, Iran, in the early 1970s.

Crocker is currently a member of The Iran Project, a nonpartisan group that has called for a rethink of U.S. strategy regarding Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. Crocker was recently nominated to join the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the body that oversees U.S. international broadcasting, including RFE/RL.

RFE/RL: In a recent interview with “The Los Angeles Times,” you suggested that sanctions are easy enough to impose but “the more you press this regime, the more they dig in.” Can you expand on why you think the sanctions regime has not worked?

Ryan Crocker: I think it’s fairly clear-cut, as is sadly so often the case with sanction regimes — whether it’s Iran now, Iraq a decade ago, or others — it isn’t the regimes who feel the pain and the pressure of the sanctions. Very often they make money out of them. Saddam [Hussein] certainly did and it wouldn’t surprise me if the Iranian leadership is actually profiting from sanctions. They’re not responsive to their populations.

So, what they see is a sign of hostility from the West that doesn’t really cause them pain. They’re digging in and saying: ‘No, I’m not changing policy.’ [Which] is, I think, the entirely predictable thing to do.

RFE/RL: You have suggested that diplomacy should be stepped up. What concrete measures do you have in mind?

Crocker: What we suggested in the recent Iran report (issued by the Iran Project), to which I was a signatory, is that without removing pressure — [leave] the sanctions on, don’t take the military option off the table — that we should do what President [Barack] Obama said he was ready to do at the beginning of his term. And that is engage in comprehensive, wide-ranging talks with the Iranians. Everybody can bring everything to the table and let’s see what we’ve got. Again, our current approach may have some effect on the speed of their nuclear program, but it certainly isn’t stopping it.

Let’s talk about everything, including the nuclear program, and see if there might be some common ground on some areas — for example, Afghanistan. The Iranians can’t be happy about what is happening in Syria. However, this comes out, they will either lose or have a badly weakened ally in Bashar al-Assad and he is their only Arab ally. So, let’s talk about the broader Middle East, and so on and so on.

One of several things will happen. Either we may find the basis for ongoing discussions on a couple of issues where we can find common ground; or, the Iranians will publicly demonstrate a complete intransigence across the board which will further isolate them and strengthen international pressure against them. Either way, I think it’s an initiative we should take.

RFE/RL: As U.S. ambassador to Iraq, you held talks with your Iranian counterpart, but you said that it didn’t get anywhere. Why do you now think talking to Iran can bring results?

Crocker: Because some years have passed since then and times change, circumstances change, people change. I was also involved with direct talks with the Iranians in 2001 and 2002 on Afghanistan, where we did make progress. There’s also — to come back to the Iraq talks — as I suggested, that if we do have talks and they go nowhere and it’s because of Iranian intransigence, you know, that is not a bad thing either, because it makes clear to the world just where responsibility lies.

RFE/RL: What is the end goal when dealing with Iran? Ending Iran’s sensitive nuclear activities? Or regime change, as Iranian leaders seem to believe?

Crocker: Let me start with the last point. We’ve tried regime change once in Iran, as you know, with Prime Minister Mosadegh in 1953. That did not turn out well. And I think the seeds of the 1979 revolution were planted in ’53. So I definitely do not recommend regime change as a policy for the U.S. or anyone else.

What we would like to see is a change in the policies and behavior of the regime. It’s up to the Iranian people to make their own decisions on their government. Regime change imposed from outside through a coup did not work well for the West in Iran and sensitivities among Iranians — not just the government but the population as well — of foreign interference are very high, and we need to understand and respect that.

The point of negotiations, again, is certainly not to bring down a regime but it’s to see if we can find some common ground that leads to some productive engagement. Again, I cited Afghanistan as a possibility where we do have some common interests, and then see if we can broaden that to a set of understandings that may cause the Iranians to say, “Okay, we can have a different relationship with the West and we really don’t need to pursue this nuclear issue any further.”

Now, that may never happen. It certainly would take a long time in any case, but I think it’s worth pursuing. But again, this is about policy change. It’s not about regime change.

RFE/RL: Are we heading toward a war, seeing as you and many others believe sanctions are not going to change Iran’s policies? Are we turning Iran into a failed state?

Crocker: No, I don’t think [so]. Iran is a strong nation, it’s a resilient nation. An eight-year war with Iraq didn’t turn Iran into a failed state, neither will any of this. What I’m suggesting is exactly the opposite of going to war, it’s moving to diplomacy: broad-gauged, sustained, diplomatic engagement precisely to lessen the possibility that there may be a resort to military force.

Although, as I said — and as [the Iran Project] said in the Iran report — this is about, as we say in America, carrots and sticks. Let’s have a broad-range discussion. They’ve always said they wanted that, but we neither lift sanctions nor do we take the military option off the table. So it’s the two together.

RFE/RL: Should the U.S. look at a containment policy? Can the U.S. live with a nuclear armed Iran?

Crocker: Well, that’s the whole point — to see that we don’t have to deal with a nuclear-armed Iran. Because I cannot tell you what the consequences of that maybe except to say it would create a very dangerous situation in the region. I don’t know how other states would react.

One of the dangers is proliferation. If Iran acquires that capability, some of its neighbors are going to start working very hard to get a capability of their own. It just is not a direction you want to go. So, that is why we’re suggesting let’s start talking broadly and see if we can come up with some areas of agreement, some tradeoffs, that can take this region away from further proliferation.

RFE/RL: Do you think the ground-level effect of the sanctions, which arguably have harmed Iran’s economy and helped spur inflation, could harm the United States’ image among average Iranians?

Crocker: It’s a good question. I haven’t seen recent polling. I do know that over time the United States has enjoyed a consistently high level of popularity among the Iranian public. We certainly would not want to see anything develop that would taint those attitudes. I do hope the Iranians — who are sophisticated, well-educated people — understand that these sanctions are meant to target the regime’s nuclear program, to obstruct it, to extract a high cost for pursuing it. They are not directed at the Iranian people, and if the Iranian people are feeling the pain it’s because their government is using these sanctions against them.

Syria opposition sticks to talks boycott

Syria’s opposition has reiterated its decision to boycott planned peace talks in Geneva, as rebel fighters reeled from losing a strategic city to forces of President Bashar al-Assad.

George Sabra, the interim head of the Syrian National Coalition (SNC), however, called for urgent military assistance to help rebel forces battle the Syrian army.

His statement came days after regime forces seized the key border city of Qusayr and other adjoining areas.

“What is happening in Syria today completely closes the doors on any discussions about international conferences and political initiatives,” Sabra told a press conference in Istanbul on Saturday.

He was referring to an initiative headed by Washington and Moscow to bring the regime and opposition to peace talks in Geneva.

“The war declared by the regime and its allies in the region has reached a level we cannot ignore,” Sabra said.

Sabra had already said on May 30 that the opposition would not attend a peace conference while Iran and the Lebanese Shia movement Hezbollah were supporting Assad’s troops on the ground.

Assad’s forces retook Qusayr, which had been in rebel hands for a year, four days ago, and followed that up by seizing Eastern Bweida village. The capture of the last rebel bastion in the area brought the entire Qusayr region back under regime control.

Sabra charged Hezbollah, along with majority-Shia Iraq and Iran, of pushing towards a “sectarian conflict”.

But he said the opposition would refuse to be dragged in, saying that this would change “our lives in the region into hell”.

Assad’s regime is dominated by members of the Alawite community, an offshoot of Shia Islam, while the rebels fighting it are mostly Sunni Muslims.

Sabra also repeated previous statements by rebels that they had the right to defend Syria, warning the Lebanese government that it would have to take responsibility for the “implications of the invasion” by Hezbollah.

Qusayr, less than 10 miles from Lebanon, is important for the regime as it links Damascus to the coast. For the rebels, it was an important conduit for men and supplies coming from Lebanon.

Dozens of wounded Syrians and Lebanese from the rebel side have been evacuated to Arsal, a border town in northern Lebanon, and to Baalbek in the east.

The conflict in Syria has killed more than 94,000 people. Some 1.6 million Syrians have fled the country since the uprising against Assad began in March 2011.

420

North and South Korea hold official talks

North and South Korean officials have sat down for their first talks in years, confronting decades of mutual distrust in a search for some positive end to months of soaring military tensions.

The working-level discussions, which began on Sunday at around 10:00am (0100 GMT) in the border truce village of Panmunjom, were intended to pave the way for ministerial-level talks in Seoul on Wednesday.

The agenda focused on restoring suspended commercial links, including the Kaesong joint industrial complex that the North effectively shut down in April as tensions between the historic rivals peaked.

The talks came about after an unexpected reversal on Thursday from North Korea, which suddenly dropped its default tone of high-decibel belligerence and proposed opening a dialogue.

South Korea responded swiftly with its offer of a ministerial meeting in Seoul, the North countered with a request for lower-level talks first and – after some relatively benign to-and-fro about the best venue – Sunday’s meet in Panmunjom was agreed.

Broadly welcome

In a further signal of intent, North Korea on Friday restored its official hotline with the South, which it had severed in March.

The two Koreas last held working talks in February 2011, and they have not met at the ministerial level since 2007.

The move towards dialogue has been broadly welcomed – given the threats of nuclear war that were being flung around in April and May – but there is sizable scepticism in the South and elsewhere about Pyongyang’s intentions.

“The North Korean offer has all of the hallmarks of Pyongyang’s diplomacy,” said Stephan Haggard, a North Korea expert at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

“Pyongyang is ‘sincerely’ and ‘magnanimously’ inviting the South to fix, and pay for, problems of the North’s own creation,” Haggard said.

It was the North’s decision to withdraw its 53,000 workers in early April that closed Kaesong which, until then, had proved remarkably resilient to the regular upheavals in inter-Korean relations.

Obama-Xi summit

The North also wants to discuss resuming tours by South Koreans to its Mount Kumgang resort. These were suspended after a North Korean soldier shot dead a South Korean tourist there in July 2008.

Kaesong and Mount Kumgang were both significant sources of scarce foreign currency for North Korea, which is squeezed by UN sanctions imposed over its nuclear weapons programme.

There are also suggestions that Pyongyang was playing to a specific audience by proposing talks just before US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping sat down for their crucial summit in California.

“The offer was transparently timed to coincide with the Obama-Xi summit, suggesting – probably wrongly – that the North is willing to do something substantive to unfreeze relations on the peninsula,” said Haggard.

China, the North’s sole major ally and economic benefactor, has been under US pressure to restrain its neighbour and has pushed Pyongyang to drop its destabilising strategy of confrontation.

481

North Korea proposes talks with South

North Korea has proposed official talks with South Korea to normalise commercial projects, including the Kaesong industrial zone that had been shuttered at the height of tensions between the rivals in early April.

More than 50,000 mostly North Korean workers lost their jobs when the jointly run business park shut down.

Kaesong was the last remaining symbol of cooperation between both nations.

North Korea’s state-owned KCNA news agency also said on Thursday the government would restore severed communications channels if the South accepts the offer of talks.

South Korea’s Ministry of Unification said in a statement that they take North Korea’s offer of government-level talks positively and hope to build trust between the two nations positively. The ministry added that they will announce a date and agenda regarding the talks.

The North, in a statement by its Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea which handles ties with the South, also proposed discussing the reopening of tours to a mountain resort and family reunions as well as to hold events to mark the 2000 summit of their leaders.

“We propose holding talks between authorities of the North and the South for the normalisation of the operation in the KIZ (Kaesong industrial zone) and the resumption of tours of Mt. Kumgang on the occasion of the anniversary of the June 15 joint declaration,” the committee said.

The June declaration refers to the outcome of the 2000 summit between then South Korean President Kim Dae-jung and the North’s Kim Jong-il, who died in 2011.

Follow coverage of escalating threats in Northeast Asia

South Korea has previously proposed to hold talks with the North on reopening the Kaesong zone, but Seoul has been reluctant to link those talks with the summit commemoration, saying Pyongyang would try to use them for propaganda.

Al Jazeera’s Harry Fawcett, reporting from Seoul said that North Korea’s proposal carries a very different tone compared to its views in March. He said a possible explanation could be the number of North Korean jobs that were lost during the shutdown.

“This was a big economic hit for North Korea to take,” Fawcett said.

He said that this dramatic offer for talks adds to South Korean President Park Geun-hye’s policy to build trust on the the peninsula, which she mentioned during her Memorial Day speech on Thursday.

From the beginning of March, North Korea has threatened to attack the South and US military bases in the Pacific using its missile and nuclear arsenal, driving tensions to the highest point in decades.

The daily barrage of threats and steps to cut off communications channels with the South and the US-led forces guarding the Korean border ceased in late April, timed with the end of annual military drills by the South and US forces.

Experts said the threats may have been designed by the North to reinforce leader Kim Jong-un’s stature as a military leader and to beef up his grip on the country’s nearly 1.2-million strong army.

482

Window Closes For Pakistani Peace Talks With Taliban

Pakistani politicians vying for a seat in parliament lured war-weary voters with promises of peace negotiations with one of the country’s most violent militant groups. But now that the elections are over, it appears the window of opportunity for talks has already closed.

A string of events essentially buried hopes of a negotiated peace between the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the government. And this, observers say, could compel the incoming government to abandon the promises they made to their constituents and settle instead for minimizing future TTP attacks.

The first blow to negotiation efforts came with the recent death of TTP deputy leader Wali-ur Rehman. His killing in a U.S. drone attack on May 29 prompted the militant group to withdraw its offer to hold talks with the government through interlocutors.

Days later, they suffered another setback through the assassination of newly elected provincial lawmaker Farid Khan, an independent candidate who recently joined ranks with the Pakistan Movement for Justice party (Pakistan Tehrik-e Insaf, or PTI) of retired cricket star Imran Khan. The PTI heads a coalition government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, where Farid Khan was killed, and had campaigned in the run-up to the May 11 general elections for talks with the Taliban and had vowed to end U.S. drone strikes.

The final nail in the coffin appears to have come with the public retreat of Jamiat Ulam-e Islam leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman, who had actively pursued talks.

Jan Achakzai, a spokesman for Rehman, said the powerful Islamist leader backed away from his position after sensing that Pakistan’s powerful military was against talking to the TTP because of its violent campaign against security forces and civilians.

“The federal government of Pakistan, major political parties, and the military all need to agree on creating conducive atmosphere for talks. Maulana Fazlur Rehman and our party Jamiat Ulama-e Islam see no role for themselves in the absence of a favorable environment for negotiations,” Achakzai said.

Shattered Hopes

Islamabad-based security analyst General Talat Masood says the Islamist leader’s retreat shows there is not a strong will for negotiations with a group that has vowed to enforce its world view by force.

He says that many Pakistani politicians have mixed views on the TTP, with some seeing it as an existential threat that needs to be confronted and others downplaying it as an isolated, local problem.

The U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan have spurred protests, and many parties promised an end to them.

The killing this week of PTI politician Farid Khan raised questions about how much the party’s leaders truly understand the threat posed by the TTP. Shattering the idea that the PTI would be spared of any violence from the TTP, a local Taliban commander was arrested in connection with the killing.

Masood says that given that the PTI and the Pakistan Muslim League –Nawaz (PML-N), whose head Nawaz Sharif was sworn in as prime minister on June 5 and will rule without a coalition, opposed military operations against the TTP during the election campaign, their new administrations in Islamabad and the northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province are unlikely to back new offensives against the group’s strongholds.

The two parties are also between a rock and a hard place because they risk alienating their supporters if they fail to live up to promises of reaching a negotiated settlement with the TTP.

“Pakistan’s new government will have to think very hard [to figure out] exactly how they want to move forward with Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan. Even, in the future, if there is any possibility of negotiations, they must lay down a framework in which they should be able to talk,” Masood says.

‘Agreements A Stalling Tactic’

Past efforts of negotiating with the Taliban have failed. Since 2004, Pakistani military and the civilian administrations in Islamabad and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have talked to the Taliban. They signed agreements with the insurgents in the hopes that they would accept government authority, end their violence, and distance themselves from Al-Qaeda.

But most agreements resulted in the insurgents being strengthened. The TTP, in particular, used the agreements to extend its control and establish its own political system. Its violation of the agreements spurred military operations. After being pushed out of its strongholds in northwestern Swat Valley and the South Waziristan tribal district in 2009, the group vowed to carry on armed struggle in order to replace representative rule with an Islamic empire.

Former Brigadier General Mehmood Shah says that both the PML-N and the PTI have little experience of dealing with the Taliban. He says their leaders are mainly based in the eastern Punjab Province, away from the harsh realities of northwestern Pashtun regions where the Taliban still control pockets of territory.

Shah, a former security official, negotiated with the Taliban after their insurgency began in 2003. He says that the TTP never really accepted any of the agreements signed with them.

“In Swat for example, the government accepted all their demands and only insisted that the Taliban fighters lay down their arms to return to a normal civilian life,” Shah says. “The Taliban did not abide by this one condition, which ultimately led to the failure of the agreement.”

Masood, the former military officer, says that new administrations cannot afford to appear weak by pursuing negotiations even after the Taliban renounced negotiations. He says that the new civilian rulers will need to wholeheartedly support military operations against the Taliban to be able to deliver on their promises to voters.

“All their plans for economic revival of the country — promoting education, health, and energy — will all be in jeopardy,” Masood points out.

Assyrian International News Agency

Iraqi Kurd Leader Says Baghdad Talks Last Chance

ARBIL, Iraq (Reuters) — Iraqi Kurdistan will be forced to seek a “new form of relations” with the central government in Baghdad if negotiations fail to resolve their disputes over oil and land, the president of the autonomous region said.

Masoud Barzani, who has hinted at full independence from Iraq in the past, told Reuters the current round of talks, which started last month, marked the final opportunity to end a feud that has strained Iraq’s uneasy federal union to the limit.

How the matter is settled will have a major impact on oil producers like Exxon Mobil and Iraq’s neighbor Turkey, which has upset Baghdad and Washington by deepening energy ties with Kurdistan.

“The current talks will be the last chance,” Barzani said in an interview at his presidential office outside the Kurdish capital Arbil. “There has been a softening of their (Baghdad’s) position, but practically speaking there has been no progress”.

“Either we will be able to reach an agreement… or we will have to think of a new form of relations between the region and Baghdad,” he said, declining to elaborate.

Ten years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, a stable power-sharing arrangement between Shi’ite, Sunni and ethnic Kurdish factions is still elusive and a recent intensification of violence has prompted warnings of civil war.

But Kurdistan has managed to insulate itself against the fallout, and is enjoying unprecedented prosperity for a region that was once the most impoverished and repressed in Iraq.

The northern enclave of more than 4.5 million people is also pursuing increasingly independent energy and foreign policies, antagonizing Baghdad to the point that both sides have deployed troops to reinforce positions along their disputed internal border.

STATEHOOD GOAL

Even if a compromise were to be found with Baghdad, statehood remains the ultimate objective for Barzani, a former guerrilla fighter who was born in the short-lived Kurdish republic of Mahabad in Iran in 1946.

Divided between Iran, Syria, Turkey and Iraq, the Kurdish people number more than 25 million and are often described as the world’s largest ethnic group without their own state.

“It’s the goal of all the Kurdish people and it’s a right,” said Barzani, who was wearing traditional costume with a red and white headdress. “I believe that to be the final solution.”

Key to realizing that ambition is oil. In recent years, the Iraqi Kurds have signed contracts on their own terms with the likes of Exxon Mobil, Total and Chevron Corp. That has infuriated the central government, which insists it alone is entitled to control exploration of Iraq’s oil.

Kurdistan used to ship crude through a pipeline network controlled by the central government and receive a share of the national budget. But exports via that channel dried up last December due to a row over payments for oil companies operating in the region.

The region says the constitution allows it to exploit the reserves under its soil, and is building the final leg of an independent export pipeline that could help bypass the central government and send as much as 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) of oil to international markets through neighboring Turkey.

Resource-hungry Turkey has cultivated close energy ties with Barzani’s Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), despite objections from the United States, which fears the region’s increasingly independent oil policy will lead to the break-up of Iraq.

“Both sides (Turkey and the KRG) are determined to make progress in terms of this relationship,” Barzani said. “When you have oil, oil will find its own way.”

The partnership has helped foster a nascent peace process between the Turkish state and rebels from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), who have fought it for the past three decades. PKK fighters began withdrawing from Turkey into Iraqi Kurdistan last month, drawing complaints from Baghdad, which said it would not accept any armed group entering its territory.

Asked whether he had any qualms about receiving several hundred guerrillas in the mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan, Barzani said there was no cause for concern. “We are expecting that after the problem is solved, they will go back to their homes.”

Barzani has responded to the civil war in neighboring Syria by sending aid to fellow Kurds there, receiving thousands of refugees, and seeking to unite the ranks of Syrian Kurdish political parties, with mixed success.

“They have still got some internal problems,” Barzani said. “We will encourage them to continue to work collectively and to take advantage of any opportunity that may come in order to achieve their objectives.”

By Isabel Coles

Editing by Patrick Markey and Mark Trevelyan.

IAEA Chief Says Tehran Talks Going ‘Around In Circles’

The United Nations’ nuclear agency chief has said that no progress had been made in efforts to clarify concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.

Yukiya Amano, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), was addressing a regular meeting of the agency’s governing board on June 3.

According to a copy of his speech, Amano said that talks with Tehran for some time had been “going around in circles.”

During the weeklong meeting in Vienna, the IAEA’s board of governors is expected to examine the latest report by the agency’s investigators on the Iranian program.

The report, circulated on May 22, said Iran has continued to expand its nuclear activities, including operations at its uranium enrichment facilities.

The report also mentioned Iranian advances toward building a plutonium-producing reactor.

Based on reporting by Reuters, dpa, and AP

Pakistan Taliban withdraws peace talks offer

The Pakistani Taliban have withdrawn their offer of peace talks, following the death of the group’s deputy leader in US drone attack, a spokesman for the group said.

Hakimullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, had made the offer of talks to the government in December but imposed demanding conditions and said his men would never lay down their arms.

The announcement on Thursday was a blow to the incoming government of Nawaz Sharif that was elected partly on promises to restore security after years of deadly attacks.

The death of Wali ur Rehman, wanted by the US for a 2009 attack in Afghanistan that killed seven people working for the CIA, also focuses attention on the controversial US drone programme.

Despite President Barack Obama’s sweeping promise last week of new transparency, Wednesday’s strike against a longtime US target shows that the CIA will still launch attacks on fighters without having to explain them publicly.

The news came amid conflicting reports about whether the group had selected a replacement for Rehman, who was killed Wednesday in an attack that Pakistani officials said left at least four other fighters dead.

Still deciding

Taliban spokesman Ahsanullah Ahsan said the group is discussing whether Khan Said, Rehman’s deputy, will succeed him as head of the group’s most powerful branch in South Waziristan, which would effectively make him the second-in-command.

Two Taliban commanders said commanders voted in favour of Said at a meeting, but Ahsan said a vote had yet to be taken. The commanders both spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to speak to the media.

Said is believed to be about 40 years old and is known mainly for coordinating attacks in Afghanistan, say intelligence and Taliban sources.

He was responsible for organising an assault on a prison in northwestern Pakistan in April 2012 in which close to 400 prisoners, including 20 who were considered dangerous insurgents, were freed.

Ahsan also told the AP news agency in a telephone call from an undisclosed location that the group had withdrawn an offer to join peace talks because they believe the Pakistani government approves of the US drone strikes, despite official statements to the contrary.

He also formally confirmed that Rehman had been killed.

“We had made the offer for peace talks with the government with good intention but we think that these drone attacks are carried out with the approval of the government so we announce the end of the talks process,” he said.

Fifth fighter

Three of the others killed were mid-level Pakistani aides to Rehman, two Pakistani intelligence officials said, also speaking on condition they not be identified because they were not authorised to release the information. They said they are still trying to confirm the nationality and identity of the fifth fighter.

The Pakistani Taliban, formed in late 2007, aims to overthrow the Pakistani government, which it believes is too closely aligned with the United States.

The group, formally called the Tehrik-e-Taliban or the TTP, has been responsible for hundreds of shootings and bombings across Pakistan that have resulted in thousands of deaths.

Earlier this year the group had indicated it was open to the idea of peace talks to end years of fighting if certain individuals, including Sharif, were involved.

The talks did not go anywhere at the time but the May 11 election victory of Sharif’s party once again brought the issue to the forefront.

Days after the election Sharif, who is set to become prime minister for a third time, called for peace talks with the Taliban militants. Sharif said Taliban offers to talk should be taken seriously.

A spokesman for Sharif’s party, the Pakistan Muslim League-N, promised to continue to push for talks when they take office despite the Pakistani Taliban’s announcement.

621

Pakistan Taliban withdraws peace talks offer

The Pakistani Taliban have withdrawn their offer of peace talks, following the death of the group’s deputy leader in US drone attack, a spokesman for the group said.

Hakimullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, had made the offer of talks to the government in December but imposed demanding conditions and said his men would never lay down their arms.

The announcement on Thursday was a blow to the incoming government of Nawaz Sharif that was elected partly on promises to restore security after years of deadly attacks.

The death of Wali ur Rehman, wanted by the US for a 2009 attack in Afghanistan that killed seven people working for the CIA, also focuses attention on the controversial US drone programme.

Still deciding

Said is believed to be about 40 years old and is known mainly for coordinating attacks in Afghanistan, say intelligence and Taliban sources.

He was responsible for organising an assault on a prison in northwestern Pakistan in April 2012 in which close to 400 prisoners, including 20 who were considered dangerous insurgents, were freed.

He also formally confirmed that Rehman had been killed.

Fifth fighter

The Pakistani Taliban, formed in late 2007, aims to overthrow the Pakistani government, which it believes is too closely aligned with the United States.

The group, formally called the Tehrik-e-Taliban or the TTP, has been responsible for hundreds of shootings and bombings across Pakistan that have resulted in thousands of deaths.

Earlier this year the group had indicated it was open to the idea of peace talks to end years of fighting if certain individuals, including Sharif, were involved.

The talks did not go anywhere at the time but the May 11 election victory of Sharif’s party once again brought the issue to the forefront.

Days after the election Sharif, who is set to become prime minister for a third time, called for peace talks with the Taliban militants. Sharif said Taliban offers to talk should be taken seriously.

A spokesman for Sharif’s party, the Pakistan Muslim League-N, promised to continue to push for talks when they take office despite the Pakistani Taliban’s announcement.

621

Assad agrees to peace talks ‘in principle’

President Bashar al-Assad has said Syria would be willing to attend peace talks with the opposition in principle, but any subsequent deal would have to be approved by a referendum.

Assad was referring to talks, backed by Russia and the US, planned next month in Geneva aimed at finding a political solution to the country’s civil war.

Speaking to Lebanon’s Hezbollah-owned Al Manar TV in his latest interview, Assad also said weapons contracts with Russia are not linked to the crisis, and that he would contest presidential elections next year if the Syrian people want him to.

He also said there is “a world war being waged against Syria and the policy of [anti-Israeli] resistance … [but] we are very confident of victory.”

The interview, pre-recorded and released on Thursday, was welcomed by some in Damascus with celebratory gunfire.

“The only condition [to attend peace talks] is that anything to be implemented will be submitted to Syrian public opinion and a Syrian referendum,” Assad said.

Agreeing “in principle” to talks shows a “lack of relevance to the diplomatic process,” said Geneive Abdo, a fellow in the Middle East programme at the Stimson Centre in Washington.

Speaking to Al Jazeera, she said: “This is not good ahead of peace talks in Geneva.”

Coalition talks ending

Assad’s interview was broadcast as the main opposition coalition wrapped up several days of talks in Istanbul.

“The National Coalition will not take part in any international conference or any such efforts so long as the militias of Iran and Hezbollah continue their invasion of Syria,” Sabra told reporters in Istanbul.

Earlier on Thursday, George Sabra, head of the Syrian National Colaition (SNC), said the opposition would not participate in the Geneva talks until the international community intervened to end a siege in Qusayr, a town in Homs province near the Lebanese border.

Khaled Saleh, the SNC spokesperson, who addressed the news conference after Sabra, said civilians in the town had been “severely wounded” and Qusayr had been completely cut off by forces loyal to Assad.

“Civilians have no access to water, electricity and the massacre continues minute by minute while the Assad regime continues to use weapons” it receives from allies, he said.

Saleh said the UN and Arab League should intervene to stop the killings that the Lebanese group “Hezbollah is responsible for”.

Meanwhile, fighting in Qusayr continued as activists claimed medical staff were running out of supplies to treat the wounded.

The battle of the town, which is close to the border with Lebanon, is considered strategic, and foreign fighters are reportedly supporting both sides.

Reports have said up to 4,000 Hezbollah fighters have joined forces with the Syrian military, which has claimed to be winning the battle.

469

Syrian opposition to boycott Geneva talks

Syria’s opposition will not participate in proposed international peace talks in Geneva next month, its leader has said.

George Sabra, the head of the Syrian National Coalition (SNC), on Thursday said the opposition was suspending their participation until the international community intervened to end the siege in Qusayr, a town in Homs province near the Lebanese border.

SNC’s George Sabra announces boycott of Geneva talks.

“Civilians have no access to water, electricity and the massacre continues minute by minute while the Assad regime continues to use weapons” it receives from allies, he said.

He said the secretary-general of the UN and the Arab League should intervene to stop the killings that the Lebanese group “Hezbollah is responsible for”.

The planned peace talks in Geneva are being brokered by Russia – a key Syria ally – and the United States. The SNC had earlier said it would take part only if a peace process that leads to Assad stepping down is put in place.

Russian missiles

SNC’s announcement to boycott the talks came only hours after Assad said his country would respond to any Israeli attack on its soil.

In an interview to be aired on Thursday by Al-Manar TV station, owned by Hezbollah, Assad also said he had already received the first shipment of an advanced S-300 Russian missile system and would soon get the rest.

In-depth coverage of escalating violence across Syria

The comments were first published on Thursday by the Lebanese newspaper al-Akhbar which got excerpts of the interview.

“Syria has received the first shipment of Russian anti-aircraft S-300 rockets,” al-Akhbar quoted Assad as saying. “The rest of the shipment will arrive soon.”

Israel has suggested its military might strike the Russian S-300 missiles.

Gerald Steinburg, a professor of Political Studies at Bar-ilan University, told Al Jazeera that Israel was paying attention “closely” to what is happening in Syria.

But he said Israel was not alarmed by shipments of arms to Syria.

“Mr Assad has got problems dealing with his own survival and that of his regime, so it it is not really a major concern in Israel,” he said from Jerusalem.

Several foreign envoys had participated in the Istanbul meeting to help the opposition arrive at a decision.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said major powers also remain divided on who will take part in the talks or when they will be held.

Ban told reporters “active consultations” were still being held, while Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, said the US government’s “entire foreign policy apparatus” was working to hold the meeting.

The US has also called on Hezbollah to withdraw its fighters from Syria immediately.

France says about 3,000 to 4,000 Hezbollah fighters are currently battling alongside regime troops in Syria.

565

Syrian opposition sets conditions for talks

Syrian opposition members meeting in the Turkish city of Istanbul have set preconditions on entering international peace talks scheduled for next month in Geneva.

The Syrian National Coalition (SNC) will meet for a final day on Thursday to see how they can take part in peace talks being brokered by Russia – a key Syria ally – and the United States for ending the ongoing conflict.

The SNC laid out preconditions on Wednesday for the conference, which hopes to bring the Syrian government and opposition together for the first time.

They want, among other requirements, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to quit before they enter international peace talks.

“The participation of the Syrians in any conference is tied to the presentation of a deadline for a solution and giving the necessary binding international guarantees,” said a statement released by the coalition.

“The Syrian Coalition welcomes the international efforts to find a political solution to what Syria has been suffering for two years while being committed to the principles of the revolution.”

Al Jazeera’s Rawya Rageh, reporting from Istanbul, said: “The opposition wants to see guarantees by the international community – binding measures as they say in their own words – that Assad will not be part of any settlement agreement.”

Major powers also remain divided on who will take part in the talks or when they will be held, Ban Ki-moon, the UN chief, said on Wednesday.

The US has also called on Lebanon’s Hezbollah to withdraw its fighters from Syria immediately. Fighters from the Shia militia-party backed by Iran are fighting alongside Syrian forces.

France says some 3,000 to 4,000 Hezbollah fighters are currently battling alongside regime troops in Syria.

Foreign envoys

Several foreign envoys from different countries, including Saudi Arabia, had joined Wednesday’s meeting in Istanbul.

Ahmet Davutoglu, Turkey’s foreign minister, participated in the meeting in what was seen as an effort to break the deadlock in talks to push the movement forward.

US ambassador to Syria Robert Ford and a top French diplomat on Syria also attended.

Veteran Syrian dissident Michel Kilo, head of a liberal bloc, also attended the talks at the Istanbul hotel alongside a top Saudi official.

Our correspondent said: “It’s very interesting that Kilo, a secular opposition figure whose internationally-backed bloc has been at the heart of the stalemate, arrived with these foreign officials and diplomats.”

Saudi Arabia wants the Coalition to expand in order to water down the influence of the powerful Muslim Brotherhood, and has backed Kilo’s bid to join the opposition group.

Opponents, including the Muslim Brotherhood, have resisted the Saudis’ move.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, France, Turkey and the United States all back the revolt against Assad, but have conflicting visions for the National Coalition.

‘Worst crisis’

“Things are not moving. The opposition has hit its worst crisis yet,” said a Coalition member on Wednesday, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The meeting is supposed to choose a new coalition president, agree on an interim government and vote in new members to join the bloc, as well as reach a decision on the proposed Geneva conference.

Meanwhile, Syria’s foreign minister Walid Muallem told the Beirut-based Arab news channel Mayadeen that the Syrian government would allow its people to vote on agreements made at the so called Geneva 2 meeting.

“If we reach an agreement in Geneva, and I hope we will, it will be put to a referendum and if the people approve what we agreed upon, I can assure you it will be fully respected,” Muallem said.

Muallem has already said earlier this month that the Syrian government will, in principle, send delegates to the Geneva 2 conference.

Also on Wednesday, the US, Turkey and Qatar pushed through a UN resolution demanding a probe into the fighting around the Syrian town of Qusayr, near Lebanon.

698

Syrian opposition sets conditions for talks

Syrian opposition members face their final day of talks in Istanbul having set out ‘preconditions’ on entering international peace talks scheduled for next month in Geneva.

The Syrian National Coalition, so far deeply divided on how to take the movement forward, will meet for a final day in Istanbul on Thursday.

On Wednesday, they laid out what are being called preconditions for attending a proposed international meeting on Syria, spearheaded by the US and Russia, and which aims to bring the Syrian government and opposition together for the first time.

They want, among other requirements, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to quit before they enter international peace talks.

“The Syrian Coalition welcomes the international efforts to find a political solution to what Syria has been suffering for two years while being committed to the principles of the revolution.”

“The opposition wants to see guarantees by the international community – binding measures as they say in their own words – that Assad will not be part of any settlement agreement,” said Al Jazeera’s Rawya Rageh, reporting from Istanbul.

Foreign envoys

Several foreign envoys from different countries, including Saudi Arabia, had joined Wednesday’s meeting.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu participated in the meeting in what was seen as an effort to break the deadlock in talks to push the movement forward.

US ambassador to Syria Robert Ford and a top French diplomat on Syria also attended.

Veteran Syrian dissident Michel Kilo, head of a liberal bloc, also attended at the Istanbul hotel alongside a top Saudi official.

Saudi Arabia wants the Coalition to expand in order to water down the influence of the powerful Muslim Brotherhood, and has backed Kilo’s bid to join the opposition group.

Opponents, including the Muslim Brotherhood, have resisted the Saudis’ move.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, France, Turkey and the United States all back the revolt against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, but have conflicting visions for the National Coalition.

‘Worst crisis’

“Things are not moving. The opposition has hit its worst crisis yet,” said a Coalition member on Wednesday, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The meeting is supposed to choose a new coalition president, agree on an interim government and vote in new members to join the bloc, as well as reach a decision on the proposed Geneva conference.

Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Walid Muallem told the Beirut-based Arab news channel Mayadeen that the Syrian government would allow its people to vote on agreements made at the so called Geneva 2 meeting.

“If we reach an agreement in Geneva, and I hope we will, it will be put to a referendum and if the people approve what we agreed upon, I can assure you it will be fully respected,” Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said.

Muallem has already said earlier this month that the Syrian government will, in principle, send delegates to the Geneva 2 conference.

Also on Wednesday, the US, Turkey and Qatar pushed through a UN resolution demanding a probe into the fighting around the Syrian town of Qusayr, near Lebanon, and condemnation of foreign fighters supporting President Assad.

The resolution approved by a vote of 36-1 in the UN Human Rights Council calls for urgent investigation into alleged abuses by government forces and Hezbollah fighters in Qusair, along with more aid access and civilian protections.

Only Venezuela voted against it. Eight other nations in the 47-nation council abstained; two were absent.

643

EU ends Syria arms embargo talks without deal

European Union nations have failed to reach an agreement on whether to arm Syria’s rebels when an embargo expires at the end of this week, Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger said.

EU foreign ministers met in Brussels on Monday to bridge their differences over the issue, with Britain and France pushing to allow European governments to deliver arms. Austria and several other EU capitals oppose such moves.

“I regret that after long talks it was not possible to find a compromise with the UK and France,” Spindelegger told reporters.

Other EU diplomats said more discussions would be held later in the evening and it was not clear whether a new attempt at finding a compromise would be made.

Opponents of relaxing the arms embargo say more weapons would only lead to more violence.

The regime of President Bashar al-Assad has been using extensive firepower against lightly armed rebel factions.

More than 94,000 people have died since the uprising against Assad’s regime erupted in March 2011, according to the latest UN figures.

Peace talks

Both sides have agreed in principle to enter direct talks in the Swiss city of Geneva next month, backed by both the US and Russia.

Nations who back arming of the opposition say it would create a level playing field that would force Assad into a negotiated settlement.

“It is important to show we are prepared to amend our arms embargo so that the Assad regime gets a clear signal that it has to negotiate seriously,” William Hague, UK foreign secretary, said ahead of Monday’s meeting.

The date, agenda and list of participants for the so-called Geneva 2 conference remain unclear, and wide gaps persist about its objectives.

The opposition Syrian National Coalition, which has been meeting in the Turkish city of Istanbul since Thursday, has yet to reach an official position on the peace initiative.

Any decision on the EU arms embargo would require unanimity among the 27 member states, but failing to come up with a decision would leave options for individual member states open.

Beyond the moral question of providing arms in a civil war, there are also fears that delivering weapons to the opposition would open the way for groups considered to be extremist to get hold of weapons that could then be targeted against the EU.

Over the past two years, the EU has steadily increased the restrictive measures against the Assad regime, including visa restrictions and economic sanctions.

In February, it also amended a full arms embargo to allow for non-lethal equipment and medicine to protect the civilians in the conflict.

If not renewed, all those measures expire at the end of the month.

448

Yanukovych Holds Informal Talks With Putin In Sochi

SOCHI, Russia — Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych is in the southern Russian city of Sochi for informal talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Yanukovych arrived on May 26 for discussions centered on bilateral relations within the framework of the Commonwealth of Independent States.

Yanukovych praised the work being done in Sochi to prepare for the 2014 Winter Olympic Games. Putin said that he works on the project “practically every day.”

Both Putin and Yanukovych plan to attend the Eurasian Economic Summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, on May 28-29.

Ukraine is seeking observer status in the Eurasian Customs Union (ECU), which unites Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan.

Russia has been pushing Kyiv to join the union outright, although Ukrainian Prime Minister Mikola Azarov said in April that ECU members had agreed to grant Ukraine observer status.

Syria agrees to attend Geneva peace talks

Syria’s foreign minister has said that his government will take part in a peace conference in Geneva, terming it a “good opportunity for a political solution” to the civil war in Syria.

Walid Muallem also praised an Iraqi army operation against Sunni armed groups near the border with Syria, during a surprise visit to Baghdad on Sunday.

President Bashar al-Assad’s regime had agreed “in principle to participate in the international conference which is supposed to be convened in Geneva” in June, Muallem said.

“We think… that the international conference represents a good opportunity for a political solution to the crisis in Syria.”

Muallem also took a swipe at countries supporting rebels who are locked in a bloody civil war with Assad’s regime, saying that “the regional countries that conspire against Syria are the same that support terrorism in Iraq.”

Moscow, a key all of Assad, said earlier in the week that Damascus had agreed to take part in the conference.

An exact date for the conference has not been set yet because of what Moscow described as a lack of unity among Syria’s opposition.

Officials in the main opposition Syrian National Coalition have signalled readiness to attend the conference, but said they first wanted guarantees that Assad would step down eventually.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry are due to meet in Paris on Monday for further talks regarding Syria.

Washington and Moscow unveiled earlier this month a plan to bring both Damascus and the opposition to the table to negotiate an end to the country’s 26-month conflict, which the United Nations estimates has left at least 80,000 people dead.

291

Discord bogs down Syrian opposition talks

Syria’s opposition factions, struggling under Western and Arab pressure to close their ranks and elect a viable leadership, have left a meeting aimed at creating a coherent front key to a proposed international peace conference.

“They have delayed the crucial vote on the expansion of the Syrian coalition ,” said Al Jazeera’s Hashem Ahelberra, reporting from Istanbul on Saturday.

After three days of meetings in Istanbul, senior coalition players were in discussions late into the night on Friday after Michel Kilo, a veteran liberal opposition figure, rejected a deal by Mustafa al-Sabbagh, a Syrian businessman who is the coalition’s secretary-general, to admit some members of Kilo’s bloc to the coalition, the sources said.

In-depth coverage of escalating violence across Syria

Kilo has said that his group wants significant representation in the opposition coalition before it will join.

“Kilo is ready to join but his list includes 25 people in a take or leave offer,” said our correspondent, Hashem Ahelberra.

“The problem with the opposition is that if they add the group of secularists into the general committee, they will have a veto power, and right now the current opposition thinks the secularists have been very soft on Assad, and they might undermine the hardliners and the Islamists.”

Much to the frustration of its backers, the coalition has struggled to agree on a leader since the resignation in March of Moaz al-Khatib, a former Damascus religious leader, who had floated two initiatives for Assad to leave power peacefully.

Khatib’s latest proposal, a 16-point plan that sees Assad handing power to his deputy or prime minister and then going abroad with 500 members of his entourage, won little support in Istanbul, highlighting the obstacles to wider negotiations.

“He has the right to submit papers to the meeting like any other member, but his paper is heading directly to the dustbin of history. It is a repeat of his previous initiative, which went nowhere,” a senior coalition official said.

The failure of the Syrian National Coalition to alter its Islamist-dominated membership as demanded by its international backers and replace a leadership undermined by power struggles, appears to be playing into the hands of President Bashar al-Assad.

No let up in violence

By Saturday night, the factions locked themselves up in a room, trying to find a way to work together.

And while they continued their discussions behind closed doors, fighting continues inside Syria in Qusayr, where heavy bombardment has been going on for days.

Interim opposition leader George Sabra spoke at a press conference in Istanbul on Saturday, when he took a harsh tone with Hezbollah as well as Iran.

“Thousands of invaders from the Iranian forces and the terrorists of Hezbollah are still coming to Syria and still killing our people,” said Sabra.

“The killers are blockading, shelling and trying to storm several cities…they are, with the participation of the falling Syrian regime, killing Syrians in so many locations, in all governorates,” said Sabra.

Meanwhile, in a speech on Saturday, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah on Saturday vowed “victory” in Syria, where militants of his powerful Lebanese Shia movement are fighting alongside regular troops against rebels trying to topple
the regime.

“I say to all the honourable people, to the mujahedeen, to the heroes: I have always promised you a victory and now I pledge to you a new one” in Syria, he said at a ceremony marking the 13th anniversary of Israel’s military withdrawal from Lebanon.

Government forces are attacking a key town as Assad’s ally Russia says he will send representatives to a proposed international conference in the Swiss city of Geneva, coalition insiders said.

591

Russia: Syria agrees to take part in talks

Russia says the Syrian government had agreed in principle to attend an international peace conference proposed by Russia and the US, and criticised what it called attempts to undermine peace efforts.

The summit has been suggested by the US and Russia and could take place in the Swiss city of Geneva.

“We note with satisfaction that we have received an agreement in principle from Damascus to attend the international conference, in the interest of Syrians themselves finding a political path to resolve the conflict, which is ruinous for the nation and region,” Alexander Lukashevich, Russian foreign ministry spokesman, said on Friday.

Faisal Mekdad, Syrian deputy foreign minister, said after talks in Moscow on Wednesday the government would soon decide whether to take part in the conference aimed at bringing government and opposition representatives together for talks.

Lukashevich said international action including a May 15 UN General Assembly resolution that praised the opposition and condemned President Bashar al-Assad’s forces has “essentially pushed [the opposition)]to reject negotiations”.

Some European media have reported that the conference has been tentatively scheduled to be held on June 10.

But Lukashevich said such reports “cannot be taken seriously” because the ranks of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s foes remain so divided.

“Demands to immediately name a specific date for the conference without having clarity about who, and with what authority, will speak in the name of the opposition, cannot be taken seriously,” Lukashevich said.

The opposition Syrian National Coalition, which is currently meeting in Istanbul, to discuss an interim government, has said it will only go to “Geneva II” if Assad steps down as president.

Louai Safi, a senior member of Syria’s main opposition, told Al Jazeera, “The fact that it has been announced in Moscow, rather than in Damascus, is a worrying point, as we want to hear the spokesperson of the Syrian government making that statement with clarity.”

“There is alot of ambiguity. What does it mean, ‘in principle’?,” he said.

“We want to hear definitive answers….We want to see a clarity of the purpose of Geneva.”

The Syrian National Coalition, which is main opposition group based outside the country, entered a second day of talks on Friday aimed at finding an approach to the joint Russian-US peace push.

The first Geneva meeting in June last year ended in a broad agreement aimed at forming a transition government in Syria and introducing a long-lasting truce.

But the deal was never implemented because of disagreements over Assad’s role in the new government and neither side’s decision to lay down their arms.

431