Houthis make gains in Yemen's Aden, approach port

Houthis make gains in Yemen's Aden, approach port
World | Sun Apr 5, 2015 5:49am EDT Related: WORLD, YEMEN ADEN

(Reuters) - Yemen's Houthi militiamen, supported by army units, gained ground in the southern city of Aden on Sunday, pushing back loyalists of the Saudi-backed President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi.

Residents took refuge in their homes and reported hearing sporadic gunfire and blasts of rocket-propelled grenades, and one witness saw a Houthi tank in the downtown Mualla district, which sits astride Aden's main commercial port.

Houthi forces have inched forward in street-fighting in the city despite an 11-day nationwide bombing campaign by a Saudi-led coalition aimed at halting the Iran-allied group and protecting Hadi's last bastion of support in the country.

Saudi planes parachuted weapons to Hadi's armed supporters there on Friday, helping them temporarily beat back Houthi advances.

The crates of light weapons, telecommunications equipment and rocket-propelled grenades were parachuted into Aden's Tawahi district, on the far end of the Aden peninsula which is still
held by Hadi loyalists, fighters told Reuters.

Saudi Arabia has said defending Aden's government is a "main objective" of its mission and Hadi's administration has called for a foreign ground intervention into the beleaguered city.

Adel al-Jubeir, Saudi ambassador to the United States, said sending ground troops remained "on the table" and the operation's spokesman Brigadier General Ahmed Asseri declined to comment on media reports of Saudi special forces there.

In six months of fighting, the Shi'ite Muslim Houthis have seized much of Yemen's north and center but have faced stiff resistance in the country's Sunni south, raising fears of a sectarian civil war.

In the city of Lawdar about 200km east of Aden, 10 Houthi fighters and allied soldiers were killed in clashes which also killed four local tribesmen on Sunday, residents said.

(Reporting By Mohammed Mukhashaf; Writing by Noah Browning; Editing by Jon Boyle)

பா.ஜ.க.அரசின் நில அபகரிப்பை எதிர்த்து கழகம் பிரச்சார இயக்கம்!

பிரிட்டிஷ் அரசு கொண்டுவந்த 1894 சட்டத்தில் கூட நியாயம் கேட்க நீதிமன்றத்தை அணுகமுடியும். ஆனால் பா.ஜ.க. அரசு கொண்டு வந்துள்ள இந்த சட்டத்தில் அதற்கு வழியேயில்லை. காங்கிரஸ் அரசின் சட்டம்
கார்ப்பரேட் நலன்களை ‘பொதுநலன்’ என்று கருதுவதைப் போலவே, பா.ஜ.க. அரசு கொண்டுவந்த இந்தச் சட்டமும் கார்ப்பரேட் நலன்களை ‘பொது நலன்’ என்று கருதினாலும், காங்கிரஸ் அரசு கொண்டுவந்த சட்டத்தில் விவசாயிகளுக்கு அளிக்கப்பட்டுள்ள சில சலுகைகள் கூட இச்சட்டத்தில் கைவிடப்படுகிறன.
* தற்போது பா.ஜ.க. அரசு கொண்டுவந்துள்ள சட்டத்தில் முப்போகம் விளையும் நிலங்களைக் கூட கையகப்படுத்தலாம்.
 * தற்போது பா.ஜ.க. அரசு கொண்டுவந்துள்ளச் சட்டம், 13 துறைகளுக்கு காங்கிரஸ் அரசு அளித்திருந்த விதிவிலக்குகளைக் கைவிட்டுள்ள அதே நேரத்தில், ரியல் எஸ்டேட் உள்ளிட்ட பல்வேறு துறைகளை விதிவிலக்கு பட்டியலில் கொண்டு வந்துள்ளது.
* பா.ஜ.க. அரசின் சட்டப்படி, அரசுத் துறைகளுக்கு மட்டுமின்றி, எந்த ஒரு தனியார் முதலாளிகளுக்காக நிலத்தைக் கையகப்படுத்துவதாக இருந்தாலும் விவசாயிகளின் ஒப்புதலை அரசு கேட்கத் தேவையில்லை.
 * அப்பகுதியைச் சேர்ந்த நிலமற்ற கூலி விவசாயிகள், கைவினைஞர்கள் போன்றோருக்கு நிவாரணம் தரத் தேவையில்லை.
* சுற்றுச் சூழல் பாதிப்பு குறித்துப் பரிசீலிக்கத் தேவையில்லை.
 *  கையகப்படுத்திய நிலம் 20 ஆண்டுகளுக்குப் பயன்படுத்தாமல் இருந்தாலும் அதைத் திருப்பித்தர வேண்டியதில்லை.
*  ‘தனியார்’ என்பதை ஒரு தொழில் நிறுவனம் என்று காங்கிரஸ் கட்சியின் 2013ஆம் ஆண்டு சட்டம் வரையறுத்திருந்தது. ஆனால் பா.ஜ.க. அரசின் சட்டப்படி ‘தனியார்’ என்பது நபராகவோ தன்னார்வ நிறுவனமாகவோக் கூட இருக்கலாம்.
 * அதுமட்டுமல்ல, தனியார் சுயநிதிக் கல்வி நிறுவனங்கள், தனியார் மருத்துவ மனைகள் ஆகியவற்றையும் ‘பொதுச்சேவை’ என்று வரையறுத்துள்ளது. அவற்றிற்கு விளை நிலத்தைக் கையகப்படுத்தித் தரும் பொறுப்பை அரசு ஏற்றுக்கொள்கிறது.
* நிலத்தின் சந்தை விலையைத் தீர்மானிப்பது உள்ளிட்டு, இந்தச் சட்டத்தை அமலாக்கும் அரசதிகாரம் பெற்ற மத்திய, மாநில அரசு அதிகாரிகள் முறைகேட்டில் ஈடுபட்டாலும் அவர்களுக்கு எதிராக பாதிக்கப்பட்டோர் வழக்குத் தொடுக்க முடியாது. அரசின் அனுமதி பெறாதபட்சத்தில் அதை நீதிமன்றமும் விசாரிக்கக் கூடாது.

இவைதான் பா.ஜ.க. அரசு கொண்டுவந்துள்ள நிலத்தைக் கையகப்படுத்தும் சட்டத்தின் மிக முக்கியமான அம்சங்களாகும்.

>>>>>>>>> சமரன்

காணாமல் போனோர்:That there were ONLY 210 Persons in custody! புதிய அரசு!!

Missing persons: Justice Minister denies allegations made against previous govt.

April 2, 2015, 9:58 pm by Shamindra Ferdinando



Dismissing much-touted allegations that thousands had been still held on terrorism charges, Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, PC, on Monday said that there were only 210 persons in custody.

The minister stressed that nine held on terrorism charges had been given bail.

The Justice Minister was addressing a gathering of religious leaders at his ministry.

In the run-up to the Jan.8 presidential election, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), overseas LTTE groups and some civil society organisations accused the previous government of holding thousands of political prisoners in secret detention camps.

According to the minister, 134 persons had been remanded had 60 were under investigation and 25 held under Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). Of the total number, nine have been released on bail.

Recently, Prime Minister Ranil  Wickremesinghe denied the existence of secret detention camps in the country while asserting those who had been categorised as missing were either dead due to the conflict or living overseas.

The previous government on more than one occasion briefed the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) regarding the release of over 11,000 ex-LTTE combatants following rehabilitation.

Saudi DAIRY FACTORY BOMBING KILLS 29 IN HODEIDA

DAIRY FACTORY BOMBING KILLS 29 IN HODEIDA
Published on 1 April 2015 in News
Bassam Al-Khameri (author)

SANA’A, March 31—Investigations are ongoing to identify the source of an explosion at a dairy factory in Hodeida governorate early Wednesday that killed 29 employees and injured 25.

A source in the Hodeida SECURITY Department, speaking to the Yemen Times on condition of anonymity, said investigations are at an early phase and remained inconclusive as of Wednesday afternoon.

“Warplanes from the Saudi-led bombing campaign have only targeted military INSTALLATIONS, but civilians are known to have been hit, as happened near Sana’a International Airport on the first day of airstrikes, so anything is possible,” the source said. “Everything will become clear as investigations proceed, there is a difference between shells from warplanes and tanks.”

The number of civilians killed in the blast rose from 25 in the morning as several employees suffered life-threatening injuries and could not be SAVED. Abdulrahman Jar Allah, director of the Ministry of Public Health and Population’s office in Hodeida, confirmed the number of casualties and said 18 of the survivors were seriously injured.

According to Basim Al-Jenani, a freelance journalist based in Hodeida, the explosion occurred at about 12 a.m. while hundreds of nightshift employees were inside the factory. He said investigations have been hampered by heavy bombing in the area by Saudi-led forces under Operation Decisive Storm.

“It is difficult to verify information because the factory is in the Kilo Seven Area, one kilometer from the Coastal Defense Camp and about 300 meters from the Hodeida Airbase, and it is also near the 67th and 33rd Air Brigade camps,” all of which have been under attack since Tuesday.

The factory is owned by Thabet Brothers Group and employs about 3,000 workers.

Mohammed Al-Bukhaiti, a member of the Houthi Political Office in Sana’a, denied his group’s involvement and said forces fighting on their behalf were incapable of causing the level of damage seen at the factory.

“We use anti-aircraft weapons to prevent these airstrikes and everyone knows that Saudi-led warplanes TARGET these facilities. The administration of the factory has said they were targeted by an air raid, not shelled by a tank as people have claimed,” he said.

A source in Thabet Brothers Group’s marketing department, speaking Wednesday evening on condition of anonymity, said the company’s board of directors have refused to comment or release any information on the matter, but that a press statement will soon be made.

Source: Yermen Times

PFLP condemns US-supported aggression on Yemen

PFLP condemns US-supported aggression on Yemen

Mar 31 2015

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine condemns the US-backed aggression on Yemen, in a statement released March 29, expressing concern about the implications of these developments and their inherent risks at all levels.

The PFLP emphasizes:

1. its condemnation of the US-backed aggression on Yemen, rejecting any interference in its internal affairs 

2. the adoption of dialogue as a means to resolve internal issues and for a path of democratic and peaceful change determined by the Yemeni people.

3. that it is the duty of the Arab nation and the Arab League to instead assist Yemen to resolve the crisis in order to achieve the aspirations of the Yemeni people for democratic governance, protect the freedoms of all, and protect them from sectarian or tribal conflict.

Speaking in Ramallah at a mass rally commemorating Martyr’s Day, Comrade Khalida Jarrar said that the Front salutes the Arab people of Yemen, calling for their steadfastness and victory against this criminal US-backed war in the Gulf. “The people in the end will prevail, and Yemen will defeat the invaders,” she said.

Iran and world powers strike initial nuclear deal

Iran and world powers strike initial nuclear deal

Agreement will curb Iran's nuclear programme and end most sanctions imposed on country.

02 Apr 2015 22:00 GMT

The United States, Iran and five other world powers say they have reached an understanding that will lead to a comprehensive nuclear agreement within three months.

Reading out a joint statement on Thursday evening, EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said a "decisive step" has been achieved.

The agreement, announced in the Swiss city of Lausanne on Thursday, will curb Iran's nuclear capacities by reducing its enrichment capacity and end most sanctions imposed on the country because of its programme.

Foreign Minister Javad Zarif welcomed the agreement as he read out the same statement in the news conference. He described the deal as a "win-win" agreement.

US President Barack Obama said the US and its allies had "reached a historic understanding with Iran, which if implemented will prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."

Obama said the deal was a "long time coming" and added it would not be based on trust but on independent verification of Iran's commitments.

'Solid foundation'

US Secretary of State John Kerry said the agreement in Lausanne was a "solid foundation for a good deal".

Al Jazeera's James Bays, reporting from Lausanne, said that US diplomats still faced the challenge of convincing opposition Republican dissenters in Congress, and its strongest ally, Israel, that the deal was sufficient.

"There are a lot of places where this deal will not be accepted and one of those is Israel," Bays said.
Obama said his SECURITY officials would be working with Israel and Arab states, including Saudi Arabia, to make sure their concerns are addressed.

He's keeping sanctions in regard to human rights violations and FUNDING of groups the US considers to be terrorists. The critics have said easing sanctions will give Iran more money to fund groups like Hezbollah.

The biggest complaint from critics is that this only limits Iran for 10-15 years. The president made sure to say in his speech that Iran is a signatory to the NPT so that means they will never get a nuclear bomb.

The president has the public on his side.  Polls show the majority of Americans want a diplomatic solution.  He is going to fight Congress by making the case to the American people if they vote down the deal they are voting for war.

Iran has also agreed to not build any new facilities for the purpose of enriching uranium for 15 years.
Zarif said the countries had agreed an elaborate mechanism if any of the parties to the agreement "returned to old practices" and reneged on their obligations.

"We will not allow excuses that will allow a return to the old system," Zarif said.

Mogherini said the seven nations would now start writing the text of a final accord.

She cited several agreed-upon restrictions on Iran's enrichment of material that can be used either for energy production or in nuclear warheads. She said Iran will not produce weapons-grade plutonium.

Phased approach

Iran's commitments on limiting domestic enrichment capacity will last ten years, with additional aspects of its programme, such as limitations on the amount of enriched uranium stockpiles it can hold, will last 15 years.

The lifting of sanctions placed on Iran will follow verification by the Un nuclear watchdog, IAEA, that it has met the obligations placed on it in the agreement.

The US, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China have negotiated with Tehran for years to prevent it from acquiring the means to develop a nuclear bomb.

Tehran had insisted on the lifting of international sanctions that have crippled its economy, while preserving what it views as its right to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Source: Al Jazeera and agencies

Iran nuke talks: Deal or ordeal?

OPINION
Iran nuke talks: Deal or ordeal?
A long and difficult path lies ahead regardless of whether there's an interim deal, half a deal, or no deal at all.
02 Apr 2015 13:40 GMT |

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Marwan Bishara
Marwan Bishara is the senior political analyst at Al Jazeera.
@MarwanBishara



At best, the nuclear talks in Lausanne will culminate, if at all, in a "political understanding" or a "declaration of principles" of a sort.

Such an understanding will then lead to long and complex negotiations over each and every item that the two parties "understand" requires detailed agreement. This process could go well through June and beyond.

Presidents Barack Obama and Hassan Rouhani have lots at stake in these negotiations and it's therefore paramount for them to reach an interim agreement, if only to buy themselves more time.

Iran nuclear talks extend deadline

The Iranian government needs the DEAL to lift the multi-layered sanctions in order to grow their economy and normalise relations with the international community. Such an outcome would eventually help the "reformist" government overcome the ultra-conservative sceptics of the regime.
Threat of military action

Indeed, the regime has much to benefit from such an opening that allows it to improve its standing domestically and in the region. Failure to reach a deal would lead to new tougher sanctions and ultimately to the threat of military action.

For its part, the Obama administration wants a DEAL that ensures Iran doesn't become a "nuclear state" or develop nuclear weapons.

By reaching such a deal without resorting to the use of force, Obama wants to make the larger and more important point that foreign policy is most effective and least costly when the US leads an international diplomatic effort that involves sticks and carrots, not bombs.

According to a recent Washington Post poll, Americans, 2 to 1, support the president on this, although many don't believe Iran will stick to it.

It's estimated that using force against Iran's nuclear programme would have paved the way to a full fledged war culminating in terrible death and destruction without setting back the enrichment process more than a year or two, all the while the US would pay heavily in both lives and dollars, perhaps up to $5 trillion.

Fierce opposition

And yet, expect the opposition forces in both countries to do what they do best, oppose a diplomatic solution.

Unlike the supporters of dialogue over the nuclear programme and other issues, the opponents of a deal enjoy decades of experience and master the discourse of doubt and demonisation of the other.

If there's a deal, they will oppose it in every possible way on the grounds of "GIVING AWAY too much for too little".

And if there's no deal, they will rub it in with the "we told you so" mantra until they get their next confrontation or war.

That's why, American and Iranian delegates might be listening to each other, but their eyes are directed to the home front.

Both leaders need a sweet enough deal that allows them TO WIN enough hearts and minds to withstand legislative and other pressures.

Lausanne, Iran's Oslo?

Iranian officials both in Switzerland and in Tehran have repeatedly underlined the importance of a comprehensive deal, while US officials emphasise the need for a conditional long-term process.
US insistence on multi-phased, performance-based process with Iran reminds me of US-sponsored talks with the Palestinians stemming from the Oslo process. These are meant to keep Iran under probation and allow the US the final word on how and when Iran can be free of all threats of sanctions.

The Obama administration emphasisses the need for "snap back sanctions" in case of Iranian violations of the signed DEAL, Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei has been unequivocal about full sanctions lift as a condition of a nuclear deal.

One gets the impressions that Washington treats Iranians in similar ways it once treated the Palestinians. After demonising them and accusing them of terrorism, it suddenly took them off the terrorist list to become legitimate negotiations partners.

Predictably, US mainstream media, citing the usual suspects with Middle Eastern sounding names, has been picking on Iran's negotiations mindset even though the Iranians proved to be formidable and pragmatic negotiators.
 
However, Iran is a regional power not an occupied nation, and the ayatollahs are in a far stronger position than the PLO.

That's why they won't accept an open-ended process with no specific endgame, that involves safeguarding Iran's sovereignty to enrich uranium while lifting the sanctions and normalisation of Iran's status in the world.

Predictably, US mainstream media, citing the usual suspects with Middle Eastern sounding names, has been picking on Iran's negotiations mindset even though the Iranians proved to be formidable and pragmatic negotiators.

Iranians are criticised for their obsession with "symbolism" merely because of insisting on their "sovereign rights", and for confusing ideology with technology because they reject western double standards.

If or when basic Iranian demands regarding sovereignty and normalcy are met, Ayatollah Khamenei will in all likelihood accept a nuclear deal. But will America's self-designated Ayatollah?

Netanyahu and US Congress

Recalling Netanyahu's rude manoeuvre to speak to Congress, and his obnoxious lecturing of the American people about the naivete of their president and the dangers of their foreign policy towards Iran, the Israeli prime minister is unrelenting.

He claims the deal, which has not been reached or signed yet, will pave the way to Iran's development and possession of nuclear weapons. And he's ready to use whatever dirty tricks, including CONTINUOUSLY invoking the Holocaust to derail the talks.

Alas, much of the Republican Right, including the main 2016 presidential candidates, as well as Israel's staunch friends among the Democrats support Netanyahu's stance.

These extremist forces are bound to do all in order to torpedo whatever understanding is reached, finalised or otherwise, between the US and Iran in Lausanne. And are adamant at escalating the tensions if no deal is reached.

The more delays in the talks, and the deeper the US delves into its 2016 elections, the weaker Obama becomes, and his ability to make grand decisions is undermined.

That's why the P5+1 mechanism is very helpful to the Obama administration. Once a deal is reached and is enshrined in a UN SECURITY Council resolution, it will be tougher for the US Congress or any future president to walk away from the deal.

All of which, makes it timely, rational and perhaps more likely for the two sides to reach a DEAL soonest, or before April 14 when Congress is back in session; a deal that meets the minimum demands of both parties, but leaves the important issues for further discussion in the coming months.
What effect that will have on Iran and the Middle East, is a subject for another day.

Marwan Bishara is the senior political analyst at Al Jazeera.The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
Source: Al Jazeera

யேமன் அகதிமுகாம் மீது சவூதி அரசு வான்வெளித் தாக்குதல், எண்ணற்ற மக்கள் படுகொலை!

அந்தக் கந்தக புகை மூட்டத்தின் உள்ளே தான் இந்தப் படுகொலை அரங்கேறியது1

இடம் பெயர்ந்த யேமன் மக்களின் அகதி முகாம் மீதான, சவூதிக் காட்டுமிராண்டி அரசின் வான்வெளி இராணுவப் போர்த்தாக்குதலில் எண்ணற்ற மக்கள் படுகொலை!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saudi Air strike kills at least 40 at Yemen camp for displaced

ADEN | BY MOHAMMAD MUKHASHAF AND SAMI ABOUDI

(Reuters) - An air strike killed at least 40 people at a camp for displaced people in north Yemen on Monday, humanitarian workers said, in an attack which apparently TARGETED near by Houthi fighters who are battling President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi.

Yemen's state news agency Saba, which is under the control of the Houthis, said the camp at Haradh was hit by Saudi planes. It said the dead included women and children, and showed the bodies of five children laid out on a blood-streaked floor.

A Saudi military spokesman said the kingdom was seeking clarification on the incident.

"It could have been that the fighter jets replied to fire, and we cannot confirm that it was a refugee camp," Brigadier General Ahmed Asseri said.

"We will ask the Yemeni official agencies to confirm that," he told reporters.

Hadi's Foreign Minister Riyadh Yassin earlier blamed Houthi artillery for the explosion.

The International Organisation for Migration, which initially reported 45 deaths, said 40 people were killed and 200 wounded - dozens of them severely.

A humanitarian worker said earlier that the strike hit a truck of Houthi militiamen at the gate to the Mazraq camp, near Haradh, killing residents, guards and fighters.

"People in Al Mazraq camp have been living in very harsh conditions ... and now they have suffered the consequences of an air strike on the camp," said Pablo Marco, MSF operational Mazraq, in the province of Hajja next to the Saudi border, is a cluster of camps that are home to thousands of Yemenis displaced by over a decade of wars between the Houthis and the Yemeni state, as well as East African migrants.

Saudi Arabia, supported by regional Sunni Muslim allies, launched an air campaign to support Hadi after he withdrew last month from the capital to Aden. He left Yemen on Thursday to attend an Arab summit and has not returned.

The fighting has brought civil war to the Arabian Peninsula's poorest country. Sunni Muslim tribesmen allied with Hadi are battling northern Zaydi Shi'ites backed by soldiers loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who stepped down after 2011 mass protests against his 33 years in office.

Yemen was already sliding into chaos with a growing southern secessionist movement and a covert U.S. drone campaign -- now stalled -- against al Qaeda in the east.

The growing power of the Houthis, part of a Shi'ite minority that makes up about 20 percent of the country's 25 million people, also means Yemen has become the latest stage for Saudi Arabia's power struggle with Iran.

The two regional rivals support opposing sides in Syria's civil war and in neighbouring Lebanon. Tehran also supports and arms Shi'ite militias in Iraq, although it denies Riyadh's accusations that IT SUPPORTS Yemen's Houthis militarily.

WARSHIPS FIRE ON HOUTHIS

In the capital Sanaa, controlled by the Houthis, jets struck around the presidential palace overnight and made more raids throughout the day. Most of the air strikes, launched on Thursday, have taken place so far only at night.

In the south, Houthi fighters closed in on the port city of Aden, the last major stronghold of Hadi supporters, and residents said warships believed to be Egyptian shelled a column of Houthis advancing along the coastal road.

It was the first known report of naval forces taking part in the conflict. A Reuters reporter heard heavy explosions and saw a thick column of black smoke rising from the area about 15 km
northeast of Aden, apparently after air strikes.

Saudi-led war planes also shook buildings in Aden's Khor Maksar district when they fired at least one missile at the airport, where Houthi-allied fighters are based, residents said. A stray

shell killed at least three people on a mini-bus in the same area, local fighters said.

A Hadi aide told the Dubai-based al-Arabiya TV that Houthi fighters also shelled the president's private residence in Khor Maksar killing a number of guards.

While Hadi's fighters ceded ground around Aden, Pakistan announced it would send troops to support the Saudi-led coalition.

"We have already pledged full support to Saudi Arabia in its operation against rebels and will join the coalition," a Pakistani official said.

In a cabinet statement, Saudi King Salman said Riyadh was open to a meeting of all Yemeni factions willing to preserve Yemen's SECURITY, under the auspices of the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council.

The Arab leaders agreed at their meeting in Egypt to form a unified military force to counter growing regional SECURITY threats such as the Yemen conflict.

But working out the logistics of the force will be a protracted process and Yemen's rugged geography, internal power struggles and recent history all present challenges to any military
campaign.

Just four years after the 1990 unification of North and South Yemen, civil war erupted when southerners tried to break away, but were defeated by Saleh's northern forces.

In the 1960s, intervention by Saudi Arabia and Egypt on opposing sides of a civil war in North Yemen led to a long and damaging military stalemate.

Saudi Arabia says it is focussing for now on air strikes against the Houthis, rather than a ground campaign, promising to increase pressure on them over coming days.

On Sunday, sources said Yemeni exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) were running as normal despite the shutdown of major seaports. But French oil firm Total said on Monday

operations at its Block 10 had been reduced, with gas production maintained only for local power generation and to supply nearby areas.

Several countries have evacuated citizens from Yemen in recent days. About 500 Pakistani nationals were flown out of the Red Sea port of Hodeida on Sunday, and India said on Monday it was preparing to fly out 500 people from Sanaa.

(Additional reporting by William Maclean, Noah Browning and Rania El Gamal in Dubai, Angus McDowall in Riyadh, Stephanie Nebehay in Lausanne; Writing by Dominic Evans; Editing by Angus MacSwan and Catherine Evans)

Iran Backs Away From Key Detail in Nuclear Deal

Iran Backs Away From Key Detail in Nuclear Deal
By DAVID E. SANGER and MICHAEL R. GORDON NY Times MARCH 29, 2015

Foreign ministers from other world powers joined Secretary of State John Kerry in an effort to reach the outlines of a nuclear accord with Iran by a midnight Tuesday deadline. CREDIT Pool photo by Brendan Smialowski

LAUSANNE, Switzerland — With a negotiating deadline just two days away, Iranian officials on Sunday backed away from a critical element of a proposed nuclear agreement, saying they are no longer willing to ship their atomic fuel out of the country.

For months, Iran tentatively agreed that it would send a large portion of its stockpile of uranium to Russia, where it would not be accessible for use in any future weapons PROGRAM. But on Sunday Iran’s deputy foreign minister made a surprise comment to Iranian reporters, ruling out an agreement that involved giving up a stockpile that Iran has spent years and billions of dollars to amass.

“The export of STOCKS of enriched uranium is not in our program, and we do not intend sending them abroad,” the official, Abbas Araqchi, told the Iranian media, according to Agence France-Presse. “There is no question of sending the stocks abroad.”

Depending on the technical details, that could make the process of enriching it for military use far more lengthy, or perhaps nearly impossible.

Nonetheless, the revelation that Iran is now insisting on retaining the fuel could raise a potential obstacle at a critical time in the talks. And for critics of the emerging deal in Congress, in Israel and in Sunni Arab nations like Saudi Arabia, the prospect of leaving large amounts of nuclear fuel in Iran, in any form, is bound to intensify their already substantial political opposition.

If an accord allowing Iran to retain the fuel is reached, the Obama administration is expected to argue that it would not constitute a serious risk, particularly if it is regularly inspected. So far under an interim agreement negotiated in 2013, Iran has complied fully with a rigorous inspection process for the stockpiles of its fuel, the International Atomic Energy Agency has said.

But the development could give opponents another reason to object, adding it to a list of what they call concessions made by an administration in search of an agreement. If Iran ever bars the inspectors from the country, as North Korea did a dozen years ago, the international community would have no assurance about the fate of the fuel. Nor has Iran answered longstanding questions about its suspected nuclear design and testing of components that could be used to detonate a warhead.

Ray Takeyh, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who has been critical of the emerging accord, said the development raised serious questions about a possible deal.

“The viability of this agreement as a reliable arms control accord is diminished by this,” Mr. Takeyh said. “One of the core administration arguments has been that the uranium would be shipped abroad as a confidence building measure.”

On the assumption that Iran’s uranium stockpile would be small, the United States and its negotiating partners had been moving toward an agreement that would allow Iran to retain roughly 6,000 centrifuges in operation. It is not clear how much that might change if the fuel, even in diluted form, remains in the country.

If the fuel had been shipped to Russia, the plan called for MOSCOW to convert it into specialized fuel rods for the Bushehr nuclear power plant, Iran’s only commercial reactor. Once it was converted into fuel rods, it would have been extremely difficult for Iran to use the material to make a nuclear weapon.

It is not clear what form the fuel would take if it remains on Iranian territory.

The disclosure also adds a new element to the growing debate over whether the proposed agreement would meet President Obama’s oft-stated assurance that the world would have at least a year’s warning if Iran raced for a bomb — what experts call “breakout time.”

The argument over warning time, which was accelerated by a skeptical paper published over the weekend by the former chief inspector of the International Atomic Energy Agency, offered a taste of the kind of arguments already taking shape in Congress.

On Sunday, Republican leaders made it clear they would press for more sanctions against Iran if no agreement is reached here by Tuesday. In an interview with CNN, Speaker John A. Boehner expressed doubts about a potential agreement on Iran’s nuclear program.

“We have got a regime that’s never quite kept their word about anything,” he said. “I just don’t understand why we would sign an agreement with a group of people who, in my opinion, have no intention of keeping their word.”

With pressure mounting to settle on the main parameters of an accord, negotiators were still divided on how fast United Nations’ and others’ sanctions on Iran might be lifted. Important differences remained on what kind of research and development Iran could carry out on new types of centrifuges during the last five years of what is intended to be a 15-year agreement.

There was a clear sense that the talks were approaching a pivotal moment as the foreign ministers from other world powers joined Secretary of State John Kerry in an effort to reach the outlines of a deal by a midnight Tuesday deadline.

“We are not there yet,” said one Western official who, like others in this article, declined to be identified because he was discussing diplomatic deliberations. “There are lots of pieces floating around.”

Yet even if a deal was reached by late Tuesday, American negotiators made clear that this was just an interim step, and that any final agreement would require months of negotiations over what were once called “technical agreements” but are now clearly the source of CONTINUING disagreement.

That calculation over “breakout time” is so complex that experts from Britain, France, Germany and Israel all have somewhat slightly different calculations than those of experts from the United States.

The debate over breakout time intensified when Olli Heinonen, who ran inspections for the I.A.E.A. before moving to Harvard several years ago, published a paper on Saturday concluding that, based on leaked estimates that Iran would operate roughly 6,500 centrifuges, “a breakout time of between seven and eight months would still be possible.”


A senior Obama administration official here said that while he did not dispute Mr. Heinonen’s figures, the former inspector had conducted a textbook calculation rather than examining the real-life conditions at Iran’s facilities.

Like other countries, Iran loses some of its nuclear material every time it is changed from a gas to a solid, and its machinery, the evidence shows, does not run at perfect efficiency. The official said that the United States had created a measure based on what American officials have called the “fastest reasonable” estimate of how long Iran would take to produce a weapon.

Some experts outside government say the American assumptions are reasonable, and perhaps even generous to the Iranians — who have taken 20 years to get to this point, far longer than it took PROGRAMS, including in North Korea and Pakistan, to produce bomb-grade material.

But the emergence of COMPETING estimates could pose a political problem for President Obama, who has made breakout time the paramount measure for a potential agreement.

Parts of the agreement have begun to leak out, and reflect the balancing act underway: An effort by the United States and the other five powers here to cripple Iran’s ability to produce enough nuclear material for a weapon for at least 10 years, while letting the Iranians preserve a narrative that they are not dismantling major facilities, or giving in to American pressure.

For example, a deep underground facility at Fordow — exposed in 2009 — would likely be converted to make medical isotopes. That means it would not be used for enriching uranium.

But several hundred centrifuges might still be spinning there — the facility now has about 3,000 — and that fact alone, American officials acknowledge, could provide fodder to opponents of the deal.

Reporting was contributed by Thomas Erdbrink from Tehran, and Andrew Siddons from Washington.

ஹூத்தி யுத்த ஆதரவுச் சுவரொட்டி