International news – Bladsy 2

Britain tries to buy influence

BERLIN – The United States lost its status as the largest donor to the World Bank’s main fund for poor countries, the lender said on Friday, as Britain pledged more in the latest funding round that secured a record amount of aid.

Losing its position as the top donor could weaken Washington’s influence over the World Bank, which is the largest provider of development assistance to poor countries, and over the policies that decide how its cash is spent.

The Washington-based lender conducts a fund-raising campaign among its richer members every three years to determine funding for the International Development Association. The IDA is the bank’s lending arm.

After negotiations that began in March in Paris and ended with two days of talks in Berlin, Britain promised US$4.2 billion ($5.4 billion) for the period from July 2008 through June 2011, World Bank President Robert Zoellick told reporters in a conference call.

The US Treasury said it pledged US$3.7 billion to the bank’s International Development Association fund, up 30 per cent from its contribution three years ago and the largest increase since the Carter administration in the 1970s.

A senior Treasury official applauded Britain’s move, which amounts to an increase of about 50 per cent.

"We made our decision based on what we thought was a solid number — one of the largest increases the United States has ever made — and the UK obviously put in an even greater amount, which means that the overall number for IDA goes up. We think it’s great what the UK did," said Clay Lowery, Treasury assistant secretary for international affairs.

Lowery said the United States "has no problem" with Britain being a larger donor, adding that it is "good for poor people, which is frankly what we’re mostly concerned about."

Forty-five donor countries, the most ever, promised a record total of US$25.1 billion at the Berlin talks, with a further US$16.5 billion coming from the bank and previous donor pledges for financing debt forgiveness, officials told the news conference.

The total of US$41.6 billion, also a record, represents an increase of US$9.5 billion over the previous funding period and will support around 80 countries, mainly in Africa.

In a coup for Zoellick, who is in China this week, Beijing was one of six nations joining the list of donors for the first time, along with Cyprus, Egypt and the three Baltic states.

"We’re feeling pretty positive, but I’m glad I don’t have to do this every year," Zoellick said. "The donor community has demonstrated its full commitment to helping countries overcome poverty and achieve sustainable growth, especially in Africa."

Zoellick said the money would go toward helping 2.5 billion people in poor nations across five continents.

IDA-financed projects support education, basic health services, clean water and sanitation, as well as environmental safeguards, infrastructure and policy and institutional reform.

The latest talks were complicated by slowing economic growth in rich nations and the weakening dollar, which inflates contributions by some other countries when calculated in the US currency.

At the same time, the bank’s mission is widening, with governments demanding more help in developing sophisticated economies and markets.

The United States, whose economy is almost six times as big as Britain’s, wanted to hold on to its No. 1 spot as the bank’s largest donor, but it is also struggling with a budget stretched by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The US share of contributions has slowly declined from 22 per cent in 1960, the year of the fund’s inception, to about 14.7 per cent of the fund in the new round.

Britain’s share is now 16.7 per cent of the fund.

In comparison, after the previous round of IDA negotiations in 2005, the US share was 13.8 per cent and Britain’s was 13.2 per cent.

The US$3.7 billion US contribution, which Congress must approve, will be split into annual appropriations requests over the next three years.

Germany made the fourth-biggest contribution to the new funding round, boosting its pledge by 18.57 per cent to 1.514 billion euros ($2.8 billion), the Development Ministry said.

Фильчаков Харьков

No “coalition of the willing’

Nearly five years into the occupation of Iraq, the ‘coalition of the willing’ is about to lose two of its key supporters.

The British handover to Iraqi forces is seen as the beginning of the end for Britain, which plans to cut its troop numbers dramatically.

With Australia planning to withdraw its combat troops, the United States will soon be the only country left.

Al Qaeda is already trying to make mileage out of the latest development, saying the pull-back by British troops shows insurgents have gained the upper hand.

Basra is the ninth of Iraq’s 18 provinces to resume responsibility for its own security. The British Commander there is Major-General Graham Binns:

"I commanded the coalition troops who entered Basra in April 2003. Four-and-a-half years later I have the privilege of handing the city and the province back to Iraqi control," he said.

"I came to rid Basra of its enemies and I now formally hand Basra back to its friends."

But not everyone believes Basra is from free of its enemies. This resident doesn’t trust the Iraqi troops who are now in charge.

"The police and army are from the militias. Who do we speak to? If you go to the police station you’ll be killed the next day."

The, 4,500 British troops in Iraq won’t be leaving immediately but they are taking a back-seat role, focusing instead on training Iraqis.

Britain will reduce its troop numbers to 2,500 early next year and a decision on a complete pullout is expected within months.

The Australian Government is yet to announce exactly when and how Australia’s 500 or so combat troops will be withdrawn, but Ron Huisken from the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University says the impact in Iraq will be more symbolic than strategic.

"Our move is elevated because we were one of the three musketeers if you like, the three that went in from the beginning," he said.

"So there’s a bit of extra symbolism that attaches to our withdrawal of combat troops. But in combat terms it’ll make very little difference at all."

Al Qaeda is already attaching symbolism to Britain’s handover in Basra. The group has posted a video on the internet of its second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who says it shows insurgents are gaining the upper hand there.

Dr Michael McKinley, a senior lecturer in international relations at the Australian National University, says that’s not an accurate interpretation.

"Not entirely. Clearly the British wanted to get out of southern Iraq and they have wanted to get out for a while and they have actually suffered some small military reverses – some of their outposts have actually been overrun by local militia," he said.

"I think the British were not prepared to give an indefinite undertaking. Nobody really would be.

"But the British are getting out with the fear that there is no clear, dominant party in southern Iraq, there are some competing Shia factions, and that is very much a cause for concern."

Only US forces left

Dr McKinley says the British troops’ handover of power in Basra has symbolic importance.

"The significance really is that this is the last of the major contributions of the ‘coalition of the willing’ from outside the United States to go," he said.

"I mean, Australia is there, but the British were always stronger in numbers than Australia. So this is quite important symbolically. It marks the effective end of the British commitment in a significant way."

He says that leaves the United States hoping its own strategy will work.

"It leaves the United States on course for what it wants, which is, it will – even when they have the ‘drawdown’… of their forces – the United States is still talking about at least 50,000 will be in Iraq to look over things," he said.

"There will be at least 50,000 private military contractors supplementing that US presence.

"So, it means basically that it’s like a wish list. They’re hoping like hell that it’s going to work."

Creationism row ends in death

A bizarre row about evolution versus creationism led to an English backpacker fatally stabbing a Scottish backpacker during a fruit-picking trip to earn money for their travels.

Alexander York, 33, from Essex, was sentenced to a maximum of five years in jail yesterday for the manslaughter of Rudi Boa, 28, a biomedical student from Inverness.

The incident happened in January last year at a caravan park in southern New South Wales, where York had become friendly with Mr Boa and his girlfriend, Gillian Brown. The Scottish couple had just arrived in Australia, and headed to Tumut, a picturesque town at the foothills of the Snowy Mountains, to pick fruit.

Their neighbour at the Blowering Holiday Park was Alexander York, who had been in Australia since April 2005. The three of them got on well. On the night of Mr Boa’s death, they had spent the evening drinking at a pub in Tumut, the Star Hotel.

Towards the end of the night, however, they became embroiled in the creationism versus evolution argument, and it escalated into a shouting-match in the pub. Mr Boa and Ms Brown were both adamantly opposed to York’s Christian fundamentalist point of view.

Sentencing York in the New South Wales Supreme Court yesterday, Justice Michael Adams said: "Although this became perhaps a little sharp-edged, it did not really amount to anything.

"For some reason, however … the offender’s mood changed suddenly and he began to abuse Ms Boa and Ms Brown. There was no hint of a physical confrontation and what happened amounted to little more than a verbal contretemps."

The row had been defused by the time the backpackers left the pub separately, but all three were drunk, and tempers flared again after they returned to the caravan park.

Ms Brown told the court that York, who had been making dinner, attacked the couple outside his tent and delivered a single stab wound Mr Boa with a kitchen knife. York claimed he lashed out in self-defence after being attacked by Mr Boa.

He was found guilty of manslaughter but acquitted of murder, and ordered to serve at least three years in jail. The judge said he was giving him a relatively lenient sentence partly because of the accidental nature of the stabbing.

"I do not believe that he took aim, but rather thrust out," he said. "I think he knew that the knife was in his hand … but he did not actually turn his mind to the potentially serious consequences of doing this.

"The offender’s act was done impulsively and on the spur of the moment. I do not think the offender was aware of how seriously he had harmed Mr Boa."

The judge added that York was "a person of good character" and that the offence was "a complete aberration". York, unshaven and dressed in prison uniform, sat impassively as he was sentenced. Mr Boa’s sister, Debbie, broke down when York was led into court, and during the sentencing.

A spokeswoman for the New South Wales office of the Director of Public Prosecutions said: "Justice Michael Adams QC took into account that part of the sentence has been served. Mr York is eligible for release in January 2009."

Burglin’ Bob

Flemish boo beauty queen

Belgium’s political tensions entered the glamour stakes after it was revealed that the new Miss Belgium does not speak Dutch.

Alizee Poulicek, who comes from the country’s French-speaking region, was booed by some of the 4,000 audience when she admitted that she could not understand a question put to her in Dutch at the contest on Saturday night in the main Flemish city of Antwerp.

Poulicek, a 20-year-old language student, speaks French, Czech and English, but Flemish tabloid daily Het Laatste Niuews headlined its Monday edition with: "Miss Belgium does not speak Dutch".

The paper underlined that the "community crisis in our country" — where there is no government six months after general elections amid bickering between leaders of the main French and Flemish parties — "has insinuated itself into even the lightest sector."

Poulicek’s victory "is not going down well," the daily said.

She said she had been taking Dutch lessons before the contest and has pledged to improve her standard in one of Belgium’s three official languages, along with French and German.

The incident did not hurt her image with television viewers who voted for her, but Flemish journalists assailed her with questions at a press conference, highlighting her deficiencies in their tongue.

The Flemish community accounts for 60 percent of Belgium’s 10.5 million people. A further 3.5 million live in Wallonia and one million in the largely Francophone, but officially bilingual Brussels.

Лобановский

The Peak Oil Crisis

Peak Oil started as a story about geology. It was once relatively simple. After 150 years of pumping up oil, the easy-to-find kind was gone and from here on out it was going to be much more difficult to find and eventually prohibitively expensive.

In recent years, however, the peak oil story took on new facets such as rapidly increasing consumption of oil in Asia and producing countries, concentration of most production in the hands of a few governments, unstable world finances, rapidly increasing cost of production and a growing inability or unwillingness to export oil to other countries.

Of all the reasons that gas prices are going up, only the geologic constraint – “supplies are running out” – has an air of finality. There is nothing anybody can do about it.

Other constraints on unlimited oil flows sometimes called “above ground factors” carry with them the subtle implication that there is something that can and just might be done to set things right. A war on top of your oilfield? Stop it! Getting too expensive to produce the necessary oil? Invest more. Government failing to step up production? Change the government! You get the idea. Peaking of world oil production by definition implies that the oil age is on the way out. Almost any other reason for restricted oil flows implies there is a “fix” which will allow us to continue on for awhile without any great disruption.

For over 25 years now, nobody in America has had to think much about oil. It was cheap, hardly taxed at all (by European standards), and available in unlimited quantities. In the last few years, this has started to change with gasoline circa $3 a gallon, oil in the $90s and, thanks to the ethanol craze, food prices going through the roof. Our newspapers are starting to take notice. The problem has become too big to ignore.

Three weeks ago the Wall Street Journal took a stab at explaining what was happening and came up with the notion that world oil production was only “plateauing,” not peaking. Plateauing carries the implication that life as we know it can go on for awhile. All the oil we import today will continue to be available and, if only the Chinese economy would stop growing so fast, all will be well.

Last Sunday, the New York Times came at the high gas price problem from a different direction – availability of imports. Drawing on the combined wisdom of no less than seven of their reporters strung out around the earth, the Times boldly concluded that “The economies of many big oil-exporting countries are growing so fast that their need for energy within their borders is crimping how much they can sell abroad.”

The Times then told its readers some very scary stuff. “Experts say the sharp growth, if it continues, means several of the world’s most important suppliers may need to start importing oil within a decade to power all the new cars, houses and businesses they are buying and creating with their oil wealth.” I particularly like the “if it continues” clause which suggests that the Russians, Mexicans, Venezuelans, Iranians and all those incredibly rich Persian Gulf Arabs might just stop buying new cars, building themselves places to live, and buying flat screen TV’s so they can export their oil to their good friends in America instead.

After more scary talk about world oil exports dropping by 2.5 million barrels a day in the next three years and how a drop of this size could lead to major economic problems, the Times switches to a reassuring mode. “The trend, though increasingly important, does not necessarily mean there will be oil shortages. More likely, experts say, it will mean big market shifts, with the number of exporting countries shrinking and unconventional sources like Canadian tar sands becoming more important, especially for the United States. And there is likely to be more pressure to open areas now closed to oil production.”

They even go so far as to suggest that an era of peace and friendship might just break out in the next few years. ”Greater political stability and increased drilling in some important oil states, notably Iraq, Iran and Venezuela, could help offset the rising demand from other oil exporters.”

After reassuring us that all is not necessarily lost, the Times concludes by reinforcing its basic point by saying “Internal oil consumption by the five biggest oil exporters — Saudi Arabia, Russia, Norway, Iran and the United Arab Emirates — grew 5.9 percent in 2006 over 2005, according to government data. Exports declined more than 3 percent. By contrast, oil demand is essentially flat in the United States. CIBC’s demand projections suggest that for many oil countries, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Libya, internal oil demand will double in a decade.”

The Times and the Journal have taken a major step forward by admitting for essentially the first time in front-page stories that the U.S. is going to face a big problem in the next few years. Neither however has connected the dots.

Nowhere does the Times remind us that the U.S. is now importing two-thirds of its oil consumption each day and that a drop of a few percent in daily flow is likely to cause pandemonium at the pumps as it did back in the 1970’s. Neither paper has as yet mustered the editorial courage to discuss the 800-pound gorilla, oil depletion, which every year quietly eats away 4 or 5 percent of our oil supply – the life blood of modern civilization.

Until our major newspapers begin discussing in a frank and open manner what will soon be the first major crisis of the 21st Century, the U.S. Congress is doomed to empty posturing and debating energy red herrings. It is clear that most have no clue as to what is about to befall us.

100+ Scientists warn UN

BALI, Indonesia – The UN climate conference met strong opposition Thursday from a team of over 100 prominent international scientists, who warned the UN, that attempting to control the Earth’s climate was “ultimately futile.”

The scientists, many of whom are current and former UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) scientists, released an open letter to the UN Secretary-General questioning the scientific basis for climate fears and the UN’s so-called “solutions.”

“Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity’s real and pressing problems,” the letter signed by the scientists read. The December 13 letter was released to the public late Thursday. (Canada Free Press)

The letter was signed by renowned scientists such as Dr. Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists; Dr. Reid Bryson, dubbed the “Father of Meteorology”; Atmospheric pioneer Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, formerly of the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute; MIT atmospheric scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen; UN scientist Dr. Vincent Gray of New Zealand; French climatologist Dr. Marcel Leroux of the University Jean Moulin; World authority on sea level Dr. Nils-Axel Morner of Stockholm University; Physicist Dr. Freeman Dyson of Princeton University; Physicist Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, chairman of the Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Poland; Paleoclimatologist Dr. Robert M. Carter of Australia; Former UN IPCC reviewer Geologist/Geochemist Dr. Tom V. Segalstad, head of the Geological Museum in Norway; and Dr. Edward J. Wegman, of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

“It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables,” the scientists wrote.

“In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of climate change is ‘settled,’ significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming,” the open letter added. [EPW Blog Note: To read about the latest peer-reviewed research debunking man-made climate fears, see: New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears – LINK – & New Peer-Reviewed Study Finds: “Warming is naturally caused and shows no human influence.” (LINK) – For a detailed analysis of how “consensus” has been promoted, see: Debunking The So-Called “Consensus” On Global Warming – LINK ]

The scientists’ letter continued: “The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC’s conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions.”

“The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by government representatives. The great majority of IPCC contributors and reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a consensus view among experts,” the letter added. [EPW Note: Only 52 scientists participated in the UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers in April 2007, according to the Associated Press. – LINK – An analysis by Australian climate researcher Dr. John Mclean in 2007 found the UN IPCC peer-review process to be “an illusion.” LINK ]

Complete Letter with all signatories – As published in Canada’s National Post on December 13, 2007:

Don’t Fight, Adapt; We Should Give Up Futile Attempts to Combat Climate Change
Dec. 13, 2007

Link to Letter
Key Quote from Scientists’ Letter to UN: “Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity’s real and pressing problems.”

His Excellency
Ban Ki-MoonSecretary-General,
United Nations New York, N.Y.
Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction

It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC’s conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions. On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it.

The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by government representatives. The great majority of IPCC contributors and reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a consensus view among experts.
Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports:

*Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.

*The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years.

*Leading scientists, including some senior IPCC representatives, acknowledge that today’s computer models cannot predict climate. Consistent with this, and despite computer projections of temperature rises, there has been no net global warming since 1998. That the current temperature plateau follows a late 20th-century period of warming is consistent with the continuation today of natural multi-decadal or millennial climate cycling.

In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of climate change is “settled,” significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming. But because IPCC working groups were generally instructed ( http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/wg1_timetable_2006-08-14.pdf ) to consider work published only through May, 2005, these important findings are not included in their reports; i.e., the IPCC assessment reports are already materially outdated.

The UN climate conference in Bali has been planned to take the world along a path of severe CO2 restrictions, ignoring the lessons apparent from the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, the chaotic nature of the European CO2 trading market, and the ineffectiveness of other costly initiatives to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Balanced cost/benefit analyses provide no support for the introduction of global measures to cap and reduce energy consumption for the purpose of restricting CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it is irrational to apply the “precautionary principle” because many scientists recognize that both climatic coolings and warmings are realistic possibilities over the medium-term future.

The current UN focus on “fighting climate change,” as illustrated in the Nov. 27 UN Development Programme’s Human Development Report, is distracting governments from adapting to the threat of inevitable natural climate changes, whatever forms they may take. National and international planning for such changes is needed, with a focus on helping our most vulnerable citizens adapt to conditions that lie ahead. Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity’s real and pressing problems.

Yours faithfully,

The following are signatories to the Dec. 13th letter to the Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations on the UN Climate conference in Bali [Link to List of signatories]:

Ian D. Clark, PhD, Professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Richard S. Courtney, PhD, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.

Willem de Lange, PhD, Dept. of Earth and Ocean Sciences, School of Science and Engineering, Waikato University, New Zealand

David Deming, PhD (Geophysics), Associate Professor, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Oklahoma

Freeman J. Dyson, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.

Don J. Easterbrook, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Geology, Western Washington University

Lance Endersbee, Emeritus Professor, former dean of Engineering and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Monasy University, Australia

Hans Erren, Doctorandus, geophysicist and climate specialist, Sittard, The Netherlands

Robert H. Essenhigh, PhD, E.G. Bailey Professor of Energy Conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University

Christopher Essex, PhD, Professor of Applied Mathematics and Associate Director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario

David Evans, PhD, mathematician, carbon accountant, computer and electrical engineer and head of ‘Science Speak,’ Australia

William Evans, PhD, editor, American Midland Naturalist; Dept. of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame

Stewart Franks, PhD, Professor, Hydroclimatologist, University of Newcastle, Australia

R. W. Gauldie, PhD, Research Professor, Hawai’i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, School of Ocean Earth Sciences and Technology, University of Hawai’i at Manoa

Lee C. Gerhard, PhD, Senior Scientist Emeritus, University of Kansas; former director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey

Gerhard Gerlich, Professor for Mathematical and Theoretical Physics, Institut für Mathematische Physik der TU Braunschweig, Germany

Albrecht Glatzle, PhD, sc.agr., Agro-Biologist and Gerente ejecutivo, INTTAS, Paraguay

Fred Goldberg, PhD, Adjunct Professor, Royal Institute of Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Stockholm, Sweden

Vincent Gray, PhD, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of ‘Climate Change 2001, Wellington, New Zealand

William M. Gray, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University and Head of the Tropical Meteorology Project

Howard Hayden, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Connecticut

Louis Hissink MSc, M.A.I.G., editor, AIG News, and consulting geologist, Perth, Western Australia

Craig D. Idso, PhD, Chairman, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Arizona

Sherwood B. Idso, PhD, President, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, AZ, USA

Andrei Illarionov, PhD, Senior Fellow, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity; founder and director of the Institute of Economic Analysis

Zbigniew Jaworowski, PhD, physicist, Chairman – Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland

Jon Jenkins, PhD, MD, computer modelling – virology, NSW, Australia

Wibjorn Karlen, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden

Olavi Kärner, Ph.D., Research Associate, Dept. of Atmospheric Physics, Institute of Astrophysics and Atmospheric Physics, Toravere, Estonia

Joel M. Kauffman, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Chemistry, University of the Sciences in Philadelphia

David Kear, PhD, FRSNZ, CMG, geologist, former Director-General of NZ Dept. of Scientific & Industrial Research, New Zealand

Madhav Khandekar, PhD, former research scientist, Environment Canada; editor, Climate Research (2003-05); editorial board member, Natural Hazards; IPCC expert reviewer 2007

William Kininmonth M.Sc., M.Admin., former head of Australia’s National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological organization’s Commission for Climatology

Jan J.H. Kop, MSc Ceng FICE (Civil Engineer Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers), Emeritus Prof. of Public Health Engineering, Technical University Delft, The Netherlands

Prof. R.W.J. Kouffeld, Emeritus Professor, Energy Conversion, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Salomon Kroonenberg, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Geotechnology, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Hans H.J. Labohm, PhD, economist, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations), The Netherlands

The Rt. Hon. Lord Lawson of Blaby, economist; Chairman of the Central Europe Trust; former Chancellor of the Exchequer, U.K.

Douglas Leahey, PhD, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary

David R. Legates, PhD, Director, Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware

Marcel Leroux, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS

Bryan Leyland, International Climate Science Coalition, consultant and power engineer, Auckland, New Zealand

William Lindqvist, PhD, independent consulting geologist, Calif.

Richard S. Lindzen, PhD, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

A.J. Tom van Loon, PhD, Professor of Geology (Quaternary Geology), Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland; former President of the European Association of Science Editors

Anthony R. Lupo, PhD, Associate Professor of Atmospheric Science, Dept. of Soil, Environmental, and Atmospheric Science, University of Missouri-Columbia

Richard Mackey, PhD, Statistician, Australia

Horst Malberg, PhD, Professor for Meteorology and Climatology, Institut für Meteorologie, Berlin, Germany

John Maunder, PhD, Climatologist, former President of the Commission for Climatology of the World Meteorological Organization (89-97), New Zealand

Alister McFarquhar, PhD, international economy, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.

Ross McKitrick, PhD, Associate Professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph

John McLean, PhD, climate data analyst, computer scientist, Australia

Owen McShane, PhD, economist, head of the International Climate Science Coalition; Director, Centre for Resource Management Studies, New Zealand

Fred Michel, PhD, Director, Institute of Environmental Sciences and Associate Professor of Earth Sciences, Carleton University

Frank Milne, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Economics, Queen’s University

Asmunn Moene, PhD, former head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway

Alan Moran, PhD, Energy Economist, Director of the IPA’s Deregulation Unit, Australia

Nils-Axel Morner, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics, Stockholm University, Sweden

Lubos Motl, PhD, Physicist, former Harvard string theorist, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

John Nicol, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Physics, James Cook University, Australia

David Nowell, M.Sc., Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, former chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa

James J. O’Brien, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Meteorology and Oceanography, Florida State University

Cliff Ollier, PhD, Professor Emeritus (Geology), Research Fellow, University of Western Australia

Garth W. Paltridge, PhD, atmospheric physicist, Emeritus Professor and former Director of the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies, University of Tasmania, Australia

R. Timothy Patterson, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University

Al Pekarek, PhD, Associate Professor of Geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, Minnesota

Ian Plimer, PhD, Professor of Geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide and Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia

Brian Pratt, PhD, Professor of Geology, Sedimentology, University of Saskatchewan

Harry N.A. Priem, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Planetary Geology and Isotope Geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences

Alex Robson, PhD, Economics, Australian National University Colonel F.P.M. Rombouts, Branch Chief – Safety, Quality and Environment, Royal Netherland Air Force

R.G. Roper, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology

Arthur Rorsch, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Molecular Genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands

Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, B.C.

Tom V. Segalstad, PhD, (Geology/Geochemistry), Head of the Geological Museum and Associate Professor of Resource and Environmental Geology, University of Oslo, Norway

Gary D. Sharp, PhD, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, CA

S. Fred Singer, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia and former director Weather Satellite Service

L. Graham Smith, PhD, Associate Professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario

Roy W. Spencer, PhD, climatologist, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville

Peter Stilbs, TeknD, Professor of Physical Chemistry, Research Leader, School of Chemical Science and Engineering, KTH (Royal Institute of Technology), Stockholm, Sweden

Hendrik Tennekes, PhD, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

Dick Thoenes, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Chemical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands

Brian G Valentine, PhD, PE (Chem.), Technology Manager – Industrial Energy Efficiency, Adjunct Associate Professor of Engineering Science, University of Maryland at College Park; Dept of Energy, Washington, DC

Gerrit J. van der Lingen, PhD, geologist and paleoclimatologist, climate change consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand

Len Walker, PhD, Power Engineering, Australia

Edward J. Wegman, PhD, Department of Computational and Data Sciences, George Mason University, Virginia

Stephan Wilksch, PhD, Professor for Innovation and Technology Management, Production Management and Logistics, University of Technolgy and Economics Berlin, Germany

Boris Winterhalter, PhD, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland

David E. Wojick, PhD, P.Eng., energy consultant, Virginia

Raphael Wust, PhD, Lecturer, Marine Geology/Sedimentology, James Cook University, Australia

A. Zichichi, PhD, President of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva, Switzerland; Emeritus Professor of Advanced Physics, University of Bologna, Italy

тамбов тестеры Фильчаков прокурор

Oil supply crunch looms

A prominent energy economist warned Tuesday that global oil markets are at risk of being under-supplied as national oil companies gain greater control of the world’s petroleum supplies.

Some 37.5 million barrels a day of additional oil-production capacity is needed by 2015, but only 25 million barrels a day are planned, International Energy Agency Chief Economist Fatih Birol said.

To narrow the gap, major oil producers, especially OPEC members, must ramp up production, Birol said, while major oil consumers, including the U.S., must make policy changes to ease demand.

While those changes are possible, there are "no major reasons to be optimistic," Birol said at an event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations. Birol said he is worried that oil-producing nations will allow parochial political interests to get in the way of global economic interests.

Key oil producers in the Middle East, Venezuela and elsewhere have the reserves and the financial means to close the expected supply gap, but "the role of the market will be less and less relevant in these decisions," Birol said, imploring the providers not to use those assets for political leverage.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has threatened to cut off oil exports to the U.S. if Washington interferes in his nation’s political processes. The U.S. is the No. 1 buyer of Venezuelan oil.

To maintain growth in production capacity, the oil industry needs to invest about $5.4 trillion between now and 2030, the Paris-based agency said last month in its 2007 World Energy Outlook.

But top global energy consumers, especially the U.S., China and India, also need to do their part by implementing policies aimed at easing demand, Birol said.

If those two things do not happen, oil prices will remain near historic highs and that is not good for anyone, including the producers, he said. The average price of crude oil averaged $66 in 2006, and is expected to rise to $72 this year and reach $85 a barrel in 2008, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said Tuesday.

Light, sweet crude for January delivery added 81 cents to $88.67 a barrel in midday trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. That’s down more than $10 a barrel from the all-time high of $99.29 set last month, but still well above the year-ago price of roughly $61 a barrel.

China and India, with their rapidly advancing economies, now drive global energy demand, and China will surpass the U.S. as the world’s top energy consumer in 2010. "We are on the eve of a new world energy order," Birol said.

China and India also must ramp up efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the IEA said in its report last month. The two countries will account for about 45 percent of the increase in global demand through 2030, when the world’s energy needs are expected to be more than 50 percent higher than current levels.

Uganda should resort to jambo

Kampala – Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has urged his people to stop shaking hands to try halt a deadly epidemic of Ebola fever that has infected 101 people and caused 22 deaths, state media reported on Saturday.

"Ebola spreads through contact. For the time being, people should resort to jambo (waving)," Museveni was quoted in the state-owned newspaper New Vision as saying. "If I don’t shake your hand, it doesn’t mean I don’t like you."

On Friday, the government said suspected cases of Ebola – most of them in western Bundibugyo district bordering Democratic Republic of the Congo – had risen to 101. They included two in Kampala, one of them a doctor who died.

Another 338 people were being monitored because they came into contact with those infected by the virulent haemorrhagic fever.

Doctors say the virus can be passed through contact with an infected person.

The outbreak began in August and has spread panic since it was confirmed last week. Eleven health workers treating Ebola patients have contracted the disease. Four of them died.

Ebola is spread by contact with body fluids, including saliva. Kenya, Rwanda and Congo are screening travellers entering their borders with Uganda.

However, Ugandans remained free to move anywhere, raising fears that the disease could spread outside Bundibugyo, through the east African country’s highly mobile population.

Uganda was last hit by an epidemic of Ebola in 2000, when 425 people were infected and just over half died.

This year, an outbreak in Congo – where some of the first cases in 1976 gave the virus its name after the country’s Ebola river – infected up to 264 people, killing 187.

Ebola… and bubonic plague

Uganda has 101 suspected cases of Ebola fever and hundreds more people being closely monitored, officials said on Friday, as fear grew in Uganda and neighboring countries that the deadly virus might spread.

Twenty two people have so far died of the fever and Minister of State for primary health-care Dr. Emmanuel Otaala told journalists 11 health workers have fallen sick.

"Cumulatively, we have 101 cases," he said.

Another 338 people are being monitored because they came into contact with those infected by the virulent hemorrhagic fever, which often causes victims to bleed to death through the ears, eyes and other orifices.

All were in western Uganda’s Bundibugyo district, except for two in Kampala, including a doctor who died. Otaala said the cabinet had approved a pay increase to compensate health workers taking on the risk of dealing with Ebola.

The outbreak, which started in August, has sparked panic amongst officials, health workers and the public, with the medical union calling on staff to refuse looking after patients unless they are issued proper protective gear.

The affected region borders Democratic Republic of the Congo, whose Ebola river gave the virus its name after some of the first cases were recorded in its valley in 1976.

The independent Daily Monitor said Congo had sealed its border with the district. Congolese officials denied this.

"We have just informed people in the region they need to be vigilant," Congolese Health Ministry official Dr Benoit Kabela told Reuters by telephone from Kinshasa. Kabela said medical staff had been deployed and given protective gear.

Meanwhile, southwestern neighbor Rwanda said it had set up mobile clinics and isolation wards at border posts with Uganda.

"The Ministry of Health has deployed trained medical personnel at the borders," spokeswomen Ines Mpambara said.

Kenya is also screening Ugandans at its western border.

The four-month delay between the start of the outbreak and confirmation last week that it was Ebola has raised suspicions the government covered it up so as not to scare delegates — Britain’s Queen Elizabeth and 53 heads of government — who met in Kampala two weeks ago for a Commonwealth summit.

The government denies it hid information. "Confirmation of this epidemic took a long time because we had to go to (the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in) Atlanta," Otaala said.

The last Ebola outbreak in Uganda was in 2000, when 425 people caught it and more than half died.

Meanwhile, north of the Ebola-hit district, a separate epidemic of bubonic plague has infected 160 people and killed 19 since July, Health Ministry spokesman Paul Kabwa said.

Two outbreaks in separate places struck northwest Uganda’s West Nile region. Kabwa told Reuters by telephone a cultural practice of making women sleep on the floor where they are bitten by fleas whilst men take the bed was to blame.

"Women are more affected because they sleep on the floor. The fleas cannot jump onto the bed, so the men survive. We have a program of public education to tackle this," he said.игри для детей 6 лет

China key to DRC reconstruction

President Joseph Kabila used a state of the nation address Thursday to hail cooperation with China in industries such as mining as key to the reconstruction of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

"For the first time in our history, the Congolese people can at last see that their cobalt, nickel and copper is being used to good effect," Kabila said in his first such address since taking office last year.

Kabila, 36, said similar accords with other partners would see the successful completion of his five-year plan to overhaul the country’s creaking infrastructure, including roads, airports, schools, hospitals and ports.

China signed a deal in September to loan the mineral-rich Democratic Republic of Congo five billion dollars (3.6 billion euros) to build up its infrastructure and develop its mining industry.

Three billion dollars went towards the building of thousands of miles of railways and roads as well as hospitals, universities and housing, while the rest went into mining and creating joint Chinese-Congolese firms.

Also in September, Chinese Exim Bank agreed to provide some 8.5 billion dollars in financing to build up infrastructure and develop the DR Congo’s mining industry.

The following month Kinshasa signed loan accords — whose value was not given — with the China Development Bank.

China is keen to get its hands on raw materials from around the world to feed its fast-growing economy, and in recent years has been on a diplomatic offensive to secure what it needs. A major focus has been on Africa.

Top Chinese officials including President Hu Jintao have toured the continent, and in November last year Beijing invited scores of African leaders to a summit where it pledged to double aid and offer billions of dollars in loans.

With its huge but largely untapped natural resources, Congo is a key prize.

It has 34 percent of the world’s known cobalt reserves, 10 percent of its copper, vast forests full of timber and a treasure trove of gold and diamonds.

But after years of inter-ethnic wars drawing in its neighbours and leaving millions dead, Congolese infrastructure is practically nonexistent. Its 65 million people are desperately poor even by African standards.

China’s interest in Africa has attracted criticism, however, for ignoring African countries’ sometimes dubious human rights records — in oil-rich Sudan, for example — and for low environmental standards.

детский велосипед

Risk of food riots rising

The risks of food riots and malnutrition will surge in the next two years as the global supply of grain comes under more pressure than at any time in 50 years, one of the world’s leading agricultural researchers said.

Recent pasta protests in Italy, tortilla rallies in Mexico and onion demonstrations in India are just the start of the social instability to come unless there is a fundamental shift to boost production of staple foods, Joachim von Braun, the head of the International Food Policy Research Institute, warned in an interview with the Guardian.

The growing appetite of China and other fast-developing nations has combined with the expansion of biofuel programs in the US and Europe to transform the global food situation.

After decades of expanding crop yields and falling food prices, the past year has seen a sharp rise in the cost of wheat, rice, corn, soya and dairy products.

"Demand is running away. The world has been consuming more than it produces for five years now. Stocks of grain and of rice, wheat and maize are down at levels not seen since the early 80s," said von Braun, whose organization is the world’s largest alliance of agricultural researchers, economists and policy experts.

So far, crises have been averted because states have eaten into national stocks, but this could be set to change because China, in particular, has run down its supplies.

"Over the next 12 to 24 months we are in a fairly risky situation. Large consuming nations, particularly China, will feel pressed to enter international markets to bid up prices to unusual levels," von Braun warned ahead of a speech on Tuesday to the institute’s annual general meeting in Beijing.

Thanks to its manufacturing prowess, China has huge foreign exchange reserves and could buy the global food crop several times over. But its consumers are already feeling the cost of food inflation. Three shoppers died last month in a stampede at a supermarket in Chongqing that was offering cheap rapeseed oil. The threat of instability has prompted Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) to make the fight against food price rises one of his government’s priorities. So far it seems a losing battle.

Economic growth — estimated at 11.5 percent in the first nine months of the year — has made Chinese consumers wealthier, while urbanization and globalization has changed their diet. In October the government announced pork prices were up more than 50 percent, vegetables 30 percent and cooking oil 34 percent compared with the year before.

The knock-on is felt across the world. In rich nations it means a few more cents for breakfast cereal in the short term and a slightly higher cost for toys, clothes and other China-made goods. But for the world’s poorest communities the rises will have a potentially devastating effect.

Bangladesh has had to ask for half a million tonnes of food aid — a severe blow to the pride of a country that had been trying to wean itself off international assistance. Bangladeshi officials say the price of cooking oil, of which it imports 1.2 million tonnes a year, has almost tripled in the past two years because it is now valued as an alternative to diesel oil. More worryingly, their main staple of rice is hard to buy at any price because India, Vietnam and Ukraine have cut exports.

Added to this is pressure from global warming, which has been blamed for droughts that damaged crops in Australia this year.

The social tensions caused by rising food prices are already evident, von Braun said.

"The first sign was the tortilla riot in Mexico city, where 70,000 took to the streets. I think that was only the beginning — there will be more," von Braun said. "For a year or two countries can stabilize with stocks. But the risk comes in the next 12 to 24 months. The countries that cannot afford to buy will be the losers, while those with huge foreign exchange reserves will bid up the world market."

Von Braun called on Europe to reconsider biofuel policies, provide more aid to poor nations, keep markets open and boost production.

TV campaign scares away Africans

A German media report said the European Union and Switzerland have started a television, radio and poster campaign in African countries to keep potential illegal migrants from trying to immigrate to Europe.

Switzerland’s migration authority initiated and directed the campaign, which has included producing a promotional film during the past few months meant to scare away potential illegal immigrants, according to German business daily Handelsblatt.

The paper reported on Monday, Nov. 26, that a spokesperson for Switzerland’s Federal Migration Office in Berne confirmed the ad was being shown on television in Cameroon and Nigeria, and may soon be aired in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The Geneva-based International Organization for Migration (IOM) said it had actually produced the campaign, which was funded by the Swiss migration office.

The aim of the campaign is to "give a more balanced view of irregular migration networks," IOM spokesman Jean-Philippe Chauzy told AFP news agency.

Some African migrants pay thousands of dollars to smuggling networks who promise them that life in Switzerland or other European countries will be easy, without warning them of the risks of exploitation, poverty and deportation they will face, Chauzy said.

Many others die in their attempts to flee African countries by water.

"Stay home, since Europe is not the continent of milk and honey. No one’s waiting for you there," Handelsblatt summarized the message of the film to be. "Fleeing does not mean starting a new life," the last sentence of the film states.

A sequence of images in the film includes a telephone ringing with an older, black man in a cozy apartment picking it up to hear his son on the other end. The father asks his son if he’s found a home and how his studies are going. The son is then shown in a grungy camp under a bridge, but answers that everything is fine. More images appear, showing him sitting on the side of the street and begging, and then later being picked up by police.

The film continues along the same vein for almost two more minutes.

Handelsblatt reported that the film is part of a 250,000-euro ($371,000) campaign by the European Union and Switzerland to stem illegal emigration where it starts.

The film was shown on Nigeria’s state television channel during half-time of an international soccer match between Nigeria and Switzerland last week. There are a huge number of potential immigrants in these countries and we want to show them that Europe is no paradise," the spokesperson for Switzerland’s Migration Office told Handelsblatt.

The IOM has produced similar ads in Senegal and Niger, funded by Spain and the European Union respectively, Chauzy told AFP.

He also said such ads were a "useful tool" in trying to combat people-smuggling.

Switzerland’s right-wing justice minister Christoph Blocher, whose ministry controls the Migration Office, supports the campaign. He, too, told the Swiss paper SonntagsBlick that "we must show the Africans that Switzerland is not paradise."

Blocher’s populist Swiss People’s Party won the majority of votes in last month’s federal elections after a campaign that focused heavily on immigration.

в бане на

Report contradicts Bush on Iran

A new U.S. intelligence report says Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and it remains on hold, contradicting the Bush administration’s earlier assertion that Tehran was intent on developing a bomb.

The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) released on Monday could undermine U.S. efforts to convince other world powers to agree on a third package of U.N. sanctions against Iran for defying demands to halt uranium enrichment activities.

Tensions have escalated in recent months as Washington has ratcheted up the rhetoric against Tehran, with U.S. President George W. Bush insisting in October that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to World War Three.

But in a finding likely to surprise U.S. friends and foes alike, the latest NIE concluded: "We do not know whether (Iran) currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."

That marked a sharp contrast to an intelligence report two years ago that stated Iran was "determined to develop nuclear weapons."

But the new assessment found Iran was continuing to develop technical means that could be used to build a bomb and it would likely be capable of producing enough enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon "sometime during the 2010-2015 time-frame."

The shift in the intelligence community’s thinking on Iran comes five years after a flawed NIE concluded neighboring Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction — a report that helped pave the way for the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.

No nuclear, chemical or biological weapons were ever found in Iraq and intelligence agencies since have been more cautious about Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, who have repeatedly accused Iran of seeking nuclear weapons, were briefed on the new NIE last Wednesday.

Washington, which insists it wants to solve the Iran problem diplomatically while leaving military options "on the table," is pushing for tougher U.N. sanctions against Tehran but faces resistance from China and Russia.

Iran insists it wants nuclear technology only for civilian purposes, such as electricity generation.

The nuclear standoff has become a major issue in the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign, with candidates weighing in on the prospects for military action against Iran.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, among senior Democrats who had requested the updated report on Iran, said the assessment challenged some of the administration’s "alarming rhetoric about the threat posed by Iran."

He and other critics had accused Bush trying to rush the country into war again based on faulty intelligence.

Bush’s national security adviser said that on balance the report was "good news," insisting it showed Tehran was susceptible to international pressure but that the risk of it acquiring nuclear weapons "remains a very serious problem."

But he added: "The international community has to understand that if we want to avoid a situation where we either have to accept Iran on a road to a nuclear weapon … or the possibility of having to use force to stop it with all the connotations of World War III, then we need to step up the diplomacy, step up the pressure."

Administration officials denied the new NIE had exposed a serious intelligence lapse but could not explain how agencies failed to detect for four years that Iran’s nuclear weapons program had been halted.

Intelligence officials said the suspension involved design and engineering for a bomb and covert uranium-conversion work.

A key NIE finding was that: "Tehran’s decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005."

Still, the report said: "We also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons."

мойка оборудования Фильчаков

?So close to war?

A meticulously planned, brilliantly executed surgical strike by Israeli jets on a nuclear installation in Syria on 6 September may have saved the world from a devastating threat. The only problem is that no one outside a tight-lipped knot of top Israeli and American officials knows precisely what that threat involved.

Even more curious is that far from pushing the Syrians and Israelis to war, both seem determined to put a lid on the affair. One month after the event, the absence of hard information leads inexorably to the conclusion that the implications must have been enormous.

That was confirmed to The Spectator by a very senior British ministerial source: ‘If people had known how close we came to world war three that day there’d have been mass panic. Never mind the floods or foot-and-mouth — Gordon really would have been dealing with the bloody Book of Revelation and Armageddon.’

According to American sources, Israeli intelligence tracked a North Korean vessel carrying a cargo of nuclear material labelled ‘cement’ as it travelled halfway across the world. On 3 September the ship docked at the Syrian port of Tartous and the Israelis continued following the cargo as it was transported to the small town of Dayr as Zawr, near the Turkish border in north-eastern Syria.

The destination was not a complete surprise. It had already been the subject of intense surveillance by an Israeli Ofek spy satellite, and within hours a band of elite Israeli commandos had secretly crossed into Syria and headed for the town. Soil samples and other material they collected there were returned to Israel. Sure enough, they indicated that the cargo was nuclear.

Three days after the North Korean consignment arrived, the final phase of Operation Orchard was launched. With prior approval from Washington, Israeli F151 jets were scrambled and, minutes later, the installation and its newly arrived contents were destroyed.

So secret were the operational details of the mission that even the pilots who were assigned to provide air cover for the strike jets had not been briefed on it until they were airborne. In the event, they were not needed: built-in stealth technology and electronic warfare systems were sophisticated enough to ‘blind’ Syria’s Russian-made anti-aircraft systems.

What was in the consignment that led the Israelis to mount an attack which could easily have spiralled into an all-out regional war? It could not have been a transfer of chemical or biological weapons; Syria is already known to possess the most abundant stockpiles in the region. Nor could it have been missile delivery systems; Syria had previously acquired substantial quantities from North Korea. The only possible explanation is that the consignment was nuclear.

The scale of the potential threat — and the intelligence methods that were used to follow the transfer — explain the dense mist of official secrecy that shrouds the event. There have been no official briefings, no winks or nudges, from any of the scores of people who must have been involved in the preparation, analysis, decision-making and execution of the operation. Even when Israelis now offer a firm ‘no comment’, it is strictly off the record. The secrecy is itself significant.

Israel is a small country. In some respects, it resembles an extended, if chaotic, family. Word gets around fast. Israelis have lived on the edge for so long they have become addicted to the news. Israel’s media is far too robust and its politicians far too leaky to allow secrets to remain secret for long. Even in the face of an increasingly archaic military censor, Israeli journalists have found ways to publish and, if necessary, be damned.

ресивер воздуха Фільчаков прокурор