bonjour la presse

IRIB- Selon CBS, citant les autorités du Pentagone, une partie des forces spéciales russes serait en route pour le port syrien de Tartous.

c’est à bord d’un navire que ces forces gagneront la Syrie. Des fusiliers marins figurent au nombre de cette force spéciale. Debka News, site israélien, affirme que le Pentagone a, déjà, décidé de s’attaquer à la Syrie, et que la seule chose à décider, c’est le moment. La guerre civile, en Syrie, est entrée dans une nouvelle phase, selon ce site.

http://french.irib.ir/info/moyen-orient/item/195234-les-forces-sp%C3%A9ciales-russes-en-route-pour-la-syrie

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:37 UTC 2013

bonjour la presse

Les autorités de Turquie ont officiellement confirmé l’information sur le déploiement des troupes turques sur la frontière avec la Syrie, communiquent jeudi les médias turcs. Ankara explique cette décision par les mesures de sécurité résultant du récent incident de l’avion turc abattu par la Syrie.

Plus tôt la télévision d’Etat turque a annoncé le déploiement d’un système de défense anti-aérienne sur la frontière syrienne.

Qui plus est, l’information est parvenue qu’un convoi d’une trentaine de véhicules militaires se dirigeait vers la frontière avec la Syrie. /G.

http://french.ruvr.ru/2012_06_28/Turquie-Syrie-guerre/

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:37 UTC 2013

hello the press room

ISLAMABAD/PESHAWAR | Thu Jun 28, 2012 7:23am EDT

(Reuters) – Shortly after sneaking across the Afghan border this week, more than 100 militants loyal to Pakistani Taliban leader Fazlullah waited patiently on a mountain for Pakistani troops to approach.

Several days later, the fighters released a video of what they said were the heads of 17 ambushed soldiers, along with their identification cards.

Laid across a white sheet, they were a chilling reminder of the major security threat the man once known as FM Mullah still poses to U.S. ally Pakistan, three years after the army pushed him out of the Swat Valley, a former tourist spot he terrorized.

« He is a very big problem for Pakistan, » said a Western diplomat.

During his heyday, Fazlullah, who like many senior Taliban members is known as a mullah, or preacher, organized thousands of fighters who roamed picturesque Swat, imposing his radical version of Islam.

Opponents, and those deemed immoral, were publicly flogged, or even beheaded and hung in squares and at intersections. Girls’ schools and government buildings were burned down.

Nowadays, Fazlullah’s men control a 20-km (12-mile) stretch of the rugged and largely unpatrolled border with Pakistan from areas in Afghanistan’s forbidding Nuristan province, described by nearby U.S. troops as « the dark side of the moon ».

From there, Fazlullah, a burly man in his thirties with a heavy black beard, plots cross-border raids that don’t kill many soldiers but agitate Pakistan’s military, which thought it had defeated him during a Swat offensive in 2009.

His activities in the border area, described by U.S. President Barack Obama as the world’s most dangerous place, could complicate efforts to stabilize the region before most foreign combat troops leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

BIG AMBITIONS

Fazlullah is a distraction for Pakistan’s military, which is also fighting Hakimullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistan Taliban umbrella group blamed for many of the suicide bombings across the South Asian country.

Sirajuddin Ahmad, Fazlullah’s spokesman and cousin, said the group’s aim was to recapture Swat, and take control of Pakistan.

« The establishment of sharia (Islamic law) is our goal, and we will not rest until we achieve it. We will fight whoever stands in our way, » he told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location in Afghanistan.

Fazlullah has slowly rebuilt his militia by securing shelter and support from Afghan militants in an area where groups form loose alliances against the United States, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

« He is extremely dangerous, » said a Pakistani security official. « Fazlullah has 150 men, rocket-propelled grenades and light machine guns. You just need a small amount of men to carry out effective operations. This is a big number. »

Fazlullah, once known for fiery radio sermons, was the first Taliban leader that took control of an area in Pakistan outside the unruly ethnic Pashtun tribal belt along the Afghan border.

There are no signs that he will be able to penetrate deep inside towns or cities. His men usually arrive in a big wave, attack and retreat back into Afghanistan.

But his operations have prompted Pakistan’s military – one of the world’s largest – to repeatedly urge the Afghan government and NATO forces to go after the militant leader.

On Monday, Pakistan protested to NATO and the Afghan military, accusing them of failing to act against militant havens in Afghanistan after the cross-border attack in which the Pakistani soldiers were killed.

Nuristan police chief Ghulamullah Nooristani says there are no signs that anyone intends to eliminate Fazlullah, even though he was creating havoc for people there, charging illegal taxes, stealing supplies from trucks and sometimes killing drivers.

« We can’t attack them because they are armed with light and heavy weapons which are much better than ours, » he said. « If we get support from the central government or coalition forces we will be able to destroy their strongholds. »

Fazlullah’s fighters usually slip across the border into Pakistan at night and take positions on high ground.

« We have patrols and vehicles moving in the area to guard the border, so they wait and try to ambush them, » said a Pakistani intelligence official.

Intelligence officials say Fazlullah’s men operate in the Afghan provinces of Nuristan and Kunar, and enjoy the support of hundreds of militants there.

Support goes both ways when it comes to fighting the U.S.-backed governments in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Some militants have long-standing bonds.

« Many of us know each other from before, as we studied in the same madrassas (religious seminaries), » said a commander of a militant group in Kunar.

« When we need to conduct an operation in Afghanistan, we request help and they give us fighters. When they need to conduct an operation, we provide them with assistance as well. »

Few experts expect Fazlullah to make the kind of gains he seems determined to achieve. But he is making a big impact.

« Their aim is to carry out these cross-border attacks which don’t just take a toll in terms of casualties, but also have a psychological impact, » said Mansur Mehsud, a director at the FATA Research Centre, an independent think tank in Islamabad.

« They reinforce the fear of the Taliban in the local population there. The people that help the government and the army would be very worried because of this, fearing revenge. »

(Additional reporting by Saud Mehsud in DERA ISMAIL KHAN, and Rob Taylor and Mirwais Harooni in KABUL; Editing by Robert Birsel)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/28/us-pakistan-militants-fazlullah-idUSBRE85R0H920120628

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:37 UTC 2013

hello the press room

Not since Charles De Gaulle has a French president confronted an economic and international situation as tumultuous as the one faced by François Hollande. Hollande, who took over the presidency from Nicolas Sarkozy last month, is facing an unemployment rate in the double digits and a national debt that stands at 90 percent of GDP. In addition to his domestic challenges, Hollande finds himself at the center of a deepening European crisis, with Greece on the brink of collapse and most eurozone countries in a recession. While the challenges facing the new president are enormous, there seems to be little consensus on how he will govern. This is largely because Hollande managed to capture France’s highest office while remaining a relatively unknown commodity. Even though he is now the most powerful man in French politics, many still wonder – who is François Hollande?

The new French leader’s electoral campaign does provide a few clues about the man and his politics. Throughout his campaign, Hollande wooed his left-wing electorate, while at the same time putting himself in a position to deliver on his promise to keep deficits under control. Take his rollback of Sarkozy’s pension reforms, which would allow French workers to retire at 60. This policy proposal is actually more of a modest tweak than a fundamental revamp, as it only impacts the few workers who have worked continuously for 41 years. Hollande also promised to hire 60,000 new teachers, a pledge that has deficit hawks concerned. However, the new president plans to pay for these new teachers through an equal reduction in the number of civil servants elsewhere in France’s sprawling bureaucracy. Finally, his famous campaign promise to institute a 75 percent tax bracket on the rich may include many exemptions and be temporary. Hollande’s platform shows that he campaigned as a Socialist, while making sure he could govern as a moderate.

Unlike his predecessor, Hollande is able to consistently stay on message. President Sarkozy would launch several new ideas and initiatives on any given week, to the point where people lost track of his core positions. By contrast, Hollande, even when his poll numbers dropped dangerously low and advisers urged him to change tack, stuck to his strategy of offering a « normal, » predictable presidency with just a few flagship reforms.

This consistency continued after the election, especially in his approach to the European crisis. Upon arriving in Berlin, only hours after his inauguration, for meetings with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, he spoke in favour of Eurobonds and a package of growth measures designed to pull Europe out of its economic rut. Days later, while attending the G8 meetings at Camp David, Hollande reiterated his stance for more spending. He did so again in Brussels during the first European Union summit.

His main proposals during the campaign led The Economist to label Hollande a « rather dangerous man » who would never implement the structural reforms advocated by a number of free-market analysts. However, a glance at his stable of economic advisers shows that they are not « dangerous leftists. » One example is Harvard economist Philippe Aghion, a known supply-sider keen on spurring long-term growth through innovation and ambitious R&D policies. Another example is Jean Pisani-Ferry, a former advisor to Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who is attuned to the need for France to restore its competitiveness. Of course, whether these advisers will be able to influence the president on ambitious structural reforms remains to be seen.

On European policy, Hollande has maximized his freedom of action. His choice to head up French diplomacy is former Prime Minister Laurent Fabius, who famously came out against the European constitutional treaty back in 2005. However, as foreign minister, Fabius will have little say over European policy and negotiations with Berlin, which will be directed from the Elysée and executed by pro-Europe figures such as Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and Economy and Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici.

These choices seem to confirm the personal image of Hollande as a strong believer in European integration. Hollande is known to be a disciple of Jacques Delors, the legendary head of the European Commission (1985-1995) who presided over a jump in integration with the creation of the European Common Market. Delors was also the Minister of the Economy and Finance who crucially urged President Mitterrand to take the necessary austerity measures so that France could stay within the European Monetary System in 1983.

Hollande’s deep support of the European integration project might answer the most existential question France will have to face in the coming years. Specifically, is France ready to accept European federalism as a solution to the eurozone crisis? Berlin will not acquiesce to increased fiscal solidarity and common debt liability unless there is accompanying progress on integrated political structures – and Merkel is ready to fight for these structures. With Hollande, France – traditionally more protective of its sovereignty – might be more likely to play ball.

Justin Vaïsse is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the director of research of its Center on the United States and Europe. This article originally appeared in The Financialist and has been republished with permission.

http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2012/06/28/the_mysterious_francois_hollande_100108.html

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:37 UTC 2013

hello the press room

THE decision by the United States and Israel to develop and then deploy the Stuxnet computer worm against an Iranian nuclear facility late in George W. Bush’s presidency marked a significant and dangerous turning point in the gradual militarization of the Internet. Washington has begun to cross the Rubicon. If it continues, contemporary warfare will change fundamentally as we move into hazardous and uncharted territory.

It is one thing to write viruses and lock them away safely for future use should circumstances dictate it. It is quite another to deploy them in peacetime. Stuxnet has effectively fired the starting gun in a new arms race that is very likely to lead to the spread of similar and still more powerful offensive cyberweaponry across the Internet. Unlike nuclear or chemical weapons, however, countries are developing cyberweapons outside any regulatory framework.

There is no international treaty or agreement restricting the use of cyberweapons, which can do anything from controlling an individual laptop to disrupting an entire country’s critical telecommunications or banking infrastructure. It is in the United States’ interest to push for one before the monster it has unleashed comes home to roost.

Stuxnet was originally deployed with the specific aim of infecting the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in Iran. This required sneaking a memory stick into the plant to introduce the virus to its private and secure “offline” network. But despite Natanz’s isolation, Stuxnet somehow escaped into the cyberwild, eventually affecting hundreds of thousands of systems worldwide.

This is one of the frightening dangers of an uncontrolled arms race in cyberspace; once released, virus developers generally lose control of their inventions, which will inevitably seek out and attack the networks of innocent parties. Moreover, all countries that possess an offensive cyber capability will be tempted to use it now that the first shot has been fired.

Until recent revelations by The New York Times’s David E. Sanger, there was no definitive proof that America was behind Stuxnet. Now computer security experts have found a clear link between its creators and a newly discovered virus called Flame, which transforms infected computers into multipurpose espionage tools and has infected machines across the Middle East.

The United States has long been a commendable leader in combating the spread of malicious computer code, known as malware, that pranksters, criminals, intelligence services and terrorist organizations have been using to further their own ends. But by introducing such pernicious viruses as Stuxnet and Flame, America has severely undermined its moral and political credibility.

Flame circulated on the Web for at least four years and evaded detection by the big antivirus operators like McAfee, Symantec, Kaspersky Labs and F-Secure — companies that are vital to ensuring that law-abiding consumers can go about their business on the Web unmolested by the army of malware writers, who release nasty computer code onto the Internet to steal our money, data, intellectual property or identities. But senior industry figures have now expressed deep worries about the state-sponsored release of the most potent malware ever seen.

During the cold war, countries’ chief assets were missiles with nuclear warheads. Generally their number and location was common knowledge, as was the damage they could inflict and how long it would take them to inflict it.

Advanced cyberwar is different: a country’s assets lie as much in the weaknesses of enemy computer defenses as in the power of the weapons it possesses. So in order to assess one’s own capability, there is a strong temptation to penetrate the enemy’s systems before a conflict erupts. It is no good trying to hit them once hostilities have broken out; they will be prepared and there’s a risk that they already will have infected your systems. Once the logic of cyberwarfare takes hold, it is worryingly pre-emptive and can lead to the uncontrolled spread of malware.

Until now, America has been reluctant to discuss regulation of the Internet with Russia and China. Washington believes any moves toward a treaty might undermine its presumed superiority in the field of cyberweaponry and robotics. And it fears that Moscow and Beijing would exploit a global regulation of military activity on the Web, in order to justify and further strengthen the powerful tools they already use to restrict their citizens’ freedom on the Net. The United States must now consider entering into discussions, anathema though they may be, with the world’s major powers about the rules governing the Internet as a military domain.

Any agreement should regulate only military uses of the Internet and should specifically avoid any clauses that might affect private or commercial use of the Web. Nobody can halt the worldwide rush to create cyberweapons, but a treaty could prevent their deployment in peacetime and allow for a collective response to countries or organizations that violate it.

Technical superiority is not written in stone, and the United States is arguably more dependent on networked computer systems than any other country in the world. Washington must halt the spiral toward an arms race, which, in the long term, it is not guaranteed to win.

Misha Glenny, a visiting professor at the Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs, is the author of “DarkMarket: Cyberthieves, Cybercops and You.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/opinion/stuxnet-will-come-back-to-haunt-us.html?_r=1

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:38 UTC 2013

hello the press room

MOSCOW | Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:15am EDT

(Reuters) – A ship carrying Russian helicopters to Syria, which turned back after its insurance was cut, was expected to sail back to Syria accompanied by at least one other vessel, Interfax reported on Sunday, citing a military source.

The ship, which entered the Russian port of Murmansk on Sunday to change its flag to the Russian Standard, will not be accompanied by military vessels, the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Russia, which said on Sunday it had « no doubt » there were attempts at regime change in Syria, is one of Assad’s main arms suppliers and has shielded its long-standing ally President Bashar al-Assad from tougher U.N. sanctions.

Moscow says the shipment was unrelated to the conflict inside Syria, something U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dismissed on June 13 as « patently untrue ».

Russia has said it is sending defensive weapons that can only be used to protect the country from outside aggression. The ship Alaed first set off from the Russian port of Baltiisk in the Baltic province of Kaliningrad on June 11.

(Reporting By Thomas Grove; Editing by Andrew Heavens)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/24/us-syria-crisis-russia-helicopters-idUSBRE85N03L20120624

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:38 UTC 2013

hello the press room

A Polish official claims that prosecutors in Krakow have proof the CIA wanted a special “torture cage” to be constructed at one of its secret “black site” prisons.

European Phoenix — According to ABC News, the proof consists of a document showing that “a local contractor was asked to build a cage at Stare Kiekuty, a Polish army base used as a CIA prison for al Qaeda terror suspects in 2002 and 2003.”

Senator Jozef Pinior told the Polish paper Gazeta Wyborcza that he had not seen the construction order himself but that the prosecutor’s office has a copy of it. “In a state with rights, people are not kept in cages,” Pinior stated.

He said he was sure the cage was intended for humans, since there could have been no other purpose for it, and that a cage is “non-standard equipment” for a prison unless “torture was used there.”

The CIA has declined to comment on these allegations.

Gazeta Wyborcza also reports that the prosecutor’s office has a signed order from the former head of Polish intelligence, Zbigniew Siemiatkowski, authorizing the creation of the black site. According to the paper’s source, there is no American signature “because they do not want to sign documents inconsistent with their own Constitution and international law.”

Siemiatkowski has refused to either confirm or deny the existence of the agreement but acknowledges that he is under investigation for permitting the corporal punishment of prisoners of war.

The existence of the CIA’s black site network was first revealed by the Washington Post in 2005, but the Stare Kiekuty location was only identified in 2007, in a Raw Story article by Larisa Alexandrovna and David Dastych. Since then, Abu Zubaydah and other terrorism suspects have stated that they were tortured at the former intelligence training school before being taken to Guantanamo.

Raw Story reported at the time that “only the Polish prime minister and top Polish intelligence brass were told of the plan, in which agents of the United States quietly shuttled detainees from other holding facilities around the globe for stopovers and short-term interrogation in Poland between late 2002 and 2004.”

According to the current ABC story, “Alexander Kwasniewski and Leszek Miller, who were president and prime minister at the time it was allegedly used as a CIA prison, have denied the existence of the Stare Kiekuty black site. Sen. Pinior said he presented his evidence ‘with regret, because I always valued [Kwasniewski's] presidency

http://www.europeanphoenix.com/en/component/content/article/48-health/1766-cia-order-for-torture-cage-at-secret-prisons.html

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:38 UTC 2013

bonjour la presse

MOSCOU, 23 juin – RIA Novosti
L’Arabie saoudite envisage de payer les salaires des combattants de la dénommée « Armée syrienne libre » (ASL) pour encourager les défections de l’armée régulière et intensifier la pression sur Damas, rapporte samedi sur son site le journal britannique The Guardian, citant des sources anonymes.

L’Arabie saoudite a déjà évoqué cette possibilité lors des négociations avec les Etats-Unis et certains pays arabes.

Fin mars, le ministre saoudien des Affaires étrangères Saoud al-Fayçal a déclaré que le royaume soutenait l’idée d’armer de l’opposition syrienne, cette dernière étant incapable de « se défendre sans armes ».

Plus tôt dans la semaine, le quotidien américain New York Times, se référant aux sources anonymes au sein de l’administration américaine et aux employés des services de renseignement des pays arabes, a rapporté qu’une équipe de la CIA se trouvait dans le sud de la Turquie afin d’empêcher que les armes fournies à l’opposition syrienne ne tombent entre les mains des membres d’Al-Qaïda et d’autres extrémistes.

Selon le journal, les armes destinées à l’ASL, parmi lesquelles figurent des fusils d’assaut, des lance-grenades, des munitions et des armes antichars, sont transférées en Syrie à travers la frontière turque avec l’aide des Frères musulmans syriens. Les livraisons sont payées par la Turquie, l’Arabie saoudite et le Qatar.

Depuis la mi-mars 2011, la Syrie est en proie à une vague de contestation du régime du président Bachar el-Assad. Selon les Nations unies, les affrontements ont déjà fait plus de 12.000 morts parmi les civils et les militaires. Un cessez-le-feu a été décrété dans le pays en avril dernier, en vertu du plan de paix formulé par l’émissaire spécial de l’Onu et de la Ligue arabe Kofi Annan. Toutefois, les parties en conflit font régulièrement état de nouveaux affrontements et victimes.

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:38 UTC 2013

hello la presse

IRIB- Les Etats-Unis utilisent des drones, pour des assassinats ciblés de terroristes.

Une pratique dénoncée par les associations de Droits de l’Homme, qui y voient une violation du droit international. Les explications de Reed Brody, avocat de « Human Right Watch ». Le Président américain, Barack Obama, a, personnellement, supervisé une procédure destinée à déterminer quels membres présumés d’Al-Qaïda devaient être placés sur une liste de personnes à abattre, notamment, au Yémen et en Somalie, selon le « New York Times ». Ces révélations interviennent, deux mois après que le ministre de la Justice Eric Holder a justifié l’utilisation de drones, pour assassiner, « de manière appropriée et légale », dans le cadre de la guerre contre le terrorisme des responsable d’Al-Qaïda ou d’une organisation affiliée. Ces pratiques provoquent un sérieux malaise, parmi les défenseurs des Droits de l’Homme. Le rapporteur de l’ONU sur les exécutions, extra-judiciaires a, ainsi, fait part, mardi, de son « inquiétude » concernant ces exécutions délibérées par les Etats-Unis.

http://french.irib.ir/info/international/item/195626-drones-human-rights-watch-d%C3%A9nonce-obama-et-son-permis-de-tuer

This article is copyright © by admin: Mon May 20 16:33:38 UTC 2013