International Atomic Energy Agency says it has been able to verify non-diversion of nuclear material in Iran

Vienna, Feb 23

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in its latest report released on Friday said it has been able to continue to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran.

The report presented to representatives of 35 member states of IAEA’s Governing Board said,
 

“Iran has provided the Agency with access to declared nuclear material.”

“Iran has also responded to questions and provided clarifications and amplifications on the issues raised in the context of the work plan.” 

Iran News Agency

Of course, the war-mongering Western media tries to spin a dark shadow on the report:

The UN nuclear watchdog says Iran has supplied transparent data on its past nuclear activities but adds it has limited knowledge of its current work.

The IAEA also found in a report that Tehran was still enriching uranium in defiance of the UN Security Council.

Iran said the report was a clean bill of health but the US said it showed Tehran was not co-operating.

The BBC’s Jon Leyne says Iran probably has done enough to fend off any new UN sanctions and has deferred the crisis.

The BBC’s Bethany Bell in Vienna says that while a number of questions about Iran’s past nuclear work have been answered, the report says the IAEA’s knowledge about Tehran’s current nuclear programme is diminishing.

The report, a copy of which was obtained by the BBC, found Tehran had been operating 3,000 centrifuges, the machines used to enrich uranium, at its plant at Natanz.

“Contrary to the decisions of the Security Council, Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities,” the document says.

But the IAEA also noted the answers Iran had given about the history of its centrifuge programme were consistent with the agency’s own findings.

The report by IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei praised Iran for making progress in responding to questions about its past nuclear activities.

“Iran has provided sufficient access to individuals and has responded in a timely manner to questions and provided clarifications and amplifications on issues raised in the context of the work plan,” the report said.

A senior UN official said this was a significant step forward.

However, the report said Iran’s co-operation with the IAEA had been “reactive” rather than “pro-active” and that the IAEA was continuing to check whether Iran’s declarations were complete.

On Tuesday, diplomats said Iran had given the IAEA a document containing design information that could be used for parts of a nuclear weapon. The IAEA had been asking Iran for the document since 2005.

Western powers are concerned because, while enriched uranium is used as fuel for nuclear reactors, highly enriched uranium can also be used to make nuclear bombs.

Tehran has argued that it needs nuclear power and insists its intentions are entirely peaceful.

At a Tehran news conference held after the report was given to the IAEA board and the Security Council, Iran’s new chief nuclear negotiator welcomed the findings.

Saeed Jalili said: “For those who had doubts about the Iranian nuclear programme, the report is very clear and indicates that the basis upon which the nuclear case was referred to the Security Council has collapsed.”

However, the US said the IAEA confirmation of Iran’s expanding uranium enrichment programme backed up their argument that Tehran was continuing to defy world demands.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said: “The United States will work with our partners on the UN Security Council and Germany as we move towards a third set of Security Council sanctions.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7096883.stm

---

Back in mid November of 2007, the IAEA released another favorable report about Iran:US dismisses nuclear report on IranKaveh L Afrasiabi

The much-anticipated report on Iran by the head of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that was released this week confirms “substantial progress” in Iran’s cooperation with the agency and the steady resolution of disputed issues and, yet, the US government has reacted swiftly by belittling Iran’s cooperation and maintaining its aggressive push for a new round of United Nations sanctions on Iran.

…

But, this may not be so easy in light of the depth and scope of Iran’s genuine cooperation, the IAEA’s confirmation of consistency of new Iranian information with their own independent investigations, and the sheer absence of any evidence of nuclear weapons proliferation in Iran. The report states:

The agency has been able to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran. Iran has provided the agency with access to declared material, and has provided the required material accountancy reports in connection with declared nuclear material and activities … Iran has provided sufficient access to individuals and has responded in a timely manner and provided clarification and amplifications on issues raised in the context of the work plan of Iran and the IAEA.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IK17Ak01.html

---

That’s bad news for the war-mongering, no matter how the Western media spins it, they can’t change the fact that the report stated, “Iran has provided sufficient access to individuals and has responded in a timely manner to questions and provided clarifications and amplifications on issues raised in the context of the work plan.” And even the BBC had to admit that “The report by IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei praised Iran for making progress in responding to questions about its past nuclear activities.”It once again exposes them as consistent liars, and it removes their excuse for attacking Iran. 

UK Troops Accused In Shock Dossier

Friday February 22, 2008

British troops have been accused of executing as many as 20 Iraqi civilians after a gun battle.
Lawyers say prisoners may also have been tortured and mutilated by members of the UK military.

The MoD denies the claimsThey produced a dossier of evidence from five men taken captive after the battle near the southern Iraqi town of Majat-al-Kabir in May 2004.

Solicitor Phil Shiner said: “We would be very surprised if it did not shock the nation.”

The allegations were first reported within weeks of the incident, known as the Battle of Danny Boy after a checkpoint where it took place.

But lawyers for the five Iraqis, said to be innocent labourers, have now issued detailed witness statements, photographs of corpses and death certificates of the men who died.

Mr Shiner and another solicitor, Martyn Day, suggested prisoners captured after the three-hour gun battle may have been taken to a British base at Abu Naji and killed.

They are bringing a damages claim in the UK courts. They say many injuries – such as eyes being gouged out – were not consistent with battlefield wounds.

A spokesman for the MoD said: “Allegations of mistreatment, unlawful killing and mutilation by British troops following an incident at Vehicle Checkpoint Danny Boy were thoroughly investigated by the RMP.

“Their investigation lasted 10 months, involved the interviewing of over 150 British personnel and 50 Iraqi nationals, and found no evidence to support these allegations.

“New allegations are part of an ongoing RMP investigation and judicial review and it would be inappropriate to comment further.”

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1306478,00.html?f=rss

---

British troops executed 20 captives in southern Iraq, say lawyersFred Attewill and agencies guardian.co.uk, Friday February 22 2008 Article history· 

It was last updated at 12:15 on February 22 2008.British troops may have executed up to 20 captives in southern Iraq in 2004, human rights lawyers claimed today.

A dossier of evidence from men taken captive after a gun battle near the Iraqi town of Majat-al-Kabir in May 2004 also suggested soldiers tortured and mutilated captives.

Lawyers for five Iraqis today issued detailed witness statements, photographs of corpses and death certificates of the men who died. The allegations first emerged within weeks of the incident and have since been investigated by the Royal Military Police.

The claims, which the Ministry of Defence denies, are among the most serious yet levelled against British soldiers who served in Iraq.

Solicitor Phil Shiner said: “There is the clearest evidence available of systematic abuse and systematic failings at the very highest levels of politicians, the civil service and the military.”

He added: “Until we as a nation face up to this evidence we cannot hope for the fundamental reforms required to ensure these things can never happen again.

“We do not want to be talked about in the same vein as the Japanese in the second world war or the Americans at My Lai, but unless we stand up and say as a nation that this cannot happen in our name, that is where we seem to be headed.”

Shiner and his colleague, Martyn Day, suggested prisoners captured after the three-hour gun battle may have been taken to a British base at Abu Naji and killed.

Detailed witness statements from the five men – Hussein Jabbari Ali, Hussain Fadhil Abass, Atiyah Sayid Abdelreza, Madhi Jassim Abdullah and Ahmad Jabber Ahmood – described what they heard while in detention, when they were handcuffed and forced to wear blacked-out goggles.

The statements described hearing other men screaming and choking as well as the sound of gunfire.

Abdelreza’s statement read: “I believed people were being killed. I have never heard anything like that sound ever before in my life. It shocked me and filled me with such terror.”

The lawyers, who are bringing a damages claim in the UK courts, say the five witnesses are labourers who have lived all their lives in Majar and had “absolutely nothing” to do with the Shia Mahdi army, who engaged British troops in the gun battle.

Day said: “The nature of a number of the injuries of the Iraqis would seem to us to be highly unusual in a battlefield.

“For example, quite how so many of the Iraqis sustained single gunshots to the head and from seemingly at close quarter, how did two of them end with their eyes gouged out, how did one have his penis cut off (and) some have torture wounds?”

The solicitors called for an ongoing investigation by the RMP to be taken over by Scotland Yard.

An MoD spokesman said: “Allegations of mistreatment, unlawful killing and mutilation by British troops following an incident at Vehicle Checkpoint Danny Boy were thoroughly investigated by the RMP.

“Their investigation lasted 10 months, involved the interviewing of over 150 British personnel and 50 Iraqi nationals, and found no evidence to support these allegations.

“New allegations are part of an ongoing RMP investigation and judicial review and it would be inappropriate to comment further.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/feb/22/military.iraq

Russia warns of resorting to ‘force’ over Kosovo

 

 

Friday 22 February 2008

Russia could resort to “force” if NATO or the European Union defy the United Nations on Kosovo, Moscow’s envoy to NATO was quoted as saying by Interfax news agency on Friday.

 

Friday 22 February 2008

By AFP

Iraq: US occupation faces crisis of its own making

 

James Cogan,WSWS

22 February 2008

The much-touted successes of the Bush administration’s deployment of 30,000 American additional troops to Iraq last year rest on unstable and rapidly eroding foundations. The unstated fear in the Pentagon debate over how many American troops can be withdrawn this year is that the policies associated with the surge have created potential triggers for a return to wide-spread resistance.

Three laws passed by the Iraqi parliament on February 13 embody the looming crisis. The legislation consisted of the government’s 2008 budget, an amnesty for thousands of Sunnis who have been detained during counter-insurgency operations and, finally, the definition of the power-sharing arrangements between the federal government in Baghdad and provincial authorities and the naming of October 1 as the date for long-overdue provincial elections. In January, a law was enacted that went some way toward lifting US-imposed restrictions on political activities by former members of the Sunni-dominated Baath Party of former dictator Saddam Hussein.

US ambassador in Iraq Ryan Crocker hailed the bills’ passage as “important steps forward”. The parliament, he declared, “deserves congratulations from all of us”. The truth is that the legislation was accepted only because of intense pressure on a number of major factions in the Iraqi establishment to accept a curtailment of their ambitions. In many cases, political groupings have been compelled to accept policies that fail to meet the guarantees they were given by US officials and officers in exchange for cooperating with the occupation.

The Sunni establishment, which has suffered the greatest losses of power and privilege under US occupation, has been left with an array of grievances. The de-Baathification law still bars former Baathists from holding positions in security ministries. The military and police remain firmly under the influence of the Shiite fundamentalist parties that dominate the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

The amnesty law, which Sunni parties had claimed would free the majority of detainees, only applies to those in Iraqi government facilities—not the more than 20,000 people being held in US-operated prison camps. It also does not cover thousands of men accused of “terrorism” and other charges levelled against Iraqis captured while engaged in armed resistance to the US occupation.

Now, aggravating the sense of betrayal, the provincial election law makes clear that the US authorities and the Shiite-dominated government are offering Sunni factions the role of a side-lined minority at best.

The last provincial elections in 2005 were boycotted by the majority of Sunnis out of sympathy for the insurgency. The low turnout in majority Sunni provinces led to the formation of unrepresentative governments by Shiite parties or Sunni groups that were collaborating with the occupation.

The former insurgent groups that have agreed during the past year to end resistance and join US-backed Awakening Councils demanded that they be represented in the provincial governments before new ballots were held. One reason is their concern that the parties installed in 2005 will use their grip over electoral authorities to rig the vote in October. The provincial law did not meet this concern. It instead proposed that the United Nations—which has little presence in the country, and especially not in the volatile Sunni areas—assist in organising and monitoring the ballot.

The limited character of the concessions to Sunni demands coincides with growing frustration inside the ranks of the Awakening Councils. The primary motive for ending much of the insurgency last year was fear in the Sunni elite and population as a whole over the entrenchment of Shiite fundamentalist power. The bloody Sunni-Shiite civil war that developed throughout 2006 led to mass killings in Sunni areas and the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Sunnis from Baghdad and other mixed areas.

In desperation, tribal councils and Baathist-linked insurgent groups in western Iraq and the surrounds of Baghdad accepted US overtures for a deal. In exchange for a ceasefire and substantial bribes, they formed US-financed militias—which now number close to 80,000—to work with American units in hunting down and destroying Islamist groups that continued resistance. American troops prevent Shiite troops, police and militia from entering the areas under the control of the Awakening Councils. In Iraq’s capital, the US military has flung up 12-foot concrete walls around Sunni suburbs to protect them from Shiite militias, establishing little more than ghettos.

The curbing of Sunni attacks on US forces has been a key factor in the substantial drop in American casualties. The collaboration, however, has not led to the hoped-for significant political openings for the Sunni elite or their followers. The Shiite parties view the Awakening Councils as a long-term threat to their power. Maliki has refused demands that the Sunni militias be recruited into the military or police.

The tensions are now surfacing. In Diyala province, the Awakening Council has suspended all cooperation with the occupation and the government over allegations that the local Shiite police are continuing to launch pogroms against Sunnis. Over recent weeks there have been several more incidents in which US troops have allegedly mistaken the militiamen for insurgents and attacked them. A Sunni militia in Babil, close to Baghdad, temporarily suspended all collaboration this week over the US killing of three of its members and two women in separate incidents last Thursday and Friday.

In the western Anbar province, the Awakening Council has issued an ultimatum to the provincial government to resign by April or it will use its 20,000-strong Sunni militia to overthrow it. The government is headed by the Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party, one of the few Sunni organisations to stand candidates in the 2005 ballot. Only 2 percent of the population of Anbar voted.

Another key aspect of the provincial law only intensifies the prospect of violence over the coming months. The legislation leaves the way open for provinces in other parts of Iraq to form regions with comparable powers to the Kurdish Regional Government in the north (KRG). There is still no oil law to block regions from using clauses of the 2005 US-drafted constitution to claim jurisdiction over the development of new oil and gas fields. In the north, the KRG has proceeded in defiance of opposition in Baghdad to sign contracts with transnational companies for the exploration and opening up of 15 fields.

The main party of the Shiite business and clerical establishment, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), is a strong advocate of regionalism. It will be seeking to gain control of the majority Shiite-populated southern provinces in the October election and pursue its perspective of establishing an oil-rich autonomous region centred on the Shiite religious capital, Najaf. The focus of its efforts will be Basra—the centre of the oil industry—which is currently governed by a Shiite faction which opposes ISCI’s plans.

An ISCI-controlled Shiite regional government is expected to seek to appropriate the bulk of the oil revenues generated by new developments in the south, where more than 60 percent of Iraq’s reserves are located. Shiite regionalism therefore threatens to deprive the elite in both the central Sunni provinces and Baghdad, with its mixed Sunni-Shiite population, of any minor benefits from the planned opening up of Iraq’s vast untapped oil and gas resources to US and other transnational energy corporations.

The centralist tendencies that advocate the concentration of powers in the hands of the Baghdad government include Sunni parties, the alliance headed by former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, as well as the Baghdad-based Shiite Sadrist movement and the Basra-based Shiite Islamic Virtue Party. Apart from their rejection of regionalism, these factions agree on little else. They represent rival and, at times, openly hostile tendencies.

They came together, however, to attempt to block the provincial law. The vote for the bill was deadlocked 82-82 and only passed by the speaker’s casting vote. They also combined in an outpouring of resentment against the Kurdish region during the parliamentary sittings. The centralists stridently called for the share of the federal budget paid to the KRG to be reduced from 17 percent to between 14 and 15 percent. While a compromise was reached that agreed to the 17 percent, it stipulated that a census must be held before the next budget to determine what percentage of the population actually lives in the KRG. A majority rejected a Kurdish demand that the Baghdad government pay the wages of the 80,000-strong Kurdish peshmerga militiamen in northern Iraq.

The conflict over regionalism creates two additional flashpoints. Firstly, within the ranks of the Shiite Sadrist movement, there are increasing demands for its leader Moqtada al Sadr to end his opposition to armed resistance to the pro-US government. While the Sadrist Mahdi Army militia generally complied with the “ceasefire” that Sadr announced last August, the US military and ISCI-controlled forces stepped up operations to substantially weaken the Sadrist position in the south ahead of the provincial elections. Hundreds and possibly thousands of Mahdi militiamen have been killed or detained during the surge. More and more dissident groupings are breaking with Sadr in order to fight back.

Over the past several days, US forces in Baghdad have come under stepped-up attack from alleged “rogue” Shiite militiamen. On Monday and Tuesday, Katuysha rockets were fired at American bases in and near the capital, killing at least one civilian contractor and wounding two soldiers.

The second volatile area is the northern oil-rich city of Kirkuk. The opposition in Baghdad toward the Kurdish nationalists’ claims on resources has further poisoned the debate over the holding of a referendum in Kirkuk to determine whether the majority Kurdish population wishes to join the KRG.

The Bush administration pressured the Kurdish leadership last December to accept a delay in the scheduled holding of a vote in order to cement Washington’s own geo-political relations with Turkey, which opposes any strengthening of Kurdish regionalism.

The KRG now faces the likelihood that the Iraqi parliamentary majority will push for the delay to become indefinite. Open warfare over the issue is becoming more likely. Moreover, there are signals that the Turkish government intends to intervene to ensure no vote takes place. The Turkish media reported this week that the plans are being finalised for the deployment of tens of thousands of Turkish troops into northern Iraq during March. While the ostensible reason is to hunt down Kurdish separatists of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the operation will be designed to threaten the KRG into dropping its designs on Kirkuk.

A year after the surge began, disgruntled Sunni, Shiite and, increasingly, Kurdish factions are seething with resentment toward the cynical manipulation and false promises made by the Bush White House and US commander General David Petraeus. The political alienation is intensified by the social catastrophe that continues to afflict the vast majority of the population. For all the talk of “reconstruction”, millions of people lack jobs, clean water, adequate food, fuel, electricity and sewerage. The ebb in the anti-occupation insurgency over the past six months may prove to be short-lived.

www.wsws.org

2 GIs, 38 Iraqis Killed; 16 Iraqis Wounded 

Fev 22.2008

As the country awaits news on whether Shi’ite Moqtada al-Sadr will extend his ceasefire, at least 38 Iraqis were killed and another 16 were wounded in the latest attacks. New developments at the Turkish border also occurred. Also, two GIs were killed and four British soldiers were wounded in separate incidents.

A Marine was killed today in combat in Anbar province, and one American soldier was killed during a blast yesterday in Baghdad. Also, four British soldiers were wounded during a roadside bombing in Basra.

In northern Iraq, Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, who are allied with the Coalition, reportedly clashed with Turkish forces that were moving tanks from their base within Iraq to another location, but Peshmerga officials later denied this. Meanwhile, Turkish forces also shelled locations used by Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) rebels. The casualties in either incident are unknown.

Tomorrow, Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr will announce whether a unilateral ceasefire will continue. The ceasefire contributed heavily to a reduction in sectarian attacks in the latter half of 2007. Should the ceasefire be lifted, it could mean an increase in violence. The cleric instituted the ceasefire after a deadly clash in Karbala in order to weed out disruptive elements within his Mahdi Army.

Fifteen bodies, ten of them belonging to Iraqi soldiers, were discovered in a mass grave near Baquba. A second mass grave contained the bodies of six men and three women.

In Baghdad, five dumped bodies were found. A roadside bomb wounded three civilians near Shabb stadium. In Besateen, shelling injured two people. A police officer was killed and two others were wounded during an armed attack in Waziriya. Gunmen killed a driver near Sadr City. In Karada, a home used as a bomb factory was discovered.

A car bomb in Mosul wounded five policemen.

A policeman was gunned down in Numaniya.

A hostage was freed near Amara.

In Basra, the Iraqi army clashed with gunmen in different neighborhoods of the city. The number of casualties is unknown. A separate attack on a four-wheel-drive vehicle left two Iraqis dead and four more wounded.

One suspect was killed and 20 more were detained during Coalition operations across northern and central Iraq.

In Anbar province, a brigadier general was killed, along with his driver, and a bodyguard was wounded during a roadside bombing.

A car bomb at a marketplace south of Fallujah killed one civilian and wounded a second person.

http://antiwar.com/updates/?articleid=12399

Kosovo and Muslim solidarity

22/ 02/ 2008

MOSCOW.

RIA Novosti commentator Maria Appakova

 

More and more countries are getting ready to recognize Kosovo’s independence, but many are hesitant, including some Arab and Muslim countries despite Washington’s appeals to display solidarity with Kosovo Muslims.During a briefing on Kosovo after its declaration of independence, Under Secretary for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns welcomed the recognition of this step by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), and hence, by the governments of its member countries. He said: “And we think it is a very positive step that this Muslim state, Muslim majority state, has been created today.”

It’s up to the Europeans to decide whether Burns is right or not, but the U.S. and European media have many apprehensions over the emergence of a Muslim enclave in the heart of Europe that is still predominantly Christian. European self-identification is one of the most sensitive issues. It is being raised over and over again – during debates on the European Constitution, the prospects of Turkey’s admission into the European Union (EU), migration, or the protests after the publication of cartoons of Prophet Muhammad. These debates are a European affair, but Washington is using the Islamic factor to pursue its own ends.

Today, the most urgent issue is whether Kosovo will create a precedent for other territories. This is why many Muslim and other countries do not rush to accept Kosovo’s independence. The United States hoped for Islamic solidarity, but in vain.

Only three OIC members – Turkey, Afghanistan and Senegal – have recognized Kosovo’s independence out of almost 60 members of the organization. Others have adopted a wait-and-see attitude because of the potential threat of a domestic split, or destabilization in neighboring countries.

Let’s name some of the potentially dangerous zones – Iran with Kurdish and Azerbaijani enclaves; Morocco and the Western Sahara problem with the periodic Berber unrest; and Algeria with the same Berber problem. There are sizeable Shiite communities in the Persian Gulf monarchies. Shiites account for 75% of Bahrain’s population; the relevant figure for Saudi Arabia is about 15%, Qatar 11%, and the United Arab Emirates 17%.

Relations between these communities and the government are quite complicated. The situation in Syria is also potentially explosive. The situation only appears stable, but if the central government shows weakness, inter-communal conflicts will instantly flare up. However, events in Lebanon and Iraq are much more dangerous than that.

For the time being, no politician in these conflict-prone zones has loudly expressed readiness to follow Kosovo’s example. This is not because it would not be entirely correct to compare them with Kosovo from the legal and political points of view. Kosovo’s independence is threatening primarily because a decision on it was made without a UN Security Council resolution. It is solely based on the support of the United States and some European countries. In other words, political circumstances have prevailed over international law. Hence, others may follow Kosovo’s example. Success will depend on what Washington wants to achieve. This gives food for thought to those who may follow this example and those who are afraid of separatist attitudes in their own countries.

It is no accident that the Kurds did not follow this path in the first days after Kosovo declared independence, although many analysts and journalists, including those from America and Turkey, have been discussing the Kurdish problem in this context. They are asking why the Kurds are denied what the Kosovars have been given.

The Kurdish problem is very similar to the Kosovo case, but the political situation does not favor the Kurds. For the most part, they live in four countries – Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria. No matter how much Washington would like to get at Damascus and Tehran, it will not undermine the interests of Ankara, its long-standing ally and partner. Moreover, the Americans do not even interfere with Turkey’s military operations against the “Kurdish separatists.” As for the Iraqi Kurds, they themselves need U.S. support that guarantees security and brings tangible political and economic benefits. This is why the Kurds are not rushing to follow Kosovo’s scenario, and Ankara has boldly recognized Kosovo’s independence.

Unlike the Kurds, the Palestinians were not silent. Yasser Abd Rabbo, an advisor to head of the Palestinian National Administration Mahmoud Abbas, declared that the Palestinians may follow Kosovo’s example and declare unilateral independence if dialogue with Israel does not produce the desired effect. His statement was instantly refuted by other high-ranking Palestinian politicians, including Abbas himself who favors continuing the talks.

But once again, it does not matter whether the situation in Kosovo is similar to that in the Middle East, although Washington is doing all it can to prove that the Kosovo case is truly unique. Everything is much simpler. Currently, the United States stands for the continuation of Palestinian-Israeli talks and insists on an early declaration of Palestine’s independence. Under different circumstances, the Palestinians will recall the Kosovo case, and will be backed by other Arab and Muslim politicians.

For the time being, most governments are pondering over what will cost them more – recognition of Kosovo’s independence or neutrality.

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080221/99818092.html