War in Libya could drag on, military analysts say

The posting of liaison officers - probably fewer than 40 by you, and as a military instructor is also carefully not reported - a sign, they said that only a combination of military pressure from the sky, economic pressure on the Government and a better organized and coordinated rebel group will finally convince Col. Muammar el-Gaddafi, that he no option but to stop you.

"Some Libya thought of could be fast,", a senior said Ambassador to NATO. "But no military commander thinks so."

Sending consultants to Libya is the latest in a series of characters effort for the NATO campaign, which set out with a seriously began American-led attack, but has seemed to fizzle out as command was transferred to NATO on 31 March. After that an offensive was rebel smashed by Qadhafi forces, which the rebels reeling towards the eastern town of Ajdabiya sent.

New tactics of Qadhafi troops - mix with civilians, camouflage arms and drive pickup trucks instead of military vehicles - pilot, it was hard for NATO to objectives are. At the same time the rebels have hammered loyalist artillery and tanks held city of Misurata, with cluster bombs, allegedly, by large parts of the world, so that civilians to protect prohibited a mockery of the NATO central mission.

But as the new Qadhafi seem tactics, divisions within the Alliance's strategy of damage, Robin Niblett, Director of Chatham House, said the Royal Institute Affairs in London of international. Only six of the 28 countries participate in the air raids and France and the United Kingdom are about half of them during Denmark, Norway, Belgium and Canada do the rest.

Prominent Nations such as Italy and Spain are back, and other aircraft only for the support of the no-fly zone have sent or are helping to enforce the arms embargo. The Obama administration, which has ruled out deploying American troops in Libya, announced Wednesday that it approximately $25 million in military surplus supplies, even though not weapons, to the Libyan opposition forces would authorize.

"You want to Qadhafi of a collective will, send that there is no way that he is a firm and unified opposition, facing" Mr Niblett said. "And he is a European-led NATO, which is not enough contiguous see."

"If I were him, I consider European differences and heart of them, take in the opposition so weak," said Mr Niblett.

Colonel Qadhafi "feel there is a gap between means and ends," he added. "He can by divisions among allies and feeling that he part of a political solution can be, because he can feel at the end, there are not enough cohesion strategy follow up to the end, look at" which is his downfall.

Colonel Qadhafi and his sons to leave convincing, he said: "we need both the political and military track, and we have bits of the military and a broken political situation, and we give the best shot of the strategy."

In a sense, the problems in the NATO changes can be traced since the end of the cold war. With the end of the threat of the Soviet Union and the expansion to global missions outside Europe, NATO of less has an Alliance as a coalition of like-minded Nations, analysts say.

"If NATO went from area it an Alliance, stopped," said Francois Heisbourg, an expert in the Foundation for strategic research in Paris defense. "In the area it is partnership unlimited liability." But now with a global scope, everything needs to be negotiated, and it is all à la carte. "This is the post cold war world."

Tomas Valasek, a defense expert at the London Centre for European reform, to NATO one political party, "a coalition of countries with largely the same interests, but with different views." It was inevitable after the cold war, he said that NATO countries would focus on various threats: terrorism and Afghanistan for some, such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and the Netherlands; Russia, for the Central Europeans. He said "I know why they remain in NATO"As for the rest,"also."

NATO never said what it was, Mr Valasek. "NATO of more a transactional site in the future be so as in Libya, the Willigen will mostly coalitions, with the support of NATO."

The reject NATO official criticism, that Alliance has done a good job in a short time and that the air campaign is working well.

"There is no question of the collective will of NATO" to the UN resolution on Libya perform, Oana Lungescu, spokeswoman for the Alliance said. She said that in the three weeks since NATO took command of the operation, "we are steadily Qadhafi's ability degrading, to carry out and maintain attacks on his own people and gradually the regime forces pressing."

But almost all are agreed, "that there no military solution to the crisis as such", said Ms Lungescu.

"This mission is the pressure for a credible political solution," she said.

A senior NATO Ambassador asked for patience. "At the end of the balance changes, it has," he said. "Qadhafi gets no more weapons, no more tanks, no more ammunition, and he gets weaker and the others get stronger over the course of time." "And at some point someone decides in Qadhafi, have a political way out."

Colonel Qadhafi Foreign Minister, Moussa Koussa, defected to the United Kingdom three weeks ago - where he half-heartedly as an encouragement to others to the Libyan leader change pages treated was - there was no significant defector since.

The current political debate, which said senior NATO Ambassador, is not whether the war will end Libya in negotiations, but the nature and context of the discussions. Some countries would like to start negotiations with Colonel Gaddafi, before he makes with the clear goal of leaves, he has to leave. But others, especially the rebels, saying that negotiations can only after the Colonel and his sons are sure of the country.

For now, Mr Valasek said, the problem is that Colonel Qadhafi and NATO supported opposition time on their side think. "It may take this is as leads us military force longer everyone to see." "But if we want a shared Libya we need to sit down and negotiate."

Steven Lee Myers contributed reporting from Washington.

View the original article here

Could Putin and Medvedev in an open Russian election face off? -Christian Science Monitor

Moscow

As the political differences between Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev in a visible public rift will expand, and each request for President in the polls remain next year to run, some Russians are mulling, who like a fantasy before a few weeks sound a perspective: What is when she confronted each other in an open and fair elections?

Skip to the next paragraph

It was Putin himself who started the speculation is now surging as electricity through Russia's blogosphere. "Neither me nor Dmitry have excluded, that each of us was a candidate in the race," he said last week in a bid to down discussion on the, choice clog apparent Kremlin. "We of the actual situation closer to the elections go."

Putin was responding to comments by Mr Medvedev at a Conference of the BRICS Nations in China. He said "I do not exclude to do that I will run for a new term as President,". "Will be decided in the relatively near future, because there are less than a year." "It is time for change."

RELATED: Putin's marquee moments

For the last three years, the former two-term President Putin and anointed successor, Medvedev, have run the country in a more or less amicable "tandem", but one in which seemed Putin always the senior partner. Both routinely insisted that relations between them were good, and that in due time that would decide them "between themselves" as candidate for President of the institution would lead. Built into the system of "managed democracy" of the Putin Government support is crucial for the election win, and Kremlin critics have pushed to the edge, found even if they can put their name on the ballot.

Is it a campaign platform?

But in recent weeks, public disagreements within the "tandem" have grown more common, and some political forces have begun to potential nominations of individual coagulation, complete with think tank studies, that read much like draft campaign platforms.

"There are a number of votes now, both Liberals and conservatives, which would be it best to break with [the Putin system] and let the voters between them decide, the" says Alexei Pushkov, anchor of the Post Scriptum, Russia's most popular TV public affairs.

"If we, had other policies two candidates, Putin and Medvedev with something, that could create the basis for a genuine two-party system in Russia." After all, are these authentic differences within the Russian society, "says Mr Pushkov." "Some prefer the more traditional approach grab from Putin, while others for the more liberal line, pushing Medvedev...." Who would be the next President, he would have a new level of legitimacy. If it were Medvedev, he would finally free from the bindings of the Putin system and in the location, its own course. "If it would be Putin, we would know that his victory was based on honest public support."

The idea of weaning Russia from its searches autocratic governance has a long history, but attempts been never successful. The short intermezzo swept across a team, the lack of 1917 was followed to the last tsars soon by a Bolshevik flood, took more than 70 years. Try to build a democratic system in the 1990s failed amid economic chaos and social collapse.

Putin was the traditional chain makes the direct command to restore the "power vertical" which means more than swear a decade from the Kremlin after below, in every corner of the expanded Russia.

Although he stepped aside in 2008, his longtime aide Medvedev let take the top Kremlin job Putin Chair that keep it enabled lot of control over Russia's moved into the Prime Minister hurled red tape and the lever of the domestic policy. He was also managing United Russia, the State supported political behemoth that controls carried out practically all legislators in the country - from the State Duma to small urban - and whose membership is so strong with officials, which wags stacked it have called a "Union for bureaucrats."

View the original article here

Liberals could still govern if Harper WINS minority: Ignatieff

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff, said that he would be willing to form a Government under parliamentary rules if Stephen Harper wins the most seats in the election but not unable to win the confidence of the House of Commons.

"If"the Governor wants to call on other parties, or myself, for example, to try and form a Government, then we attempt to form a Government, Ignatieff said Peter Mansbridge for CBC in an interview exclusive Tuesday afternoon."

"This is exactly how the work rules and what I'm trying to say Canadians is, I understand the rules, I respect the rules, I will follow them to the letter and I'm not going to form a coalition.". This I am ready to do so is to speak to Mr. Duceppe and Mr. Layton or even Mr. Harper and say, "we have a problem and here's the plan I want to put before the Parliament, it is the budget I would bring in ' and then 'We take from there. ?

The statement is that the nearest Ignatieff has come to describe how he could become Prime Minister since his first day of the campaign to renounce a coalition with the NDP and the Bloc Québécois.

Ignatieff, who had signed to form a coalition with the NDP supported the block when then-Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion had worked a deal three years ago, says Mansbridge that he later rejected the idea because it was not in the interest of Canadians.

"I could be sitting here and talking to you as Prime Minister and chose not to do that because I felt that it was not in the national interest," he said. "If I have dismissed the coalition in 2008 and I went into this election firmly in 2011 excluding the coalition."

"Mr. Harper had a coalition in 2004 with Mr. Duceppe and Mr. Layton discussions." Not me. ?

Shortly after the interview, the Tories back shot, issuing a statement which said Ignatieff "clearly." it is his agenda to become Prime Minister, even if he loses the election

"Michael Ignatieff ambition to be Prime Minister outweighs everything: our economic recovery, what is best for families, and even how Canadians vote,"said conservatives."."

Ignatieff has also denied he has started a negative campaign against Harper, saying that the question boils down to whether if you can trust the Conservative leader with the authority. The Liberals were forced to modify an anti-Harper announces attack on health care, after it was determined that a quotation has been attributed incorrectly to Harper.

"I think we must be very difficult, I believe that we have to frame the issues. I think that Canadians want to know what choices on 2 may, "Ignatieff said advertisements that his party is running."

"We believe that a strong campaign here is essential."

Pressed Mansbridge Ignatieff on some of the announcements of campaign, the Liberals are running, more specifically those who say Stephen Harper wants to "absolute power".

Ignatieff said Harper closes Parliament twice and held contempt of Parliament. He said that the important issue of the campaign is: "can you trust this guy with power."

"If you can not trust this man with democracy, you can be trusted with anything else," said Ignatieff.

Foundation of the Ignatieff with Mansbridge discussion is part of a series of one-on-one interviews with the leaders of the party. Harper accepted an interview at a time that has yet to be determined.

At the interview, Ignatieff rid of similarities that platform of his party may have with the NDP, saying that, unlike the Liberals table cost the NDP does not add.

But the NDP was quick to offer a rebuttal, saying their platform is not encrypted only, but also third validated.

"Unlike the platform Liberals, it is not making promises non-encrypted several billion dollars (e.g., payment of HST at Quebec, prescription drugs, high speed rail), or it does not ignore two years," the Democrats said in a statement.

"And unlike the Conservatives, it contains no reductions unidentified 11 billion from $.".

Accessibility links

View the original article here

News Analysis: pain of the British tax cuts could US debate to inform

But in the UK, a year in its own program to put controversial austerity measures a tax gaping hole, the future is now. And for the time being, the early returns are less than promising.

3.5 Percent plunged retail sales the sharpest monthly downturn in the UK in 15 years in March. And a new report by the Center for economic and business research, an independent research group here established, forecasts that real household income to 2 percent will fall this year. Britain's income that would make squeeze worst for two consecutive years since the 1930's.

George Osborne has all according to the British top economic officials, in a time of high deficits and economic weakness, which is the best approach aggressively the deficit first by rapid fire cuts aimed to the heart of the British Welfare State challenged.

This, says Mr Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, ensures the confidence of the financial markets and thus ensures the low interest rates for long-term economic growth required.

This approach, and the question of whether the risk of stifling economic recovery, which could help define the budget gap, is the cause of the deficit debate in the United States. On the one hand, the go-slow strategy of President Obama is preferred. On the other hand, which is more radical path by the Republicans who. The two camps are undoubtedly closely watching Britain's experiment.

At least on paper, both countries face challenges largely deficit. United Kingdom aims to close a fiscal gap of around 10 percent of gross domestic product. The comparable figure in the United States is 9.5 per cent.

In Washington the Republican proposal recently, Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin outlined by Representative calls for the width and significant reduction in social spending, including Medicare and Medicaid, and large tax cuts.

On Wednesday President Obama one called for a more balanced approach, which he said, would combine some tax increases for the wealthy, with selective austerity measures, he said, not the "basic contract" would break programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.

While harder in its approach to the issues of the British plan lacks the strong momentum cuts, which the Republican proposal. British will certainly feel pain at the local government level, as money for the care of older people, youth programmes and dry garbage collection. But icons such as the national health service have been spared largely.

Other notable differences suggest that Europe is the Conservative Party on the left is the mainstream Republican position in the United States, and in a sense as Mr Obama has the position.

To strike a political balance, led the coalition Government of Prime Minister David Cameron of the conservative party, Mr Osborne – even a conservative - retains a 50% tax rate for the richest people. This is among the highest in Europe, and it more a burden on the rich than anything, what Mr Obama imposed on, or someone in Washington would find politically feasible.

But in the UK, the major concern now is not tax rates. Instead, the fear that Mr Osborne emphasis on reducing social spending - you aim at is now to achieve an approximate budget surplus by 2015 and will lead more than 300,000 government jobs - the economy could tip into recession.

Already the Government has its growth was estimated at 1.7 per cent, from 2.4 per cent for this year are slash as consumer income under the pressure of high inflation, weak wage growth and stagnant economic activity.

"My view is that we are in serious danger, a double-dip are recession,", said Richard Portes, an economist at the London Business School. "It will be a cautionary tale."

Not all economists agree, of course. And this week slight improvement in the unemployment rate to 7.8 per cent 7.9 per cent, suggests that it still too early, inevitably declare to a second burglary.

With Mr Portes, no one would deny that a deficit of 10% of the G.D.P is untenable in the long term. But with the opposition labour party, he argues that move so quickly in the face of weak economic growth is not justified.

Mr Osborne suggests the deficit to 1.5 percent by 2015 slash. Comparison, is not the strong reach project program that provides Mr Ryan, that deficit target by 2021.

In addition to the difference in speed is an important distinction as each plan would reach its goals. Mr Osborne plan calls for 75 percent savings come from spending cuts, and the rest from increased above all indirect revenue and taxes - an increase of in sales tax, for example.

Mr Ryan, on the other hand, proposes to slash would enable expenditure $ 5.8 trillion but - in contrast to the British approach - most of expenditure be compensated cuts of $4.2 trillion in tax cuts, rather than the deficit gap close applied. In other words, while Mr Ryan would strongly lean to close expenditure reductions to the deficit, he hopes to inspire, discussed the nature of the supply side economic growth in most cases, when Ronald Reagan in the White House.

View the original article here

Attractions, Zoo could be affected by the shutdown

The Government shutdown could have far-reaching effects if the current budget impasse is resolved. Those who visit national parks, including the State of freedom and the Grand Canyon to name of only two, will be be rejected in the near future. Also the next space shuttle launch would be delayed in the case of the Government shutdown.

The statue of liberty-probably said to avert huddled masses yearning for access, the same fate as the Grand Canyon and other U.S. suffer National Park, a U.S. budget impasse Friday is not resolved, officials.

With the White House and Congress reached a dead end about issues, contingency plans were made for a shut down non-essential eGovernment services. This could be some 800,000 federal employees and locations, such as the Smithsonian Institution museums including the National Zoo influence.

The National Zoo was closed, but Zoo officials assured discovery messages, which care for the plant would continue to animals.

"All behind the scenes work relating to the animals zoo will be the same," said Lindsay Renick Mayer of the Smithsonian's National Zoo in an e-Mail to Discovery News. "The animals will be made all the possibilities, that they be done any other time."

But the shutdown would affect operated by the National Park Service, including the popular attractions in the West such as Yellowstone and Alcatraz pages.

"We hope there will be no Government shutdown." "If there is a Government shutdown, we all our 394 national park sites, will close", Park Service spokesman David Barna said.

The Agency is not only parks and historical landmarks including the statue of liberty in New York Harbor and the former prison of Alcatraz in San Francisco Bay.

These sites host an average 800,000 unique visitors per day at this time of year.

If they are shut down, removed Barna Rangers in place, and in the Park, where people live in camping or hotel, "We will ask them to leave," said people would turn.

Shutting down the Park Service would maintain only around 2,000 of the 17,000 employees at protecting sites. A further 15,000 employees of subcontractors such as hotels would risk no budget is approved also layoffs.

Barna said that the economic losses would be from a shutdown of the Web sites to around 32 million dollars per day.

Also the next NASA shuttle ready, now 29 April, could be affected. After one would today published NASA memo only tasks for the protection of life and assets critical during the shutdown process a Government further. So, the work on new shuttle launches and other new projects could face an indefinite delay.

View the original article here

Explosives detecting ink could help terrorists to ground

A new spray-on material that detects and neutralized used explosives by terrorists could Government carried out lift restrictions on liquids on board aircraft.

The material is an ink like substance made from tiny metal oxide nano particles, that changes color, dark blue, pale yellow or clear, in the presence of peroxide-based explosives. These explosives were terrorist in the bombing and the thwarted u-Bahn 2005 London used to bring "Shoe bomber", the attempted, this substance on board an aircraft in the year 2001 for the detonation.

"This stuff is everywhere used terrorist explosives are used including battlefields, airports and u-Bahnen," said study leader Dr All Apblett. "It is to save lives." Apblett, a chemistry professor at Oklahoma State University, presented his findings at a meeting of the American Chemical Society.

Apblett said that function allows the material as fast motion vapours produced was the color changes of explosives that are hidden in clothing, food or beverages. The ink contains a molybdenum Nonparticles connection, a metal often used in missiles and aircraft parts used.

Test strips, contains the ink could be dipped liquids before boarding in not drinks. For drinks a unique capillary tube could be inserted filled with ink in these liquids, which would not contaminate the drink. An example would be drawn and the chemical reaction inside the tube would be.

Aplebett and his colleagues founded Xplosafe, a company that developed and marketed the ink-like material. She hope that the experimental explosive substance is used in less than a year in airports.

Photo: C Squared Studios

View the original article here