Group items tagged

One member of the European Parliament's budget committee said it was "a huge scandal" given that "normal people" weren't compensated for losses sustained by their pension funds in the financial crisis.

Public money already makes up two thirds of the pension fund. At the moment, each MEP is required to make monthly contributions of €1,194.59 ($1550) into their retirement funds, while the parliament itself makes a matching contribution of double that amount.

SPIEGEL: Only 13 percent of Germany's stimulus funds are slated for environmental measures. There is little evidence here of the "crisis as opportunity" you repeatedly mention. Gabriel: That puts us in fourth place worldwide, which isn't bad. If you added the money other countries earmark for renewable energy in their national budgets, which goes through the cost of electricity in Germany, we would be even higher up in the ranking, perhaps even at the top.

SPIEGEL: At least that would have deserved the name environmental premium. Gabriel: But, as environment minister, I am very interested in a thriving German automobile industry, because I can only pay for the rising costs of environmental protection at home and abroad if there are people in Germany with jobs and who pay taxes. The increase in expenditures for environmental and climate protection in the federal budget from €875 million ($1.14 billion) under a Green environment minister to €3.4 billion ($4.4 billion) today would not work without the economic success of German industry.

SPIEGEL: And what happens to your own credibility, when you reward people for buying cars by paying a so-called environmental premium that makes no environmental sense? Gabriel: I still call it the scrapping premium, because the main goal is to stabilize auto sales. But the project clearly has an economic impact, because new vehicles emit less CO2 and pollutants per kilometer driven than old ones. SPIEGEL: But the production of new car consumes enormous resources. Gabriel: One could take that argument a step further and say: It would be best for the environment if we stopped buying or producing any new products. That would be the way to save the most energy and CO2. The next thing you'll ask me is why the government didn't give people €2,500 ($3,250) to buy tickets for public transportation.

The environmental industry, with its new technologies, is the biggest market worldwide. We must retain our leading position, because other countries, like the United States, have started to compete with us.

SPIEGEL: US President Barack Obama is depriving the Germans of their leadership role in climate protection?

Gabriel: No, but his economic stimulus programs are good, and he introduced an overdue change of direction in climate policy. But as far as concrete reduction targets are concerned, his current proposals are still not sufficient. America remains well removed from the European targets and the necessary international targets in climate protection. Many in politics are so pleased about the new American administration that they want to be nothing but nice to the United States. But in doing so, we fail to recognize that the American president, no matter who he is, will always strongly champion American interests.

SPIEGEL: Obama has offered to reduce American CO2 emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Gabriel: But that is still far from enough. International climate scientists believe it is vital that we reduce CO2 emissions by 2020 to a level 25 to 40 percent lower than in 1990. And the developing and emerging nations expect serious efforts on the part of the industrialized nations. The Americans must also show some movement if the December climate summit in Copenhagen is to be a success. Otherwise, many will hide behind the United States. If that happens, our efforts will fall far short of what is needed to stop climate change and its devastating consequences. We must now discuss this openly worldwide.

Speaking to leaders gathered in Port of Spain, Mr Obama declared: "The US seeks a new beginning with Cuba."

"I know there is a longer journey that must be travelled to overcome decades of mistrust, but there are critical steps we can take toward a new day," he said.

Cuba is excluded from the summit, which includes 34 members of the Organisation of American States (OAS), though Latin American leaders have been calling for the communist country to be readmitted.

speaking on Friday in the Dominican Republic, Mrs Clinton acknowledged that US policy towards Cuba had "failed" and said Washington was "taking a very serious look at how to respond."

Addressing the summit, Mr Obama said he wanted to move forward with a sense of "equal partnership" with all the nations of the Americas despite decades of mistrust.

Mr Obama earlier greeted and shook hands with Venezuela's President, Hugo Chavez, during an impromptu meeting. Photographs released by the Venezuelan government showed Mr Chavez - one of the Bush's administrations most strident critics - smiling and clasping hands with Mr Obama at the start of the summit.

Before the summit began Mr Chavez appeared to chastise the US for its approach to Cuba, which is not a member of the OAS. In a pre-summit statement, he also said that "there is more democracy in Cuba than in the United States". But he greeted the US president warmly when the opportunity arrived, gripping the Mr Obama's hand in welcome. "I greeted Bush with this hand eight years ago; I want to be your friend," Mr Chavez told Mr Obama, according to a Venezuelan presidential press office statement.

Mr. Obama will meet with leaders from the region this weekend. They will discuss the economic crisis, including a plan to replenish the Inter-American Development Bank, a Washington-based pillar of clout that has suffered losses from the financial crisis.

Meanwhile, China is rapidly increasing its lending in Latin America as it pursues not only long-term access to commodities like soybeans and iron ore, but also an alternative to investing in United States Treasury notes.

One of China’s new deals in Latin America, the $10 billion arrangement with Argentina, would allow Argentina reliable access to Chinese currency to help pay for imports from China. It may also help lead the way to China’s currency to eventually be used as an alternate reserve currency. The deal follows similar ones China has struck with countries like South Korea, Indonesia and Belarus.

As the financial crisis began to whipsaw international markets last year, the Federal Reserve made its own currency arrangements with central banks around the world, allocating $30 billion each to Brazil and Mexico. (Brazil has opted not to tap it for now.) But smaller economies in the region, including Argentina, which has been trying to dispel doubts about its ability to meet its international debt payments, were left out of those agreements.

Details of the Chinese deal with Argentina are still being ironed out, but an official at Argentina’s central bank said it would allow Argentina to avoid using scarce dollars for all its international transactions. The takeover of billions of dollars in private pension funds, among other moves, led Argentines to pull the equivalent of nearly $23 billion, much of it in dollars, out of the country last year.

China is also seizing opportunities in Latin America when traditional lenders over which the United States holds some sway, like the Inter-American Development Bank, are pushing up against their limits.

Just one of China’s planned loans, the $10 billion for Brazil’s national oil company, is almost as much as the $11.2 billion in all approved financing by the Inter-American Bank in 2008. Brazil is expected to use the loan for offshore exploration, while agreeing to export as much as 100,000 barrels of oil a day to China, according to the oil company.

The Inter-American bank, in which the United States has de facto veto power in some matters, is trying to triple its capital and increase lending to $18 billion this year. But the replenishment involves delicate negotiations among member nations, made all the more difficult after the bank lost almost $1 billion last year. China will also have a role in these talks, having become a member of the bank this year.

In February, China’s vice president, Xi Jinping, traveled to Caracas to meet with President Hugo Chávez. The two men announced that a Chinese-backed development fund based here would grow to $12 billion from $6 billion, giving Venezuela access to hard currency while agreeing to increase oil shipments to China to one million barrels a day from a level of about 380,000 barrels

Mr. Chávez’s government contends the Chinese aid differs from other multilateral loans because it comes without strings attached, like scrutiny of internal finances. But the Chinese fund has generated criticism among his opponents, who view it as an affront to Venezuela’s sovereignty. “The fund is a swindle to the nation,” said Luis Díaz, a lawmaker who claims that China locked in low prices for the oil Venezuela is using as repayment.

“This is China playing the long game,” said Gregory Chin, a political scientist at York University in Toronto. “If this ultimately translates into political influence, then that is how the game is played.”

Last week, the Economist called for the United States to reduce its aid to Israel if the Netanyahu government continues to reject a two-state solution.  The Boston Globe offered a similar view earlier this week, advising Obama to tell Netanyahu "to take the steps necessary for peace or risk compromising Israel's special relationship with America." A few days ago, Ha’aretz reported that the Obama Administration was preparing Congressional leaders for a possible confrontation with the Netanyahu government.

We already know what it means for the United States to put pressure on the Palestinians, because Washington has done that repeatedly -- and sometimes effectively -- over the past several decades.  During the 1970s, for example, the United States supported King Hussein’s violent crackdown on the PLO cadres who were threatening his rule in Jordan. During the 1980s, the United States refused to recognize the PLO until it accepted Israel’s right to exist.  After the outbreak of the Second Intifada, the Bush administration refused to deal with Yasser Arafat and pushed hard for his replacement. After Arafat's death, we insisted on democratic elections for a new Palestinian assembly and then rejected the results when Hamas won. The United States has also gone after charitable organizations with ties to Hamas and backed Israel’s recent campaign in Gaza.

In short, the United States has rarely hesitated to use its leverage to try to shape Palestinian behavior, even if some of these efforts -- such as the inept attempt to foment a Fatah coup against Hamas in 2007 -- have backfired.

The United States has only rarely put (mild) pressure on Israel in recent decades (and never for very long), even when the Israeli government was engaged in actions (such as building settlements) that the U.S. government opposed.  The question is: if the Netanyahu/Lieberman government remains intransigent, what should Obama do?

4. Downgrade existing arrangements for “strategic cooperation.”  There are now a number of institutionalized arrangements for security cooperation between the Pentagon and the Israel Defense Forces and between U.S. and Israeli intelligence. The Obama administration could postpone or suspend some of these meetings, or start sending lower-grade representatives to them.

2. Change the Rhetoric. The Obama administration could begin by using different language to describe certain Israeli policies.  While reaffirming America’s commitment to Israel’s existence as a Jewish-majority state, it could stop referring to settlement construction as “unhelpful,” a word that makes U.S. diplomats sound timid and mealy-mouthed.  Instead, we could start describing the settlements as “illegal” or as “violations of international law.”

U.S. officials could even describe Israel’s occupation as “contrary to democracy,” “unwise,” “cruel,” or “unjust.”  Altering the rhetoric would send a clear signal to the Israeli government and its citizens that their government’s opposition to a two-state solution was jeopardizing the special relationship.

3. Support a U.N. Resolution Condemning the Occupation.  Since 1972, the United States has vetoed forty-three U.N. Security Council resolutions that were critical of Israel (a number greater than the sum of all vetoes cast by the other permanent members)

If the Obama administration wanted to send a clear signal that it was unhappy with Israel’s actions, it could sponsor a resolution condemning the occupation and calling for a two-state solution.

1. Cut the aid package? If you add it all up, Israel gets over $3 billion in U.S. economic and military aid each year, which works out to about $500 per Israeli citizen. There’s a lot of potential leverage here, but it’s probably not the best stick to use, at least not at first. Trying to trim or cut the aid package will trigger an open and undoubtedly ugly confrontation in Congress (where the influence of AIPAC and other hard-line groups in the Israel lobby is greatest). So that’s not where I’d start.

There is in fact a precedent for this step: after negotiating the original agreements for a “strategic partnership,” the Reagan administration suspended them following Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982. Today, such a step would surely get the attention of Israel’s security establishment.

5. Reduce U.S. purchases of Israeli military equipment. In addition to providing Israel with military assistance (some of which is then used to purchase U.S. arms), the Pentagon also buys millions of dollars of weaponry and other services from Israel’s own defense industry. Obama could instruct Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to slow or decrease these purchases, which would send an unmistakable signal that it was no longer "business-as-usual." Given the battering Israel’s economy has taken in the current global recession, this step would get noticed too.

6. Get tough with private organizations that support settlement activity. As David Ignatius recently noted in the Washington Post, many private donations to charitable organizations operating in Israel are tax-deductible in the United States, including private donations that support settlement activity. This makes no sense: it means the American taxpayer is indirectly subsidizing activities that are contrary to stated U.S. policy and that actually threaten Israel’s long-term future.  Just as the United States has gone after charitable contributions flowing to terrorist organizations, the U.S. Treasury could crack down on charitable organizations (including those of some prominent Christian Zionists) that are supporting these illegal activities. 

7. Place more limits on U.S. loan guarantees. The United States has provided billions of dollars of loan guarantees to Israel on several occasions, which enabled Israel to borrow money from commercial banks at lower interest rates.  Back in 1992, the first Bush administration held up nearly $10 billion in guarantees until Israel agreed to halt settlement construction and attend the Madrid peace conference, and the dispute helped undermine the hard-line Likud government of Yitzhak Shamir and bring Yitzhak Rabin to power, which in turn made the historic Oslo Agreement possible.

8. Encourage other U.S. allies to use their influence too. In the past, the United States has often pressed other states to upgrade their own ties with Israel.  If pressure is needed, however, the United States could try a different tack.  For example, we could quietly encourage the EU not to upgrade its relations with Israel until it had agreed to end the occupation.

most of these measures could be implemented by the Executive Branch alone, thereby outflanking die-hard defenders of the special relationship in Congress.  Indeed, even hinting that it was thinking about some of these measures would probably get Netanyahu to start reconsidering his position.

Most importantly, Obama and his aides will need to reach out to Israel’s supporters in the United States, and make it clear to them that pressing Israel to end the occupation is essential for Israel’s long-term survival.

He will have to work with the more far-sighted elements in the pro-Israel community -- including groups like J Street, the Israel Policy Forum, Brit Tzedek v'Shalom,  and others

In effect, the United States would be giving Israel a choice: it can end its self-defeating occupation of Palestinian lands, actively work for a two-state solution, and thereby remain a cherished American ally.  Or it can continue to expand the occupation and face a progressive loss of American support as well as the costly and corrupting burden of ruling millions of Palestinians by force.

Indeed, that is why many—though of course not all--Israelis would probably welcome a more active and evenhanded U.S. role. It was former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert who said "if the two-state solution collapses, Israel will face a South-Africa style struggle for political rights." And once that happens, he warned, “the state of Israel is finished."

The editor of Ha’aretz, David Landau, conveyed much the same sentiment last September when he told former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the United States should "rape" Israel in order to force a solution. Landau's phrase was shocking and offensive, but it underscored the sense of urgency felt within some segments of the Israeli body politic.

Berlin's city government has banned sausage sellers and souvenir stalls from the area, hoping to preserve the decorum of a site that symbolizes the nation's history of division and unification like few others. But there's not much it can do about street performers, who don't require official permits to pose for tourists.

He says that a state prosecutor to whom he took his findings refused to pursue the cases for fear of being killed himself. Gordan Malic is another journalist who now relies on police protection. "Organised crime has become part of the establishment," he says.

The deputy head of Croatia's privatisation fund is currently on trial after he was secretly filmed by prosecutors apparently stuffing a brown envelope filled with money into his pocket. The pictures were all over the newspapers, the film is on YouTube (in Croatian). The Index of Economic Freedom recently ranked Croatia below several African states in one of its corruption measurements.

"You can see corruption with government officials and practically ministerial-level people with wealth that cannot be explained," says Natasha Srdoc from the anti-corruption think tank the Adriatic Institute for Public Policy.

"Croatia needs to put an independent judiciary, the rule of law, and protection of property rights in place before it gets into the EU, because if it is allowed to get in before then it will not reform - it won't do anything."

Croatian police recently arrested a number of suspects in a mafia crackdown.

The crackdown has been prompted by Croatia's desire to join the European Union (on 1 April Croatia became a member of Nato). But some here, like politics professor Zarko Puhovski of Zagreb University, complain of double standards.

"If you have Bulgaria and Romania in the European Union, if you have a divided Cyprus, if you have Greece with all the corruption and problems with its judiciary, if you have Baltic states with catastrophic minority politics and so on, then you can't see why Croatia has to commit itself to all these reforms before being accepted."

Others suggest that some EU member states opposed to further expansion have exaggerated Croatia's problems with organised crime and corruption in order to damage its accession prospects.

That move could open the way for a greater flow of information to the island via the internet, says the BBC's Kevin Connolly in Washington, although much will depend on the attitude of the Cuban government itself.

The US president has indicated he would be open to dialogue with Cuba's leaders. But he has said that, like previous American presidents, he will only consider a full lifting of the US embargo once Cuba's communist government makes significant moves such as the holding of democratic elections.

Cuba's President Raul Castro has said he is prepared to negotiate with the new US administration, providing there are no preconditions.

President Obama clearly believes that engagement may yet achieve what the half-century embargo never did, says our correspondent: real political change in Cuba. But there is no talk for the moment of opening diplomatic relations or of lifting the general trade embargo, he adds.

Some analysts fear that the US may push India to limit its presence in Afghanistan to "please" Pakistan. India is spending millions of dollars in infrastructure projects in Afghanistan.

Mr Holbrooke has denied that Washington wanted to become a mediator between the two neighbours. "That is not our job," he told reporters in Islamabad. He said the US was "not going to be involved" in mediating in the dispute over Kashmir.

Mr Obama has pledged substantial economic assistance for Pakistan - more than $1bn (£684m) annually over the next five years - but the money will depend on the army's performance against the Taleban and al-Qaeda.

U.S. telecommunications companies will now be allowed to set up fiber-optic cable and satellite links with Cuba, start roaming service agreements and permit U.S. residents to pay for telecoms, satellite radio and television services provided to people in Cuba, the White House said.

Obama also directed his government to look at starting regularly scheduled commercial flights to Cuba. Air travel between the United States and Cuba is now limited to charter flights.

Mrs Clinton made her comments about Cuba in the Dominican Republic, ahead of the Summit of the Americas that begins in Trinidad and Tobago later on Friday. "We are continuing to look for productive ways forward because we view the present policy as having failed," she said at a press conference.

Cuba is excluded from the summit, which includes 34 members of the Organisation of American States (OAS), though Latin American leaders have been calling for the communist country to be readmitted. OAS Secretary-General Jose Miguel Insulza said on Friday he would ask the organisation's members to readmit Cuba, 47 years after it was suspended.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said he would veto the final declaration from the OAS summit because of Cuba's exclusion.

"I am prepared to have my administration engage with the Cuban government on a wide range of issues -- from human rights, free speech and democratic reform to drugs, migration and economic issues," he said.

"Let me be clear: I am not interested in talking for the sake of talking. But I do believe that we can move U.S.-Cuban relations in a new direction."

They come a day after Cuban President Raul Castro said he was prepared to discuss "everything, everything, everything" with the United States. Castro told a summit of leftist Latin American leaders gathered in Venezuela, "We are prepared, wherever they want, to discuss everything -- human rights, freedom of the press, political prisoners," Castro said Thursday.

Chavez's press office said Obama walked up to Chavez to greet him, a meeting it called "historic." "President Chavez expressed his hope that relations between the two countries would change," the press office said, quoting Chavez as having told his U.S. counterpart, "Eight years ago with this same hand I greeted Bush. I want to be your friend." It said Obama then thanked Chavez.

Obama's push for a rapprochement with Havana is supported by most Americans, 71 percent of whom said they favor re-establishing diplomatic relations, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll carried out April 3-5.

This week, the president opened the door to the discussions by abandoning longstanding restrictions on the ability of Cuban-Americans to travel freely to the island and send money to relatives there.

“I know there is a longer journey that must be traveled in overcoming decades of mistrust, but there are critical steps we can take toward a new day,” Mr. Obama said, adding that he was “prepared to have my administration engage with the Cuban government on a wide range of issues — from human rights, free speech, and democratic reform to drugs, migration, and economic issues.”

He said the United States needed to acknowledge long-held suspicions that it has interfered in the affairs of other countries. But, departing from his prepared text, he also said the region’s countries needed to cease their own historic demonization of the United States for everything from economic crises to drug violence.“That also means we can’t blame the United States for every problem that arises in the hemisphere,” he said. “That’s part of the bargain. That’s the old way, and we need a new way.”

On Cuba, the president’s words were as notable for what he said as for what he did not say. He did not scold or berate the Cuban government for holding political prisoners, as his predecessor, George W. Bush, often did.

But he also did not say that he was willing to support Cuba’s membership in the Organization of American States, or lift the 47-year-old trade embargo against Cuba, as some hemisphere leaders here want him to do.

“Let me be clear,” he said. “I am not interested in talking for the sake of talking. But I do believe we can move U.S.-Cuban relations in a new direction.”

The new tone from Washington drew warm praise from leaders like President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner of Argentina and President Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua. Mr. Ortega, who said he felt ashamed that he was participating in the summit meeting without the presence of Cuba, evoked images of the collapse of the Berlin Wall, saying, “I am convinced that wall will collapse, will come down.”

Mrs. Kirchner praised Mr. Obama for “what you did to stabilize the relationship from the absurd restrictions imposed by the Bush administration,” adding: “We sincerely believe that we in the Americas have a second opportunity to construct a new relationship. Don’t let it slip away.”

Mr. Obama’s speech on Friday night was only the latest in a string of overtures between the countries. On Thursday, Raúl Castro, Cuba’s president, used unusually conciliatory language in describing the Obama administration’s decision to lift restrictions on family travel and remittances.

“We are willing to discuss everything, human rights, freedom of press, political prisoners, everything, everything, everything they want to talk about, but as equals, without the smallest shadow cast on our sovereignty, and without the slightest violation of the Cuban people’s right to self-determination,” Mr. Castro said in Venezuela during a meeting of leftist governments meant as a counterpoint to this weekend’s summit meeting in Trinidad and Tobago.

On Friday, Mrs. Clinton responded, saying, “We welcome his comments, the overture that they represent, and we’re taking a very serious look at how we intend to respond.”

Earlier this week Brazilian officials signaled in Rio de Janeiro that President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, potentially flanked by the Colombian president, Álvaro Uribe, would raise the issue of accepting Cuba into the Organization of American States at the summit meeting. Cuba’s “absence is an anomaly and he is waiting for this situation to be corrected,” Marco Aurélio García, Mr. da Silva’s foreign policy adviser, told reporters.

On Friday, the secretary general of the O.A.S., José Miguel Insulza, said he would call for Cuba to be readmitted. And Mr. Chávez recently said he would refuse to sign the official declaration produced at the summit meeting because Cuba was not invited.

The BBC's Jo Floto in Jerusalem says Mr Lieberman's supporters are unlikely to be troubled by the police interest in him.

More significantly from a European perspective, the US agreed to significantly strengthen international oversight of financial markets, with particular attention paid to tax havens, hedge funds and ratings agencies.

It was a move that both Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy insisted upon -- and one which will go a long way toward removing whispers of friction between Obama and Merkel.

"In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world." He went on to say that "there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive."

"In Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual, but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans chose to blame America for much of what's bad…. On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise."

At the Afghanistan Conference in The Hague earlier this week, Obama was careful not to make any concrete demands for more troops from his European NATO allies. But on Thursday, he seemed willing to tighten the screws slightly. In addition to warning that al-Qaida still posed a threat, he also said, referring to Afghanistan, that "Europe should not simply expect the United States to shoulder the burden alone. This is a joint problem that requires a joint solution."

The response from Sarkozy, who was standing right next to Obama, was swift. "There will be no French military enforcements," the French president said. "We are ready to do more in the field of policing, of gendarmes, in the field of economic aid, to train Afghans."

Other NATO countries on Friday, though, said that they would be willing to send more troops. SPIEGEL ONLINE learned from diplomats attending the NATO summit that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown intends to send several hundred more troops to Afghanistan. Both Belgium and Spain are likewise promising more soldiers, though Spain is reportedly planning to send just 12 additional troops.

The US recently invested millions of dollars in a bridge connecting Tajikistan and Afghanistan, which will almost certainly be used to transport the supplies.

The US had previously announced it intended to transport supplies to Uzbekistan through Russia and Kazakhstan.

It comes after Kyrgyzstan accused the US of not paying enough to rent the air base at Manas, near the capital city of Bishkek.

The licence to close the base was signed into law this week by Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev. The Kyrgyz foreign ministry said on Friday that it had officially issued an eviction notice giving the US 180 days to vacate the area.

Analysts have suggested that Kyrgyzstan's leaders will not carry out their threat to evict the US, but are using the law as a bargaining chip to get more rent money from Washington. US Defence Secretary Robert Gates sought to play down the Kyrgyz spat on Thursday, saying the US was open to negotiation on the rent. "We are prepared to look at the fees and see if there is justification for a somewhat larger payment," he told a news conference.

"We are working on terms for the granting of amnesty for those who are prepared to lay down their arms," he told a meeting of leaders of his People's Democratic Party (PDP).

The country is one of the largest oil producers in Africa, but the attacks have severely hit its oil revenue and caused many oil companies withdraw their staff. Some of the militants says they are fighting for a bigger share in the oil wealth for people living in the Delta. But others use an almost complete breakdown in the rule of law to make money by extortion, oil theft and kidnapping.

The most visible group, the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (Mend), said they would not give up their arms because of "a mere verbal statement" from the president.

This is a radical change of tone and content from the Bush administration which envisaged that emissions would continue to grow to 2025.

Mr Pershing did promise that the US would help poor countries to fund clean technology. He would not mention figures but he hinted the sums would be much less than many developing countries demanded.

He said the best role for governments would be to incentivise the private sector to develop energy efficiency, clean technologies and reduce deforestation. He said China did not want money for technology from the USA but co-operation on technology development.

Negotiators from China, India and Papua (representing vulnerable states) all told BBC News that the US and other rich nations needed to cut emissions much harder and offer concrete funding. Surya Sethi from India said: "Progress is extremely slow. Rich nations seem to think that developing countries can help the world out of the climate problem. But the poorest 50% have just 11% of emissions. "It is crystal clear that the answer is for the United States and other rich nations to change their lifestyles and their methods of production and consumption. We do not see any real evidence that they have grasped that issue properly yet."

The findings of other intelligence agencies in the Middle East also indicate that Iran is sending weapons and explosives to Hezbollah in Lebanon and to the Palestinian radical group Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip. The latest indication of this kind of support came with a failed attack on a shopping center in the Israeli port of Haifa on Sunday, March 22. Security forces managed to disable several dozen kilograms of explosives that had been loaded into a car parked outside the mall. Both Palestinian and Israeli experts who cooperated on the case believe that the attempted attack was the work of Iranian-backed Hezbollah.

Meanwhile, the Israelis have carried out aerial attacks in Sudan in an attempt to halt the delivery of weapons to Hamas -- including rockets with a range of 70 kilometers, far enough to reach Tel Aviv from the Gaza Strip. The Israeli Air Force bombed a convoy of 17 trucks travelling through the Sudanese desert which were attempting to deliver weapons to Gaza via Egypt. The two bombing raids in January and February killed more than 30 people, including Sudanese, Ethiopians and Eritreans. Last Thursday a Sudanese government official confirmed the attacks took place and on Friday the New York Times quoted unnamed US officials saying Israeli warplanes had attacked the convoy.

The level to which Iran is intervening politically in the region is made evident by the failure of attempts so far to achieve reconciliation between the rival Palestinian factions.

Sources close to the Egyptian mediation efforts say that an agreement between the two sides has been tentatively close on several occasions. There had even been a deal to release 450 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails in exchange for the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit who is being held hostage by Hamas. However, even the veteran Egyptian mediators had underestimated Iran's influence.

Khaled Mashaal is regarded as Tehran's man in Hamas. The politburo chief lives in exile in Damascus but in recent months he has been frequently on the move, with Iran one of his most important destinations. Many Fatah officials, such as Ibrahim Abu al-Nasha from Gaza City who has known Mashaal for over 30 years, are convinced that the Hamas leader allowed the talks to fail under pressure from Tehran.

Mr Obama has pledged substantial economic assistance for Pakistan - more than $1bn annually over the next five years - but the money will depend on the army's performance against the Taleban and al-Qaeda.

The BBC's Barbara Plett in Islamabad says President Zardari has now told the two US envoys that this is not good enough.

His statement after the meeting read: "Pakistan... needs unconditional support by the international community in the fields of education, health, training and provision of equipment for fighting terrorism."

"Pakistan is fighting a battle of its own survival," his office quoted him as telling Mr Holbrooke.

Our correspondent says his statement revealed the frustration and resentment about the aid conditions - which reflect American distrust of the Pakistani army. The conditions strengthen Pakistani perceptions of its army as a mercenary force doing American bidding, she adds.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said: "We can only work together if we respect each other and trust each other."

Mr Qureshi admitted there were differences on the issue. "We did talk about drones, and let me be very frank - there is a gap. There is a gap between us and them, and I want to bridge that gap."