Report: Syria accepts Kofi Annan’s plan to end violence

By msnbc.com staff and news services

Updated at 7:01 a.m. ET: Syria has accepted a United Nations peace proposal calling for a ceasefire, international envoy Kofi Annan said on Tuesday amid reports Assad's troops have enterted Lebanon and clashed with rebels hiding there.

On a two-day visit to Beijing, Annan told Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao that he faced a long and difficult task in his mission to end fighting in Syria, but global cooperation with China and other countries was the only way to do it.

---

"I indicated that I had received a response from the Syrian government and will be making it public today, which is positive, and we hope to work with them to translate it into action," Annan told reporters in Beijing after meeting Wen.   More >>

Is Obama planning to let Russia help re-elect him to his 2nd Term

WND/ by Aaron Klein

What specifically was President Obama referring to when he told Russian President Dmitri Medvedev he would have “more flexibility” after the November election to deal with controversial issues such as missile defense?

In remarks caught on mic and later broadcast around the world, Obama asked Medvedev to tell incoming Russian President Vladimir Putin to give him more “space,” indicating missile issues can be resolved during a second term in office.

Obama made the remarks in a bilateral meeting at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul.

Find out more about Barack Obama’s radical past in Aaron Klein’s “Red Army: The Radical Network that must be defeated to save America,” available at WND’s Superstore

Stated Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space.”

Medvedev replied: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you. …”

Obama then stated: “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”

Last year, Obama committed to reducing stocks of U.S. weapons-grade plutonium and signed an agreement that will lower the country’s deployed nuclear arsenals.

Obama’s “science czar,” John Holdren, long petitioned for the moves in a magazine whose personnel were used for the benefit of Soviet propaganda in an attempt to disarm America, according to a former top intelligence official during the Soviet era.

The magazine’s founders were accused of providing vital nuclear secrets that helped the Soviets develop an atomic bomb.

The magazine, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, has been urging the U.S. to surrender its nuclear arsenal to international control.

In April 2010, the U.S. and Russia signed a deal reducing stocks of weapons-grade plutonium, officials in both nations said at the time.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov signed a non-binding protocol to a 2000 agreement on eliminating excess weapons-grade plutonium from defense programs.

U.S. officials have said each country is to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium by burning it in reactors.

One week earlier, Medvedev and Obama signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, committing them to reducing their deployed nuclear arsenals.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, with Holdren on the board of directors from 1984 until recently, has long petitioned for the U.S. to reduce its nuclear stockpiles. According to Pavel Sudoplatov, a former major-general in Soviet intelligence, this kind of work by the magazine editors was for the benefit of the Soviet Union.

Holdren is assistant to the president for science and technology, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and co-chairman of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists began publishing regularly in 1945, when it was founded by former physicists from the Manhattan Project, which developed the first atomic bomb.

Two of the magazine’s founding sponsors, Leo Szilard and Robert Oppenheimer, were accused of passing information from the Manhattan Project to the Soviets. Both were also key initiators of the Manhattan Project.

In 1994, Sudoplatov, a former major-general in Soviet intelligence, identified Szilard and Oppenheimer as key sources of crucial atomic information to the Soviet Union.

“The most vital information for developing the first Soviet atomic bomb came from scientists engaged in the Manhattan Project to build the American atomic bomb – Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard,” wrote Sudoplatov.

Sudoplatov wrote the Soviet Union “received reports on the progress of the Manhattan Project from Oppenheimer and his friends in oral form, through comments and asides, and from documents transferred through clandestine methods with their full knowledge that the information they were sharing would be passed on.”

Oppenheimer was accused in Senate hearings of bringing communists into the Manhattan Project. He brought his brother Frank and three former graduate students into the project, all of whom, according to Senate hearings, were well known to him to be “members of the Communist Party or closely associated with activities of the Communist Party.”

Oppenheimer admitted he knew by August 1943 that two of the scientists working under him were Communist Party members. Three of five scientists under Oppenheimer’s direct supervision were accused of leaking secret information about the atomic bomb to the Soviets.

On Oct. 25, 1945, Oppenheimer met with President Truman at the White House, urging him to surrender the U.S. nuclear monopoly to international control. Truman was outraged, reportedly telling Secretary of State Dean Acheson, “I don’t want to see that son-of-a-b*tch in this office ever again.”  More >>

The Summit of the Americas: What “The Sun” shines on Cuba

By John Paul Rathbone/

February is the month of balmy summer days in Latin America, although the season of beach holidays hasn’t stopped a delicious diplomatic storm from brewing.

At the heart of the thundery electrostatic is the perennial problem. Will Cuba attend the “Summit of the Americas” this April?

This is more than recondite politics. It is drama. If Cuba does attend, then the world will enjoy the unique spectacle of a US President sharing the same podium as one of the Castro brothers.

If it doesn’t, well that would be because Cuba again does not meet the democratic requirements of the Organisation of American States.

The stakes – if you can call them that – are growing.

Ecuador – junior member of the Venezuela and Cuba- sponsored regional grouping, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (or ALBA, which recently brought the world these words of support and respect for the Bashar Al-Assad regime in Syria) – has said Cuba should be allowed to attend. Furthermore, if Cuba isn’t invited, then ALBA should boycott the Summit, where 34 heads of state are otherwise supposed to attend.

That would hold out the prospect of a similar fiasco to the 2005 Summit, when a protest rally, partly organised by the Argentine hosts, saw Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez round on a trade deal that was subsequently approved by 29 other countries.

This time round, a similar boycott would produce collateral damage for the Summit’s hardworking but embarrassed Colombian hosts. More importantly, it would be a snub for the US. Why?

Because the OAS is the sole regional forum where the US still has a voice, and a walkout by Ecuador, Venezuela et al would show that even this forum no longer counts. A case of “adios” to the gringos.

There is all sorts of fun to be had wondering how, or if, this thorny issue might be resolved.

One possibility: Cuba does attend, but walks into a firestorm of criticism about human rights and lack of elections. (Forget it: the Castros haven’t remained in power for 50 years for nothing.)

Another possibility: Raul Castro turns up on the beach at Cartagena for his April holiday anyway, and sidles into the meeting. (Unlikely.)

A third: Cuba attends as just an observer, like Spain and Portugal, which would annoy both Havana and Washington in equal measure, but might give everyone else a laugh.

The problem with this meaningless membership debate, diverting as it might be, is that it masks the real question, and hijacks the real issue. Indeed, it is a diversion.

The real issue the region should be talking about is regional integration – which indeed is the Summit’s main theme. And the real question is why Cuba doesn’t meet the OAS guidelines? (The answer is not just because the US wishes it so: when Cuba was invited to enter negotiations with the OAS in 2009, Havana said it didn’t want to.)

Still, the best defence against criticism is often attack. Indeed, looking at it all from London, the affair is somewhat reminiscent of News International staff’s protests about the heavy-handedness of the police investigation into its Sun newspaper about possible phone-hacking. The Sun’s protest may be valid but is really just a smokescreen for the bigger question: why is there an investigation in the first place?

Afghan president to meet with Taliban

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Obama’s Genocidal Mediator: Radical Islamist cleric Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi

FrontPageMag/ by Arnold Ahlert

The Obama administration, fresh from abandoning Iraq at a critical time in its post-war development, is apparently preparing to do the same thing in Afghanistan. According to a report published late last month in The Hindu, radical Islamist cleric Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi is serving as a “key mediator in secret talks between the U.S. and the Taliban.” Unnamed government sources assert that Qaradawi helped in putting together a “road map” whose purpose is to provide America a “face-saving political settlement ahead of its planned withdrawal from Afghanistan which is due to begin in 2014.” Once again, for an Obama administration concerned with the 2012 election, a “political settlement” becomes a viable substitute for victory.

How viable? Viable enough to pretend that a rabid anti-Semite such as Qaradawi is a “moderate” Islamic cleric. Here is part of a speech he made in Tahrir Square in Cairo before a huge crowd on February 18, 2011, after returning to Egypt from 30 years of forced exile:

A message to our brothers in Palestine: I have hope that Almighty Allah, as I have been pleased with the victory in Egypt, that He will also please me with the conquest of the al-Aqsa Mosque to prepare the way for me to preach in the al-Aqsa Mosque. May Allah prepare the way for us to [preach] in the al-Aqsa Mosque in safety–not in fear, not in haste. May Allah achieve this clear conquest for us. O sons of Palestine, I am confident that you will be victorious.

The speech was hardly unique. Mr. Qaradawi has a track record of anti-Semitic, genocidal statements. In 1995, at a conference held by the Muslim Arab Youth Association (MAYA) in Toledo, Ohio, he told his audience that “the balance of power will change, and this is what is told in the Hadith of Ibn-Omar and the Hadith of Abu-Hurairah: You shall continue to fight the Jews and they will fight you, until the Muslims will kill them. And the Jew will hide behind the stone and the tree, and the stone and the tree will say: ‘Oh servant of Allah, Oh Muslim, this is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him!’ The resurrection will not come before this happens.” In 1998, the Associated Press quoted his writing: “There should be no dialogue with these people [Israelis] except with swords.” In April 2001, he characterized suicide bombings as “heroic martyrdom operations.”

In 2009, he had this to say during two TV broadcasts on al-Jazeera: “I will shoot Allah’s enemies, the Jews, and they will throw a bomb at me, and thus, I will seal my life with martyrdom. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds. Allah’s mercy and blessings upon you.” Two nights later it was this: “Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them–even though they exaggerated this issue–he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers.”

 More >>

Taliban to open Qatar office for peace talks with US

Afghanistan sets ground rules for Taliban talks

msnbc.com/

KABUL — Afghanistan will accept a Taliban liaison office in Qatar to start peace talks but no foreign power can get involved in the process without its consent, the government's peace council said, as efforts gather pace to find a solution to the decade-long war.

Afghanistan's High Peace Council, in a note to foreign missions, has set out ground rules for engaging the Taliban after Kabul grew concerned that the United States and Qatar, helped by Germany, had secretly agreed with the Taliban to open an office in the Qatari capital, Doha.

U.S. officials have held about half a dozen meetings with their insurgent contacts, mostly in Germany and Doha with representatives of Mullah Omar, leader of the Taliban's Quetta Shura, this year to prepare the way for face-to-face talks between the group and the Afghan government.

A representative office for the group is considered the starting point for such talks and Doha has in the past served as a meeting ground for initial contacts. More >>

How to win any conflict

 siiaonline.org

Global Guerrillas

NOTE:  I'm in the process of modernizing conflict theory (for wars, insurgencies, protests, etc.) and needed to get this backgrounder on John Boyd's thinking out of the way first.  IF any part of it is unclear/difficult to understand, let me know.  I'll improve it.
What is Conflict?
To answer this question, let's start with a theory of conflict developed by the late great John Boyd, America's best military thinker.  It's a bit of a journey, but trust me, it's worth the effort.
Boyd's theory is based on the assumption that all conflict can be reduced to a contest of minds.  Mind vs. Mind.   It doesn't matter whether a conflict is person vs. person or army vs. army or corporation vs. corporation (i.e. Toyota vs. GM).  It doesn't matter what the weapons or technology used in the conflict are.  It doesn't matter where the conflict takes place.  For Boyd, all conflict boils down to a contest of one mind against another (Sun Tzu implies the same thing).
So far, so good.  Let's dig a little deeper.

• Question:  how does a mind "fight"?  Boyd concluded that a mind fights by adapting.  
• This leads us to a Better Question:  how do we adapt?  
• Answer: by making decisions.  The better/faster our decisions the greater our chances of success/survival.  

This then leads us to the next step.  How do we make decisions?  Basically, all organisms follow a simple process. Boyd put this process into a simple decision making model.  It has four steps (called the OODA loop for short,):

1. Observe:  Gather data.  What's changed? Objectivity is paramount.
2. Orient:  Make sense of this data.  Reference all experience/insight.  What does this observation mean?
3. Decide:  What should be done.  Given what has changed, what should be done next.
4. Act:  Make the decision real.    

Ok.  So, what does this all of this decision making stuff mean?
I'm Inside Your OODA Loop
How does all of this apply to conflict?  The simple answer is that conflict, in its most basic form, is a contest between decision making loops.  The side with the FASTER and BETTER decision making loop wins any conflict.  Why?  They adapt quicker.   Here's some more detail:
A FASTER decision making loop means that you accomplish a successful OODA loop quicker than an opponent.  If you can do this, you are inside your opponent's OODA loop.  This means that by the time your opponent responds to your last actions, you are already onto your next ones.  Get far enough ahead and the opponent's decision making process will collapse and victory is assured.
A BETTER decision making loop means that the process you use to make decisions is better than your opponents.  How to make a decision making loop better and how to damage your opponents decision making process is complex.  It can lead to endless debates and theory crafting.  The easiest way to look at it is as a function of connectivity (mental, physical, and moral).  More connectivity typically means better decisions, less/corrupted connectivity means worse.

NOTE: The OODA loop is an excellent way to understand how Zen applies to martial arts.  Zen training consists of repetitive muscle training attack/defense and a clearing of the mind of conscious processes.  What does this do?  It short circuits the orientation and decision steps by making the act instinctual.  You observe, you act.

Perversos los "Dialogos" de Cuesta Morua?

Sin llegar a comprender los factores que hacen inevitable el dialogo y la negociacion para los sujetos politicos, Manuel Cuesta Morúa concluye que "El asunto es que el castrismo parte de una supuesta ética de los fines que nos dice que todos los medios son legítimos, incluso el diálogo, para el supremo de sus fines: el poder. Por eso no se debe dialogar con ellos, ...". [Ver Diálogos perversos (I)  

(II) y  (III)]

Como el mismo reconoce, le ha tomado 20 anos llegar a tal conclusion, mas por constatacion de la futilidad practica de los intentos, que por  elaboracion conceptual a pesar de su empeño por abordarlo desde el pensamiento y no desde la praxis. 

"En ausencia de actores racionales cabe arriesgarse a un diálogo siempre y cuando exista una estructura ética compartida. O a la inversa. Se puede crear una comunicación ética si se actúa racionalmente", afirma Cuesta Morua como si la negociacion entre sujetos politicos fuera una platica espontanea entre parroquianos en una barra o una tertulia cafetera a orillas del Sena. 

El dialogo o la negociacion politica supone que dos o mas actores requieran de su contraparte aquello que por si mismos no pueden alcanzar y que les resulta necesario en un contexto determinado: “La razón para negociar es obtener algo mejor de lo que se obtendría sin negociar...", siguiendo a Fisher-Ury y ello supone ante todo el reconocimiento de la legitimidad del otro.   

Legitimidad que es un activo en tanto expresion de una cuota de poder politico reconocida, tangible, util y necesaria. Por ello el Castrismo en su momento y el Neocastrismo en las actuales circunstancias valida y reconoce a sus interlocutores sin detenerse en escrupulos eticos de ninguna indole tan apreciados por Cuesta Morua. No tiene la menor importancia si hace apenas dos anos Castro I arremetia contra la OEA  calificandola de "infame" y "basura" ,  si ahora lo conveniente es afirmar que CELAC no desafia ni sustituye a la OEA

Porque el meollo del asunto en la praxis politica cubana no se ubica ante todo en lo etico-moral y la perversidad de un regimen manipulador por excelencia, sino en que las fuerzas politicas que discienten o se oponen al mismo carecen de ese activo politico tangible que obligue  a aquel a aceptar su legitimidad.

En cualquier caso, como muchos caminos conducen a la cima y basta solo un paso para el barranco, se aplaude la tardia conclusion de Cuesta Morua, en la esperanza que no tome otros 20 anos construir lo necesario para ser un interlocutor obligatoriamente valido mas alla de valores universales, porque la politica no es excusa, sino el arte de hacer posible lo necesario [Ch. Maurras].

ICCAS: Simulacro, enigma y desparpajo/ Pedro Pablo Bilbao

Enviado por ei en julio 17, 2011 – 14:40 pm

 

Pedro Pablo Bilbao

El Instituto de Estudios Cubanos y Cubano-Americanos (ICCAS, por sus siglas en inglés) de la Universidad de Miami (UM) se atrevió a colgar en su página digital el video de la pieza enigmática anunciada e interpretada sin difusión inmediata como simulacro de reunión preparatoria del Buró Político castrista con vistas al VI Congreso del único Partido. El enigma estriba en que no se define bien si esta pieza teatral con elenco y guión académicos es una sátira para llorar o un drama para reír.

Da ganas de llorar que los académicos, en roles de jerarcas del partido único, satiricen al castrismo con propuestas de ingreso al Buró Político de dos hijos de Raúl Castro (Mariela y Alejandro) y dos generales descontinuados (Silvano Colás Sánchez y Humberto Omar Francis Pardo), porque otra propuesta: el zar de la «economía» Marino Alberto Murillo Jorge, imprime seriedad al asunto. Hay que estar en la luna de Pyongyang para pensar que se entra al Buró Político castrista tan sólo por ser hijo de Raúl o general negro, y que alguien sugiera endilgar el título oficial de Líder y Guía Supremo a quien sólo necesita su nombre de pila para seguir ejerciendo la dictadura derivada de su revolución.

Da risa que la única actriz (Vanessa López, en el papel de Concepción Campa  Huergo) dramatice con ínfula académica la argumentación de preservar el cargo de segundo secretario del único partido en Cuba, con la experiencia del Partido Comunista de la Unión Soviética (PCUS) y ejemplifique con la sucesión Brezhnev – Andropov -Chernenkov, que habría discurrido por ascenso del segundo secretario a primero.

Jamás hubo segundo secretario en el PCUS. Antes de Stalin no hubo siquiera secretario general. Lenin era líder del partido bolchevique sin otro cargo que miembro del Politburó y del CC. El cargo de Secretario General del Comité Central (CC) se creó para Stalin (1922-53) y cambió a Primer Secretario con Jruschov (1953-64). Siguió con Brezhnev (1964-66), quien retornó a la denominación anterior (1966-82) y así se mantuvo con Andropov (1982-84), Chernenkov (1984-85) e incluso Gorbachov (1985-91). Ninguno tuvo segundo secretario. El sucesor se escogía entre los miembros numerarios (también había suplentes) del Politburó que eran también miembros del Secretariado del CC.

Andropov no era segundo de Brezhnev. Por el contrario, el consenso radicaba en que el sucesor sería Suslov, pero este premurió (enero 25, 1982) a Brezhnev (noviembre 10, 1982). A poco de fallecer Suslov, Andropov abdicó de la jefatura de la KGB para meterse en el Secretariado del CC y conseguir así la dualidad propicia para alzarse con la sucesión del cada vez más enclenque Brezhnev, a quien Andropov venía desprestigiando ya desde la KGB con medidas activas, como recomendar más comparecencias por televisión. Chernenkov no fue segundo de Andropov ni Gorbachov de Chernenkov.

Así, tanta desconexión con la realidad cubana y la ignorancia supina de claves históricas del comunismo soviético, entre cubanólogos que se desempeñan como actores, despierta la sospecha de que son más bien actores que se desempeñan como cubanólogos y lo que es peor: en uno u otro caso cobra vigencia aterradora la duda con que Félix Varela increpó al ciego Nicolás Manuel de Escobedo tras escuchar su disertación sobre cuestiones de índole especulativa: ¿Para qué sirve esto?

-Foto: Coro de Electra Garrigó © Teatro Universidad del Magdalena (Colombia). Los simulacros del ICCAS son tan innovadores del teatro cubiche como acaso la ocurrencia de Virgilio Piñera en Electra Garrigó (1948) de simular el coro griego con tandas de La guantanamera.

#Gadafi desesperado por parar los bombardeos

Ni negociación ni alto el fuego. La OTAN y los rebeldes libios no están dispuestos a dar tregua a Muamar el Gadafi. Por primera vez desde que las revueltas que están sacuediendo los países árabes se extendiaran a Libia, el pasado febrero, el dictador libio se ha mostrado abierto al diálogo. "Dejadnos negociar con vosotros, con los países que nos atacan", dijo Gadafi en un discurso difundido la pasada madrugada a través de la televisión estatal.

 

Continuar leyendo  AQUI

McCain travels to #Libya to meet with rebel forces

Benghazi, Libya (CNN) -- Libyan rebels made gains Friday on the morale front from Sen. John McCain's visit to Benghazi and on the battlefront as they gained ground in central Misrata, under a bloody siege for weeks.

The rebels, locked in a deadly standoff with forces loyal to strongman Moammar Gadhafi, welcomed McCain to their de facto capital, Benghazi. McCain's tour came a day after the United States said it was deploying drones to Libya.

McCain, a strong proponent of beefing up U.S. efforts to oust Gadhafi from power, said the drones would increase NATO's capability but not enough to make up a shortfall in assets needed to break a "significant degree of stalemate."

He said he was against U.S. troops on the ground, but he said nations need to "facilitate" weapons and training for the rebels.

"We have prevented the worst outcome in Libya, McCain told reporters in Benghazi. "Now we need to increase our support so that the Libyan people can achieve the only satisfactory outcome to this mass protest for universal rights -- the end of Gadhafi's rule and the beginning of a peaceful and inclusive transition to democracy that will benefit all Libyans."

FULL STORY  

Negociaria la disidencia la transicion????

El Nuevo Herald reproduce una version de las ultimas declaraciones del Dr. Biscet bajo el titulo de Disidencia interna negociaría transición y muchos corren a reproducirlas. Anadiendo en el pie de foto que “Si el régimen quisiera conversar, nosotros tenemos exigencias”

Seria la mejor noticia en mas de 52 anos, que la disidencia interna "NEGOCIARIA" una transicion con el regimen .

Lamentablemente lo que no se tiene en consideracion por superfluo, es que para negociar hay que poseer una cuota minima de poder que obligue al "otro" a aceptarnos obligatoriamente como parte en la solucion de un "confilcto". Pero para el kaxtrizmo ni hay conflicto, ni nadie con poder suficiente para servir de contraparte.

Por otro lado, el unico "mediador" realmente poderoso con capacidad de sentar a ambas partes alrededor de una mesa de negociadora, acepta impavido las trompetillas frecuentes del regimen, y no muestra ningun animo de ejercer tal papel.

#Gaddafi regime admits attempts to talk to west

• Peter Beaumont
• guardian.co.uk



Former Libyan prime minister Abdul Ati al-Obeidi said the Gaddafi regime was 'trying to talk to the British, the French and the Americans to stop the killing'. Photograph: Mahmud Turkia/AFP/Getty Images

The regime of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi has initiated a concerted effort to open lines of communication with western governments in an attempt to bring the conflict in the country to an end. As fighting continues in Libya, the country's former prime minister Abdul Ati al-Obeidi told Channel 4 : "We are trying to talk to the British, the French and the Americans to stop the killing of people. We are trying to find a mutual solution."

#Cuba Mr. Manicero [ #Carter ] complacido con "TODO"

Yemen talks end in stalemate

Talks between Ali Abdullah Saleh, the Yemeni president, and opposition forces who are calling for him to step down from power have ended in a stalemate. Saleh says that he is prepared to leave office by the end of the year, and possibly sooner, but only if he is allowed to leave with "dignity" and to remain head of his political party. The opposition, however, has accused Saleh of political manoeuvring, and insist that he and his family stand trial for alleged corruption.

Al Jazeera's special correspondent, who we are not naming for her own safety, reports from the capital Sanaa.

What #Castro wants to talks with #Carter next week?

Washington –  Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter will visit Cuba next week for talks with head of state Raul Castro and other officials, the Carter Center said Friday.

Carter, who will be accompanied by wife Rosalynn, is making the trip at the invitation of the Cuban government, the former president's Atlanta-based nonprofit organization said.

During their March 28-30 stay on the island, the couple "will meet with President Raul Castro and other Cuban officials and citizens to learn about new economic policies and the upcoming (Communist) Party Congress, and to discuss ways to improve U.S.-Cuba relations," according to a statement from the Carter Center.

Noting that Mr. and Mrs. Carter last went to Cuba in May 2002, the center described their upcoming visit as a "private, nongovernmental mission."

Some observers suggest Carter's trip to Havana represents an opportunity to appeal to Cuban authorities to release U.S. government contractor Alan Gross, recently sentenced to 15 years in prison for distributing computers and communications gear on the island.

Read more: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2011/03/26/jimmy-carter-visit-cuba/#ixzz1HfdHI1N1

Libyan Rebels, Regime To Meet Face-To-Face

BENGHAZI, Libya -- France declared Libya's airspace "under control" on Friday, after NATO agreed to take command of the no-fly zone in a compromise that appeared to set up dual command centers and possibly new confusion. Coalition warplanes struck Moammar Gadhafi's forces outside the strategic eastern gateway city of Ajdabiya.Representatives for the regime and the rebels were expected to meet formally for the first time Friday, in Ethiopia, in what the U.N. described as a part of an effort to reach a cease-fire and political solution.
The overnight French and British strikes on an artillery battery and armored vehicles were intended to give a measure of relief to Ajdabiya, where residents have fled or cowered under more than a week of shelling and fighting between rebels and government troops. Explosions also could be heard in Tripoli, the Libyan capital, before daybreak Friday, apparently from airstrikes.

More  Here

Corea del Norte considera reanudar diálogo sobre su programa nuclear

Corea del Norte anunció que está dispuesta a reanudar las negociaciones sobre su programa nuclear, sin condiciones previas, declaró un representante del Ministerio del Exterior del país asiático.

Libyan rebels set out conditions-F..Chavez!

Libyan rebels set out conditions

Rebels in eastern Libya have said they will not engage in negotiations unless Col Muammar Gaddafi quits and goes into exile.