Syria Has Just Been Taken Offline

Wired
Noah Shachtman

Updated 1:37 pm.

Syria has been largely cut off from the rest of the internet — just as rebel forces are making some of their biggest advances yet against the Assad regime.

“From what we are seeing,” information security specialist Chris Ginley tells Danger Room, “Syria is offline.”

The network monitoring group Renesys reported on Thursday that 77 networks — 92% of the country’s total — began experiencing outages at 10:26 Greenwich Mean Time.
But Syria’s apparently systematic disconnection from the internet actually began at least a week earlier, according to research by the SecDev Group internet analytics firm. Around the middle of the month, Syria’s ordinary handful of daily requests to withdraw from Syria’s BGP [Border Gateway Protocol] routes started to grow to a few hundred per. These connections are what enables one national network to interface with the broader internet. On November 22, the withdrawals suddenly jumped to more than 2000. An even greater spike occurred on November 29.

“When a country withdraws itself from the internet using BGP such as Syria has, it means that on a technical level no one knows how to get there anymore, because there are no longer any paths, effectively shutting off the internet in the region,” SecDev explains in a draft report.

“On some networks there are still some paths in place,” Ginley adds. “But this could be to maintain some limited communication or perhaps it’s just an error on their side.”
The communications blackout — which, according to some local reports, also briefly included cell and landline phone service – is hugely important to the war effort in Syria.

 The rebels don’t just use these networks to share information with one another. They train their forces and document regime atrocities with YouTube clips. The government has been known to shut down internet service in a particular city in advance of a major attack.

“But this is the first time are seeing it centralized (from what I can tell),” emails SecDev CEO Rafal Rohozinski, who has been working with Syrian opposition groups. “We are trying to ascertain whether this is a deliberate pulling of the plug, a technical error, or something else.”

Damascus International Airport has also reportedly disappeared from some flight radars.
“I would be a bit surprised if this was a long-lasting outage,” Rohozinski adds. “The Syrian government and security forces rely alsp on the internet as a means of coordination, propaganda, and ensuring a degree of satisfaction among its constituency. Also, Syria has seen increase in cell phone and internet subscribers during the period of the conflict. In other words, it’s a source of revenue for the economy and government, as well as a vital lifeline for most people.”

Syria’s information minister claims that the Damascus government had nothing to do with the shutdown. “It is not true that the state cut the internet. The terrorists targeted the internet lines, resulting in some regions being cut off,” Reuters quotes him as saying. One regime-friendly website calls the cutoff a NATO “psychological operation.”

Perhaps. But one thing is for certain: the communications clampdown comes as Syrian rebels are enjoying some of their most important gains of the war. They seized a major hydroelectric dam on Monday. And “in the past month,” the New York Times reports, “fighters have overrun a half-dozen [military] bases around Damascus, Syria’s capital; two in the country’s eastern oil-producing area; and the largest military
installation near the country’s largest city, Aleppo.” The AP reports that American officials are preparing to recognize the opposition as Syria’s legitimate government.

A chart from Akamai shows the drop-off of Syrian internet traffic.

The regime is continuing to bombard rebel-controlled bases and towns from the air. On Tuesday, the regime warplanes bombed an olive press factory near the Turkish border, killing at least 20 people. A day prior, air attacks on two rebel bases reportedly sent hundreds of people fleeing into Turkey. These attacks came just before a NATO team arrived in Turkey to scout potential sites for Patriot missile batteries, which could be used to defend against a regime attack across the border.

Syrian rebels have fought back with captured anti-aircraft missile launchers, days ago shooting down a regime helicopter. It’s all part of an increasing array of heavy weapons captured from army bases overrun by the rebels. Earlier in November, rebels seized a major military base near the northern city of Aleppo, capturing several tanks, multiple armored vehicles and long-range artillery guns. Perhaps more vital for the war against Assad is the situation near the capital of Damascus, which is now seeing signs of a “rebel siege,” opposition activist Fawaz Tello told Reuters. Rebel forces captured at least two military bases near Damascus in this month, and are are reportedly coming close to cutting off the city’s airport.

Syria’s networks have also become a central battlefield in the conflict. In recent months, pro-regime hackers are trying to gain access to activists’ machines — by tricking them into downloading fake security software. Once installed, the surveillance programs will “take screenshots of target machines, turn on the computer’s microphone or camera, log all your keystrokes — and then send it all back to Damascus,” Eva Galperin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation tells Danger Room. As Renesys notes, it may be no coincidence that one of the few networks to survive the Syrian blackout was implicated the May malware attacks targeting activists.

Both sides have leaked embarrassing emails belonging to the other. In August, pro-regime hackers broke into the Reuters news service, posting a fake news story about the crumbling of rebel support in Aleppo. In September, the Al-Jazeera news network had its websites defaced with messages calling the rebels “terrorists.”

Meanwhile, several hundred Syrian activists have traveled to Istanbul for training in secure communications, funded by the U.S. State Department. The rebel leaders received tips on how to leapfrog firewalls, encrypt their data, and use cellphones without getting caught, as Time magazine recently reported. Then they returned to Syria, many of them with new phones and satellite modems in hand.

In response, perhaps, the regime has detained tech activists like the open source advocate Bassel Khartabil. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has “launched a letter-writing campaign, hoping to flood Syrian officials and diplomats with physical mail demanding that Khartabil be formally charged and given access to a lawyer or released immediately.” Given the state of Syria’s networks, it may be the only kind of mail that gets through.

Elections in Georgia: U.S. and NATO Lose their “Geopolitical Chess Queen”

Global Research
John Robles

It is no secret that Saakashvili is the “West’s man in the Caucasus” the darling of Hillary Clinton and Obama’s US State Department, NATO headquarters and the Pentagon and the intelligence services of the UK and the US. He is yet another despotic dictator that has murdered, oppressed, strangled, tortured and subjugated his people with the support of the West in exchange for advancing their geopolitical agenda in yet another region far removed from their own borders yet where they want control.

As there is no statute of limitations on war crimes, Saakashvili has a lot to worry about and had better stock up on ties.

Saakashvili was one of the crowning jewels in NATO’s and the West’s consolidation of power and control after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The loss by Mikheil Saakashvili’s party in parliamentary elections in Georgia may spell the end for his regime and a return to democracy in Georgia. It may also spell the warming of relations, soured by Saakashvili, between Russia and Georgia. For the West the elections may be the first step towards his removal from power, the loss of a queen, in their game of geopolitical chess.

Suffering an unexpected blow at the polls in the parliamentary elections, tie-eating Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili in the middle of the night conceded defeat, opening the trap-door beneath his own feet and paving the way for real change and real democracy in Georgia, but pundits and experts are already saying that he will undoubtedly find a reason to dissolve parliament and call for new elections.

The blow to the plutocratic despot is one that the West cannot allow to stand as they have too much to lose and have invested far too much to quietly just go away, lose their influence and simply mothball all of their plans for the integration of Georgia into the Western sphere.

It is no secret that Saakashvili is the “West’s man in the Caucasus” the darling of Hillary Clinton and Obama’s US State Department, NATO headquarters and the Pentagon and the intelligence services of the UK and the US. He is yet another despotic dictator that has murdered, oppressed, strangled, tortured and subjugated his people with the support of the West in exchange for advancing their geopolitical agenda in yet another region far removed from their own borders yet where they want control.

The VOR’s Dmitry Babich has already gone into the hypocrisy of the West with regard to Saakashvili, so I won’t go into that right now. Suffice it to say that the hypocrisy when it comes to Saakashvili is total and all-encompassing and characterizes total anti-Russian hysteria by the West, something they need to propagate to continue to have support for their intrusions on the sovereignty of the countries in the region and to justify their aggressive military build-up and the expansion of NATO into the Caucasus.

What the complete loss of power of the Saakashvili regime will mean for the West and for Saakashvili himself is hard to predict exactly: the opposition has shown leniency toward him, so it is possible he may remain in some sort of position of power for the mid-term. However, what few have focused on is that his loss may open the door to prosecution and punishment for the crimes he has committed against his own people and against innocent civilians.

These crimes include the recent revelations that his “security” apparatus was responsible for torturing and illegally detaining people opposed to his regime and a plethora of charges that could be brought in relation to how his regime has stifled dissent and cracked down on anyone opposed to his regime. But that would only be the start: there are those who have accused Saakashvili of crimes that could be tantamount to treason for selling out his country to the interests of the West. Although prosecution for such a crime is unlikely, that would be one possibility which would end in his execution.

The biggest worry for Saakashvili and his Western paymasters right now should be whether Saakashvili will end up having to face the war crimes tribunal in The Hague. According to an article regarding a European Union-Commissioned Report on the invasion of South Ossetia in 2008 by Russia Today, back in October of 2009, citing Interfax, Nestan Kirtadze, international secretary of Georgia’s Labor Party concluded that:

“The commission accused Saakashvili of war crimes. Namely, of unleashing active hostilities, of a massive, wide-scale military operation in the South Ossetian capital Tskhinval and the use of prohibited types of weapons, of shelling and destroying non-military facilities, and of attacking military personnel from the peacekeeping mission that was mandated by the United Nations.”

As there is no statute of limitations on war crimes, Saakashvili has a lot to worry about and had better stock up on ties.

The winners of the parliamentary elections have said that they will normalize relations with Russia, with the West screaming indignantly about “Russian influence” as they once again conveniently ignore their own attempts at influencing the country.

As we might recall, Georgia shares almost half of her borders with Russia and has classically fallen into Russia’s sphere of influence. We should also remember that until Saakashvili came to power Russia and Georgia shared a rich and proud history and very close ties and good relations in trade, economic and other areas of cooperation, education and more. This was beneficial for the peoples of both countries.

Saakashvili was one of the crowning jewels in NATO’s and the West’s consolidation of power and control after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Who would have ever thought that the country that gave the world the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’ Joseph Stalin would become a pawn of Western expansionism?

The fall of Saakashvili would mean many things for many people. For one, tens of thousands of refugees from Georgia that have fled to Europe and other countries could finally return home. It would also mean the utter failure of Hillary Clinton and the West’s plans at geopolitical domination in Russia’s backyard, a nice retirement present and the crowning failure of her diplomatic career.

Regardless of all my musings it is too early to count our chickens. Saakashvili is still in power and will do everything possible, including killing his own people, to stay in power. We will probably see attempts to dissolve parliament, call for a recount of the vote, which he will win, and a massive crack-down on the Georgian opposition. Saakashvili has too much to lose to quietly acquiesce, and has shown he has no qualms about taking his country down into the abyss with him.
============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= ==
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/stopnato/ messages

Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff. wordpress. com

The Unanswered Questions of 9/11

Global Research
James Corbett

In his latest weekly address to the nation, President Obama asserts that America’s questions about 9/11 have been answered. If only it were so.

The questions of 9/11 have only continued to pile up higher since that fateful day, and despite official platitudes we are no closer to having those questions answered today then we were when they first arose. In fact, for some of the most important 9/11 questions, the government’s own documents and records that could conceivably answered them have been destroyed, meaning we may never have answers.

The unanswered questions of 9/11 are too numerous to enumerate, but they include:

-Why has NIST classified the data that they used to make their computer animation of the WTC7 collapse? Would knowledge of how NIST believes the building collapsed really “jeopardize public safety“?

-Why did the DIA destroy more than 2.5 terabytes of data on their Able Danger investigation that reportedly identified four of the alleged hijackers years in advance of the attack? Why did the Pentagon buy up and burn the entire first print run of Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer’s book on the program?

-Why did the SEC destroy their records on the 9/11 insider trading question, presumably the most important investigation in the agency’s history?

-Why did the alleged “mastermind” of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, confess not only to plotting 9/11 “from A to Z” but also confess to masterminding numerous crimes that he could not have committed?

-Why did Osama bin Laden repeatedly deny any involvement in the attacks until a series of mistranslated and otherwise manipulated videos came along appearing to portray him as taking credit for those attacks?

-Why was the report of US State Department official Frank Taylor supposedly proving the case for Al Qaeda’s role in 9/11, which NATO used to justify its invasion of Afghanistan, presented in a classified briefing? Why is that report still classified to this day?

-Why did the 9/11 commission rely so heavily on the confessions extracted through torture which even the Senate’s Armed Services committee points out is specifically used to extract false confessions?

-Why did the CIA destroy 92 videotapes of their illegal torture sessions after being specifically ordered by a court not to do so? Why did the courts eventually absolve the CIA of any culpability for this crime?

-Why did Donald Rumsfeld announce a new “war” on September 10, 2001? What was the reason for the 2.3 trillion missing dollars which the Pentagon had lost up until that point, what did Rumsfeld’s “war on bureaucracy” hope to achieve, how was that “war” hindered when the budget analyst office in the Pentagon was destroyed the following morning, and where are the public records into this accounting scandal?

-Why did Rumsfeld go into a regularly scheduled meeting with a CIA officer in his office on the morning of 9/11, after both of the Twin Towers had been struck by airplanes and it had been determined that “America was under attack.” Why did the highest ranking official in the US military remain in that meeting and unavailable for contact even by his highest staff members as the worst attack on US soil in history continued to unfold? Why did he suddenly come out for a photo op on the Pentalawn after the explosion instead of helping to coordinate the defense of the nation?

-Why is there such a massive discrepancy between the 9/11 commission’s official finding of the time of entry of Dick Cheney into the Presidential Emergency Operation Center on the morning of 9/11 and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta’s testimony of the timing of that arrival?

-Why did the US government contract with Ptech, an enterprise architecture software firm, to install its backdoor access software on some of the most sensitive databases in the US government? Why did they continue to use Ptech even after it was discovered that its sweetheart investor was a specially designated global terrorist on the Treasury’s own terror list? Why did they declare that there was nothing untoward in the software mere hours after raiding Ptech’s offices in 2002? And what was Ptech doing in the basement of the Pentagon on 9/11? What interoperability tests was it running on the link between FAA and NORAD systems on 9/11, and how did that interfere with the FAA and NORAD’s response?

-And, perhaps most tellingly of all, how did four highjacked aircraft fly so wildly off course for such lengthy periods of time without being confronted by a single fighter interceptor, and why did the Pentagon admittedly and on the record lie to the American public about the timing of its response that day?

These and many, many questions like them have been asked by the victims’ family members, the first responders, members of the US military, American congressmen and women, intelligence agents, foreign dignitaries and heads of state, and concerned members of the public across America and around the globe. And still, 11 years after the events themselves, the American president has the gall to suggest that all questions have been answered and it is time for Americans to move on.

See our GRTV Feature 9/11 Video



On the contrary, Mr. President. Those who are concerned with 9/11 truth and justice will continue to fight on, to answer the questions that your government cannot and will not answer, whether those answers come now, 11 years from now, or generations from now. Those who fight for 9/11 truth will not give up until these questions have been answered. Echoing the words of those brave souls in the wake of that other great American tragedy, the OKC bombing:

“We search for the truth. We seek justice. The courts require it. The victims cry for it. And God demands it.”

For more on the unanswered questions of 9/11 truth, please watch the latest episode of The Corbett Report podcast, “The Meaning of 9/11 Truth“:

America's Long-standing Campaign to Destabilize Russia

Global Research
Eric Draitser

The shootings and bombings in Ingushetia and Dagestan this week rekindled a long-standing, brutal campaign of violence and terrorism in Russia’s Caucasus region – one that has seen more than its share of terror stretching back to the Chechen “rebellion” of the 1990s. However, in examining the recent attacks, it becomes clear that there are political and geopolitical interests behind the scenes that are actively working to destabilize Russia, with violence as their most potent weapon. The attacks are not simply isolated terrorist actions, but rather, cynically orchestrated events carried out by well-connected criminal networks whose goal is to foment conflict and carry out the agenda of the US intelligence establishment in its subversion of Russia.

Terrorists, Propagandists and Handlers

The complex network of terrorist organizations that operate under the banners of “separatism” and “independence” for the Caucasus region, has been at the center of the destabilization of Russia for the last two decades. Within hours of the deadly attacks, the Kavkaz Center – an organization known to be the propaganda mouthpiece of terrorist leader Doku Umarov – released an article characterizing the attacks as heroic acts and referring to the dead as “Russian puppets.” Though this would seem to be not in keeping with the Center’s stated mission “to provide reporting of events... and assistance of journalistic work in the Caucasus,” this is, in fact, very much par for the course for an organization that is funded by the US State Department and Finland’s Foreign Ministry.

Kavkaz Center has a long track record of supporting and legitimizing terrorist actions throughout the region, rationalizing atrocities committed in the name of “resistance.” In fact, Kavkaz engages in perpetual upside-down logic, referring to Russians as “terrorists” and terrorists as “heroes.” This type of Goebbles-esque propaganda is the hallmark of Western imperialist projects; most recently in the conflict in Syria, in which the Syrian National Council, Western corporate media and the like refer to terrorism and subversion as “rebellion and freedom-fighting”. Additionally, it is essential to note that Emarat Kavkaz (Umarov’s terrorist organization translated as “Caucasus Emirate”) has been listed by the United Nations as an organization associated with Al-Qaida. Kavkaz Center has been described by Umarov himself as “the official information organ of the Emarat Kavkaz.” This, of course, supports the claims made repeatedly by Moscow of the connection between Chechen and other extremists in the region and Al Qaida, a claim which, until recently, Kavkaz Center continued to deny.

Despite the fact that organs such as Kavkaz Center operate in the service of terrorists who advocate the destruction of Russia, their activity alone is not altogether significant if seen in a vacuum. Rather, it is the association of these types of individuals and organizations with the US State Department and US intelligence that makes them particularly insidious. One such entity that bears scrutiny is the American Committee for Peace in the Caucasus (ACPC), previously known as the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya. As reported by Right Web at the Institute for Policy Studies, “The ACPC was founded in 1999 by Freedom House, a neoconservative organization that has worked closely with the U.S. government, receiving funds from the National Endowment for Democracy and other U.S. democratization initiatives.” This intimate relationship between the ACPC and the US State Department indicates not merely a confluence of interests, but rather a direct relationship wherein the former is an organ of the latter.

The paternalistic role of the US intelligence establishment in the ACPC is made all the more evident when one examines some of the more well known members of the ACPC including former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, former Pentagon advisor Richard Perle and other top neocons such as William Kristol, Elliott Abrams, Kenneth Adelman, and Robert Kagan – the last two being closely associated with the inner circle of the Romney campaign. What becomes apparent in even a cursory analysis of these figures is that, despite the preponderance of neoconservatives, the top members of the ACPC are pulled from both the liberal and conservative establishments. Therefore, one can see how the ACPC represents a bipartisan consensus within the US imperialist ruling class – a consensus of aggression against Russia. What should be even more concerning to political observers is that, given the very real possibility of a Romney victory in November, Russia may see a surge in separatism and violence supported overtly or covertly by the ACPC and a future Romney administration.

The ACPC has taken the lead in championing the cause of separatism and terrorism directed toward Russia, both tacitly and overtly. After having championed the cause of former Chechen Foreign Minister Ilyas Akhmadov in his quest for asylum in the United States – subsequently granted along with a generous taxpayer-funded stipend – ACPC member Zbigniew Brzezinski went so far as to write the foreward to Akhmadov’s book The Chechen Struggle. The alliance between political figures such as Akhmadov and terrorist leaders in the region demonstrates conclusively the partnership between the various terror networks and the imperialist ruling class in the West. Moreover, it shows that, along with oligarchs such as Boris Berezovsky and Roman Abramovich, the US and UK are still the favorite safe havens for criminals fleeing Russian justice.

The Political Context

Kosher Terrorists to be Delisted

The Ugly Truth
Gilad Atzmon

NBC reported two days ago that Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran’s nuclear scientists

The attacks, which have killed five Iranian nuclear scientists since 2007 and may have destroyed a missile research and development site, have been carried out in dramatic fashion, with motorcycle-borne assailants often attaching small magnetic bombs to the exterior of the victims’ cars.

Both Iranian, Israeli and Western commentators tend to believe that Israel and the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, known as the MEK are behind the terror campaign.

In 1997, the State Department listed the MEK as a terrorist group, justifying it with an unclassified 40-page summary of the organization’s  activities going back more than 25 years.

But in the last few weeks the Jewish Lobby in the USA is going out of its way to support the terrorist MEK.

Watch Zionist Alan Dershowitz advocating the immediate delisting of an active terror organisation.

In the video above Zionist Dershowitz  urges the U.S. government to protect the 3,400 MEK members and their families at Camp Ashraf in Iraq, about 35 miles north of Baghdad.  With the departure of U.S. troops, the MEK feared that Iraqi forces, with encouragement from Iran, would attack the camp, leading to a bloodbath.  One may be naïve enough to believe that Dershowitz’call is nothing but noble, yet, embarrassingly enough,  the same Dershowitz, has never been caught trying to stop his beloved Jewish State from murdering Palestinians in Gaza, in the West Bank or anywhere else.

This discrepancy is far from being a coincidence. Apparently killing civilians in the name of the Jewish State must be a ‘kosher endeavour’.

 

Were Cheerleaders for a Libyan Style Intervention of Syria Interrupted by Patrick Seale?

Amy Goodman's appalling coverage of NATO's plundering of Libya made "Democracy Now" look like cheerleaders for humanitarian death squads.

The next good-will bombing adventure may take place in Syria. No challenge from Amy Goodman as Susan Rice chastises China and Russia for their decision not to participate.  State Department Spokesperson Victoria Nuland also occupied a sizable chuck of "Democracy Now" time to deliver her caring, empathetic, yet offensively condescending tone as she stated the need for the U.S. to "work outside of the United Nations" so the U.S. can force democracy on Syria.

Amy Goodman began her final interview on the subject with British author Patick Seale, who offered a surprisingly realistic account of the situation in Syria.  Is that what Amy Goodman was going for?  You decide.

BREAKING NEWS: NATO Massacres of Civilians Aimed at "Cleansing" the Libyan People's Resistance

Global Research
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

Photographic Evidence of NATO War Crimes

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) conducted intensive attacks on Libyan civilians in the night of August 8 and in the early hours of August 9, 2011 from approximately 2:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. EET.

Civilians in Tripoli and many other cities in Libya were bombed indiscriminately by NATO.

A large number of casualties occurred in the city of Zliten, in the district of Misurata. In Zliten, 85 people were killed including 33 children, 32 women, and 20 men as a result of NATO’s deliberate targeting of residential areas and civilian infrastructure. Many of the injured civilian victims are in critical condition and near death.

Zliten has been under constant NATO bombardment for several days. The recent NATO attacks started at about 11:30 p.m. EET on August 8, 2011. At least 7 civilian homes belonging to local farmers were destroyed, killing entire families. In all 20 families were the targets of the NATO bombings.

The images below pertain to destroyed farm houses in Majer, near Zliten.

Destroyed farm house in Majer, near Zliten. Copyright of all photos above. Matthew Ozanon 2011


Colonel Roland Lavoie, NATO’s official military spokesperson for Operation Unified Protector, confirmed that NATO bombed Zliten at 11:45 p.m. on August 8, 2011 and 2:34 a.m. on August 9, 2011.

In a second round of bombing, NATO targeted the same homes once more when local residents had arrived to the rescue of those who had been bombed.

Dismembered bodies were recovered from the ruble throughout the day. According to a Libyan eyewitness, a pregnant woman was killed with her dead unborn child exposed out of her torn body.

Media Disinformation

The only members of the international press that reported the damage of the bombings in detail were Russia Today (RT), TeleSUR, Chinese Central Television (CCTV), and independent journalists.

CNN was present taking footage, but essentially released nothing and distorted the facts.(See photos below)

Report: U.S. threatens to halt humanitarian aid to Gaza

Haaretz

State Department announcement comes in light of Hamas demands to audit the books of U.S. charities, New York Times reports, which would violate U.S. policy against direct contacts with Hamas.

A truck bearing merchandise at the Gaza border

The United States threatened Thursday to halt humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, after Hamas demanded to audit the books of U.S.-financed NGOs in Gaza, the New York Times reported.

According to the report, the U.S. State Department said it would stop delivering to Gaza some $100 million in aid for health care, agriculture, and water infrastructure if Hamas does not stop insisting on auditing the books of U.S. charities in the Gaza Strip.

The threat comes after Hamas officials took over the offices of the International Medical Corps on Sunday after the NGO refused to be audited by Hamas.

Hamas has been trying to tighten their grip on the NGOs in Gaza, first demanding they register with the central government, pay a fee and submit financial reports, the New York Times reported, but when they demanded in June that the groups must allow officials to audit their books, the charities began objecting.

Moreover, the report said that while Hamas did not explain the reason for its demand to audit the charities' books, there are fears that money could be diverted for political or intelligence-gathering purposes.

The United States forbids American organizations from having direct contact with Hamas, who it labels as a terrorist group, and therefore on-site audits by Hamas officials would lead to the suspension of aid, the NYT quoted the U.S. State Department as saying.

 

US State Dept. slams Israel over human trafficking

Globes
Ran Dagoni

The State Department report takes Israel to task for not complying with minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.

"The Government of Israel does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so," says the US Department of State in its "Trafficking in Persons Report for 2011". It adds, "Israel continued law enforcement actions against sex trafficking and continued to make strong prevention efforts. The government continued to take inadequate steps, however, to identify and protect labor trafficking victims and prosecute and convict labor trafficking offenders in the reporting period."

The State Department classifies countries with three ratings, "tier 1" countries that comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking, mostly countries in Europe and North America; "tier 2" countries that not comply with the minimum standards, and have large numbers of human trafficking, but which make efforts to combat it; and "tier 3" countries that neither comply with the minimal standards and make no effort to do so. Israel is classified as a "tier 2" country.

Israel's "tier 2" peers include Afghanistan, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Pakistan, Rwanda, Syria, as well as India, China, Russia, and developed countries such as Iceland, Japan, Greece, and Switzerland.

The report on Israel is little different from the previous reports. It says, "Israel is a destination country for men and women subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking. Low-skilled workers from Thailand, China, Nepal, the Philippines, India, Sri Lanka, and, to a lesser extent, Romania, migrate voluntarily and legally to Israel for temporary contract labor in construction, agriculture, and home health care provision.

"Some, however, subsequently face conditions of forced labor, including through such practices as the unlawful withholding of passports, restrictions on movement, inability to change or otherwise choose one’s employer, nonpayment of wages, threats, sexual assault, and physical intimidation. Many labor recruitment agencies in source countries and in Israel require workers to pay recruitment fees typically ranging from $4,000 to $20,000 - a practice making workers highly vulnerable to trafficking or debt bondage once working in Israel. One NGO noted that recruitment fees increased in 2010."

The report cites Ministry of Interior figures, which say that 14,000 migrants entered Israel from Sinai in 2010, up from 5,000 in 2009.

U.S. Is Intensifying a Secret Campaign of Yemen Airstrikes

NY Times

A Yemeni airstrike targeting al-Qaeda
missed its mark on Tuesday

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has intensified the American covert war in Yemen, exploiting a growing power vacuum in the country to strike at militant suspects with armed drones and fighter jets, according to American officials.

The acceleration of the American campaign in recent weeks comes amid a violent conflict in Yemen that has left the government in Sana, a United States ally, struggling to cling to power. Yemeni troops that had been battling militants linked to Al Qaeda in the south have been pulled back to the capital, and American officials see the strikes as one of the few options to keep the militants from consolidating power.

On Friday, American jets killed Abu Ali al-Harithi, a midlevel Qaeda operative, and several other militant suspects in a strike in southern Yemen. According to witnesses, four civilians were also killed in the airstrike. Weeks earlier, drone aircraft fired missiles aimed at Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical American-born cleric who the United States government has tried to kill for more than a year. Mr. Awlaki survived.

The recent operations come after a nearly year-long pause in American airstrikes, which were halted amid concerns that poor intelligence had led to bungled missions and civilian deaths that were undercutting the goals of the secret campaign.

Officials in Washington said that the American and Saudi spy services had been receiving more information — from electronic eavesdropping and informants — about the possible locations of militants. But, they added, the outbreak of the wider conflict in Yemen created a new risk: that one faction might feed information to the Americans that could trigger air strikes against a rival group.

A senior Pentagon official, speaking only on condition of anonymity, said on Wednesday that using force against militants in Yemen was further complicated by the fact that Qaeda operatives have mingled with other rebels and antigovernment militants, making it harder for the United States to attack without the appearance of picking sides.

The American campaign in Yemen is led by the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations Command, and is closely coordinated with the Central Intelligence Agency. Teams of American military and intelligence operatives have a command post in Sana, the Yemeni capital, to track intelligence about militants in Yemen and plot future strikes.

Concerned that support for the campaign could wane if the government of Yemen’s authoritarian president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, were to fall, the United States ambassador in Yemen has met recently with leaders of the opposition, partly to make the case for continuing American operations. Officials in Washington said that opposition leaders have told the ambassador, Gerald M. Feierstein, that operations against Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula should continue regardless of who wins the power struggle in Sana.

The extent of America’s war in Yemen has been among the Obama administration’s most closely guarded secrets, as officials worried that news of unilateral American operations could undermine Mr. Saleh’s tenuous grip on power. Mr. Saleh authorized American missions in Yemen in 2009, but placed limits on their scope and has said publicly that all military operations had been conducted by his own troops.

Mr. Saleh fled the country last week to seek medical treatment in Saudi Arabia after rebel shelling of the presidential compound, and more government troops have been brought back to Sana to bolster the government’s defense.

“We’ve seen the regime move its assets away from counterterrorism and toward its own survival,” said Christopher Boucek, a Yemen expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “But as things get more and more chaotic in Yemen, the space for the Americans to operate in gets bigger,” he said.

But Mr. Boucek and others warned of a backlash from the American airstrikes, which over the past two years have killed civilians and Yemeni government officials. The benefits of killing one or two Qaeda-linked militants, he said, could be entirely eroded if airstrikes kill civilians and lead dozens of others to jihad.

Edmund J. Hull, ambassador to Yemen from 2001 to 2004 and the author of “High-Value Target: Countering Al Qaeda in Yemen,” called airstrikes a “necessary tool” but said that the United States had to “avoid collateral casualties or we will turn the tribes against us.”

Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen is believed by the C.I.A. to pose the greatest immediate threat to the United States, more so than even Qaeda’s senior leadership believed to be hiding in Pakistan. The Yemen group has been linked to the attempt to blow up a transatlantic jetliner on Christmas Day 2009 and last year’s plot to blow up cargo planes with bombs hidden inside printer cartridges.

Mr. Harithi, the militant killed on Friday, was an important operational figure in Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and was believed to be one of those responsible for the group’s ascendance in recent years. According to people in Yemen close to the militant group, Mr. Harithi travelled to Iraq in 2003 and fought alongside Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian operative who led the Qaeda affiliate in Iraq until he was killed in an American strike in 2006. Mr. Harithi returned to Yemen in 2004, those close to the militants said, where he was captured, tried and imprisoned in 2006 but released three years later.

Even as senior administration officials worked behind the scenes with Saudi Arabia for a transitional government to take power in Yemen, a State Department spokesman on Wednesday called on the embattled government in Sana to remain focused on dealing with the rebellion and Qaeda militants.

“With Saleh’s departure for Saudi Arabia, where he continues to receive medical treatment, this isn’t a time for inaction,” said the spokesman, Mark Toner.  “There is a government that remains in place there, and they need to seize the moment and move forward.”

Muhammad al-Ahmadi contributed reporting from Sana, Yemen, and Eric Schmitt and Scott Shane from Washington.

Obama Attempts to Secretly Meet Bahrain’s Crown Prince

Wall Street Journal
By Carol E. Lee and Jay Solomon

President Barack Obama will meet with the crown prince of Bahrain at the White House on Tuesday, an administration official said. But in a show of how delicate relations with the U.S. ally have become, the sit-down is not officially on the president’s schedule.

Instead Mr. Obama will “drop by” a meeting that Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa has Tuesday afternoon with National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, the administration official said.

The White House said last week that senior officials would use Prince Salman’s visit to push for political reforms in Bahrain, where the government’s harsh response to uprisings has created a diplomatic challenge for Washington, because of the Khalifa family’s role in helping U.S. efforts to combat terrorism and Iran’s nuclear program.

Last week, a senior administration official said the White House views Prince Salman as “a serious interlocutor” and believes there is “value in engaging with him directly.” The official said the White House sees as a “positive sign” the recent call from Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa for a national dialogue.

In a speech at the State Department last month, Mr. Obama criticized the crackdown in Bahrain, including the government’s detainment of hundreds of political prisoners.

It is unclear how long the president will spend with the crown prince on Tuesday. The White House does not plan to open any portion of the meeting to media coverage. The administration official said the White House will issue a written statement afterwards.

U.S. Special Ops Troops Deployed in Mexico, Leaked Briefing Confirms

NarcoSphere

Document, Prepared At the Request of a “Tea Party” Congressman, Indicates the 7th Special Forces Group “Has Conducted Operations in Every Latin American Country”

A Pentagon document has come to light that confirms the U.S. has put special operations troops on the ground in Mexico as the drug war there continues to escalate, notching some 40,000 murders since late 2006.

The document is a Department of Defense briefing presented in mid-May 2009 in Washington, D.C., to a group of business and political leaders from northwest Florida. The “Unclassified/For Official Use Only” briefing reveals the 18 Latin American nations where 7th Special Forces Group soldiers [Airborne Green Berets] were deployed as of fiscal year 2009, which ended Sept. 30, 2009.

Among those nations, according to the briefing document, was Mexico.

The document also indicates a 7^th Special Forces unit was deployed in Mexico in 1996 as well, as part of a “counter-narcotics” mission.

The revelations in the briefing material are important because, to date, neither the Pentagon nor the State Department has confirmed that U.S. special forces have been deployed inside Mexico — a politically volatile subject in that Latin American nation given the rising drug-war death toll there and the “Yankee” history of U.S. Gunboat Diplomacy in the region.

From the vantage point of U.S. policymakers, the deployment of covert Pentagon special forces inside Mexico also is fraught with political peril, given the discovery of such operations by the targets, narco-traffickers in this case, could result in blowback against U.S. agents and interests in Mexico. It also could strain relations with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who is already feeling increasingly isolated due to his disastrous drug-war policy.

The 7^th Special Forces Group (SFG) has played a key role since the 1980s in the bellicose history of Latin America, according to the briefing document and other sources. The 7th SFG has participated in numerous “counter-insurgency” missions in Central America as well as in the invasion of Panama in late 1989. It also has been quite active over the years in counter-narcotics missions in the South America Andean Ridge Countries of Colombia, Venezuela, Peru Ecuador and Bolivia; and more recently in hostage rescue operations in Colombia.

The latter operation, according information in the briefing document, involved the participation of the 7^th SFG in the July 2008 rescue of three DoD contractors and noted Colombian activist and politician Ingrid Betancourt, among others, who were being held as hostages by the leftist FARC guerrillas.
Narco News reported on that rescue at the time, indicating then, against the tide of mainstream reporting, that a U.S. special-forces unit was deeply involved in the rescue — a report now seemingly confirmed by this briefing document.

Narco News also reported in detail last year about the activities of U.S. special forces operating covertly inside Mexico.

From that June 12, 2010, story:

The U.S. unit [operating inside Mexico], dubbed Task Force 7, since early 2009, according to the CIA operative, has helped to uncover a warehouse in Juarez packed with U.S. munitions and under the control of drug traffickers; provide critical intelligence that led to the raid of a Juarez sweatshop that was manufacturing phony Mexican military uniforms; worked with the Mexican military in uncovering a mass grave near Palomas, Mexico, just south of Columbus, New Mexico; and, behind the scenes, cooperated with the Mexican Navy in hunting down a major narco-trafficker, Arturo Beltran Leyva -- who was killed by Mexican Navy special forces last December [2009] during a raid on a luxury apartment complex in Cuernavaca, Mexico.

That information was provided to Narco News at the time, according to the source, Tosh Plumlee, a former CIA contract pilot who still has deep connections in the covert world, because the members of Task Force 7 believed they had been compromised by leaks.

In fact, Plumlee had relayed some information to Narco News about the task force and its security concerns as early as April of 2009 on the condition we not publish that information then for fear it might jeopardize the lives of the unit’s members.

By June of 2010, however, when Narco News published its story, Plumlee told Narco News the “bad guys” already knew the task-force members were in-country and, as a result, they had become targets. Coming forward in the media, Plumlee says, provided the task force with some cover that made it more difficult for bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., to avoid addressing the security breach — a tendency on the part of some who might wish to avoid the complications that come with accountability.

The stakes of the covert game are quite high, for all those on the ground who are touched by it, including innocent citizens – and are made even steeper when politics and special interests (including careerism) start dictating the shots, literally.

The whistleblower organization WikiLeaks recently released a State Department cable revealing that the Mexican Navy unit that conducted the operation against narco-capo Beltran Leyva “received extensive U.S. training” — which serves as further evidence supporting Narco News’ original reporting on the involvement of U.S. special forces in that operation.

The same cable, however, also points out that the killing of Beltran Leyva will, in the short-term (a period not defined precisely) result in a “spike” in narco-related violence “as inter- and intra-cartel battles are intensified by the sudden leadership gap in one of the country’s most powerful cartels.”
 
That ramped up violence was still playing out as recently as this past March, when the son of Mexican poet and journalist Javier Sicilia, along with six of his compadres, none of them involved in narco-trafficking, were brutally tortured and murdered near Cuernavaca (just outside Mexico City) – the same region where Beltran Leyva was killed. The senseless murder of those innocents has sparked a mass movement in Mexico, one that is currently marching toward Juarez, the most violent city on earth, where a collective, non-violent action in opposition to the drug war is planned for June 10.

The confirmation that U.S. special forces are now in the mix of the drug-war violence, which Mexican citizens by the millions now see as senseless and resulting in far too much collateral damage (the death and disappearances of thousands of innocent victims), is certain to enhance the public outrage in that land — given the quite visible U.S. role as the major consumer of the drugs and the major exporter of weapons and policies fueling the drug war.

Given this madness, and the inherent duplicity, treachery and buffoonery marking the drug war, it should come as no surprise to anyone, even if their sympathies are not with the U.S. special-forces in Mexico whose lives are jeopardized due to leaks and other security lapses, that the source of those transgressions (intentional or not) is, in part, traceable to the U.S. side of the border.

The briefing document revealing the extent of the 7^th SFG operations in Latin America in fiscal 2009 – in 18 countries involving 21 missions and 165 soldiers, including Mexico — was made public by a Florida business group whose membership includes a number of defense contractors. That group, the Economic Development Council for Okaloosa County (EDC), via its Defense Support Initiative, made the May 14, 2009, briefing available on its Web site for all to see and download — including WikiLeaks and some media in Latin America who made it available in Spanish to their audiences (almost assuring that the narco-trafficking organizations being targeted by covert U.S. special forces also were tipped off to their presence in Mexico).

This occurred despite the fact that the briefing document was marked “For Official Use Only,” which, according to Ken McGraw, spokesman for the Pentagon’s U.S. Special Operations Command, means the document was “not to be released publicly.” McGraw adds that he does not “know the specifics” of the 7th SFG operation referred to in the briefing document, explaining that “by the end of the year, we [USSOCM] will have operations in 120 countries.”

That briefing was prepared by the 7^th SFG at the request of U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller, a far-right Republican with Tea Party leanings whose Florida district is about to become the new home for the 7th SFG (which is relocating from Ft. Bragg in North Carolina to Elgin Air Force Base in Florida’s panhandle).

Dan McFaul, chief of staff for Congressman Miller, stressed, when contacted by Narco News, that his boss did not attend the May 14, 2009, 7th SFG briefing.

“That was a non-classified briefing,” McFaul said. “The Congressman is on the [House] Intelligence Committee … and he is briefed at the classified level. … We request briefs on different issues affecting District 1 [Miller’s Congressional area] for chambers or economic development groups [and others], and so this [the 7th SFG briefing] could have been for something like that.”

Both the briefing document and a letter drafted by the EDC’s Defense Support Initiative chairman appear to indicate that was the case. McFaul said he had not received any other media inquiries about the restricted briefing document being made public prior to being contacted by Narco News.
Calls to the Okaloosa County EDC were not returned by press time.

However, someone as of Saturday, June 4, had removed the link on the EDC’s Web site that directs readers to the site where the briefing document can be downloaded. [See screen shot here of material removed]. The EDC Web-site download link for the document is still active, though, and can be accessed here — as well here should that EDC download link be deactivated in the future, with a screen shot here of the EDC download link as it exists as of the publish date of this story.


 It is important to stress that there is no evidence that the Okaloosa County EDC, Congressman Miller or members of the 7th SFG intentionally included or made public information that might compromise the security of the U.S. special-forces operations in Mexico.

But it seems clear that somewhere along the line, some bad calls were made — beginning with the decision to include country and date-specific specific information about supposedly covert troop deployments in a non-classified briefing and to then put those briefing materials online, even though the document is marked “For Official Use Only.”

In fact, Narco News contacted the press office for the U.S. Army Special Operations Command, which oversees the 7th SFG, seeking comment on how the sensitive mission information ended up in a non-classified briefing, but was told no one was available to comment until next week, after Narco News’ deadline for this story.

Narco News also contacted USNORTHCOM, which has command control over DoD missions involving Mexico. Lt. Commander William Lewis, USNORTHCOM spokesman, said he would look into the matter and get back to Narco News after “finding out what can and cannot be released” about the matter.

Narco News will update the story if additional pertinent information is provided by USASOC, USNORTHCOM, or others.

Stay tuned…..
 

US evacuating Syria embassy, Issues travel warning

Iron Mill

The United States has ordered embassy family members and some non-emergency personnel to leave Syria, citing the “uncertainty and volatility” of a crackdown on protesters there.


The State Department’s directive early Tuesday, along with a travel warning telling US citizens to leave the country, followed another day of violent attacks on protesters by Syrian security forces. At least 26 people in Deraa were reported killed on Monday in assaults by Syrian tanks and troops.

“The Department of State has ordered all eligible family members of US government employees as well as certain non-emergency personnel to depart Syria,” the statement said, according to Agence-France Press.

“Embassy operations will continue to the extent possible under the constraints of an evolving security situation,” it said.

“US citizens in Syria are advised to depart while commercial transportation is readily available,” the statement said.

US Weapons to Israel Are Disincentives to Peace

Antiwar
Josh Ruebner

U.S. Israeli Weapons Systems

Israel may be forgiven for failing to realize the current fiscal woes of the United States.  After all, U.S. military aid to Israel not only sailed unscathed through last week’s passage of the 2011 budget, but reached the record level of $3 billion.

The United States additionally provided Israel $415 million for procurement, research and development of joint U.S.-Israeli missile defense projects, including $205 million to fund Israel’s newly-deployed Iron Dome system. 

This anti-missile battery already has altered significantly the strategic balance in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when Israel successfully shot down incoming rockets fired from the Gaza Strip earlier this month.  With the assured diplomatic backing of the United States to prevent Israel from being held accountable by the international community for its illegal blockade, Iron Dome will embolden Israel to tighten its siege and escalate its attacks on the occupied Gaza Strip by providing its citizens with additional protection against retaliatory fire.

U.S. funding of Iron Dome is but one example of many of how U.S. weapons transfers to Israel privilege Israeli military dominance over Palestinian freedom and create perverse economic disincentives for Israel to defy U.S. policy goals such as halting Israel’s colonization of Palestinian land, ending its collective punishment of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, and negotiating in good faith a lasting peace agreement.            
As long as U.S. weapons continue to flow, Israel will feel free to disregard the Obama Administration’s mild blandishments and half-hearted attempts to bring Israel to the negotiating table. Unfortunately this disincentive structure is set to be reinforced over the coming years.   

Under a Bush-era agreement, U.S. weapons transfers to Israel are scheduled to total $30 billion from 2009-2018, an annual average increase of 25 percent above previous levels.  With this 2007 Memorandum of Understanding, the United States solidified Israel’s position as the largest recipient of U.S. military aid this decade. In line with increases proposed under this arrangement, President Obama asked for a record-breaking $3.075 billion of weapons for Israel in his 2012 budget request.

A new online database — "How Many Weapons to Israel?" — casts doubt on whether the United States can afford, either morally, financially or politically, to continue transferring weapons to Israel at taxpayer expense without examining the ramifications of this policy.

From 2000-2009, the United States licensed, paid for, and delivered to Israel more than 670 million weapons and related equipment, valued at nearly $19 billion, through three main weapons transfer programs (Foreign Military Sales, Direct Commercial Sales, and Excess Defense Articles).  These weapons transfer programs accounted for nearly 80 percent of the more than $24 billion in military aid appropriated to Israel during these years. The bulk of the remaining money was spent by Israel on its own domestic arms industry, a unique exemption written into law for Israel.  All other countries receiving U.S. military aid are required to spend the whole sum within the United States.

Military aid to Israel ran the gamut from the patently absurd — one used food steamer valued at $2,100 — to the lethal — 93 F-16D fighter jets valued at a total of nearly $2.5 billion.  With nearly 500 categories of weapons transferred to Israel, the United States is pervasively, intricately, and comprehensively involved in arming its military.        
        
These weapons transfers also make the United States deeply complicit in almost every action the Israeli military takes to entrench its illegal 43-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip and the apartheid policies that undergird its government’s stance toward Palestinians.

From September 2000-December 2009, roughly the same period during which the United States transferred these 670 million weapons to Israel, the Israeli military killed at least 2,969 Palestinians, of whom 1,128 were children, who took no part in hostilities, according to the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem.

For example, Israel killed 446 unarmed Palestinians, including 149 children, with missiles fired from helicopters.  The Pentagon classifies the number, types, and value of missiles transferred to Israel; however, the United States gave Israel nearly 200 AH-64D Apache, Sikorsky CH-53, and Cobra helicopters from which at least some of these lethal missiles were fired.   It was likely one such U.S.-supplied missile from a U.S.-supplied helicopter that Israel fired in the Jabalya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip on December 29, 2008, which killed five sisters, Jawaher (age 4), Dina (age 7), Samar (age 12), Ikram (age 14), and Tahrir Baulusha (age 17) during an attack on a nearby mosque.

Israel’s misuse of U.S. weapons to commit human rights abuses like these against Palestinian civilians should trigger sanctions against, rather than increasing amounts of military aid to, Israel.  The Arms Export Control Act limits the use of U.S. weapons to "internal security" and "legitimate self-defense."  Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip is defined by the U.S. government as a foreign military occupation, and the killing of thousands of unarmed civilians in support of a military occupation cannot be justified as legitimate without distorting the meaning of self-defense. 

In addition, the Foreign Assistance Act strictly prohibits U.S. foreign assistance to any country that "engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights."  The State Department’s recently released 2010 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices documents amply, if not comprehensively, Israel’s human rights abuses of Palestinians.

As Washington now considers raising the debt ceiling and making even more substantial cuts to the 2012 budget, the moral, financial, and political costs of arming Israel can no longer be ignored. 

If the Obama Administration is serious in its efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and genuine in its stated commitment to the universality of human rights, then it must utilize the significant leverage the United States wields over Israel through its military aid program.  By terminating weapons transfers to Israel at least until Israel upholds its obligations under U.S. and international law, ends its illegal military occupation of Palestinian land, and negotiates in good faith a just and lasting peace with Palestinians, the United States can create an incentive structure to achieve its frustrated policy goals.

US rejects Palestinian bid to seek UN recognition

U.S. State Department Spokesman
Mark Toner

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The United States again Tuesday rejected Palestinian plans to seek recognition for an independent state unilaterally from the United Nations without reaching a peace accord with Israel.

"We don't believe it's a good idea, we don't believe it's helpful," said US State Department spokesman Mark Toner.

US-brokered peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians resumed in September, 2010, but collapsed shortly afterwards when Israel refused to extend a moratorium on settlement building in the occupied territories. Israel has insisted that all issues, including the settlements, should be hammered out in direct talks.

Palestinian Authority president Mahmud Abbas has said that he will seek recognition at the United Nations for an independent state in September.

But the United States, which has shepherded the peace process, continues to insist that only a fully-negotiated agreement with Israel on a "two-state solution" can lead to a durable peace between the two countries.

"We continue to press both sides to begin talking again in direct negotiations," Toner said.