Saturday, 3 May 2014

Chelsea's season has been s*** - Luiz

Chelsea's season has been s*** - Luiz
Jose Mourinho's side crashed out of the Champions League at the semi-final stage on Wednesday night to leave the Premier League as their only hope for silverware this term
David Luiz believes that Chelsea's season will be a "s***" one if they do not win the Premier League.

Wednesday night's 3-1 loss to Atletico Madrid saw Jose Mourinho's side crash out of the Champions League at the semi-final stage, with earlier exits in the FA Cup and Capital One Cup leaving just the league title to claim.

Chelsea are outsiders to win a fifth top-flight crown following recent losses to Sunderland and Crystal Palace but Luiz feels that a trophy is a must if the season is not to be deemed a failure.

CHELSEA LATEST
14/1Chelsea are 14/1 with Paddy Power to win the Premier League title
"You can say it is a s*** season if you don't have trophies in a season at a big club. That is true," Luiz told reporters.

"We are a big club and we want to win trophies. We keep fighting in the league. We cannot win automatically. It will be difficult.

"We have many fantastic players and everyone wants to win trophies. It is normal when you sit at home and watch television to see Chelsea fighting for trophies.

"We need to be men and it is not always possible to win. The season we won [the Champions League] was a s*** season until the end and then we won two titles at the end."

Fernando Torres gave Chelsea the lead on Wednesday night before goals from Adrian Lopez, Diego Costa and Arda Turan saw the Primera Division leaders progress to the final.

Captain John Terry was seen in tears at the final whistle, an expression of emotion that Luiz admires as it shows a player's "personality" and "fight".

He continued: "Everyone is crying. Nobody likes to lose a Champions League semi-final - not just John.

"We have to remember we are lucky people who have the best job in the world. We have to respect that people at home do not have the same life as us.

"The most important thing is the personalities for me. We need to fight in many situations. This is sport, this is football. Everyone speaks about results but, in the end, you need to remember everyone here is human. Everyone gave their best all season. Everyone can make mistakes – that is normal - but you cannot hide yourself from any situations.

"I do my job every day. I gave everything. If there were many s*** games, when you didn't run, then fine but we gave our best in many, many games but sometimes it's possible to win, sometimes not."

Thursday, 1 May 2014

Al-Qaeda weakened in Pakistan: US report

Al-Qaeda weakened in Pakistan: US report
WASHINGTON: The world-wide terror threat is evolving as Al-Qaeda linked groups and other militants become increasingly violent and a new generation of global terrorists is spawned in Syria, said the State Department s 2013 Country Reports on Terrorism.
US counter-terrorism efforts focused on Al-Qaeda have “degraded” the core leadership, but “subsequently 2013 saw the rise of increasingly aggressive and autonomous AQ affiliates and like-minded groups in the Middle East and Africa.Al-Qaeda, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, Punjabi Taliban and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi carried out terrorist activities in Pakistan.
The report said that the activities were carried out by planting locally made bombs in bicycles, motorcycles, rickshaws and other vehicles.The report pointed that al-Qaeda has weakened in Pakistan as communications between the leadership and militants were cut.The report, however, said that al-Qaeda and Haqqani Network posed a great risk to US interests in 2013.

Decades later, hostage crisis still haunts US-Iranian relations

Decades later, hostage crisis still haunts US-Iranian relations

Responding to a groundswell of domestic pressure, the Obama administration has denied a visa to Iran's new UN ambassador, Hamid Aboutalebi. The White House decision goes against normal diplomatic protocol, raising questions about Washington's ability to unilaterally veto another country's choice of representation at the world body.
Aboutalebi was a member of the Muslim Student Followers of the Imam's Line. The student group seized the US embassy and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days during the 1979 Islamic revolution, which ousted the US-backed Shah dictatorship and brought Ayatollah Khomeini's theocratic regime to power. Aboutalebi says he worked for the student group only as a translator and negotiator.
'Given his role in the events of 1979, which clearly matter profoundly to the American people, it would be unacceptable for the United States to grant this visa,' State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters in Washington last Tuesday.
Although Tehran's decision to choose Aboutalebi may not have been politically wise in hindsight, the Islamic Republic did not intend to provoke the US by selecting him as UN ambassador, according to Ellie Geranmayeh, an Iran expert with the European Council on Foreign Relations.
'They had sent this person to the European Union before; he had served as an ambassador in other countries,' Geranmayeh told DW. 'His previous background has never been an issue in the same way that it has come up in the US context.'
'I do think that there was genuinely never an intention on the Iranian side to provoke, because if they really wanted to do that there were other applicants that have probably more difficult backgrounds to sell to the US than Hamid's one,' she said.
Domestic pressure in the US
The White House's decision came after Congress passed a bill - by unanimous consent - that would deny admission to the US for any UN representative who engages in espionage, terrorism, or poses a threat to US national security. The legislation was aimed at preventing Aboutalebi from taking his seat at the UN.
'We, as a country, can send an unequivocal message to rogue nations, like Iran, that the United States will not tolerate this kind of provocative and hostile behavior,' Senator Ted Cruz, a sponsor of the bill, stated in a press release.
So far, President Barack Obama has not indicated whether or not he will sign the bill into law. But White House spokesman Jay Carney said the president does 'share the intent of the bill passed by Congress.'
According to Iran expert Gary Sick, the domestic politics of both Iran and the United States are often more important than their foreign policies. And in Washington, the legacy of the hostage crisis remains a salient factor in US politics.
'In the United States, it became a political football, and I think the administration is simply not willing to put a lot of political capital into fighting for an ambassador under these circumstances,' Sick, who served as the White House's principal Iran aide during the hostage crisis, told DW.
Aboutalebi actually falls within the moderate circles in Iran, according to Geranmayeh. She believes that this episode could spell out who exactly Washington is willing to hold accountable for the hostage crisis.
'Whether or not Hamid was a translator, another issue that really needs to be addressed by the US is actually defining who is going to be held accountable from now on, and hopefully, this incident can set a precedent for that to happen.'
Iran refuses to back down
Tehran, for its part, has refused to select someone other than Aboutalebi as its UN ambassador. The Islamic Republic has filed a complaint with the Committee on Relations with the Host Country, the body that oversees the UN's relationship with the US.
'This decision of the US government has indeed negative implications for multilateral diplomacy and will create a dangerous precedent and affect adversely the work of intergovernmental organizations and activities of their member states,' Iran's Deputy UN Ambassador Hossein Dehghani wrote in a letter to the committee.
According to Iran's foreign ministry, Aboutalebi received a visa once before in the 1990s to visit the UN in New York.
'Now that this whole problem has arisen, it's pretty clear that he would have a very hard time doing his job as ambassasdor here, so in that sense the game is over,' said Sick, who teaches international affairs at Columbia University.
'My guess is Iran will see the handwriting on the wall and decide he probably couldn't conduct his operations as ambassador under these circumstances and chalk it up to a mistake on all sides,' he added.
Greater interests at stake
The diplomatic dispute at the UN between Iran and the US comes at a delicate time, as the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany seek to hammer out a final deal on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
Last November, they reached an interim agreement that eased economic sanctions in exchange for Iran freezing its uranium enrichment activities.
According to Sir Richard Dalton, Britain's former ambassador to Iran, both the Islamic Republic and the US have a major interest in seeing the nuclear negotiations succeed.
'They will make efforts to insulate the negotiations from adverse developments over other matters,' Dalton wrote to DW in an email. 'They are fundamentally opposed to each other on more significant issues, such as Syria, and have not let that stop an ever more intense set of bilateral and multi-lateral exchanges on the nuclear question in the last year. This [Aboutalebi dispute] is unfortunate in that it reinforces negative stereotypes on both sides rather than damaging prospects for an agreement.

Ukraine to get IMF bailout in return for economic reforms

Ukraine to get IMF bailout in return for economic reforms
Financial help is on its way to Ukraine with the International Monetary Fund agreeing on a $17bn (12.2bn euros) bailout. The money will be released over two years with the first installment of $3bn (2.1bn euros)to be made available immediately.
IMF chief Christine Lagarde admitted it was a gamble relying on the country’s government being able to carry out unpopular measures to get its finances in order.
'It’s a programme that has implementation risks. It’s one where we are trying to mitigate the risks as much as we can. We have had prior actions which have been addressed satisfactorily,' she said.
One of those risks concerns the unity or otherwise of Ukraine. Interim Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk has threatened a cabinet reshuffle if order isn’t restored in the east.
He has also called for a national poll on 'territorial integrity' ( national unity) to be held at the same time as the May 25 election.
Outside the cabinet office there was a small protest by demonstrators complaining about the government’s infighting and ineffectiveness in dealing with the country’s beleaguered economy.




Crimea annexation celebrated at Red Square marches

Crimea annexation celebrated at Red Square marches
There was plenty of patriotism on show for May Day in Moscow.
The International Labour Day celebrations returned to Red Square for the first time since the break up of the Communist Soviet Union in 1991.
Coming just weeks after Russia’s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine, the event was an opportunity for supporters of President Vladimir Putin to demonstrate their approval .
Signs and banners proclaimed 'Patriots support their president!', 'Trust Putin' and 'Putin is right!'. The march took place with Putin’s approval ratings at their highest level since 2010.
Andrei Isaev, a lawmaker from the president’s party addressed the crowd, hammering home the point: 'This year Russia was joined by two new members of the Federation – Crimea and Sevastopol. We welcome them!'
Moscow police said more than 100,000 people took part in the Red Square marches. Nationwide an estimated two million people were on the streets in Labour Day rallies.
Away from the cameras of state TV opposition and human rights groups also held demonstrations in Russian cities.

Moscow and Washington warn each other to ease tensions in Ukraine

Moscow and Washington warn each other to ease tensions in Ukraine
Moscow and Washington are urging each other to exert influence on the two sides in the Ukraine crisis in the absence of any sign that last week’s Geneva accord is being implemented.
Pro-Russian separatists are still refusing to vacate buildings they’ve occupied in east Ukraine, and ultra-nationalists are being blamed for the weekend’s shootout at a separatist checkpoint.
In a web chat with a Russian radio station, the US State Department said more sanctions were being considered unless Moscow tells its allies in Ukraine back down, with even the Russian president now a possible target.
In a show of US support Vice-President Joe Biden has arrived in Kyiv where he’s expected to announce new technical support to the Ukrainian interim government to implement energy and economic reforms.
However Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, has called for the US to restrain what he called the Kyiv 'hotheads'.
'The Geneva agreement is not only not being implemented, but also steps are being taken – primarily by those who have seized power in Kyiv – that are crude violations of the agreements reached in Geneva. The authorities aren’t doing anything, they haven’t lifted a finger to eliminate the causes that are the basis for the deep crisis today in Ukraine.'
As the diplomatic exchanges continue, members of the OSCE – a European security body – has deployed mediators in Ukraine to explain the Geneva accord.

Subsidies for oil, gas and coal must be curbed

‘Subsidies for oil, gas and coal must be curbed’
Germany's development agency GIZ, the UN's Environment Program and the International Monetary Fund worked together to organize the talks. GIZ expert Dr. Detlev Schreiber spoke with DW about why they are working to reform subsidies for the fossil fuel industry.
DW: Dr. Schreiber, how do fossil fuels subsidies work?
Detlev Schreiber: Many countries are pouring money into subsidizing energy prices. In some cases, this means they are not charging the actual market price for energy. Oil-rich countries like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia have ridiculous fuel prices as low as a few cents per liter.
Now, this has a long, complicated history which differs from country to country. As far back at the late 18thcentury, the United States used tax revenue to subsidize coal. Why have governments around the world been willing to subsidize gas, coal and oil?
Some do it to help national industries be more competitive, while others want to give their citizens advantages in order to secure reelection.
What kinds of differences are there in the way rich and poor nations subsidize fossil fuels?
Nowadays, most rich countries - especially European countries - have stopped subsidizing fossil energy. Some EU nations are also selling fuel above market price. But indirect subsidies are not calculated in here. In Germany, there has been an ongoing discussion about the disposal of nuclear waste, for example. We do not include the price of disposal of nuclear waste in the energy price. The same is true when we speak of global warming effects caused by burning fossil fuel.
Many developing nations are still providing heavy direct subsidies. Most of the world's oil-rich nations are subsidizing fossil fuels - though some countries like Mexico are already tackling this problem. Astonishingly, countries like Egypt, which don't have many fossil fuel resources, are subsidizing this energy. It's tough to get rid of because there is a tradition in place. So transporters, taxi drivers and the industry think they are dependent on those subsidies.
So you are defining these subsidies not just as the funds invested in direct price reduction, but also the money paid to deal with waste and environmental damage.
Yes, this is part of subsidizing fossil fuels. In total, an estimated 500 to 600 billion US dollars are being spent to subsidize fossil fuels each year. Imagine if all that money was used for green economy transition programs, for social welfare programs, for education. Many governments could use this money in a more effective way.
Countries like Ghana have started eliminating their fossil fuel subsidies because of budget deficits. They simply cannot afford to pay so much into subsidies anymore.
What are delegates at the talks in Nairobi telling you about the challenges they are facing at home as they attempt to curb subsidies?
In some places, fuel prices, bread prices, prices for basics like milk and flour, even transportation, are fixed by the government. These are not market prices. The population attributes responsibility for the price to the government. If the government says we have to raise prices because we are paying more for fuel, many groups think that's bad. Taxi drivers, transport companies, unions, bus drivers and political parties organize protests.
Look at Indonesia or Tunisia, where - some decades ago - prices increased, triggering protests and the governments were suddenly in trouble. This shows it's important to establish good communication about these changes and also fund compensation.
In Iran, Ghana and Vietnam they've answered this challenge by providing direct cash transfers to poor households. This can smooth the transition, while slowly lifting fuel prices to market level.
This movement must be unsettling for industry leaders as you push for a rollback in the funding they receive. How much influence do oil, gas and coal companies have when governments decide to support the shift away from subsidies?
In many countries, industry is opposed. This must be taken seriously. Industry has one argument on their side: we will lose competitiveness, we have to close down, we are dependent on oil prices.
The fossil fuel industry argues that their energy products are keeping the lights on. They say oil, coal and gas are necessary for energy security - and are the most reliable sources of energy we have. How do you respond to that?
Okay, fossil fuels were the backbone of industrialization, but in many countries, they are diminishing in importance rapidly. Not only in Germany, which wants to say goodbye to nuclear energy and fossil fuels, but also places like Uruguay, which doesn't have its own fossil fuels. They are saying, 'We need independence and we have to reduce our fossil fuel bill.'
Look at Costa Rica. They have to pay about two billion US dollars every year to import fossil fuel. But they have many sources of renewable energy. Most of their electricity is already generated by hydropower. They have geothermal resources, solar resources. There is so much potential.
How do subsidies for fossil fuels affect the development of renewable energy?
Fossil fuel subsidies have a very strong effect on the competitiveness of renewable energy. In countries with heavy subsidies for fossil fuels, renewable projects are just niche projects. In countries that do not have fossil fuel subsidies, renewables do very well. According to the International Energy Agency, the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies will be the single most effective measure for climate change mitigation and would be one of the most effective measures for keeping the temperature rise beneath two degrees, which has been agreed upon in the international climate negotiations.
Dr. Detlev Schreiber is with Germany's development agency GIZ. Working with the United Nations Environment Program and the International Monetary Fund, GIZ has launched a series of talks on reforming fossil fuel subsidies.