Pages

Thursday, 15 November 2012

Etats Unis: Romney accuse Obama d'avoir gagné grâce à des cadeaux électoraux

Romney accuse Obama d'avoir gagné grâce à des cadeaux électoraux

Le Monde.fr avec AFP | 
Abonnez-vous
à partir de 1 €
 Réagir Classer Imprimer Envoyer
Partager   google + linkedin
Mitt Romney, le 5 novembre 2012, à Manchester, dans le New Hampshire.

Le républicain Mitt Romney a du mal à se remettre de sa défaite. Lors d'une conférence téléphonique avec ses principaux donateurs, l'ex-candidat attribue sa défaite à la présidentielle du 6 novembre aux "cadeaux" offerts par le présidentBarack Obama à une partie de son électorat.

"Dans chaque cas, ils ont été très généreux dans ce qu'ils ont donné à ces groupes", a expliqué Mitt Romney, qui ne s'est pas exprimé publiquement depuis le soir de l'élection. "En ce qui concerne les jeunes, par exemple, l'annulation d'intérêts sur des emprunts étudiants a été un gros cadeau", a-t-il relevé, avant d'évoquer les contraceptifs gratuits pour les jeunes femmes et la réforme de la santé pour les personnes à bas revenus, rapporte le New York Times.
 
"Imaginez, pour quelqu'un qui gagne 20, 30 ou 35 000 dollars par an, à qui on dit qu'il recevra une assurance-maladie gratuite d'une valeur de 10 000 dollars parfamille, c'est énorme", a-t-il affirmé, notamment "pour les électeurs hispaniques".
"En outre pour les électeurs hispaniques, l'amnistie pour les enfants de sans-papiers a été un grand "plus" pour ce groupe d'électeurs", a poursuivi l'ex-candidat, selon le journal.
Durant les 20 minutes du coup de fil, le candidat n'a pas admis d'erreurs sur la gestion de sa campagne, attribuant la victoire du démocrate à "de gros cadeaux à certains groupes – il a fait un gros effort sur des petites choses. Toutes ces choses, cumulées, se montent à des milliers de milliards de dollars", selon la retranscription du Los Angeles Times.
Proposant aux participants de rester en contact à l'avenir pour "avoir une influence sur la direction du parti, et peut-être la sélection du futur candidat présidentiel", Mitt Romney a immédiatement précisé, selon ce journal : "... qui, au fait, ne sera pas moi".

http://www.lemonde.fr/elections-americaines/article/2012/11/15/romney-accuse-obama-d-avoir-gagne-grace-a-des-cadeaux-electoraux_1790739_829254.html

Wednesday, 14 November 2012

Britain cautions over continued Rwanda aid

Britain cautions over continued Rwanda aid

SHARE BOOKMARKPRINTRATING
Former International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell. He is under fire for signing off £16m in aid on his last day in the job - despite concerns about Rwanda's alleged backing for violent militias in DR Congo.
Former International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell. He is under fire for signing off £16m in aid on his last day in the job - despite concerns about Rwanda's alleged backing for violent militias in DR Congo. 
By BBC

Posted  Tuesday, November 13  2012 at  17:02
The UK will reflect "very carefully" before giving more financial aid to Rwanda, International Development Secretary Justine Greening has said.
Her predecessor Andrew Mitchell is under fire for signing off £16m in aid on his last day in the job - despite concerns about Rwanda's alleged backing for violent militias in DR Congo.
Ms Greening said his decision had been taken in a "sound and robust" way.
But continued support for Rwanda would depend on progress on various issues.
The UK's decision to go ahead with an initial £16m tranche of funding to Rwanda was controversial as the African country's rulers have allegedly funded rebels from the M23 militia group accused of murder and rape in neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo.
Other EU nations have withdrawn funds and the UK suspended budget support in July over concerns about Rwanda's alleged behaviour.
'Robust process'
But Mr Mitchell told MPs last week he had decided to resume aid to the country after two out of three conditions set by the UK - a ceasefire in the Kivus region and an end to practical support from Rwanda to militias - were met.
Ms Greening told the Commons international development committee that she was not going to "second-guess" her predecessor's decision - which was taken on his last day in the department in September.
"I am not going to disagree with Andrew Mitchell. I think it is very difficult for me to agree or disagree with him."
Ms Greening said her predecessor, when he appeared before the committee last week, had set out in "very clear-cut" terms the basis for his decision: "He had clearly been through a very robust process and I think that was absolutely the right thing to do...
"I believe that he did a full, sound and proper job in his role in taking what I think was a very difficult decision".
Mr Mitchell denied he had acted as a "rogue minister" and said the decision to approve the aid had been taken collectively, with the prime minister, foreign secretary and senior civil servants.
'Options on the table'
A decision on whether to approve the rest of the money would be taken next month, Ms Greening told MPs.
It would depend in part, she added, on whether Rwanda was continuing to honour the conditions relating to its neighbour, including playing a constructive part in peace talks and condemning the actions of the militias, which it has yet to do.
Ms Greening said there was a "lull" in fighting at the moment but there was a risk this was only "temporary".
The UK had yet to decide whether evidence linking Rwanda to the militias was accurate - but claims about it were "very disturbing," added the minister.
She said the UK's support for Rwanda had been "very successful" - but President Paul Kagame had to demonstrate his government was living up to the principles of their aid partnership with the UK, based on respect for human rights and a commitment to good governance and poverty reduction.
Other factors would also be considered, she added, including UN reports on the country.
She told the MPs "all options were on the table", ranging from withholding financial aid entirely, asking for further reassurances, or allocating it in a "different form" - potentially by giving it to third-party organisations rather than directly to the government.
At the moment, half of the money is being given directly to education and agriculture projects, with the rest going directly to the government to spend.
"One thing is clear is that I will be prepared to look across the piece at what my options are and will very carefully reflect about progress against partnership principles," she added.
The current coalition government and its Labour predecessor have both had a close relationship with Rwanda.
Like Mr Mitchell, Ms Greening has taken part in Project Umubano, which saw Tory MPs - including several members of the committee quizzing the minister, who declared an interest - help with local business and education projects.
The project, visited by Mr Cameron in 2007, was a key part of the Tory leader's effort to present a more compassionate image.
http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/Britain-cautions-on-continued-Rwanda-aid/-/2558/1619810/-/item/0/-/qaqop2z/-/index.html

USA: Senators prefer John Kerry to Susan Rice for secretary of state

Senators prefer John Kerry to Susan Rice for secretary of state

Susan Rice and John Kerry are pictured in this composite image. | AP Photos
Several GOP senators dissed Rice while giving Kerry a ringing endorsement. | AP Photos
If Senate Republicans got to choose between Susan Rice and John Kerry for next secretary of state, it'd be no contest: Kerry by a landslide.
In interviews Tuesday, several GOP senators dissed the United Nations ambassador while giving the Massachusetts Democrat a ringing endorsement to succeed Hillary Clinton in the prestigious post. Rice and Kerry are reportedly high on President Barack Obama's list of potential replacements.
It's hardly a surprise many senators favor Kerry over Rice. They've served with him for years, enduring endless committee hearings and floor debates and occasionally even teaming up with him on legislation.(PHOTOS: President Obama's second-term Cabinet)
"I think he'd be much more easily confirmed in the Senate than Susan Rice," said Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee that will hold confirmation hearings on the next secretary of state.
As senators returned to the Capitol on Tuesday, it was clear Rice's public remarks on the Sept. 11 Libya assault would continue to dog her if Obama gives her the nod. Specifically, Republicans blasted her Sept. 16 statements on the Sunday talk show circuit that the deadly attack was triggered by "spontaneous" demonstrations against an anti-Islam YouTube video.
Republicans have insisted that the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans was a terrorist attack — a position the White House later agreed with.
"It's clear at a minimum she made misrepresentations and misstatements on Benghazi on every major news network and so I think those questions have to be answered," Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) told POLITICO. "And so I have serious questions about her being put in the position of secretary of state."
"Our intelligence officials in Libya, in real time while the event was taking place, were letting our folks know back here this was a terrorist attack," added Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who is expected to succeed outgoing Sen. Dick Lugar as the top Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee.
"It is beyond me that [Rice] would be out publicly talking about that event [as something sparked by a spontaneous demonstration]. It's beyond belief."
Those two senators did not threaten to filibuster Rice's possible nomination, saying more questions needed to be answered. But Barrasso said her public remarks after the Libya attack meant that he could not support her.
"I think she disqualified herself as secretary of state because in that role you need to have somebody with sound judgement and who is able to ask tough questions in situations which are stressful," Barrasso told reporters. "And I think she failed in light of Benghazi and the reports she did five days later."
Corker's concerns about Rice are significant, and the Foreign Relations panel has oversight of the State Department and would vote to confirm or reject Obama's pick to replace Clinton. Kerry, a five-term senator and the committee's chairman, is also a top prospect for the job, though a Washington Post report Tuesday suggested Obama is also considering him for defense secretary.
Kerry, a Vietnam veteran and the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, declined to comment when asked by POLITICO about whether he has had any conversations with Obama about the defense job.
"I don't have any comment about anything that we're doing," Kerry said before ducking into a closed-door Foreign Relations Committee briefing on the Benghazi attack.
Some GOP senators acknowledged that the final decision rests with the president, but that didn't stop them from stating their preference.
"I'd rather have John Kerry," said Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who is retiring at the end of the year and won't get a vote on the president's nominee next year.

"I think he's well positioned, he's experienced, I think he'd take the job and he's not tainted with the kinds of things that would I think be a problem for Ambassador Rice."
As for Rice, Kyl said her appearances on the Sunday shows are "a huge, huge issue for her."
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) defended Rice, saying she has done an "outstanding job" as U.N. ambassador to the U.S. But he said Kerry would benefit from his decades spent building relationships on Capitol Hill.
"Sen. Kerry is under consideration for a high position because he's talented, has tremendous integrity and respect — he also happens to be a senator," Cardin, who also serves on the committee, told POLITICO.
"Part of your responsibility in the administration is your relationship with the Senate and House, and obviously Sen. Kerry has an incredible relationship. I think colleagues on both sides of the aisle will tell you that."
Lugar said Kerry "would be a very good choice" for Obama to appoint to the Cabinet as secretary of state or defense and predicted an easy confirmation.
"I'd think so," Lugar (R-Ind.) told POLITICO when asked if he expected Kerry could get through the Senate vetting process. "I'm not certain I would understand opposition. He's served so well in the Senate, as chairman of our committee."
Lugar, who sits opposite Kerry atop the Foreign Relations Committee, said he didn't think Obama should make his decision on whether to appoint Kerry based on the prospect that an open Massachusetts Senate seat could go to a Republican like outgoing Sen. Scott Brown in a special election.
"That seems to me not to be a very thoughtful reason for failing to nominate John for secretary of State," Lugar said.
Both Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), who serve on the Foreign Relations panel, said they would reserve judgment until Obama makes his selection and they have a chance to interview the nominee.
"I don't go in with any preconceived prejudice against either one," Rubio told POLITICO.

Darren Samuelsohn contributed to this report.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83771.html

Is the U.S. blocking a controversial U.N. report to shield Rwanda?

A senior Congolese diplomat lambasted the United States and other Security Council members for delaying the release of a U.N. investigation linking Rwanda to a military mutiny led by one of the world's most notorious accused war criminals in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Atoki Ileka, Congo's ambassador to France, told Turtle Bay that Security Council members mentioned to him during a visit to New York this week that the United States had sought to hold up publication of the findings. 
Ileka's remarks, made in a telephone interview from Paris this morning, came one day after the United States asked the council to delay the release of the Group of Expert findings for two weeks to give the Rwandan government a chance to review the report, according to council diplomats. "We cannot wait for the United States and other members of the Security Council to find a convenient way to protect Rwanda," Ileka said.
A spokesman for the U.S. mission to the United Nations, Payton Knopf, denied that the United States is trying to quash the report or shield Rwanda from scrutiny. 
"The U.S. is not blocking a report by the DRC group of experts," Knopf told Turtle Bay. "The United States asked a number of relevant questions and is carefully studying the information presented by the experts in anticipation of council discussions on June 26."
The dispute dates to late March, when Bosco Ntaganda, a former rebel leader who had been integrated into the Congolese Army as a general, led a group of hundreds of his former rebels under the banner of the M23 Movement in an armed mutiny.
Ntaganda, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for recruiting child soldiers, and his forces suffered an initial military setback, fleeing their stronghold in the town of Massisi to a site near the border with Rwanda, which has since begun to supply them with financial support, weapons, and recruits, according to a report by Human Rights Watch, which interviewed dozens of Rwandan nationals, including children, who claimed to have been forcibly conscripted.
"The leaders of the M23 figure among the worst perpetrators of human rights violations in the DRC, or in the world for that matter," Navi Pillay, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said of the movement this week. "Many of them have appalling track records including allegations of involvement in mass rape, and of responsibility for massacres and for the recruitment and use of children.... I fear the very real possibility that they will inflict additional horrors on the civilian population as they attack villages."
Earlier this month, a panel of U.N. experts monitoring a U.N. arms embargo in Congo on behalf of the U.N. Security Council completed an interim report into illicit arms smuggling into the region. But the public release of the report has been held up over the fate of a controversial annex that delves into reports of Rwandan support for mutineers in eastern Congo, according to council diplomat and human rights advocates.
On June 13, the so-called Group of Experts informed the Security Council's sanctions committee, which has representatives from the council's 15 states, that it would only publish the findings of the annex if the council agreed to make it public.
The experts reasoned that the publicity surrounding the release of the findings would make it more difficult for the Rwandan government to retaliate against suspected informants.
The U.N.'s findings apparently confirm the previous reporting by Human Rights Watch and identify top Rwandan officials involved in the effort.  
"I haven't seen the annex but I'm told that it names top officials in Rwanda who are allegedly involved in the effort to back the mutineers, and it goes to extremely senior levels" of the government, said Anneke Van Woudenberg, Human Rights Watch's senior Africa researcher, and the author of the report on Congo.
Ileka, who previously served as Congo's U.N. envoy, traveled to U.N. headquarters from Paris this week to press the United States and other Security Council members to approve the release of the group of expert's findings. In a letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the U.N. Security Council, Ileka called on the U.N. to condemn Rwanda's aggression in eastern Congo.
"The U.N. sanctions committee now needs to do its job and publish the information, denounce the violation of the arms embargo and put pressure on Rwanda to halt any support to Bosco Ntaganda and the M23 mutineers," Ileka wrote in a cover letter. "The findings of the group should not be buried, ignored or pushed to a later date until they are published. Efforts by any Security Council members to try avoid publication of the findings is shameful and does nothing to help the people of eastern Congo."
Woudenberg said that the U.S. mission also provided a more forceful signal to its U.N. colleagues last week that it wanted to block the publication of the annex, arguing that it would be better to pursue the matter through quiet diplomacy. The U.S. position, she added, had "pissed off" other officials in the State Department, who favored the report's release.
The debate has since evolved, with the United States now agreeing to the ultimate release of the annex but asserting that Rwanda should at least have a right of reply, a concession that is not routinely offered countries that are accused of violating sanctions, she said. U.S. officials deny there was a division between the U.S. mission in New York and the State Department.
On Tuesday, the Group of Experts met again with the U.N. sanctions committee, where the United States forged a compromise that will result in the release of the interim report next week, but would delay publication of the controversial annex for at least a couple of weeks. During that time, the Group of Experts would brief the Rwandan government on its findings, according to a council diplomat.
"While I will not comment on particulars because committee deliberations are confidential, the committee discussed the recent unrest in eastern Congo, which is of serious concern to the United States and the council," Knopf said. "The council takes into account all information when studying situations of unrest and the group of experts findings are important. We and the other members of the committee are studying the findings carefully and will continue to discuss their implications once the report is public."
In the meantime, the dispute has sparked intensive speculation over the fate of the experts' findings in the blogosphere, including this account at the Texas in Africa blog, and a feud on Twitter, with Human Rights Watch asserting that Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and the State Department had quarreled over the decision to release the report.
"U.S. blocks UN report that confirms @HRW finding that #Rwanda military is backing #Congowarlord wanted by #ICC," Ken Roth, the executive director of Human Rights Watch tweeted, citing areport in the Guardian containing the allegation. "U.S. Amb Rice, over opposition of State Dept colleagues, seems to put loyalty to [Rwandan President Paul] Kagame over concern for Congo victims."
Rice's spokesman, Mark Kornblau, fired back "Not true. You have it wrong."
"No. False. U.S. is NOT blocking," he added in another tweet.
Follow me on Twitter @columlynch
http://turtlebay.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/06/20/is_the_us_blocking_a_controversial_un_report_to_shield_rwanda

RDC: le chef du M23 sur la liste noire des Etats-Unis

RDC: le chef du M23 sur la liste noire des Etats-Unis

L'AUTEUR
Slate Afrique avec l'AFP
PARTAGER
TAILLE DU TEXTE
 
 Le chef des rebelles du M23, le colonel Sultani Makenga, le 8 juillet 2012 à Bunagana, près de la frontière ougandaise AFP Michele Sibiloni
Les Etats-Unis ont annoncé mardi qu'ils plaçaient le chef des rebelles congolais du M23, Sultani Makenga, sur leur liste noire des personnes physiques ou morales sanctionnées pour leur participation au conflit en République démocratique du Congo (RDC).
Le département du Trésor, à l'origine de cette décision, accuse M. Makenga d'être "responsable d'horreurs à grande échelle contre la population en RDC, notamment du recrutement d'enfants soldats et de campagnes de violence contre les civils".
Le ministère affirme également dans un communiqué que M. Makenga a reçu des cargaisons d'armement en violation de l'embargo international sur les armes qui vise ce pays.
Les éventuels avoirs que M. Makenga pourrait détenir aux Etats-Unis sont désormais gelés, et la mesure du Trésor expose également à des poursuites pénales les ressortissants américains qui viendraient à commercer avec lui.
Le M23 (Mouvement du 23 mars) est formé d'anciens rebelles qui, après avoir été intégré en 2009 dans l'armée congolaise, se sont mutinés et combattent depuis le mois de mai l'armée régulière dans l'est du pays, aux confins du Rwanda et de l'Ouganda.
Le 19 octobre, le Conseil de sécurité de l'ONU avait exprimé son "soutien sans réserve" aux experts des Nations unies qui accusent ces deux pays d'armer le M23 et avait menacé implicitement de prendre des sanctions contre de hauts responsables à Kampala et Kigali.

http://www.slateafrique.com/98221/rdc-le-chef-du-m23-sur-la-liste-noire-des-etats-unis

-“The root cause of the Rwandan tragedy of 1994 is the long and past historical ethnic dominance of one minority ethnic group to the other majority ethnic group. Ignoring this reality is giving a black cheque for the Rwandan people’s future and deepening resentment, hostility and hatred between the two groups.”

-« Ce dont j’ai le plus peur, c’est des gens qui croient que, du jour au lendemain, on peut prendre une société, lui tordre le cou et en faire une autre ».

-“The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish.”

-“I have loved justice and hated iniquity: therefore I die in exile.

-“The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.”

READ MORE RECENT NEWS AND OPINIONS

Popular Posts

WebMD Health Channel - Sex & Relationships

Love Lectures

How We Made It In Africa – Insight into business in Africa

David DeAngelo - Dating Questions For Men

Christian Carter - Dating Questions For Women

Women - The Huffington Post

Recent Articles About Effective Communication Skills and Self Development