November 2009

Iran nuke plans largely bluster, experts say

TEHRAN, Iran – Iran's announcement of plans to build 10 more uranium enrichment facilities is largely bluster after a strong rebuke from the U.N.'s nuclear agency, analysts said Monday. Nonetheless, the defiance is fueling calls among Western allies for new punitive sanctions to freeze Iran's nuclear program.
U.S. and European officials were swift to condemn the plans, warning that Iran risked sinking ever deeper into isolation. Iran responded that it felt forced to move forward with the plans after the International Atomic Energy Agency passed a resolution Friday demanding that it halt all enrichment activities.
Iran's bold announcement Sunday appears to be largely impossible to achieve as long as sanctions continue to throw up roadblocks and force Iran to turn to black markets and smuggling for nuclear equipment, said nuclear expert David Albright.
"They can't build those plants. There's no way," he said. "They have sanctions to overcome, they have technical problems. They have to buy things overseas ... and increasingly it's all illegal."
A more worrisome escalation in the standoff would be if Iran reduced its cooperation with the IAEA, as some Iranian officials have threatened to do if the West continues its pressure. The U.N. inspectors and monitoring are the world's only eyes on Tehran's program. The head of Iran's nuclear agency on Monday ruled out an even more drastic move, saying Tehran does not intend to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Enrichment is at the center of the standoff between Iran and the West because it can be used both to produce material needed for atomic weapons as well as fuel for nuclear power plants. Iran insists it only wants the latter.
New enrichment plants, on the scale of the one Iran already operates in the town of Natanz, would be extremely expensive, take years to build and would be difficult to stock with centrifuges and other necessary equipment while sanctions are in place, Albright said.
Further dimming the credibility of the plan, 10 new facilities on the scale of Natanz would put Iran in league with the production levels of any of Europe's major commercial enrichment suppliers, said Albright, president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security.
"And also they don't have enough uranium. They would need a massive amount of uranium," he said.
A diplomat from one of the six world powers attempting to engage Iran on its nuclear program described the Iranian announcement as a "political move" with little immediate significance beyond demonstrating Tehran's defiance.
The diplomat, who follows the nuclear dossier the IAEA has gathered on Iran, noted that Tehran appears to have significant problems with its present enrichment program, to the point that it cannot even keep the centrifuges it has set up at Natanz running without breakdowns.
The diplomat demanded anonymity because he was not authorized to comment on the issue.
Still, the announcement is of major concern because it could signal an intention to put up numerous decoy sites to deceive the outside world, while building perhaps a few secret military enrichment sites on a small scale that could be put to use in weapons production if Tehran decides to do go down that path, Albright said.
Such concerns were heightened with the recent discovery that Iran had a second, previously unknown enrichment facility burrowed partway into a mountain near the holy city of Qom.
"I tend to think that this Qom site was probably meant to be a clandestine facility for breakout that they wanted built for nuclear weapons," said Albright. "And now that it's been exposed they may want to replace it."
Iran's announcement triggered calls for new penalties that Albright said could evolve into a "mini-cold war strategy" to further isolate and contain Iran while holding out a hand for negotiations.
The United States' ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, said Iran's plans would be "completely inappropriate" and would further isolate it from the world.
In Paris, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner called Iran's decision "a bit childish."

"Iran is playing an extremely dangerous game," Kouchner said on France's RTL radio Monday. "There's no coherence in all this, other than a gut reaction."

The French defense minister, Herve Morin, said the international community should "probably commit toward new economic sanctions against Iran."

Iran and the top powers at the U.N. are deadlocked over a U.N.-drafted proposal for Iran to send much of its enriched uranium abroad, which the West seeks because it would at least temporary leave Tehran unable to develop a nuclear bomb. So far Iran has balked at the offer. The unusually strong IAEA censure of Iran over enrichment was a sign of the West's growing impatience with its defiance.

Iranian Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi, who heads the nuclear program, told state radio that the decision to build the new uranium enrichment facilities was necessary to respond to the resolution.

"We had no intention of building many facilities like the Natanz site, but apparently the West doesn't want to understand Iran's peaceful message," Salehi said.

Salehi said Iran would not go so far as to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, under which Iran is subject to oversight by the U.N. nuclear agency.

"If we wanted to obtain nuclear weapons, we would have pulled out of NPT ... Iran doesn't want to withdraw from the treaty," the official IRNA news agency quoted him as saying Monday.

Iran's parliament speaker Ali Larijani insisted "a diplomatic opportunity" was still possible "under which Iran will continue its (nuclear) work under international surveillance."

But a day earlier, Larijani warned that Iran could reduce its cooperation with the IAEA if the West continues its pressure and doesn't compromise.

___

Keyser reported from Cairo. Associated Press Writers George Jahn in Vienna and Ingrid Rousseau in Paris contributed to this report.

Unbridled imports crippling Nigeria

KANO, Nigeria (AFP) –
Despite huge natural resources and vast tracts of arable land, Nigeria, sub-Saharan Africa?s second largest economy and the continent's most populous nation, largely relies on imports.

The once agro-driven and food self-reliant economy, Nigeria has in recent decades relied more and more on oil, becoming a net importer of even the most basic goods.

"We import almost everything, from the important items such as food and medicines to the frivolous ones such as toothpick and razor blade," said Ibrahim Ayagi, economic adviser to former president Olusegun Obasanjo.

"We have become a classical importer nation," lamented Ayagi, ex-chairman of a government think tank, the National Economic Intelligence Committee (NEIC).

In 2007, Nigeria spent about 39 billion dollars (26 billion euros) on imports according to the World Bank, while the CIA factbook puts the value of imports for 2008 at 46 billion dollars.

Agriculture Minister Abba Sayyadi Ruma recently said a billion dollars is spent on fruit juice imports yearly. In a bid to encourage local production, the government in October banned the consumption of foreign alcohol at official events as it launched an ambitious 'Made-in-Nigeria' campaign.

Manufacturers see imports as more profitable than producing in a country desperately starved of electricity.

The discovery 50 years ago, of oil, which provides the country with 95 percent of its foreign exchange earnings and some 80 percent of budgetary income, is seen as largely responsible for some of Nigeria's woes.

About 70 percent of Nigeria?s 150 million people engage in subsistence farming and before the oil boom in the 1970s, the country grew enough to feed itself and export surplus.

Agriculture then accounted for nearly 60 percent of GDP, but this has tumbled to just over 30 percent.

"A country?s economy is gauged by its GDP. Its volume of production determines its economic growth and the fact that we don?t produce much explains our economic woes," Abdullahi Adamu, head of National Agricultural Foundation of Nigeria said.

He said only half of arable land is under cultivation, suggesting 90 million Nigerians are food insecure.

Nigeria used to rely on cash crops for its foreign exchange earnings with cocoa, rubber, cotton and groundnuts as its major export earners but with the discovery of oil in the 1950s, crude export took over as the major export earner.

Easy oil money lured the government to abandon industrial development and concentrate on oil export, leading to the "national culture of oil export for commodities import," Ayagi said.

The country now ranks as the world?s eighth largest oil producer with an estimated daily output of around two million barrels per day. But it even imports most of the refined oil as its refineries are ailing.

"The problem started with the discovery of oil and worsened over time to this moment where we virtually import everything," said Ayagi, also an economics professor.

The non-oil sector accounts for 3.9 percent of GDP, according to the country's statistical office. The World Bank put that figure at 2.6 percent in 2007.

Nigeria grapples with woeful power shortages due to dilapidated equipment and corruption. It needs a minimum of 20,000 megawatts but currently generates some 3,000 megawatts, according to National Electricity Regulatory Commission.

"Many factory owners have abandoned their factories for imports, particularly from Asia," said Ali Madugu of the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria in Kano.

Umar Sani Marshall is one of such manufacturer-turned importer. He abandoned his pasta and biscuits factory in Kano and turned to automobile and electronics imports from Asia.

"To operate my factory I needed to spend 10,000 dollars every week to power my machines, which translated into 40,000 dollars a month. You can?t make any profit with such ridiculous overhead cost," Marshall said as he gave an AFP reporter a tour of his dusty and desolate factory.

"I can make a fortune from 40,000 dollars worth of imported goods," Marshall said with a wink.

Sarah Palin coy about 2012 run, but door is open

NEW YORK – Sarah Palin said in an interview broadcast Tuesday that a 2012 presidential bid is "not on my radar," but wouldn't rule out playing some role in the next presidential election.
"My ambition, if you will, my desire is to help our country in whatever role that may be, and I cannot predict what that will be, what doors will be open in the year 2012," she told Barbara Walters.
When asked whether she'd play a major role, the former Republican vice presidential candidate replied that "if people will have me, I will."
Palin is making the rounds to promote her new book, "Going Rogue," which came out Tuesday. On Monday, she appeared on "The Oprah Winfrey Show."
Palin said she's gotten plenty of offers during the past few months, including to open up her family for a reality show, that she has rejected. She also said she wasn't sure whether a talk show would be best for her family.
"I'd probably rather write than talk," she told Walters.
The former Alaska governor said she'd rate President Barack Obama's performance a 4 out of 10. She criticized the president for his handling of the economy and for "dithering" on national security questions.
"There are a lot of decisions being made that I — and probably the majority of Americans — are not impressed with right now," she said on ABC. She said Obama's Nobel Peace Prize was "premature."
Palin also discussed David Letterman, whom she criticized for a sexually suggestive jokes made at the expense of her teenage daughter in June. Letterman eventually apologized to Palin.
Palin told Walters she has ruled out an appearance on Letterman's late night TV show. "I don't think that I'd want to boost his ratings," she said. "I do want him to sell my book, though I hope he keeps it up."
The title of Palin's book refers to a phrase John McCain's campaign used to describe his vice presidential running mate going off message. In the book, she criticizes the people who ran McCain's campaign and says she wished she had been allowed to speak more freely. But she told Walters the outcome probably would not have been different if she had.
"The economy tanked," she said. "(The) electorate was ready, sincerely, for change."
On the controversy about the $150,000 spent on her wardrobe by the campaign, Palin said there was a double standard: No one ever questions male candidates where their shoes or suits came from, she said. In the end, she added: "The clothes all went back. They were never my clothes."
Despite the internal squabbling and ultimate loss, Palin said she would go through the experience again. "(I) would do it again in a heartbeat," she told Walters.
And though she backed the first federal bailout, Palin says she would not support a second. "That did not put our economy back on the right track. So we learn from our mistakes."
During her interview with Winfrey, which was taped last week, Palin said that it's heartbreaking to see the road that Levi Johnston, the father of her grandson, has taken and that the soon-to-be Playgirl model hasn't seen his baby in a while.
The new memoir doesn't mention Johnston, who has sparred repeatedly with his former mother-in-law-to-be. When Winfrey asked about Johnston, Palin said she didn't think "a national television show is the place to discuss some of the things he's doing and saying."
But Palin went on to say she finds it "a bit heartbreaking to see the road that he is on right now" and that "it's not a healthy place to be."

Palin also said Johnston remains a member of the family and that they can work out any troubles. She said she prays for him and that he has an "open invitation" to Thanksgiving dinner.

Winfrey began the interview by asking Palin if she felt snubbed at not getting an invitation to "The Oprah Winfrey Show" last year. Winfrey said she didn't have any candidates on her Chicago-based show during the campaign because of her support for President Barack Obama.

Palin said she didn't feel snubbed and told Winfrey, "No offense to you, but it wasn't the center of my universe."

___

AP Writer Caryn Rousseau in Chicago contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

http://www.abcnews.com

http://www.oprah.com

Failed anti-depressant drug could be 'women's Viagra'

WASHINGTON (AFP) –
A drug that failed to fight the blues could be the female answer to the little blue pill Viagra, the lead North American investigator analysing tests of the drug said Tuesday.

Women who took the drug flibanserin when it was being tested as an anti-depressant said it didn't help them beat the glums, but did give them "an increase in libido that they liked," John Thorp, one of the investigators analyzing data from three clinical trials of the drug, told AFP.

Lack of desire is the most common sexual problem in women aged 30 to 60, just as erectile dysfunction, for which Viagra is one of a choice of treatments, is the most common sexual disorder among men in the same age bracket, Thorp said.

"Men remain interested but can't act or perform properly and women lose interest," said Thorp.

"So where Viagra and other erectile dysfunction medications work in the blood supply, flibanserin works in the brain," he said.

In the light of the women's reactions to flibanserin, the German drug company that had first tested the drug as a treatment for depression, Boehringer Ingelheim, several years ago began exploring the possibilities of it being the active ingredient in the female answer to Viagra.

Clinical trials were held in Canada, Europe and the United States to test the drug's efficacy in raising the level of sexual desire in women.

Nearly 2,000 pre-menopausal women were given flibanserin or a placebo for 24 weeks and asked to report back to researchers or make diary entries on six variables, including the number of satisfactory sexual encounters they had and their level of sexual desire.

The studies found that 100 milligrams a day of flibanserin resulted in "significant improvements" in the two variables.

Flibanserin is currently an investigational drug and is only available to women taking part in clinical trials.

Kuwait says OPEC to keep production steady

KUWAIT CITY (AFP) –
Kuwait's Oil Minister Sheikh Ahmad Abdullah al-Sabah said on Tuesday OPEC will leave its production unchanged at its meeting next month, adding that current oil price was "comfortable."

"Nothing. (Quota will remain) as is," the minister told reporters when asked if the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could alter its production quota at its December 22 meeting in Angola.

"Seventy-five to 80 dollars a barrel is a good and comfortable price," the minister said.

His comments match those of OPEC president Jose Maria Botelho de Vasconcelos, who told reporters on the sidelines of a conference on Gulf energy security in Abu Dhabi that oil at 75 to 80 dollars a barrel "is a good price... for the recovery of the world economy."

But the Kuwaiti minister said that if the oil price rose to around 100 dollars a barrel "at that time we should have another discussion."

Sheikh Ahmad said demand for the crude "is picking up everywhere."

"There is ample supply," on the markets, he added.

Asked about the indications of the oil price for 2010, the minister said that it was early to judge.

"This will depend on the (global) economic recovery. Maybe this (price rise) is the effect of stimulus packages. Let's give it more time," he said.

Oil fell slightly in Asian trade on Tuesday after overnight gains spurred by a weak dollar and hopes of improved energy demand amid a global recovery.

New York's main contract, light sweet crude for December delivery eased 20 cents to 78.70 dollars a barrel.

Brent North Sea crude for January delivery fell 32 cents to 78.44 dollars a barrel.

Kuwait the fourth-largest producer of OPEC, a 13-member cartel of oil-rich nations, and is pumping just over 2.2 million barrels per day.

When a hug becomes a kiss of death (Politico)

Charlie Crist is getting killed by a hug.
The Republican governor is being bombarded with images of him hugging President Barack Obama when he was in Florida to pitch his $787 billion economic stimulus plan earlier this year.
In just the past two weeks, that hug has appeared in an ad by the conservative Club for Growth attacking Crist, in a Democratic National Committee e-mail highlighting his recent assertion that he actually didn’t “endorse” the stimulus bill and in headlines all over Florida, including one Wednesday that read: “Charlie Crist needs to figure out a way to undo a hug.”
It will only get worse.
“These kinds of images can be deadly,” said Republican strategist Mark McKinnon. “Circumstances and context don’t matter. People impose their own meaning and interpretations. And it’s impossible to undo.”
It is one of the oldest and simplest forms of affection. It’s spanned cultures and religions and gone without stigma for generations. In politics, though, it’s never that simple. And as people, and politicians, have become more comfortable with the hug — particularly the “man hug” (always with a handshake in between to keep the chests from touching) — a downside of this friendly gesture has emerged.
Crist, who until recently maintained untouchable approval ratings, is now getting a taste of what a string of politicians over the past decade have learned the hard way: You’ve got to watch whom you hug.
In other words, political PDAs can be career killers.
Sometimes the hug comes and goes (Hillary Clinton and Yasser Arafat’s wife). Other times, it becomes such a fixture in a campaign that it indelibly labels a candidate (John McCain and George W. Bush).
The hug is most dangerous when it reinforces a narrative that’s already resonating with voters.
Take Crist. It’s not only that his Obama hug feeds into the widespread distrust of him among conservative Florida Republicans and allows his U.S. Senate primary opponent, Marco Rubio, to paint him as a liberal. Crist’s bipartisan embrace also comes at a time when there is a mounting effort among some in the GOP to drive out Republican candidates who aren’t seen as conservative enough.
Democratic strategist Chris Lehane called Crist’s bipartisan hug a “twofer.”
“This hurts him,” he said.
Roger Handberg, a political science professor at the University of Central Florida, put it more starkly: “What’s Charlie Crist’s hug of Obama going to do for him?” he asked. “Probably get him defeated.”
Handberg predicted that Rubio will “beat him to death with the picture.”
The hug attack is fairly new. That it exists at all indicates a cultural shift. As Lehane noted, it’s hard to imagine John F. Kennedy publicly hugging fellow politicians, as the macho cast of the HBO series “Entourage” does.
Crist has tried to shrug off the hug. “I’m a civil guy,” he explained when the gesture started to creep up as an issue.
But civil translates in civics, not in politics, where spontaneous moments of seemingly innocuous public displays of affection can come back to haunt someone.

In the past few election cycles, the hug has done its share of damage.

Ned Lamont was a political novice in 2006 when he ran a successful primary challenge against Sen. Joe Lieberman that was essentially based on the image of the veteran Connecticut Democrat being embraced by President George W. Bush after the 2005 State of the Union address. Bush even appeared to give Lieberman a peck on the cheek.

Lieberman’s embrace of the embattled Republican president played into the already-prevailing notion that he was out of touch with his liberal New England constituents.

Lamont supporters distributed a campaign button showing the moment, labeling it “the kiss.” After former President Bill Clinton campaigned in Connecticut for Lieberman, the senator’s camp made a button showing Clinton with his arm around Lieberman, labeling it “the hug.” And Lieberman held on to win as an independent.

But even embracing the wrong politician during a better time can be deadly. And Crist needs to look no further than his home state to see the hazards of a hug.

McCain’s embrace of Bush at a rally in Pensacola, Fla., in 2004 was meant to signal that the two former rivals had buried the hatchet after their bitter 2000 primary. But the moment was so awkward and strained that it seemed less than believable.

Then, in 2008, the Bush-McCain hug was splashed on billboards and in television ads. Just before the Republican National Convention last year, a Democratic Party spokesman said the image was a key part of a plan to “spend every day looking for every opportunity” to draw the connection between McCain and Bush. It certainly didn’t help McCain with independent voters who were down on Bush — and who flocked to Obama in the election.

Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle tried to leverage a Bush hug to his advantage.

Struggling for reelection in North Dakota, Daschle used the image of Bush embracing him on the Senate floor in 2001 to help him among conservatives. “Daschle: Time to Unite Behind Troops, Bush” read the headline above the image in his television ad. He still lost.

Dick Gephardt’s 2004 presidential campaign was done in by a hug from Bush. The former House majority leader recently told The Wall Street Journal: “The Howard Dean campaign ran multiple TV ads with me hugging George W. Bush, and I never recovered from that with liberal primary voters.”

There are instances when candidates overcome a perilous embrace.

One Bush-hug survivor, Texas Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar, was able to fend off a primary challenge even though his opponent played up a photograph of Bush embracing Cuellar while he stood on the Republican side of the aisle during the State of the Union.

New York Republicans hit Hillary Clinton during the 2000 Senate campaign for her hug and kiss of Suha Arafat, the wife of the late Palestinian leader, after Arafat gave a speech in the West Bank attacking Israel. “While Israel sacrifices for peace, Arafat spreads hatred and lies — and Hillary embraces her,” said one ad aimed at turning New York’s sizable Jewish population against Clinton.

But Clinton was able to push past it because she had a long record of supporting Israel. And once the criticism started coming, Clinton became adamantly more pro-Israel — and was elected to the Senate.

So far, Crist’s embrace of Obama appears to be having an impact. Rubio has seen an uptick in fundraising, and Crist is already running campaign ads a year before the election.

The question for the Republican governor is: Can he live it down?

“Charlie’s very vulnerable at this stage,” Handberg said. “You know, a picture’s worth 1,000 words. ... It’s highlighting all of his weaknesses.”

But if there’s one universal truth about the hug, it’s that circumstances change.

If Crist survives the Republican primary, the hug may reappear — in his own ads.

Read More Stories from POLITICOA guide to who gets whackedObama, Hu talk economic cooperationCLICK: Top 10 state dinner guestsOne-man crusade taking toll on EnsignMcCain mum on Palin's account

Races an early test of Obama influence

WASHINGTON – In a very early test of President Barack Obama's political influence, two states are choosing whether to continue Democratic rule while voters elsewhere elect a handful of congressmen and big-city mayors.
Elected just a year ago, the president has spent a considerable amount of time and energy trying to ensure that Democrats win governor's races in Virginia and New Jersey and pick up a GOP-held congressional seat in upstate New York.
In doing so, Obama raised the stakes of a low-enthusiasm off-year election season — and risked political embarrassment if any lost.
All three could.
Heading into Tuesday's elections, Democrat gubernatorial candidate R. Creigh Deeds was trailing Republican Bob McDonnell in polls by double digits in Virginia. In a three-way race in New Jersey, Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine was in a close race with Republican Chris Christie and independent Chris Daggett. And in the race to fill the vacant 23rd Congressional District seat in New York, Democrat Bill Owens was in a tight fight with conservative Doug Hoffman after the GOP's hand-picked candidate bowed out over the weekend.
Elsewhere, California Lt. Gov. John Garamendi is expected to maintain the Democratic Party's hold on the open 10th Congressional District seat near San Francisco, while New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to cruise to a third term. Atlanta, Houston, Boston, Detroit and Pittsburgh also will elect mayors, while voters in Maine and Washington weigh in on same-sex unions and voters in Ohio decide whether to allow casinos.
To be sure, it's easy to overanalyze the results of such a small number of elections in a few places. The results will only offer hints about the national political landscape and clues to the public's attitudes. And the races certainly won't predict what will happen in the 2010 midterm elections.
But, given that Democrats control the White House and Congress, defeats in Virginia — a new swing state in national elections — or New Jersey — a Democratic stronghold — would be setbacks for the White House, even though both states having long histories of electing governors from a political party opposite that of the president.
After all, this is a president who won a year ago in an electoral landslide after building a fundraising and organizational juggernaut that attracted scores of new voters into what Obama loyalists have called a movement. And this is a party that has comfortable majorities in the House and Senate — and that controls governor's mansions in Virginia and New Jersey.
As the Democratic Party chief, Obama had little choice but to work hard to elect Corzine and Deeds; doing otherwise would have been seen by the base as a breach of duty.
So, he campaigned several times for Corzine and raised money for Deeds. Obama also was featured in campaign advertisements for both. He characterized the success of their candidacies as key components for the White House to make good on its political promises and advance its agenda. And he deployed the Democratic National Committee and his own political campaign arm, Organizing for America, to ensure the swarms of new voters he attracted in 2008 turn out even if he's not on the ballot.
Of the two races, a Republican victory in Virginia would be the most telling about potential trouble ahead for Democrats as they compete in swing states next fall.
Long reliably Republican in national races, Virginia is a new swing state. It's home to a slew of northern bellwether counties filled with swing-voting independents who carried Obama to victory last fall, the first Democrat to win the state in a White House race since 1964. Rapidly growing counties like Loudoun and Prince William swung toward Democrats in the 2005 governor's race, previewing an Obama win three years later.
Conversely, New Jersey is a traditional Democratic-leaning state with an incumbent Democratic governor. As such, it's the trickier of the two for Republicans to win — and yet the GOP just might.

Muslim ex-Gitmo detainees face challenges in Palau

KOROR, Palau – Six former Guantanamo Bay detainees brought to Palau for resettlement have received a warm official welcome, but a plan to deport Bangladeshi workers could halve this Pacific Island nation's already-tiny Muslim community, making integration harder.
The ex-detainees, who are Muslim ethnic Uighurs from a region in China's far west, already face tough challenges to adapt to their new lives in Palau after eight years in the U.S. military camp in Cuba, although they will be provided housing, job training and a full-time interpreter.
President Johnson Toribiong himself welcomed the group when they arrived before dawn Sunday on a secret flight, and he will treat them to a personal tour of the Rock Islands, a diving attraction that is country's top tourist destination, later this week as part of their orientation.
But Toribiong has also announced plans to send home between 200 and 300 Bangladeshi Muslim migrants whose work visas have expired, and last month he banned anyone else from the South Asian country from entering Palau. No timetable has been set for deporting the Bangladeshis.
Palau's Muslim community of about 500 is made up almost completely of Bangladeshi migrant workers. Reducing their number by half could make the Uighurs' transition to island life that much more difficult.
"They need a community of Muslims," Mujahid Hussain, the only Pakistani in Palau, said of the Uighurs.
"They need to sit together and pray together. So if they send home a lot of the Bangladeshis, that's going to be a problem," Hussain, 36, told The Associated Press on Monday.
Announcing the decision to repatriate the Bangladeshis whose visas have expired, Toribiong said last week it has nothing to do with the Uighurs but is a reflection of his administration's commitment to the rule of law.
"We follow the principles of justice and fairness," he said, adding that Bangladeshis with valid work permits have nothing to fear.
The Uighurs (pronounced WEE'-gurs) have been kept out of the public eye and away from media since they arrived.
They hail from one of the most landlocked regions on earth and are making the jump from the prison-like conditions of Guantanamo to another alien environment — the leisurely pace of a palm-fringed tropical island.
Muslims here say they will accept the newcomers.
"All the Muslims, they are our brothers," said Mohammed Main Uddin, 26, as he gathered with about 50 others recently for traditional Friday prayers at the small tin-roofed building sitting atop bamboo stilts that serves as one of just two mosques in Palau.
The Uighurs will be welcome as long as they "follow the Muslim rules" on tolerance and peace, said Uddin, a sweet potato farmer who moved to Palau from Bangladesh four years ago.
The Uighurs brought here were among 22 Chinese Muslims picked up by American forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan in 2001 on suspicion of terrorism. They were taken eventually to Guantanamo, where they were held without trial as "enemy combatants."
The Uighurs were approved for release after a federal court ruled they were not enemy combatants, but they spent months in legal limbo as U.S. officials tried to find somewhere to send them. China calls them terrorists and has demanded they be returned. Uighur activists say they would face persecution and possibly death in China.
After protracted negotiations, the six agreed to accept Palau's offer of resettlement. Seven others are still at Guantanamo. One of them did not receive an invitation to resettle in Palau over concerns about his mental health.
Lawyers for the remaining Uighurs at Guantanamo say that among their clients' concerns about going to Palau is the lack of an existing Uighur population.

Palau is an archipelago of about 200 islands 800 miles (1,290 kilometers) east of the Philippines. It has just 20,000 residents, most of them of Micronesian origin with strong clan and family ties. The country is overwhelmingly Christian, with church pews filled on Sunday mornings. The community is close-knit, and, like other outsiders, the Uighurs are likely to find it hard to fit in.

"Some Palauans want (the Uighurs) to come here and some don't," says Johnson Salii, 41, a taxi driver. "Palauans are good people, so they will make friends with them."

Bangladeshis began arriving in Palau about a dozen years ago seeking steady work and a reprieve from the conflict and poverty plaguing their homeland. They mostly work as farmers, laborers and night watchmen, and they are at the bottom rung of Palauan society.

Most of them make the minimum wage for foreigners of $1.50 an hour — a dollar below the rate for Palauans. Like other immigrants in Palau — Palau hosts as many as 6,000 Filipinos — they don't mix much with the locals.

"The tourists come here for the natural beauty," said Harun Rashid, a 40-year-old gas station attendant who moved to Palau 13 years ago. "We are like tourists also, but we work here."

An influx of Bangladeshi immigrants in 2004 and 2005 more than doubled Palau's Muslim community, before the government moratorium on new arrivals.

"Language barriers and fraud among recruiters have resulted in social tensions and problems for the Palauan government, which does not have formal diplomatic ties with Bangladesh," the U.N. refugee agency said in a 2007 report. It did not elaborate, and there have been no reports of fighting between Palauans and migrants.

The United States is paying Palau a little less than $100,000 for each Uighur to cover housing, educating and food costs, Toribiong said.

Toribiong has stressed the Uighurs' resettlement is temporary, saying it could last "a few months or a few years."

Though they won't get Palauan passports, Toribiong says, the Uighurs will be free to leave Palau — if they can find a country that will take them.

Clinton eases praise of Israel after Arab concerns

MARRAKECH, Morocco – Trying to mute Arab criticism that the Obama administration had retreated from its tough stance on Israeli settlements, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday softened her praise for Israel's offer to restrain new housing in Palestinian areas.
While Israel was moving in the right direction in its offer to restrict but not stop the settlements, Clinton said, its offer "falls far short" of U.S. expectations.
Clinton said her earlier praise of Israel's offer, during a stop in Jerusalem, had been intended as "positive reinforcement." But her comment drew widespread criticism from Persian Gulf ministers who interpreted it as a U.S drawback on settlements, which have been the main obstacle to a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.
In a sign of U.S. eagerness to calm Arab concerns, Clinton is extending her trip by one day to fly to Cairo to meet with President Hosni Mubarak on Wednesday, her staff announced. She had been scheduled to return to Washington on Tuesday.
Clinton's comments in Jerusalem on Saturday appeared to reflect a realization within the Obama administration that Netanyahu's government will not accept a full-on settlement freeze and that a partial halt may be the best lesser option. Her appeal on Saturday seemed designed to make the Israeli position more palatable to the Palestinians and Arab states.
Clinton had traveled to the region only reluctantly, concerned her visit might be seen as a failure, according to several U.S. officials. She agreed to meet Israeli and Palestinian leaders after pressure from the White House, according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal administration thinking.
During a photo-taking session Monday with her Moroccan counterpart, Clinton was asked by a reporter about the Arab reaction, and she responded by reading from a written statement that appeared designed to counter the skepticism about the Obama administration's views on settlements.
"Successive American administrations of both parties have opposed Israel's settlement policy," she said. "That is absolutely a fact, and the Obama administration's position on settlements is clear, unequivocal and it has not changed. As the president has said on many occasions, the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."
Clinton's tweaking of her earlier remarks appeared to satisfy at least some of the Morocco meeting attendees. Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki said Monday that "we have heard her say something completely different from that statement in line with previous statements, so we are happy that such a position was highlighted and brought back to the right line and right now we will see how things will go."
Malki added that "we completely appreciate the sincere efforts made by President Barack Obama and his team to take this issue as a top priority and to try to deal with it from day one."
In her recalibrated comments Monday, Clinton also called on the Israelis to do more to improve "movement and access" for Palestinians and on Israeli security arrangements.
She added, however, that Israel deserved praise for moving in the right direction.
"This offer falls far short of what we would characterize as our position or what our preference would be," she added. "But if it is acted upon, it will be an unprecedented restriction on settlements and would have a significant and meaningful effect on restraining their growth."
In her statement to reporters, Clinton also stressed that the Palestinian authorities deserved credit for what she called "unprecedented" steps to improve security in the West Bank and praised the Palestinians for progress in training their security forces.
On Monday evening, Clinton met with representatives of the Gulf Cooperation Council, plus officials from Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Morocco. Clinton also flew Monday to the south-central city of Ouarzazate for an audience with King Mohammed VI, then returned to Marrakech for talks with foreign ministers of several Persian Gulf nations.
Clinton was expected to meet separately with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, who has rejected U.S. appeals for improved Arab relations with Israel as a way to help restart Middle East peace talks.
After taking office in January, Obama buoyed Palestinian hopes for progress toward establishing a Palestinian state with his outreach to the Muslim world and an initially tough stance urging a full freeze to all settlement construction.
But after making little headway with the Israelis in recent months, Clinton urged Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in a face-to-face meeting in Abu Dhabi on Saturday to renew talks, which broke down late last year, without conditions. Abbas said no, insisting that Israel first halt all settlement activity in the West Bank and east Jerusalem — lands the Palestinians claim for a future state.

Then, at a joint news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu late Saturday in Jerusalem, Clinton praised Netanyahu's offer to curb some settlement construction, saying it was an unprecedented gesture.

That statement provoked a chiding by Palestinian government spokesman Ghassan Khatib. Jordan and Egypt also issued statements Sunday critical of the latest U.S. approach.

___

Associated Press writer Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.