Egyptian foreign minister rejects US intervention - The Guardian

Protesters in Tahrir Square. The US has warned that Cairo has not done enough to meet the protesters' demands. Photograph: Pedro Ugarte/AFP/Getty Images

The Egyptian leadership is pushing back against American pressure for rapid political reform, again warning that mass demonstrations and spreading strikes to demand President Hosni Mubarak's immediate resignation could lead to a military coup.

Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, rejected Washington's demand for concrete actions to show that major change is under way, saying that Washington should not "impose" its will.

The White House responded by warning that Cairo has not done enough to satisfy what the Obama administration has previously characterised as the legitimate demands of the protesters.

"I think it is clear that what the government has thus far put forward has yet to meet a minimum threshold for the people of Egypt," said Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman.

Earlier this week, the US vice-president, Joe Biden, called Mubarak's deputy, Omar Suleiman, the former intelligence chief who is now overseeing dealings with the opposition and the promised political transition, to urge him to immediately lift the oppressive 30-year state of emergency.

In an interview with PBS television in the US, Aboul Gheit was asked if he regarded Biden's call as helpful advice from a friend.

"No, not at all. Why is it so? Because when you speak about prompt, immediate, now – as if you are imposing on a great country like Egypt, a great friend that has always maintained the best of relationship with the United States, you are imposing your will on him," he said.

The Times has reported that Saudi Arabia has threatened to prop up Mubarak if the White House tries to swiftly force him from power. It said that King Abdullah told Obama two weeks ago not to humiliate Mubarak and said Saudi Arabia would step in to replace the $1.5bn (£0.9bn) in annual US aid to Egypt, most of it to the military, if Washington cuts off assistance.

Such an offer would embolden Suleiman who would otherwise be concerned about the impact on the army about the sudden loss of financing.

King Abdullah has defended Mubarak and accused "intruders" of meddling in Egypt's affairs.

Aboul Gheit said that the US should accept the extended timetable for political change outlined by the Egyptian leadership which centres on Mubarak resigning at elections in September.

"So for Americans to come and say 'Change is now', but already we are changing! Or 'You start now', we started last week. So better understand the Egyptian sensitivities and better encourage the Egyptians to move forward and to do what is required. That is my advice to you," he said.

However, talks with Mubarak's political opponents have faltered before they even gained traction after the regime declined to consider the establishment of an interim government.

Diaa Rashwan, a member of a key opposition group, the Council of Wise Men, told the Guardian that talks are going nowhere for now and that pro-democracy campaigners are alarmed at Suleiman's warning - since reiterated by Aboul Gheit - that if the protests continue there could be a military coup.

"The regime is taking a hard line and so negotiations have essentially come to an end. Suleiman's comments about there being a danger of a coup were shocking to all of us. It was a betrayal of the spirit of negotiations, and is unacceptable," he said. "The regime's strategy has been just to play for time and stall with negotiations. They don't really want to talk to anyone. At the start of this week they were convinced that the protests were going to fade away."

Instead, the government was faced with its largest demonstration to date in Cairo on Tuesday with another mass turnout planned tomorrow (Friday), Some trade unions have thrown their weight behind the opposition cause with a series of strikes.

Rashwan said that the lack of swift progress in the talks and the upsurge in protest has shifted the initiative back to the street.

The Egyptian foreign minister said that Mubarak has not considered stepping down immediately as the demonstrators are demanding because it would lead to chaos and possibly a coup.

"When you have a president who is stepping down, you have one of two possibilities. The demonstrators and the opposition insisting that they compose a government unconstitutional. And then maybe the armed forces would feel compelled to intervene in a more drastic manner," he said. "Do we want the armed forces to assume the responsibility of stabilizing the nation through imposing martial law, and army in the streets? The army is in defence of the borders of the country and the national security of the state. But for the army to rule, to step in, to put its friends on the scene, that would be a very dangerous possibility."

View the original article here

Julian Assange faces 'man-hater prosecutor and media trial' in Sweden - The Guardian

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange leaves Belmarsh magistrates court, London. Photograph: Suzanne Plunkett/Reuters

The prosecutor leading the rape and sexual assault case against Julian Assange is a "malicious" radical feminist who is "biased against men", a retired senior Swedish judge has told the hearing into Assange's extradition to Sweden.

In caustic evidence on the first day of the two-day hearing, Brita Sundberg-Weitman, a former appeal court judge, told Belmarsh magistrates court that Sweden's chief prosecutor, Marianne Ny, who is seeking the WikiLeaks founder's extradition, "has a rather biased view against men". "I can't understand her attitude here. It looks malicious," she said.

Geoffrey Robertson QC, acting for Assange, asked if it was her view that Ny wanted "to get [Assange] into her clutches and then arrest him no matter what?"

"Yes" said Sundberg-Weitman. "It might be her attitude to have the man arrested and maybe let him suffer for a few weeks to have him softer [for interrogation]."

Such was the hostility towards Assange in Sweden that "most people take it for granted that he's raped two women", she said. The country is seeking Assange's extradition in relation to allegations of rape, sexual assault and sexual molestation made by two women in August.

He denies all the allegations and has not been charged.

Under cross-examination by Clare Montgomery QC, for the Swedish government, however, Sundberg-Weitman admitted she had no personal knowledge of the conduct of the prosecutor in the case, basing her views instead on what she had been told.

She also acknowledged that while she believed the warrant to have been disproportionate, a Swedish district court and the appeal court, considering evidence from Assange's Swedish lawyer Björn Hurtig, had judged it both proportionate and legal. "I must say I am very concerned about the state of the rule of law in Sweden," she said in response. "It has been decaying since the mid-1970s."

The hearing is being presided over by Judge Howard Riddle, the chief magistrate. Assange listened intently from the dock, watched by supporters including Jemima Goldsmith, Bianca Jagger and Tony Benn, who had agreed to attend following an invitation from Goldsmith.

Montgomery also led the former judge to acknowledge that she was not an expert in the European arrest warrant, despite criticising its use in this case, and challenged line by line the newspaper article on which she said she was basing her assertion that Ny was a "radical feminist".

Sundburg-Weitman pointed to lectures on sexual violence that the prosecutor had made, to which Montgomery said: "But she's a rape prosecutor." The former judge maintained her assertion that the prosecutor was "a bit biased".

Robertson argued that both Ny and Claes Borgström, the lawyer representing the two women, were politically motivated. Ny had illegally confirmed Assange's identity on the charges when asked by a Stockholm tabloid, he said (accused sex offenders are customarily anonymous in Sweden).

"This man Borgström", meanwhile, had vilified Assange in the press and "would be behind bars for contempt in this country," the lawyer said.

Also called by the defence was Göran Rudling, a Swedish blogger and campaigner on the country's rape laws, which he believes are not tough enough.

Rudling said he was not a supporter of Assange or WikiLeaks, but had taken an interest in the case after finding tweets that were later deleted sent by "Miss A", one of the two women, in the hours after the alleged offences, in which she had asked if anyone was holding a crayfish party that she could attend with Assange, and in a tweet from the partythat she was "sitting outside at 2am, with the coolest and smartest people".

"It meant that the story told to police was not consistent with the tweets," he said. He had reported the tweets to police but had not heard back from them, he said.

Rudling also translated another document for the court that he had found on the internet, entitled "A seven point programme for legal revenge", apparently posted by Miss A in January 2010 but deleted in November. The last point included the admonition: "Remember, your victim has to suffer as much as he made you suffer."

Asked had he seen the police file relating to the case, Rudling said his knowledge was based on a 100-page bundle of documents faxed in November by Hurtig to Mark Stephens, Assange's British solicitor, and leaked onto the internet last week.

Earlier, Robertson, in opening the case for the defence, said that the Swedish custom of trying rape cases in secret was a "flagrant denial of justice". Assange had been subject to "trial by media", and it was "hyperbolic and irrational to suggest there was wickedness involved" in Assange's sexual behaviour, he said.

All relationships had "moments of frustration, irritation and argument", he said. "It doesn't mean that the police are entitled to slip between the bedclothes."

The act of "minor rape" allegedly committed by Assange against the second woman would not be an extradition offence in English law, he said. After three "utterly consensual" sex acts, she had objected to Assange having sex with her again without a condom, but "she let him continue". "It's not natural to call this rape."

Outside court, Assange said that since August "a black box has been applied to my life. On the outside of that black box has been written the word rape. That box has now, thanks to an open court process, been opened. I hope in the next days you will see that the box is in fact empty."

The case continues.

View the original article here

Multiculturalism: Mr Cameron's crude caricature solves no problems - The Guardian

Multiculturalism is one of the most flexible words in the political lexicon, meaning whatever the speaker wants it to mean.

To its defenders, it is the principle that people of different faiths and traditions should be able to live side by side, without surrendering their identities. To its detractors, it is the notion that the state should sponsor cultural division, exempting minority groups from certain obligations of citizenship. Viewed this way, multiculturalism is seen as excusing behaviour that should never be tolerated in a civilised democracy.

That is the interpretation given in a speech in Munich yesterday by David Cameron. He drew a direct connection between "the doctrine of state multiculturalism" and the insularity of Muslim communities that can foster terrorism.

Britain, the prime minister said, has "encouraged different cultures to live separate lives" with the effect of "weakening our collective identity". This has contributed to a disorientation among young Muslims that makes them susceptible to extremist preachers. The antidote, according to Mr Cameron, is a more consistent, robust promotion of liberal-democratic values – human rights, religious tolerance, gender equality – and a greater emphasis on shared British cultural attributes. He calls it "active, muscular liberalism".

It is a forcefully worded intervention on a sensitive topic and therefore guaranteed to cause controversy. Probably, that was part of the intention. Uncontroversial pronouncements don't make headlines. But the provocative tone also guarantees a more frenzied debate, which suits the least tolerant forces in society.

It was sad and predictable that Mr Cameron's words were quickly hailed by the far right, anti-Muslim English Defence League, which held a rally in Luton yesterday. Any speech that heartens the fascist fringe must be deemed a failure.

But at one level, Mr Cameron is right. The state should never turn a blind eye to cruelty and crime out of some misguided sense of cultural sensitivity. That is as true in cases of female genital mutilation, forced marriage and "honour killing" as it is in the case of jihadi preaching.

Police, social workers and teachers have all sometimes been guilty of excusing appalling or dangerous behaviour instead of confronting it. Meanwhile, the government has often failed to make the right partnerships with the Muslim community. That is generally because there is no such thing as "the Muslim community", but, rather, a patchwork of communities, with their distinct traditions and beliefs. That is one reason why the Home Office and local government have struggled effectively to manage funds that are meant to promote social cohesion. Misallocated grants can end up in the hands of groups that foster division.

In fairness to Mr Cameron, these problems can reasonably be seen as unintended consequences of multiculturalism. But it is some extrapolation to then say the whole concept has failed.

At the end of his speech, Mr Cameron made an ambitious leap from bemoaning social segregation to blaming government intervention per se. Integration, he maintains, will happen when people from different communities find "common purpose", released from the burden of the state. He stopped short of weaving "muscular liberalism" into the "Big Society", perhaps because he was addressing a foreign audience unfamiliar with his pet project for civic renewal.

But the prime minister cannot seriously believe that big government is the main cause of social division, still less that his cuts agenda solves the problem. He says, for example, that he wants to make sure more immigrants learn English. Who will teach them? The courses are all run by further education colleges whose budgets are being annihilated. At the heart of Mr Cameron's analysis is a sound impulse. He wants the boundaries of acceptable behaviour – cultural, social, political – to be set in line with modern liberal notions of equal rights and then applied, without fear, favour or prejudice to every section of society. Who could disagree?

But wishing it were so will not get him any closer to achieveing that goal. Nor will caricaturing multiculturalism as some sinister big state project to undermine national unity get him closer to fostering collective solidarity.

The problems Mr Cameron identifies are not new. Headline-grabbing rhetorical flourishes are no substitute for policy solutions.

View the original article here

Merkel call for eurozone economic harmonisation prompts protests - The Guardian

Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy backed eurozone economic policy harmonisation at the EU summit. Photograph: Lionel Bonaventure/AFP/Getty Images

The two most important leaders in the EU today announced radical new plans for coordinated economic government across mainstream Europe in an attempt to fix the flaws exposed over the past year in the single currency.

The proposal represents German chancellor Angela Merkel's new-found conviction that greater fiscal and economic union is required for the crisis-stricken eurozone to survive. But, along with President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, she has run into strong opposition, mainly from smaller EU countries fearful of losing control over national policies on taxation, pensions and social security systems.

"Germany and France will make clear," announced Merkel, "that we are defending the euro not just as a currency… [but also as] a political project … We want to send out a clear message that, as the EU, we intend to grow together. What we want to establish is a pact for competitiveness."

Sarkozy announced a summit of the 17 eurozone leaders early next month – only the third such gathering in the euro's history – to try to agree on a package of economic and fiscal policies to be tightly coordinated among the different countries.

The sudden shift in stance by Berlin, which has always opposed fast-track economic integration of the eurozone because of the fear that it would create a two-tier EU, represents a huge leap for Merkel and defines her response to the year-long crisis destabilising the single currency, triggered by sovereign debt emergencies among the eurozone's weaker states.

Merkel wants agreement by next month on policies aimed at harmonising corporation tax rates, retirement ages, national bank rescue plans, and the abolition of index-linking for wages in the 17 eurozone countries. But tonight in Brussels, countries as diverse as the Netherlands, Slovenia, Belgium and Austria were already balking at the proposals. "We don't need to accept any diktat from Berlin," said a Belgian official, who suggested that national legislation indexing wages to inflation would not be ditched to suit Berlin or Paris.

"A lot of countries have very big difficulties with the proposals," said one diplomat from a smaller state. "But we cannot now say that we are against the Franco-German proposal, because that would send the wrong signal to markets."

The Dutch also view tax and pension policies as sacrosanct areas. Luxembourg, Estonia and Ireland will resist outside influence over their low corporation tax rates. Austria jealously guards national sovereignty over wages and pensions policy. And even though France lined up alongside Germany to announce the package, it is uneasy about several of the German demands.

The opposition that surfaced last night within hours of Merkel and Sarkozy announcing their proposal for eurozone economic government will mean weeks of tussling in Brussels and EU capitals. But resistance to a blueprint that has been drawn up in Berlin will be difficult because the scheme is the German condition for standing behind a new permanent eurozone bailout fund, which is to be up and running by 2013 and whose details are to be decided in the next four months.

In return for agreement on the Franco-German competitiveness pact by next month, Berlin will bow to pressure to bolster its guarantees on the eurozone's current temporary €440bn rescue fund raising its lending capacity in case Portugal or Spain need to join Greece and Ireland in being saved from national insolvency.

View the original article here