---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

The UN General Assembly condemned Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces and praised the opposition on Wednesday, but a decline in support for the resolution suggested growing unease about extremism among Syria's fractious rebels.

While the non-binding text has no legal force, resolutions of the 193-nation assembly can carry significant moral and political weight. There were 107 votes in favour, 12 against and 59 abstentions - a drop in support compared with a resolution condemning the Syrian government that passed in August with 133 votes in favour, 12 against and 31 abstentions.

Diplomats cited concerns that Syria could be headed for "regime change" engineered by foreign governments and fears about a strengthening Islamist extremist element among the rebels as reasons for the decline in support for the resolution.

Russia, a close ally and arms supplier for Assad, strongly opposed the resolution drafted by Qatar, which Assad's government has accused of arming the rebels seeking to oust him. But Moscow, which along with China has used its veto three times to prevent Security Council action against Assad, could not block the motion as there are no vetoes in the General Assembly.

Diplomats said the Russian delegation wrote to all U.N. members urging them to oppose the resolution. Moscow has complained that the resolution undermines U.S.-Russian efforts to organize a peace conference that would include Assad's government and rebels, a meeting U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has said would likely take place in early June.

Syrian U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari told the General Assembly before the vote that the resolution went against the U.S.-Russia push for a diplomatic solution to the 2-year-old crisis, which the United Nations says has killed at least 80,000 people.

"It is running against the current, especially in the light of the latest Russian-American rapprochement, which the Syrian government welcomed," Ja'afari said.

U.S. Deputy Ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo argued that the resolution was consistent with the Russian-U.S. initiative and sent "a clear message that the political solution we all seek is the best way to end the suffering of the people of Syria."

British Prime Minister David Cameron told reporters at U.N. headquarters in New York that he did not want planning for the conference to become "too long a process." He said pressure should be put on all warring parties to come up urgently with names for a transitional government "that everyone in Syria can get behind.

Some U.N. diplomats and officials, however, are sceptical that the U.S.-Russian initiative will resolve the deadlock, which has prevented the 15-nation Security Council from taking any action on Syria, given the wide gulf between Moscow and Washington.

DOUBTS INCREASE ABOUT THE REBELS

Wednesday's resolution, which had strong backing from Western and Gulf Arab states, was originally conceived to give Syria's U.N. seat to the opposition Syrian National Coalition. But U.N. diplomats said it became clear in early negotiations that such a move would not pass the assembly, where many delegations fear their own governments could one day face rebel uprisings.

The resolution did, though, welcome the establishment of the Syrian National Coalition "as effective representative interlocutors needed for a political transition."

The Syrian National Coalition welcomed the U.N. resolution, but said in a statement that much more needed to be done with a greater urgency to end the suffering of the Syrian people.

Syria accuses Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United States, Britain and France of arming the rebels. The countries have denied the allegations but the rebels keep getting arms.

South Africa Ambassador Kingsley Mamabolo said his country, which voted in favour of the previous resolution condemning Assad's government, abstained this time because it opened the door to "regime change" by forces from outside Syria.

Experts have long said the militant al-Nusra Front in Syria is receiving support from al Qaeda-linked militants in neighbouring Iraq. The group has claimed responsibility for deadly bombings in Damascus and Aleppo, and its fighters have joined other Syrian rebel brigades.

Iran, Bolivia, Venezuela, North Korea, Belarus and other delegations that tend to oppose U.S. policy at the United Nations also voted no. Ecuador, which abstained last year, said it voted against the resolution because it feared it legitimized a coup and wondered "who will be the next country on the list."

Indonesia, which voted in favour of the August resolution, said it abstained mainly because of the resolution's implied recognition of the Syrian opposition.

Mohammad Khazaee, the ambassador of Syria's ally and arms supplier Iran, accused the rebels of using chemical weapons against Syrians, something the opposition says was done by Assad's government and not rebel forces. He also spoke of an increasing number of "terrorist and extremist groups" in Syria.

Russia also warned about terrorist elements in Syria.

A U.N. plan for a chemical weapons investigation has been blocked because Assad's government has refused to grant an international inspection team unfettered access in the country. The government only wants the team to inspect Aleppo and not Homs, both sites of alleged chemical weapons attacks that the rebels and government accuse each other of perpetrating.

The vote could show that recent images of savagery from the civil war - a rebel commander biting a heart ripped out of an enemy combatant - may be undermining the case of those arguing Syria would be better without Assad.

TheFre have also been grisly images of acts committed by Assad's forces making their way around the Internet.

Another reason for drop in support for the resolution, envoys said, may be the fact that Assad remains in control of much of the country and has demonstrated that his armed forces and allied militia have not lost the war - although they have not been able to win either.

"I'm convinced a lot of countries voted for (last year's) text because they believed they were voting for the winning side," a senior Western U.N. diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said in reference to the August, 2012 resolution. "They are not so sure anymore."

"Now also you have the Islamist, terrorist factor which is much more conspicuous," he said.

The Syrian conflict started with mainly peaceful demonstrations against Assad, but turned into a civil war in which the United Nations says at least 80,000 people have been killed. Islamist militants have emerged as the most potent of the anti-Assad rebels.

Wednesday's vote came as Washington and European governments have been mulling the benefits and risks of supplying arms to Syrian rebels.

A French official said on Wednesday that France was floating a proposal that the European Union should ease an arms embargo but delay acting on the decision to intensify pressure on Damascus to negotiate an end to the civil war.

---

---

The White House on Wednesday sought to defuse controversy over its handling of last year's killing of Americans in Benghazi, Libya, by releasing emails detailing a back-and-forth discussion inside the administration about how to describe the incident to the public.

President Barack Obama has faced Republican criticism that his administration covered up details of the assault, especially after a news report last week said the emails were edited to omit a CIA warning of an al Qaeda threat.

There appeared to be little in the roughly 100 pages of emails that has not been leaked previously. Senior administration officials told reporters at the White House the emails were released to clear up misinformation about the process.

The emails were the basis for the controversial "talking points" memos that U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice used when discussing the attacks that killed four Americans in Benghazi.

Republicans say the talking points were an attempt to portray the attacks as arising from a spontaneous protest, and not an organized terrorist assault, so as to protect Obama in last year's presidential campaign from any charges that he was weak on fighting terrorism.

They believe the emails show the talking points were changed because of intervention by a State Department that felt vulnerable for not doing more to prevent the attacks.

"The seemingly political nature of the State Department's concerns raises questions about the motivations behind these changes and who at the State Department was seeking them," said Brendan Buck, a spokesman for Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner.

The State Department raised concerns about references in the talking points that could be used by members of Congress to criticize State officials for not heeding warnings by the CIA about the threat from militants in eastern Libya, the emails show.

The officials said the emails showed the talking points were based on intelligence information approved by the CIA and meant to avoid pre-judging the outcome of an FBI investigation into the September 12, 2012, attacks.

---

---

An early Monday morning at Maputo's International Airport finds the departure lounge packed with commuters waiting to fly to Mozambique's booming coal town.


Brazilians, Portuguese and Mozambicans, already dressed for work in their company-coloured shirts, are about to board the flight for the 100-minute journey to Tete.


Five years ago, there were just two planes a week to Tete, once better known for its searing heat and tender goat meat. Now, there are 12.


A combination of rising coal prices, increased demand and in-depth surveys that revealed vast seams of high grade coking coal underground have attracted seven different international mining companies to the area.


Production started in 2011 but such is the scale of the coal reserves, once mining reaches full capacity - from 2015 - Mozambique will be vying to join the top 10 coal producers in the world.


The expectation is that mining will fuel the whole country's development, and that Tete and its surrounds will become prosperous and thriving.


Tete itself is already being transformed. What was once a sleepy town is a becoming a bustling city.


Piled high



The group of children jumping into the Zambezi, apparently unconcerned by the crocodiles lying on the sand banks just downstream, belie the activity nearby.


The suspension bridge that spans the majestic river to reach the coal mining area is choked with traffic.


And, while the centre is small with low colonial buildings and villas by the river bank, Tete is expanding, mainly in the direction of the nearby town of Moatize where many of the mining subcontractors have their offices, factories and accommodation.


Coal is stockpiled above ground while waiting to be transported to port
Brazilian mining giant Vale was the first to establish itself in Tete in 2004.
About 10km (six miles) from the city is a grass-covered hill dotted with large trees. This is fertile land, and Tete's curse, some say. The best arable land close to the river is also where you find the most valuable coal.


From the highest hill, through the heat haze, there is a spectacular view of the Vale plant. Painted bright blue, it looks like a model factory with red excavators transporting coal from mine to an open storage area.
Just next to the plant, lying on the ground, is the coal that Vale has dug out of the ground in recent weeks.


But there is a problem. The coal lined up in enormous neat piles cannot be transported to port and thence to market.


"We need to get this coal to the port before we produce more," says Altiberto Brandao, Vale's coal operations director.


"The coal can be stored in the open air up to six months, after that the quality deteriorates," he explains, adding that production was stopped for the whole of March as a result of the hold up.


Mozambique's dilapidated infrastructure is to blame. There is only one railway line to take the coal to Beira the nearest port, 575km (357 miles) away.


Such is the condition of the track that trains are constantly being derailed and in February several kilometres of the railway were washed away by floods. Repairs were still being carried out in mid-March.


Three coal mining companies are now building or proposing to construct entirely new railways to export their coal.


However, it is not clear if the lines will be open to all or if Mozambique will end up with three competing railway lines.


It is not just coal that is piling up. Local frustration with the recent development is also growing.


It is generally held that Vale mishandled the resettlement of 5,000 people who were moved to make way for its mining operation.


At one point, protesting groups from the resettled population blocked the railway in protest at what they said were broken promises.


The conflict has only partly been resolved, despite Vale's efforts last year to make amends.


There are also rumblings on the streets about the lack of jobs for locals, using workers from abroad and not buying locally grown produce.
Backlash?



Vicente Adriano, a teacher of long standing in Moatize, says that few of his former pupils have been employed by the mining companies and those that have are either "guards or chauffeurs".


Furthermore, Mr Adriano says, the impression is that those getting the jobs come from other parts of Mozambique or from neighbouring countries. He says he worries there could be a violent backlash.


"We can already hear the mumbling on the streets and the issue has found its way into songs and poems. That´s always where it starts," he says.


There have been complaints that too few locals have been employed by the mine companies



Mr Brandao says Vale does its best to recruit locally.


"It's difficult to find the skills we need here. The jobs are highly technical and there is no technical institute here," he says.


"We compete with coalmines in Australia and Canada. We don't get a higher price for the coal because it's extracted in Africa. It's easy to blame the companies but the problems were here before."


Vale says it employs nearly 400 workers from Tete province - out of a 1,400 strong workforce - and are recruiting 300 others for training, a third of whom are earmarked for jobs in a new mine opening next year.


Local government officials admit they have been slow to response to the mining boom and the need of skilled labour.


"We were taken by surprise by the boom. We were not prepared," says Americo Conceicao, acting permanent secretary of Tete province.


He says there are plans for a new technical school, but admits: "Of course we should have done that 10 years ago."

Processed food


However, one thing the province is ready to supply is food.

Mr Conceicao says he is frustrated that the new companies are importing pre-packaged food and not buying locally.


"I had a coffee with one of the directors the other day," he recounts. "I said to him, if you need 100 tonnes of tomatoes and we just have 10 tonnes. Please buy the 10 tonnes we have. Next time we will be able to produce 15 tonnes."


But the companies want pre-packaged foodstuffs and these services are not found in Tete.

Mr Conceicao recognises the need to develop a local food processing industry, but nothing has been done yet.


Vale has a plan of setting up a small industry in Cateme, where the majority of the resettled populations live, Mr Brandao says.


This would create employment were it is badly needed and maybe also dampen the criticism.


The mining companies still have a job to convince the population of Tete and Moatize about the benefits of coal.


There are more banks, shops, restaurants and hotels than before the boom.


But for the population still living on smallholdings or minimum wages, this is not the kind of benefits they were hoping for.


They are also living with the less visible side effects of the development; rising criminality and increased prices for food and housing.


Vicente Adriano is not impressed by the mining companies' commitment to development in Tete and Moatize.


"Look at the roads, still full of potholes," he laments. "Not much has been done in the schools [either]. Everything has just become much more expensive. Nothing has really changed here to the better."

---

---

The United States is rethinking its opposition to arming the Syrian rebels, President Barack Obama's defence chief said on Thursday, even as Obama himself signalled that no decision to deepen U.S. involvement in the conflict was imminent.

Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel cautioned that giving weapons to the forces fighting President Bashar al-Assad was only one option being considered by the United States. It carries the risk of arms finding their way into the hands of anti-American extremists among the insurgents, such as the Nusra Front.

But it may be more palatable to many in the United States than direct U.S. military intervention in the conflict, such as carving out a no-fly zone or sending in troops to secure chemical weapons.

Asked whether the Obama administration was rethinking its opposition to arming the rebels, Hagel said, "Yes."

"You look at and rethink all options. It doesn't mean you do or you will" choose them, Hagel told a Pentagon news conference.

Obama, speaking in Mexico, said the United States would "look at all options." But he also signalled no decision would be rushed.

"We want to make sure that we look before we leap and that what we're doing is actually helpful to the situation, as opposed to making it more deadly or more complex," Obama said.

Pressure on Obama to act on Syria has grown since the disclosure of U.S. intelligence that Assad's forces likely used chemical weapons on a small scale, particularly sarin gas.

The Syrian government has also mounted a string of attacks reaching from the capital, Damascus, and the central city of Homs out to the Mediterranean coast, homeland of the Alawite minority sect to which Assad himself belongs.

Forces loyal to Assad stormed the coastal village of Baida on Thursday, killing at least 50 people, including women and children, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

An Obama administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said re-examining the option of arming the rebels was part of a broad look at ways to hasten an end to the conflict, which has cost more than 70,000 lives and forced refugees to flee to U.S. allies Turkey and Jordan.

"Does that mean that they (arms) will be provided? No, it means we're reviewing all options to see how we can accelerate the transition in Syria," the official told Reuters.

Most Americans do not want the United States to intervene in Syria's civil war even if the government there uses chemical weapons, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Wednesday.

British Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, speaking alongside Hagel, noted that his government was constrained by a European Union ban on supplying armaments to the rebels.

"Both of our nations will only do what we legally can do," Hammond said, adding his government would "look at the situation when that ban expires in a few weeks' time."

CHEMICAL WEAPONS

The Obama administration would be extremely reluctant to authorize any intervention involving a large-scale U.S. ground force, and Hagel warned of the risks of Americans being mired in a broad, regional conflict.

The Pentagon has developed plans, however, to potentially deploy troops if needed to secure Syrian chemical weapons sites.

"Any kind of boots-on-the-ground scenario like Iraq is not likely at all," the U.S. official said.

Indeed, the United States has resisted being dragged militarily into Syria's conflict and is providing only non-lethal aid to rebels trying to overthrow Assad.

The U.S. official denied that looking again at possibly arming the rebels was being done in response to the intelligence assessment of Syria's likely use of chemical weapons.

The White House has not specified what evidence it has that Syrian forces used sarin, but U.S. government sources said it included samples of blood from suspected victims, and of soil.

Obama has called any confirmed use of such weapons a "game changer," but said last week the evidence was only preliminary and that he would not allow himself to be pressured prematurely into deeper intervention in Syria's two-year-long civil war.

Hammond noted that any evidence of chemical weapons use would need to be at a very high legal threshold to justify military action - particularly with memories still fresh from the Iraq war.

Then, faulty intelligence was used to justify the Iraq invasion in pursuit of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons that turned out not to exist.

Asked whether it might take another chemical weapons attack before the United States and Britain could gather the right kind of evidence, Hammond said it was not that they "necessarily would need" a new attack, even as he acknowledged that evidence of chemical weapons use degraded with time.

"But clearly, if there were future use of chemical agents, that would generate new opportunities for us to establish a clear evidence of use to a legal standard of evidence," Hammond said.

"There is a very strong view that we have to have very clear, very high-quality evidence before we make plans and act on that evidence."

Ake Sellstrom, the Swedish scientist leading a U.N. inspection mission charged with investigating allegations of chemical weapons attacks in Syria, met U.S. chemical weapons and regional experts at the State Department on Thursday.

U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon said on Monday the investigators had been gathering and analyzing available information on alleged chemical weapons attacks in Syria but that access to the war-torn country was needed for a "credible and comprehensive inquiry."

Syria has blocked unconditional and unfettered access by the U.N. mission, which has an advance team in Cyprus ready to deploy to Syria within 24 to 48 hours, and it is unlikely it will gain that type of access any time soon.

---

---

North Korea's continuing development of nuclear technology and long-range ballistic missiles will move it closer to its stated goal of being able to hit the United States with an atomic weapon, a new Pentagon report to Congress said on Thursday.

The report, the first version of an annual Pentagon assessment required by law, said Pyongyang's Taepodong-2 missile, with continued development, might ultimately be able to reach parts of the United States carrying a nuclear payload if configured as an intercontinental ballistic missile.

North Korea launched a multi-stage rocket that delivered a satellite into orbit in December, an advance that "contributes heavily" to the country's development of a long-range ballistic missile capability, the report said.

It is also continuing to refine its atomic weapons capability, including with a nuclear detonation in February, and is capable of conducting "additional nuclear tests at any time," the report said.

"These advances in ballistic-missile delivery systems, coupled with developments in nuclear technology ... are in line with North Korea's stated objective of being able to strike the U.S. homeland," the report said.

"North Korea will move closer to this goal, as well as increase the threat it poses to U.S. forces and allies in the region, if it continues testing and devoting scarce regime resources to these programs," it said.

The document characterized North Korea as one of the biggest U.S. security challenges in the region because of its effort to develop nuclear arms and missiles, its record of selling weapons technology to other countries and its willingness to "undertake provocative and destabilizing behaviour."

The report comes at a sensitive time in the region, with friction between Washington and Pyongyang only now beginning to ease following two months of increasingly shrill rhetoric that seemed to edge the Korean peninsula close to war.

Tensions between the two countries rose sharply after North Korea put the satellite into space in late December and conducted the nuclear test in February. The test triggered new U.N. sanctions, which led to a barrage of threats from Pyongyang.

North Korea went so far as to warn of nuclear strikes on the United States and South Korea, as its new leader, Kim Jong-un, marked his first year in office following the death of his father.

The U.S. and South Korean militaries went ahead with a long-scheduled military exercise despite the threats and Washington sending stealth bombers and other planes to the region in a show of force.

North Korea signed a deal to get rid of its nuclear program in exchange for aid in 2005 but later backed out of the pact and now says it will not give up its atomic weapons program.

The United States has firmly rejected North Korean demands that it be recognized as a nuclear-armed state. Washington has stepped up its diplomacy with China over the issue.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---