Japan 'underestimated risk' - UN

The UN nuclear energy agency has said Japan underestimated the risk of a tsunami hitting a nuclear power plant.

 

This image shows the first waters of the tsunami breaching the Fukushima power plant's buildings

However, the response to the nuclear crisis that followed the 11 March quake and tsunami was "exemplary", it said.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) draft report also said a "hardened" emergency response centre was needed to deal with accidents.
The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, which was badly damaged by the tsunami, is still leaking radiation.
The IAEA inspectors spent a week in Japan compiling their report on the Fukushima nuclear crisis, a summary of which has been handed to the Japanese government.
A full report will be submitted at an inter-governmental meeting in Vienna later this month, intended to improve nuclear safety around the world.
The UN team was led by Britain's top nuclear safety official Mike Weightman and includes experts from France, Russia, China and the United States.
Independent regulators
The inspectors pointed out a key failure, already admitted by Japan, to plan for the risk of waves crashing over the sea wall and knocking out the plant's back-up generators.
Even though a major faultline lies just offshore, the sea wall at Fukushima was less than 6m (20ft) high. The height of the tsunami wave was about 14m.
"The tsunami hazard for several sites was underestimated," the UN team's three-page preliminary report said.
"Nuclear plant designers and operators should appropriately evaluate and provide protection against the risks of all natural hazards," it said.
Amid concerns about safety, just 17 of the country's 54 reactors are operating.
Continued monitoring of the health and safety of the nuclear workers and the general public was necessary, it added.
The report also emphasised the importance of independent regulators in the nuclear industry.
In Japan there has been criticism because the Nuclear Safety Agency is part of the industry ministry, which promotes nuclear power.
"The planned road map for recovery of the stricken reactors is important and acknowledged. It will need modification as new circumstances are uncovered and may be assisted by international co-operation," the IAEA report said.
Goshi Hosono, an aide to Prime Minister Naoto Kan, accepted the report and said the government would need to review its nuclear regulatory framework.
The government invited the IAEA in to Japan to demonstrate that lessons are being learned from what happened at Fukushima, says the BBC's Roland Buerk in Tokyo.
The powerful earthquake and the tsunami it generated are now known to have killed more than 15,280 people, while nearly 8,500 remain unaccounted for.

Counterprotesters confront Westboro Baptist

Protesting members of the controversial Westboro Baptist Church were met with an unlikely group of counterprotesters Monday at Arlington Cemetery.

 

Hours before President Barack Obama led the nation's Memorial Day observances at the Tomb of the Unknowns, three members of the Westboro Baptist Church were challenged by others who disagreed with them -- including members claiming to be from the Ku Klux Klan.
The Kansas-based church has attracted nationwide attention for its angry, anti-gay protests at the funerals of U.S. military members.
Among those counter-protesting at the cemetery's main entrance: About 10 members of a group that claims to be a branch of the Ku Klux Klan from Virginia called the Knights of the Southern Cross. They were cordoned off separately in a nearby area, but drew little attention as they gave out small American flags behind a banner that read "POW-MIA."
They said they were there to object to the Westboro Baptist Church's anti-troop message.
"It's the soldier that fought and died and gave them that right to free speech," said Dennis LaBonte, the self-described "Imperial Wizard" of the KKK group that he said he formed several years ago.
"That's fine," said Abigail Phelps, the daughter of Westboro Baptist Church founder Fred Phelps. "They have no moral authority on anything.
"People like them say it's white power ... white supremacy," Phelps said. "The Bible doesn't say anywhere that it's an abomination to be born of a certain gender or race."
LaBonte insisted he is not a racist nor a "hate-monger," but said he believes the white race is "slowly and most assuredly being denigrated."
Members of the group declined to say whether they were armed.
A larger group of about 70 protesters -- separate from the KKK -- located across the street waved pro-USA signs and took turns shouting down the Westboro Baptist Church group.
Some of the counterprotesters, including Malaika Elias, stood in front of the Westboro participants in an attempt to block them from street view.
"I think they're twisted and confused, and we're just here to show them there are people who think they're completely wrong," Elias said.
Many passersby shouted their thanks to the counterprotesters as they entered the cemetery on foot and in vehicles.
Several police officers, some on horseback, observed the proceedings.

Phelps said her trio was there to tell people they should not "idolize" the dead, especially those who died for an "unrighteous cause."

Egyptian general admits 'virginity checks'

A senior Egyptian general admits that "virginity checks" were performed on women arrested at a demonstration this spring, the first such admission after previous denials by military authorities.

The allegations arose in an Amnesty International report, published weeks after the March 9 protest. It claimed female demonstrators were beaten, given electric shocks, strip-searched, threatened with prostitution charges and forced to submit to virginity checks.
At that time, Maj. Amr Imam said 17 women had been arrested but denied allegations of torture or "virginity tests."
But now a senior general who asked not to be identified said the virginity tests were conducted and defended the practice.
"The girls who were detained were not like your daughter or mine," the general said. "These were girls who had camped out in tents with male protesters in Tahrir Square, and we found in the tents Molotov cocktails and (drugs)."

The general said the virginity checks were done so that the women wouldn't later claim they had been raped by Egyptian authorities.
"We didn't want them to say we had sexually assaulted or raped them, so we wanted to prove that they weren't virgins in the first place," the general said. "None of them were (virgins)."
This demonstration occurred nearly a month after Egypt's longtime President Hosni Mubarak stepped down amid a wave of popular and mostly peaceful unrest aimed at his ouster and the institution of democratic reforms.
Afterward, Egypt's military -- which had largely stayed on the sidelines of the revolution -- officially took control of the nation's political apparatus as well, until an agreed-upon constitution and elections.
Mubarak denies ordering shootings
The March 9 protest occurred in Tahrir Square, which became famous over 18 historic and sometimes bloody days and nights of protests that led to Mubarak's resignation.
But unlike in those previous demonstrations, the Egyptian military targeted the protesters. Soldiers dragged dozens of demonstrators from the square and through the gates of the landmark Egyptian Museum.
Salwa Hosseini, a 20-year-old hairdresser and one of the women named in the Amnesty report, described to CNN how uniformed soldiers tied her up on the museum's grounds, forced her to the ground and slapped her, then shocked her with a stun gun while calling her a prostitute.
"They wanted to teach us a lesson," Hosseini said soon after the Amnesty report came out. "They wanted to make us feel that we do not have dignity."
The treatment got worse, Hosseini said, when she and the 16 other female prisoners were taken to a military detention center in Heikstep.
There, she said, she and several of other female detainees were subjected to a "virginity test."
"We did not agree for a male doctor to perform the test," she said. But Hosseini said her captors forced her to comply by threatening her with more stun-gun shocks.
"I was going through a nervous breakdown at that moment," she recalled. "There was no one standing during the test, except for a woman and the male doctor. But several soldiers were standing behind us watching the backside of the bed. I think they had them standing there as witnesses."
The senior Egyptian general said the 149 people detained after the March 9 protest were subsequently tried in military courts, and most have been sentenced to a year in prison.
Authorities later revoked those sentences "when we discovered that some of the detainees had university degrees, so we decided to give them a second chance," he said.
The senior general reaffirmed that the military council was determined to make Egypt's democratic transition a success.

"The date for handover to a civil government can't come soon enough for the ruling military council," he said. "The army can't wait to return to its barracks and do what it does best -- protect the nation's borders."

Al-Qaeda fighters seize Yemeni city

Yemeni gunmen alleged to be al-Qaeda fighters have reportedly taken control of the capital of the southern Abyan province.
A resident told Al Jazeera on Sunday around 300 fighters entered the southern coastal town of Zinjibar on Friday.
Other residents said the fighters had taken over "everything" in the area, but the reports could not be independently verified by Al Jazeera due to official restrictions on reporting by foreign media.
The developments came amid reports that an informal ceasefire in Yemen between security forces loyal to Ali Abdullah Saleh, the president, and a tribal group had brought a pause in political unrest.



The pro-opposition Hashed tribe has been clashing with forces loyal to Saleh, whose 33-year rule demonstrators have been trying to bring down in protests that have lasted three months.

Al Jazeera's sources said that despite the truce, explosions were heard in Sanaa, the Yemeni capital, on Saturday.
Fighting this week has killed at least 120 people and prompted thousands of residents to flee Sanaa.

Saleh, who has backed out of a deal brokered by the Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) to step down peacefully, warned last week that al-Qaeda could take over in many parts of the Arabian Peninsula country if he is forced out of office.
There are worries that impoverished Yemen, where some 40 per cent of the country's 23 million people live on less than $2 a day, could become a failed state and located on a shipping lane through which three million barrels of oil pass daily.
The United States and Saudi Arabia, both targets of foiled attacks by the Yemen wing of al-Qaeda, are concerned any spread of anarchy could embolden the rebel group.
With the political strife, the Yemen-based al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) is likely to have more freedom to use a proven talent for daring bombing plots, analysts said.
"Given how distracted Saleh's government is in its attempts to cling to power, AQAP has much more open space in which to operate at the moment," Gregory Johnsen, a Yemen scholar, said.

In another development, three French aid workers disappeared in Yemen's southern province of Hadramout on Saturday, but it remains unclear whether they had been abducted.

Tenuous calm
Tribal sources and residents said a tenuous calm prevailed in Sanaa's northern district of Hasaba, the scene of heavy clashes this week for control of government buildings, and outside Sanaa, a city now divided between the sides.
A government official said mediated talks were planned aimed at reducing tensions and fighting had been suspended for the duration of the discussions.
The International Crisis Group, a think-tank, said a broad, lasting ceasefire was needed immediately and should be part of a plan that leads to a transition of power.
"To prevent further escalation and loss of life, the most urgent step is for both sides to immediately accept a ceasefire mediated by Yemen's statesmen and tribal leaders," the ICG said in a "conflict risk alert" issued late on Friday.
Foreign states should be involved, it said, "but, given the deeply personal and tribal nature of the feud between the Salehs and al-Ahmars, it cannot be addressed effectively by international mediation or initiatives alone".
Global powers have little sway in Yemen, where tribal allegiances are the most powerful element in a volatile social fabric and the fighting already appears to be playing out along tribal, quasi-feudal lines.


The political crisis has already cost the economy as much as $5bn and immediate aid is needed to prevent a meltdown in the country with a nominal GDP of $31bn, the country's trade minister told the Reuters news agency.
"The economy should not be held hostage to the political crisis, because the situation is alarming," Hisham Sharaf Abdalla said.
On Friday, Yemeni tribesmen said they had captured a military compound from elite troops loyal to the president 100km outside Sanaa, widening a conflict that so far has been concentrated mainly in the capital.

New conditions
The fighting has overshadowed a largely peaceful protest movement that started months ago aimed at ending Saleh's 33-year-long rule and inspired by the movements that brought down the long-standing leaders of Tunisia and Egypt.
Saleh has repeatedly imposed new conditions each time a Gulf-led transition agreement was due for signing, most recently demanding a public signing ceremony, according to mediators.

Machinegun fire and explosions rattled Sanaa this week before clashes eased after mediation efforts. Al-Ahmar's fighters evacuated government ministry buildings they had taken over in return for a ceasefire and troops withdrawing from their area.

Yemen forces agree on ceasefire

Yemen's president and the country's most powerful tribal leader have agreed a ceasefire after five days of fighting in the capital Sanaa, a mediator says.

Hashid tribesmen have fought to protect the compound of Sheikh Sadiq al-Ahmar

At least 124 people have died in battles between forces loyal to Hashid leader Sheikh Sadiq al-Ahmar and President Ali Abdullah Saleh.
A tribal mediator says both sides have agreed to withdraw their troops.
Meanwhile in southern Yemen, three French aid workers are feared kidnapped after going missing, officials say.
The three are reported to have gone missing in Hadramawt in the south-east.
Gun battles
The ceasefire brings a halt to gun battles that had threatened to push Yemen into civil war.
The clashes began when President Saleh's security forces attacked the compound of Sheikh Ahmar, in the Hassaba neighbourhood of Sanaa.

Armed tribesmen fought back and reportedly seized control of several government buildings in the area.

The tribal mediator said the sides have now agreed to withdraw their forces from Hassaba, beginning on Sunday morning.
President Saleh is under pressure to step down after months of street protests, but has so far refused to sign a power-transition deal mediated by the Gulf Co-operation Council.
The three missing French aid workers had been in Seyun since mid-April working for Triangle Generation Humanitaire, a French NGO working in Yemen since 1998.
A Yemeni security official told the French news agency AFP that the three men were reported missing on Saturday afternoon when they failed to return to their residence in Seyun.
He added that their mobile phones "were suddenly switched off".
"Units of the security forces were immediately deployed to search for them," he said.
"The most likely thing is that they have been kidnapped."
The French foreign ministry in Paris confirmed that three French nationals had gone missing and said authorities were doing everything possible to find them.
On its website, Triangle Generation Humanitaire says its work in Yemen includes aiding Somali refugees and helping provide clean water in the southern port of Aden.

A spokesman for the group told Reuters news agency there had been no word from its three workers since 1000 GMT. He declined to name them.
"For the moment, we have no news. We are in a crisis situation, information is arriving little by little," he said.
He said the three had been on their way home from work when they vanished.
There have been dozens of kidnappings of foreigners in Yemen over recent years, and most have been freed unharmed.
Yemen's powerful tribes frequently kidnap people in order to bargain with the government in disputes.

Japan plant 'unready' for typhoon

Japan's crippled Fukushima nuclear plant is not fully prepared for heavy rain and winds of a typhoon heading towards the country, officials admit.

The problems with the Fukushima nuclear plant have raised questions over Tepco's future

Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco), which runs the plant, said some reactor buildings were uncovered, prompting fears the storm may carry radioactive material into the air and sea.
Typhoon Songda is expected to hit Japan as early as Monday.
Fukushima was heavily damaged by the deadly 11 March quake and tsunami.
'Inappropriate measures'
"We have made utmost efforts, but we have not completed covering the damaged reactor buildings," a Tepco official said on Saturday.
"We apologise for the lack of significant measures against wind and rain," the official added.
Tepco has been pouring anti-scattering agents - such as synthetic resins - around the damaged buildings of reactors one and four.
But some of the buildings still remain uncovered after they were damaged by hydrogen explosions soon after the quake and tsunami struck.
A special adviser to Prime Minister Naoto Kan criticised Tepco, saying that the current safety measures "cannot be said to be appropriate".
Adviser Goshi Hosono added: "We are now doing the utmost to prevent further spreading of radioactive materials".
Typhoon Songda - with winds up to 216km/h (134mph) - was moving north-east and could hit Japan on Monday, the Japan Meteorological Agency said.
It was unclear whether Fukushima could be directly in the path of the storm.
Tepco and Japan's government have faced widespread criticism - both at home and abroad - over their handling of the Fukushima crisis.

Egypt eases blockade at Gaza's Rafah border

Egypt has relaxed restrictions at its border with the Gaza Strip, allowing many Palestinians to cross freely for the first time in four years.

Click to play

Gazans will want to see how much change the open crossing will bring

Women, children and men over 40 are now allowed to pass freely. Men aged between 18 and 40 will still require a permit, and trade is prohibited.
The move - strongly opposed by Israel - comes some three months after Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak lost power.
Egypt and Israel closed borders with Gaza when Hamas seized power in 2007.
Israel retains concerns that weapons will be imported into Gaza through the Egyptian frontier, but Egypt insists it will conduct thorough searches of all those crossing. People leaving Gaza will also need to be carrying Palestinian ID cards, which are issued by Israel.
The BBC's Jon Donnison, in Gaza, says the decision to ease the border controls is symbolically important.
It is another sign that the new leadership in Egypt is shifting the dynamics of the Middle East.
Israel has criticised the border move, saying it raised security concerns.
But with elections coming up in Egypt, our correspondent says the change in policy is likely to be popular with a public sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.
New hopes
Egypt says the crossing will now be open from 0900 to 2100 every day except Fridays and holidays.
Although the border will still be closed for trade, the opening of the Rafah crossing is expected to provide a major economic boost to Gaza.

Up to 400 Palestinians were estimated to have gathered at the crossing as it opened on Saturday. By contrast, only about 300 Palestinians were previously allowed out of Gaza every day.

One of the first people to cross was Ward Labaa, a 27-year-old woman leaving Gaza for the first time to seek medical treatment in Cairo, the Associated Press reported.
Gaza resident Ali Nahallah, who has not left the Strip for four years, told the BBC the changes would be welcome.
"Of course this is our only entry point from Gaza to the external world," he said.
"We feel that we live in a big jail in Gaza so now we feel a little bit more comfortable and life is easier now. My kids are willing to travel to see other places other than Gaza."
The latest move comes a month after Egypt pushed through a unity deal between the two main Palestinian factions - Fatah and Hamas - something Israel also opposed.
Fatah runs the West Bank, while Hamas governs Gaza.
Analysts say that with elections looming in Egypt the new policy is likely be popular with a public largely sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.
Egypt's co-operation in blockading Gaza was one of President Mubarak's most unpopular policies.
Last year, Israel eased restrictions on goods entering Gaza, but severe shortages in the territory remain.
In 2010, the International Committee of the Red Cross said the blockade was a clear violation of international humanitarian law.
Hundreds of smuggling tunnels run under the Egyptian border with Gaza.

Top Afghan police general killed

The police commander for northern Afghanistan has been killed in a suicide bomb attack on the provincial governor's compound in Takhar.

General Daud was attending a meeting with other officials when the bomber struck, reports say

Gen Mohammad Daud Daud is one of at least six people killed in the attack, claimed by the Taliban.
Two German soldiers were killed and Gen Markus Kneip, commander of foreign troops in north Afghanistan, wounded.
Afghanistan has seen a series of attacks in recent months by militants on police and military targets.
Takhar provincial Governor Abdul Jabar Taqwa is among those wounded, officials said.
Gen Daud was former military commander of the Northern Alliance, the Afghan forces who fought the Taliban.
Police uniform
The latest attack will be seen as significant because it has struck an area of the country's north which has been seen as relatively secure

One intelligence official who survived the attack in Taloqan told the BBC's Bilal Sarwary that Gen Daud had left a meeting and was heading to the second floor of the building when there was a huge explosion.

"There was fire. Daud and the police chief of Takhar province were laying on the ground. There were shouts and crying. There was chaos all over the place," the official said.
Intelligence officials said Gen Daud had been warned about a threat to his life and that security was extremely tight.
However, the attacker was wearing a police uniform and passed several security checks.
Gen Daud was in charge of all interior ministry forces in northern Afghanistan and is the most senior figure to be killed so far in a Taliban "spring offensive".
He was highly thought of by Nato because he got the job done, correspondents say.
Last week he told our correspondent, Bilal Sarwary: ''The Haqqanis and Taliban groups have tried to offer money to some of the police. Some of my guards.
"I am very vigilant. I have made a lot of changes in my movements and who guards the front and rear of the my headquarters. But I have to travel all over northern Afghanistan, to different provinces. I can't stop doing this.''
Gen Daud was a former deputy interior minister for narcotics.

He also served as the bodyguard to Ahmad Shah Massoud, who commanded the Northern Alliance.
At least six people were killed in the explosion, including Gen Daud and the provincial police chief Shah Jahan Nuri.
At least 10 Afghans were injured, including the governor, he added.
Early reports said three German soldiers had been killed, but this was later corrected to two, with three wounded.
An spokesman for the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) confirmed that Gen Kneip was in the compound at the time but "was not killed".
German troops are based in neighbouring Kunduz province, and have oversight of Takhar.

The province was until recently a relatively quiet area of Afghanistan, but tensions rose in May after a Nato-led night raid in Taloqan which killed four people.

A crowd of 2,000 people took to the streets to protest against the attack, claiming the victims were civilians.
Nato said the group were insurgents.
Police opened fire on the demonstrators, killing 12 people and wounding 80.
A smaller protest the following day saw the provincial police chief's compound attacked.

Yemeni jets bomb opposition tribal forces

In an escalation of Yemen's crisis, air force combat jets bombed tribal forces opposed to embattled President Ali Abdullah Saleh, a senior defense official said.

At least seven air force bombers were deployed east of Sanaa to the district of Nehm, where two military compounds had been overtaken earlier by tribal fighters, said the official, who was not identified because he is not authorized to speak to the media.
Ahmed Soufi, a senior advisor to Saleh, said 18 people were killed in the fighting.
Witnesses in Nehm said the airstrikes were carried out in several areas of the province northeast of Sanaa, including Al-Fartha Thoma and Beni Shokan.
The fighting started earlier Friday between the Nehm tribesmen and soldiers of the Yemeni Republican Guard.
The tribesmen said the soldiers attacked a village and tribal fighters, battling back, managed to take over military compounds. They said several Yemeni soldiers were killed but CNN could not verify casualties.
"The guards attacked one of our villages for no reason," said Sheikh Moqbel Najeeb, a tribal leader in the area. "We will not accept that and will fight back against anyone who tries to attack us."
The clashes in Nehm have been going on for the past month, Soufi said. He said the tribal fighters were encouraged by the actions of Sheikh Sadeq al-Ahmar, the leader of the powerful al-Hashid tribe whose forces oppose the government.
Soufi said the fighting this week erupted after tribesmen were barred from entering Sanaa.
The Nehm district has about 35 tribes but they are not affiliated with al-Hashid.
Abdul Makik Ali, a Nehm tribal fighter said at least seven tribes joined to fight the Yemeni soldiers Friday.
"Our blood is not cheap and we will avenge from the government for every drop of Nehm blood that is shed," Ali said.
Saleh, who has ruled Yemen since 1978, has been clinging to power amid a wave of protests calling for his ouster in the past few months.
The simultaneous tribal battle began after a regionally brokered deal calling for Saleh to leave office fell through. Saleh himself is a member of the al-Hashid tribe, a huge entity with many strands.
After an incident in March during which dozens of anti-government demonstrators were killed, al-Ahmar embraced the anti-government demonstrators and broke ranks with the president. Since then, more and more tribal members have turned their backs on the president.
The recent fighting has raised fears of a full-blown civil war in Yemen, an impoverished, arid and mountainous nation that has been a key U.S. ally in the battle against the al Qaeda terrorist network.
Government troops fought street battles with one of Yemen's leading tribes in the capital Thursday, leaving dozens dead as prosecutors sought the arrests of several tribal leaders.
More than 28 people were killed in an explosion at a weapons depot in Sanaa during clashes with members of the al-Hashid tribe, which has turned against Saleh.
Government forces, meanwhile, hit an opposition-controlled television station with rocket-propelled grenades overnight, taking it off the air, witnesses said Thursday. Government troops blocked the roads leading into the capital to prevent other tribal forces from joining the battle.
Witnesses said the fighting subsided considerably after nightfall, but gunfire still crackled across several parts of Sanaa.
The Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said the escalation in violence was alarming. Spokesman Rupert Colville said Friday that the agency has received reports of dozens of civilian casualties, including women and children, in the fighting over the past few days .
"We are deeply concerned that such violence may be pushing the country to the brink of a civil war," Colville said at a briefing in Geneva.

"We call on the government to stop the excessive and disproportionate use of force, to stop targeting activists, human rights defenders and journalists, and to seriously investigate all allegations of crimes committed by security forces."

Ratko Mladic cleared for extradition

A medical team in Serbia has determined that war crimes suspect Ratko Mladic is in good enough shape to be extradited to face a war crimes tribunal, a court spokeswoman in Belgrade said Friday.

While Mladic suffers from several chronic conditions, the team said there are no immediate problems barring a move. This comes after five doctors examined Mladic Thursday night, said Mladic's lawyer, Milos Saljic.
"The court decided that conditions for extradition have been met," court spokeswoman Maya Kovacevic said.
The determination was made during a deportation hearing Friday, held to decide whether Mladic will be transferred to the United Nations war crimes tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands.

 Top Serbian war crimes suspect captured

Mladic in custody in Belgrade

Muted cheers for Mladic arres

Mladic refused to make any statement before the court, but Saljic said the Mladic team will appeal. That appeal could come by Monday.
Mladic's son, Darko, said his father has trouble speaking and his right arm is partially paralyzed.
"We saw him for the first time in many years. He's in bad shape," Darko Mladic said to reporters in front of the courthouse. "His health is very deteriorated."
He said the family is asking the court to send Mladic to a hospital for treatment and analysis of his physical and mental condition, and insisted that his father is not guilty of the grave charges against him.
The judge will recommend a decision to Serbia's justice ministry, Saljic told state media.
Asked how soon the judge would rule on the appeal, Kovacevic answered, "immediately."
Mladic is in a jail near Belgrade facing charges that he presided over Europe's worst massacre since World War II. He was arrested Thursday after more than 15 years in hiding.
Mladic was the highest-ranking fugitive to remain at large after the conflicts that accompanied the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s.
Saljic described Mladic as a "ruin of a man" who has suffered two heart attacks and three strokes since 1996.
Serbian President Boris Tadic said Serbian authorities are still investigating who aided Mladic during his decade and a half on the run, but he called allegations that the country's military sheltered him "rubbish."
"At the end of the day, he was protected by a very small group of people from his family," Tadic said. He acknowledged that Mladic may have been aided by military officers early on, "but at the end of that process, I don't believe that."
The former Yugoslav army officer was the commanding general of Bosnian Serb forces during the 1992-95 war that followed Bosnia-Herzegovina's secession from Yugoslavia.
The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has charged him with leading a genocidal campaign against Bosnia's Muslim and Croat populations, including "direct involvement" in the 1995 killings of nearly 8,000 men and boys in the Muslim enclave of Srebrenica -- the worst European massacre since the Holocaust.

However, Mladic remains a hero to some Serbs, and small outbursts of anger in reaction to his arrest were seen in Belgrade late Thursday.

The battle for Libya: Up in smoke

If Libyans let the West completely control the war, the country risks receiving a 'bill' at the end that it cannot pay.

Many questions are being asked about the West's true intentions behind its intervention in Libya [EPA]

It was meant to be rapid, unburdened by collateral damage or ethical liability and in support of a worthy cause: Ridding Libya of Gaddafi as a helping hand for the spectacular Arab Spring.

In reality, the battle for Libya is everything but that. It is progressing slowly and remaining inconclusive. Worse, its collateral damage has been mounting, and consequently the ethics are beginning to look shaky.

The word muddle comes to mind.

And there are five questions that urgently need answers.

'Iraq endgame' looming?

While there are plenty of differences between Libya and Iraq, there is an 'oil' connection that justifies the comparison.

Gaddafi and Saddam share many misdemeanours - but there are important differences between the two: Gaddafi never invaded any neighbouring states and he also agreed to give up his nuclear ambitions. It was Saddam's fate that prompted Gaddafi to give up his rudimentary Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) programme and engage in information-sharing about it with the West in the first place.

When he did, Gaddafi was embraced by the West from which he received billions of petro-dollars. Its also worth noting the countries in which he recycled this money, namely, in key EU states starting with France and Italy - two countries who are at war with him today.

Italy's embattled Berlusconi surely knew about Gaddafi's oppression of his people when he signed a friendship treaty with the colonel in 2008. Berlusconi's unethical free-wheeling diplomacy even pandered to Gaddafi's whim to preach Islam to glamourous Italian ladies. The same questionable diplomacy, inaugurated in 2004 by Tony Blair's "hand of friendship" with Gaddafi's oil-rich Libya, also applies to Spain and France.

This is part of the whole muddle surrounding the mess in Libya.

So far, all NATO has been able to produce is a stalemate in Libya, scorn over civilian deaths and questions about its real intentions.

Indeed the US should be thinking about scaling down war-making by its Nobel Laureate president, instead of the opposite. Obama has shown that he does not lack the imperial bona fides needed when he was called upon to act decisively by France and Britain to protect civilians in Libya.

However, in light of the stalemate, and despite Obama's opposition to sending ground troops, is it conceivable that Libya is secretly still being strategised by NATO as the next Iraq? 

NATO vs Gaddafi: What are the options?

If Libya is to be a testing ground for western military hardware and European hard-power, the agenda of the mission would eventually be totally altered from protection of civilians to a grand scheme increasingly hinting at imperial designs. It would move beyond being a UN-mandated mission for 'protection of civilians' with no commitment to send occupying boots to Libya. But this, of course, would require a new UN mandate.

The stalemate is far from the possibly zero-sum game NATO had in mind: To dislodge Gaddafi from power swiftly and display military kudos that might serve as a veiled threat to other Arab dictators busy killing protesters in their streets.

Gaddafi is not going to be easily defeated, and definitely not by the imposition of a no-fly zone or even by an additional thousands of sorties against his military hardware and fighting units. Nor will his defeat be hastened by Arab provision of logistical support and weapons.

Unless the Libyan Transitional National Council, NATO and the Arab League will need to consider new options. These could include cutting their losses and offering the Gaddafis a deal they cannot refuse, safe passage out of the country and immunity from prosecution in return for surrender.

Gaddafi knows he cannot win the conflict. But he also knows NATO cannot defeat him without sending in ground troops.

Afghanistan-isation of Libya?

If NATO wants to get more involved in Libya it could probably operationalise a quasi Bosnia-Kosovo strategy. Its content resonates with 'humanitarianism' by performing combat missions to protect civilians while at the same time fighting Gaddafi specifically.

One of the likely problems with this plan is that once the boots are on the ground the strategy could take on the character of the conflict in Afghanistan. If NATO draws up such a plan for Libya, chances are that it will find itself drawn deeper into the quicksands of the Libyan battlefield.

NATO would be drawn into Libya by none other than al-Qaeda's Organisation in the Islamic Maghrib (AQIM). In the event of an intervention by ground troops, AQIM's Salafi lineage would most likely judge Libya to be ripe terrain for its twin agenda of preaching and combatting 'infidels' (NATO forces).

Plus, in its post-bin Laden phase, AQIM and al-Qaeda in general would welcome a battlefield to regroup, re-sharpen its fangs, and recruit foot soldiers against Western 'infidels' and neo-imperialism.

This is a group that has proven itself to be lethal, and one that owes its own identity partially to the Afghan war against the former Soviets and partially, of course, against the junta that ruled after the cancellation of the second round of elections in Algeria in 1992.

Of course, this is only a hypothesis - but one that Gaddafi would cherish. It would give him a badly needed reprieve and validate his political rhetoric that it is al-Qaeda, not freedom-hungry citizens, that is attempting to topple his regime.

When it comes to al-Qaeda and authoritarianism, the second has featured as the lesser of the two evils in the eyes of Western governments who have invested so much in fighting. The West may be able to control and co-opt the latter - but not so successfully the former (despite attempts in Iraq and Afghanistan).

Historically, Western military intervention, in Afghanistan and Iraq respectively, had either to be justified or re-calibrated and prolonged to fight al-Qaeda. This is also true in Kosovo where intervention initially was calculated to be a short. But that situation proved strategists wrong - NATO and US troops had to stay on for years after the guns fell silent.

If there is a lesson to be learned from Iraq, it is that nothing helps groups like AQIM thrive more than ground occupation.

Whatever rationale may be used to justify sending ground troops into Libya, post-Gaddafi reconstruction or peace-keeping, the outcome will be the same - and AQIM would be there too. Foreign troops will create resentment and will most likely be dragged into an unwinnable fight they never wanted - as the results of the West's direct intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq amply shows.

Similarly, the presence of al-Qaeda in Libya may be one development that would please some NATO commanders and states. The reason for this is that it would prompt a much more active and enthusiastic US intervention in Libya.

Were AQIM to gain ground in Libya, the implications could potentially be very serious for the two Arab states that have been able to topple their dictators and seem to be on the way to adopting democratic systems. Plus, the Salafi current is more prominent in Tunisia now than it was before Bin Ali's advent in power and commands a substantial following in Egypt. 

Note that this scenario characterised by more involvement by al-Qaeda worries not only the Transitional National Council but also the other civic bodies who will be re-shaping politics in post-Gaddafi Libya.

Libya: Whose battle is it anyway?

The battle for Libya increasingly tempts one to ask who is pulling the trigger. Leaders of the Transitional National Council undoubtedly do a great deal of lip-shooting, and obviously the weak rebel forces do a bit more.

The Libyan agency in charge of deciding the conduct of the war and its overall strategic aims seems to be quickly falling under the influence of powers who provided the expensive, state of the art weaponry that is being used to execute the bulk of the fighting.

Already the conflict has changed. It has no relation to any pretences of an Arab Spring or a democratising agenda.

Libyans who oppose Gaddafi have to ask themselves an important question: Who is running the battle and why?

Even more importantly, what is the price of delegating the war against Gaddafi to the West? In international politics there is no such thing as a free lunch, so to speak.

The stalemate, possible protraction or even more direct intervention are all dynamics that would augment the internationalisation of the battle for Libya. Increased internationalisation naturally chips into the Libyan side's share in the struggle - in which the stakes are high for all Libyans, not just the rebels.

Plus, there is the moral responsibility that comes with the territory of delegating war to foreign powers, especially when the conflict is in a protracted stalemate.

Hence, it is crucial that the rebels and the Transitional National Council avoid sole reliance on the West as well as making it a priority to develop alternative back-up plans. This should include negotiating an exit policy for Gaddafi if that is likely to spare Libya the trauma of all-out war, humanitarian crisis, loss of human rights, and dependence on the West.  

Gaddafi in Charge?

Gaddafi's 'Houdini' instinct has a great deal to do with the stalemate. He realises NATO cannot defeat him without ground troops and at the same time that he cannot win. He cannot even so much as recover Misurata - much less Benghazi.

With his back to the wall and nowhere to retire from politics safely, luxuriously and with impunity; Gaddafi may be the one deciding the outcome of this war. It is conceivable that his strategy right now is to dig in for a no-win-no-lose war.

His troops are trying desperately to give the impression of strong attacks in order to camouflage their complete defensiveness and weakness.

The reality on the ground, within a prolonged stalemate, might actually be what Gaddafi really desires - entrenching the East-West division, and returning to the pre-1963 divisions. That means Tripolitania for the Gaddafis and Cyrenaica for those who have rejected his revolution and sought to author their own.  

For now, the battle for Libya, Operation Odyssey Dawn, lacks the strength of character and right development of Odysseus. It is obscured by smoke screens, a far cry from the symbolism of fulfilment contained in the metaphor of dawn.

Egypt 'to open Rafah border permanently'

Egyptian state news agency quotes military sources as saying the border with Gaza will be opened starting from Saturday.

There have been several attempts, some successful, to break the blockade on the Gaza Strip [GALLO/GETTY]

Egypt will permanently open its Rafah border crossing starting from Saturday, the country's official news agency reported, easing a four-year blockade on the Gaza Strip.

The news agency MENA said on Wednesday that Egypt's new military rulers had set the date for the opening of the crossing as part of efforts "to end the status of the Palestinian division and achieve national reconciliation".

It said the Rafah border crossing would be opened permanently, starting on Saturday, from 9am to 9pm every day except Fridays and holidays.

"Sources in national security told Al Jazeera that the military intended to open up the border," said our correspondentAyman Mohyeldin, reporting from the capital, Cairo.

"A senior member of Hamas visiting Egypt has also confirmed that they have been notified that the military will open the border," he said.

Al Jazeera's Nicole Johnston, reporting from Gaza, said, "It comes as no surprise; people of Gaza and Egypt have been waiting for the news for the last few weeks."

However, it will not be a full opening as there will be some conditions on exit.

"It will allow basically all women to leave Gaza, also children under the age of 18 years will be allowed to leave, as well as men over the age of 40 years. However, those between the ages of 18 and 40 years will require an Egyptian visa," she said.

"Visas would have to come from Ramallah. Sources in Hamas say they have been told by the Egyptian authorities over the last few weeks that they [Egyptians] do intend to open some sort of representative office inside Gaza, so that people can get the visa from there."

Sharp departure from past

The decision is a sharp departure from the policies of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, who had restricted the movement of people and goods through the Egyptian-Gaza border.

Our Cairo correspondent said that "mechanisms in place at the border are going to be very important to watch".

"In fact, one of the military's first and important announcements was to abide by all international agreements that the previous government had committed to," he said.

One of those agreements commits Egypt to granting access to the crossing to European monitors. But sources told Al Jazeera that European monitors had not been notified that the border would be opening on Saturday, according to our correspondent.

Concerns for Israelis

"Certainly this is going to cause some concerns for Israel, particularly as to what mechanism is going to be put in place," our correspondent said.

Sources at Rafah said it was unlikely that all the mechanisms needed to be put in place could actually be ready in time to deal with the flow of people expected to come out of Gaza, he said.

"One of the biggest problems for Gazans, besides a shortage of food and supplies, has been the psychological impact of not allowing 1.5m people to move freely. There's no doubt if the border is opened freely for all, there's going to be a massive influx of Palestinians, who would want to get out for the first time since the siege was put in place."

Israel significantly eased its restrictions on cargo entering Gaza a year ago, but it still severely limits the entry and exit of Gazans through crossings in the north of the strip.

Gazans have circumvented the blockade by operating hundreds of smuggling tunnels under the 15km Gaza-Egypt border.

The tunnels have been used to bring in all manner of products, as well as people.

Israel says Hamasm which controls Gaza, has used the tunnels to import weapons, including rockets that can reach main population centres in Israel.

The crossing has been mostly closed, in line with Israel's blockade on Gaza, imposed since 2007 when Hamas took control of the coastal territory.

Congress to Palestinians: Drop dead

Netanyahu's address to Congress demonstrated that he has no intention of making peace with the Palestinians.

'In Judea and Samaria, Israelis are not foreign occupiers', Israel's Netanyahu told the US Congress  [EPA]

If anyone had any doubt about whether the Palestinians would declare a state in September, they can't have them now.

On Tuesday, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu delivered a speech to Congress that essentially was a series of insults to Palestinians and every insult was met by applause and standing ovations.

In fact, Netanyahu's appearance itself was an insult.

In the entire history of the United States, only four foreign leaders have addressed joint sessions of Congress more than once.

Prime Minister Winston Churchill, America's great ally, addressed Congress three times during World War II. President Nelson Mandela was honored for destroying apartheid and freeing South Africa. Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was recognised for opening negotiations with the Palestinian people.

And now Netanyahu. For what?

In his entire term in office he has done nothing but reject every request by the United States that he take some action (like freezing settlements) to promote Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. In the history of Israel, there has been no prime minister as hardline on Palestinian rights and as indifferent to the wishes of the United States as Netanyahu.

So why was he invited to address a rare joint session?

He was invited because the new Republican leadership of the House of Representatives wanted to demonstrate, loudly and clearly, that Congress will not support President Barak Obama in the event that he tries to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian agreement.

And that is exactly what the Netanyahu appearance today did demonstrate. The prime minister unambiguously stated that he had no intention of making peace with the Palestinians.

He began by saying that, in point of fact, there is no occupation, stating, that "in Judea and Samaria [the term Israeli right-wingers use for the West Bank], Israelis are not foreign occupiers" but the native inhabitants. (He cited Abraham and Isaiah from the Bible!)

He said he might consider giving up some of that land but not an inch of Jerusalem. Additionally, he said that Israel would retain most settlements and insist on a military presence in the Jordan Valley (thereby ensuring the any State of Palestine would be locked in on both sides by Israel).

He said that Israel would never negotiate with a Palestinian government that included Hamas, whether democratically elected or not. He declared that not a single Palestinian would be allowed to return to Israel; not even a symbolic return would be acceptable to him.

There is little reason to elaborate. Netanyahu today essentially returned to the policies that Israel pursued before Yitzhak Rabin and Yasir Arafat agreed on mutual recognition and the joint pursuit of peace.

And the worst part is not the appalling things Netanyahu said, but how Congress received them. Even Netanyahu's declaration that there is no Israeli occupation was met with thunderous applause with the Democrats joining the Republicans in ecstatic support. Every Netanyahu statement, no matter how extreme, was met with cheers.

Netanyahu was also applauded wildly when he invoked Palestinian terrorism over and over again, even seeming to lump his former "partner," President Mahmoud Abbas with people who "educate their children to hate, [who] continue to name public squares after terrorists. And worst of all continue to perpetuate the fantasy that Israel will one day be flooded by the descendants of Palestinian refugees."

His bottom line, which Congress fully bought, was that all Palestinians are terrorists who haven't earned a state. And probably never will.

Congress cheered and cheered and when Netanyahu was finished, they climbed over each other to touch the hem of his garment.

It was as if Congress thought that no Palestinians or other Arabs (or Muslims) would be watching. It was as if it believes that it can shout its lungs out for Netanyahu (and thereby secure those campaign contributions from AIPAC), without any consequences to US policy and national interests in the Arab world.

But Congress is wrong. The message it sent to the Middle East today, to the whole world, in fact, was that Palestinians cannot count on the United States to ever play the role of "honest broker" between Israel and the Palestinians. Even if President Obama was inclined to, Congress would stop him. And AIPAC, using the leverage its campaign contributions gives it, would hold Obama's feet to the fire too. As far as Congress is concerned, Palestinians do not exist. They have no rights, to a state least of all. 

And that is why Palestinians have no choice but to unilaterally declare a state in the fall. They cannot count on America. As David Ben Gurion understood when he went to the General Assembly to achieve recognition of Israel, a small, powerless people must take its destiny into its own hands.

The good news is that, although Congress is in Netanyahu's pocket, the Obama administration isn't. Netanyahu insulted the President at the White House last Thursday and then again in the halls of Congress by eliciting support for policies Obama rejects. And the administration is furious.

That means that although Palestinians can and should ignore Congress, the White House and State Department are still in play. Yes, they will both go along with Netanyahu, but, probably, without much enthusiasm.

And they can send a signal to our allies that although the United States cannot openly oppose Bibi's policies because of Congress - and AIPAC's control of it - the allies can. The Palestinians should not give up on Obama or on Secretary of State Clinton either who cannot abide Netanyahu and made sure she was out of the country to escape being present for his speech.

And so we can look forward to a unilateral declaration of statehood in September. The Israelis who refuse to negotiate with stateless Palestinians will have no choice but to negotiate with the state whose land it is occupying. And those negotiations, state to state, may produce peace and the "two states for two peoples" that most Palestinians and Israelis aspire to. In any case, it's the only hope.

Palestinians should thank Prime Minister Netanyahu and, even more, the United states Congress for making their choice so much easier. Together they helped create the Palestinian state today. And that is a very good thing.

As for Americans, we should be deeply ashamed of our Congress. It has been sold to the highest bidder.

Blasts hit Chinese government buildings

Explosions are reported at two government buildings in an eastern Chinese city, possibly caused by explosions in cars, according to state media. 

The nearly simultaneous blasts happened in Fuzhou city, in Jiangxi province, on Thursday morning, the official Xinhua news agency reported. It did not give details of the cause or casualties. 

A Jiangxi government news website said explosions may have occurred in cars parked in front of the prosecutor's office and a district-level government office.

江西省抚州市临川区政府大楼和检察院发生爆炸的最新相关信息

核心提示：26日，江西抚州市临川区政府大楼和检察院同时发生爆炸，交警对两处路段实行临时管制，抚州市南川路临川区政府附近300米的道路，双向全部封闭。现场有几辆车被炸飞，旁边屋子的玻璃被炸碎。

人民网北京5月26日电 据江西交通广播消息，今天上午，江西省抚州市临川区政府大楼和检察院同时发生爆炸事件。

据了解，交警对这两处事故路段实行了临时管制，抚州市南川路临川区政府附近300米的道路，双向全部封闭。

Is Hu Jintao Really The Most Powerful Person In The World?

This year’s Forbes list of The World’s Most Powerful People is out with a twist that may be a surprise to some and a confirmation of reality to others: Ranking Chinese President Hu Jintao at number one, above U.S. President Barack Obama.

Hu Jintao: World's most powerful?

Is Hu really deserving of the title of World’s Most Powerful? How about the other Chinese big names on the list? People’s Bank of China chief Zhou Xiaochuan, often imperfectly described as the Ben Bernanke of China, is ranked 11th, just three spots below the Fed chairman, who in point of fact is considerably more powerful, if you’re just measuring based on the levers at their disposal and their independent ability to maneuver them. Unlike Bernanke, Zhou answers to higher authorities, including Hu and Premier Wen Jiabao, who didn’t make the list.
But Zhou is the top central banker for the one economy in which so many are investing their anxious hopes, in the one nation that is spending and investing with some abandon in the global marketplace. As long as the U.S. economy and most of the developed economies are mired in stagnancy, the perceived power of China is all the greater. And that is the key clue to the makeup of this list.

That is why Lou Jiwei, head of China’s $330 billion sovereign fund, China Investment Corporation, is ranked 30th. There are many ways to define power, and having a steady stream of CEOs and financiers fly into Beijing from far and wide to seek an audience and ask you for money — that would be one definition of power. Of course, on big decisions Lou doesn’t have final say either.

That brings us to how power works in China, which is no simple or transparent matter. One argument for suggesting Hu is more powerful than Obama is that Hu doesn’t have to contend with those annoying artifacts of democracy like Congress, an independent judiciary, an uncensored media and voting by common citizens. But in contrast to Obama’s vast executive powers, Hu (whose title that matters most is not president but general secretary of the Communist Party of China) cannot decide the important matters of state and party on his own. He has to contend with other powerful factions as one of nine members of the Communist Party’s Politburo Standing Committee, one of whom, propaganda chief Li Changchun, is ranked 32nd on our list. (I had nominated for the list another Politburo member, Zhou Yongkang, who holds sway over the oil sector and security forces and who could be considered the Dick Cheney of China, but he did not make the list of 68).

Trying to figure out the ebbs and flows in the balance of power among these nine members occupies the time of many academics, diplomats, journalists and political risk analysts, and in truth, it’s all a game of educated guesses, many of them likely wrong. The Kremlin goes by a different name in Beijing — Zhongnanhai — but it’s still Kremlinology all the same.

What we do know is that today’s leaders of China don’t have the kind of singular power that their famous Communist Party predecessors did. Instead, as I have written before when the current Politburo’s membership was being selected three years ago, it is the Communist Party system that is powerful, and bends men to its ethos and principles, rather than the other way around. That does not mean personalities don’t matter, but it may be be more accurate to say that as a collective, China’s Politburo Standing Committee may be the most powerful “person” in the world. Maybe. There are other powerful constituencies in China that make governing extremely difficult, from large state-owned enterprises that want to protect their profits to countless local fiefdoms that routinely ignore edicts from Beijing, and so on. Even in an authoritarian system, power is not nearly as straightforward as it may seem.

What do you think? What about the other Chinese figures who made our list? Like Robin Li, the second-richest man in China on the latest Forbes China Rich List and the co-founder and CEO of the dominant Chinese search engine, Baidu, who comes in at 46th after watching Google give up on its China-based search engine. He ranks 14 spots behind the propaganda chief whose orders he must obey to keep his company out of trouble, and 24 spots below Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. And finally at #62 there’s Wang Yong, chairman of the administration that oversees China’s biggest SOEs, including many enterprises whose chiefs are far more powerful individually than Wang, making his job a tough one.

I invite you to make this a debate. Comment below on where China’s most powerful fit in the world order, nominate your own suggestions for China’s most powerful people, and quibble with the choices above. You can also comment on the main story about the global list here.

Dismay over Netanyahu's US speech

Palestinian officials have dismissed Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the US Congress, saying it will not lead to peace.

Click to play

Benjamin Netanyahu: "Israel will not return to the indefensible boundaries of 1967"

Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas said the speech merely added obstacles on the road to peace.
Mr Netanyahu had told the US Congress that Israel was "willing to make painful compromises" to achieve peace.
But he rejected US President Barack Obama's call for a peace deal based on pre-1967 borders, plus land swaps.
Mr Abbas said the Israeli prime minister's speech "contained nothing we can build on", adding that if no progress was made towards peace talks by September, the Palestinians would seek UN recognition unilaterally.
"Our first choice is negotiations, but if there is no progress before September we will go to the United Nations," Mr Abbas told the Palestinian Legislative Committee at a meeting in the West Bank town of Ramallah.
Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat said the speech proved Israel could not be a partner for peace in the region.
Mr Erekat said Mr Netanyahu was seeking to "dictate the results" of negotiations before they had begun.

Continue reading the main story

Analysis

Jon Donnison BBC News, Ramallah

---

Initial Palestinian reaction to Benjamin Netanyahu's speech has been scathing. One senior Palestinian official told me it was a declaration of war not peace.
Palestinian leaders already frustrated with America's role in a stagnant peace process will have been dismayed by the rapturous reception Mr Netanyahu received.
Right now the two sides seem very far apart. Neither Israelis nor Palestinians are talking as if they anticipate being back at the negotiating table anytime soon.

"He dictated that Jerusalem will be undivided, that refugees cannot return, that his army will remain on the borders, that his settlements will be expanded and kept, that he wants Palestine to be demilitarised," Mr Erekat said.

The BBC's Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen says that the speech shows that the gulf between Mr Netanyahu's view of an acceptable peace deal and that of the Palestinians is as wide as ever.
'Unstable Middle East' Mr Netanyahu had said Israel would be "generous on the size of the Palestinian state, but very firm on where we put the border with it".
Speaking to a supportive bipartisan audience at the US Capitol in Washington, Mr Netanyahu urged Mr Abbas to "tear up" a recent reconciliation agreement with Islamist party Hamas, which controls Gaza.
He said Israel could not make peace with a faction that did not recognise its right to exist.
But a Hamas spokesman dismissed his remarks.
"The true response to this arrogant speech which denies Palestinian rights should be the complete ending of all negotiation and the implementation of [Palestinian] reconciliation as soon as possible," Sami Abu Zuhri told AFP.
President Abbas is due to meet leaders of the PLO and his Fatah movement on Wednesday to consider how to pursue an attempt to seek recognition for statehood by the UN in September.
Mr Abbas has said that he would prefer to establish a state through negotiations, and suggested that he is being forced into taking this unilateral step by Israel's refusal to engage.
But President Obama said he would not support such a move, which he said failed to address and resolve fundamental issues with Israel.
Mr Netanyahu said he remained committed to a two-state solution to the conflict, in which an independent Palestinian state sat alongside a Jewish state.
"I'm willing to make painful compromises to achieve this historic peace," he said. "We seek a peace where [the Palestinians] will be neither Israel's subjects nor its citizens."
But he said the future border could not rest at Israel's "indefensible" 1967 lines, because many Israelis now live in suburbs of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem beyond Israel's pre-1967 territory.
He said the precise border must be drawn at the negotiating table, but said it would be different from the 1967 border.

Obama: West still leads the world

IAEA: Syria site bombed by Israel 'was likely nuclear'

A Syrian site bombed by Israeli jets in 2007 was "very likely" a nuclear reactor, the UN's atomic watchdog says.

 

The US said Syria's reactor was similar to a North Korean one

The International Atomic Energy Agency has been investigating US claims that Syria was building a secret nuclear reactor with North Korean help.
The strongest IAEA report yet on Syria came after several years of blocked investigations, and is likely to increase the pressure on Damascus.
Israel bombed the remote desert site of the alleged reactor in September 2007.
Syria says the site - near Deir Alzour in the country's remote north-east - was an unused military facility under construction. It also denied having any nuclear links to North Korea, which has itself denied transferring nuclear technology to Syria.
But the confidential IAEA report, obtained by the BBC, says the bombed building was similar in type and size to a reactor and that samples taken from the site indicated a connection with nuclear activities.

The report's conclusions are likely to raise international pressure on Damascus, says the BBC's Bethany Bell in Vienna.

It opens the door for Western powers to push for Syria to be referred to the UN Security council, an action last taken against Iran in 2006. That step could come at the next meeting of the IAEA's board of governors in June.
Syria is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which gives it the right to enrich its own fuel for civil nuclear power, under inspection from the IAEA.
But it has also signed a safeguards agreement with the IAEA under which it is obliged to notify the UN's nuclear watchdog of any plans to construct a new nuclear facility.

Queen greets President Obama on first UK state visit

The Queen has greeted US President Barack Obama, and his wife Michelle, at the start of his first UK state visit.

Click to play

The Queen welcomes President Obama to Buckingham Palace

The Obamas also met Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall and spent 20 minutes with newlyweds the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
They have laid a wreath on the Tomb of the Unknown Warrior in Westminster Abbey and will attend a state banquet at Buckingham Palace.
It came after David Cameron and Mr Obama spoke of "essential" UK-US ties.