Recent Posts

[Argentina Falls From Its Throne as King of Beef]

June 13, 2013

Argentina Falls From Its Throne as King of Beef

By SIMON ROMERO
IHT

BUENOS AIRES — A thick slab of grass-fed sirloin dripping in its own juices: so many Argentines consider such a feast a birthright to be enjoyed regularly that one president in the 1990s quipped to an American magazine, “Tell your readers, ‘Don’t come to my country if they’re vegetarian.’ ”

But tastes change, even here.

Beef consumption in this red-meat colossus has decreased so much over the decades that the nation recently fell from its perch as the world’s top per capita consumer of beef, a title Argentine ranchers are fighting to regain from their tiny neighbor, Uruguay. In another jolt, a study warned that pizzerias could soon outnumber steakhouses in this city.

As if that were not enough to rattle the national psyche, Argentina slipped into 11th place, behind countries like New Zealand and Mexico, in the global ranking of beef exporters this year, prompting solemn reactions like one in a major newspaper that declared it “the end of a reign.”

“We live, at this moment, immersed in shame,” the writer Diego Vecino said in a recent 4,000-plus-word magazine article that explored declining beef consumption. “In the last few years, our Argentine national identity has been roughed up as never before,” he lamented, in a slightly tongue-in-cheek fashion. “The ritual of the barbecue persists, but in many cases under the kitsch glow of a retro experience.”

It is hard to overstate beef’s centrality to the Argentine way of life for more than a century. Novels and poems extol the art of cattle ranching on the vast pampas, long a touchstone of national pride. Cafes in this city bulge with diners feasting on steaks washed down with glasses of malbec. At lunchtime, it is still possible to see construction crews preparing slabs of beef on makeshift grills, the smoky smell of this ritual permeating their work sites.

Argentines ate about 129 pounds of beef a person last year, far surpassing Americans, who mustered a mere 57.5 pounds by comparison. But Argentina’s current level is a pale shadow of its peak: 222 pounds of beef for every man, woman and child, achieved in 1956.

Reasons vary for these doldrums. Beef prices have surged with inflation, but cattlemen contend that government price controls aimed at preventing domestic beef consumption from falling further have wreaked havoc by making it costly to maintain large herds. Others, eying China’s rising demand for grains over the last decade, say it is simply more profitable to farm soybeans than to raise cattle.

“We are witnessing a historic decline in our beef industry,” said Ernesto Ambrosetti, chief economist of the Argentine Rural Society, the country’s largest farming association. “Now our smaller neighbors, Paraguay and Uruguay, have passed us” in the export rankings.

Government officials contend that their policies to lift beef consumption, including export restraints and price controls intended to make the meat more affordable, are turning the tide. Indeed, domestic consumption has recovered slightly from a record low in 2011.

But while Argentina has experienced swings in beef consumption in the past, some see the latest drops as evidence of a broader paradigm shift: many Argentines are simply opting for a more varied diet.

The shift — reflected in a rising demand for foods like poultry, pasta and pizza; a greater awareness of the health risks associated with eating beef; and even the emergence of an insurgent vegetarian dining scene in Buenos Aires — does not sit well with some Argentines.

“Beef consumption is threatened by modern trends of healthy eating, mainly the exaltation of what’s natural and ecological, stimulating vegetable consumption,” the Argentine Beef Promotion Institute warned in a 2006 report, warily acknowledging a “new age culture and the appearance of cooking fads incorporating other products.”

For some Argentines who were raised in a society so focused on beef, the adjustment was long overdue. “I almost don’t eat meat now,” said Susana Carfagna, a 61-year-old retiree, as she walked out of a butcher shop with some ground chicken as an alternative to beef burgers. “It’s not healthy. I have high cholesterol and need a more balanced diet.”

At Buenos Aires Verde, a vegetarian restaurant with a pastel orange and lime green color scheme, diners can choose from options like patties made from yamani rice and adzuki beans, or cannelloni made with dehydrated fruit and flax seeds.

“Argentines are demanding a change,” Mauro Massimino, 33, a vegetarian who owns the restaurant, said as his predominantly svelte clientele ate their meals. “Around five years ago, vegetarianism started to gain traction here, and the growth since has been incredible.”

The growth of vegetarian restaurants in Argentina’s capital has unfolded at a time of big change — some say upheaval — in the countryside. As recently as 2007, Argentina had about 55.6 million head of cattle, according to the United States Department of Agriculture. That number fell to 48.1 million in 2011, before recovering somewhat this year to an estimated 51.2 million. (That is still more cows than people, given the country’s population of more than 40 million.)

As Argentina’s economy over the past decade recovered from a collapse in 2001, beef prices in the country surged. Struggling with the broader increase in inflation, the authorities in 2006 announced a temporary ban on beef exports in an effort to expand the domestic supply and bring down prices for Argentine consumers.

Since then, the government has limited beef exports and imposed price controls, moves that ranchers claim are eroding profitability. As losses mounted, a wave of slaughterhouse shutdowns left thousands of people jobless in recent years. Many cattle ranchers have shifted into soybean farming, with the grain exported largely to China where it is used as animal feed.

The government has tried to curb the impact of rising beef prices and diminished supply through a program called “Meat for Everyone,” offering more than a dozen popular cuts of beef at low prices to consumers in the Buenos Aires metro area.

But officials have also promoted other types of animal protein, reflecting the nation’s dependence on agribusiness. “It is much more gratifying to eat some grilled pork than to take Viagra,” President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner said in 2010, joking about what she described as the meat’s libido-enhancing qualities while announcing subsidies for the pork industry.

For many Argentines, how much beef they eat comes down to another factor: price. In the last three years, coveted cuts of cuadril (rump steaks) have jumped in price almost 90 percent, to about $5.80 a pound, said Juan Pagano, a butcher in the neighborhood of Colegiales.

“It’s unbelievable how the prices have shot up,” said Eduardo González, 48, who cleans industrial water tanks for a living. Buying a relatively cheap and tough cut of beef one recent evening at a supermarket, he said he could no longer afford sirloin.

“But I still try to eat beef four times a week; if I did not, I would die!” he said, with a chuckle. “It is fundamental.”

Indeed, many Argentines are not taking the decline of their beef industry lying down.

Claudia Valenti, a nutritionist for the municipality of Buenos Aires, said people should eat beef, preferably lean cuts, every day.

“We are not herbivores,” Ms. Valenti said.

“Human beings never were, apart from at the very beginning of time.”

Jonathan Gilbert contributed reporting.


************

June 13, 2013

Ex-President of Argentina Sentenced

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Former President Carlos Saúl Menem was sentenced to seven years in prison on Thursday for illegally smuggling weapons to Ecuador and Croatia in violation of international embargoes in the 1990s. The court also barred Mr. Menem, now a senator, from holding elective office, and asked the Senate to vote to remove the immunity he enjoys as an elected member of Congress. The sentence is final unless overturned by the Supreme Court. An appeals court found Mr. Menem, above, and 11 others guilty in March, overturning his acquittal at trial in 2011. Mr. Menem, 82, who served two terms as president from 1989 to 1999, acknowledged signing secret decrees to export weapons to Venezuela and Panama, but said he had no idea that the tons of rifles and ammunition made in Argentina would end up in Ecuador and Croatia. Given his age, Mr. Menem could be allowed to serve his sentence at home.

[Tunisian Feminist Leader: 'Femen, Please Leave Us Alone']

 SPIEGEL ONLINE
06/13/2013 06:09 PM

Tunisian Feminist Leader: 'Femen, Please Leave Us Alone'

By Raniah Salloum

European Femen activists have been sentenced to four months in prison for their topless protest in the Tunisian capital last month. Now the country's opposition leader, herself a respected feminist, is asking Femen to leave, calling their actions counterproductive.

With their topless protest in Tunis, three Femen activists -- one German, two French -- caused widespread outrage in Tunisia last month. Representatives of the Muslim community have already expressed their anger, but now Tunisian feminists are also criticizing the women's actions.

"Femen, please leave us alone," appealed Tunisian feminist and opposition leader Maya Jribi in an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE. "You risk ruining everything that we have fought for."

At the end of May the three Femen activists demonstrated half-naked in front of the Justice Ministry in Tunis. It was the group's first such stunt in an Arab country. On Wednesday, a Tunisian court convicted the women of public indecency and sentenced each of them to four months in prison.

The three young Europeans were protesting in support of Tunisian activist Amina Sboui, who has gone by the name of Amina Tyler. Sboui is currently in prison for protesting a Salafist gathering and writing the word "Femen" on a wall near a cemetery. She was convicted of desecrating a cemetery and public indecency.

"We already have enough problems in Tunisia. Femen, please don't add one more," says Jribi. The 53-year-old Tunisian politician has been working for decades for women's rights, first under the authoritarian regime of Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali and now under the Islamist-led coalition government.

Playing into the Hands of Islamists

When it comes to women's rights, Tunisia is ahead of the curve in the Arab world. There is a decades-old feminist movement, to which Jribi belongs. She leads one of the country's major political parties, the secular-liberal Republican Party, and hers is one of the loudest voices in Tunisia's Constituent Assembly. One of her central goals is making sure that women's rights are not scaled back under pressure from radicals.

"We in Tunisia have a different cultural and political context than in Germany," says Jribi. "Here, Islamists try to explain women's issues in terms of identity politics." The 'emancipated woman' is a concept of the permissive, debauched West, she says, and it doesn't work in Tunisia. "We Tunisian feminists are trying to steer the discussion away from identity. Women's rights are a social and political issue," says Jribi.

But the efforts of Tunisian women are now endangered by Femen, she complains. In their own way, the European activists are playing the game according to the Islamists' rules, she says. They are turning the emancipation of Tunisian women into a question of identity -- as well as a culture war, by dubbing their campaign "Topless Jihad."

Concern from Berlin

After the activists were charged on Monday, Femen announced that they would be staging further protests in Tunisia. "Please don't," says Jribi. "There are other ways to fight for women's rights in Tunisia -- without getting undressed."

The German government, meanwhile, has expressed concern about the incarceration of the activists. "The council of the three women has decided to appeal the verdict," said a spokeswoman for the Foreign Ministry. The German Embassy in Tunis will "continue to give consular guidance to the German national and will follow the proceedings carefully."

Sources at the Foreign Ministry say that Germany's human rights commissioner, Markus Löning, will travel to Tunisia to visit to the imprisoned Femen activists.
URL:

[Mugabe calls elections – and Tsvangirai rejects them as illegal]

Mugabe calls elections – and Tsvangirai rejects them as illegal

Zimbabwe set for fresh political chaos as Mugabe decrees date for elections and quashes constitution

David Smith   
The Guardian, Thursday 13 June 2013 17.51 BST

Zimbabwe seems poised for a fresh political crisis following Robert Mugabe's declaration of an election for next month which has now been rejected as "unlawful" by his chief rival.

Seeking to extend his 33-year rule Mugabe on Thursday used a presidential decree to bypass parliament and set the long-awaited poll for 31 July.

"Given the deadline imposed by the constitutional court it is inexpedient to await the passage through parliament of an act dealing with the situation," the 89-year-old said in a government notice.

But there was swift and angry reaction from the prime minister, Morgan Tsvangirai, whose Movement for Democratic Change joined the president's Zanu-PF party to form the unity government after the violent 2008 election.

Under the power-sharing agreement they signed then, Tsvangirai said, the president could only act in consultation with the prime minister in announcing election dates.

"President Mugabe's actions are a unilateral and flagrant breach of our constitution and the GPA [global political agreement]," Tsvangirai told journalists in the capital, Harare. "I, as PM, cannot and will not accept this."

Mugabe was also infringing the voter-registration process, disenfranchising first-time voters and denying political parties and Zimbabweans the chance to inspect the much-criticised voters roll, Tsvangirai said.

"The point being made is that president Mugabe has acted unlawfully and unconstitutionally and is deliberately creating and precipitating an unnecessary constitutional crisis. The constitution makes the president the chief upholder and defender of the constitution.

"It is therefore regrettable that the chief defender and upholder has become the chief attacker and abuser of the constitution. Surely, the defender-in-chief cannot become the attacker-in-chief!"

He also accused Mugabe of ignoring a regional mediation process led by South Africa's president, Jacob Zuma. Tsvangirai said crucial reforms to the media and security sector, both of which were seen as favouring Zanu-PF, had yet to be carried out.

"Clearly therefore, the unilateral proclamation made today is a deliberate attempt to stall the reform agenda in Zimbabwe. Without reforms, Zimbabwe is yet again heading to another contested, predatory and illegitimate election."

Referring to the last election in 2008 in which more than 200 people died, he added: "In short, another June 27."

The 61-year-old continued: "I will not accept a situation where Zimbabweans will yet again be railroaded and frog-marched to another illegitimate and violent election.

"The people of Zimbabwe are suffering. Businesses are shutting down, workers are under attack and the economy has frozen. A fraudulent and illegitimate election will deepen the crisis and will not reverse this malaise."

Tsvangirai said he had advised his lawyers to make an urgent court application to reverse the decision and he would appeal to regional mediators to intervene. He argues that Zimbabwe cannot hold elections before 25 August.

Lindiwe Zulu, Zuma's top Zimbabwe negotiator, told Reuters she was flying to Harare on Friday but declined to comment on the election announcement.

According to Mugabe's declaration, legislative and local elections will also take place on 31 July, and a presidential runoff will be held on 11 September if necessary. Opinion polls suggest a close contest between Mugabe and Tsvangirai, making a runoff likely.

Tsvangirai pulled out of the second round of the previous election, accusing the security forces and pro-Mugabe militias of attacking his supporters around the country.

Mugabe has repeatedly dismissed calls for reforms in the security services. Senior generals have vowed their allegiance to him and have refused to salute Tsvangirai since he became prime minister in 2009, arguing he did not take part in the guerilla war that ended colonial rule and gave Mugabe power in 1980.

Campaigners have criticised Mugabe for again denying access to international observers for this year's ballot.

The pressure group Free and Fair Zimbabwe Election said: "The general election will be fiercely contested. It is in the interest of all parties that the process is clean and the result is acceptable and sustainable.

"Given what happened in 2008, when violence and intimidation were among the main features of the campaign, it seems a reasonable expectation that the government would welcome the presence of neutral observers so that all parliamentarians, and their supporters, can accept the result as the fair outcome of a free election in a democracy."

Veritas, a legality research group, said Mugabe's amended election laws still had to be passed by Zimbabwe's parliament.

"Presidential powers cannot be used to do by regulation what the constitution says must be provided for by an act of parliament," the group said.

[US says it will arm Syrian rebels following chemical weapons tests]

US says it will arm Syrian rebels following chemical weapons tests

US says it will provide military aid to rebels after confirming for first time that it has evidence of nerve gas use

• White House statement on Syria regime's chemical weapons

Dan Roberts in Washington
The Guardian, Friday 14 June 2013   

The US has said it will provide military support to the Syrian rebels after confirming it believes there is concrete evidence of nerve gas attacks by government forces against rebel groups.

The assessment that limited attacks have taken place, based on CIA tests on blood, urine and hair samples from dead or wounded rebel fighters, is the first time Washington has supported claims made by British and French intelligence services in recent weeks. Assad has repeatedly denied using any chemical weapons in the bitter civil war.

"Following a deliberative review our intelligence community assesses that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons, including the nerve agent sarin, on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year," said a White House statement.

"Our intelligence community has high confidence in that assessment given multiple, independent streams of information. The intelligence community estimates that 100 to 150 people have died from detected chemical weapons attacks in Syria to date; however, casualty data is likely incomplete. "

The White House believes its assessment means Syria has crossed the so-called "red line" that President Barack Obama established early in the conflict as a test for further western intervention to support the rebels.

Late on Thursday details began to emerge of the shape military aid might take. Senator John McCain, one of the strongest proponents of US military action in Syria, said he was told on Thursday that Obama had decided to "provide arms to the rebels", a decision confirmed by three US officials, according to the Associated Press. The officials cautioned that decisions on the specific type of weaponry were still being finalised, AP said, but they might include small arms, ammunition, assault rifles and a variety of anti-tank weaponry such as shoulder-fired remote-propelled grenades and other missiles.

The CIA was expected to be tasked with teaching the rebels how to use the arms the White House had agreed to supply, AP said. The New York Times gave a similar outline of the arms involved, while adding that the anti-aircraft munitions hotly sought by the rebels were not under consideration. Syrian rebel groups have repeatedly called for both anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles.

The deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, said: "The president has made a decision about providing more support for the opposition and will be providing further support to the SMC (Supreme Military Council) and that includes providing military support. I can't detail what types of support yet."

He added: "We have not made any decision about a no-fly zone … The best thing we can do is help the opposition on the ground."

McCain, a leading US hawk who has been pushing for intervention, said: "I applaud the president's decision and I appreciate it."

"But the president of the United States had better understand that just supplying weapons is not going to change the equation on the ground [or] the balance of power. These people – the Free Syrian Army – need weapons, heavy weapons to counter tanks and aircraft, they need a no-fly zone, and Bashar al-Assad's air assets have to be taken out and neutralised. We can do that without risking a single American airplane."

In a conference call with reporters, Rhodes had given examples of the military support the US might be providing but did not mention offensive weapons directly. "We are trying to improve their effectiveness as a fighting force and their cohesion, such as their ability to communicate with each other … and medical equipment to deal with casualties."

Officials in Washington remain divided about more extensive intervention, with many still concerned that enforcing a no-fly zone could backfire or drag the US into further conflict.

National security advisers met in Washington on Wednesday to discuss possible options but Obama was not present.

Thursday's statement based on the CIA reports said there was no reason to think the resistance has access to chemical weapons.

"We believe that the Assad regime maintains control of these weapons, and has taken steps to secure these weapons from theft or attack," it said. "We have no reliable, corroborated reported to indication that the opposition has acquired or used chemical weapons."

The CIA report said the US has acquired blood, urine and hair samples from two Syrian rebels – one dead, and one wounded – who were involved in a firefight with Syrian government forces in mid-March near the town of Utubya, north-east of Damascus.

"While the lethality of these attacks make up only a small portion of the catastrophic loss of life in Syria, which now stands at more than 90,000 deaths, the use of chemical weapons violates international norms and crosses clear red lines that have existed within the international community for decades," said Rhodes.

The White House said it would take decisions on how to proceed "on its own timeline" but would be discussing what to do with allies at the G8 next week.
"The president has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has," said Rhodes.

"There are a range of options available to us ... but we will make decisions based on the US national interest as well as what might help the rebels on the ground," Rhodes added in the conference call with reporters.

"The influx of foreign fighters to the conflict has added an element of urgency to the situation."

Asked why this decision had been taken now, the White House said it needed to be sure that military assistance would end up in the right hands.

"It takes time to establish a pipeline for direct military assistance but we are now comfortable working with the SMC and General Idriss," said Rhodes. "The type of assistance we are going to provide is going to be substantively different to what we have provided since April."

His comments strongly point toward arming the rebels with significant new weapons.

Rhodes said the new US strategy was "aimed at strengthening the effectiveness of the SMC on the ground and their ability to defend themselves".

Washington said it would be consulting with the United Nations and had provided its alleged evidence of chemical weapons use to the Russians. Obama is due to have bilateral talks with President Putin at next week's G8 summit in Northern Ireland.

***************

White House statement on Syrian regime chemicals weapons - full text

Statement by Ben Rhodes, the US deputy national security advisor for strategic communications, on chemical weapons

guardian.co.uk, Thursday 13 June 2013 23.00 BST   

At the President's direction, the United States Government has been closely monitoring the potential use of chemical weapons within Syria. Following the assessment made by our intelligence community in April, the President directed the intelligence community to seek credible and corroborated information to build on that assessment and establish the facts with some degree of certainty. Today, we are providing an updated version of our assessment to Congress and to the public.

The Syrian government's refusal to grant access to the United Nations to investigate any and all credible allegations of chemical weapons use has prevented a comprehensive investigation as called for by the international community. The Assad regime could prove that its request for an investigation was not just a diversionary tactic by granting the UN fact finding mission immediate and unfettered access to conduct on-site investigations to help reveal the truth about chemical weapons use in Syria. While pushing for a UN investigation, the United States has also been working urgently with our partners and allies as well as individuals inside Syria, including the Syrian opposition, to procure, share, and evaluate information associated with reports of chemical weapons use so that we can establish the facts and determine what took place.

Following a deliberative review, our intelligence community assesses that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons, including the nerve agent sarin, on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year. Our intelligence community has high confidence in that assessment given multiple, independent streams of information. The intelligence community estimates that 100 to 150 people have died from detected chemical weapons attacks in Syria to date; however, casualty data is likely incomplete. While the lethality of these attacks make up only a small portion of the catastrophic loss of life in Syria, which now stands at more than 90,000 deaths, the use of chemical weapons violates international norms and crosses clear red lines that have existed within the international community for decades. We believe that the Assad regime maintains control of these weapons. We have no reliable, corroborated reporting to indicate that the opposition in Syria has acquired or used chemical weapons.

The body of information used to make this intelligence assessment includes reporting regarding Syrian officials planning and executing regime chemical weapons attacks; reporting that includes descriptions of the time, location, and means of attack; and descriptions of physiological symptoms that are consistent with exposure to a chemical weapons agent. Some open source reports from social media outlets from Syrian opposition groups and other media sources are consistent with the information we have obtained regarding chemical weapons use and exposure. The assessment is further supported by laboratory analysis of physiological samples obtained from a number of individuals, which revealed exposure to sarin. Each positive result indicates that an individual was exposed to sarin, but it does not tell us how or where the individuals were exposed or who was responsible for the dissemination.

We are working with allies to present a credible, evidentiary case to share with the international community and the public. Since the creation of the UN fact finding mission, we have provided two briefings to Dr. Åke Sellström, the head of the mission. We will also be providing a letter to UN Secretary General Ban, calling the UN's attention to our updated intelligence assessment and specific incidents of alleged chemical weapons use. We request that the UN mission include these incidents in its ongoing investigation and report, as appropriate, on its findings. We will present additional information and continue to update Dr. Sellström as new developments emerge.

The President has been clear that the use of chemical weapons – or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups – is a red line for the United States, as there has long been an established norm within the international community against the use of chemical weapons. Our intelligence community now has a high confidence assessment that chemical weapons have been used on a small scale by the Assad regime in Syria. The President has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has.

Our decision making has already been guided by the April intelligence assessment and by the regime's escalation of horrific violence against its citizens. Following on the credible evidence that the regime has used chemical weapons against the Syrian people, the President has augmented the provision of non-lethal assistance to the civilian opposition, and also authorized the expansion of our assistance to the Supreme Military Council (SMC), and we will be consulting with Congress on these matters in the coming weeks. This effort is aimed at strengthening the effectiveness of the SMC, and helping to coordinate the provision of assistance by the United States and other partners and allies. Put simply, the Assad regime should know that its actions have led us to increase the scope and scale of assistance that we provide to the opposition, including direct support to the SMC. These efforts will increase going forward.

The United States and the international community have a number of other legal, financial, diplomatic, and military responses available. We are prepared for all contingencies, and we will make decisions on our own timeline. Any future action we take will be consistent with our national interest, and must advance our objectives, which include achieving a negotiated political settlement to establish an authority that can provide basic stability and administer state institutions; protecting the rights of all Syrians; securing unconventional and advanced conventional weapons; and countering terrorist activity.

**********

Cameron backs US assessment on Syrian chemical weapons use

Exclusive: PM praises Washington for 'candid' analysis claiming Assad troops have used chemical weapons against rebels

Patrick Wintour and Nicholas Watt   
guardian.co.uk, Friday 14 June 2013 12.18 BST   

Britain shares the "candid assessment" by the US that the regime of President Bashir al-Assad has used chemical weapons against rebels in the Syrian conflict, David Cameron has said.

Speaking to the Guardian after the White House announced it had found evidence of the use of the nerve agent sarin, the prime minister praised the US for giving added detail which poses "difficult questions" about how to confront Assad.

The US has said it will provide military support to the Syrian rebels after its "deliberative review".

The prime minister showed support for the US when he told the Guardian in an interview before the G8 meeting in Northern Ireland: "We do [share the US judgment]. I discussed this with President Obama on my recent visit. Our intelligence agencies have been sharing information. We share their view that, as we put it, growing levels of information about chemical weapons used by the regime and no firm evidence that chemical weapons have been used by the opposition.

"I welcome this candid assessment by the Americans. I think it, rightly, puts back centre stage the question, the very difficult question to answer but nonetheless one we have got to address: what are we going to do about the fact that in our world today there is a dictatorial and brutal leader who is using chemical weapons under our noses against his own people."

The US assessment that limited attacks have taken place, based on CIA tests on blood, urine and hair samples from dead or wounded rebel fighters, is the first time Washington has supported claims made by British and French intelligence services in recent weeks. Assad has repeatedly denied using any chemical weapons in the bitter civil war.

"Following a deliberative review our intelligence community assesses that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons, including the nerve agent sarin, on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year," said a White House statement.

"Our intelligence community has high confidence in that assessment given multiple, independent streams of information. The intelligence community estimates that 100 to 150 people have died from detected chemical weapons attacks in Syria to date; however, casualty data is likely incomplete."

The White House believes its assessment means Syria has crossed the so-called "red line" that President Barack Obama established early in the conflict as a test for further western intervention to support the rebels.

Senator John McCain, one of the strongest proponents of US military action in Syria, said he was told on Thursday that Obama had decided to "provide arms to the rebels", a decision confirmed by three US officials, according to the Associated Press. The officials cautioned that decisions on the specific type of weaponry were still being finalised, AP said, but they might include small arms, ammunition, assault rifles and a variety of anti-tank weaponry such as shoulder-fired remote-propelled grenades and other missiles.

The CIA was expected to be tasked with teaching the rebels how to use the arms the White House had agreed to supply, AP said. The New York Times gave a similar outline of the arms involved, while adding that the anti-aircraft munitions hotly sought by the rebels were not under consideration. Syrian rebel groups have repeatedly called for both anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles.

[Julia Gillard speaks of fears for women in public life after Sattler radio ambush]

Julia Gillard speaks of fears for women in public life after Sattler radio ambush

PM raises concerns that interview in which she was asked about the sexuality of her partner might dissuade women from politics

Katharine Murphy, deputy political editor
guardian.co.uk, Friday 14 June 2013 02.49 BST   

Julia Gillard has said she does not want women and girls to be dissuaded from participation in public life after an extraordinary radio interview in which she was asked whether her live-in partner, Tim Mathieson, was gay.

Radio broadcaster Howard Sattler has been sacked after a strong public backlash to the interview broadcast on Perth radio on Thursday afternoon.

In her first comments since the encounter, Gillard told reporters that, like the sex discrimination commissioner, Liz Broderick, she was concerned that women could be put off from entering politics by unfortunate episodes such as the Sattler interview.

“I’ve seen the remarks of the sex discrimination commissioner, Elizabeth Broderick. She has spoken about her concerns that things like this send a message to women and to girls not to be involved in public life,” she said in Adelaide on Friday morning.

“I’m concerned about that too. I don’t want to see a message like that sent to … young girls. I want young girls and women to be able to feel like they are included in public life and not have to face questioning like the questioning I faced yesterday.”

The prime minister declined further comment on the issue.

Broderick had said she felt angry listening to the Sattler interview, and was concerned about the impact it would have on the public discourse, and on women with aspirations to enter politics, or any kind of public role.

Kevin Rudd, campaigning in Sydney, attacked the Sattler interview. "I think it's totally off," Rudd said.

Sattler posed the question to the prime minister on Thursday afternoon on the premise of clearing up rumours and things "you hear".

Sattler said to the prime minister he would offer her a chance to clear up ''myths, rumours, snide jokes and innuendo'' during the interview on Perth's 6PR.

"Tim's gay?" Sattler inquired of the prime minister.

"Well that's absurd," Gillard replied.

"But you hear it," Sattler persisted. "He must be gay, he's a hairdresser. It's not me saying it."

"Well, Howard, I don't know whether every silly thing that gets said is going to be repeated to me now, but to all the hairdressers out there, including the men who are listening, I don't think that in life one can look at a whole profession full of different human beings and say gee, we know something about every one of those human beings," the prime minister said, before adding: "It's absurd."

Rather than dropping the issue, Sattler continued with the inquisition, evidently seeking to obtain a direct denial. "You can confirm that's he's not [gay]?"

"Oh, Howard, don't be ridiculous. Of course not," Gillard said. "Let me bring you back to Earth."

After first suspending Sattler, Fairfax announced late on Friday that the broadcaster had been sacked from his program. Radio station 6PR issued a statement apologising to the prime minister and to Mathieson.

"During an interview on the Drive program yesterday presenter Howard Sattler pursued a line of questioning with prime minister Julia Gillard that was disrespectful to the office and the person of the prime minister and was entirely inappropriate," the statement read.

"Radio 6PR apologises unreservedly to Ms Gillard and Mr Mathieson for allowing these matters to be raised on the Drive Program. In the wake of yesterday's interview Radio 6PR suspended Mr Sattler from broadcasting pending a review of the matter today. The station has now decided to terminate Mr Sattler's engagement."

Sattler for his part was unrepentant, and signalled his intention to take legal action against Fairfax concerning his dismissal.

The ambush of the prime minister on radio followed days of political controversy over the so-called gender wars.

A furore erupted earlier this week over a lewd menu prepared in association with an LNP fundraiser in Brisbane containing explicit references to the prime minister's body including her breasts and "big red box".

Brisbane restaurant owner Joe Richards said he prepared the menu not as a public rebuke but as a private "in-joke" with his son. The LNP's candidate for the seat of Fisher, Mal Brough, apologised for the offending document, and so did his party organisation.

Richards says the menu was not circulated among guests at the fundraiser for Brough in late March – although Labor ministers on Thursday queried whether that account of events should be believed.

Brough has said the content of the menu was entirely inappropriate.

The LNP candidate said he apologised initially, not because he has seen the menu himself, but because he believed others might have seen it. He later clarified with Richards that it had not gone beyond the kitchen.

***********

‘Intersex’ included on Australia’s new gender guidelines

By Agence France-Presse
Friday, June 14, 2013 7:24 EDT

The Australian government has announced new guidelines on gender recognition which state that individuals should be given the option of selecting “male”, “female” or “intersex” on their personal documents.

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said the new guidelines, which come into operation from July 1, will make it simpler for people to establish or change their sex or gender in personal records held by federal government departments and agencies.

“We recognise individuals may identify, and be recognised within the community, as a gender other than the gender they were assigned at birth or during infancy, or as an indeterminate gender,” Dreyfus said in a statement Thursday.

“This should be recognised and reflected in their personal records held by departments and agencies.”

The move comes after the Australian Human Rights Commission in 2009 recommended the government consider developing national guidelines concerning the collection of sex and gender information.

The new guidelines state that “where sex and/or gender information is collected and recorded in a personal record, individuals should be given the option to select M (male), F (female) or X (Indeterminate/Intersex/Unspecified)”.

They state that sex reassignment surgery and/or hormone therapy are not pre-requisites for the recognition of a change of gender in Australian government records.

When someone requests the sex on their personal record be changed, Dreyfus said the government would accept a statement from their doctor or psychologist, a valid Australian passport (which have allowed X under sex for several years), or a state or territory birth certificate or other document which shows their preferred gender status.

“Transgender and intersex people in Australia face many issues trying to ensure the gender status on their personal records matches the gender they live and how they are recognised by the community,” Dreyfus said.

“These guidelines will bring about a practical improvement in the everyday lives of transgender, intersex and gender diverse people.”

[South Korean Agents Accused of Tarring Opposition Before Election]

une 14, 2013

South Korean Agents Accused of Tarring Opposition Before Election

By CHOE SANG-HUN
IHT

Nine agents from the National Intelligence Service of South Korea wrote more than 1,700 postings on the Internet in a psychological warfare campaign against North Korea last year, using some of them to attack domestic opposition parties and their candidates ahead of South Korea’s presidential election in December, state prosecutors said on Friday.

Their top supervisor, Won Sei-hoon, former director of the intelligence agency, was accused of overseeing the online operation and was indicted in the case on Friday. But prosecutors said they did not indict the nine agents because they were simply obeying Mr. Won’s instructions.

Mr. Won, who was not arrested, faced trial on charges of violating the national election law, which bans government officials from using their influence to affect an election, as well as violating a separate law that prohibits government intelligence officials from meddling in domestic politics.

While announcing the result of their two-month-long investigation, prosecutors did not comment on whether or how the alleged operation by the intelligence agents affected the Dec. 19 election. President Park Geun-hye, the governing party candidate at the time, won one million votes more than her main rival, Moon Jae-in, the candidate of the main opposition Democratic Party and a key target of the intelligence agents’ online criticism.

The agents used hundreds of Internet IDs to upload comments as part of what the intelligence authorities have called a normal psychological campaign against North Korea. The intelligence agency has accused North Korea of using the Internet to try to spread Communist propaganda and spawn anti-government sentiment in South Korea, one of the world’s most wired countries.

But prosecutors said that at least 67 of the postings uploaded by the agents between September and December last year criticized the main opposition Democratic Party, a minor progressive party and their presidential candidates, accusing them of being too soft on North Korea or sympathizing with it. Prosecutors said they would present the postings, some of which used offensive language, in court as evidence of illegal meddling in the presidential election.

In their nationally televised announcement of their investigation results, prosecutors depicted the intelligence agents as overzealous officials who overstepped their normal job duties by using their anti-North Korean psychological operations to attack the domestic opposition's North Korea policies. The opposition parties have called for a new parliamentary investigation, claiming that the intelligence agency’s online activities were aimed directly at helping Ms. Park’s election.

Ms. Park’s office did not comment on the prosecutor’s announcement on Friday. Mr. Won also was not immediately available for comment. But through his lawyers, he has denied interfering in the election, saying that his agency’s online activities were part of normal psychological operations focused on North Korea.

Mr. Won had served as the top intelligence official under President Lee Myung-bak, Ms. Park’s predecessor, until Ms. Park took office in February.

During the election campaign, the opposition claimed that the intelligence agency engaged in illegal campaigning for Ms. Park. But three days before the election, the police announced that they had investigated and found no evidence to support the opposition’s allegation.

Kim Yong-pan, former chief of the Seoul Metropolitan Police, was indicted on Friday on charges of withholding criminal evidence in an attempt to illegally intervene in the police investigation by junior officers.

[A Hardliner and Conservatives: Iranians Get Few Choices for President]

 SPIEGEL ONLINE
06/14/2013 01:38 PM

A Hardliner and Conservatives: Iranians Get Few Choices for President

By Raniah Salloum

Fifty million Iranians are voting on Friday for a new president. Of the six conservative candidates, Saeed Jalili is the most hardline. If he wins, the Islamic Republic could become even more authoritarian -- and the West should expect tougher confrontations.

The people of Iran will choose from six candidates during this Friday's presidential election -- all are conservative. Not a single candidate has seriously criticized the system in the Islamic Republic. They belong to the establishment. But one stands out as being particularly extreme.

"Saeed Jalili stands for radical positions," says Walter Posch, an expert on Iran at the respected German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) in Berlin. "The question with this election is: Will Jalili win or not?" If Jalili prevails, it means the radical wing within the Iranian establishment has won.

Elections in Iran are not free. There are no independent election observers monitoring the voting process, so tampering is possible. The outcome of the election is therefore nearly impossible to predict. Aside from Jalili, the candidates include Tehran Mayor Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, former Minister of Petroleum Mohammad Gharazi, Mohsen Rezai of the Revolutionary Guard and former nuclear negotiator Hassan Rowhani. If none of the candidates receives over 50 percent of the vote on June 14, the top two will compete in a run-off race scheduled for June 21.

The candidates are handpicked by the Guardian Council, whose members were all chosen directly or indirectly by the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. So the results of the election are telling about the distribution of power within the establishment. "The infighting this time is more heated than it has been during other elections," says Posch.

Jalili is running under the slogan: "Resistance is the key to success." For the 48-year-old, these are not empty words. He is serious about the ideology of the Islamic Republic. The arch-conservative veteran of the Iran-Iraq War is a staunch supporter of the system. He accuses his rivals in the presidential race of being too lenient.

Foreign Confrontation, Domestic Repression

They also continue to believe that Iran has the right to its nuclear program. In dealing with the West, however, some of the candidates are in favor of moderation and have signaled a willingness to compromise on the details. The fact of the matter is that it is Ayatollah Khamenei who defines the basic aspects of Iran's nuclear policy. Still, the president does have influence over the tone of exchange with the West. Ultimately he represents Iran in the international arena. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom term limits prohibit from re-election, will likely be remembered above all for his verbal swipes at Israel.

In some ways Jalili and Ahmadinejad are similar. Both are relatively young nationalist radicals who from rather modest circumstances have managed to climb the ranks of the Islamic Republic.

But Jalili is considered a more faithful devotee of Khamenei. Ahmadinejad, on the other hand, is more of a populist than an ideologue. Unlike Jalili, he has charisma and support among parts of the population. He often challenged the establishment. Even Khamenei was personally opposed to Ahmadinejad's presidency -- and drew the short straw.

A victory for Jalili would mean not only a continuation of confrontational foreign policy, but also of domestic repression.

Under Ahmadinejad's presidency, the political freedoms of Iranians were scaled back, especially after the controversial election of 2009 and subsequent protests.

On the other hand, the populist was also willing to engage in confrontations with the clerical establishment -- such as when he granted certain women permission to watch soccer before Ayatollah Khamenei intervened and reinstated the ban.

Jalili the ideologue would scarcely try to expand the social rights of women. Were Jalili to become president, the political system could very well become even more authoritarian. The power would be even more densely concentrated around Khamenei. As a faithful devotee of the supreme leader, the president would be relegated to a minor role.

During the presidency of Ahmadinejad, Khamenei publicly considered abolishing the office -- the only halfway-democratic-looking element in Iran's political system. "If Jalili becomes president, Iran will undergo an internal conversion and move forward on its course of confrontational foreign policy," says Posch. "With this election, Iran stands at a crossroads."

*************

Iranians go to polls after spirited end to presidential campaign

Public interest in Friday's election surges after Hassan Rouhani attracts backing from reformers and opposition figures

Saeed Kamali Dehghan   
The Guardian, Friday 14 June 2013   

Iranians are voting for a new president following an election campaign that began flatly but took off when thousands poured on to the streets to show their support for their preferred candidate.

Since reformists and opposition figures threw their weight behind the moderate contender Hassan Rouhani, public interest in the lone cleric running in the election has surged significantly.

Videos and pictures posted online of Rouhani's campaign rallies in Tehran and other major cities such as Mashhad show scenes reminiscent – albeit on a smaller scale – of the 2009 election, when supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi, dubbed the Green movement, created a historic momentum.

Six candidates, a slate of hopefuls who qualified to stand only after an acrimonious vetting process, are competing to succeed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after eight years in office.

"We are finally bidding farewell to Ahmadinejad, and that alone is something to welcome," Mohammad, a Tehrani citizen, said via online chat on Facebook.

"Regardless of the outcome, I celebrate the fact that he is finally leaving Iranian politics."

The three-week campaign period, which saw candidates embarking on an extensive schedule of provincial visits and campaigners taking to the streets to spread the word, officially ended in the early hours of Thursday and polls opened on Friday morning.

"At first I did not want to vote. Elections are not free in my country," said Mona, a university student in Tehran. "But I have changed my mind after seeing the euphoria in the past couple of days in the streets of Tehran. People are desperate for a change and I'm voting for Rouhani."

As the polls opened, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei urged a large turnout and said he did not "give a damn" about US suggestions that the ballot was unfair.

"What is important is that everyone takes part," Khamenei said, speaking live on state television as he cast his ballot in Tehran. "Our dear nation should come [to vote] with excitement and liveliness and know that the destiny of the country is in their hands and the happiness of the country depends on them."

Earlier, Khamenei, who has the final say on all state matters in the country, said: "It is possible that some do not want to support the Islamic republic but surely they want to support their own country. They should vote too." Khamenei had previously said that he would consider any vote a vote for the Islamic republic.

It is the first presidential election since 2009, when protests against the official results sparked an uprising. This was followed by months of unrest and a crackdown on journalists and activists. Mousavi and another candidate, Mehdi Karroubi, are currently under house arrest.

Despite a surge in the number of people deciding to vote, some still fear their vote will not be counted. Mina, a young woman from the central city of Isfahan, said: "Last time they stole our votes. What is the guarantee this time that they will count them?"

On the last full day of campaigning, thousands of activists filled the streets. A video shot on Tehran's Vali-e-Asr street and posted on YouTube showed hundreds of Rouhani supporters holding up banners and chanting slogans at supporters of Saeed Jalili, a hardliner.

Many prominent figures sympathetic to Rouhani have in the past few days urged undecided voters to back him, warning that lack of participating will increase Jalili's chances.

Although the remaining five candidates besides Rouhani are conservative figures unlikely to bring major reform to the country's ruling system, almost all the men are critical of Ahmadinejad's government and have pledged to bring changes to the country's economic and political landscape, putting an end to an era when populist policies of the outgoing president sparked widespread controversies.

Tehran's pragmatic mayor, Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, is also among the conservative candidates seen as having a good chance of winning or entering a runoff with Rouhani.

"On Ghalibaf's watch, Tehran has changed positively," said Akram from Tehran. "I'll vote for him because I believe he can be a good president."

In the run up to the election Iranian authorities clamped down on activists and campaigners, with journalists, lawyers and members of Iran's religious and ethnic minorities facing harassment.

"The escalation in repression is an outrageous attempt by the Iranian authorities to silence critics ahead of the presidential election," said Amnesty's Middle East and North Africa director, Philip Luther. "The surge in recent violations underlines Iran's continued and brazen flouting of human rights standards through its persecution of political dissidents, and betrays the glaring absence of a meaningful human rights discourse in the election campaign."

On Wednesday Google's security chief warned against a "politically motivated" phishing attack on tens of thousands of Iranian users.

[Exhibit at Auschwitz-Birkenau Honors Children of Holocaust]

June 13, 2013

Exhibit at Auschwitz-Birkenau Honors Children of Holocaust

By MELISSA EDDY
IHT

OSWIECIM, Poland — A small bird, an empty baby carriage, a soldier pointing a gun at a family in the woods. The simple sketches arranged by the Israeli artist Michal Rovner tell the story of loss, fear and hope through the eyes of the 1.5 million children killed in the Nazi Holocaust.

The sketches, with work that includes color footage of Jewish life in Europe between the World Wars and a six-and-a-half-foot-high volume of the Book of Names, make up the new permanent exhibit at Auschwitz-Birkenau honoring the Jewish victims. Called simply “Shoah,” the multimedia exhibit, which tries to push visitors beyond their knowledge of the facts of the Nazis’ Final Solution, was dedicated Thursday in a ceremony attended by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

“There are Holocaust deniers,” Mr. Netanyahu said after touring the exhibit. There, he found the name of Judith, his father-in-law’s twin sister, who was among the 4.2 million known victims listed in the oversize book displayed in the former brick barracks. “Let them come to Block 27 and let them go name by name.”

Mr. Netanyahu has accused Iran of plotting a second Holocaust, and recent Israeli attacks on Damascus demonstrate Israel’s desire to take advantage of the chaotic situation in Syria to send a clear message to Iran’s government. On Thursday, he charged that the Allies had failed to act against the Holocaust, despite knowledge of what was happening in the gas chambers of Birkenau, and vowed that the Israeli people would never again place their fate in the hands of others.

“From here in Auschwitz-Birkenau, this place that serves as a living testimony to the wish to destroy and obliterate our nation, I, the prime minister of the state of Israel, state of the Jewish people, am telling all nations of the world the state of Israel will do all within its power to prevent a second Holocaust,” Mr. Netanyahu said, in Hebrew.

Set in the original brick, two-story former barracks of Block 27, the exhibit seeks to complement the museum’s permanent collection of artifacts and the authenticity of the camp itself, through multimedia installations by contemporary Israeli artists, said Avner Shalev, the director of the Yad Vashem Institute for Holocaust Research in Israel, who curated the $8 million exhibit.

“We decided that we are not going to compete with the artifacts,” Mr. Shalev said. The Israeli government asked Yad Vashem to create the exhibit, after Ariel Sharon, then the prime minister, returned from the camp in 2005 dismayed at the outdated, ill-kept display created in the 1960s to honor the Jewish dead.

Faced with the task of making it worth visitors’ effort to spend 30 more minutes with the display, after having already toured the sites and main museum at Auschwitz-Birkenau, Mr. Shalev huddled with researchers, teachers and survivors for several years to develop a mix of moving images, maps, audio clips of Hitler’s anti-Semitic rants and survivors’ videotaped testimony.

“The exhibit deals with a level of spiritual experience that builds on a culture of elements that you identify with and that make up your identity as a human being,” Mr. Shalev said.

One room is dedicated to the youngest victims. With dark, wooden watchtowers outside the windows, the fragility of the children’s drawings rendered on the wall by Ms. Rovner slows down visitors and draws them close.

Edited together from fragments of about 3,000 pictures drawn by Jewish children before they were executed, the work tells their story of longing for a daily life lost, through empty baby carriages and a mother hugging her child goodbye; of fear of soldiers poised in the woods and bombs breaking their homes; of the train tracks disappearing beneath the yawning gate at Birkenau.

“They found some kind of energy although they were taken away from everything they knew,” Ms. Rovner said of the children.

“They didn’t tell this story,” she said. “They couldn’t.”

[Pussy Riot documentary directors: 'They are awakening the world' - video interview]

Pussy Riot documentary directors: 'They are awakening the world' - video interview

Catherine Shoard   
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 13 June 2013 12.02 BST   

Maxim Pozdorovkin and Mike Lerner, co-directors of a documentary about the Russian punk band Pussy Riot, tell Catherine Shoard why the group are being persecuted by the Russian Orthodox church – chiefly because they are women – and how we could all afford to be a little more radical

Click to watch: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/video/2013/jun/13/pussy-riot-documentary-persecuted-orthodox-video

************

Pussy Riot: A Punk Prayer – first look review

Sheffield Doc/Fest kicks off with a film on Russia's feminist punk collective, an at-times unsubtle study of naivety forced into acuity

Catherine Shoard   
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 13 June 2013 12.02 BST   

Link to video: Pussy Riot on Putin, 'punk prayers' and superheroes

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/jul/29/pussy-riot-russia-interview-video

The best translation of the word "pussy", explains a man halfway through the opening night film of Sheffield Doc/Fest, is "deranged vagina". Other definitions include "kitten" and "uterus". He pussyfoots round actually saying the word, this man, sweaty in woolly beard and vast hat and "Orthodoxy or Death" T-shirt, and, when he does, it's impossible not to recall Sean Connery. Vowels, it turns out, can sound Scottish, said with a Russian accent.

One wouldn't have thought there was a lot more to goggle at in the saga of the feminist punk collective, three members of which were sentenced to two years in penal camps after a 40-second performance in Moscow's Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in February 2012. And yet directors Mike Lerner and Maxim Pozdorovkin spike their summary with enough shocks to make even the well-acquainted gulp.

First, it has to be said, is the amateurism of the performance itself: an awful, attention-hustling racket, musically horrible, lyrically adolescent; poetry-free provocation. It's an ill-planned shambles – they've barely had time to strap on their guitars, let alone belt out the chorus ("Shit! Shit! It's God shit!") before they're hustled off by security guards. The second is the naivety of the band. These are kids, mostly in their early 20s, genuinely inspired by the Spice Girls, caught short by the hardline nature of the regime they were protesting against.

The regime raises its eyebrows; initial questions levelled by police at the women include whether they dream of getting married and having children, but the film also takes care to lay bare the broader cultural background. The orthodox men defame the Pussy Rioters as witches; their female counterparts despair of the girls' behaviour as unpatriotic vulgarity: "It's like someone walked into the heart of Russia and took a shit." Parallels peddled by the band between their experience and the Stalinist showtrials are then illustrated with archive footage, to ambiguous effect.

Yet the main surprise is the increasing poise of the young women themselves. Initially it's superficial – "I always look good," says the most telegenic, in reply to a compliment from her husband, the other side of the courtroom glass – but as the case proceeds and its implications for them, their families, and for Putin's image outside Russia, percolate down, so they wise up. They admit their failings – we're not saying we're ethically flawless, says one – and express genuine contrition for offence caused. By the end, they are speaking with enormous precision and passion, an intellectual rigour miles superior to the work that landed them in trouble in the first place. Being on the receiving end of Putin's wrath turns out to be something of a public-speaking boot camp.

The 90-minute documentary – granted theatrical release in the UK in a few weeks, but a HBO number in the US – is, have no doubt, modulated propaganda, that leaves you in no doubt which hymnbook you're supposed to sing from. Putin is seen drifting smoothly through corridors as scared lackeys salute; the girls are inevitably only shown in captivity, with sympathetic choruses from their parents. Difficult questions – about the young children of two of the three – are skirted around, and the spotlight stays with the key trio. Of the eight other members of the troupe, we hear and see nothing.

"Art is not a mirror to reflect the world, but a hammer with which to shape it," says the opening quote, from poet Vladimir Mayakovsky. A Punk Prayer holds up a glass that doesn't need to be quite so flattering, nor so selective, to hold our attention.

 Pussy Riot: A Punk Prayer (Pokazatelnyy Protsess: Istoriya Pussy Riot)
    Production year: 2013
    Country: Rest of the world
    Runtime: 90 mins
    Directors: Maxim Pozdorovkin, Mike Lerner

[Transparency in Serbia: Natasa Djereg, director, Centre for Ecology and Sustainable Development]

Transparency in Serbia: Natasa Djereg, director, Centre for Ecology and Sustainable Development

Harriet Salem
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 13 June 2013 08.55 EDT   

Natasa Djereg

In 1999, bombs rained down on Belgrade as Nato forces attempted to topple Slobodan Milosevic's regime. Amid the chaos of war, Natasa Djereg, a student at the University of Belgrade's faculty of forestry, founded the Centre for Ecology and Sustainable Development (Cekor) with her professors. "Those were terrible years," says Djereg, who is now the director of the NGO. "We wanted to start a project that looked to the future."

Since then Cekor has grown in size and scope. Today, the team consists of nine multi-disciplinary professionals working on national and cross-border environmental projects.

"Campaigning around transparency was a natural progression," she says. "In Serbia sustainable development is not high on political agendas, people are not aware of their rights. The system is open to abuse. We have to speak with courage … ensure government and large companies meet environmental standards … this is our everyday work".

Last year, Cekor began investigating Electric Power Industry Serbia (EPS), a state-owned company and monopoly electricity provider, and one of their funders, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). What began as a project lobbying against the expansion of lignite mining in the Kolubara basin quickly took a sinister turn.

"We found people living very close to the mines, less than 200 metres," says Nikola Perusic, Cekor's project manager. "Many are not being offered adequate compensation for their homes; some no compensation at all."

Serbia's transition towards democracy since the conflict ended has been faltering. Despite anti-corruption crackdowns, unscrupulous practices in politics and business remain rife.

"[EBRD] have completely failed to monitor EPS," says Perusic. "This is not uncommon; wherever we see EBRD or other banks involved in large infrastructure projects, in energy or transport, there are often problems. Cekor have worked on similar projects before."

On paper, Serbia's access to information legislation is liberal, but in practice requests are often subject to lengthy delays and rules are hard to enforce.

"We are trying to follow a paper trail," explains Perusic. "But in this instance, the [most important] piece of information I'm seeking, an action plan for the resettlement of these houses, is the one lacking. It just doesn't exist … We have to piece together information like a puzzle."

When the paper trail disappears, the team search for physical evidence instead. Visiting villages on the edge of the mines, they see the suffering caused. "It is like Armageddon, houses are collapsing and being bulldozed," says Perusic. "Many villagers do not know their rights … Civil society is weak. People are poor and have little education. They don't know who is responsible or how to make complaints."

Cekor is now a regional leader in environmentalism. Since 2004 it has represented the international NGO Bankwatch in Serbia. "Collaborating with international organisations and the growing influence of [the] EU has helped our work," says Djereg. "With this pressure, the government has to pay attention. Since we started out important legislation has been passed – now we need to see it enforced."
Clear thinking

What does transparency mean to you?

Transparency is a crucial issue and a condition for democratic global and local environmental governance, and necessary for the expression of the right to an environment adequate for human health and wellbeing.

Why is access to information important in development?

Access to information is an indispensable prerequisite for the right to public participation in environmental decision-making. Improved access to information aims to facilitate public participation, enhance public awareness and understanding, and, ultimately, the greater public accountability of public authorities

What is the one piece of information you most want released?

In our practice we most often want released an environmental assessment of the various plans/programmes: the environmental objectives of the programme, the current state of the environment, the alternatives considered, feasibility studies, and – particularly – data from emissions from industry into the air, water and soil.