H E Abdulla Nasser Al Suwaidi ADNOC s Director General Keynote Opening at 2012 edition

Young ADIPEC Engineer Category Seeks to Groom Future Leaders and Innovators
Regional Jury Panel Includes Two Experts from Kuwait’s Oil and Gas Industry

Kuwait City–Kuwait: 16 June, 2013 – The Abu Dhabi Petroleum Exhibition and Conference (ADIPEC) Awards, which recognise and reward excellence within individual projects and departments of gas and oil companies in the MENA region, has announced the introduction of two new categories: Empowerment of Women in the Gas and Oil Industry and the Young ADIPEC Engineer.

The category for ‘Empowerment of Women in the Gas and Oil Industry’ seeks to highlight companies that recognise the value of diversity and are committed to strengthening women’s participation in the sector, particularly in leadership roles. Candidate companies looking to compete in this category would need to demonstrate efforts in exploring challenges and implementing changes to drive women’s integration into the gas and oil industry.

The Young ADIPEC Engineer award comes as part of ADIPEC’s efforts to nurture future leaders and innovators in the gas and oil sector. Open to individuals who hold less than four years of experience in the industry, the award will recognise the potential of individuals to serve as successful team leaders. The evaluation will scrutinise the aspirant’s scope of work and ability to adapt to the environment, people and situations. Proven leadership qualities and mentor’s recommendations will also be taken into consideration.

Sara Akbar CEO of Kuwait Energy

Serving as ADIPEC’s jury member for the first time, Sara Akbar, CEO of Kuwait Energy Co, is one of five women on the panel. She said: “The institution of this category is highly relevant. Women’s participation in the sector is a subject close to my heart and I have invested considerable time and effort to encourage this trend. Currently, the example of my career is an exception and not the norm for women in the oil and gas industry in the MENA region. Undoubtedly, progress has been made, but I hope that stories like mine will soon become a way of life. I am confident that initiatives such as the ADIPEC awards will accelerate the process. The institution of a category for Young Engineers will also serve as a timely motivation for young professionals in the industry.”

Steve Peacock COO of Mubadala Petroleum

Steve Peacock, COO of Mubadala Petroleum, another new entrant on the 20-member judging panel, said: “It is unfortunate that women need to prove themselves more than men in most industries and cultures – an attitude that is especially hard to understand when the work is intellectual rather than physical! Women do not need any favours; their work speaks for them. However, it is good to specifically showcase their talent as a way of demonstrating and reinforcing the point. The industry has some very talented women holding technical and business leadership potential that we must recognise, nurture and further develop.”

ADIPEC Awards will close submissions on 1 August, 2013 across all categories including Best Gas and Oil Project, Best Gas and Oil Innovation or Technology, Best Gas and Oil HSE Project, Best CSR Initiative, Empowerment of Women in Gas and Oil Industry, and Young ADIPEC Engineer. The easy-to-apply process requires the submission of entries through an online form at www.adipec.com/awards/ The website also offers information on the criteria for each category and the application process. Companies and individuals that have applied in earlier editions and were not recognised are welcome to re-enter. Such entries would have to pay specific emphasis on the updates to their projects.

The judging panel will receive the entries by 1 September, and deliver their independent evaluations by 1 October. The panel will convene in October for final deliberation and decide the winners of this year’s most coveted energy awards. ADIPEC Awards – Excellence in Energy 2013 will honour winners across all categories at a gala ceremony in Abu Dhabi on 10 November.

In addition to Sara Akbar, Bader Al Khashti, Chairman and Managing Director of Kuwait Oil Tanker Company, will continue to be a member of the regional jury panel for the awards. As judging members, they will provide their insight of Kuwait’s gas and oil sector to facilitate the evaluation process. The jury comprises key industry experts from regional national oil companies, international oil companies, research and development entities, as well as engineering, procurement and construction departments, academic institutions, and professional associations.

The 2013 awards is sponsored by OMV, Partex Oil and Gas and JODCO. The 2012 edition of the awards featured six categories and received 170 entries from 15 countries. The ceremony was attended by more than 750 senior regional industry representatives.

[ENDS]

For further information, contact:
Tea Vutmej
Special Projects Manager – ADIPEC
dmg events
ADNEC House, PO Box 74879, Abu Dhabi, UAE
T: +971 2 444 4909 / D: +971 2 406 4467
E: teavutmej@dmgeventsme.com

For the complete list of 2013 judges, see www.adipec.com/rsj

For media inquiries, please contact:
Ashraf Abdullah
APCO Worldwide – Abu Dhabi
Mobile: +971 55 9548663
email: aabdullah@apcoworldwide.com

ADIPEC Trophy

ABOUT ADIPEC
Held under the patronage of the President of the United Arab Emirates, His Highness Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and organised by dmg events, ADIPEC is the largest regional exhibition for the Middle East oil and gas industry. Supported by Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) and the UAE’s Ministry of Energy, it hosts more than 1,600 exhibitors and attracts more than 45,000 attendees.

ABOUT THE ADIPEC AWARDS – EXCELLENCE IN ENERGY 2013
ADIPEC Awards 2012
After the introduction of the new judging system and 21 newly-appointed regional oil and gas experts to form the official judging panel, the interest for the ADIPEC Awards rocketed. Fresh categories and a very detailed process of how to write an entry helped candidates to focus their accomplishment in a less than a 1000 word summary, which resulted with a very competitive environment.

•Six categories of Awards open for nominations
•170 entries received from 15 countries and 65 organisations
•Regional Select Jury formed (21 oil and gas experts join the judging panel)
•Three stage judging process implemented
•Two keynote speeches delivered at the opening ceremony
•Attended by over 150 senior managers from ADNOC
•Attended by senior representatives of the top 30 oil and gas organisations in MENA

In 2012 there were six award categories:
• Best MENA Oil & Gas Project
• Best MENA Oil & Gas Innovation or Technology
• Best MENA Oil & Gas HSE Project or Initiative
• Best MENA CSR Initiative
• Best MENA Oilfield/Gas Field Management Strategy
• Best International Oil & Gas Project

ADIPEC Awards 2010
ADIPEC Awards – Excellence in Energy was created to recognise the excellence within individual projects and departments of oil and gas companies in the MENA region, and to support development of a stronger and even more successful oil and gas business community throughout the region.
The competition commenced in 2010 and the statistics of the first year show:
• 6 categories of Awards open for nominations
• 70 entries received
• Nominations came from 16 countries
• Esteemed judging panel comprising six highly respected industry experts
• Attended by 320 senior managers including 70 managers from ADNOC

Nepal flood (Photo : onlinekhabar.com)

Kathmandu- Incessant monsoon rains have wreaked havoc in western Nepal. Dozens of people were killed in the floods and mudslides triggered by the heavy rain. About 60 houses, including 11 government offices and a hospital of Darchula district headquarters were swept away by the swollen Mahakali river that flows down from the Nepal-India border in western Nepal. The flooded river also swept away a small hydropower project.

Several people of this tiny town located near the Nepal-India-China border in the western hills became homeless after the river swept away 52 houses and huts of civilians on Monday.

The government has dispatched the Nepal Army from Kathmandu with relief materials to the affected area.

Uttarkashi flood (Photo : onlinekhabar.com)

The swollen Mahakali river inundated several settlements in the plains of Nepal and India while several fishermen were stranded in the river for hours.

Reports of deaths in floods and mudslides from other areas are also pouring in. Mudslides killed dozens of people in Kalikot, Dailekh and Humla districts.

A key highway linking the capital city with rest of the country was also obstructed due to landslides.

According to the Home Ministry, nine districts of western Nepal were affected badly by floods and landslides.

(Photo : onlinekhabar.com)

Worst was the situation in Uttarakhanda province of India where several settlements were swept away by flooded Ganges and Bhagirathi rivers.

According to television news, over 60 people were killed in the floods while 100,000 people and passengers were stranded in different areas after roads were swept away by  floods and landslides. The railway services were also affected due to the floods. Even the Indian capital city of New Delhi was at high risk of flood due to the floods in the local Yamuna river.

Almost all rivers originating in the high mountains of Nepal reached India and caused huge damage there.

Professors of Chonnam National University lead a student march toward Geumnam Street to attend the Grand National Rally for Democratization. (Photo : The May 18 Memorial Foundation)

Korean history as seen in South Korea is deeply contentious. It is not incidental that many school textbooks prefer to stop their narrative around 1960, quietly assuming that what happened after is too controversial for anything resembling an impartial judgment to emerge. Most of the prominent historical events and figures of the post-1945 period are deeply polarizing, so in modern Korea one person’s hero is almost certainly another person’s villain.

One of the events, which has been of little controversy up until now, was the Gwangju uprising of May 1980. Korean ‘progressives’ (this is how the Korean nationalist left likes to style itself) perceive this movement as a great expression of freedom and democracy directed against the then emerging military regime of General Chun Doo Hwan, and to some extent against his (alleged) American backers. A significant part of the right has come to agree with such an appraisal, and as a result only a relatively small faction of South Korea’s paleocons – often themselves former enthusiastic supporters of General Chun and his clique – have remained suspicious or hostile.

This seems to be changing though. In mid-May, two South Korean TV stations (both associated with right-wing media conglomerates, but quite respectable) aired what they said were sensational revelations. They insisted that new evidence indicates that a number of North Korean agents and Special Forces were secretly dispatched to Gwangju in 1980, whereupon they took part in the bloody street fighting between the pro-democracy revolutionaries and the forces of the new military dictatorship in Seoul. A recent defector from North Korea who claims to have been a Special Forces solider was interviewed by Channel A and TV Chosun – and said that he himself was on the special mission in Gwangju.

The immediate reaction of the South Korean left was a complete rejection of these claims, which were presented as a conspiracy by dictatorship-loving elements of the right to try to destroy the greatest and most tragic events in South Korea’s tortuous history on the road to democratization.

The left might actually turn out to be right. The evidence presented thus far does not appear to be all that persuasive, and it is not incidental that the channels received an official warning from the South Korean Broadcast Ethics Commission. Nevertheless, the left’s reaction is also rather unhelpful in a number of regards.

First, North Korean involvement with events in Gwangju cannot be ruled out – as we’ll see later. Second, even if North Korean forces were present, it does not change the meaning of the Gwangju movement. Regardless of whether a few dozen North Korean spies were present – or even fighting –on the streets of Gwangju, we cannot question the fact that the Gwangju uprising itself remains a seminal event in the history of South Korea’s democratic movement. Furthermore, the personal bravery and sacrifice of the people of Gwangju will not be undermined or forgotten by the fact that some North Korean spies happened to be in the city at the same time.

It would be helpful if South Korea’s leftist journalists were more careful in how they dealt with such accusations. The American experience is instructive: since the 1950s, the leftist intellectuals have vehemently denied all accusations of Soviet involvement with and support for the radical American left.

The partial opening of the Soviet archives in the 1990s, though, has substantiated many (but by no means all) of these accusations. Now we know that Alger Hiss, long presented as an innocent victim of a rightist conspiracy, was indeed on the KGB payroll (and worth every dollar spent on him). The Rosenbergs, the belief in whose innocence has long been an article of faith for every good American progressive, were indeed secretly working for the Soviets with great enthusiasm (but with few actual results).

But is this that significant? Soviet government was doing what all governments do, they were spying on other countries in order to learn as much about their political plans and technological advantages. Sometimes the Soviet agents managed to recruit people from the American left (or cooperate with them) – unsurprisingly, taking into account pro-Communist and even Stalinist sympathies of many American ‘progressives’ of the era. However, this fact does not make the witch hunt of Senator McCarthy less odious.

At the time, there is no doubt that the Gwangju uprising was welcome news in Pyongyang. North Korean leaders never made a secret of the fact that they wished to see South Korea’s military dictators overthrown by a popular rebellion. As a matter of fact, they also did not disguise their willingness to support anti-government movements in South Korea.

When, in 1960, the Syngman Rhee dictatorship was suddenly toppled in a popular uprising, the leadership of North Korea was shocked. Kim Il Sung stated that next time the South Koreans overthrow their leadership, the North should be ready to exploit political opportunities.

In the late 1960s, the North Korean government even sent Special Forces to organize a guerilla movement to launch a people’s insurrection against the South Korean state.

When the South Korean strongman Park Chung Hee was assassinated in October 1979, the pro-democracy movement in the South strengthened greatly, culminating in the Gwangju uprising. It seems all too logical to expect the North to have closely monitored the situation, and even tried to infiltrate the movement (and this is what we should expect of any government given the circumstances). All this does not mean that North Korean agents were necessarily present at Gwangju, but their presence is not implausible – regardless of what South Korea’s left-wing dailies now want their readers to believe.

However, the significance of these alleged revelations seems to be blown out of all proportions. Even if these accusations are proven to be correct, it should have no impact on our understanding of the Gwangju uprising. As every historian knows, there are indeed some very strange bed fellows in history, and in many cases independence and pro-democracy movements often receive significant assistance from forces of highly dubious repute.

It is worth remembering that Stalin’s Soviet Union was perhaps the most active and generous foreign supporter of the Spanish Republic during the Spanish Civil War. This support was motivated both by geopolitical considerations, but also by a desire to steer a future state in the direction of communism. Nonetheless, Soviet guns do not tarnish the reputation of the many democrats who lost their lives in the Spanish Civil War.

Similarly, Sun Yat-sen, the father of Chinese democracy, received support from a number of foreign powers – including, at times, Imperialist Japan, but no one would see him and his supporters as Japanese agents or even victims of evil Japanese manipulation.

As a matter of fact, the Japanese also provided support to a number of independence movements in Southeast and Southern Asia, but it would be completely dishonest to describe the emergence of independent Indonesia as a result of some Japanese machinations.

There are hundreds of such examples throughout history. Therefore, while there is a chance that the North Korean government did intervene in order to help the pro-democracy movement in South Korea, no sane person would use this fact (if it is indeed proven to be case) to argue that the pro-democracy movement was the result of North Korean intervention itself. The reports of North Korean involvement seem to imply that it is only thanks to a dastardly scheme on the part of the North Korean leaders that South Korea is today a democracy. Furthermore, the implication is that had the North Koreans left their Southern brothers alone, they would still be living very happily under the loving care of military dictators. Fortunately, both implications are deadly wrong.

Protesters demonstrate near the U.S. embassy on John F. Kennedy Street in Ankara, Turkey, early Monday, June 17, 2013. A day earlier, riot police cordoned off streets, set up roadblocks and fired tear gas and water cannons to prevent anti-government protesters from an effort to return to Taksim Square in Istanbul. (Photo : AP Photo/Burhan Ozbilici)

Turkish labor groups fanned a wave of defiance against Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s authority, leading rallies and a one-day strike to support activists whose two-week standoff with the government has shaken the country’s secular democracy.

Riot police again deployed in Turkey’s two main cities, and authorities kept up their unyielding stance against the street demonstrations centering on Istanbul’s Taksim Square. But Monday’s police sweep was less forceful than in recent days, with only scattered firing of tear gas and water cannon on pockets of protesters.

After activists were ousted from their sit-in in adjacent Gezi Park over the weekend, two labor confederations that represent some 330,000 workers picked up the slack Monday by calling a strike and demonstrations nationwide. Unionists turned up by the thousands in Ankara, Istanbul, coastal Izmir and elsewhere.

The turnout defied Turkey’s interior minister, Muammer Guler, who warned that anyone taking part in unlawful demonstrations would “bear the legal consequences.” But one analyst called the rallies a “legitimate and a lawful expression of constitutional rights.”

“People are raising their voices against the excessive use of police force,” said Koray Caliskan, a political science professor at Istanbul’s Bosphorus University. Demonstrators, he said, were showing they were no longer cowed by authorities, and “the fear threshold has been broken.”

In a sign that authorities were increasingly impatient, Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc floated the prospect that authorities could call in troops to quash the protests.

Erdogan’s opponents have grown increasingly suspicious about what they call a gradual erosion of freedoms and secular values under his Islamic-rooted ruling party. It has passed new curbs on alcohol and tried, but later abandoned its plans, to limit women’s access to abortion.

The government set off protests nationwide and drew criticism abroad over a police crackdown that began May 31 against environmentalists and other activists in Taksim Square who were protesting against plans to tear down trees and re-develop Gezi Park. Thousands have flooded the streets nightly since then, many honking car horns and waving Turkish flags.

Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan speaks during a meeting in Ankara, Turkey, Monday, June 17, 2013. (Photo : AP Photo)

Erdogan, who has held power for 10 years and was re-elected in 2011, mobilized his supporters over the weekend in two huge rallies – insisting his duty was to keep order, railing against media coverage of the protests and lashing out at unspecified foreigners whom he said want to hurt Turkey.

TV images Monday showed crowds of government supporters in Istanbul facing down some protesters and chanting “the hands targeting the police should be broken.” On Twitter, a trending topic urged protesters to stay home – some expressing concern that pro-government mobs might attack them.

But overnight, for hours, a lone man stood silently on Taksim Square, eventually joined by about 20 other people who did likewise before police escorted them away. The group put up no resistance. Pockets of unrest erupted elsewhere in Istanbul, with police resorting to water cannon and tear gas at times.

The labor rallies had a more structured feel than the counterculture-style sit-in at Gezi Park’s tent city, and the work stoppage involved many professionals who make up a liberal, urban class that mostly backs the anti-Erdogan protesters. But labor strikes often have little visible impact on daily life in Turkey, a country of about 75 million, and Monday’s rallies were no different.

Feride Aksu Tanik, of the Turkish Doctors Union, said it had called its work stoppage “to protest against the police force that attacks children, youngsters and everyone violently, and to the detentions of doctors who provide voluntary services to the injured.”

Turkey’s doctors association said Monday that four people, including a police officer, had died in violence linked to the crackdown, and an investigation was ongoing into the death of a fifth person who was exposed to tear gas. More than 7,800 people have been injured; six remained in critical condition and 11 people lost their eyesight.

The tough tactics used by the government to disperse protesters during the past two weeks have drawn international criticism.

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany – home to some 3 million Turks – told German broadcaster RTL she was “appalled” to see footage of police forces moving in to clear Gezi Park over the weekend. She criticized the crackdown by Turkish police as “much too strong.” <AP/NEWSis>

Kashmiri Hindu migrant women pray at the Kheer Bhawani temple during an annual Hindu festival in Jammu, India, Monday, June. 17, 2013. Kheer Bhawani temple originally in Srinagar, was built in Jammu as well by exiled Kashmiri Hindus. The temple is dedicated to the Goddess Rajnya Devi, popularly known as Kheer Bhawani, in which thousand of devotees offer milk and “Kheer” or pudding to the sacred spring, as they believe the pudding turns black to warn of impending disaster. <AP Photo/NEWSis/Channi Anand>

An aged priest applies vermilion on the forehead of a young Hindu devotee at the Khir Bhawani temple in Tulmula, some 30 kilometres north of Srinagar, summer capital of Indian-controlled Kashmir, June 17, 2013. Thousands of Hindu devotees thronged the historic Kheer Bhavani Temple dedicated to the Hindu goddess Kheer Bhavani and offered prayers. <Xinhua/NEWSis/Javed Dar>

A Kashmiri Hindu devotee helps his child in pouring milk into the spring to pay respects to the deity at the Khir Bhawani temple in Tulmula, some 30 kilometres north of Srinagar, summer capital of Indian-controlled Kashmir, June 17, 2013. <Xinhua/NEWSis/Javed Dar>

A Kashmiri Hindu devotee carrying earthen lamps on a plate to pay respects to the deity at the Khir Bhawani temple in Tulmula, some 30 kilometres north of Srinagar, summer capital of Indian-controlled Kashmir, June 17, 2013. <Xinhua/NEWSis/Javed Dar>

People walk past a banner supporting Edward Snowden, a former CIA employee who leaked top-secret documents about sweeping U.S. surveillance programs, at Central, Hong Kong’s business district, Monday, June 17, 2013. Top officials from the Obama and Bush administrations say the government’s newly exposed secret surveillance programs have been essential to disrupting terrorist plots and have not infringed on Americans’ civil liberties. The officials justify the massive trawling for phone and Internet data as new revelations add to public disclosures about the classified operations. <AP Photo/NEWSis/Kin Cheung>

A banner supporting Edward Snowden, a former CIA employee who leaked top-secret documents about sweeping U.S. surveillance programs, is displayed at Central, Hong Kong’s business district, Monday, June 17, 2013. <AP Photo/NEWSis/Kin Cheung>

Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) arrive to rescue stranded Sikh devotees from Hemkunt Sahib Gurudwara, a religious Sikh temple, to a safe place in Chamoli district, in northern Indian state of Uttarakhand, India, Monday, June 17, 2013. Torrential rain and floods washed away buildings and roads, killing at least 23 people in the northern Indian state of Uttarakhand, officials said Monday. (Photo : AP Photo)

Over 50 people have been killed and hundreds marooned by flooding as early monsoon struck northern India, including capital Delhi, since last weekend, said officials on Monday.

Most of the deaths occurred in the states of Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh, while another state Haryana saw widespread flooding which submerged dozens of villages, said the officials.

In Uttarakhand, over 30 were killed by flash flood from the Ganga and its tributaries after being washed away by the torrents, disaster relief officials at Dehradun, the state capital, told the media.

Bulldozer and other vehicles flow in a flooded river in Uttarkashi district, India, Monday, June 17, 2013. (Photo : AP Photo)

Meanwhile, over 15 were killed in Uttar Pradesh’s Saharanpur district, while about 10 were killed in Himachal Pradesh by landslides and flooding, reported Press Trust of India.

Over 700 people, including the state’s Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh who was campaigning for a national parliamentarian poll, were stranded by flood and the Election Commission has given permission for his evacuation by a state chopper.

In Delhi, the heavy rains relieved the city of heat but water logged many areas and flooded some low lying areas near the Yamuna River. <Xinhua/NEWSis>

Prime Minister David Cameron chairs an EU/US trade summit with US President Barack Obama (left), German Chancellor Angela Merkel (right) and French President Francoise Hollande (not pictured) at this year's G8 Summit on Lough Erne near Enniskillen in Northern Ireland. PRESS ASSOCIATION Photo. Picture date: Monday June 17, 2013. See PA story POLITICS G8. (Photo : Stefan Rousseau/PA Wire)

Deep differences over Syria’s fierce civil war clouded a summit of world leaders Monday, with Russian President Vladimir Putin defiantly rejecting calls from the U.S., Britain and France to halt his political and military support for Syrian leader Bashar Assad’s regime.

But there were also fissures among the three Western nations, despite their shared belief that Assad must leave power. Britain and France appear unwilling – at least for now – to join President Barack Obama in arming the Syrian rebels, a step the U.S. president reluctantly finalized last week.

The debate over the Syria conflict loomed large as the two-day summit of the Group of 8 industrial nations opened Monday at a lakeside resort in Northern Ireland. The lack of consensus even among allies underscored the vexing nature of the two-year conflict in Syria, where at least 93,000 people have been killed as rebels struggle to overtake Assad forces buttressed by support from Hezbollah, Iran and Russia.
Obama and Putin, who already have a frosty relationship, did little to hide their differing views on the matter while speaking to reporters following one-on-one talks on the sidelines of the summit Monday evening. The two-hour meeting marked the first time the leaders have met in person since last year.

“We do have different perspectives on the problem,” Obama said of their divergent views on Syria.
The Russian leader, speaking through a translator, agreed, saying, “our opinions do not coincide.”

But despite their seemingly intractable differences, Obama and Putin did express a shared desire to stop the violence in Syria and convene a political conference in Geneva, Switzerland. U.S. officials said they were still aiming to hold the summit next month, though that prospect was looking increasingly unlikely given the deepening violence.

It’s also unclear who would participate in such a meeting or whether the rebels, given their weakened position, would have any leverage if they did.

U.S. officials say Obama’s decision to send the rebels weapons and ammunition for the first time was an attempt to increase their military strength in order to bolster their political bargaining power. But the American inventory for the rebels is not yet expected to include the high-powered weaponry sought by the opposition, raising questions about whether the deepening U.S. involvement will be effective in changing the situation on the ground.

The White House also announced Monday an additional $300 million in humanitarian aid for Syria and neighboring countries absorbing refugees escaping the violence. The new money brings the total U.S. humanitarian assistance to $800 million, according to the White House.

Obama’s decision to arm the rebels coincided with the White House’s announcement last week that it had definitive evidence of multiple instances of chemical weapons use by Assad’s regime against the opposition. Britain and France have also accused Assad of using the deadly agent sarin, while Russia has publicly questioned the credibility of chemical weapons evidence.

“It’s necessary to refrain from unproven claims by either party,” Putin adviser Alexei Kvasov told reporters at the summit Monday. “We have no evidence proving it.”

Moscow’s continued support for Assad is based in part on Russia’s deep economic and military ties with his regime. Last month, Russia acknowledged it has agreed to sell Syria advanced S-300 air-defense missiles, which are considered to be the cutting edge in aircraft interception technology.

The Russian president’s divisions with Western leaders on Syria were also on display in his separate meetings with British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Francois Hollande. Both European leaders have previously indicated a willingness to arm vetted Syrian rebels and successfully pushed for the European Union to allow an arms embargo preventing the flow of weapons to expire.

British Prime Minister David Cameron welcomes President Barack Obama to the G-8 summit in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland, on Monday, June 17, 2013. Leaders are expected to discuss the ongoing conflict in Syria, and free-trade issues. (Photo : AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Still, neither country is yet to join Obama in arming the opposition. Following the U.S. decision, there has been growing public concern in both countries over the wisdom of delivering weapons to a country where groups affiliated with al-Qaida are supporting elements of the rebellion.

“I am as worried as anybody else about elements of the Syrian opposition, who are extremists, who support terrorism and who are a great danger to our world,” Cameron said Monday.

Hollande, following his own meeting with Putin, did not commit to sending weapons to the rebels. But he did appear to open the door to some form of deeper involvement from Paris.

“How can you allow Russia to continue to send weapons to the regime of Bashar al-Assad while the opposition gets so few weapons?” Hollande asked. “How can we accept the fact that we have proof of the use of chemical weapons without a unanimous condemnation by the international community, and that includes the G8?”

Obama, who has long signaled a preference for deepening U.S. engagement in Syria in conjunction with international partners, was expected to urge his British and French counterparts to join the U.S. in boosting lethal aid to the opposition. Syria was the primary topic among the G-8 leaders at a working dinner Monday night.

Britain, which is hosting the summit, has pressed leaders to ensure the meeting results in a statement on Syria, including the need for greater humanitarian access. The U.K. floated the possibility of releasing a statement even without Russia’s approval, but a British official said the dinner resulted in broad consensus among the leaders on key points.

While Putin did not publicly criticize the U.S. decision to arm the opposition during his meeting with Obama, he exhibited far less restraint Sunday following his meeting with Cameron.

“One hardly should back those who kill their enemies and, you know, eat their organs,” he said, referencing a gruesome Internet video purportedly showing a rebel commander committing an act of cannibalism.
“Do we want to support these people?” Putin asked. “Do we want to supply arms to these people?”

Among the other options being considered by the U.S. – though reluctantly is a no-fly zone to stop Assad from using his air power to crush rebel forces of kill civilians. But European nations are so far opposed to that idea, and Obama’s own aides have publicly questioned the feasibility, given Assad’s air defenses and the significant costs of such a program.

Perhaps signaling another fight to come between the U.S. and Russia, the foreign ministry in Moscow said Russia would veto a motion to set up a no-fly zone if the U.S. sought authorization from the United Nations Security Council. <AP/NEWSis>

Iranian President-elect Hasan Rowhani listens to a question at a press conference in Tehran, Iran, Monday, June 17, 2013. Iran's newly elected president pledged on Monday to follow a "path of moderation" and promised greater openness over the country's nuclear program, but sided with the hard-line Islamic establishment that refuses to consider halting uranium enrichment. (Photo : AP Photo/Ebrahim Noroozi)

Iran’s newly elected president showcased his reform-leaning image Monday by promising a “path of moderation” that includes greater openness on Tehran’s nuclear program and overtures to Washington. He also made clear where he draws the line: No halt to uranium enrichment and no direct U.S. dialogue without a pledge to stay out of Iranian affairs.

Hasan Rowhani’s first post-victory news conference was a study in what may make his presidency tick.
Rowhani may be hailed as a force for change, but he also appears to carry a deep and self-protective streak of pragmatism. He knows he can only push his views on outreach and detente as far as allowed by the country’s real powers, the ruling clerics and their military protectors, the Revolutionary Guard.
Many of Rowhani’s statements reflected these boundaries, which could later expand or contract depending on how much the theocracy wants to endorse his agenda.

When he appealed to treat “old wounds” with the U.S., he also echoed the ruling clerics’ position that no breakthroughs can occur as long as Washington is seen as trying to undermine their hold on power.

Rowhani’s urging for greater “nuclear transparency” as a path to roll back sanctions was also punctuated by a hard-liner stance: No chance to stop the uranium enrichment labs at the heart of the stalemate with the West and its allies.

Rowhani spoke eloquently about a “new era” on the international stage but avoided direct mention of the sweeping crackdowns at home since the disputed re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2009.

At the end of the news conference, a spectator – whose identity was not immediately known – yelled out for the release of opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, who has been under house arrest for more than two years. Rowhani smiled but made no comment.

“You can make any kind of promises you want,” said Merhzad Boroujerdi, director of the Middle East Studies program at Syracuse University. “At the end of the day, it’s the ruling clerics that decide whether they go anywhere.”

There is no doubt, however, that the overall tone of Rowhani’s remarks resonates well in the West. The White House and others have already signaled cautious hope that Rowhani’s presence could open new possibilities on diplomacy and efforts to break the impasse over Tehran’s disputed nuclear program after four failed negotiating rounds since last year.

Even so, the Obama administration won’t welcome Rowhani’s election with any new nuclear offer.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the U.S. is open to new nuclear talks with Iran. But Washington and its international partners first want a response to an offer of sanctions relief for Iranian nuclear concessions they presented in April.

“The ball is in Iran’s court,” Psaki said Monday in Washington.

If nothing else at the Tehran news conference, the contrast was vivid with Ahmadinejad and his hectoring style.

“We are on a path of moderation. … We have to enhance mutual trust between Iran and other countries,” Rowhani told journalists. “We have to build trust.”

Rowhani appeared to borrow phrases from another cleric-president, reformist Mohammad Khatami, who preceded Ahmadinejad and opened a range of social and political freedoms that have been largely swept aside in the lockdown atmosphere of recent years.

“The basis of politics is constructive interaction with the world,” said Rowhani, wearing a white turban and surrounded by violet flowers – the signature color of his campaign. “Circumstances have changed in the world by this election. … The new atmosphere will definitely be turned into a new opportunity.”

Many questions remain, though. Rowhani sidestepped the issue of Iran’s close alliance with Syrian President Bashar Assad, saying only that the efforts to end the civil war and restore stability rest with the “Syrian people.”

In Paris, Israel’s defense minister, Moshe Yaalon, underscored worries among some Israeli officials that their Western allies could hope for Rowhani-inspired breakthroughs while Iran continues “to make progress in their military nuclear project.”

Although the 64-year-old Rowhani cannot directly set key policies, he might be able to use the strength of his landslide victory and his influential connections, including with former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, to shape opinions. Rowhani served as Iran’s first nuclear envoy from 2003-2005 during a period of intense deal-making with Europeans.

Rowhani’s aides have said he proposed an accord in 2005 with then-French President Jacques Chirac to allow uranium enrichment in exchange for the highest level of monitoring by the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog agency. The deal did not gain support from other countries such as Britain and the U.S.

In an interview last year with the Iranian magazine Mehr Nameh, Rowhani said he also received a U.S. proposal in 2004, carried by the head of the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency at the time, Mohamed ElBaradei, for direct dialogue on nuclear and other issues. Rowhani said he passed along the offer to the ruling clerics and “the decision was that we should not negotiate with the U.S.”

Rowhani has not given any clear details on his advice for the current talks, which face pressure from factions in the Israel and the U.S. urging greater consideration of military options.

But Rowhani appears to favor the general contours of the reported French-backed deal for greater openness as the way to ease Western sanctions over Iran’s nuclear efforts. The sanctions have slashed oil revenue and contributed to a spike in inflation. “If sanctions have any benefits, they will only benefit Israel,” he said at the news conference.

He outlined “step by step” measures to reassure the West about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The West suspects that Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon. Iranian leaders, including Rowhani, insist Iran seeks reactors only for energy and medical applications.

Enriched uranium is used as fuel for energy and research reactors but it can be further boosted to make a nuclear warhead.

“The first step will be showing greater transparency. We are ready to show greater transparency and make clear that the Islamic Republic of Iran’s actions are totally within international frameworks,” he said. “The second step is promoting mutual confidence. We’ll take measures in both fields. The first goal is that no new sanctions are imposed. Then, that the (existing) sanctions are reduced.”

Rowhani, though, reaffirmed the positions that have contributed to the logjam in talks so far: Iran’s insistence that Washington “should recognize all of Iran’s rights, including the nuclear rights.”

He further added that any hope for one-on-one dialogue with the U.S. depends on the improbable starting point already set out by the ruling clerics. “The Americans need to specify that they will never intervene in Iran’s internal affairs,” Rowhani said.

“It’s not easy,” he said. “There is an old wound. This wound could be treated through prudence. We will not seek increasing tensions. Wisdom requires that the two nations and the two governments look to the future.”

On Syria, he said the ultimate responsibility to resolve the more than two-year-old civil war should be in the hands of the “Syrian people.”

“We are opposed to foreign intervention,” he said. “We hope peace and tranquility will return to Syria through cooperation with countries of the region and world.”

Rowhani formally takes office in August. In the meantime, it appears Ahmadinejad’s political foes could be plotting a payback, underscoring the often cutthroat nature of internal Iranian affairs.

Iran’s official news agency said a criminal court summoned Ahmadinejad over a lawsuit filed by the country’s parliament speaker and others.

The report gave no further details, but Ahmadinejad and the speaker, Ali Larijani, have waged political feuds for years. The court has set a November date for Ahmadinejad’s appearance, it said. <AP/NEWSis>