Katakamidotcom News Indonesia

Please also visit : KATAKAMIDOTCOMNEWSINDONESIA.BLOGSPOT.COM

Daily Archives: 06/10/2010

Photostream : Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron meets President Hamid Karzai

 

https://i2.wp.com/1.1.1.2/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0gVY5gI9cA3dL/610x.jpg

Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron (Centre R) walks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, (Centre L) at the Presidential Palace in Kabul, on June 10, 2010, on his first visit to Afghanistan since taking office. Cameron said Thursday that Britain would send no more troops to Afghanistan, in a televised press conference with President Hamid Karzai in Kabul.

https://i0.wp.com/1.1.1.3/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/06Je9cK6ytg1K/610x.jpg

Afghan President Hamid Karzai, center, shakes hands with British Prime Minister David Cameron prior to a meeting at the presidential palace in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Thursday, June 10, 2010.

https://i0.wp.com/1.1.1.1/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0bTbbHMaPM0WR/610x.jpg

British Prime Minister David Cameron (L) talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai during a meeting at the Presidential Palace in Kabul June 10, 2010. Cameron arrived in Afghanistan for talks with Karzai on Thursday, his first visit as prime minister to a country that his new coalition government has set as its top foreign policy priority.

https://i1.wp.com/1.1.1.5/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0fT92aOcXodrZ/610x.jpg

British Prime Minister David Cameron (L) talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai during a meeting at the Presidential Palace in Kabul June 10, 2010. Cameron arrived in Afghanistan for talks with Karzai on Thursday, his first visit as prime minister to a country that his new coalition government has set as its top foreign policy priority.

https://i1.wp.com/1.1.1.1/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/01QHbhU4cw069/x610.jpg

Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron (L) attends a joint news conference with President Hamid Karzai at the Presidential Palace in Kabul, on June 10, 2010. Cameron said Thursday that Britain would send no more troops to Afghanistan, in a televised press conference with President Hamid Karzai in Kabul.

https://i0.wp.com/1.1.1.1/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/00R0cmM8GSd9T/x610.jpg

Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron arrives in Kabul to hold talks with President Hamid Karzai, on June 10, 2010, on his first visit to Afghanistan since taking office. Cameron said Thursday that Britain would send no more troops to Afghanistan, in a televised press conference with President Hamid Karzai in Kabul.

Bomber Kills 40 at Afghan Wedding Party

undefined

June 10: A father comforts his injured son at a hospital following a blast at wedding party in Kandahar city, Afghanistan.

 

June 20, 2010

( FOX NEWS / AP)  KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — A homicide bomb ripped through a wedding party in full swing in the Taliban’s heartland in southern Afghanistan, killing at least 40 people and wounding dozens more, officials said Thursday.

The blast occurred late Wednesday in a housing compound where men had gathered during the festivities, with female guests at a different house that was not hit, one witness said. Interior Ministry spokesman Zemeri Bashary said children were among the dead and wounded.

The family that was attacked included a number of Afghan police officers. The groom’s brother and two of his cousins were in the police force, according to another cousin, Mohammad Alkozay. The groom survived the attack, but was injured.

It occurred in Nadahan village in the Argandab district of Kandahar province, considered the spiritual home of the Taliban, and the focus of an upcoming U.S. military operation.

Bashary said the explosion hit the wedding party about 9 p.m., and that it was a homicide attack. He said at least 40 people were killed and 74 were wounded in the blast. The bride and groom survived.

Taliban spokesman Qari Yousef Ahmadi denied the group carried out the attack.

U.S. military spokesman Col. Wayne Shanks said the deaths were not the result of an airstrike, and said any suggestion otherwise was “Taliban misinformation.”

NATO said in a statement that no service members from the alliance were involved in the incident.

Agha Mohammed, who survived the blast, said the guests were all seated and having a meal when the explosion occurred, sending a huge fireball and smoke into the sky.

He said the scale of the destruction caused by the blast was more than was common in a homicide attack.

“We have experience with war and this does not look like a homicide bombing,” Mohammed said.

At a news conference in Kandahar city, provincial Gov. Tooryalai Wesa held up a chunk of metal he said was from the site and described it as a piece of equipment usually used in homicide bombs.

He rejected the Taliban’s denial of involvement in the attack.

“The Taliban are doing two things at once,” Wesa said. “On one side they target people who are in favor of the government, then at the same time they don’t want people to know their real face.”

NATO condemned the attack and said it would help Afghan police investigate the cause.

“This ruthless violence brought to the Afghan people at what should have been a time for celebration demonstrates the Taliban’s sickening and indiscriminate tactics to try to intimidate the citizens of Afghanistan,” said Lt. Gen. Nick Parker, the deputy commander of NATO forces, in the statement.

President Hamid Karzai’s office condemned the attack in a statement and called for a thorough investigation.

Nadahan is a farming community on the northern border of Kandahar city. The surrounding district is a major route for insurgents to enter into the city — the commercial hub of the south. NATO forces have been battling insurgents in Argandab for months in an attempt to gain control of the area and it is expected to be a focus of a summer push to squeeze the Taliban out of the area.

Insurgents have often targeted civilian government officials and police in areas under their control and use violence on civilians to intimidate them. On Wednesday, the Taliban hanged a seven-year-old boy in public in Helmand province, neighboring Kandahar, for alleged spying, a local official said.

And in Spin Boldak district, insurgents dragged a local council member, Amir Mohammad Noorzai, from his house on Wednesday evening and shot him to death, said Zalmai Ayoubi, a Kandahar provincial government spokesman.

Violence has spiked in Afghanistan this month, with the Taliban stepping up attacks as U.S. commanders gear up for a major operation to clear Kandahar that Washington hopes will be a turning point in the nearly nine-year-old insurgency.

At least 17 U.S. service members have been killed in the past four days, including the four Americans who died Wednesday when insurgents in southern Helmand province’s Sangin district — one of the most volatile in the country — shot down a NATO helicopter.

A total of 29 NATO troops have been killed this month, including 10 on Monday alone — seven of them Americans. It was the deadliest day for the military alliance in seven months.

Obama urges Israel to help loosen aid flow to Gaza

https://i2.wp.com/1.1.1.4/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0faJcst9ZI9pM/610x.jpg

June 10, 2010

(IBTIMES)   President Barack Obama urged Israel on Wednesday to help ease restrictions on the flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza following a deadly flotilla raid, and pledged $400 million (275 million pounds) in assistance to the Palestinians.

Hosting Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas at the White House, Obama described the situation in the Israeli-blockaded Gaza Strip as “unsustainable” and called on the Jewish state to work with all parties to find a solution.

But Obama, sticking to a cautious line, stopped short of joining in broader international condemnation of close U.S. ally Israel over last week’s flotilla incident and did not back Abbas’s demand for a lifting of the Gaza blockade.

“The status quo that we have is one that’s inherently unstable,” Obama told reporters with Abbas at his side in the Oval Office.

Obama also called on Israel and the Palestinians to do more to advance U.S.-mediated indirect peace talks as he sought to contain the fallout from the flotilla incident.

Abbas’s visit came amid an international backlash against Israel after its forces boarded a Turkish aid ship bound for the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip on May 31. Nine pro-Palestinian activists were killed.

The Palestinian leader urged Obama, who has been more measured in his response to the flotilla raid than the broader international community, to take a tougher line with Israel.

“We see the need to lift the Israeli siege of the Palestinian people,” Abbas said.

Obama voiced sympathy for the plight of Palestinians in impoverished Gaza but insisted that any solution must also meet Israel’s security needs. Israel says its three-year-old blockade is required to stop weapons smuggling to Hamas. Palestinians call it collective punishment.

“There should be ways of focussing narrowly on arms shipments, rather than focussing in a blanket way on stopping everything and then, in a piecemeal way, allowing things into Gaza,” Obama insisted, saying his administration had begun some “hard-headed” discussions with Israel on the issue.

AID PLEDGE

There was no sign of a breakthrough in Abbas’s talks with Obama, but the U.S. president did not send his Palestinian counterpart home empty-handed. Obama announced $400 million in new economic development aid for the West Bank and Gaza.

Any fresh infusion of funds to Gaza would come with strings attached to keep it out of the hands of Hamas, which is on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations. Hamas Islamists seized control of the coastal enclave from Abbas’s Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority in 2007.

In recent years, U.S. aid to the Palestinians has been sent mostly to the West Bank, where Abbas governs, or funneled to Gaza through international agencies.

Signalling a U.S. desire to boost Abbas’s standing with his people, reporters were allowed into the Oval Office to see the leaders together. Press coverage was barred during a tense visit in November by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which Israeli media widely interpreted as a snub.

Obama reiterated his support for a “credible” investigation of the flotilla incident, saying it was important to “get the facts out.” But he steered clear of calls for an independent international probe. Israel has insisted on conducting its own inquiry, with a role for foreign experts or observers.

Despite heightened regional tensions, the Obama administration is seeking to keep alive indirect U.S.-brokered talks that have made little headway since starting in early May. Obama hopes to push the sides towards direct negotiations.

Obama’s Middle East diplomacy, central to his outreach to the Muslim world, has been complicated by the flotilla incident.

Abbas’s meeting with Obama took place a week after Netanyahu cancelled talks in Washington and rushed home from Canada to deal with the crisis sparked by the flotilla raid.

Netanyahu’s visit had been billed as a fence-mending session to move beyond discord over Jewish settlement construction on occupied land.

Obama has little room to manoeuvre. With U.S. congressional elections looming in November, he must be mindful that support for Israel is strong among U.S. lawmakers and voters.

Abbas arrived from Turkey, a U.S. ally that has condemned Israel’s action and curtailed ties with it. Abbas has called the raid a “massacre.” Israel said its commandos defended themselves when attacked during the boarding.

David Cameron: time to increase pace in Afghanistan

https://i1.wp.com/1.1.1.5/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/00D6bKu1oA7QO/x610.jpg

Junee 10, 2010

(TELEGRAPH.CO.UK)   The Prime Minister said that British and coalition forces should examine how to go “further and faster” in order to bring troops home sooner.

He also promised to double the number of British bomb disposal teams in Afghanistan and announced extra aid to help the country build up its army, police and civil service in what he said was “the vital year” to make progress.

Speaking as he met Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, in Kabul, Mr Cameron said that the public in both Britain and America wanted to see “real progress this year”.

He said that people in both countries had accepted that time was needed to see results from US President Barack Obama’s troop surge.

But he said: “We should all the time be asking ‘Can we go further, can we go faster?’.

“Nobody wants British troops to be in Afghanistan a moment longer than is necessary.”

However he ruled out sending further reinforcements.

“The issue of more troops is not remotely on the UK agenda,” said the Prime Minister.

“We have just had quite a significant uplift, not just in terms of UK troops but also of US troops.

“In Helmand there are now over 20,000 US troops and 10,000 UK troops.

“I think it is important to let them get on with the very important work of delivering greater security in Helmand and making sure we have the right force density – the right number of troops – together with the Afghan national security forces throughout the province.”

Earlier Mr Cameron announced an additional £67 million to counter the threat from improvised explosive devices (IEDs), weeks after Colonel Bob Seddon, Britain’s senior bomb disposal officer, resigned his post after raising concerns for the welfare of his men.

Speaking alongside Mr Karzai at his presidential palace, Mr Cameron said the number of British teams dealing with IEDs will be doubled.

He also announced additional aid funding for Afghanistan to build up its army, police and civil service capacity in what he said was “the vital year” to make progress in stabilising the country.

Describing relations between the two countries as “very, very important”, Mr Cameron said he regarded Afghanistan as Britain’s most important foreign policy and national security issue.

Mr Cameron’s first major overseas trip since taking office is expected to form part of the new Government’s review of the mission in Afghanistan, which has lasted almost a decade and cost nearly 300 British lives.

Since entering No 10, Mr Cameron has overseen a “stocktake” of Britain’s Afghan strategy, consulting even outspoken critics of the current Nato strategy of supporting Mr Karzai’s regime and training his police and army.

So far, that review has not led to any significant change in Britain’s approach to Afghanistan, although government sources said the Coalition wants to play a more active role in shaping the international Afghan strategy.

The early days of the Coalition have been also marked by some public confusion over Britain’s Afghan aims.

Liam Fox, the defence secretary, has insisted the mission is about preventing regional instability and stopping al-Qaeda using Afghanistan as a base for terrorism, and not about the political development of a “13th century state”.

By contrast, Andrew Mitchell, the development secretary, has said that economic, social and political progress are essential to British success in Afghanistan.

Officials are privately concerned that UK influence in Afghanistan has been waning amid a surge in American troop numbers.

Britain has around 10,000 troops in Afghanistan, making it the second largest contributor behind the US. A “surge” in American force levels will take US numbers in Afghanistan to 100,000.

Confirming the growing American dominance of the Afghan mission, a US Marine Corps general recently took over command of international forces in Helmand province, where around 8,000 British troops are based.

Some commanders have suggested that Britain should leave Helmand altogether and transfer its forces to Kandahar, where the next major Nato operation against the Taliban will soon begin.

However, Dr Fox this week confirmed that the Government rejects any move from Helmand, where most British lives have been lost.

Mr Cameron has previously spoken of a “timetable” for beginning the withdrawal of British forces from Afghanistan, though officials insist that any withdrawal will be based on the ability of the Afghan security forces to operate unaided.

However, that “conditions-based” timetable may come under growing scrutiny in the months ahead.

Barack Obama has indicated that he wants US numbers in Afghanistan to start falling by July 2011.

With Nato allies including Canada also planning to reduce their forces in Afghanistan, Mr Cameron may soon come under increasing pressure to tell UK voters when British forces might leave the country.

The growing British death toll is also likely to push Afghanistan up the political agenda. A total of 294 British personnel have died in Afghanistan since 2001, more than were lost in the wars in the Falklands or Iraq.

The most recent British casualty was announced yesterday as Mr Cameron was flying to Afghanistan.

Col Seddon, of the Royal Logistic Corps, has been responsible for tackling the growing threat to troops posed by Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) on the front line as the Army’s Principle Ammunition Technical Officer (PATIO).

He has resigned his commission and is due to leave in January amid concerns that previous cuts have left his team overstretched and undermanned.

Taliban fighters have successfully adopted roadside bomb tactics developed in Iraq making it the most deadly threat to British troops in Afghanistan.

Earlier this year two bomb disposal experts received the George Cross, which ranks alongside the Victoria Cross as Britain’s highest award for bravery, for “awe-inspiring and humbling” efforts to defuse IEDs in Afghanistan.

They include included Staff Sergeant Olaf Schmid who was killed in October last year on what should have been the last day of his tour of duty while disarming his 70th roadside bomb.

David Cameron arrives in Afghanistan

https://i2.wp.com/1.1.1.3/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/09P41Fv3IAbqE/x610.jpg

June 10, 2010

(TELEGRAPH.CO.UK)  Mr Cameron landed in Kabul on an RAF plane before holding talks with Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president.

On his first major overseas trip since taking office, the Prime Minister is visiting a country where 10,000 British troops.

His visit is expected to form part of the new Government’s review of the mission in Afghanistan, which has lasted almost a decade and cost nearly 300 British lives.

Mr Cameron announced extra spending on armoured vehicles and other specialised equipment to protect British forces in Afghanistan from improvised explosive devices. (IEDs).

Since entering No 10, Mr Cameron has overseen a “stocktake” of Britain’s Afghan strategy, consulting even outspoken critics of the current Nato strategy of supporting Mr Karzai’s regime and training his police and army.

So far, that review has not led to any significant change in Britain’s approach to Afghanistan, although government sources said the Coalition wants to play a more active role in shaping the international Afghan strategy.

The early days of the Coalition have been also marked by some public confusion over Britain’s Afghan aims.

Liam Fox, the defence secretary, has insisted the mission is about preventing regional instability and stopping al-Qaeda using Afghanistan as a base for terrorism, and not about the political development of a “13th century state”.

By contrast, Andrew Mitchell, the development secretary, has said that economic, social and political progress are essential to British success in Afghanistan.

Officials are privately concerned that UK influence in Afghanistan has been waning amid a surge in American troop numbers.

Britain has around 10,000 troops in Afghanistan, making it the second largest contributor behind the US. A “surge” in American force levels will take US numbers in Afghanistan to 100,000.

Confirming the growing American dominance of the Afghan mission, a US Marine Corps general recently took over command of international forces in Helmand province, where around 8,000 British troops are based.

Some commanders have suggested that Britain should leave Helmand altogether and transfer its forces to Kandahar, where the next major Nato operation against the Taliban will soon begin.

However, Dr Fox this week confirmed that the Government rejects any move from Helmand, where most British lives have been lost.

Mr Cameron has previously spoken of a “timetable” for beginning the withdrawal of British forces from Afghanistan, though officials insist that any withdrawal will be based on the ability of the Afghan security forces to operate unaided.

However, that “conditions-based” timetable may come under growing scrutiny in the months ahead.

Barack Obama, the US President, has indicated that he wants US numbers in Afghanistan to start falling by July 2011.

With Nato allies including Canada also planning to reduce their forces in Afghanistan, Mr Cameron may soon come under increasing pressure to tell UK voters when British forces might leave the country.

The growing British death toll is also likely to push Afghanistan up the political agenda. A total of 294 British personnel have died in Afghanistan since 2001, more than were lost in the wars in the Falklands or Iraq.

The most recent British casualty was announced yesterday as Mr Cameron was flying to Afghanistan.

Photostream : Pope's Weekly General Audience in St. Peter's square at the Vatican

https://i2.wp.com/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0auCdzH5Y7462/610x.jpg

Pope Benedict XVI, wearing his Saturn hat, greets the faithful at the end of his weekly general audience in St. Peter’s square at the Vatican, Wednesday, June 9, 2010.

https://i2.wp.com/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/06gP5h4ffC4nr/610x.jpg

Pope Benedict XVI, wearing his Saturn hat, greets the faithful at the end of his weekly general audience in St. Peter’s square at the Vatican, Wednesday, June 9, 2010.

https://i0.wp.com/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0fdGbeVdAK4LG/610x.jpg

Pope Benedict XVI waves from the popemobile after his weekly general audience in St.Peter’s square at the Vatican on June 9, 2010.

https://i1.wp.com/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/02oGbsD9qggWN/610x.jpg

Pope Benedict XVI waves during his weekly general audience on June 9, 2010 in Saint-Peter’s square at the Vatican.

Iran remains defiant despite new UN sanctions

 

Twelve out of 15 UN Security Council members voted for new sanctions on Iran on Wednesday. 

Twelve out of 15 UN Security Council members voted for new sanctions on Iran on Wednesday.

June 9, 2010

TEHRAN (NATIONAL POST) — Hardline Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that the new UN sanctions imposed on Tehran on Wednesday should be “thrown in the dust bin,” the ISNA news agency reported.

“These resolutions are not worth a dime for the Iranian nation,” Mr. Ahmadinejad told ISNA in Tajikistan.

“I gave one of them (world powers) a message that the resolutions you issue are like a used hanky which should be thrown in the dust bin. They are not capable of hurting Iranians.”

Mr. Ahmadinejad, under whose presidency Iran has doggedly pursued the nuclear programme, said: “Those who have atomic bombs, have used them, stored them or threatened others with them, keep issuing resolutions against us under the pretext that Iran might build an atomic bomb in the future.”

The UN Security Council slapped a fourth set of punitive measures on Iran Wednesday hoping to persuade the Islamic republic to curb its suspect nuclear programme by widening military and financial sanctions.

The vote in the 15-member council was 12 in favor of the U.S.-drafted resolution, with Lebanon abstaining and Brazil and Turkey voting against.

World powers led by Washington suspect Tehran’s nuclear drive is aimed at weapons. Iran denies the charge, saying it is pursuing nuclear technology purely for the peaceful goal of generating electricity.

Iran’s envoy to the UN’s atomic watchdog said the country would not halt its contested uranium enrichment activities in spite of the new UN sanctions.

“Nothing will be changed. We’ll continue without any interruption our enrichment activities under the full scope of IAEA safeguards,” Ali Asghar Soltanieh told reporters at the board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency here.

“Even a second enrichment activity will not be suspended,” Mr. Soltanieh said, referring to the recent move by Iran to enrich uranium to a higher level of purification.

“No matter how many resolutions are passed, Iran will not stop its enrichment activities, which are in full accordance with its right under the statute of the IAEA and the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty).”

Mr. Soltanieh was speaking after the UN Security Council in New York slapped broader military and financial sanctions on Iran over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, a process which can be used not only to make fuel for nuclear energy, but also the fissile core of an atomic bomb.

Iran has long been enriching uranium to low levels of purification, in defiance of three previous sets of sanctions. But earlier this year, it started enriching to higher levels, ostensibly to make the fuel needed for a research reactor in Tehran which makes radioisotopes for medical use.

The West argues that Iran does not have the technology to turn the higher-enriched uranium into the fuel rods for the reactor.

The West has long accused the Islamic republic of seeking to develop nuclear weapons under the guise of its civilian nuclear energy programme, charges that Tehran denies.

“What happened today in New York was another dark chapter of mistakes and miscalculations” on the past of Western nations, Mr. Soltanieh said.

U.N. Security Council Approves New Sanctions on Iran Over Its Nuclear Program

https://i2.wp.com/1.1.1.3/bmi/cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0cSjbEE7zs2gJ/x610.jpg

 

June 9, 2010

 

 

UNITED NATIONS (FOX NEWS / AP) — The U.N. Security Council on Wednesday approved new sanctions against Iran over its suspect nuclear program that target Iran’s powerful Revolutionary Guard, ballistic missiles and nuclear-related investments.

The resolution imposing a fourth round of sanctions against Iran was approved by a vote of 12-2 with Lebanon abstaining and Brazil and Turkey voting “no.”

Turkey and Brazil, both non-permanent council members, brokered a fuel-swap agreement with Iran which they hoped would address concerns Tehran may be enriching uranium for nuclear weapons and avoid new sanctions.

Brazil’s U.N. Ambassador Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti said sanctions would lead to “suffering” by the Iranian people, delay dialogue on the country’s nuclear program, and run contrary to Brazil and Turkey’s efforts to engage Tehran.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has called the sanctions the toughest ever, but the measures are still far short of crippling economic punishments or an embargo on oil shipments, Iran’s prime money earner.

The Security Council imposed limited sanctions in December 2006 and has been ratcheting them up in hopes of pressuring Iran to suspend enrichment and start negotiations on its nuclear program. The first two resolutions were adopted unanimously and the third by a vote of 14-0 with Indonesia abstaining.

Iran has repeatedly defied the demand and has stepped up its activities, enriching uranium to 20 percent and announcing plans to build new nuclear facilities. Tehran insists its program is purely peaceful, aimed at producing nuclear energy.

The U.S. and its allies believe Iran’s real aim is to produce nuclear weapons and want Iran to suspend uranium enrichment and start negotiations on it nuclear program.

The new resolution bans Iran from pursuing “any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons,” bars Iranian investment in activities such as uranium mining, and prohibits Iran from buying several categories of heavy weapons including attack helicopters and missiles.

It imposes new sanctions on 40 Iranian companies and organizations — 15 linked to Iran’s powerful Revolutionary Guard, 22 involved in nuclear or ballistic missile activities and three linked to the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines. That more than doubles the 35 entities now subject to an asset freeze.

The resolution also adds one individual to the previous list of 40 Iranians subject to an asset freeze — Javad Rahiqi who heads the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran’s Esfahan Nuclear Technology Center. Under its provisions, all 41 individuals are now also subject to a travel ban.

The resolution also calls on all countries to cooperate in cargo inspections — which must receive the consent of the ship’s flag state — if there are “reasonable grounds” to believe the cargo could contribute to Iranian nuclear program.

On the financial side, it calls on — but does not require — countries to block financial transactions, including insurance and reinsurance, and to ban the licensing of Iranian banks if they have information that provides “reasonable grounds” to believe these activities could contribute to Iranian nuclear activities.

China and Russia have strong economic ties with Iran and last week Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was quoted as saying in Beijing that the resolution would protect the economic interests of both countries.

China’s U.N. Ambassador Zhang Yesui said after the vote that the sanctions were aimed at curbing nonproliferation and would not affect “the normal life of the Iranian people” nor deter their normal trade activity.

The new resolution was hammered out during several months of difficult negotiations by the five veto-wielding permanent council members — the U.S., Russia, China, Britain and France — and nonmember Germany who have been trying for several years to get Iran into serious discussions on its nuclear ambitions.

The five permanent council members, in a statement after the vote, stressed that the resolution “keeps the door open for early engagement” with Iran. It welcomed and commended “all diplomatic efforts, especially those by Brazil and Turkey.”

But in Vienna, three diplomats said the U.S., Russia and France dismissed Iran’s proposal to swap some of its enriched uranium for fuel for a research reactor in Tehran which was brokered by Brazil and Turkey.

The diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity because the replies were private, said they contain a series of questions that in effect stall any negotiations on the issue and present Tehran with indirect demands that it is not ready to meet.

The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed receipt of the three-nation response and said it would be passed on to Tehran.

The U.S., Russia and France have said that — unlike the original plan drawn up eight months ago — the swap proposal would leave Iran with enough material to make a nuclear weapon.

A European Union statement also criticized Iran for stonewalling attempts to probe its nuclear activities and refusing to heed U.N. Security Council demands for a freeze on enrichment, which can make both nuclear fuel and fissile warhead material.

But his Iranian counterpart, Ali Asghar Soltanieh told the meeting that “illegal resolutions” by the council will not stop his country from exercising its “legitimate right to develop its nuclear program.”