Mr Obama makes his first visit to Moscow as president on Monday, with talks scheduled with his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev and Mr Putin.

The US President has used an Associated Press interview to say it is important that Mr Putin understands a Cold War approach to US-Russia relations is outdated.

“I think Putin has one foot in the old ways of doing business and one foot in the new,” Mr Obama said.

In response, Mr Putin told journalists that Russia “stands firmly on [its] feet and always looks to the future”.

Mr Putin says Moscow is waiting for Mr Obama’s visit “with very warm feelings”.

Unknown hackers attacked 25 South Korean websites, shutting them down for several hours.

The Defence Ministry says websites were flooded by traffic at the same time, which overwhelmed the server.

South Korean media is reporting that this type of cyber attack is commonly used by Chinese hackers.

The country’s cyber terrorism response centre has been called in to investigate the attack.

The Department of Homeland Security confirmed that US government and private sector websites had come under so-called “distributed denial of service” (DDoS) attack, but declined to identify any of the targeted sites.

A DDoS attack attempts to paralyse a website by overwhelming it with traffic from an army of malware-infected computers known as a “botnet”, but does not involve any theft of data.

The chief technology officer for the private SANS Internet Storm Centre, Johannes Ullrich, said the internet assault, which began over the weekend, was “a pretty massive attack”.

“Nothing really terribly sophisticated. It just floods the websites,” he said.

“It prevents the websites from responding. They’re just overloaded with traffic.

“The only site that was hit pretty bad was the Federal Trade Commission, ftc.gov.”

Mr Ullrich said the US government sites, which came under attack, included the White House, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, National Security Agency, State Department, US Postal Service, US Treasury Department and Voice of America.

He said a Pentagon site, defenselink.mil, was also targeted, as was a site for US forces in South Korea.

North Korea ‘responsible’

South Korean politicians were quoted as saying that South Korea’s intelligence service believes North Korea or its sympathisers may have staged the attack.

Seoul’s National Intelligence Service (NIS) said in a statement that this was not a simple attack by individuals.

“The attack appeared to have been elaborately prepared and staged by a certain organisation or state,” it said.

The global intelligence network director at security firm Symantec, Dean Turner, said a “little over 50,000 machines” may have made up the botnet and the number of US and South Korean websites targeted was “greater than 20″.

But Mr Turner cautioned against assigning blame.

“We don’t know who is behind this, and we don’t necessarily know what the purpose is either,” he said.

“We can say where the attacks are coming from, where those machines are located but that doesn’t give us any visibility into the ‘who.’

“The person or persons responsible could be located on the moon.”

Mr Turner said if the attackers’ goal was to make these sites unavailable for an extended period of time, or take them off the internet, then it was “terribly successful”.

Private sector sites, which came under attack, included the New York Stock Exchange, the Nasdaq electronic exchange, Web portal Yahoo!, online retail giant Amazon and The Washington Post.

- AFP

A total of 184 British troops have now been killed in Afghanistan since the start of the war in 2002.

British foreign secretary David Miliband has rejected claims that British forces do not have the right equipment and says Britain must stay in Afghanistan to stop the country becoming an incubator of international terrorism.

“Al Qaeda is a global movement, but its place of choice is the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan – everybody agrees on that,” he said.

“So the mission is absolutely clear, is to back our own security.

“The strategy to deliver that is first to build up the Afghan security forces so that they’re able to defend their own country rather than being rolled over by the Taliban.

“Second, to build up Afghan governance which is a critical element.”

US President Barack Obama agrees the international community will have to start focusing its attention on developing Afghanistan’s capabilities, so Afghans can take greater responsibility for controlling their own security.

Mr Obama wants a new push to train Afghanistan’s army and police after the country’s August elections, he said on Saturday (local time) during his visit to Ghana in an interview with Britain’s Sky News.

“The most important thing we can do is to combine our military efforts with effective diplomacy and development so that Afghans feel a greater stake and have a greater capacity to secure their country,” he said.

“Post-election … I think we need to start directing our attention to how do we create an Afghan army, an Afghan police, how do we work with the Pakistanis effectively, so that they are the ones who are really at the forefront at controlling their own countries.

“All of us are going to have to do an evaluation after the Afghan election to see what more we can do.

“It may not be on the military side, it might be on the development side, providing Afghan farmers alternatives to poppy crops, making sure that we are effectively training a judiciary system and a rule of law in Afghanistan that people trust.”

- BBC/AFP

I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt’s advancement.

Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum.

We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world – tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars.

More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.” That is what I will try to do – to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.

Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam – at places like Al-Azhar University – that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.

I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library.

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words – within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: “Out of many, one.”

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores – that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.

Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations – to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.

Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.

For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.

This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.

That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together.

The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.

In Ankara, I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people.

The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America’s goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.

Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case.

That’s why we’re partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America’s commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths – more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.

We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.

Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: “I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be.”

Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future – and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq’s sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq’s democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.

And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.

So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer.

The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.

America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.

Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed – more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction – or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews – is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.

On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations – large and small – that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.

For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers – for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel’s founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.

That is in Israel’s interest, Palestine’s interest, America’s interest, and the world’s interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them – and all of us – to live up to our responsibilities.

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America’s founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It’s a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.

Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel’s right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine’s. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel’s security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel’s legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.

Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.

The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.

This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran’s leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.

It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America’s interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

The fourth issue that I will address is democracy.

I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.

There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments – provided they govern with respect for all their people.

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom.

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of another’s. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld – whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah’s Interfaith dialogue and Turkey’s leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action – whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster.

The sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights.

I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

Now let me be clear: issues of women’s equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.

Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.

I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations – including my own – this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities – those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith.

But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.

This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement.

On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo.

On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world.

On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.

All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.

The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek – a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God’s children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.

I know there are many – Muslim and non-Muslim – who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn’t worth the effort – that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country – you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort – a sustained effort – to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples – a belief that isn’t new; that isn’t black or white or brown; that isn’t Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It’s a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It’s a faith in other people, and it’s what brought me here today.

We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

The Holy Koran tells us, “O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.”

The Talmud tells us: “The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace.”

The Holy Bible tells us, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”

The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God’s vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God’s peace be upon you.

###

Thanks to murderous Mao (he killed more than Hitler and Stalin) & his loyal Red comrades, Tibetan Buddhism came to the West following the 1959 “liberation.”

Given that 50 years have passed, the last generation of born-and-raised-and-trained in Tibet teachers is getting long in the tooth. So get thee to a nunnery or monastery–or an urban meditation center, or a luxurious rural retreat–and dip your toes in enlightenment.

The Buddhists won’t mind if you’re just window-to-the-soul shopping…a pioneer (along with Alan Watts and Suzuki Roshi) in transmitting Buddhism to the West, Chogyam Trungpa (author; founder of Naropa University) wanted his best-selling Shambhala book to be sold in every grocery in America, right by the tabloids.

Though he warned against “spiritual materialism“–using religion to perfect the Self, and brace up the ego–he wanted the wisdom of Buddhism to be available, and made practical, to Rabbis, Reverends and Heathens alike.

So here’s my Top 10 Buddhist Teachers You Can Study With list. I’ve disqualified charlatans, egomaniacs, promising youngsters who have yet to prove themself…and those who you can’t really study with because they’re too famous to actually study with (Dalai Lama, Thich Nhat Hanh), in private meditation retreat all the time (Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche, Dzongsar Khentsye Rinpoche), or rarely in the West (The Karmapa, Khandro Rinpoche).

If I’ve forgotten or overlooked anyone, I’ll be happy to add them to the must-check-out list if I get a groundswell of vicious comments.

1. Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche ~ he’s young but not too young, experienced, thoroughly Westernized (though exotically Tibetan, heritage-wise), a great teacher and frequently accessible at programs around the US, Europe, Canada, even South America. But because he’s a rising star, you’ve got to make an effort if you want personal training.

2. Pema Chodron ~ though Pema is a best selling, accessible, wise, safe teacher, and Oprah loves her…I nearly disqualified her because she’s no longer frequently accessible. But she’s just too good to overlook. So check out her teaching schedule, and connect with her before she retires or goes into retreat.

3. Sharon Salzberg ~ like Pema, she’s a best-selling author and accessible teacher. While less magnetizing than Pema, she’s deeply experienced and warm-hearted. With her partners-in-crime Joseph Goldstein and Jack Kornfield, she teaches mostly out of the Insight Meditation Centre in Barre, Mass.

4. Ponlop Rinpoche ~ like Mipham Rinpoche and Dzigar Kongtrul Rinpoche (below), a young, well-trained teacher who belongs to the first generation of Tibetan Buddhist raised and trained in the West. He’s got an avid, small community–perfect if you want personal attention and training.

5. Joan Halifax Roshi ~ a strikingly-lovely, wise and venerable American Zen teacher, she’s based out of her Upaya Zen Center in New Mexico, and works with the yoga community extensively. A superstar.

6. Dr. Reggie Ray ~ while he’s been caught in that “I’m American yet folks treat me like a guru vortex” that’s chewed up and spit out Osel Tendzin and Richard Baker Roshi before him, Reggie is like Pema a magnetic, accessible teacher. Unlike Pema, he’s got a small community with whom he works closely. Perfect if you want personal attention and training.

8. Norman Fischer ~ I don’t know him at all, being mostly a Tibetan Buddhist trained boy myself, but he’s got a stellar reputation for integrity.

9. Robert Thurman, Dr. Judith Simmer-Brown, Dale Asrael, Frank Berliner ~ alright, I’m cheating–combining four in one–but if you’re college-age, you can find the last three professors (and other gems, too) at little Naropa University. Dr. Simmer-Brown is an expert in feminism, or the feminine principle in Buddhism, Ms. Asrael is wise and kind, Mr. Berliner is deeply serious, knowledgeable, caring, and impossibly good looking–the Marlboro man of Buddhism

As for superstar Robert Thurman, he teaches at Columbia, and is perfect for those who want to connect with the Dalai Lama’s teachings.

10. Dzigar Kongtrul Rinpoche ~ like Ponlop Rinpoche, if you’re looking for a small community, personal attention and deep study, he’s perfect for you. If however, like me and most, you’re looking to simply inject a little mindfulness and awake-ness and peace and sanity into your daily life, stick with the superstars listed above.

The basic point: meditation is good for you. As Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche says, we here in the West get that we have to train our bodies if we want ‘em to be healthy. But what about our minds? We ignore them. So get thee to an eco meditation cushion, if only for a few minutes each morning before the day’s madness ensues…and if you need a jump-start of inspiration or a little training, check out one of the above.

Last week’s terrorist siege of Mumbai has created a new geopolitical crisis, with many angles and complications that will make President-elect Barack Obama’s life even more complicated as he attempts to keep things in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India on an even keel. Here are some important things to keep in mind about it.

** The attackers were Islamic jihadists, and Pakistani-connected. This isn’t what we want to hear, but even the Pakistanis are not denying this. What they do deny is official Pakistani involvement in the attacks.

** India and Pakistan had been having a slight rapprochement. The two countries have been at sharp odds since the British partition after World War Ii. The disputed, mountainous region of Kashmir has been the most frequent flashpoint between the two countries, though there have been others.

A terrorist bomb killed more than 20 people today in Peshawar, in Pakistan’s northwest frontier.** Pakistan is key to Afghanistan. It was central in the US war against the Soviet occupiers of Afghanistan during the not so Cold War, when it was a safe haven for Afghan rebels, a staging area for the CIA, and the funnel for US aid to the insurgency. Now it’s key to the US and NATO effort to hold back the Taliban resurgence. Even as it provides safe havens for Taliban and Al Qaeda cadres.

** Elements of the dread Pakistani intelligence outfit, the ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) played major roles in creating the Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba. The ISI has always had a heavy Islamist influence. The Taliban were developed to bring a fundamentalist Islamic sense of order to the chaos of Afghanistan left in the wake of the Soviet defeat and America’s always wavering attention span.

The Lashkar-e-Taiba, working hard to end Indian rule in Kashmir, have the goal of establishing Islamic rule over South Asia.

Years of fighting over Kashmir have accomplished nothing.** Both the Indian and Pakistani governments are shaky. Last year’s assassination of Pakistan’s returned opposition leader, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, hastened the end of General Pervez Musharaff’s regime. But the new government is shaky, trying to balance between modernist reformers, Islamic fundamentalists, the ISI, and the most stable institution in an unstable country, an army founded on British traditions.

The Indian government has been under fire for past security lapses, particularly related to Kashmir, and closely pressed by its conservative religious-oriented opposition.

** There’s a discrepancy about the number of terrorists taking part in the Mumbai attacks. The reports from the first few days referred to 25 to 30 gunmen, perhaps 40. That made sense, given the amount of havoc they were wreaking simultaneously at multiple locations around the city. But the official number ended up at 10, with nine killed by Indian security forces and one captured and talking about his Pakistani connection.

However, other evidence suggests there were at least 15 attackers. With all the chaos and anger, Indian authorities wouldn’t want to admit that some of the attackers had escaped. Although it’s embarrassing to claim that it took two-and-a-half days for Indian police and elite military units to defeat 10 terrorists.

The Mumbai attacks were very disruptive to India’s commercial and financial capital.** Whatever the facts, India was always going to blame Pakistan. India’s home minister has been sacked in the wake of the attacks, along with the provincial governor. Calling it a homegrown attack, even if that were true, would be devastating for the government’s tattered credibility. The siege of Mumbai was very disruptive to India’s commercial, financial, entertainment, and tourist capital.

** Pakistan’s civilian government has been trying to rein in the army and the ISI. With only limited success. In the wake of the attacks, Pakistan’s prime minister announced that the ISI director would go to India to cooperate with Indian authorities in the investigation.

The ISI then announced that that was wrong, that an assistant would go later on. Yesterday, the former head of the ISI met with the prime minister and informed him that it is far more important for the prime minister to defend the integrity of the institutions of Pakistan than to open the country up to inspection from the outside.

The tactics used in the terrorist siege of Mumbai were not as unique as originally portrayed.

** The Mumbai plan looks just like a 1993 plan against New York. At first, the terrorist tactics employed in Mumbai were said to be novel. But it turns out that what took place looks a lot like an Al Qaeda plan from the early ’90s, employing water-borne transportation and assault weapon and grenade attacks against luxury hotels and well-known landmarks to create large numbers of casualties and a general sense of havoc in the major commercial city of a country.

That doesn’t mean that Al Qaeda is behind this, even if an Al Qaeda plan is. The attacks also bore great similarities to those made by Chechen rebels, according to Russian security services.

** The Clintons have been very close to India, which may make it hard for new Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to deal with Pakistan. When President Clinton made a farewell tour of the region in 2000, he spent five days in India and seven hours in Pakistan. Hillary has raised so much money from Indian-American interests that an Obama campaign document described as “Senator Hillary Clinton (D-Punjab).”

** It should not be a surprise that resurgent Russia is playing in this as well. The two countries earlier this year announced that they had created the world’s fastest cruise missile. Now they have just announced that they are collaborating on a new multiple-role fighter aircraft. Russian President Dmitri Medvedev visited India the day after Secretary of State Condi Rice. The Soviet Union was very close to India during the Cold War, and was certainly no friend to Pakistan while that country helped create the Soviet Vietnam.

** There are no easy solutions. If the Indians don’t retaliate militarily against targets inside Pakistan — whether official, rogue official, or private — they risk looking weak. If they don’t demand the hand-over of terrorist suspects, they risk looking weak. But the first option could lead to outright war. The second option could further destabilize Pakistan. Or it could lead to a military confrontation if Pakistan did not comply.

His remarks followed comments from his brother, President Raul Castro, who told a U.S. magazine he could meet Obama in a “neutral place” to try to end the Communist-run island’s four-decade conflict with the United States.

“With Obama, talks could happen anywhere he wants,” Fidel Castro, America’s longtime Cold War enemy, wrote in the latest of a series of columns he has published in state-run media since falling ill in 2006.

“He should remember the carrot-and-stick approach will not work with our country,” Castro wrote of Obama. “The sovereign rights of the Cuban people are not negotiable.”

Fidel Castro, who took power nearly 50 years ago after an armed revolution, has not been seen in public since undergoing surgery for an undisclosed illness in July 2006. But he has met several state leaders and appeared in photographs.

Obama, who takes office on January 20, has raised hopes of improved U.S.-Cuba ties by saying he was open to talks with the Cuban government and has favored easing some U.S. sanctions.

He has said he will reverse the U.S. administration’s policies restricting Cuban Americans from visiting Cuba and sending cash to their families. He is willing to talk to Castro but would keep the four-decade-old U.S. trade embargo as leverage to influence changes in the one-party state.

Raul Castro formally took over the Cuban presidency in February and has said several times Havana is willing to talk to the United States.

Before the U.S. presidential election last month, Fidel Castro praised Obama as intelligent and humanitarian in the columns that have become his main form of communication.

Raul suggested in the interview he could meet Obama in Guantanamo Bay, where the United States maintains a naval base, which Cuba considers a violation of its sovereignty.

(Reporting by Patrick Markey; editing by Todd Eastham)

The chairman of Gazprom, which is world’s largest extractor of natural gas and the biggest company in Russia, Alexey Miller, stated that the three companies were creating a “big gas troika”. He mentioned that the decision to create the carted would mean increase in prices for hydrocarbons.

“We are united by the world’s largest gas reserves, common strategic interests and, which is of great importance, high cooperation potential in tripartite projects. We have agreed to hold regular – three to four times a year – meetings of the gas G3 to discuss the crucial issues of mutual interest,” said Miller.

The statement of Gazprom’s chairman is likely to tense the situation on the west, pushing it to focus on energy alternatives, such as wind. Miller arranged a meeting at Tehran with Gholamhossein Nozari, petroleum minister of Iran, and Abdullah bin Hamad al-Attiyah, deputy prime minister of Qatar, who is also the country’s oil and energy minister. Gazprom’s representative announced that the group was setting a technical committee, featuring experts and specialists who would discuss the realization of cooperative projects, which would include a value chain ranging from geological exploration to marketing, The Guardian reports.

Despite the fact that Russia decided not to state the term “cartel,” the Iranian side, and namely Nozari, at a news conference said everything loud and clear: “there is a demand to form this gas Opec and there is a consensus to set up gas Opec.”

On Friday Opec will held a meeting where its members will analyze the ways to drive prices for oil. At the same time Miller said that the prices for fossil fuels would increase. “We share the opinion that oil price fluctuations don’t put in question the fundamental thesis stating that the era of cheap hydrocarbons has come to an end.”

At one of its recent meeting the European commission announced that it votes against the creation of organizations that might put a ceiling on competition. Ferran Tarradellas Espuny, the spokesman of the European commission outlined that the European commission considers that energy supplies should be marketed should be traded in a free market. Western analysts believe that Russia and Iran would take advantage of the cartel to pursue their political goals.

Representatives of western Europe raised concerns after Moscow cut off gas to Ukraine during the political and commercial disagreements. As for Iran, then its leader stated that they would choke off oil shipments coming from the Persian Golf in case of assault on the country.

The meeting, which will take place in Tehran, will need to be further discussed at other meeting in Russia and Qatar. However, the first meeting is the most important step forward to the creation of such group. It is worth mentioning that the idea was proposed in January 2007 by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iranian leader.

About half of European Union’s gas is imported from Russia and Moscow gained a tight hold on gas supplies, controlling the majority of pipelines from Russia and central Asia. According to James Cordier, president and head trader of Florida Liberty Trading Group and OptionSellers.com, the idea to try to control supply markets is a good one. Although it won’t affect oil, it is still advantageous to deliver natural gas where it should go and control the supply to be able to control the price.

The parliamentary poll was delayed after the killing of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, and is intended to complete a transition to civilian rule.

Polling stations officially closed at 1700 (1200 GMT), and initial results are expected within hours.

BBC correspondents reported many irregularities in voting, and some incidents of violence.

However, there were none of the major bomb attacks which overshadowed the run-up to the elections.

Nine killed

But fears of violence dissuaded many of the country’s 80 million eligible voters from leaving their homes, and voting in many places was slow.

At least nine people are reported to have been killed in election related violence on the eve of the vote and on the day itself.

In one incident in Daska district in the Punjab, a polling agent from one party reportedly shot dead an agent from a rival party after a dispute.

In another, on Sunday, at least four people, including a candidate, were reported to have been killed after an attack on former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s PML-N party.

BBC journalists also reported a number of voting irregularities across the country:

* BBC correspondent Riaz Sohail was shot at as he approached a polling station in Natario village, Sindh province, to investigate reports of ballot stuffing. Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) activists and voters were also fired upon

* In Karachi, protesters from Awami National Party (ANP) blocked roads and stoned vehicles after an attack on their candidate

* Firing on a polling station in Gujranwala in the Punjab caused voting to be suspended

* The presiding officer of a polling station in east Karachi – a PPP stronghold – said his police escort took him to the wrong location, leaving him 5km (three miles) from the station, meaning polling was delayed by five hours

Nawaz Sharif, after casting his ballot in the eastern city of Lahore, accused the PML-Q party that backs President Musharraf of “committing rigging, and… attacking our candidates and supporters”, AFP news agency reported.

The leader of Ms Bhutto’s PPP party, her widower Asif Ali Zardari, has threatened to launch street protests in the event of vote-rigging.

President Musharraf, voting in Rawalpindi, vowed to work in “harmony” with whoever won the polls, his spokesman said.

There are many local election observers on the ground, but few international observers, who have either not been invited or complained they could not work freely.

One, US Senator Joseph Biden, said he feared instability if the vote was rigged.

“If the majority of Pakistani people do not think the election was fair then I think we have a real problem,” he said.

Security tight

Close to half a million security personnel, including about 80,000 soldiers, have been deployed for the voting.

The BBC’s Barbara Plett, outside a polling station in Lahore, described a barrier designed to prevent car bombs and a heavy police presence.

She said men and women were in separate queues for voting.

In one tribal area near Peshawar, she said, elders had banned women from voting.

In certain areas the fear of violence hung heavy.

In the town of Charsadda, in volatile North West Frontier Province, election official Shah Zeb told the AP news agency: “We’re all afraid but what can we do? I left my home today, and I prayed to God to bring me back safely. Now it is in the hands of God.”

Local police told the BBC that nine election security officers had gone missing, feared kidnapped, near the town of Bannu, in North West Frontier Province.

Prospects

Analysts say polls suggest a fair vote is likely to result in a hung parliament, with none of the three biggest parties winning a majority.

Attention will then turn on the PPP, and whether it chooses to join forces with pro-Musharraf parties, or with Mr Sharif’s party.

Mr Sharif is staunchly opposed to the president, and if the two opposition parties jointly gain two-thirds of the seats, they may try to impeach him, correspondents say.

Mr Musharraf stepped down as army chief late last year. He has ruled the country since seizing power in a coup in 1999.

Source: news.bbc.co.uk