A German official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the cancellation would have no practical consequences

BERLIN Germany canceled a Cold War-era surveillance pact with the United States and Britain on Friday in response to revelations by National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden about those countries’ alleged electronic eavesdropping operations.

Chancellor Angela Merkel had raised the issue of alleged National Security Agency spying with President Barack Obama when he visited Berlin in June. But with weeks to go before national elections, opposition parties had demanded clarity about the extent to which her government knew of the intelligence gathering operations directed at Germany and German citizens.

Government officials have insisted that U.S. and British intelligence were never given permission to break Germany’s strict privacy laws. But they conceded that an agreement dating back to the late 1960s gave the U.S., Britain and France the right to request German authorities to conduct surveillance operations within Germany to protect their troops stationed there.

“The cancellation of the administrative agreements, which we have pushed for in recent weeks, is a necessary and proper consequence of the recent debate about protecting personal privacy,” Germany’s Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said in a statement.

A German official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the cancellation would have no practical consequences.

He said the move was largely symbolic since the agreement had not been invoked since the end of the Cold War and would have no impact on current intelligence cooperation between Germany and its NATO allies. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to publicly discuss the issue, said Germany was currently in talks with France to cancel its part of the agreement as well.

In March 2011, two U.S. Air Force members were killed and two others wounded when a gunman from Kosovo fired on a military bus at Frankfurt International Airport. The gunman told police he was motivated by anger over the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. embassy in Berlin, Ruth Bennett, confirmed that the agreement had been canceled but declined to comment further on the issue. Officials at the United Kingdom’s embassy in Berlin couldn’t immediately be reached for 부산출장안마 comment.

Related Posts

“This is a movement of defensive assets operating in an air-to-air role only,” the statement continued. “They are not deploying to take part in any military action against Syria. The (prime minister) has made clear no decision has been taken on our response and the gGovernment has said that there will be a Commons vote before direct military involvement.” U.S. officials describe the Pentagon decision as prudent planning and say it doesn’t suggest the carrier would play a role in any possible strikes in Syria. The officials were not authorized to discuss ship movements publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. The U.S. had kept two carriers in the region, but budget cuts in February forced officials to cut to one. CBS News correspondent David Martin reports two submarines — one American, one British — are in the eastern Mediterranean along with four American destroyers and a fifth on the way — all armed with cruise missiles. That’s more than enough firepower for a strike Pentagon officials say would be limited to fewer than 50 targets. Each of the destroyers carries about 40 cruise missiles – a satellite-guided weapon that carries a 1,000-pound warhead, has a range of 1000 miles or more and is accurate to within about 15 feet. Standard procedure would be for the ships to fire an opening salvo at night, wait for satellites to assess the damage and re-strike any targets that were not destroyed — a process that could take a few days. Any strike against Syria, Martin points out, would be designed to convince its dictator, President Bashar Assad, never to use chemical weapons again. But airstrikes never succeeded in changing the behavior of another Mideast dictator — Iraq’s Saddam Hussein — until he was finally captured and hanged.
The Department of Justice is keeping the charges against the suspect, Libyan militia leader Ahmed Abu Khattalah, under seal, but CBS News’ Margaret Brennan reports that the suspect has been living openly in Benghazi since the September, 2012 attack. Khattalah admitted to CBS News last fall that he was at the scene on the night of the attack, but denied a personal role in the violence. “I went to help four men who were trapped inside,” Boukhatala told CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer. When he arrived, though, the men were gone, according to the Islamist militant. At the time, Libya’s government had told CBS News that Boukhatala was a “prime suspect” in the attack on the U.S. offices, but asked about that accusation by Palmer, the militant smiled and said, “if that’s what the President is saying, then he should come to my house and arrest me.” But that’s something Libya’s government security forces wouldn’t have dared to do. Khattalah is the chief of a ferocious militia in Benghazi, the Abu Ubaidah Brigades – a sub-group of the larger Ansar al Shariah militia. Palmer reported that the militia — armed to the teeth with weapons looted from deposed dictator Muammar Qaddafi’s arsenals — acted at the time of the attack as both military and police in parts of Benghazi. The government’s security forces, the official police and army, are simply too weak to push them out. Khattalah told Palmer that the attackers were merely ordinary people armed with rocket-propelled grenades and added that he expected a fight should the government move to arrest Islamist militia members suspected in the attack. It remains unclear whether the U.S. has now asked Libyan authorities to arrest Khattalah or whether the FBI has identified the other suspects, pictured alongside Khattalah in a series of photos taken from the security cameras at the consulate. The other men are thought to be members of Khattalah’s militia. Neither the militia nor Khattalah have been specifically identified by the U.S. government as terrorists, according to Brennan. “The investigation is ongoing. It has been and remains, a top priority,” Justice Department spokesman Andrew C. Ames said Tuesday. However, the FBI has not made any arrests in the 11 months since the attack and the Obama Administration faces mounting pressure to take action. Last week, a small but vocal group of eight Republican congressmen sent a message to the newly-confirmed FBI Director James Comey, pressing him to take action. In the letter, initiated by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-U.T.), the legislators called the administration’s investigation thus far “unacceptable” and called for an “aggressive” investigation.”
“It will depend on whether any UN member state goes to the secretary-general and says we should look at this event,” Sellstrom told TT from Damascus. “We are in place.” Just hours after Sellstrom made the comments, French President Francois Hollande said in a regular cabinet meeting that the latest allegations of a chemical attack “require verification and confirmation,” according to government spokeswoman Najat Vallaud-Belkacem. Vallaud-Belkacem said Holland would ask the UN team to go to the site “to shed full light” on the allegations. CBS News correspondent Holly Williams reported, however, that it wasn’t immediately clear whether the Syrian government would grant the UN team access to the Ghouta suburbs to gather evidence. Ahmed al-Jarba, the head of the Western-backed Syrian National Coalition, and the London-based Syrian Observatory opposition group also called on the U.N. team to investigate the incidents. Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a British expert in chemical and biological weapons, told CBSNews.com on Wednesday that, based on the reported death tolls and the available video evidence — which he stressed he could not authenticate independently — it appeared that a weapon of mass destruction like Sarin gas was probably involved. In many of the smaller-scale attacks across Syria, de Bretton-Gordon has said small quantities of Sarin, or far weaker organophosphate compounds, could have been to blame, and it is feasible that poorly-trained rebel forces could have been behind such attacks. “Sarin is 4,000-times more powerful than organophosphates,” he explained, suggesting that if the toxic gas was used Wednesday on a large scale, it was “very unlikely” that opposition fighters could have been behind the attacks, as they “just don’t have access to that level of chemical weapons and the delivery means” needed to disperse them so widely. Damascus, the sprawling ancient capital city and President Assad’s base of power since the conflict erupted, had come under increasing pressure from rebel forces, which had tried to advance on the city center primarily from the east. Baghdadi reported that, according to eyewitnesses, the fierce military offensive began around 7:00 a.m. on Wednesday. One man said he counted about seven air raids and dozens of shelling targeting the district of Jobar, less than one mile from a main square in the capital. On Sunday, the 20-member U.N. chemical weapons team, led by Sellstrom, arrived in Damascus to investigate three sites where chemical weapons attacks allegedly occurred. The sites they were meant to probe are the village of Khan al-Assal just west of the embattled northern city of Aleppo and two other locations, which are being kept secret for security reasons. The Syrian government has always denied claims by the opposition of chemical weapons use, saying rebels fighting to overthrow Assad’s government have used such weapons.

No comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *