Yuli Edelstein, the Minister of Public Affairs and the Diaspora in the Israeli cabinet, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss the prospects of peace in the Middle East and why Israel won’t agree to a settlement freeze.

Al Jazeera English’s John Terrett reports on the challenges and reasons behind Abbas’ decision to bow out of politics — including the expansion of Israeli settlements and the impartial U.S. stance.

Crima has secured enough votes to get his name on the ballot, but Russian opinion vacillates from rejecting him because of his color to interest in his exoticism. The video raises questions on race relations in Russia, and what it actually means to be Russian.

U.S. President Barack Obama was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” His selection has generated broad reaction around the world, much of it — but not all — positive.

In the Middle East, Israel’s President Shimon Peres said he was encouraged. But in Gaza, the prime minister of the militant group Hamas said the United States needs to do more.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa said the award “speaks to the promise of President Obama’s message of hope.”

Should the Nobel Peace Prize have been awarded to President Obama?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below. Please remember to be respectful and on-point in your comments. Malicious or offensive comments will be deleted and repeat offenders will be banned.

The target was the Indian embassy, and once again, the Taliban claimed responsibility.

Daniel Markey, a senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss Afghanistan’s importance to India and the effect of the bombing on the U.S. mission in Afghanistan.

Gates took the extraordinary step of saying something else — that those advising the president should keep their views private. This was an implicit criticism of the top commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, for publicly lobbying for more troops.

Worldfocus spoke with Gabriel Schoenfeld, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, about U.S. strategy in Afghanistan and the implications of troop increases.

Do you agree with Defense Secretary Robert Gates that those advising President Obama on war strategy should keep their opinions private?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below. Please remember to be respectful and on-point in your comments. Malicious or offensive comments will be deleted and repeat offenders will be banned.

They discuss the debate over next steps in the war in Afghanistan, as U.S. President Barack Obama considers sending tens of thousands of additional troops, a move that some in his administration oppose. They also explore developments in regards to Iran’s nuclear program.

McChrystal has also recommended up to 40,000 additional troops for Afghanistan. That recommendation is being considered by U.S. President Barack Obama, who held a three-hour meeting Wednesday night on Afghanistan with key members of his national security team, some of whom are divided on the troop issue.

Alex Their, the director of the Future of Afghanistan Project at the United States Institute of Peace, joins Martin Savidge to discuss the administration’s options.

Worldfocus producer Mohammad Al-Kassim blogs about Friday’s revelations on Iran.

The news that Iran was building a “semi-industrial enrichment fuel facility” dominated the international headlines today. Here is how the news was covered in some Middle Eastern media outlets.

Iran’s Press TV, a government-funded news channel, broke into its regularly scheduled programming to feature the press conference held by U.S. President Barack Obama, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

The 24-hour channel, which is based in Tehran and broadcasts in English, targets viewers outside Iran.

As she was talking to a correspondent in Vienna, Press TV anchor Nargess Moballeghi noted British PM Gordon Brown’s comment that “the most urgent challenge in the world we face today is Iran.” Ms. Moballeghi told her colleague that this statement was completely opposite a statement made by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon who said that it was “climate change.”

On Alalam Web site, a government-funded 24-hour news channel airing in Arabic from Tehran, the top story was same as its sister channel, Press TV. The news article on Alalam was short, quoting Iran’s top nuclear program official who said there is nothing secret about Iran’s nuclear site and that the IAEA is aware of its existence, adding that Iran has the right to have a peaceful nuclear program.

On Al Arabiya, the all-news channel based in Dubai, the news of Iran’s secret nuclear sites overshadowed the rest of the day’s news. Al Arabiya has been very critical in its coverage of Iran’s presidential election.

In general, the channel — which is funded by Saudi money — is critical of Iran’s influence in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia feels that Iran is treading on its territory as the natural leader in the Muslim world.

Al Jazeera Arabic also joined in the coverage of the breaking news with the press conference from Pittsburg, PA. The headline of the story on its Web site read, “World powers pressure Iran,” and the story reported the views of both sides, adding the position of Russia and China. The news article also quoted the Iranian student’s news agency for Iran’s official statement.

Al Jazeera is funded by the government of Qatar and is generally viewed by the Iranian government as relatively biased against Iran.

People in the West assume that because Iran is a Muslim country, it must be friends with many counties in the region. On the contrary, Iran’s neighbors are equally opposed to it obtaining a nuclear program and weapons as the West is. The so-called moderate Arab states –Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan — are quietly calling to disarm Iran nuclear program. Watching these media outlets, one cannot help but notice that the coverage is a reflection of this position.

- Mohammad Al-Kassim

In Pittsburgh, the Europeans will be pushing for more regulation of the capital markets and groups like hedge funds and rating agencies.

For more, read Worldfocus blogger Nina Hachigian’s thoughts: Deciding who decides at the G-20 summit

John Authers, the investment editor for the Financial Times, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss what’s likely to happen at the G-20 summit.

“I will repeat that I am committed to diplomacy that opens a path to greater prosperity and a more secure peace for both nations if they live up to their obligations,” Obama said. “But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards, if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability…if they are oblivious to the dangers an escalating nuclear arms race in both East Asia and the Middle East, then they must be held accountable.”

In an interview with the Associated Press, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he expects next week’s discussions with the West about Iran’s nuclear program to be “free and open,” but called on the world’s nuclear powers to give up some of their weapons too.

Mansour Farhang is a professor of international relations at Bennington College and was revolutionary Iran’s first ambassador to the United Nations.  He joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss how Ahmadinejad’s nuclear stance is influenced by domestic Iranian politics, Israel and other concerns.

In his speech, the president said that the United States is committed to working with other countries to solve the world’s major problems. But he challenged them to do more and derided what he called “an almost reflexive anti-Americanism” sweeping the globe.

The president gave no hint of any major changes in U.S. policy toward Afghanistan. The president also seemed to break little new ground in his remarks about the Middle East, calling on the Palestinians to pursue peace with Israel and urging the Israelis to curb settlements in Palestinian territories.

Though he gave no hint of it during his speech, The New York Times reports that the Obama administration is considering major foreign policy changes in the Middle East and Afghanistan.

Obama also spoke about another key foreign policy issue — the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea. Several countries, led by the U.S., are considering additional sanctions against Iran and North Korea if they don’t curb their nuclear programs.

James Lindsay, senior vice president and director of studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss policy reversals.

Eight months into the Obama administration, is U.S. foreign policy headed in the right direction or wrong direction?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below. Please remember to be respectful and on-point in your comments. Malicious or offensive comments will be deleted and repeat offenders will be banned.

Heralding a “new chapter of international cooperation,” U.S. President Barack Obama delivered his maiden speech to the U.N. General Assembly today. Obama remains very popular around the world, although he has not yet elicited any major concessions in global geopolitical conflicts.

I asked media personnel at the U.N. whether Obama’s good will might translate into tangible foreign policy benefits.

“I am very proud of the way that Obama has spoken frankly, since he comes from Africa,” said Boukar Doungous, press attache from Chad to the U.N. “But in terms of the tough foreign policy issues, all these conflicts — such as Israel-Palestine — existed before Obama came to power.”

“It’s difficult for him to truly resolve these issues of external politics before resolving internal American political problems. Although he has a clear vision, he’s prioritized the domestic issues for now,” Doungous said.

Brenda Miyeh Yufeh, a reporter at the state-owned daily Cameroon Tribune, said: “Obama has the good will to act, and he will be true to what he says. But he cannot operate alone as the president.” She continued, “There are so many groups with whom he needs to collaborate. The speed at which he needs to act should not frustrate us. As far as Africa is concerned, we need to give him some time to do better than George Bush.”

Watch: Reaction to Obama’s speech from an Indian print reporter, the bureau chief of Al-Arabiya and a reporter from Iran’s Press TV, a state-supported English-language news service.

A reporter for the Arabic-language Algerian daily Sawt Al Ahrar, which is associated with the ruling FLN party, expressed cautious optimism about Obama’s speech.

“He confirmed his intention to reform the foreign policy of the U.S. with regards to international organizations,” Nadjib Belhimer said. “But in reality, to change American strategy is a big task. For example, Guantanamo is still there. With the Muslim world, he has not yet modified the American stance.

Belhimer continued, “The Obama administration knows it’s not easy to shift the foreign policy of a superpower overnight. Yet it’s good to be optimistic. Obama already convinced the world that change has come. This president clearly doesn’t resemble Bush. Still, the whole world is waiting. Everyone wants to give Obama his chance.”

- Ben Piven and Mohammad al-Kassim

The meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas did not produce a breakthrough, but it was a moment deep in symbolism — the beginning, perhaps, of a new and more productive phase in the struggle for peace in the Middle East.

For his part, Obama had a strong message for the leaders after meeting with them individually: Get moving again on a comprehensive peace agreement.

After the meeting, Netanyahu said there was general agreement that the peace process has to be resumed as soon as possible with no preconditions.

Ghassan Shabaneh, an assistant professor of international studies at Marymount Manhattan College, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss the significance of the meeting for the peace process.

“We risk consigning future generations to catastrophe,” said Obama. “To promote renewable energy projects and technologies in the developing world…we have put climate change at the top of our diplomatic agenda.”

The American president spoke mostly in generalities, but his message was received warmly by delegates in the General Assembly Hall. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon exhorted the international community to take “urgent action…the climate negotiations are too slow.”

“We can contribute to the greater good by limiting the global temperature rise to safe levels,” said Ban.

Expectations were high ahead of Chinese President Hu Jintao’s speech at the United Nations summit on climate control. His speech introduced four new proposals, but the proposals lacked details on when and how China is going to implement them.

President Hu emphasized the importance of climate change and said that achieving sustainable development is an urgent matter for China, adding that his country will do its best to develop renewable and nuclear energy. He promised emissions would grow slower than economic growth in the future.

“We will endeavor to cut carbon dioxide emissions per unit of GDP by a notable margin by 2020 from the 2005 level,” he added, and charged developing countries with supporting the world in tackling climate change.

“This is not only their responsibility, but also serves their long-term interest.”

But President Hu would not commit China to a specific target in reducing emissions.

Watch: Shao Zheng of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs discusses the Chinese president’s speech.

French President Nicholas Sarkozy delivered the most impassioned address in support of immediate legislation on climate change. The French leader also mentioned specific targets for 80 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by developed countries before 2050. The policy idea most strongly emphasized by Sarkozy was the transfer of financing and technology from the developed nations to underdeveloped nations. France is one of the countries most ready to implement actual legislation that would result in such a transfer of green energy in the near future.

While there will no doubt be a lag between the inspired speeches and political reality, the chorus of global leaders seemed to be speaking in unusual harmony.

“The journey is long. The journey is hard,” concluded Obama. “If we resolve to work tirelessly in common effort, then we will achieve our common purpose: A world that is safer, cleaner, and healthier than the one we found; and a future that is worthy of our children.”

- Mohammad al-Kassim and Ben Piven

Tunnels near Rafah.

On Monday, one day before U.S. President Barack Obama was scheduled to meet in New York with the leaders of Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Israel’s air force launched an attack on Palestinian targets in the southern Gaza Strip.

The targets were three tunnels Israel says are used to smuggle arms into Gaza across the border from Egypt. The Israeli army said the attack was a response to rockets fired into Israel by Palestinian militants from Gaza over the weekend.

Meanwhile, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas met in Cairo with Egypt’s president Hosni Mubarak. Abbas repeated the Palestinian position that negotiations with Israel cannot resume without an agreement by Israel to freeze Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem.

If Israel imposes a freeze on all settlement construction, are you confident there would be a peace deal between the Israelis and Palestinians?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below. Please remember to be respectful and on-point in your comments. Malicious or offensive comments will be deleted and repeat offenders will be banned.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Marius Arnesen under a Creative Commons license.

But on Friday, at an annual political event known as Quds Day to show solidarity with the Palestinian cause, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made some harsh comments about Israel and the West, calling the Holocaust “a lie.”

The event brought out tens of thousands of demonstrators for — and against — the government.

Do you think the Obama administration is making a mistake by engaging Ahmadinejad?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below. Please remember to be respectful and on-point in your comments. Malicious or offensive comments will be deleted and repeat offenders will be banned.

Ervand Abrahamian, a distinguished professor of history at the City University of New York, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss the state of the protest movement in Iran and talks about the country’s nuclear program.

On Thursday, Obama announced that he is dropping that plan for eastern Europe. Instead, he said, the U.S. will develop an alternative plan to counter what is now perceived as the more immediate threat of short- and medium-range missiles from Iran.

Heather Conley, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a former assistant secretary of state, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss the motivations behind Obama’s decision and how it will be received in Europe.

Even with the embargo, the United States is Cuba’s fifth largest trading partner — there are exemptions on food sales to the island. Photo: USDA

There’s no reason to be surprised by President Obama’s decision this week to renew the U.S. embargo with Cuba — he was sticking the script followed by presidents since John F. Kennedy.

Not doing so would throw a wrench into his efforts in Congress on universal health care. Without even arguing pro or con on the issue, let’s just state the obvious — the president is dealing with pressing matters that take front-burner attention right now. Cuba and Latin America are way down on the list of problems to deal with.

All this despite the emptiness and loneliness of the embargo. Many Americans don’t realize the oddities of the U.S. stance — it can’t be called a policy. Something like 178 other countries have normal diplomatic relations with Cuba. Even with the embargo, the United States is Cuba’s fifth largest trading partner — there are exemptions on food sales to the island.

A majority of Cuban Americans now support an end to the embargo. Some of the most vociferous supporters of a change are midwestern Republicans, who want to open new markets for their constituents. And it should be made clear: Those suffering the most are the Cuban people, not the Cuban government.

President Obama’s decision therefore may be disappointing to the coalition of Americans who think it’s time to acknowledge the failure of the 50-year economic embargo of Cuba. But they won’t scream as hard as the other side would if the president endorsed a new policy. Obama can’t stand potential defections of support for the health care bill.

Cubans in Cuba and Miami tend to see their own issue as the only issue. But even they know the reality.

The Cuban government has expressed doubt for some time that Obama would strike up a new, close friendship with the Communist country. Ricardo Alarcon, the president of Cuba’s National assembly, told me in Havana this year that he hoped, but didn’t think the new president would live up to his billing as an agent of change.

Watch: Cuba embraces Obama and clamors to end the embargo.

Any idea of quick change comes from an early flurry of talk that Obama might be willing to drop a travel ban to Cuba affecting most U.S. citizens. There was a lot of noise in the spring when Obama suggested changes in U.S. Cuban policy. But he’s taken minor steps other than to eliminate restrictions imposed by George W. Bush on Cuban Americans traveling and sending more to relatives on the island.

Actually, there were two small changes that are worth mentioning. One is that the United States and Cuba have begun holding regular occasional meetings on immigration and other matters. So there is some level of official contact between the countries. There was also an odd contact point recently when Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico paid a visit to Havana and said he held unofficial meetings with high-ranking Cuban officials. It’s not clear whether he was carrying water for the president or not, and it’s also not clear who he really met with, besides Alarcon.

The real point person on Cuba and Latin America should be Arturo Valenzuela, who President Obama has designated as the deputy assistant secretary of state for Inter-American Affairs. He’s not on the job yet — Congress is stalling on confirmation hearings.

Latin America, as usual, is an afterthought in U.S. foreign policy planning.

- Peter Eisner

As the goals and the strategy are debated in coming weeks, the chairman of the joint chiefs — the top U.S. officer — told Congress on Tuesday that more U.S. forces in Afghanistan are probably required.

But Afghanistan is not the only battleground in the U.S. fight against extremists and terrorism. There have also been developments in Pakistan and Somalia.

Is the United States being aggressive enough — or too aggressive — in its efforts to combat international terrorism?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below.

Juan Carlos Zarate, a senior advisor on terrorism at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss strategies in the fight against terrorism. He says that in some cases, the Obama administration has actually been more aggressive than the Bush administration in fighting the so-called war on terror.