Iran USA agreement on nuclear capability

Iran and a group of six nations, led by the United States, said they had reached a historic accord, on Tuesday 14^th July 2015, to significantly limit Tehran’s nuclear ability, for more than a decade, in return for lifting international oil and financial sanctions.

The deal culminates 20 months of negotiations on an agreement that President Obama had long sought as the biggest diplomatic achievement of his presidency. Whether it portends a new relationship between the United States and Iran — after decades of coups, hostage-taking, terrorism and sanctions — remains a bigger question.

Mr. Obama, in an early morning appearance at the White House that was broadcast live in Iran, began what promised to be an arduous effort to sell the deal to Congress and the American public, saying the agreement is “not built on trust — it is built on verification.”

As soon as the agreement was announced,  in Vienna and on the streets of Tehran, its harshest critics said it would ultimately empower Iran rather than limit its capability. Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, called it a “historic mistake” that would create a “terrorist nuclear superpower.”

American officials said the core of the agreement, secured in 18 consecutive days of talks, lies in the restrictions on the amount of nuclear fuel that Iran can keep for the next 15 years. The current stockpile of low enriched uranium will be reduced by 98 percent, most likely by shipping much of it to Russia. That limit, combined with a two-thirds reduction in the number of its centrifuges, would extend to a year the amount of time it would take Iran to make enough material for a single bomb should it abandon the accord and race for a weapon — what officials call “breakout time.” By comparison, analysts say Iran now has a breakout time of two to three months.

Compared with many past efforts to slow a nation’s nuclear programs,  including a deal struck with North Korea 20 years ago,  this agreement is remarkably specific. Mr. Kerry said he had insisted it must be “airtight.” But some mysteries remain. For example, it is not clear whether the inspectors would be able to interview the scientists and engineers who were believed to have been at the center of an effort by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to design a weapon that Iran could manufacture in short order.

Croatian and Slovenian dispute over Adriatic sea

On 6 June 2010 referendum Slovenian voters have backed an agreement with Croatia to settle a long-standing border dispute between the two countries through international arbitration.
The agreement, under which the dispute over the maritime border in the Adriatic Sea is to be solved by an EU-led arbitration panel, won the support of 51.5 per cent of voters
The two countries have been at loggerheads over their maritime border in Piran Bay, and over small terrestrial border disputes, since the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991.
Slovenia has claimed that the dispute was preventing its ships from gaining free access to the Adriatic.The dispute over the maritime border in the Adriatic Sea has in the past prompted Ljubljana to block Zagreb’s accession talks with the European Union, fueling tensions between the two neighboring countries which have no history of past conflict.
The deadlock was broken last November when Pahor and Kosor agreed to allow international arbitration settle the matter.
But while both the Croatian and Slovenian parliaments approved the agreement reached between the two leaders, the Slovenian government decided to give the public the final say.
The European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso described Slovenian voters’ decision to support the deal as “an important step forward” for the Balkan region.
"This is an important step forward. I very much welcome the support that the Slovenian people have given in the referendum on the Border Arbitration Agreement signed by the governments of Slovenia and Croatia," Barroso said in a statement. He added that he was looking forward to a final settlement of the dispute which would represent "an important signal for the region and the relations between Slovenia and Croatia."

Libya political and diplomatic crisis situation

In 2011, the world once again turned against the Libyan government over its use of violence against the popular uprising against the Colonel, inspired by the anti-authoritarian protests sweeping through the Arab world.

The UN Security Council passed a resolution authorising Nato air strikes to protect civilians. After months of near-stalemate, the rebels stormed into Tripoli in August 2011, and several weeks later Col Gaddafi was killed when his last holdout was overrun.

A transitional government took charge and had the challenge of imposing order, disbanding the former rebel forces, rebuilding the economy, creating functioning institutions and managing the pledged transition to democracy and the rule of law.

Elections for a General National Congress were held in July 2012, the country's first free national election in six decades. The congress appointed a prime minister, Ali Zeidan, in October, who formed an interim government tasked with preparing the ground for a new constitution and fresh parliamentary elections.

However, tensions between nationalists and Islamists have stymied attempts to produce a stable government, and in 2014 the country was riven by fighting between rival militias. Central government collapsed, and the United Nations has struggled to bring political factions together.