Palestinians under Arab pressure to meet demands, Jordan’s King Abdullah said in an interview broadcast on Saturday there was broad Arab agreement that a Palestinian unity government must adhere to the demands of the Quartet of Middle East mediators.

The King’s comments on Israeli television were the first from an Arab leader to cast doubt on the willingness of major Arab donors to sidestep a U.S.-led embargo of the Hamas-led government. Those sanctions seek to induce Hamas to recognise Israel, renounce violence and accept interim peace deals.

Since the unity government agreement was signed in Mecca earlier this month, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah and Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal have been lobbying Arab and European countries to lift the economic embargo, which has pushed the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority to the brink of financial collapse and increased poverty among the people.
After meeting French President Jacques Chirac in Paris on Saturday, Abbas said he was encouraged by the "wait and see" approach taken by the Quartet, comprised of the United States, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations.

"We hope that the embargo will be lifted ... If the situation were to continue as it currently is, the Palestinian people would suffer," Abbas said.

Continuing violence underlined the urgent need for a settlement. Four Palestinians were killed in clashes between rival clans in the Gaza Strip on Saturday, though both sides said the fighting was not motivated by political rivalries.

Speaking in Khartoum, Meshaal said: "The U.S. administration has no choice but to respect the will of the Palestinians and the Arab support for the Palestinian accord."

But King Abdullah, in an interview with Israel’s Channel 2 television, said he understood Israeli concerns that the power-sharing deal fails to meet the Quartet’s demands.

Without security, Iraq will not achieve progress,Howard pleads for more time on Iraq
Staged pullout from Iraq a priority ,I am well aware of the sharp political differences that exist over Iraq. I am not asking Australians to discount the enormous difficulties or to change their views about the original decision. I am asking them to consider the situation we now face and the stakes involved.

What Iraq and its people need now is time, not a timetable; our patience, not political positioning. They require our resolve, not our retreat.

The long war against violent Islamic extremism goes on. Terrorist cells are active today in between 30 and 40 countries, plotting action based on a warped interpretation of Islam. Attacks have been planned in Australia.

Roughly 2000 Australians are part of operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It is just over four years since the commitment of Australian forces to the US-led military operation in Iraq. This was one of the most difficult and contentious decisions this Government has taken.

There have been setbacks and mistakes. The loss of life and injuries are tragic. But I hope critics of our involvement recognise the need to honour our obligations to the Iraqis and to help them towards a more stable future.

Iraqis want the same things we look for in our own lives - safety for their families, a chance to earn a living and a say in how they are governed.

Security is the precondition for political and economic progress. That's why the international community must stay in Iraq. What the Iraqi people need most is our sticking power in their midst. I do not want our forces in Iraq one day longer than necessary. But to signal our departure now would be against Australia's national interest.

The stakes are high - for Iraq, for the wider Middle East, for American power and prestige and, ultimately, for our region and national security.

Ironically, last year the Government was castigated by the Opposition for placing our troops in a dangerous and worsening security environment in Iraq. Then, the critique shifted. Our troops were themselves exacerbating the situation. Now we are being told by the Opposition that the southern provinces of Iraq are not dangerous enough to justify Australia's presence.

If it's bad, our troops shouldn't be there. If it's good, our troops shouldn't be there. When has a political party made so many worthless speeches about internationalism and "good international citizenship" and done so little to support it?

A timetable for the premature withdrawal of coalition forces from Iraq would invite disastrous strategic and humanitarian consequences.

, Faisal Meqdad and Ellen Sauerbrey discussed Iraqi refugees
Syria has called for a "serious dialogue" with the US on all matters relating to the Middle East.
Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Meqdad made the call after welcoming US refugees official Ellen Sauerbrey, the most senior US visitor in two years.

The US played down Ms Sauerbrey's visit, insisting all talks were on Iraq-related issues.

Both Syria and another US foe, Iran, attended a key security conference on Iraq in Baghdad last weekend.

Assistant Secretary of State Sauerbrey's visit was to discuss the plight of Iraqi refugees, hundreds of thousands of whom have crossed into Syria to escape the insecurity of Iraq.

The US state department stressed it was not a bilateral visit, saying Ms Sauerbrey was accompanying the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

Lasting solution

Mr Meqdad said the Syrian policy on Iraqi refugees had "left a positive impression on the US side".

But he added: "We told [Ms Sauerbrey] that all the questions are linked in the Arab region and that a comprehensive dialogue is needed on all these questions.

"We can't find lasting solutions without such a dialogue."

Ms Sauerbrey, the most senior US visitor to Damascus since then deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage in January 2005, did not speak to the media about her talks.

The US has accused Syria and Iran of helping militants in Iraq.

However, both neighbours were present at the security summit this weekend.

Senior US official, David Satterfield, sat down with Syria's deputy foreign minister at the conference.

Billionaires club gets even bigger,Richer getting younger,The number of super rich is increasing rapidly around the world, .WITH a tidy nest egg of $US56 billion ($A72 billion), Bill Gates might still be the richest man in the world but others are catching up.

According to the latest Forbes list of the filthy rich, there are now a record

946 billionaires in the world, up more than 150 from last year. And there's not only more — two-thirds of last year's billionaires are richer.

From Moscow to Mumbai, fortunes around the world are on the up, driven higher by rising real estate values and commodity prices, the weakness of the US dollar, and the march of technology.

The list's total net worth grew by $US900 billion, a whopping 35 per cent from last year. Lined up end to end, the swelling number of super-rich are worth $US3.5 trillion, more than five times Australia's total output and about 4½ times the country's superannuation savings. These folk made their money in all areas, from real estate to clothing, from steel to dumplings. And apart from the usual collection of US businessmen and Russian oligarchs — the list includes 415 billionaires from the US, worth a total $US1.36 trillion — entrepreneurs from India and China are making their presence felt.

The 178 new kids on the block include 14 Indians,

13 Chinese, 19 Russians and 10 Spaniards. The first billionaires from Cyprus, Oman, Romania and Serbia are on to the list.

Russia now has 53 billionaires, mostly self-made tycoons such as steel magnate Dmitry Pumpyansky ($US5.7 billion) and oil tycoon Mikhail Goutseriev ($US2.9 billion).

No doubt they are better connected than the one-time billionaire, former Russian oil magnate Mikhail Khodorkovsky. A prominent political enemy of the President, Vladimir Putin, Khodorkovsky is now serving time for tax evasion and fraud.

Germany has slightly more billionaires at 55, although that list includes ageing heirs and heiresses.

Also, Russia's billionaires are richer than Germany's. Their net worth is $US282 billion, $US37 billion more than their counterparts over in the Ruhr and Rhineland.

Spain has added 10 billionaires and there is also one former Australian, Rupert Murdoch ($US9 billion).

India now has three billionaires in the top 25, second only to the US.

They include brothers Mukesh ($US20.1 billion) and Anil Ambani ($US18.2 billion), who split up the family business created by their late father Dhirubhai Ambani, in 2005. Mukesh got Reliance Industries and Reliance Petroleum, Anil settled for the family's telecoms, finance and power interests.

Circumcision protects men from AIDS, puts women at risk

London, Mar 7 Circumcision may reduce men’s chances of contracting HIV by up to 60%—but the procedure could put women at increased risk of infection, according to preliminary data.

Early results announced on Tuesday at a UN consultation in Switzerland on the potential impact of male circumcision on AIDS in Africa showed that if HIV-positive circumcised men did not abstain from sex for about one month after surgery, their female partners might actually have a higher chance of catching HIV.

Previous studies have demonstrated the dramatic impact circumcision has in cutting men’s HIV infection rates, but a big question has been whether there would be a similar effect on women.

The first evidence - though very preliminary—suggests there is a period immediately following the surgery which may allow the virus to more easily infect women.

“This is a very big caveat,” said Jennifer Kates, an AIDS expert at the Kaiser Family Foundation. Kates was not connected to the study. “But there could still ultimately be a protective effect for women, this just underscores the importance of education,” she said. Researchers at the Rakai Health Sciences Programme and Makerere University in Uganda and the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the US tracked 997 HIV positive men and their female partners in Uganda.