• Despite tensions, US rescues 13 Iranian seamen from pirates

    The pirates were brought aboard the U.S.S. John C. Stennis, the same ship Iran's navy threatened on Tuesday. NBC's Brian Williams reports.

    By NBC News and msnbc.com staff

    Casting aside current tensions between the U.S. and Iran, the U.S. Navy on Friday rescued 13 Iranian seamen who were being held captive by Somali pirates in the Gulf of Oman.

    A Navy helicopter from the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis, responding to a distress call from a merchant ship under attack by pirates, chased the pirates to their "mother ship," an Iranian-flagged dhow that had earlier been hijacked.

    U.S. Navy

    A sailor aboard a safety boat observes a "visit, board, search and seizure team" from USS Kidd on Thursday, Jan. 5. The Navy boarded the Iranian-flagged fishing dhow Al Molai to rescue 13 Iranian seamen held captive by Somali pirates.

     

    A heavily-armed counter-piracy team from the Navy destroyer USS Kidd met little resistance when they boarded the dhow where they found 15 armed pirates and the 13 Iranians who were being held hostage. The pirates were taken into custody. The Iranians were set free in their dhow.

     

    The rescue occurred about 175 miles southeast of Muscat, Oman.

    It came less than two days after Iran threatened never to allow the USS John C. Stennis back to the Persian gulf following its departure last week for the Gulf of Oman and North Arabian Sea.

    U.S. Navy

    The USS Kidd responds to a distress call from the Iranian-flagged fishing dhow Al Molai on Thursday, Jan. 5. The Navy boarded the ship to rescue 13 Iranian seamen held captive by Somali pirates.

    An Iranian surveillance plane last week video-recorded and photographed the vessel near the Strait of Hormuz, in a bid to cast its navy as having a powerful role in the region's waters.

    Iran has threatened to close the route in possible retaliation to new U.S. and European economic sanctions, a tactic the U.S. already has said it would not tolerate.

    About one-sixth of the world's oil passes on tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, and analysts have warned the price of Brent crude could temporarily jump to as high as $210 if the strait is closed.

    Reuters

    Iranian military personnel participate in the Velayat-90 war game in unknown location near the Strait of Hormuz in southern Iran Dec. 30.

    U.S. officials have said the Navy's Fifth Fleet, based in nearby Bahrain, is prepared to defend the shipping route.

    White House officials said Iran's threat showed Tehran was increasingly isolated internationally, faced economic problems from to sanctions and wants to divert attention from its deepening problems.

    "It reflects the fact that Iran is in a position of weakness," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters Tuesday.

    State news agency IRNA quoted Iranian army chief Ataollah Salehi as saying: "Iran will not repeat its warning ... the enemy's carrier has been moved to the Sea of Oman because of our drill. I recommend and emphasize to the American carrier not to return to the Persian Gulf.

    AFP/Iran state media

    The USS John C. Stennis, pictured as it allegedly went "inside the maneuver zone" where Iranian ships were conducting war games in the Gulf, according to Iranian officials who supplied the image.

    "I advise, recommend and warn them (the Americans) over the return of this carrier to the Persian Gulf because we are not in the habit of warning more than once," he said.

    Britain's defense secretary warned Iran Thursday that any attempt to block the key global oil passageway the Strait of Hormuz would be illegal and unsuccessful — hinting at a robust international response.

    During his  first visit to the Pentagon for talks with U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Philip Hammond told the Atlantic Council in Washington that the presence of British and American naval ships in the Persian Gulf would ensure the route is kept open for trade.

    More from msnbc.com and NBC News:

      NBC's Jim Miklaszewski and msnbc.com staff contributed to this report.

  • Oil-hungry China welcomes alleged war criminal al-Bashir

    By Adrienne Mong

    Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

    BEIJING — If there’s one thing that gets discussed a lot regarding China’s relationship with Sudan, it’s the oil interest.

    As the world’s largest energy consumer and one of the fastest-growing economies, China needs oil.  Since 1995, it has invested heavily in Sudan’s oil infrastructure via the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC).

    “We cannot exaggerate the importance of Sudan oil to the whole of China’s oil input,” said Dr. He Wenping of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

    Sudan isn't China's leading supplier in Africa; that honor more recently has gone to Angola.  But Sudan does supply roughly seven per cent of the mainland's oil needs.

    In return, Beijing has provided military support — most visibly in the form of weaponry — to Khartoum.

    The oil-for-arms relationship provoked a huge international outcry in relation to the Darfur conflict.  Western governments and human rights groups called on China to stop supplying small arms to Sudan (although Russia was just as, if not more, culpable) and to use its leverage with Sudan to end the wholesale mass killings.

    But what's more interesting than simply China's oil interests in Sudan is the way in which those interests are affecting Beijing's foreign policy.

    Liu Jin / AP

    Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir, center, arrives at Beijing International Airport on Tuesday.

    Wither non-interference?
    Despite Beijing’s adherence to the non-interference principle (one of five which have guided diplomacy under the People’s Republic of China since 1954), the Chinese leadership has actually taken small steps away from its longstanding standard.

    “The global business activities of Chinese firms are heightening domestic and international pressures on the Chinese government to protect Chinese assets and citizens abroad and to help resolve international crises,” writes Erica Downs, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. 

    Sudan is a textbook case.  (Libya is another stark example — as our bureau chief, Eric Baculinao, wrote about last week.)

    Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir embarked on a four-day visit to China on Tuesday, despite global censure.  There are, after all, two international warrants for his arrest on charges of genocide and war crimes.

    But the Chinese argue that Bashir's arrest could further destabilize the region and that keeping diplomatic channels — and its doors to the Sudanese president — open is key.  “If you couldn’t even have any dialogue with the sitting president of this country, how can you guarantee peaceful transition, especially now the south Sudan is going to get its independence,” said He.

    Beijing has good reason to want a lasting peace between north and south following the latter’s secession on July 9.  Much of the oil lies in the impoverished, underdeveloped south.

    But transporting the oil out requires the use of what little infrastructure exits in the north, including a key pipeline.  Not to mention the fact that China has invested so much in the north and in its relations with Bashir, who's expected to brief Chinese President Hu Jintao Wednesday on the latest situation. 

    Although his arrival to Beijing was inexplicably delayed by a day, Bashir told the state-run Xinhua news agency that relations between the two sides would not be weakened by the south’s imminent independence.

    Perhaps another indication of “pragmatism” at play, the Chinese government is sanguine about its apparent reversal on the non-interference principle. 

    Last week, its special representative for African Affairs, Liu Guijin told reporters that China was using “a new form of diplomatic engagement” to work with north and south Sudan.

  • Attacks raze Libyan oil town, civilians flee in despair

    By Miranda Leitsinger, msnbc.com
    People are fleeing the eastern oil town of Ras Lanouf, which is coming under heavy bombardment from the air, sea and mountains by Gadhafi forces, a human rights activist on the frontline says.

    Most civilian buildings were destroyed and a large mosque was also bombed on Thursday, said the activist with the Free Libo Group (Libo refers to the aboriginal tribe of Libya). Though most civilians escaped, some people were trapped in town, including some Western journalists.

    "We left them behind. We do not know their fate," the activist said in a Skype call with msnbc.com. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the threats to opposition forces. 

    The bodies of seven men killed in the fighting were taken to a hospital in Brega, a town next to Ras Lanouf. Another 22 injured men were being treated at the hospital, though overall casualty numbers were hard to determine, the activist said.

    "It’s mostly empty, the town. The medical center in town is not fully equipped to deal with a catastrophe."

    The attack on Ras Lanouf intensified in the afternoon, and the activist said he escaped injury after shrapnel struck the car he was in.

    Residents were heading east. A family that headed west two days ago died when their car was hit in an attack, and now anti-Gadhafi fighters were blocking movement west to protect people.

    Most of containers at the port were hit, according to engineers the activist spoke with, and water supplies that go into town were also struck.

    People were "upset and depressed, frightened – both the civilians and the fighters.”

    Related story: Pro-Gadhafi kidnap gangs silencing foes – sometimes for good

  • Brits blame Obama as BP-linked pensions plummet

    By Jennifer Carlile, msnbc.com staff

    The oil polluting Louisiana’s marshes lies about 5,000 miles away from Britain’s coastline. But while wildlife, the fishing industry and tourism here are safe from the slick, the leak is hitting Britons’ pockets and their pride.

    By Wednesday night, BP's shares had lost more than half of their market value -- or at least $71 billion -- in the 52 days since the crisis began. Almost every pension fund in the U.K. owns shares in the energy giant, raising serious questions about the impact the firm's plummeting value will have on the retirement plans for millions of Britons. President Barack Obama's threat to block a BP dividend payment in order to ensure victims of the spill get compensation has also sparked widespread alarm.

    “Obama’s boot on the throat of British pensioners” read the front-page headline in Thursday's Daily Telegraph, which added that the president's "attacks on BP were blamed for wiping billions off the company’s value."

    'Aggressive rhetoric'
    “U.K. alarm over attack on BP” was the Financial Times' take on the crisis, which it suggested could damage transatlantic relations. The newspaper accused President Barack Obama of employing "increasingly aggressive rhetoric" against BP.

    Shares in BP hit their lowest level in 13 years on Thursday. According to the Telegraph, BP executives are so worried that Obama’s comments could continue to drive down BP's share price that the firm has asked Prime Minister David Cameron to intervene. Cameron is due to speak with Obama this weekend.

    Obama and U.S. officials have repeatedly referred to BP as “British Petroleum” -- despite the fact that the company officially changed its name in 2000. Some have interpreted this as an attack on the country's reputation.

    Last Friday, Obama declared “what I don’t want to hear is, when they’re spending that kind of money on their shareholders and … TV advertising, that they’re nickel-and-diming fishermen or small businesses here in the Gulf.”

    'Matter of national concern'
    Some are concerned about the battering the U.K.'s image is taking in the U.S.

    "I do think there's something slightly worrying about the anti-British rhetoric that seems to be permeating from America,” Boris Johnson, London's New York-born mayor, told the BBC on Thursday. “I do think that it starts to become a matter of national concern if a great British company is being continually beaten up on the international airwaves.

    "I would like to see a bit of cool heads and a bit of calm reflection about how to deal with this problem rather than endlessly buck passing and name calling."

    At London’s King’s Cross train station, Thelma Aengenheister echoed the mayor’s sentiments.

    “It’s easier for Obama to kick a British company than an American one; there will be fewer repercussions,” said the 80-year-old, who was on her way to Brussels. “It’s like kicking someone when they’re down. But I do feel for the people of Louisiana, it must be dreadful for them.”

    While making cappuccinos and lattes, coffee-stand owner Haroon admitted he was "worried" about the impact losing BP's dividend would potentially have on his pension plan.

    "A lot of pension funds will have invested in BP because of the dividend,” said the 34-year-old, who lives in south London.

    But despite fear over the value of their pensions, there is little sympathy for Tony Hayward, BP's gaffe-prone chief executive who has been criticized for his handling of the disaster.

    Kirsty Anthony, a 41-year-old teacher, said that she believed Hayward should be "sacked."

    “I’m worried about the wildlife and I think most British people think he should be held accountable; Obama would blame a U.S. company just the same,” Anthony added.

    Harsher treatment?
    However, some newspaper columnists have claimed that the language used against BP has been much harsher than the treatment of U.S. company ExxonMobil after the Exxon Valdez oil tanker sank off Alaska in 1989.

    Others have noted that when the North Sea oil rig Piper Alpha exploded in 1988, killing 167 people, then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher did not verbally attack its American owners.

    Some pundits even claim Obama has a deep-seated dislike for Britain.

    Stephen Glover, a columnist for the right-wing Daily Mail tabloid, wrote: "The president's public evisceration of BP cannot merely be explained by his feelings of impotence or his political predicament.

    "I don't wish to sound paranoid, but it is pretty clear that Mr Obama does not much like anything that is British. There is an anti-British undertow throughout his book 'Dreams From My Father', with slighting references to the country and its citizens."

    Glover suggested that Obama’s allegation that his grandfather was tortured by British authorities in Kenya in the 1950s “helped to shape his feelings about Britain.”

    He added that Obama displays “no affection for, or interest in, this country and its history,” and noted how upon entering the Oval Office, he immediately returned a bust of Winston Churchill that had been loaned to George W. Bush.

    However, that view didn't find much support on the streets of London.

    IT consultant Paul Titley said that blame for such an environmental catastrophe had to be placed somewhere.

    “I don’t think Americans dislike British people,” he said. “Thankfully, I don’t have money tied up in BP. I don’t have a pension. … I live for today.”