Search for Malaysian Plane Now Covers 4 Million Square Kilometers

Malaysian authorities say the search for a missing airliner has been expanded to cover over four million square kilometers.

Defense Minister Hishammuddin Hussein also Tuesday called for more international cooperation in helping narrow the search.

Authorities believe the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 was deliberately diverted and flew either north toward Central Asia or south toward the Indian Ocean.

Over 26 nations are involved in the effort to find the jet, which disappeared on March 8 en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

Authorities have refused to rule out any possibility, including terrorism, hijacking, or a mechanical malfunction.

  • A relative of Chinese passengers aboard the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 waits for a briefing at a hotel ballroom in Beijing, March 18, 2014.
Beijing on Tuesday said none of the plane's 154 Chinese passengers appear to have links to terrorism or hijacking.

Huang Huikang, China's ambassador to Malaysia, said extensive background checks were completed on the passengers from the mainland. "China has conducted a thorough investigation on the background [of Chinese passengers aboard]. So far, [China] has not found any actions that jeopardized Malaysia Airlines MH 370 flight. So we can rule out the possibilities of Chinese passengers suspected of being involved in any kind of terror or jeopardizing activities," he said.

The ambassador also said China has begun looking for the aircraft "in the territory along the northern corridor" of the search area.

Meanwhile, the New York Times is reporting the plane's intended route appears to have been altered by a computer system mostly likely programmed by someone in the cockpit with knowledge of advanced aircraft systems.

Speaking anonymously, U.S. officials told the Times the development reinforces the theory that foul play is involved and will likely increase scrutiny of the plane's pilot and co-pilot.

The search has been complicated because the plane's transponder, which identifies it to civilian radar, and other communications devices were disabled or shut off. Authorities are now forced to rely on imprecise satellite tracking data based on automated messages from the aircraft.

The search area is now so extensive that the U.S. on Monday called back the USS Kidd, a naval destroyer that had been looking for the plane in the Indian Ocean. U.S. officials say it makes more sense to look for the jet using long-range surveillance aircraft.

Putin Signs Treaty Making Crimea Part of Russia

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Crimean leaders signed a treaty Tuesday to make the Black Sea peninsula part of Russia, just two days after residents voted to secede from Ukraine in a referendum the United States and the European Union declared illegitimate.

Putin signed the document with Sergei Askyonov, the prime minister of Crimea's regional government, and other officials, including Aleksei Chalov, the mayor of the Crimean port city of Sevastopol, where Russia's Black Sea fleet is based.

The Kremlin said on its website that Crimea "shall be deemed accepted in the Russian Federation from the date of signing the treaty."

The treaty was signed shortly after Putin told Russia's parliament in a televised address that Crimea has always been an "inalienable" part of Russia, and a day after he signed a decree recognizing the peninsula as "a sovereign and independent country."

The Russian parliament is expected to begin the process of ratifying the treaty within days, the Itar-Tass news agency cited a senior lawmaker as saying.

"We will begin ratification soon. This will happen in the next few days,'' lower house vice-speaker Alexander Zhukov said.

The Black Sea peninsula voted to secede from Ukraine in a referendum Sunday that the U.S. and the European Union declared illegal.

But Putin said Tuesday that the referendum complied with democratic and international norms.

Crimean officials said the final ballot count showed 97 percent of voters favoring independence from Ukraine.

But senior White House officials told reporters they have concrete evidence that some ballots in the referendum were pre-marked when they arrived in cities before the vote.

Rising concern

Putin also declared Kyiv the cradle of Russian civilization and expressed hope Russia and Ukraine can continue to co-exist.

But with reports of several incursions by Russian or Russian-backed armed personnel in eastern Ukraine, outside of Crimea, there is rising concern throughout the country whether Russia will be satisfied with only annexing Crimea.

Ukrainian interim Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk says there is "convincing evidence" Russian special services are organizing unrest in the eastern part of the country.

"There are saboteurs who have been arrested," Yatsenyuk said. "There is no place in Ukraine for these warmongers."

Some Ukrainians tell VOA their families, even in the central part of the country, are stocking up on bread, water and medication, due to concerns tensions will escalate in the next several months amid worries there could be war.

Putin says Moscow has no designs on other parts of the former Soviet republic.

In 1954, Soviet President Nikita Khrushchev gifted the Crimean peninsula to the Ukrainian republic, then part of the USSR.

International reaction

Poland said on Tuesday that the international community cannot accept Russia's intervention in Crimea.

President Obama's Steps to Support Ukraine and Isolate Russia

  • Imposing sanctions on those responsible for undermining Ukraine's government and territorial integrity
  • Expanding scope of sanctions to include Russian officials
  • Continuing consultations with European partners, who imposed their own sanctions
  • Warned Russia that continued provocations in Crimea will result in further isolation
  • Sending US Vice President Joe Biden to Europe to meet with allies
  • President Obama traveling to Europe for talks next week
"Russia's annexation of Crimea can't be accepted by the international community including Poland. In one moment this changes the country's [Ukraine] borders and the geopolitical situation in this region of the world,'' Prime Minister Donald Tusk said at a joint news conference with U.S. Vice President Joe Biden.
       
Biden is in to Warsaw to reassure Poland, a NATO member, that it is safe in the face of events in Ukraine. The vice president will also meet with the leaders of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia.

​ 
President Obama imposed sanctions on the following people for undermining the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine:

  • Viktor Yanukovich, ousted president of Ukraine
  • Viktor Medvedchuck, former head of Ukraine's presidential administration
  • Sergei Aksyonov, Crimea's prime minister
  • Valentina Matviyenko, speaker of Russia's upper house of parliament
  • Dmitry Rogozin, deputy prime minister of Russia
  • Sergei Glazyev, Russian presidential advisor
  • Vladislav Surkov, Russian presidential aide
  • Yelena Mizulina, member of Russian parliament
  • Andrei Klishas, member of Russian parliament
  • Leonid Slutsky, member of Russian parliament
  • Vladimir Konstantinov, Crimean parliament speaker

Source: White House
U.S. President Barack Obama Monday declared a freeze on the assets of seven Russian officials and four Ukrainians who have supported Crimea's separation from Ukraine. He pledged "unwavering" support for Ukraine and said more sanctions on Russia are possible.

​"We'll continue to make clear to Russia that further provocations will achieve nothing except to further isolate Russia and diminish its place in the world," Obama said. "The international community will continue to stand together to oppose any violations of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, and continued Russian intervention in Ukraine will only deepen Russia's diplomatic isolation and exact a greater toll on the Russian economy."

​Earlier Monday, the European Union designated 21 officials from Russia and Ukraine for travel bans and trade sanctions.

In New York, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Monday voiced "deep disappointment" with Sunday's secession vote.

In Kyiv Sunday, Ukraine's interim Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk called the Moscow-backed Crimea vote "a circus spectacle" directed at gunpoint by Russia.

Ukraine not seeking NATO membership

Ukraine's new pro-Western leadership is not seeking membership of NATO, Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk said on Tuesday, in comments intended to reassure Russia and Ukraine's large number of Russian-

Opinion: Obama can't have it both ways on Crimea

Editor's note: Simon Tisdall is assistant editor and foreign affairs columnist at the Guardian. He was previously foreign editor of theGuardian and the Observer and served as White House correspondent and U.S. editor in Washington D.C. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely his.
London (CNN) -- Whatever U.S. and European leaders may say, it seems clear a majority of the residents of Crimea were only too happy to abandon Ukraine and join the Russian Federation. The referendum held there on Sunday was illegal according to Ukrainian constitutional law and took place under duress, following the large-scale incursion of "pro-Russian forces" -- and voters did not have the choice to say "no" to severing ties with Kiev.
But these failings aside, it appears plain that most of Crimea's population, with the exception of the Tatar minority and some ethnic Ukrainians, was content to return to what it regards as its ancestral home. The crucial turnout figures of up to 83% are suspect and may well be inflated. But independent reporting of enthusiastic celebrations suggested the overall outcome genuinely reflected popular wishes -- and was crudely democratic.
Simon Tisdall
Simon Tisdall
For this reason, it is unwise of U.S. President Barack Obama and his European counterparts to declare they will "never" recognize the Crimean result.
This crisis erupted when anti-Russian opposition forces in Kiev overthrew the country's democratically-elected president, Viktor Yanukovych. This action, too, was illegal under Ukraine's constitutional law and had little support in Crimea. But it was swiftly endorsed by Washington and in European capitals.
Now, faced by the pro-Russian opposition's rebound success in Crimea and a political result he does not like, Obama cries foul and refuses to accept the outcome. He cannot have it both ways.
Crimea votes to return to 'Motherland'
Crimea: The economics of independence
Russia: Crimea vote was legal
In his telephone conversation with Obama on Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin quoted the "Kosovo precedent," a reference to the recognition by the U.S. and several European states (but not Russia) of a 2008 declaration of independence by the provincial assembly in Pristina, even though Kosovo was then still a part of Serbia.
The unrepentant Russian president's slightly disingenuous question to Obama was: So what's the difference?
The right of self-determination of peoples is guaranteed under Chapter One of the U.N. Charter.
In South Sudan (which became independent in 2011), in East Timor, in Croatia and Montenegro and various other Balkan states, the U.S. and its allies have upheld and encouraged this principle. A similar process is currently underway in Scotland. If Catalonia enjoyed a similar freedom, it would quite possibly part company with Spain.
The answer given by Western governments when confronted with the "Kosovo precedent" is that each case is different and indeed, unique, and must therefore be treated on its separate merits. But this, too, is a slightly spurious argument, akin to the hypothesis which states that my invasion of a country (Iraq or Afghanistan, for example) is legally and morally justified, whereas your invasion is not.
In pragmatic as well as theoretical terms, it is a mistake to make of the assisted, hurried but essentially voluntary secession of Crimea a major issue of principle on which there can "never" be compromise. It will obscure the bigger picture. The key challenge for Obama and the EU is not the fate of Crimea per se, but what its destabilising departure implies for the future of Ukraine as a whole and for the wider region.
The sanctions and other punishments now being prepared for Russia in Washington and Brussels should pivot on what Moscow does or does not do next, most especially in the cities of eastern Ukraine where additional, large ethnic Russian populations live but so too do many non-Russian Ukrainians. This pre-emptive policy should also apply to Moldova (which has a breakaway, pro-Russian region known as Transnistria), to the Baltic states, and to Georgia, where Putin might be tempted to intrude again.


That means going much further, and acting much tougher, than the rather feeble travel and visa bans now being discussed will allow. An Iran-style sanctions regime blocking energy exports, investment, banking and other mainstream business and commercial activities such as arms sales would be more appropriate. So, too, would be direct U.S. and European military assistance to Kiev, as proposed by Senator John McCain.Whether Putin has absolutely contravened this principle in Crimea may be open to debate. But eastern Ukraine, with its mixed populations, heritage and loyalties, is a different matter altogether -- which even China, which did not support Moscow at the U.N., understands. If an emboldened Putin now makes the mistake of thinking he can extend his modern-day form of rolling Anschluss into these areas, he must be knocked back very hard indeed.
Judging by his behaviour in Chechnya and elsewhere since he first became Russia's prime minister in 1999, Putin is a bully with a massive inferiority complex who responds to strength, not weakness. When Obama stresses that diplomatic solutions can still be found, as he did on Sunday, Putin reads that as fear. You can almost hear the snigger.

The only way to stop this strutting menace, if he continues to over-reach, is to frighten him right back -- and if necessary, help create the conditions inside Russia in which he and his ugly, reactionary regime are brought down.

After Crimea, will Scotland be next to vote on independence?

London (CNN) -- Exactly six months from now, Scots will go to the polls to vote on the future of their country.
It's a vote that could end Scotland's 300-year union with England and Wales as Great Britain -- and see it launch into the world as an independent nation of some 5.3 million people.
Russian lawmakers have drawn a parallel between Scotland's vote and the referendum held in Ukraine's Crimea region Sunday.
But any such comparison is disingenuous: The referendum in Scotland is being held with the consent of the UK government, it will be internationally recognized, and Scotland's people have had years to consider what is a genuine choice.
By contrast, the referendum held in Crimea was illegal under Ukrainian constitutional law and took place under duress, only days after armed "pro-Russian forces" took effective control of the peninsula. Voters also did not have the option of saying "no" to cutting ties with Kiev.
What are the Scottish voting on, and why?
Scottish independence: Euro or pound?
Scotland's rocky relationship with England
On September 18, voters will be presented with a simple yes/no question: Should Scotland be an independent country?
The Scottish government, led by the Scottish National Party, says this is a "once in a generation opportunity" for Scotland's people to take control of the decisions that affect them most. A "yes" vote means that "Scotland's future will be in Scotland's hands," it says, and that life will be better and fairer for its people.
British Prime Minister David Cameron wants Scotland to remain part of an undivided United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. He says that it is a decision solely for the Scottish people -- but that remaining part of the United Kingdom will give them security and strength. "There will be no going back," he warns.
Because the United Kingdom has no written constitution, there's no established law to govern the process. So these are truly uncharted waters.
What's the history behind this?
Scotland has long had a testy relationship with its more populous neighbor. The Act of Union in 1707 joined the kingdom of Scotland with England and Wales, but many Scots were unhappy at being yoked to their longtime rival south of the border.
Since 1999, Scotland has had devolved government, meaning many, but not all, decisions are made at the Scottish Parliament in Holyrood, Edinburgh. In May 2011, the nationalist Scottish National Party, which had campaigned on a promise to hold an independence referendum, surprised many by winning an outright majority in the Scottish Parliament.
In October 2012, the UK and Scottish governments agreed that the referendum would be held, and the question to be put to voters was agreed on early last year.
Dauvit Broun, a professor of Scottish history at the University of Glasgow, says one driving force for the vote is the widening gulf between the policies pursued by the coalition UK government in Westminster, led by the Conservative Party under Cameron since 2010, and what the Scottish people want.
Many Scots are strongly opposed to the current Westminster government's attempts to reform -- or in their eyes dismantle -- the welfare state. Illustrating that sentiment, there's only one Conservative MP in Scotland at present.
"Since the period of Margaret Thatcher, there has been a growing divide, and a sense that what Scotland feels consensus about ... has become more and more different to England," Broun says.
Looking further back, Scotland and England have been growing apart since the demise of the British Empire, Broun says. The decline of the Presbyterian church in Scotland, which provided a sense of self-government and Scottish identity, has also played a part in fueling the desire for independence, he says.
Who can vote?
Thanks to a bill passed last year extending the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds, essentially everyone living in Scotland who is 16 or older on the date of the referendum will be able to vote.
This means English or Welsh citizens who reside in Scotland can take part. But Scots who are living elsewhere in the United Kingdom or overseas will not be entitled to cast a ballot.
It also means that the residents of England, Wales and Northern Ireland get no vote on a historic change to the makeup of the United Kingdom.
What currency would Scotland have if it leaves?
This is another big but unresolved question. Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National Party, has said he wants Scotland to continue to use the pound in a currency union with the rest of the United Kingdom.
But the three main parties in Westminster -- David Cameron's Conservatives, their coalition partners the Liberal Democrats, and Labour -- have all said this won't be an option. The Scottish government responded that this was "bullying" from Westminster.
A Treasury briefing paper last month warned that "currency unions between sovereign states are fraught with difficulty" and advised strongly against entering into one with Scotland, citing uncertainty and the risk of insolvency as factors.
Despite this, Scotland could decide to use sterling unofficially, Broun says. Also unclear is what would happen to Scotland's share of UK debt if it's not part of a currency union, he adds.
"The UK government doesn't want to talk about something they don't want to happen, but as a result they've created uncertainty," Broun says.
Would an independent Scotland be part of the European Union?
It's still not clear how an independent Scotland would fit into the European Union. It's an important issue because EU membership brings economic benefits, as well as greater global clout.
Panos Koutrakos, a professor of European law at City University London, says Scotland sees EU membership as indispensable, even as Cameron has promised a UK-wide referendum on the question if he's re-elected next year.
By leaving the United Kingdom, Scotland would have to renegotiate its membership in the 28-nation bloc. The big questions are: How would this be done, and how long might it take?
The heads of the European Commission and European Council, Jose Manuel Barroso and Herman Van Rompuy, have said Scotland would have to apply for membership in the same way as any other independent state. This "hard position" means Scotland would have to negotiate an accession agreement with all the existing EU members, Koutrakos said.
The Scottish government says that since it's already a member as part of the UK, and abides by EU laws, it could join through an amendment to existing treaties -- a quicker and potentially easier route. The Scottish government says this could be achieved within 18 months of a vote for independence.
Could an independent Scotland pay its bills?
The Scottish government argues the country would be better off after independence, largely based on its taking control of revenues from North Sea oil and gas found in Scottish waters.
Salmond said this month that new government figures show the underlying strength of the Scottish economy. "Over the last five-year period, Scotland would've been £8 billion better off standing on its own two feet than as part of the United Kingdom," he said. "That's about £1,600 for every man, woman and child in the country."
The Scottish government says it would manage the energy industry better, invest to boost production, and create a wealth fund, similar to Norway's oil fund, to benefit future generations.
But not everyone agrees with the Scottish government's rosy assessment.
report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies this month said the latest figures showed Scotland's budget deficit had worsened relative to the rest of the United Kingdom, thanks to falling North Sea revenues and higher public spending north of the border.
The IFS warns of the dangers of relying too heavily on a volatile and ultimately finite income source. "In planning for independence, the Scottish Government should be cautious in its fiscal assessment, and avoid building its budget on the back of optimistic forecasts for North Sea revenues," it said.
The Scottish government says the economy is diverse, with other key elements including food and drink, tourism, creative industries, universities, financial services and manufacturing.
What happens if Scotland votes 'yes' to independence?
A "yes" vote would mean Scotland splits from the rest of the United Kingdom -- that is, England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The Scottish government anticipates it would become formally independent in March 2016, ahead of elections in May of that year.
Once it's independent, it says, tax and social security rates will be set in line with the wishes of the people of Scotland. Decisions will no longer be imposed by parties in Westminster.
Scotland already has an independent legal system and education system. Post-independence, changes to the law would be agreed to in the Scottish Parliament.
The Scottish government says it wants to remove nuclear weapons from Scotland as soon as possible -- namely, the UK Trident nuclear submarine fleet based at Faslane. It cites different priorities for spending, such as social programs.
What would it mean for visitors?
Tourism is big business for Scotland -- and the Scottish government won't want to lose out post-independence.
But what would it mean for the tourists for so long drawn to Scotland's legendary offerings -- from its castles, lochs and misty moorlands, to its whisky distilleries, Edinburgh's stately architecture and Glasgow's vibrant urban scene?
It's unclear if the uncertainty over Scotland's future currency will discourage visitors from crossing from England.
The Scottish government intends to set its own immigration policy after independence. It has said it envisages "free movement across the border between Scotland and England" for UK citizens, in the same way as they can travel freely to Ireland. But its border controls will depend in part on its accession to the European Union.
The Scottish government says it plans to cut air passenger duty, making it cheaper for international travelers to fly into Scottish airports.
It's not just tourists who may be eyeing potential changes to immigration policy. More than 30,000 international students from more than 150 countries study at institutions in Scotland.
What's the mood?
Opinion polls suggest campaigners for a "yes" vote still have some way to go. A YouGov poll in February found that 52% of those surveyed would say "no" to Scottish independence while 34% would say "yes," up one point from the previous month.
South of the border, opposition to Scotland leaving the union seems to be strengthening, according to nonpartisan research group What Scotland Thinks. Polls conducted in the past month in England and Wales, for the Sunday Times and Observer newspapers, found only a fifth of those surveyed were in favor of Scottish independence, with just over 60% opposed.
Cameron says the loss of Scotland would leave the United Kingdom "deeply diminished." While only 4 million people will vote, he says, the result will impact 63 million within the United Kingdom.
It's not just the politicians who are getting involved. Singer David Bowie, in a Brit Awards acceptance speech last month delivered by supermodel Kate Moss, pleaded, "Scotland, stay with us."
Former Manchester United football club manager Alex Ferguson also opposes a split and has backed the "Better Together" campaign. "800,000 Scots, like me, live and work in other parts of the United Kingdom. We don't live in a foreign country; we are just in another part of the family of the UK," he is quoted as saying.
The "Yes" campaign also has some celebrity backers -- including former James Bond actor Sean Connery and comedian Frankie Boyle.

Connery, who can't vote in the referendum since he lives outside Scotland, wrote in the New Statesman that "the opportunity of independence is too good to miss."

مايكروسوفت تتكبد خسائر بالمليارات

كشفت شركة مايكروسوفت الأميركية العملاقة عن تكبدها خسائر بقيمة 6.2 مليارات دولار، نتيجة صفقة الاستحواذ على شركة الإعلانات عبر الإنترنت (أي كوانتيف).

وبينت مايكروسوفت أن الخسائر جاءت نتيجة التخفيض الاختياري لقيمة شركة أي كوانتيف، وحقيقة أن احتمالات النمو والربحية بالنسبة لشركة 

خدمات الإنترنت أقل من المتوقع.