Politicians warned of being 'on wrong side of history' as anger swells about state of nation and World Cup extravagance

As demonstrations continued in Brazil for another night, President Dilma Rousseff attempted to co-ordinate a government response among senior officials who have been stunned by the scale of protests.

Keeping the pressure on the authorities, an estimated 50,000 people flooded Cathedral Square and other main streets in São Paulo for the second night running and rallies were reported in two other cities.

This followed Monday night's demonstrations in at least a dozen cities, which drew a quarter of a million people on to the streets. 

Initially driven by opposition to a bus price hike, the marches have rapidly swollen to incorporate a range of grievances, including police brutality, inequality, corruption, dire public services and the extravagent preparations for next year's World Cup.

Faced by the biggest show of public frustration in more than 20 years, officials are struggling to grasp what is happening.

"It would be pretentious to say we understand what's going on," Gilberto Carvalho, Rousseff's secretary general, told a congressional hearing. "If we are not sensitive we'll be caught on the wrong side of history."

After bloody clashes on the streets last week, when police fired rubber bullets at demonstrators and journalists, Rousseff moved on Tuesday to placate the protestors. 

"The voices of the street want more citizenship, health, transport, opportunities," said the president, who cut her political teeth in the 1960s as a Marxist guerrilla opposed to the military dictatorship. "My government wants to broaden access to education and health, understands that the demands of the people change." 

Rousseff ? who faces re-election next year ? also convened a series of high-level meetings on Tuesday with her predecessor, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, and regional governors from São Paulo, RIo de Janeiro and Rio Grade de Sul. 

According to the domestic media, she particularly praised the restraint of the police in São Paulo during Monday night's demonstrations ? which was in marked contrast to the violence of their response the previous week. She is also reportedly pushing for a reduction of bus fares.

But with more protests planned in the coming days regional leaders are nervous. The governor of Minas Gerais, Antonio Anastasia, has asked the state to provide personnel from the National Force to strengthen public security in the face of the unrest. The government has agreed to dispatch 150 personnel, according to the Folha de São Paulo website.

Lucio Flavio Rodrigues de Almeida, a sociology professor at the Catholic University of São Paulo, said the authorities had so far responded only with repressive actions against protests that had morphed in character and size and were being organised by an amorphous social network rather than political parties.

"The strong repression, especially in São Paulo, increased the strength and sympathy for a protest movement that has successfully compared the spending on infrastructure for the Confederations Cup and the World Cup with small investments in public transportation," he said.

The vast majority of the protesters have been peaceful and many reported feeling elated at the mass and spontaneous movement to shake the government into action. On Tuesday marchers bore banners that called for reform, exclaimed "Dilma Out" and demanded an end of corruption.

One group attempted to break into the city hall, prompting police to use pepper spray to block their passage. Other demonstrators formed a human chain to hold back the attackers, chanting: "No violence!"

Television coverage of the protests ? the sixth in São Paulo ? showed a shop being looted and fires burning in the city centre. A TV van was overturned and set on fire and public transport was temporarily disrupted when protesters occupied and damaged a station control room and threw stones at a train.

Police said four people had been arrested in connection to the thefts of merchandise. It stressed that these were "isolated incidents caused by a small minority".

Crowds also gathered on Tuesday in Florianópolis, the Rio de Janeiro suburb of Sao Goncalo, and in Maringá, in northern Paraná state. Solidarity protests have been staged in several European countries including Britain, Portugal, Spain and Denmark.

Brazilian football players taking part in the Confederations Cup expressed support for the demonstrations. The Chelsea defender David Luiz said it was natural for people to express their opinion, while the midfielder Givanildo Vieira de Souza, known as Hulk, said the protesters were trying to improve things in the country.

"I come from the bottom of the social ladder and now I have a good life. I see these demonstrators and I know that they are right," Hulk told a press conference in Fortaleza. "We know that Brazil needs to improve in many areas and must let the demonstrators express themselves."

Bigger demonstrations are planned for Thursday in Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and a wider number of municipalities than anything seen so far.

Additional reporting by Marcela Bial. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

President accuses Washington of 'inconsistent statements and actions' with regard to bilateral security agreement

Afghanistan's president, Hamid Karzai, has suspended talks on a long-term security deal to keep US troops in his country after Nato leaves in 2014, accusing Washington of duplicity in its efforts to start peace talks with the Taliban.

The announcement came the day after the Taliban opened a "political office" in Qatar, saying they wanted to seek a peaceful solution to the war in Afghanistan, and the US announced plans for talks with the insurgent group.

News that American diplomats would sit down with Taliban leaders for the first time since the US helped oust the group from power in 2001 prompted speculation that real progress towards a negotiated end to the war might be in sight.

US officials underlined that they aimed mostly to facilitate talks between Afghans, although they do have issues to tackle directly with the Taliban, including a possible prisoner exchange.

But while the Taliban hinted at meeting US demands of a break with al-Qaida ? saying Afghan soil should not be used to harm other countries ? there was only the barest of nods to the Afghan government's request that they talk to the current administration and respect the constitution.

Diplomats say Karzai was kept in the loop about plans for the formal opening of a Taliban office in Qatar, but had expected it to be couched differently. After hours of ominous silence, his office issued a terse statement in effect condemning the move.

"In view of the contradiction between acts and the statements made by the United States of America in regard to the peace process, the Afghan government suspended the negotiations, currently under way in Kabul between Afghan and US delegations on the bilateral security agreement," the palace said.

The final straw for Karzai was their display of a white Taliban flag and repeated use of the name "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan", both in their statement and on a printed backdrop used for a televised press conference, according a senior Afghan official.

It was the name the group used when they ruled from Kabul, and together with their official flag gave the group's representatives the air of a government-in-exile as they addressed the media.

The US had pledged the Taliban would only be able to use the office as base for talks, not as a political platform, and Karzai felt the press conference was a clear violation of that promise, an official Afghan source told the Guardian.

The president was also unhappy about the lack of any reference to the country's constitution, which both he and the US say the Taliban must respect.

Instead the statement made more than one reference to the "establishment of an independent Islamic government"; as the group have often denounced Karzai as a puppet, that could be read as a call for a change of leader or change of system.

The decision to suspend talks was made after a meeting on Wednesday morning with his national security team and close aides, a source said.

The Afghan government's anger is a blow to hopes that the country's warring factions could be taking the first real steps towards peace; despite US cash and military might, 12 years of fighting have shown it cannot secure the country alone.

In another reminder of the fragile situation in Afghanistan, the Taliban claimed responsibility on Wednesday for an attack on Bagram air base that killed four American troops.

A Taliban spokesman said insurgents had fired two rockets into the base outside the Afghan capital, Kabul, late on Tuesday. US officials confirmed the base had come under attack by mortar or rocket and four troops had been killed.

Karzai has long been a strong advocate of peace talks and cautiously welcomed the idea of a base in Doha, while pushing hard for any negotiations to move to Afghanistan as fast as possible.

But he has also drawn clear red lines, one of them being that the Taliban office first mooted in 2011 should not be used as a base for fundraising or building diplomatic relationships.

A source at the High Peace Council, a body created by Karzai to lead government negotiation efforts, said it was still planning to send a delegation to Qatar, but it was unclear when; and without the support of the Afghan government there is little hope it can make much progress.

British hopeful that peace talks to end civil war can go ahead, but divided Syrian opposition remains a big stumbling block

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, is willing to see the removal of the Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, but only if it leads to a balanced government and not a dangerous power vacuum of the kind that followed Saddam Hussein's removal in Iraq, British officials believe after two days of intensive talks at the G8 summit.

Putin blocked any reference in the subsequent communique to the removal of Assad, but British officials believe the talks have opened the way for a peace settlement if more can be done to organise the Syrian opposition forces politically and militarily.

Talks over the terms of the communique lasted until 3am. The Russians accepted the need for UN weapons inspectors to visit Syria to check on western claims that Assad has used chemical weapons.

But Putin flatly refused to have any reference in the communiqué to the nature of delegations that should be sent to the planned Geneva peace conference, insisting that this was a matter for both sides.

British officials insisted that in private Putin had declared no personal allegiance to Assad, but needed assurances that Syria would not turn into an ungoverned space on Russia's borders if he were removed. David Cameron in his press conference at the end of the summit made repeated calls for Assad's allies to realise that a strong army and security state would be preserved during a transition, words designed to reassure them that they would have a future after Assad.

British officials admitted that the Syrian opposition was still a work in progress. They had been unable to agree a negotiating mandate for a new peace conference.

The G8 communique made no reference to Assad, but called for peace talks to be resumed as soon as possible. Cameron said the main breakthrough was an agreement that a transitional government with executive powers was needed, together with a deal to call for an investigation into chemical weapons use. "We remain committed to achieving a political solution to the crisis based on a vision for a united, inclusive and democratic Syria," the final communique read. "We strongly endorse the decision to hold as soon as possible the Geneva conference on Syria."

Putin struck a defiant tone in public, telling the west that sending weapons to rebels could backfire one day, while he defended his own military contacts with the Syrian government.

"There are different types of supplies. We supply weapons based on legal contracts to a legal government ? And if we sign these contracts [in the future], we will supply [more arms]."

In the final document, G8 leaders also called on the Syrian authorities and the opposition to commit to destroying all organisations affiliated with al-Qaida, a reflection of growing concern in the west that Islamist militants are playing a more dominant role in the rebel ranks.

Cameron, who chaired the summit, said separately after the talks that the west believed strongly that there was no place for Assad in a future Syria. "It is unthinkable that President Assad can play any part in the future of his country. He has blood on his hands. You can't imagine a Syria where this man continues to rule having done such awful things to his people."

He appealed to Assad's acolytes to abandon the president, insisting the need for the retention of a strong security force showed they would have a future role in Syria. He said the aim was "to learn the lessons of Iraq by ensuring the key institutions of the state are maintained through the transition and there is no vacuum. To those who have been loyal to Assad but who know he has to go and who want stability in their country, they should take note of this point."

In the house of Commons, John Bercow, the speaker, said it would be "undemocratic and inappropriate" if the government declined to hold a full parliamentary vote if ministers decide to arm the Syrian opposition. The speaker issued his warning after William Hague told MPs that the government would consult parliament but declined to explain the nature of the vote.

Bercow told the former Labour minister Peter Hain, who raised the matter on a point of order: "I have the sense that the government are hinting that they would not dream of executing a policy decision of the kind that is being considered without first seeking a debate in the house and a vote on a substantive motion. That would obviously be the democratic course. I think it is the democratic course on a substantive motion that the government have in mind. I am not sure that there was any other idea ever in their mind, but I feel sure that if it was in their mind, it was speedily expunged as undemocratic and inappropriate."

Russia's deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, speaking on the sidelines, said earlier that any debate about Assad's role in the resolution of the conflict was unthinkable, adding he would not tolerate an outcome that led to Assad's capitulation. "This would be not just unacceptable for the Russian side, but we are convinced that it would be utterly wrong, harmful and would completely upset the political balance," Ryabkov said.

In a further development, the French president, François Hollande, opened the door to Iran attending a Syria peace conference, but reiterated that there was no future for Assad.

Paris had previously ruled out Iran taking part in the proposed conference, saying Tehran had no desire for peace, but a new Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, was elected on Friday.

"There will no future for Syria with Assad. The Russians are not yet ready to say or write it, but when we speak of transition ... it's difficult to see how he (Assad) could be responsible for it," Hollande said.British officials said they did not rule out Iran attending talks, but needed to know more about the new president and what he would do about the Iranian-backed Hezbollah forces in Syria.

Treasury ordered to lift sanctions against Bank Mellat, as critics warn open justice and rule of law are casualties of secret courts

The government's enthusiasm for secret courts has been set back after the UK's most senior judges quashed anti-terrorist sanctions imposed on an Iranian bank and dismissed the intelligence involved as insignificant.

In two related judgments, the supreme court ordered the Treasury to remove sanctions against Bank Mellat and said that in future, appeal courts should go into closed session "only where it has been convincingly demonstrated to be genuinely necessary in the interests of justice".

The Tehran-based bank has been fighting to have the sanctions lifted since 2009. The UK Treasury alleged that the bank had financed firms involved in Iran's nuclear weapons programme.

In order to justify the allegations, the Treasury asked the supreme court to go into a secret session for the first time this spring.

In the first judgment, read out by Lord Neuberger, the president of the supreme court, the justices said: "Having held a closed hearing, it turned out that there had been no point in the supreme court seeing the closed judgment [which related to the secret intelligence], because there was nothing in it which could have affected [our] reasoning in relation to the substantive appeal.

"A [closed hearing] should be resorted to only where it has been convincingly demonstrated to be genuinely necessary in the interests of justice. If the court strongly suspects that nothing in the closed material is likely to affect the outcome of the appeal, it should not order a closed hearing."

Liberty intervened in the case. Corinna Ferguson, legal officer for the human rights group, said: "Proud principles of open justice and the rule of law are the casualties as the secret justice disease infects the highest court in the land. Today's chilling judgment brutally exposes the government's claims and lays bare its willingness to overstate the importance of secrecy to serve its own ends.

"Given recent revelations of spying and snooping it really does seem that it's one rule for the state, another for everyone else ? no scrutiny for them; no privacy for us."

Sarosh Zaiwalla, of Zaiwalla & Co Solicitors, who represented Bank Mellat said: "Today's ruling is a victory for the rule of law as much as it is for Bank Mellat. The judgment will put enormous confidence in the independence of the British Judiciary and sets an example that even controversial disputes can be resolved by applying the principle of rule of law through the British courts." Bank Mellat had has always denied supporting Iran's nuclear weapons programme.

Campaign shines light on political disenchantment with slogan: 'Tired of voting for rats? Vote for a cat'

It started as a joke between friends, but Morris the cat's bid to become mayor of the Mexican city of Jalapa, the capital of the state of Veracruz, has now turned into a social media phenomenon with a serious message about political disenchantment.

"Morris has become an expression of how fed up people are with all the parties and a political system that does not represent us," said Sergio Chamorro, the owner of the black-and-white furry candidate whose first campaign slogan was: "Tired of voting for rats? Vote for a cat."

The Facebook page for the "Candigato" (gato means cat in Spanish) now has more than 130,000 "likes" ? far more than those accrued by any of the candidates registered to stand in the Jalapa election to be held on 7 July, at the same time as local polls in about half the country. It tops those of Veracruz's governor as well.

Both Morris's Facebook page and website are filled with artwork, videos and slogans sent in by supporters from all over Mexico and beyond. Spin-off Twitter accounts have sprouted too, beyond the control of Chamorro and the small group of thirtysomething professionals running Morris's campaign since his popularity took off earlier this month.

"The truth is that Morris no longer belongs to us. He belongs to his fans," said Chamorro, who said he had even received messages from citizens designated to run the polling stations on election day describing their plans for ensuring the cat's votes are registered and made public, even if they do not officially count.

Morris has also inspired a number of other animal candidates in other Mexican cities including a donkey in Ciudad Juárez, a dog in Oaxaca and a chicken in Tepic. None have become as popular as the cat, which appears to be genuinely worrying politicians and the authorities.

The head of the Veracruz electoral institute, which organises elections in the state, has urged the electorate not to waste its vote by spoiling ballots with support for the cat. "It is important to vote for the registered candidates," Carolina Viveros said. "Please."

The cat's success also prompted the well-known columnist Julio Hernández to claim Morris's candidacy was a front for an effort by the incumbent Institutional Revolutionary party to draw votes away from genuine alternative electoral options. Morris's team insist that their point is precisely that they don't care who wins.

And beyond the election? The current plan is to put the cat's future public role to a vote of his facebook friends.

Its heart is in the right place but this account of Anglicanism's past is full of Victorian cliches and misrepresentations

I begin this review with a declaration of interest. Roger Scruton and I are rather alike. When very young, we watched our present queen's coronation on small black-and-white televisions, our first experience of the medium. We are both church organists, both distrust confident religious dogma and clerical pretensions, both love the Church of England in a grumpy fashion, and we have both been known to cultivate a fogeyish image on occasion.

Because of these congruities, I find Scruton's latest book, a paean to Anglicanism, deeply irritating and unsatisfactory. It attempts to disarm criticism by styling itself "a personal history"; but that's no substitute for real history. Instead of history, it provides a catalogue of Victorian cliches and misrepresentations, from "the church of the catacombs" through to an Anglo-Saxon church proudly independent of Rome to a Thomas Cranmer influenced by John Calvin, and beyond. A similar historical farrago of half-truths and wishful thinking helped convert TS Eliot to high church Anglicanism in the 1920s, so there's one brownie point for it, but as an account of the English past, it won't wash. Over four decades of teaching undergraduates, I have been fortunate rarely to read an essay on church history this bad: it's Sellar and Yeatman without the jokes. This is a common problem with philosophers. I will not weary the reader by cataloguing howlers and solecisms, but would be pleased to furnish a list to Prof Scruton, should he so desire.

A fundamental problem is that he persistently refers to "the Anglican church" throughout his account of its history since 1533, with a further implication that even before that, Anglicanism had always been sitting in the cupboard under the stairs, waiting for the pope to go away. Augustine of Canterbury, sent by Pope Gregory in 597 to establish Roman authority in the old imperial provinces of Britannia, would have been puzzled to learn that his mission had created such a body.

A millennium after Augustine, during the 16th-century reformation, we still couldn't talk about "Anglicanism" ? only about the Church of England. Anglicanism really didn't take shape until some determined reconstruction in 1660-62. Previously, it was a "reformed" Protestant church of the European reformation ? "reformed", technically, because it wasn't Lutheran ? and it looked much to the reformed church in Zurich, a city that doesn't get a mention in Scruton's account, though Geneva does, excessively. The Tudor C of E lacked qualities Scruton admires: tolerance and an embrace of the "middle way". Its bishops ordered images and stained glass to be smashed, a regrettable vandalism that Scruton attributes to some vaguely characterised fanatical thugs called "Puritans". Tudor and Stuart England executed more Roman Catholics than any other Protestant church in Europe, and burned Anabaptists too, besides later dispatching quite a few Scottish Covenanters. The English church was not a "middle way" between the pope and Protestantism, because, as its leaders would brutally have made clear to Scruton, you can't have a middle way between the Antichrist and truth.

There was one big difference, nevertheless, between this reformed church and others in the Netherlands, Scotland, Switzerland, Geneva and Hungary: it kept cathedrals, with virtually all their medieval institutions, especially choirs and organs, and a regular daily round of solemnly performed services to which Archbishop Cranmer's Prayer Book accidentally lent itself. The cathedrals and their continuing life threw a spanner in the works of English reformed Protestantism, directly confronting many of its cherished beliefs. Members of the church who logically enough objected to this anomaly were given that abusive label "Puritans", and in the end, their fury led to the beheading of Charles I in 1649, having already prompted the abolition of cathedrals and their bishops. Killing a king was a step too far, and so the English upper classes meekly acquiesced to bringing back crown and mitre in 1660. This restored church constructed a new myth of itself as a middle way of moderation, which was a facade for a great deal more persecution, until it realised reluctantly that it would never enjoy a monopoly on English Protestantism, and would have to tolerate competitors.

Only then, and only gradually, did the C of E really become the nuanced, slightly apologetic institution that Scruton, with justice, admires. It has evolved into a church of irreconcilable paradox, where, particularly after the 19th-century Oxford movement, people kneel at the altar rail next to each other and believe completely contradictory things about the bread and wine they are receiving. This profound clash renders trivial the present disagreements in the Anglican communion about sexuality. That seems to me one of the most hopeful things about Anglicanism: it is an arena for paradox. No false claims of clerical authority or spurious logical consistency will ever make its understanding of religion into a neat range of solutions. Yet it has a firm grip on the past: it sees that Christianity is a religion of stories, layer on layer, right back to Christ's apostles. On that, Scruton and I would probably agree, even if we drew different conclusions from such propositions. We would both commend its established status, though for different reasons. Mine include the observation that interestingly many English Muslim, Hindu and Jewish leaders approve of the Anglican establishment, though I can quite understand why other English Christians don't. Roman Catholics and Free Church people alike might appreciate the spoof letterhead I was once sent: "The Church of England: Loving Jesus with a Slight Air of Superiority Since 597." That rather embodies Scruton's account of "Anglican" history.

All this may seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel, and it has to be said that lurking behind Scruton's "597 and All That" there is a delicate essay on belief in the modern world that says sensible things about the nature of sacrifice. Scruton provides a rather moving and perhaps unintentionally revealing memoir of his youthful struggle towards Anglicanism. When he genuinely knows about something, other rewards appear: some enjoyably sensitive pages on the feel of a country church, church architecture generally, and some mostly accurate discussion of church music. The why-oh-why Daily Mailery is mostly postponed to the brief conclusion, and we do not encounter that chimera of rightwing journalism "political correctness" until late on.

But it would be nice if Scruton knew more about the Church of England for which he has such affection. He seems to take seriously the Anglican ordinariate, an expensive damp squib created by Pope Benedict XVI to attract conservative Anglicans, so far with very little success, and his knowledge of the Episcopal church (the Anglican church of the US) seems confined to the sniping from small splinter groups that have left it ? the Tea Party at prayer. Above all, the great puzzle of this book is that it hardly mentions the cathedrals, which are the great success story of the modern established church, their congregations growing and their fabrics better cared for than ever before. Perhaps a bit more church-crawling is called for?

? Diarmaid MacCulloch's Silence: A Christian History is published by Allen Lane.

Star plumps for tale of father's search for missing sons in wake of ill-fated battle of Gallipoli as first behind-camera project

Russell Crowe is to make his directing debut on the post-first world war drama The Water Diviner, reports Deadline.

Crowe has picked the project, based on a screenplay by Andrew Knight and Andrew Anastasios, from a number of Australia-themed options.

The Water Diviner focuses on a father from New Zealand-born Crowe's adopted homeland who travels to Turkey in 1919. There, he hopes to discover what has happened to his two sons, both of whom have gone missing following the battle for Gallipoli. The failed 1915-16 Allied campaign, which incorporated troops from Australia and New Zealand, aimed to knock Turkey out of the war.

Other projects considered by Crowe for his first film behind the camera have included The Long Green Shore, about a group of Australian soldiers fighting an obscure battle in a jungle in New Guinea during the second world war, and a drama about the notorious Sydney surf gang dubbed the Bra Boys. Neither has yet seen the light of day; the latter should not be confused with the 2007 documentary Bra Boys, which Crowe narrated.

There are as yet no cast details for The Water Diviner, and it is not clear whether Crowe would take an acting part, although the role of the father would appear perfect for him.

The Taliban's establishment of a negotiating team is welcome, but don't expect their 'talk and fight' strategy to end anytime soon

The Taliban announcement that they are going ahead with opening their political office in Qatar, as a base from which they can dialogue with all and sundry, is an important development. It is also one which has been a long time in coming. No one should underestimate the amount of diplomatic effort which has gone into making this happen.

The Karzai-Obama declaration in January, the Brown-Karzai-Zardari Chequers summit in February and the Kerry-Karzai-Kayani meeting in Brussels in April have all focused on getting the Taliban back to the negotiating table ? from which they walked away in March last year. In the end, the formula was quite simple. The Taliban declared they they would not want anyone else to use the soil of Afghanistan to hurt another country. For the moment, the US team seems happy to read this as code for "we shall not let international terrorists back in."

It does not embarrass the Taliban, as they can tell their friends they were really referring to US drones launched against targets in Pakistan. The Taliban also gave a bullet-pointed list of what they want to do with their office, which includes talking to other countries, Afghans, regional organisations, the United Nations and NGOs.

The important item in this list is the one where they say they will talk to "Afghans". Since January of this year, President Karzai has demanded that the Taliban office should only go ahead if the Taliban agree to move quickly to negotiating with his representatives. The Taliban have now provided themselves with a political cover to meet with the Kabul government team ? under the anodyne heading of "Afghans". In principle, the Taliban can start by meeting a US delegation, agree some confidence building measures, firm up the commitment to cut ties with al-Qaida, and then get round to talking with the Afghan government and address a political settlement and end hostilities.

Of course, no one should expect things to go so smoothly.

The Taliban have explicitly made their announcement in the name of the Islamic Emirate, which is how they referred to their pre-2001 government. To all Afghans, that sounds like a bid for restoration of Taliban rule.

It remains to be seen whether the Taliban just use their office to project the image of a government in waiting or whether in the dialogue they pursue a compromise with non-Taliban Afghans. Despite the widespread desire for peace, many residents of Kabul are for the moment highly sceptical of Taliban intentions.

But the Taliban will face dilemmas of their own. Hardliners in the movement still think that they should fight on and try to grab power once Nato leaves in 2014. Fighters, who have not been consulted at all in this process, wonder why they should make sacrifices while the leadership seems to be cutting a deal with the enemy.

Moreover, the Taliban's claims to be fighting to end foreign occupation become less credible (to Afghans) as Nato continues its handover of security and prepares to leave. For the moment, the Taliban leadership expects to be able to talk and fight. But they will find it increasingly difficult to justify and thus sustain the fighting part of that strategy.

For the present, the grim reality is that the killing continues. This was also another day of deadly attacks in Kabul, including an assassination bid on a major opposition leader, Ustad Mohaqiq. The Taliban did not give a public commitment to end violence as part of the price for this office. But the Taliban will soon find that the dialogue goes nowhere unless they give a commitment to stop shedding Afghan blood.

After weeks of market volatility and speculation, Ben Bernanke will explain tonight whether the Fed is close to slowing its stimulus programme

Tibetans required to register for internet and mobile phones under real names

China has completed a monitoring scheme in restive Tibet that requires all telephone and internet users to register under their real names, state media said on Wednesday, as part of a campaign to crack down on what officials describe as rumours.

Tibetans are already closely watched, due to decades of often violent unrest in protest at Chinese rule, which Beijing blames on exiled spiritual leader the Dalai Lama.

By the end of last year, all 2.76 million fixed line and mobile telephone users and 1.47 million internet users in the remote region had registered for services under their real identities, Xinhua news agency said.

The scheme "is conducive to protecting citizens' personal information and curbing the spread of detrimental information" the report quoted government official Nyima Doje as saying.

The growing popularity of the internet and mobile phones has "brought about social problems, including the rampant circulation of online rumours, pornography and spam messages", another official, Dai Jianguo, said.

"The real-name registration will help resolve these problems while benefiting the long-term, sound development of the internet," Dai added, according to Xinhua.

The central Chinese government last year passed a law mandating the use of real names to register for internet services and also began forcing users of Sina Corp's wildly successful Weibo microblogging platform to register their real names.

Enforcement of similar rules for cellphones, especially pay-as-you-go services, is often lax, though.

China has defended its iron-fisted rule in Tibet, saying the remote region suffered from dire poverty, brutal exploitation of serfs and economic stagnation until 1950, when Communist troops "peacefully liberated" it.

The Dalai Lama fled into exile in 1959, following a failed uprising against Chinese rule. He denies Chinese charges of stoking violence in Tibet.

China's announcement of the successful completion of the telephone and internet monitoring programme in Tibet comes as Chinese media and the government have expressed indignation at accusations of mass surveillance by the US.

The explosive revelations of the US National Security Agency's (NSA) spying programmes were made by Edward Snowden, a former CIA employee and NSA contractor now holed up in Hong Kong, a China-controlled city.

The former British colony is supposed to enjoy wide-ranging autonomy and broad freedoms denied to people in mainland China, including an independent judiciary and free press.

Since its return to Chinese rule in 1997, however, the city's pro-democracy politicians and activists have complained that Beijing has been steadily eroding Hong Kong's freedoms, despite constitutional safeguards.

China demanded on Monday that Washington explain its monitoring programmes to the international community, though China itself routinely monitors its own population.