WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama began and ended his State of the Union speech on Tuesday by reminding voters that he brought U.S. troops home from Iraq and dispatched the Navy Seals who killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.

But he said little about the vexing challenges he faces in those countries and others, from preparing Afghanistan to police itself after foreign troops pull out in 2014, to preventing sectarian strife in Iraq, containing a nuclear North Korea and trying to prevent the euro crisis from sinking U.S. recovery.

Obama said nothing about the deterioration in U.S.-Pakistani relations last year, notably after a November 26 NATO attack on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, and made little reference to China other than as an economic rival.

The U.S. economy consumed the majority of Obama’s 66-minute speech, a logical choice given the domestic concerns of voters who must decide on November 6 whether to re-elect him or to choose instead one of his Republican rivals.

Analysts said the speech was striking for the way in which Obama held out the teamwork of the U.S. military as a model for the country and, implicitly, as a rebuke to the deeply divided U.S. Congress over the gridlock in Washington.

“One of the complaints that the president’s political opponents would make about his foreign policy is that he wants to negotiate with our enemies instead of fight them,” said Jon Alterman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“He is giving a speech which is all about the importance of emulating our military,” he added. “This is a democratic president wrapping himself in the flag and surrounding himself with the images of military teamwork.”

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Major powers are divided over what to put on the table should Iran resume talks on curbing its nuclear program and whether to allow it to continue enriching uranium to some degree, diplomats said on Friday.

Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States on Friday signaled their openness to fresh talks about Iran’s nuclear program, which the West suspects is a cover to develop an atomic bomb but Iran says is to generate electricity.

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, who represents the group, issued a statement making clear that a diplomatic path remains open to Iran despite tougher sanctions and fresh speculation of a military strike on its nuclear facilities.

“The EU3+3 has always been clear about the validity of the dual track approach,” Ashton’s spokesperson said in a statement that also formally released her October 21 letter offering to resume talks with Iran. “We are waiting for the Iranian reaction.”

The dual track refers to the combination of sanctions and diplomacy to try to curtail Iran’s nuclear programs.

The release of the statement and the letter itself appeared be an effort to demonstrate that the major powers are willing to talk to Iran, while reiterating their demands that Tehran must return to the table willing to talk about its nuclear program.

It also appeared to reflect frustration at recent Iranian statements hinting at a willingness to return to the table but Tehran’s failure to formally respond to the letter and commit to discussing the nuclear program in earnest.

WASHINGTON/TEHRAN (Reuters) – Major powers signaled on Friday their willingness to reopen talks about curbing Iran’s suspected pursuit of nuclear weapons but said Tehran must show it is serious about any negotiations.

The focus on diplomacy follows weeks of rising tensions between the West, which is seeking to cut Iran’s oil sales, and Tehran, which has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz through which almost one-fifth of oil traded worldwide flows.

Alarmed Arab neighbors made a plea to avoid escalating the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program while an ally of Iran’s supreme leader called for Israel to be “punished” for allegedly killing an Iranian nuclear scientist.

The West suspects Iran is using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop atomic weapons and has pursued a two-track approach of sanctions and diplomacy to try to rein it in. Iran says its nuclear program is solely to produce electricity.

While major powers stressed their openness to renewed talks,

diplomats said they remain divided on their approach, notably on whether to let Iran keep enriching uranium at some level.

The group, known as the P5+1 and as the EU3+3, includes Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The major powers seeking to negotiate an end to Iran’s suspected pursuit of nuclear weapons are expected to issue documents on Friday laying out what Tehran would need to do return to talks, a diplomat said.

A statement by Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States would be the latest signal the diplomatic path remains open to Iran despite tougher sanctions and renewed speculation of a military strike on its nuclear facilities.

The group also is expected to provide details of a letter that European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton sent Iran in October in an effort to bring Iranians back to the table, the diplomat said, saying the letter itself may be released.

The release of the statement, and perhaps the letter itself, are an effort to demonstrate that the major powers are willing to talk to Iran and reiterate their demands that Tehran must return to the table willing to talk about their nuclear program.

Western nations suspect Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons but Tehran says its nuclear program is for civilian energy purposes.

The diplomat said that Iran had been sending mixed signals about whether it might be willing to return to talks in the face of tighter U.S. sanctions focused on its crude oil exports and the possibility of a European Union petroleum embargo.

“This is a way to ensure that our offer is absolutely clear,” said the diplomat, adding that the central points of the October letter were that “we are prepared to sit down with you if you are prepared to demonstrate serious intent.”

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Washington’s latest sanctions on Iran target Tehran’s ability to sell crude oil but they give U.S. President Barack Obama wide latitude to pull his punches and avoid imposing penalties.

Below is a description of the sanctions Obama signed into law on December 31, the timelines to carry them out, the ways Obama can avoid imposing them and the ambiguities in the law that may be interpreted by his administration.

U.S. lawmakers crafted Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2012 as part of a campaign to restrain Iran’s nuclear program, which the United States suspects of being designed to produce nuclear weapons.

Iran says its program is for civilian purposes to generate electricity so it can export more of its valuable oil and gas.

WHAT ACTIONS CAN TRIGGER SANCTIONS?

The sanctions target foreign financial institutions that conduct petroleum and non-petroleum transactions with Iran’s central bank or other blacklisted Iranian financial entities.

For non-petroleum transactions, from February 29 the law requires the president to punish private banks that “knowingly conducted or facilitated any significant financial transaction with the Central Bank of Iran” or other blacklisted entities.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States’ latest sanctions on Iran target Tehran’s ability to sell crude oil but they give President Barack Obama wide latitude to pull his punches and avoid imposing penalties.

Below is a description of the sanctions that Obama signed into law on December 31, the timelines to carry them out, the ways Obama can avoid imposing them and the ambiguities in the law that must be interpreted by the administration.

U.S. lawmakers crafted Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2012 as part of a campaign to restrain Iran’s nuclear program, which the United States suspects of being designed to produce nuclear weapons.

Iran says its program is for civilian purposes to generate electricity so it can export more of its valuable oil and gas.

What actions can trigger sanctions?

The sanctions target foreign financial institutions that conduct petroleum and non-petroleum transactions with Iran’s central bank or other blacklisted Iranian financial entities.

For non-petroleum transactions, from February 29 the law requires the president to punish private banks that “knowingly conducted or facilitated any significant financial transaction with the Central Bank of Iran” or other blacklisted entities.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States is very concerned about a Bahraini rights activist the opposition says was beaten by security forces and it called on Bahrain, a U.S. ally, to investigate, a senior U.S. official said on Saturday.

Opposition activists said security officers threw Nabeel Rajab, head of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, to the ground and beat him on the head, neck and back after a protest march on Friday.

Bahrain’s Interior Ministry denied those accounts, saying on its Twitter feed that police found Rajab “lying on the ground” and took him to the hospital for treatment.

The Sunni-led island kingdom, home to the U.S. Fifth Fleet, last year sought to crush anti-government demonstrations mounted by the country’s Shi’ite Muslim majority. Protest marches have continued in recent months, sometimes turning violent.

“We are very concerned about this case,” the U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Reuters. He said a U.S. Embassy official visited Rajab for an hour on Saturday and the activist had a cut beneath one eye and bruising on his face.

“The facts here are in dispute but we are, and have expressed to the government, our real concern about the case,” he added. “What we are urging the government to do is to conduct a full investigation and, if excessive force was used by the police, they need to hold the relevant people accountable.”

“We are not opining on the facts of what happened here but we are very concerned about this case,” he added. “In general, we are very concerned about the frequent reports of excessive use of force by the police, widespread use of tear gas.”

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Iraq war may be over for the U.S. military but may not be for the Iraqis or for the U.S. government as it tries to avert sectarian strife after the departure of American troops.

U.S. officials are on edge because of the Iraqi government’s decision to issue an arrest warrant against Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, the country’s highest-ranking Sunni politician.

The announcement of the arrest warrant on Monday, one day after the U.S. military completed its withdrawal, has revived fears that sectarian tensions between Iraq’s Shi’ite, Sunni and Kurdish communities may erupt anew.

The timing is hardly convenient for U.S. President Barack Obama as he has sought in a series of appearances to mark the end of the U.S. military involvement in Iraq nearly nine years after the invasion ordered by former President George W. Bush.

In the latest such event, Obama took part in a ceremony on Tuesday at a military base near Washington at which the flag of U.S. Forces-Iraq was formally returned home.

Obama’s Republican opponents in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail have argued the decision to bring all U.S. troops home by the end of this year – a date originally set by Bush – had aggravated the chances of instability in Iraq.

Politics aside, the stark revival of sectarian tensions at the highest level of Iraqi politics poses a fresh challenge for U.S. policymakers in a strategic oil-rich country.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Iraq war may be over for the U.S. military, but it may not be for the Iraqis – or for the U.S. government, as it tries to avert sectarian strife following the departure of American troops.

U.S. officials are on edge because of the Iraqi government’s decision to issue an arrest warrant against Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, the country’s highest-ranking Sunni politician.

The announcement of the arrest warrant on Monday, one day after the U.S. military completed its withdrawal, has revived fears that sectarian tensions between the country’s Shi’ite, Sunni and Kurdish communities may erupt anew.

It could hardly have come at a worse moment for U.S. President Barack Obama as he has sought in a series of appearances to mark the end of the U.S. military involvement in Iraq nearly nine years after the invasion ordered by former President George W. Bush.

In the latest such event, Obama on Tuesday took part in a ceremony at a military base near Washington at which the flag of U.S. Forces-Iraq was formally returned home.

Obama’s Republican political opponents in the U.S. Congress and on the presidential campaign trail have argued that the decision to bring all U.S. troops home by the end of this year – even though that date originally was set by Bush – had aggravated the chances of instability in Iraq.

Politics aside, the stark revival of sectarian tensions at the highest level of Iraqi politics appears to pose a fresh challenge for U.S. policymakers in a strategic oil-rich country.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Newt Gingrich’s comment that the Palestinians are an “invented people” was unhelpful, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday, saying the Republican presidential candidate had realized this.

Gingrich, a former speaker of the House of Representatives, stirred controversy on Friday when told the Jewish Channel cable television broadcaster he saw the Palestinians as an invented people who want to destroy Israel.

“Remember, there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire” until the early 20th century, Gingrich said in the interview.

“I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people who are in fact Arabs and who were historically part of the Arab community. And they had a chance to go many places and for a variety of political reasons we have sustained this war against Israel now since the 1940s, and it’s tragic,” he said.

Asked by PBS Newshour Executive Editor Jim Lehrer at an event on economic innovation whether Gingrich’s comment about the Palestinians being an “invented people” was helpful, Clinton replied: “No.”

“I think he recognized that from what I read,” she added, speaking at an event on Innovation and the Global Marketplace. “I think he realized that was you know one of those innovative moments that happen.”

Gingrich along with other Republican candidates are seeking to attract Jewish support for the November 2012 elections by vowing to bolster U.S. ties with Israel.