Iran considering deploying ground forces to counter US intervention in Syria: reports

Iran has grown increasingly concerned that southern Syria could see a cross-border American incursion from Jordan

US forces, accompanied by Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) fighters, drive their armoured vehicles near the northern Syrian village of Darbasiyah (AFP)

Alex MacDonald-Saturday 29 April 2017

Iran’s foreign ministry condemned Israel’s incursions into Syria on Saturday as reports suggested Iran was mulling deploying ground forces to counter a potential US-led intervention in the country.

Israeli jets struck an area near the International airport in Damascus on Thursday, reportedly an arms depot operated by the Lebanese Hezbollah militia.

"There was no doubt that the inroads were aimed at weakening Syria's legitimate government and in line with reinforcing Takfiri terrorists who have moved closer to the annihilation and defeat in the battlegrounds day by day," Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi said, according to the Fars news agency.

He said the raids were a violation of Syria’s sovereignty.

"Thus, the raids flouted international laws and regulations,” he said.

The comments follow reports by the Tabnak news agency, which is affiliated to a former commander of the powerful Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), indicating that Iran has growing concerns about increasing US military activities on Jordan’s northern border.

The article said that Israel’s strikes on Syria could be the beginning of a major offensive against the country by a coalition including Israel, the US and Arab states.

“There are increased activities in southern Syria that indicate preparations for an attack through Jordan and Israel and [with the help of] armed groups,” it read.

Another article in the same news agency said that Russian and Iranian military officials had informed Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that they stood ready to send ground forces to intervene in the country in case of such a situation.

Journalist and Syrian opposition Asaad Hanna tweeted earlier this month that US forces had been positioned and were standing by on the southern Syrian border with Jordan special forces. Another report in the Al-Hayat outlet also indicated a joint force was preparing to enter southern Syria from Jordan, albeit ostensibly with the aim of combating the Islamic State.

In an interview with the Washington Post, King Abdullah of Jordan said that he was concerned by the presence of IRGC forces across the border in southern Syria.

“We were very explicit with the Russians, as were the Israelis, that nonstate actors from outside coming towards our border are not going to be tolerated,” he told the interviewer.

“I think we came to an understanding with the Russians.”

Autonomy in south Syria?

Iran rallied to the defence of its ally in Syria following the crackdown on anti-government demonstrators in 2011.

The IRGC has lost more than a thousand fighters in Syria, fighting against opposition forces backed by the US, Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

According to reports from locals in Damascus, Iran’s influence in the pro-government areas has extended to the point that they effectively dominate both the political and military scene in the country, alongside Assad's other staunch ally, Russia.

“This is my homeland. But I am a second[-class] citizen here,” said a businessman talking to the Guardian newspaer.

“Syrians are second now. Iranians are first. And the Russians are gods.”

According to Abdel Bari Atwan, writing in the newspaper Rai al-Youm, Damascus was angered by a plan put forward by a group of 22 Syrian opposition activists in Istanbul which called for the establishment of an autonomous region in southern Syria. The government sees the so-called Houran Pact, which would see the Syrian governorates of Deraa, Suweida and Quneitra come under local decentralised control, as the first step in the federalisation of Syria, a principle which even Assad's ally Russia has expressed an openness to.

Primarily, though, the Assad government sees Jordan behind the scheme, along with the US, as a means of securing the frontiers for both the Kingdom and Israel.

Reports have also indicated that US troops have begun amassing on Syria's northern border.

On Friday, a commander of the pro-Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) said that US forces would begin monitoring the situation on Syria's northern border with Turkey following cross border fire between the YPG and Turkish forces.

EXCLUSIVE: US troops deployed at #Rojava-#Turkey border to prevent further clashes between both sides. #TwitterKurds #Syria pic.twitter.com/46s0ZBiATH

— Kurdistan24 English (@K24English) April 29, 2017

 Follow

Kurdistan24 English 

✔@K24English

EXCLUSIVE: US troops deployed at #Rojava-#Turkey border to prevent further clashes between both sides. #TwitterKurds #Syria

8:45 AM - 29 Apr 2017

 
•  264264 Retweets
 
•  187187 likes

Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis also said on Friday that US troops were deployed along the border.

“We continue to urge all the parties involved to focus on the common enemy which is ISIS,” he told reporters, referring to the Islamic State group.

The surge in US troops along the northern and southern borders of Syria has worried Damascus and Tehran primarily because of a recent dramatic turn around in the Trump administration's policy on the country, which saw airstrikes launched against Shayrat airbase following a chemical weapon attack against rebels in Idlib.

"During the US presidential campaign, Iranian leaders – including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei – uncharacteristically made complimentary remarks about then-candidate Donald Trump," wrote Ahmad Majidyar, director of the IranObserved Project at the Middle East Institute. "Iranian military leaders, in particular, hoped that Trump’s positive view of Russian President Vladimir Putin and opposition to military intervention abroad would benefit Iran’s agenda in Syria and the broader Middle East.

"But that cautious optimism has changed into growing concern in Tehran since Trump took office in January and adopted an aggressive policy toward Iran, by imposing new sanctions against Iran’s ballistic missile program, reestablishing close ties with Washington’s traditional Sunni allies in the Middle East, and broadening the scope of US military engagement in Syria and Iraq."

Iran presidential election: Five things to know

Iranian elections traditionally have a high turnout--This is the first presidential election since the 2015 nuclear deal--The six men standing for president

Opponents of the regime call for election boycotts--Women have not been allowed to stand for president--The economy and security are among the most important issues for Iranian voters

By Siavash Ardalan-28 April 2017

Iran is due to hold a presidential election on 19 May, in which the incumbent Hassan Rouhani will fight for a second term. The polls are seen as critical to the future direction of the Islamic Republic.

Here are some issues to know.

It matters to the outside world

Iran is a major player in the Middle East. Because of its nuclear programme and support for the Shia-led governments in Iraq and Syria, world powers see Tehran both as part of the problem and the solution to the region's woes.

All this could be affected by whomever becomes president, because Iranian national politics is basically a power struggle between conservatives and reformists/moderates. However, in a way the election result is academic because ultimate power rests with the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Don't forget that it was President Rouhani, a moderate, who was instrumental in helping strike an historic nuclear deal with world powers by convincing the supreme leader - considered closely associated with the conservative establishment - to reluctantly give his blessing.

So whether or not a conservative president could turn his back on the nuclear deal depends on the supreme leader's calculus, which in turn is strongly influenced by how the Americans and Europeans stick to their end of the deal, or how much they scupper Iran's efforts to take full advantage of sanctions removal.

Unlike its uranium enrichment activities, Iran's unwavering support for the Syrian government is not up for discussion. So don't expect much change on that track.

If anything, a reformist or moderate administration may be more able to put an internationally legitimate face on Iran's support for Syria's embattled President Bashar al-Assad.

Could we see normalised relations with Iran's traditional foe, the United States? Don't hold your breath.
Political reforms are not likely either, no matter who wins the election, because they would be obstructed by power structures in the hands of conservatives, among them the judiciary and security apparatus.

So don't bet on any improvements in the areas of human rights, freedom of speech, political assembly and the media.

Iran is often thought of as an Islamic theocracy, but it is a blend of different political systems, including elements of parliamentary democracy. There are two major political blocs in parliament but real power lies in the hands of unelected conservatives who try, unconvincingly, to appear neutral.

It is ultimately they who can decide how much political and social freedom they feel safe and secure in allowing.

Institutions of power in Iran are essentially either directly elected or appointed (by the supreme leader). All the appointed institutions are run by conservatives.

The elected institutions - the government, parliament and local councils - have changed hands between conservatives and reformists/moderates over the years.

The office of president and the executive branch can be reformist/moderate and has been for the past four years with Mr Rouhani at its helm.

• One of these men will be Iran's next president

He's facing the main conservative contender, Ebrahim Raisi, a relatively unknown but powerful figure within the religious and judicial establishment.

Another conservative candidate is Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, Tehran's well-known mayor, who was derailed in the last election by a few stinging one-liners by Mr Rouhani during the televised debates.
Three lower-profile contenders - Mostafa Mirsalim, Mostafa Hashemitaba and Eshaq Jahangiri - are also standing.

Many Iranians have learned to accept the limitations of any given administration to enact meaningful reforms. Iranians tend to judge their president on the basis of what he can reasonably be expected to achieve within the existing structure, which objectively speaking is not insignificant.

The polls will be free and fair - within limits

Once candidates are formally allowed to run, they gain equal access to state media platforms during their campaign. The problem is that nobody can run without the approval of the hardline Guardian Council, which itself is not only unelected but firmly in the conservative camp.

So while anyone can register as a candidate, only a chosen few are let through the gates. However, once they get in, Iranian elections are for the most part free and fair (a notable exception being the 2009 elections, where the regime was accused of rigging votes in favour of hardline conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad).

As undemocratic and restrictive as this may seem, it has not deterred most Iranians from turning out.
This is despite constant calls from regime critics to stay at home on election day, either by word of mouth or through social media. Such calls though are being drowned out by the active use of social media like Telegram, Instagram and Facebook by candidates and their supporters.

The state's tolerance of the use of social media increases considerably during election season. In fact, the state itself becomes more tolerant, open, transparent and spontaneous when it needs to ensure that voter turnout remains high.

The lowest turnout for a presidential election has been 51%; its highest an impressive 85%.

No female presidents - but women are politically active

Iran has female vice-presidents, ministers, MPs and local council members, but has not had a woman president.

The law does not explicitly ban women from running - it's thought that the constitutional term "men of political and religious stature" as a qualification requirement was not meant to be taken literally - but the Guardian Council has never allowed any to stand.

Women's rights have a long way to go in Iran, especially in terms of legal and penal codes, but it's not as bad as many Westerners think.

Mandatory headscarves for women has affected the perception outsiders have on women's rights. However, it also serves the paradoxical purpose of allowing women of power and position to be accepted in a patriarchal society.

Other matters pertaining to women's rights - such as abortion, domestic violence, unequal legal entitlements and discrimination - have never been burning electoral issues, no matter how close to the hearts of many educated and secular Iranians they may be.

Women figure prominently in the country's political discourse and no candidate can win the election by seeming to look down on women or ignoring their concerns.

Once in power, Iranian presidents do have some leeway in helping to improve women's rights by drafting progressive bills for submission to parliament. Reformist presidents have tried to do so.

Voters care about ordinary issues

The adage, "It's the economy, stupid", applies as much in Iran as it does anywhere else.

Iranians do not look too kindly on candidates who are not seen to have helped improve living standards, no matter how good they manage to strike the right chord on other issues.

The state of the economy matters at least as much as political freedoms and human rights, which the progressive middle class cherishes, or faith and family values, which rural conservative voters feel strongly about.

Corruption comes in as the second most important issue, which many may argue is closely linked with economic mismanagement.

The nuclear deal is also important to Iranians but only as long as they feel like it is necessary for the betterment of their lives.

However, whether the economic benefits of sanctions relief - the lynchpin of the deal for Iran - have filtered down yet to ordinary people's lives is debatable.

It is a debate that Mr Rouhani needs to win if he wants to stay on for a second term.

Saudi Arabia : Vision 2030

Primary commodity exporter trying to escape the “Banana republic” position in the world economy

by Elodie Pichon- Apr 29, 2017

( April 29, 2017, Vienna, Sri Lanka Guardian) The rent-based economy in Saudi Arabia has shown its limits since the drop of oil prices in 2014. Indeed, the country is potentially explosive: the current fiscal model is not sustainable, the geopolitical environment is increasingly hostile and the country has a rapidly growing population, of which 30% of 16-24 year olds find themselves unemployed. The economic choices in the years to come, and the success of the reforms announced by the government will be decisive for the survival of the regime.

For too long, Saudi Arabia’s economy has relied solely on oil for its revenues. Until 2014, oil exploitation was responsible for 90% of Saudi Arabia’s public revenues, 80% of its exports revenues and 40% of its GDP. But from 2014 to 2015, oil revenues dropped by 50%, and represented only 73% of the total revenues compared to 87% the year before. In the meantime, the government didn’t reduce its expenses, because of its military interventions in Yemen and Syria, but also because of the outstanding individual premiums given by the government. Following the Arab Spring, the government has increased its social expenses in order to buy social peace.

To tackle the economic difficulties, Prince Mohammed Bin Salman has announced, on the 26th of April 2016, an ambitious set of reforms, titled « Vision 2030 » which aimed at weaning the kingdom off oil by curbing public spending, diversifying the economy and attracting foreign investment. The government is conscious of the necessity to reform the economic system, but will it be able to do it without causing social turmoil? With a decline in social spending and a reduction in subsidies comes the risk of rising domestic turmoil, as highlighted by the Arab Spring in 2011. The risk is increased by the fact that half of the population is under 25, and 30% of young people are unemployed. This inactive youth is also among the most active in the world on the social media and might show their frustration through media outlets. Will the government be able to take the gamble of social change?

Saudi Arabia has shown pragmatism when it promised a 4,6% cut in production on November 30th, 2016. This measure was necessary since its plan to modernise the economy and privatise Saudi Aramco, the state oil company, depends on oil prices. Paradoxically, Saudi Arabia needs higher oil prices to become less dependent on oil on the long term. Other measures taken by the government include slashing salaries, and cutting benefits for public sectors employees. It has also cut huge subsidies for fuel, water and electricity that encourage overconsumption. However, the sudden jump of water bills spurred national dissatisfaction and an outcry on social media. Indeed, the minister of water and electricity was fired after telling customers to dig their own wells if they were unhappy with prices. The government also abruptly cut construction projects forcing contractors to fire workers who didn’t hesitate to set fire on buses in protests demanding months of back pay. Despite these incidents, most austerity measures have been taken according to Capital Economics, a consultancy.

However, investors are waiting for more meaningful changes, which imply conjectural reforms and a transformation of the social structures. In order to increase the presence of Saudi nationals in the labour market, the government implements a politics of Saudisation particularly in the private sector. For now, only 45% of jobs in Saudi Arabia are occupied by Saudis, and only 22% in the private sectors versus 67% in the public sector. Including them in the private sector is necessary to reduce unemployment but also to cut public spending, since salaries in the public sector constitute the most expensive expenses of the State. A “Saudisation” of the labour market is necessary, but needs a complete transformation of student’s trainings. For now, most of them study humanities and social sciences and focus primarily on the study of the Koran. But it doesn’t bring them the necessary skills to work in a commercial environment. The politics of Saudisation has vexed businesses who are forced to employ Saudi nationals, who often lack the skills that employers want. Consequently, to meet the government quotas, some companies simply pay locals to stay at home.

Moreover, the increase of the population presents new challenges. Six million people are going to join the labour market from now until 2040. Thus, job creation in the private sector is necessary, to prevent a rise of unemployment and the subsequent risk of social tensions. For now, the private sector does not offer enough good opportunities for the estimated 300,000 young people entering the work force each year, especially women. If nothing is done, the situation will become even more critical because of the important rise of the population.

“Vision 2030” shows that Saudi Arabia is conscious about the necessity to reform the country’s economy. Its cut in social spending, the plan to introduce a tax on expenses by 2018, and –more importantly- its plan to privatise the state oil company Saudi Aramco are very positive. However, too many measures, such as the plan to attract foreign investments, are still under study and lack details. The success of Saudi Arabia’s economic reforms is crucial to the West, who needs a stable Saudi Arabia in an already chaotic Middle East.

Elodie Pichon, Research Fellow of the IFIMES Institute, DeSSA Department. This native Parisian is a Master in Geopolitics, Territory and Security from the King’s College, London, UK.

EU tells May: give our citizens their rights or no trade talks

European leaders take hard line on Brexit and agree on it unanimously in only four minutes

Theresa May speaks at an election campaign rally near Aberdeen on 29 April. Photograph: Russell Cheyne/Reuters

Daniel Boffey-Saturday 29 April 2017

Leaders said they would not discuss a future trade deal with the British government until “sufficient progress” is made on the issues of Britain’s estimated €60bn divorce bill, the rights of EU nationals in the UK, and the border in Ireland.

The European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, told reporters at the special summit in Brussels that EU citizens in Britain were the number one priority, and that he had discussed the need for Britain to now live up to its warm words regarding EU citizens during a dinner with the prime minister in Downing Street last week.

“We have already prepared a text that could be adopted immediately if our British friends would be willing to sign it, but that probably won’t happen,” Juncker told reporters, adding that there was an element of tragedy in the situation of some in the UK.

“I have the impression sometimes that our British friends, not all of them, do underestimate the technical difficulties we have to face,” he said, adding that May had told him, to each of his questions about the future: “Be patient and ambitious.”

Donald Tusk, president of the European council, whose members comprise the EU states, added: “For the past weeks we have heard from our British friends, also during my visit in London, that they are ready to agree on this issue quickly.

“I would like to state very clearly that we need real guarantees for our people who live, work and study in the UK and the same goes for the Brits. The commission has prepared a full list of the rights and benefits that we want to guarantee for those affected by Brexit. To achieve sufficient progress we need a serious British response.”

 Donald Tusk speaks during a press conference after an EU Council meeting on 29 April about Brexit. Photograph: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

The two EU leaders were speaking after European leaders agreed in record time to adopt nine pages of negotiating guidelines at a special summit in Brussels.

Responding to the summit’s conclusions, David Davis, the secretary of state for exiting the European Union, said that he feared the coming talks would be “confrontational” and echoed May’s comments last week about member states “lining up to oppose us”.

He said: “Both sides are clear: we want these negotiations to be conducted in a spirit of goodwill, sincere cooperation and with the aim of establishing a close partnership between the UK and the EU going forward.

“But there is no doubt that these negotiations are the most complex the UK has faced in our lifetimes. They will be tough and at times even confrontational. There are already people in Europe who oppose these aims and people at home trying to undermine them. That is why it is so important that the UK has the right leadership in place.”

Speaking in the margins of the summit, leaders had taken turns all day to warn the British government that the EU was unified and would fight hard for the interests of its member states. The French president, François Hollande, told reporters: “There will inevitably be a price and a cost for Britain; it’s the choice they made.

“We must not be punitive, but at the same time it’s clear that Europe knows how to defend its interests, and that Britain will have a less good position outside the EU than in the EU.”

Asked about her suggestion last week that some in the UK were deluded about the coming talks, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, said she feared there was a lack of understanding about the EU’s resolve to only talk about trade once the opening issues had been resolved.

Merkel also appeared unconvinced by May’s claim that a landslide election victory would strengthen her negotiating position in the talks when they start in June, although she applauded the prime minister for calling it.

“The British prime minster thinks that a clear vote [in the general election] will strengthen her position in the negotiations,” she said. “It will certainly give her a very credible platform. The election has removed this sword of Damocles over the negotiations.”

Other leaders also appeared bemused by the prime minister’s claims about being empowered by an election triumph. Hollande, who is now in his last week as president, said: “That is an election argument that I can understand. But this is not an argument against the European Union. Why? Because the bases, the principles, the objectives are already fixed: these will be the lines that will be chosen by the negotiators and there will be no others.”

Luxembourg’s prime minister, Xavier Bettel, claimed May had called the election to resolve an internal problem in the Conservative party.

She wanted “not a hard Brexit or a soft Brexit but Theresa’s Brexit,” he said. Joseph Muscat, the prime minister of Malta, added: “I wouldn’t want to intrude in the prime minister’s decisions but the fact is we are wasting one month now.”

EU leaders at the summit also agreed a declaration that would allow northern Ireland to swiftly rejoin the EU, in the event of a vote for Irish unification. With polls showing that a majority of voters in Northern Ireland want to stay part of the UK, the Irish taoiseach, Enda Kenny, said the clause was not about triggering a poll.

“I have always been very clear that the conditions for a referendum do not currently exist, but the endorsement of the principle, the potential agreement of the Good Friday agreement is hugely important.”

The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, said it was in Britain’s interests for the EU to be unified, as it would boost the chances of a Brexit deal. “This extraordinary meeting shows the unity of the 27 on a clear line, but this unity is not directed against Britain; I think that it is also in its interest,” he said.

Keep Your Eyes on the Protests in Russia’s Provinces

While the world watches Moscow for signs of unrest, hundreds of small-scale protests are heating up in Putin’s heartland.

BY AMIE FERRIS-ROTMAN-APRIL 28, 2017

GUKOVO, Russia – Each morning, just before 11 a.m., Igor Litvinov leaves his work gutting chickens and sets off for the main square in this town of about 65,000 people in southern Russia. There he meets his wife, Irina, and together they join the group that has gathered every day for the past year on the cracked gray asphalt in front of the offices of Kingcoal Ltd., their former employer.

Keep Your Eyes on the Protests in Russia.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

Holy Shit. Ontario Just Announced Free Prescription Drugs For Anyone Under 25

The Ontario government just announced that starting in 2018, it will cover the cost of prescription drugs for anyone under 25.

Nathan Denette / THE CANADIAN PRESS

The changes will take effect Jan. 1, 2018

.

Ishmael N. Daro

The pharmacare promise is the biggest item in the Liberal budget released Thursday. The program will cover the cost of more than 4,300 prescription drugs for young people in the province.

Coverage will be available to anyone under 25 "regardless of family income." The government, which has also been pushing for a national pharmacare plan, says it will be the first program of its kind anywhere in Canada.

“We recognize that families are struggling with the increased cost of living so we’re doing more to help with everyday costs,” Ontario Finance Minister Charles Sousa said.

The Liberal prescription drug plan was unveiled just days after Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath released her own pharmacare plan to cover 125 of the most commonly prescribed drugs if she becomes premier following next year's election.

Ontario will also start funding Mifegymiso, an abortion pill also known as RU-486, which can cost as much as $400.

Ishmael Daro is a social news editor for BuzzFeed and is based in Toronto.

Contact Ishmael N. Daro at ishmael.daro@buzzfeed.com.

'Exciting' blood test spots cancer a year early

Janet Maitland, 65, from London, is one of the patients taking part in the trial.

By James Gallagher-26 April 2017

Doctors have spotted cancer coming back up to a year before normal scans in an "exciting" discovery.

The UK team was able to scour the blood for signs of cancer while it was just a tiny cluster of cells invisible to X-ray or CT scans.

It should allow doctors to hit the tumour earlier and increase the chances of a cure.

They also have new ideas for drugs after finding how unstable DNA fuels rampant cancer development.

The research project was on lung cancer, but the processes studied are so fundamental that they should apply across all cancer types.

Lung cancer kills more people than any other type of tumour and the point of the study is to track how it can "evolve" into a killer that spreads through the body.

Blood test

In order to test for cancer coming back, doctors need to know what to look for.

In the trial, funded by Cancer Research UK, samples were taken from the lung tumour when it was removed during surgery.

A team at the Francis Crick Institute, in London, then analysed the tumour's defective DNA to build up a genetic fingerprint of each patient's cancer.

Then blood tests were taken every three months after the surgery to see if tiny traces of cancer DNA re-emerged.

The results, outlined in the journal Nature, showed cancer recurrence could be detected up to a year before any other method available to medicine.

The tumours are thought to have a volume of just 0.3 cubic millimetres when the blood test catches them.

'New hope'

Dr Christopher Abbosh, from the UCL Cancer Institute, said: "We can identify patients to treat even if they have no clinical signs of disease, and also monitor how well therapies are working.

"This represents new hope for combating lung cancer relapse following surgery, which occurs in up to half of all patients."

So far, it has been an early warning system for 13 out of 14 patients whose illness recurred, as well as giving others an all-clear.

In theory, it should be easier to kill the cancer while it is still tiny rather than after it has grown and become visible again.

However, this needs testing.

Prof Charles Swanton, from the Francis Crick Institute, told the BBC: "We can now set up clinical trials to ask the fundamental question - if you treat people's disease when there's no evidence of cancer on a CT scan or a chest X-ray can we increase the cure rate?

"We hope that by treating the disease when there are very few cells in the body that we'll be able to increase the chance of curing a patient."

Janet Maitland, 65, from London, is one of the patients taking part in the trial.

She has watched lung cancer take the life of her husband and was diagnosed herself last year.

She told the BBC: "It was my worst nightmare getting lung cancer, and it was like my worse nightmare came true, so I was devastated and terrified."

But she had the cancer removed and now doctors say she has a 75% chance of being cancer-free in five years.

"It's like going from terror to joy, from thinking that I was never going to get better to feeling like a miracle's been acted," she said.

And taking part in a trial that should improve the chances for patients in the future is a huge comfort for her.

"I feel very privileged," she added.

---

Evolution

The blood test is actually the second breakthrough in the massive project to deepen understanding of lung cancer.

A bigger analysis, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, showed the key factor - genetic instability - that predicted whether the cancer would return.

Multiple samples from 100 patients containing 4.5 trillion base pairs of DNA were analysed.

DNA is packaged up into sets of chromosomes containing thousands of genetic instructions.

The team at the Francis Crick Institute showed tumours with more "chromosomal chaos" - the ability to readily reshuffle large amounts of their DNA to alter thousands of genetic instructions - were those most likely to come back.

Prof Charles Swanton, one of the researchers, told the BBC News website: "You've got a system in place where a cancer cell can alter its behaviour very rapidly by gaining or losing whole chromosomes or parts of chromosomes.

"It is evolution on steroids."

That allows the tumour to develop resistance to drugs, the ability to hide from the immune system or the skills to move to other tissues in the body.

'Exciting'

The first implication of the research is for drug development - by understanding the key role of chromosomal instability, scientists can find ways to stop it.

Prof Swanton told me: "I hope we'll be able to generate new approaches to limit it and bring evolution back from the brink, perhaps reduce the evolutionary capacity of tumours and hopefully stop them adapting.

"It's exciting on multiple levels."

The scientists say they are only scratching the surface of what can be achieved by analysing the DNA of cancers.

Follow James on Twitter.