| For continuing coverage follow us on Twitter and join our Facebook group.
Top Stories
WSJ: "The Obama administration sanctioned an Iranian airline for allegedly ferrying machine guns and munitions into Syria to help President Bashar al-Assad put down a rebellion against his rule. The shipments, according to U.S. officials, are part of an operation headed by Iran's elite military unit, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, to help bolster the Syrian regime. Iranian and Syrian officials have repeatedly denied that Tehran is supplying arms to the Assad regime. They have also accused the U.S. and its Arab allies of fomenting the revolution against the Syrian government. The Treasury on Tuesday also sanctioned three commanders from the IRGC's international arm, the Quds Force, for their alleged involvement in arms smuggling, particularly into Africa. The U.S. believes the Quds Force is using shipping companies in African countries, such as Nigeria, to move weapons into conflict areas, including Gambia. Shipments of arms apparently bound for Gambian rebels were seized by Nigerian secret service agents in late 2010, prompting Gambia to cut off diplomatic relations with Tehran." http://t.uani.com/GXU6Wn
Reuters: "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad praised the Syrian leadership's handling of a year-long uprising in which thousands have died, saying Tehran would do everything it could to support its closest Arab ally, Iranian media reported on Tuesday. Shi'ite Muslim Iran backed popular uprisings which have removed leaders in Egypt, Libya and Yemen but has steadfastly supported Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who is a member of the minority Alawite sect, an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam. 'I am very happy that Syrian officials are managing the situation well ... I hope the situation in Syria improves day after day,' the official IRNA news agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying during talks with Assad's special envoy, Faisal Meqdad." http://t.uani.com/GZPQCU
NYT: "A senior Iranian official was quoted on Wednesday as saying that long-awaited talks with world powers on his country's disputed nuclear program would begin on April 13 and he hoped the venue would be Istanbul. The comments by Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi represented one more step in a tortuous diplomatic minuet over the proposed nuclear talks that is playing out against a backdrop of speculation about a possible military strike by Israel on Iran's nuclear facilities." http://t.uani.com/GWMkvh
Nuclear Program NYT: "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have turned into the odd couple of Israeli politics in whose hands sits the prospect of an attack on Iran. From opposite political traditions with distinct experiences and worldviews, the two have forged a tight bond, often excluding the rest of the Israeli leadership. For Mr. Netanyahu, an Iranian nuclear weapon would be the 21st-century equivalent of the Nazi war machine and the Spanish Inquisition - the latest attempt to destroy the Jews. Preventing that is the mission of his life. For Mr. Barak, who spurns talk of a second Holocaust and fear for Israel's existence, it is a challenge about strategy: 'zones of immunity' and 'red lines,' the operational details of an assault on Iran's nuclear facilities. 'All leaders have kitchen cabinets, but Netanyahu and Barak have established a kitchenette of two,' remarked Nahum Barnea, a columnist for the Yediot Aharonot newspaper, in an interview. 'They haven't discussed Iran with the rest of the government in weeks and have convinced themselves there is only one way to deal with Iran - their way.'" http://t.uani.com/HiRBgZ
Sanctions
Reuters: "The U.S. Senate may soon consider a new package of sanctions targeting Iran's oil revenues, Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid said on Tuesday. The legislation would focus on foreign banks that handle transactions for Iran's national oil and tanker companies, and include a host of measures aimed to close loopholes in existing sanctions... The Senate Banking Committee easily passed the new sanctions bill on Feb. 2 and the full House of Representatives passed its version in December. Since then, several lawmakers have floated additional proposals to penalize underwriters that insure oil and gas trade with Iran, block foreign companies dealing with Iranian energy companies from U.S. financial markets, and ban foreign companies that buy Iranian oil from buying oil from U.S. emergency reserves. The timing of the next step was not immediately clear." http://t.uani.com/GVMnL1
Reuters: "A U.S. Republican lawmaker on Tuesday blocked Democrats from passing legislation designed to further punish Iran for developing its nuclear program, and each side blamed the other for its failure in a presidential election year that will put extra scrutiny on President Barack Obama to be tough on Tehran. The legislation, which had the backing of many Democratic and Republican Senators, focused on foreign banks that handle transactions for Iran's national oil and tanker companies, and included a host of measures aimed to close loopholes in existing sanctions... Senator Rand Paul formally objected to taking up the legislation unless the Senate would also consider his amendment to it saying that nothing in the bill could be construed as an authorization of war against Iran or Syria. This effectively blocked the bill from advancing." http://t.uani.com/GXZcpi
Reuters: "Iran's trading partners are scrambling to comply with the latest U.S. sanctions against Iran. If countries such as China, India and South Korea do not cut down on their Iranian oil imports by mid-year when the U.S. sanctions go into effect, their financial institutions could be blocked from U.S. markets. But U.S. lawmakers are considering additional legislation that would increase pressure on Iran to stop developing its nuclear program, which the West contends is being used to acquire atomic weapons. It is unclear when Congress will start debating whether to approve the additional penalties. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said a package of sanctions proposed by the banking committee may soon be advanced but he said he does not want to consider additional amendments. Below is a list of measures lawmakers have introduced. Most aim to punish foreign companies for dealing with Iran in any capacity." http://t.uani.com/Hlm0cn
Reuters: "South Africa imported no oil from Iran in January, according to government trade and customs data, suggesting Africa's biggest economy has heeded a call from the United States to halt oil shipments from Tehran as part of Western sanctions. Trade figures showed marked increases in January imports from Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, indicating they have replaced Iran, usually South Africa's biggest supplier of crude accounting for a quarter of its oil imports." http://t.uani.com/GTkC28
Reuters: "A unit of China's state-owned aluminum producer Chinalco has delayed a $500 million Hong Kong initial public offering planned for this month till at least June due to the impact of western sanctions on Iran, two sources said on Wednesday. By then, China Aluminum International Engineering's (Chalieco) business contracts with Iran would have expired, smoothing the way for the flotation, the sources, who had direct knowledge of the plans, said. Chalieco is an infrastructure engineering and technology company with operations in over 10 countries, including Iran. The company had hired Morgan Stanley and UBS along with China International Capital Corp to handle the listing." http://t.uani.com/GWwG1g
Opinion & Analysis
George Jonas in The National Post: "Here's a tailor-made column. The customer who 'bespoke' it probably gets his shirts made to measure, too. 'Hey, George,' his e-mail goes, 'what will happen when, in a few weeks, the so-called P5+1, the permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany, begin talks with Iran?'I've no idea. I expect the UN will ask the mullahs to abandon their nuclear program and let the inspectors verify that they've done so. 'What will the mullahs answer?' I expect they'll say that: (a) they've no nuclear weapons program; and (b) they're not giving it up. 'But doesn't the first answer contradict the second?' Please, remember, this is the Persian Gulf, not a debating society. Tehran's rulers aren't in the game to show rhetorical form or to score points. They're here to stall, gain time, develop military technology and gradually increase their power until they can dominate their neighbours and enforce their will. 'So what will happen next?' When we reach where we came in we leave. There's no elsewhere. Individuals, institutions, empires, markets, all follow their internal logic. If Iran's mullahs could give up their nuclear ambitions for the asking, they wouldn't have set out on this path in the first place. The fact they went forward with it is the reason for their being unlikely to go back. The argument is circular, but the progression of a nuclear theocracy is as straight as a malignancy's. The mullahs wouldn't feel safe without going nuclear. Not just from their enemies or rivals, the Israelis or the Saudis, they'd feel unsafe from their own people. No surprise: Have you looked at some of the demonstrating Iranians during the post-election turmoil? They meant business. A mullah's life isn't a bowl of cherries. The sacerdotal class want to go nuclear, not to bomb demonstrators, but to have a bargaining chip, something with which to buy protection for themselves. They look to the free world, to America, to NATO, for guarantees to keep them in power, in exchange for giving up their nukes." http://t.uani.com/GWPoYf |
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment