| For continuing coverage follow us on Twitter and join our Facebook group.
Top Stories
NYT: "For the first time in more than a year the global powers dealing with Iran's disputed nuclear program said Tuesday that they would resume face-to-face negotiations. 'I have offered to resume talks with Iran on the nuclear issue,' said Catherine Ashton, the European Union's foreign affairs chief, who represents the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany in dealings with Iran. 'We hope that Iran will now enter into a sustained process of constructive dialogue which will deliver real progress.' The resumption of negotiations could relieve rising pressure from Israel to use military force against Iran. But the decision is not without risks. Direct talks could allow Iranian negotiators to exploit various nations' differences. Failure could offer a rationale for military strikes." http://t.uani.com/zzmc8d
NYT: "When President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel met in the White House on Monday, the main subject was how to calibrate the resumption of negotiations with Iran while continuing to accelerate sanctions and sabotage against its nuclear program. But they remained divided on two central questions: If Iran decided to race for a nuclear weapon, would the West detect that in time to stop it? And even if it were detected, would an airstrike be the best option? From the administration's top ranks down, American officials say they would almost certainly detect a sprint to manufacture a weapon. Among the signs, they say, would be any move to evict international inspectors, satellite evidence of any testing of the kinds of conventional explosives used to develop a bomb and, quite likely, reports from the West's contacts inside the Iranian scientific community of a change in the actions of the laboratories run by Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the Iranian believed to be leading the weaponization program. The Israelis say a bolt for the bomb might be detectable but might not be." http://t.uani.com/zUV39o
FP: "Coming soon from the Congress that brought you the sanctions against the Central Bank of Iran: new legislation to sanction every single Iranian bank. Members of both the House and Senate from both parties are moving forward soon with legislation that would expand financial sanctions against Iran to include all Iranian financial institutions -- whether government-affiliated, private, inside Iran, or controlled abroad. According to multiple congressional aides who previewed the legislation for The Cable, this would effectively cut off every Iranian financial institution from the international community -- subjecting any bank that conducts transactions with an Iranian bank or holds money for an Iranian bank to risk losing its own access to the U.S. market. Currently, only the 18 Iranian banks designated by the U.S. Treasury Department and the Central Bank of Iran are subject to such sanctions -- leaving more than 25 banks free to conduct business with the international community, which the legislations' sponsors see as a major hole in U.S. policy. According to congressional aides involved with the legislation's development, the ban on all Iranian banks would contain a humanitarian exemption, the oil exemptions built into the Menendez-Kirk amendment passed into law last December, and would provide the president with the authority to issue a national security waiver." http://t.uani.com/wmHAzL
Nuclear Program
AFP: "Talks on Iran's controversial nuclear programme will fail if world powers use 'pressure' during the negotiations, Iranian parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani said on Wednesday. 'They (world powers) should pay attention that if they want to continue pressure in the talks, it will achieve nothing,' Larijani was quoted as saying on the state television website. His remarks came after world powers agreed on a renewed dialogue, which has been stalled for more than a year, with Tehran on its nuclear programme." http://t.uani.com/AiVySu
NYT: "A day after global powers said they would resume nuclear talks with Iran, Israeli officials remained skeptical Wednesday of Tehran's intentions and said that it was necessary to maintain a credible military option if the talks were to have any chance of success. 'There is no doubt that Iran is agreeing to talks because it is feeling squeezed by the sanctions and because it understands that there is more than one alternative on the table,' Yaakov Amidror, Israel's national security adviser, told Army Radio. He also cautioned against allowing Iran to use the talks as 'an umbrella under which it continues to develop its military capability.' But he said that nobody would be happier than the Israelis if the Iranians agreed to give up their nuclear aspirations." http://t.uani.com/AeGADR
Reuters: "France voiced scepticism on Wednesday that planned fresh talks between six world powers and Iran would succeed since Tehran still did not seem sincerely willing to negotiate on the future of its controversial nuclear programme... 'I am a little sceptical ... I think Iran continues to be two-faced,' French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe told i-Tele television. 'That's why I think we have to continue to be extremely firm on sanctions (already imposed on Iran), which in my view are the best way to prevent a military option that would have unforeseeable consequences.'" http://t.uani.com/zhmZDs
Sanctions
WSJ: "MTN Group Ltd. will only exit Iran if South Africa were to apply sanctions on the country, Chief Executive Sifiso Dabengwa said Wednesday, sticking to its position that it has done nothing wrong in the country and that it represents a good business with growing subscribers. The South African telecom company is facing international pressure to pull out or scale down its operations in Iran, which has been accused by the U.S. and many European Union countries of seeking to develop nuclear weapons-a charge it has denied... MTN has a 49% stake in Iran's second-largest mobile phone operator and derives 21% of its subscriber base from Iran, according to recent figures from MTN... The telecom company and its Iran operation was the latest target of U.S. lobby group United Against Nuclear Iran, which has sent letters to the company and U.S. congressmen in an effort to get MTN out of the Middle Eastern country, accusing the mobile operator of aiding the Iranian government in tracking phone users. MTN last week denied those claims. Mr. Dabengwa said Wednesday that interception equipment is installed in all countries where the company operates. 'What the government decides to do with that equipment is not in our hands,' he said. 'We cannot say who they listen to and when.'" http://t.uani.com/yvQ4DC
Reuters: "South African mobile phone operator MTN Group said it is struggling to get its money out of Iran due to tougher Western sanctions, reflecting the tightening international noose around Tehran. Africa's biggest mobile operator, which has units in the Middle East, is no longer able to use Dubai-based banks to move money out of Tehran and is looking for ways to swap cash with companies that need to move payments in, Chief Executive Sifiso Dabengwa told reporters following its annual results presentation. 'It is a challenge because of the sanctions against the central bank and a number of financial institutions,' he said." http://t.uani.com/xts0ax
Human Rights
AP: "Iran's supreme leader has ordered the creation of an Internet oversight agency that includes top military and political figures in the country's boldest attempt to control the web. Wednesday's announcement on the state media follows a series of high-profile crackdowns on cyberspace including efforts to block opposition sites and setting up special teams for what Iran calls its 'soft war' against the West and allies... The order by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei gave no specifics on the new group. But it includes powerful figures in the security establishment such as the intelligence minister and the commander of the Revolutionary Guard." http://t.uani.com/wc6da8
Foreign Affairs
Reuters: "A journalist who worked for an Iranian news agency has been arrested in connection with last month's Israeli embassy car bomb blast, police and court officials said on Wednesday, the first arrest linked to the attack. The February 13 blast, which wounded an Israeli defence attache's wife, her driver and two others, coincided with a foiled attack on Israeli diplomatic staff in Tbilisi, Georgia, and Israel has said both were engineered by the Quds Force, a covert arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps. The journalist, Mohammed Kazmi, was an employee of state television channel Doordarshan and also freelanced for Iran's state funded Islamic Republic News Agency, his lawyer and members of his family said. It was not immediately clear if he still worked for the agency." http://t.uani.com/yHscoH
NYT: "The Federal Bureau of Investigation offered a $1 million reward on Tuesday for information about a former F.B.I. agent who disappeared in Iran five years ago. The F.B.I. also said it would have billboards with a picture of the missing man, Robert A. Levinson, put up in Afghanistan, Pakistan and other places in southwest Asia. Fliers and radio announcements are also planned. The effort, announced at a news conference in Washington, is the latest move in the bureau's long campaign to find Mr. Levinson, who disappeared in March 2007 while on Kish Island, a resort area off the coast of Iran." http://t.uani.com/Ac80EI
WSJ: "A spokesman for Gaza's Hamas rulers said Wednesday that the militant group wouldn't strike Israel if there were a war between Iran and the Jewish state. In a further sign of the weaking of Iran's regional influence, Fawzi Barhoum said in an interview with the Associated Press that Hamas's weapons are 'humble' and meant for defending Palestinians. Hamas doesn't have the ability to be 'part of any regional war,' he said. Mr. Barhoum's comments might lessen Israeli concerns that if war erupted, the Iran-allied Hamas would fire rockets at Israel. Gaza militants have fired thousands of rockets into Israel over the years. While Hamas's remaining silent wouldn't remove the missile threat on Israeli targets from Iran, it would free up Israel's military from having to fight on a southern front." http://t.uani.com/xuvZJ4
Opinion & Analysis
Aaron David Miller in IHT: "Myths and facts conflate all too easily in our opinion-driven politics. One of the most dangerous these days is that President Obama's Iran policy has been taken hostage by election year pandering to Israel and the pro-Israel community in America. It's a pernicious trope that runs counter to reality. If anything, election year uncertainties will work far more to make Obama a cautious warrior when it comes to green lighting an Israeli attack against Iran or launching one of his own... The narrative is that a president caught up in election-year politics is at the mercy of the Israelis (pushing him to let them attack Iran or do the job for them), their supporters in America (even more worried about Iran with nukes), Congress (pressing the administration to be tougher), and the Republicans (waiting to pounce). Could anyone listening to Barack Obama this week at the Aipac policy conference draw any other conclusion? The president's rhetoric has toughened, but his Aipac speech was smart politics and also smart policy. He has a stake in signaling the Iranians that this issue is at the top of his agenda and that they shouldn't be relaxed about military action; reassuring the Israelis that he takes their concerns seriously without giving into an irrepressible slide toward war; and communicating to the Russians and Chinese that he plans to raise the pressure on Iran while leaving open the possibility of diplomacy, however slim that may be. The reality is that if this were 2011, and not an election year, and the current tensions were as high as they are now, the president's policy would be very much the same - buy time to determine if nonmilitary pressure against Iran can work (oil sanctions will kick in this summer); reassure Israel of his seriousness but don't give ironclad commitments (yet) that America will take care of the Iranian nuclear problem if Israel will stay its hand. The president isn't there yet. This is hardly pandering. Obama is trying to square a circle on Iran which for the time being can't be conclusively squared. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will seek a green light to take military action if he deems it necessary; the president wants a red light - for now - to give nonmilitary means more time to work. Neither will get what he wants. But what will emerge - and what should emerge - is enough of a consensus to ratchet up pressure and avoid war for now. The notion that Obama is conceding the playing field to a trigger-happy Israel just doesn't add up. Nor does the president believe he needs to toughen up his approach in order to pre-empt attacks from his political opponents. Foreign policy is not figuring prominently in this campaign and bellicose words from his Republican challengers are out of step with the American public's main priority: the economy. Obama has been tough enough on national security to get the benefit of the doubt. The last thing Americans want is another military adventure abroad, and the Republicans know it. Iran hasn't yet become a dynamic issue in America's electoral politics, and the administration is trying to keep it that way. If election politics is having an influence in the president's thinking on Iran, it's paradoxically serving as a brake, not as a catalyst to war. An Israeli strike on Iran carries many risks and uncertainties, and America will almost certainly be drawn in." http://t.uani.com/y8SERs
Claudia Rosett in Forbes: "It's time for the next installment in the adventures of the Chariot, a Russian-operated freighter that made headlines in January for delivering tons of Russian munitions to Syria. The Chariot then sailed out of the news for a while. But, with a flair for choosing disturbing destinations, this same ship has just called at Iran. Though, despite the many layers of sanctions on Iran, that's not to accuse the Chariot of violating any sanctions. If anything, the voyages of the Chariot go far to illustrate some of the commerce still permitted, despite assorted sanctions on some of the Chariot's chosen ports of call, including, over the past year, Syria, Iran and the Congo. It was thanks to a fluke of stormy weather that the Chariot drew attention back in January, when high seas led her to anchor off Cyprus. Cypriot authorities discovered the Chariot was crammed with Russian arms bound for Syria. Mindful that Syria's Assad regime has been trying to crush a mass revolt by killing thousands of its own people, Cypriot authorities released the Chariot only after obtaining assurances she would bypass Syria. Instead, the Chariot's crew turned off their ship's Automatic Identification System transponder, which transmits a vessel's location, and the Chariot slipped quietly into the Syrian port of Tartus, which hosts a Russian naval facility. Russian authorities later confirmed that the Chariot had delivered the weapons to Syria, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov telling a press conference in Moscow, 'We are not violating any international agreements or U.N. Security Council resolutions.' (That's correct, because as a veto-wielding member of the United Nations Security Council, Russia, along with China, has blocked U.S. and European efforts to impose U.N. sanctions on Syria.) Having delivered her cargo of munitions to Syria, the Chariot went on to Turkey. Data from the IHS Fairplay shipping information service show that the Chariot called at Turkey's Iskenderun Explosives Anchorage, then sailed through the Bosphorus and in late January called at the Ukrainian port of Illichevsk. The Chariot then headed back into the Mediterranean, transited the Suez Canal, rounded the Arabian Peninsula, passed through the Strait of Hormuz, and, arriving about Feb. 29, anchored for 33 hours at the Iranian port of Assaluyeh. In the eyes of the Russian government, this counts as business as usual. Whether the U.S. and European Union would view it so casually is a different matter. Assaluyeh, located in Iran's Bushehr Province, is one of seven Iranian ports served by an Iranian port operator, Tidewater Middle East Co., which has been blacklisted by the U.S. and EU as owned or controlled by the proliferation and terror-linked Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. According to the U.S. Treasury, Tidewater 'has been used by the IRGC for illicit shipments,' and its Shahid Rajaee container terminal at another Iranian port, Bandar Abbas, 'has played a key role in facilitating the Government of Iran's weapons trade.'" http://t.uani.com/wJG0cm
Sean Goforth in The National Interest: "Senator Richard Lugar recently warned of the growing threat posed by the Venezuela-Iran alliance. Lugar's concern is a scenario in which Iran manages to block transit through the Strait of Hormuz, giving Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez the opportunity to deal Washington a 'double blow' by simultaneously cutting off oil exports to the United States. On the surface, this may seem worrying. The two countries have a long tradition of trying to rile oil markets through a combination of bravado-Iran recently announced that it will preempt EU sanctions by halting oil sales to Britain and France-military exercises and repeated vows to cripple the United States any way they can. Chávez has proven willing to use Venezuelan oil for his political ends, primarily by doling out fuel subsidies to his regional allies but also by delivering oil products to Iran in clear defiance of international sanctions. Yet despite his bluster, Chávez has kept the oil flowing north since he came into office, except for brief period in 2002-2003 when a worker's strike against Chávez halted oil exports. Behind the scenes, the anti-American alliance is in tatters. Key to the partnership is Iran's ability to use Venezuela as a bridgehead for an expanded network of ties throughout Latin America. Shortly after elections brought Chávez allies to power in Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua, Iran's trade with Latin America soared, tripling from 2007-2008. To help bring those leaders closer into the fold, Venezuela and Iran pledged aid to Bolivia and Nicaragua that, when combined, amounted to more than 20 percent of each country's GDP. Despite this, Iran's support network in the region has thinned since 2010. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's four-country tour of Latin America in January, which Lugar and others have cited as a sign of a growing Iranian presence in Latin America, actually demonstrates the decline of Iranian influence. Ahmadinejad didn't visit Brazil, a country that championed Iran's right to nuclear energy less than two years ago. He also didn't go to Bolivia, which is probably the largest recipient of Iranian developmental aid in Latin America. (Iran's bypass of Bolivia is a sign of ongoing fallout from a visit by Ahmad Vahidi, Iran's defense minister, to Bolivia last summer. The visit drew Argentina's ire because the former Quds commander allegedly had a role in the 1994 bombing of a Jewish cultural center in Buenos Aires.) Unable to keep up the guise of broad-based diplomatic support in Latin America, the central features of the illicit relationship between Venezuela and Iran have become more apparent. As one unclassified Department of Defense report from 2010 points out, members of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, an elite wing of Iran's military, 'have an increased presence in Latin America, particularly Venezuela.' Given the surge of Hezbollah operatives in the area, the prevailing belief is that the groups may launch retaliatory attacks against the United States or Western-oriented countries in the Americas if Iran's nuclear installations are bombed. There is also substantial evidence to suggest that Iran is helping mine uranium in Venezuela and that financial institutions in Venezuela have funneled money to Iran's nuclear program. In December, a Venezuelan diplomat posted in Miami was implicated in a foiled Iranian cyber attack on the United States; if true, it is especially alarming because security experts regard the cyber arena as an area in which the playing field between Tehran and Washington is most even." http://t.uani.com/xgn8Jc
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment