Thursday, May 10, 2012

Eye on Iran: EU to Review Iran Oil Embargo, Shipping Insurance Ban in June






For continuing coverage follow us on Twitter and join our Facebook group.
  

Top Stories


WSJ: "The European Union will carry out its planned review of its oil embargo on Iran in June, EU diplomats said Thursday, and will also review the timing of a ban on European companies insuring the transport of Iranian crude oil exports. The review of the full oil embargo, which is due to come into effect July 1, was promised in January as a condition for gaining Greek support for the measure. The embargo was adopted in response to concerns about Iran's nuclear program. The shipping insurance ban was finalized in April but the U.K. won temporary exemptions to allow European companies to provide liability and environmental insurance on shipments of Iranian crude until July 1. It would require a unanimous decision by all 27 member states to allow any change to the details of the embargo and the shipping insurance ban. Diplomats have signaled changes are unlikely. However with a second round of talks between Iran and six major powers set to take place in Baghdad May 23 on Iran's nuclear program, the review could give the EU some room for maneuver on the measures." http://t.uani.com/KIbZxq

WSJ: "Satellite photographs published by a Washington think tank appear to back United Nations inspectors' concerns that Iran has been seeking to cleanse a military site south of Tehran suspected of being used for nuclear-weapons work. The online posting of the images by the Institute for Science and International Security could have a significant impact on a crucial month of diplomacy aimed at containing Tehran's nuclear program... The IAEA has sought over the past year to visit the military site south of Tehran, called Parchin, in the belief it contains an explosive chamber that may have been used in nuclear-weapons development. IAEA inspectors specifically asked to visit Parchin in February, but were denied access. In recent weeks, the IAEA's director-general, Yukiya Amano, has publicly raised concerns that Tehran might be seeking to cover up its past work at Parchin. The Japanese diplomat cited continuing 'activities' at Parchin, which Vienna-based diplomats said was a reference to cleansing activities at the facility." http://t.uani.com/J34wSC

Bloomberg: "Essar Oil Ltd., the operator of India's second-largest non-state refinery, provisionally hired a crude tanker to load from the Iranian port of Kharg Island, shipping data show. The Mumbai-based company chartered the United Star to carry 130,000 metric tons on May 22 for delivery to Vadinar, according to reports from three shipbrokers including Galbraith's Ltd. in London. The Liberia-flagged vessel, classed as a Suezmax tanker, is under way in the Persian Gulf. Provisional fixtures are subject to changes or cancellation. Rabin Ghosh, a Mumbai-based spokesman for Essar, declined to comment. The company, which has a contract to import about 100,000 barrels a day of Iranian crude, will buy 85 percent to 90 percent of agreed volumes, two people with knowledge of the plan said on May 2." http://t.uani.com/LXguU0


Nissan Banner

    
Nuclear Program  & Sanctions 

Reuters: "World powers must not yield in their demand Iran abandon sensitive nuclear projects, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said on Wednesday, arguing Tehran had been allowed to 'dictate' terms despite being vulnerable to sanctions. Speaking a day after the formation of a unity government that is fueling speculation a preemptive war on Iran could be in the works, Ayalon voiced cautious hope for a peaceful resolution from international talks with Tehran due to resume on May 23. 'We would very much like the negotiations to succeed, because a political solution is better than any other option,' he said. 'At the same time, a bad deal would be worse than no deal.'" http://t.uani.com/KNP91K

CSM: "When Iran agreed to serious engagement with world powers over its controversial nuclear program last month, it put special store in the agreed upon process: a "step-by-step approach and reciprocity." For the Iranians, that meant draconian sanctions imposed by the US, European Union, and the UN would be eased with each concession from Tehran. But as the next round of talks looms on May 23 in Baghdad, questions are being raised about whether the US can - or even intends to - ease sanctions no matter what steps Iran agrees to take. One senior Iranian figure last week stated that Iran's 'minimum expectation' in Baghdad talks is lifting sanctions... Administration officials say that 'sanctions relief is not on the table unless and until we see substantial concessions' from Iran, says Suzanne Maloney, an Iran specialist at the Brookings Institution in Washington. 'I don't think there is really any give on the sanctions issue ... in part because in a political year, an election year, with a Congress that is very solidly behind these sanctions, it would be very difficult for the president to appear to be waffling on them at all,' says Ms. Maloney." http://t.uani.com/KNQENh

Foreign Affairs

Daily Telegraph: "Fazel Hadi Muslimyar, speaker of the Afghan senate, said the Iranian ambassador had made the threat last week as he demanded senators reject the deal between Barack Obama and Hamid Karzai. His intervention triggered a diplomatic row as senators denounced his meddling in Afghan affairs and called for his removal. 'He told me that if we signed the agreement with the Americans then they would kick out the refugees,' Mr Muslimyar said. 'We want the ambassador removed. They should send a diplomat, not a dictator.' Iran has long lobbied against the partnership, fearing it would result in American bases along its eastern border and permanent encirclement by US forces." http://t.uani.com/JefoRf

Asharq Al-Awsat: "Egyptian security sources have informed Asharq Al-Awsat that the security apparatus in Cairo believe that Iran may be funding the smuggling of arms - belonging to the former Libyan arm - into the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt. The source added that the lack of security along the Egypt - Israeli border has increased the concerns that a new attack on Israel could be launched from Egypt's Sinai... As for the suspicions that Iran is involved in the smuggling of arms from Libya into the Gaza Strip, the Egyptian security source informed Asharq Al-Awsat that Iran might continue its attempts to incite Egyptian - Israeli tensions by utilizing hard-line groups operating from the Sinai Peninsula. The source also revealed that Egyptian authorities had observed Iranian businessmen and nationals, carrying western passports, entering the country following the collapse of the Mubarak regime." http://t.uani.com/IMSemQ

National Post: "A Toronto Islamic school's teaching materials, which have prompted a police hate crimes investigation because of their portrayal of Jews, were originally published by Iranian organizations, records show. The passages of the East End Madrassah's texts that drew the most widespread condemnation are excerpts from two books, including one published by the Al Balagh Foundation in Iran. The other book, which contrasts Islam with 'the Jews and the Nazis,' was published by the Mostazafan Foundation of New York, which the U.S. alleges was a front organization for the Iranian government." http://t.uani.com/Ji4gAl

Opinion & Analysis


David Albright and Olli Heinonen in ISIS: "The recent nuclear talks with Iran in Istanbul represent a significant gain for the United States. These talks have established a step-by-step, or action-for-action, process to prevent Iran increasing its nuclear weapons capabilities and create confidence that Iran is not on a quest for nuclear weapons. However, success is by no means assured. An Iranian decision to address at least part of the evidence about its past military nuclear programs is necessary to build confidence at this critical, initial stage that this difficult negotiating process has a chance of achieving its ultimate goal. It would be imprudent to assume Iran is acting in good faith about the rest of its nuclear programs without addressing those past activities which are at the heart of the dispute between Iran and the international community over whether or not it intends to build nuclear weapons.  Only by understanding Iran's past military nuclear activities can confidence develop that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons today. Recent evidence about Iran's past military nuclear activities at the Physics Research Center (PHRC) provides an opportunity to start dealing with this difficult issue. Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have scheduled additional talks in Vienna on May 14-15 aimed at resolving the IAEA's concerns about Iran's past and possibly on-going efforts to make nuclear weapons.  One way to increase the chances that these talks succeed, unlike the two previous rounds, is for Iran to demonstrate a new openness about discussing the PHRC's activities in the 1990s.  Iran should take the opportunity of the May meeting to commit to providing both a revised declaration about the PHRC and access to its former members. The success of the Istanbul talks has raised expectations that in the next meeting at the end of May in Baghdad the United States can at least lay the basis for an agreement where Iran would halt its most threatening uranium enrichment activities.  The priority is stopping the further production of 20 percent enriched uranium, removing stocks of enriched uranium, and freezing activities at the deeply buried Fordow enrichment plant, including the installation of any more centrifuges at this site and Natanz. Achieving these steps would make it more time consuming at least during the next year for Iran to make weapon-grade uranium for nuclear weapons, the most important and difficult part of Iran making a nuclear weapon. But many believe that Iran does not intend to make any real concessions and is using the negotiations as a ploy to buy time for the further development of its ability to rapidly make weapon-grade uranium and nuclear weapons. Underlying this suspicion is the central uncertainty of whether Iran wants to acquire nuclear weapons. It is imperative Iran concretely signal its commitment not to build nuclear weapons. The most straightforward way for Iran to show such a commitment is to cooperate with the IAEA. It wants Iran to address a range of evidence about the past and possibly on-going military dimensions of Iran's nuclear program. The evidence points to both a parallel military nuclear program and programs to develop the nuclear weapon itself, often called nuclear weaponization. Given that Iran has resisted cooperation with the IAEA for several years and the evidence has meanwhile increased substantially, this process is likely to be lengthy." http://t.uani.com/J36dPY 

Patrick Clawson in Foreign Affairs: "To judge the effectiveness of Western sanctions against Iran, it is important to first establish their purpose. U.S. officials and their European counterparts have set out a number of different goals for the sanctions regime, including deterring the proliferation of nuclear technology across the Middle East, as other countries imitate Iran, and persuading Iran to comply with the UN Security Council's orders to suspend all nuclear enrichment. The sanctions have met some of those aims and failed to meet others. But for the Obama administration, they have succeeded in one crucial way -- bringing Iran back to the negotiating table. The question, then, is not whether sanctions have worked but whether the strategy they serve is correct. To begin with, Tehran's decision to reenter discussions about the future of its nuclear program represents a dramatic about-face. During the January 2011 round of negotiations between Iran and the so-called P5 plus 1 (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany), for example, Tehran rejected any talk of its nuclear program. For the next 15 months, it refused to meet until the P5 plus 1 accepted the precondition of Iran's right to enrich uranium. In new talks in Istanbul this past March, however, Iran agreed to discuss its nuclear efforts and dropped its precondition. The Islamic Republic did not do this out of goodwill but because of tougher sanctions. By demonstrating a willingness to negotiate and working closely with Europe, the Obama administration has rallied many countries behind its efforts. This broad coalition has established increasingly severe sanctions -- results that the United States could not have achieved alone. In March, for example, the European Union banned the largest Iranian banks from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, the main institution used for transferring money between banks across the globe, thereby crippling the ability of Iranian financial institutions to conduct business. And earlier this year, the European Union began imposing an oil embargo on Iran that has already reduced the country's oil exports. In the last six months, these measures, along with Iran's erratic economic policies, have robbed the currency of half its value and, according to Iranian estimates, caused inflation to soar above 20 percent (and likely much higher). Iranian Central Bank Governor Mahmoud Bahmani described the sanctions 'as worse than physical war,' proclaiming Iran 'under siege.' And Iranian business leaders worry that more sanctions are on the way, since the United States and Europe have made clear that the longer the impasse over its nuclear ambitions continues, the more economic and political trouble Iran will face... Whether or not diplomacy results in an agreement, the sanctions have already fulfilled the core objective of the Obama administration -- namely, kick-starting negotiations. But that is not the right goal. Given Iran's poor track record of honoring agreements, negotiations remain a gamble because they may never lead to an agreement, let alone one that can be sustained. Rather than focus on talks that may not produce a deal, then, the United States should place far more emphasis on supporting democracy and human rights in Iran. A democratic Iran would likely drop state support for terrorism and end its interference in the internal affairs of Arab countries such as Iraq and Lebanon, improving stability in the Middle East. And although Iran's strongly nationalist democrats are proud of the country's nuclear progress, their priority is to rejoin the community of nations, so they will likely agree to peaceful nuclearization in exchange for an end to their country's isolation." http://t.uani.com/K59UXo

Eye on Iran is a periodic news summary from United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) a program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear Iran, Inc., a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Eye on Iran is not intended as a comprehensive media clips summary but rather a selection of media elements with discreet analysis in a PDA friendly format. For more information please email Press@UnitedAgainstNuclearIran.com

United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons.  UANI is an issue-based coalition in which each coalition member will have its own interests as well as the collective goal of advancing an Iran free of nuclear weapons.

No comments:

Post a Comment