|
TOP STORIES
The U.S. government has given plane makers Boeing Co. and
Airbus Group SE the all-clear to deliver jetliners to Iran Air in one of
the highest-profile trade breakthroughs since nuclear sanctions were
lifted on the Islamic Republic in January... Airbus on Wednesday
said some of those deliveries may occur as early as this year, a
spokesman said... Rep. Peter J. Roskam (R., Ill.), a critic of Iran
plane deals, said, "There is a still a long way to go and many more
hurdles to overcome before Iran can actually take delivery of these
planes-and thankfully Congress is committed to making the process as
difficult and expensive as possible." Other obstacles remain,
including plane financing. The U.S. approval "does not make the use
of dollars significantly easier. So any financing will have to be in
euro, already a challenge for a dollar-denominated asset," said
Bertrand Grabowski, managing director of aviation finance at DVB Bank SE. He
added that government export credit agencies will have to play "a
critical role for the first financing, there is no alternative."
That could be a challenge for Boeing. The U.S. government's Export-Import
bank, which can back plane deals, is restricted from supporting
Iran-related transactions. Export credit agencies backing Airbus signaled
they are ready to support a deal with Iran.
President Hassan Rouhani of Iran will be on a mission at
the General Assembly that could have a bearing on whether he keeps his
job: getting the United States to stop blocking bank transactions with
Iran. The historic agreement between his country and the United States
and other world powers over Iran's disputed nuclear work was supposed to
bring an end to sanctions, including financial restrictions. While Iran
has been successful in selling its oil, United States banking
restrictions that predate the nuclear dispute have obstructed increased
trade between Iran and its European business partners. Scared off by penalties
imposed by the United States Treasury Department, European banks have not
provided credit for large-scale projects in Iran. In fact, because of the
American regulations, it remains nearly impossible for ordinary
businesses to transfer money to and from Iran - a problem that has been
enormously frustrating to Mr. Rouhani, who promoted the nuclear agreement
by promising a new economic era... With his political future at risk, Mr.
Rouhani is expected to lobby other heads of state to put more pressure on
the Americans. Because there are still no diplomatic relations between
the United States and Iran, he is not expected to speak with President
Obama directly. Mr. Rouhani's foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, who
speaks to his American counterpart, Secretary of State John Kerry, has
already called for a special meeting of all the parties involved in the
nuclear agreement, on the sidelines of the General Assembly.
The Obama administration did not inform key lawmakers that
it had wired millions of dollars to Iran through the formal financial
system, even as President Obama and other administration officials
publicly defended using cash for a controversial $1.7 billion payment to
Iran by saying that wiring money to the Islamic Republic was
impossible... "No, I was not told that [the payments were
wired]," said Tennessee senator Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee. "I read about it. You may have been the
person that made me aware of it." Corker said that wire transfers
lend "a lack of credibility" to administration statements about
the $1.7 billion cash payment for a decades-old arms deal gone awry, the
first $400 million of which was sent to Iran around the time that the
country released American prisoners in January. Maryland senator Ben
Cardin, a Democrat and ranking member of the committee, could not recall
being told that the payments were wired, but he left open the possibility
that his staffers had been briefed... Senator Cory Gardner told TWS he
hadn't known the money was wired. The Colorado Republican called on the
administration to "come clean with the American public."
"The contradiction is in the president's own words, who said that ...
the United States did not have the ability to wire money to Iran because
Iran lacked access to the U.S. banking networks," Gardner said.
"And then, lo and behold, even when the full weight of the sanctions
were in place in July of 2015, those payments were indeed made by
wire."
UANI IN THE NEWS
Decoding the relationship between Israel and the Arab Gulf
states has become a kind of Middle Eastern Kremlinology... Israel has a
diplomatic mission in Abu Dhabi, and it's not surprising anymore when an
important former Gulf official will appear in public with a prominent
Israeli, or a delegation of Saudi scholars travels to the Jewish state...
This awkward balance was on display at the Iran Risk Summit, held on
September 19 in New York City. The event was United Against A Nuclear
Iran's day-long assessment of the aftermath of the U.S.'s July 2015
nuclear agreement with Iran, and was timed to correspond with the annual
opening of the United Nations General Assembly, taking place this week.
The event included talks from scholars, government officials, and experts
from the U.S. and the Middle East, and Europe, including former UANI
president and ex-Obama Administration arms control official Gary Samore,
who supported last year's nuclear deal, and former Senator and current
UANI president Joseph Lieberman, who did not. The event frequently hinted
at the Arab-Israeli thaw. On three different occasions over the course of
a roughly 40-minute long talk, Yousef Al Otaiba, the United Arab
Emirates' longtime ambassador to the United States, listed Hezbollah in
the same breath as Hamas in discussing Iranian proxy groups active
throughout the Middle East... One reason for the covert on incomplete
status of the upgrade in the Israel-Gulf relationship is the lack of any
apparent progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Tzipi Livni,
one of the heads of the Knesset's opposition Zionist Union party and
Israel's former Foreign Minister and Justice Minister, said as much
during the day's most noteworthy event: A panel discussion with former
Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski; Sheikha Haya Rashed Al
Khalifa, the former Bahraini Ambassador to France and Spain; a former
president of the UN General Assembly; and someone whom Lieberman
introduced as a current adviser to the Bahraini government. Like the UAE,
Bahrain does not recognize Israel's right to exist. But that didn't stop
a prominent Bahraini official-someone who is in fact a member of
Bahrain's royal family-from appearing onstage with (albeit one seat down
from) one of Israel's most well-known political figures for over 45
minutes.
U.S.-IRAN RELATIONS
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on Wednesday expressed
confidence that the landmark nuclear deal between his country and a group
of world powers will be able to weather the volatile U.S. election
season. MSNBC's Chuck Todd asked Rouhani whether he'd rather work
with Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, citing comments they've made on the
nuclear deal. Rouhani said, "Of course, throughout the atmosphere of
presidential elections in the United States, candidates can bring up any
topic that they see best suits the needs of their campaigns. But the
reality remains that when the joint comprehensive plan of action was
passed based on the United Nations Security Council resolution 2231, and
it was approved unanimously, that became an international
agreement... No one can say here or there that I don't accept this
agreement, I want to renegotiate it. This has purely an electoral effect
for some," Rouhani said.
A government watchdog is asking for documents from the
Treasury and State Departments that could shed light on the Obama
administration's controversial $1.7 billion cash payment to Iran. Cause
of Action Institute filed a Freedom of Information Act request on
Wednesday for records that outline and document the payment made to
settle a nearly 40-year-old case over arms sales between the United
States and Iran. Cause of Action also requested all communications about
the payment between the Treasury and State Departments. "Regardless
of the merits of the settlement agreement the State Department reached
with Iran, and regardless of whether the cash payments created
"leverage" for the release of the American hostages, shipping
more than $1.7 billion in untraceable cash to the world's leading state
sponsor of terrorism is nonsensical - particularly when alternative, more
transparent means were available," wrote Cause of Action in the
request.
CONGRESSIONAL ACTION
The White House threatened Wednesday that President Obama
would veto two bills aimed at curbing the impact of his so-called
"ransom" payment to Iran for the release of American
hostages. The administration issued the veto warnings against House
bills, one that would forbid any future ransom payments to Iran and
another that would require public disclosure of the assets of all top
Iranian leaders, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The House passed
the latter bill, the Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act, on
Wednesday night by a vote of 282-143.
Administration
Takes Bipartisan Fire over Iran Payment | The Hill
The Obama administration is facing bipartisan skepticism
over its $1.7 billion cash payment to Iran to settle a decades-old
lawsuit that coincided with a prisoner swap. Senate Banking
Committee Republicans and Democrats said in a Wednesday hearing they're
concerned about the implications and precedent set by the payment. They
focused on the fallout from giving Iran--the world's foremost state
sponsor of terrorism--more than $1 billion in untraceable money.
"Hard cash is the preferred currency of terrorism," said Sen.
Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), chairman of the Banking subcommittee on national
security. "How much more harm can Iran and its terrorist allies to
do Americans and the world?"... "There could be only one
purpose in which cash was useful," said Michael Mukasey, attorney
general under George W. Bush, "sponsoring terrorism around the
world... That money is going to buy a lot of dead westerners,"
he said. Mukasey also suggested that Iran could use the cash to buy
nuclear weapons from North Korea. Senators also questioned witnesses
as to whether the administration was legally allowed to make the payment.
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) pointed to a 2000 law that limits US payments
to Iran until American terror victims with lawsuits against Iran conclude
their cases. "This action took place so precipitously,"
said Menendez, who opposed the Iran nuclear deal. "Those victims of
terrorism who have outstanding claims and have not been satisfied in the
case of Iran were cheated out of the opportunity."
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) warned Wednesday that while he
thinks it's likely the Senate will extend Iran sanctions by the end of
the year, the issue could easily dissolve into a partisan fight...
Lawmakers in both parties want to extend the Iran Sanctions Act (ISA),
which is set to expire at the end of the year, but proposals have widely
varied. Top Democrats, including Cardin, have backed a "clean,"
standalone extension. A bill introduced this week that linked the
sanctions to bolstering funding for Israel's military is the most recent
proposal from Republicans. "There's a lot of interest in
Congress to deal with Iran, and if that holds up that debate and we're in
lame-duck session then it's possible everything could fall," said
the Maryland Democrat, who is the ranking member on the Foreign Relations
Committee. With the Senate expected to leave Washington next
week until after the election, any ISA extension is getting kicked to the
end-of-the-year session.
BUSINESS RISK
Dual nationals being held prisoner in Iran, including
three Americans, may have a long wait ahead of them, as Iranian President
Hassan Rouhani reaffirmed in an interview Wednesday that his country
doesn't recognize dual citizenship. MSNBC's Chuck Todd asked Rouhani what
steps Iran is taking to resolve the issue of having Americans in prison.
"First of all, you do know that dual citizenship is not recognized
under Iranian law," Rouhani responded, according to a translation
provided by MSNBC. "Therefore those who have dual citizenship, from
the interpretation of the Iranian laws, are Iranian citizens solely and
only.
SYRIA CONFLICT
Abandoning a long-standing reticence, Iranians are
increasingly candid about their involvement in Syria's war, and informal
recruiters are now openly calling for volunteers to defend the Islamic
Republic and fellow Shi'ites against Sunni militants. With public
opinion swinging behind the cause, numbers of would-be fighters have
soared far beyond what Tehran is prepared to deploy in Syria... Once
Tehran described these forces as military "advisers" but with
around 400 killed on the battlefield, this discretion has slipped and
several thousand are now believed to be fighting Islamic State and other
groups trying to topple Assad. Many Iranians initially opposed
involvement in the war, harbouring little sympathy for Assad. But now
they are warming to the mission, believing that Islamic State is a threat
to the existence of their country best fought outside Iran's
borders. Iran alludes to its fighters in Syria as "defenders of
the shrine", a reference to the Sayeda Zeinab mosque near Damascus,
which is where a granddaughter of the Prophet Mohammad is said to be
buried, as well as other shrines revered by Shi'ites. It is casting
its recruitment net wide. As well as Iranians, it has gathered Shi'ites
from Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan to battle the Syrian
opposition in what has become a sectarian conflict. Fighters killed
in Syria are praised as heroes on state television and given lavish
funerals. Iranian wrestler Saeed Abdevali dedicated the bronze medal he
won at the Rio Olympics to the families of "defenders of the shrine"
who have been killed. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has
described the wars in Syria and Iraq, where Iranian-backed authorities
are also fighting Sunni militants, as crucial to the survival of the
Islamic Republic. If Iranians had not gone and died fighting there,
"the enemy would enter the country", he said,
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani dismissed on Wednesday a
U.S. demand that Syria and Russia ground all aircraft in northern Syria
after the bombing of a humanitarian convoy threatened a precarious
ceasefire. In an interview with NBC News, Rouhani said stopping the
flights would help Islamic State and the Nusra Front, two Islamist groups
fighting the Iran-allied Syrian government. "They must be kept under
pressure," Rouhani said. "If we ground planes it would 100
percent benefit them."
HUMAN RIGHTS
A new campaign group on Wednesday called for a UN probe
into the 1988 massacres in Iran after the release of a decades-old audio
tape shed fresh light on the alleged atrocities. From August 1988 to
February 1989, Iranian authorities executed nearly 5,000 political
prisoners, according to Amnesty International. Iranian opposition groups
have given a figure closer to 30,000. The executions received
limited attention at the time, in part because of a media blackout
imposed Iranian Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who had taken charge of the
country in the 1979 Islamic Revolution. But a 1988 recording
released last month by relatives of a late dissident cleric -- which purportedly
includes discussion of the killings among top Iranian officials -- has
sparked renewed calls for justice. The new group called
"Justice for the Victims of the 1988 Massacre in Iran" launched
Wednesday at a press conference at the United Nations in Geneva. Its
members include Ingrid Betancourt, a former Colombian presidential
candidate held hostage for years by FARC rebels, and Tahar Boumedra, who
served as the UN's top human rights representative in Iraq.
OPINION & ANALYSIS
As he did a year ago, Rouhani will no doubt talk about
peaceful intentions; he'll make the case that Iran is complying with the
term of the nuclear deal; and he'll declare Iran open for
business. And, in each case, he will employ the deceptive and
dangerous Iranian double-speak Tehran trades in reflexively. Iran talks
peace-but promulgates terrorism and radical Islam, while an uncritical
American press and feckless international class turns a blind eye to
ongoing UN violations. All the while the Iranian regime uses recent cash
infusions and new business to expand their radical ambitions... Make
no mistake about it: despite the foolish efforts of the current American
administration to put lipstick on the Iranian nuclear deal, the regime
there remains our avowed enemy. Iran wants to kill Americans. I've seen
them do it in Iraq. They might even wait 10 years (cue, sarcasm) for the
means to do it on a much larger scale...the timeframe after which our
current "deal" expires. Just ask our friends in
Israel. Military veterans like me opposed the Iranian deal in the
first place because, as we saw first-hand on the battlefield, Iran is an
active enemy to American, our allies, and the West. The
post-revolutionary Iranian regime was literally founded on opposition to
American and the West, with their lodestar being "Death to
America." From death squads to powerful IEDs, regime-backed Iranian
agents have targeted and killed Americans and our allies wherever
possible. "Death to America" literally means dead
Americans. In fact, the so-called "moderate" who will
stand at the UN podium today personifies this Iranian mantra. In 1995 he
stood before a group of pro-regime students and proclaimed, "The
beautiful cry of 'Death to America' unites our nation." Just three
years ago, the so-called moderate Rouhani said during his campaign, that
"Saying 'Death to America' is easy. We need to express 'Death to
America' with action. Saying it is easy." Rouhani has taken action,
and history is checkered by countries who didn't take radical words like
this seriously... Economically, there is also a dangerous
misconception that because of the deal, Iran should somehow be viewed as
a global economic partner. The truth is business flowing back into Iran
will quickly transform Iran from a relatively weak, overstretched
economic backwater into a hulking economic and regional power with vast
means to support its political and military ambitions, terror proxies,
and the eventual realization of the regime's dream to build a Shia
empire. Businesses contemplating Tehran as a new investment opportunity
should contemplate enabling such geopolitical consequences. Bottom
line, New York City-the city we love that, as we saw last week, remains
an active terror target-should not open its arms to the leader of a
regime that remains the world's leading state sponsor of
terrorism. When the enemy comes to town, we should give them what
they deserve: the cold shoulder and condemnation. The Iranian deal
has not changed the nature of the Iranian regime; instead, it has only
made that regime more powerful, more legitimate, and more
dangerous. The next president will confront this scary reality.
On Feb. 14, 2005, a massive bomb killed the former prime
minister of Lebanon, Rafik Hariri, my father, along with 22 other
Lebanese. The Special Tribunal for Lebanon at The Hague identified five
Hezbollah operatives as suspected collaborators in the murder. If proved,
that would mean his assassination was carried out by Iran's allies in
Lebanon, who are financed and controlled by the regime in
Tehran. Three years later, in 2008, Hezbollah moved to occupy Beirut,
and after many years of promising that its vast, Iranian-supplied arsenal
was intended only to protect Lebanon from Israel, turned its weapons
against the Lebanese people... Iranian officials brazenly boast that
their country is now in control of four Arab capitals - Beirut, Baghdad,
Sana and Damascus - and gloat over their hegemony. Such bluster is an
obvious threat, which we in Lebanon know to take very seriously, that
Iran wants to expand its influence in the Middle East by sowing discord,
promoting terrorism and sectarian hatred, and destabilizing the region
through proxies, while pretending to be bystanders... How many
schools and hospitals has Iran built in Lebanon? How much help has it
provided for Lebanon to rebuild itself? The answer, of course, is little
to none, and any such Iranian aid is structured entirely to the political
benefit of Hezbollah. Iran has a unique opportunity to help those
who are really fighting extremism in the Arab world. But to do that, it
must stop meddling in Arab affairs, from Yemen and Bahrain to Iraq, Syria
and Lebanon. It must stop feeding Sunni resentment, which only encourages
a fringe minority to think terrorism is the answer. And Iran can force
militias from Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Iran to leave Syria. That
would be a great first step to clear the last tactical hurdle facing
those who are really fighting extremism in the Muslim world. Iran
can be part of the solution. But it must accept the extended Arab hand,
led by Saudi Arabia, for normalized, neighborly relations, allowing Sunni
Arabs to get down to the real task of getting rid of extremism.
According to a July 2016 report by the U.N. Secretary
General, Iranian firms participated in a defense trade show in Iraq last
March, in potential violation of U. N. Security Council resolution
2231. Under the resolution, prior approval is required by the
Security Council for any arms transfer to or from Iran; none was
sought. What's more, one of the firms participating in the trade
show, the Defense Industries Organization (DIO), remains on the U.N.'s
blacklist - even following the nuclear agreement. The report
concludes that Iraqi authorities "should have frozen all of the
entity's funds, other financial assets and economic resources" pursuant
to resolution 2231. However, two months following the report's
publication, no action has been taken to address these apparent
violations... Media coverage of the report around the time of its
release this summer focused on the Secretary General's expression of
concern that recent Iranian ballistic missile launches were "not
consistent with the constructive spirit demonstrated by" the nuclear
agreement. The report's coverage of Iranian arms exports that appear
to constitute violations of resolution 2231, including Iran's high-level
participation at IQDX, received scant attention. Nor does the
Security Council appear to have taken any action following the report,
some two months after its release. Indeed, the evidence is
mounting that there is no appetite for robust enforcement of the nuclear
agreement and its implementing resolution, less than one year from when
they took effect.
The conclusion of the U.S.-Iran nuclear deal-formally the
"Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action"-last year has created a
new and profoundly different set of strategic realities across the Middle
East. While this shift is hardly irreversible, it is moving rapidly, and,
by the time the next American president figures out where the restroom is
in the White House, the process will, like quick-drying cement, be well
set. Among the new realities will be the fact that Israel's
opportunity to act unilaterally-or, say, in concert with Saudi Arabia-to
preempt further development of Iran's nuclear program will have
passed... The constraints that all future U.S. presidents will face
are written in Hillary Clinton's support for the deal; despite issuing
statements larded with caveats, it's clear that the Democratic candidate
has no intention of bucking her increasingly left-leaning party-or Obama,
whose blessing she desperately needs-on a "legacy" achievement. Moreover,
the underlying rationale for the Iran deal-that there is a grand
opportunity to habituate the revolutionary regime in Tehran to the
international order, to transform the Islamic Republic into a
"normal" nation-is likewise entrenched, if only because the
West wants it to be true (and, through the JPCOA, the West has made a
giant wager on the proposition). Already, the Obama Administration has
looked the other way despite Tehran's direct violations of the deal,
notably on ballistic missile testing, and its stepped-up drive, in Iraq
and Syria, for regional hegemony. And there have been no consequences for
taking Americans hostage, including U.S. Navy sailors, or buzzing U.S.
warships in the Persian Gulf... But the most lasting effect of the
JPCOA is the change it has wrought on strategic competition in the Middle
East. It has opened a path for Iran to achieve its strategic goal of
regional domination, possibly without resort to a fielded nuclear
capability at all; its nemesis, the Great Satan United States, has
retreated a very long way from where it stood in 2009. Iran also is
reaping the rewards of strategic cooperation with Russia and has good
reason to think it might entice the Chinese into some sort of similar, if
less explicit, arrangement. What Israel-and the Gulf Arab states as
well-now face is less the threat of instant annihilation than a grinding
war of incredible complexity. And in this struggle they increasingly feel
abandoned by the United States.
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment