|
|
Top Stories
NYT:
"Secretary of State John Kerry said on Sunday that Iran might play a
role at the peace talks on Syria in Switzerland this month. It was the
first time that a senior American official has indicated that Iran might
be involved in the session, which is scheduled to begin Jan. 22, even if
it was not a formal participant. Mr. Kerry said there would be limits on
Iran's involvement unless it accepted that the purpose of the conference
should be to work out transitional arrangements for governing Syria if
opponents of President Bashar al-Assad could persuade him to relinquish
power. Iran has provided military and political support to Mr. Assad.
'Now, could they contribute from the sidelines?' Mr. Kerry said... 'It
may be that there are ways that could happen,' Mr. Kerry added, but he
said the question would have to be decided by Secretary General Ban
Ki-moon of the United Nations, 'and it has to be determined by Iranian
intentions themselves.'" http://t.uani.com/1klXdOr
WSJ:
"This broadening instability, according to Middle East diplomats and
experts, is placing the White House in a growing diplomatic quandary as
its regional allies fall into competing camps amid a intensifying proxy
battle between regional powerhouses Iran and Saudi Arabia. While the U.S.
is trying to shore up the Shiite-led government in Iraq, it
simultaneously is strongly supporting Lebanon's government and Sunni
militias in Syria that are attempting to weaken Iran's political allies
in Beirut and Damascus. The U.S.'s ability to navigate these worsening
regional divisions will greatly influence international attempts to
stabilize Iraq, Lebanon and Syria in the coming months, said these
diplomats. It will likely also determine whether President Barack Obama
succeeds in achieving the top two foreign policy initiatives of his
second term-securing an Arab-Israeli peace agreement and forging a deal
with Iran to contain its nuclear program." http://t.uani.com/1a09v50
NYT:
"But for all its echoes, the bloodshed that has engulfed Iraq,
Lebanon and Syria in the past two weeks exposes something new and
destabilizing: the emergence of a post-American Middle East in which no
broker has the power, or the will, to contain the region's sectarian
hatreds. Amid this vacuum, fanatical Islamists have flourished in both
Iraq and Syria under the banner of Al Qaeda, as the two countries'
conflicts amplify each other and foster ever-deeper radicalism. Behind
much of it is the bitter rivalry of two great oil powers, Iran and Saudi
Arabia, whose rulers - claiming to represent Shiite and Sunni Islam,
respectively - cynically deploy a sectarian agenda that makes almost any
sort of accommodation a heresy. 'I think we are witnessing a turning
point, and it could be one of the worst in all our history,' said Elias
Khoury, a Lebanese novelist and critic who lived through his own
country's 15-year civil war. 'The West is not there, and we are in the
hands of two regional powers, the Saudis and Iranians, each of which is
fanatical in its own way. I don't see how they can reach any entente, any
rational solution.'" http://t.uani.com/1f8fFYk
Nuclear Negotiations
Free Beacon:
"A top Iranian lawmaker and cleric said that the country's uranium
enrichment program could allow it to build a nuclear weapon 'in two
weeks' in order to 'put down Israel,' according to multiple reports in
the Farsi language press. Iranian lawmaker and cleric Muhammad Nabavian
said on Friday that Iran would be able to build a nuclear bomb in 'two
weeks' if it gets 'access to 270 kilograms of 20 percent [enriched
uranium], 10 tons of 5 percent, and 20 thousand centrifuges,' according
to reports on Iran's Radio Farda and in Fararu. 'We are not looking for a
nuclear bomb, but having a nuclear bomb is necessary to put down Israel,'
Nabavian said, according to an independent translation of his remarks
provided to the Washington Free Beacon." http://t.uani.com/1dpSySu
Sanctions
JPost:
"The interim nuclear deal reached between the major powers and the
Islamic Republic on November 24 opened the investment floodgates for
Western companies seeking to capitalize on a new business environment in
Iran. Just in the first week of 2014 - before the slated late January
implementation of the interim agreement - a series of articles capture
the mad dash to jump-start business with Iran... Michael Doran, a senior
fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings
Institution, told the Post, 'The idea that the United States could turn
on and off the flow of investment to Iran like a spigot was always
fanciful. It has sent a clear message that doing business with Iran is
now legitimate, and that Tehran and Washington are on a path to improved
relations. In doing so it has created an influential economic lobby in
the West dedicated to ensuring that the Americans and Iranians remain on
that path. The sanctions regime is not dead, but it is damaged.'" http://t.uani.com/1cw1s35
JPost:
"With the prospect of even wider Iranian trade in the near future,
India's construction of Iran's first deep-water port to meet modern
shipping standards will radically transform Iran's geo-strategic
position, breaking the international economic pressure on Tehran and
transforming Iran into the key transit link for the most cost-effective
transportation corridor for European-Indian Ocean trade. While Iran and
India traditionally have been allies in Afghanistan against Pakistan, New
Delhi's drive to construct a deep-sea port at the Iranian city of
Chabahar along with transportation corridors running northward has been
motivated by New Delhi's economic rivalry with Beijing. For Iran, it
means a centrally important position in the emerging pattern of trade
between Europe and a rising Asia. One of Iran's strategic weaknesses is
its lack of deep-water ports. Iran's southern ports, such as Bandar Abbas
which handles 85 percent of Iranian seaborne trade, can only receive
100,000 ton cargo ships. Since most shipping is conducted via 250,000 ton
cargo vessels, cargo must first be offloaded in the United Arab Emirates
and then sent on smaller ships which can dock in Iran. Aside from the
hundreds of millions of dollars lost to the UAE, Iran is also vulnerable
to a UAE closure of its seaborne trade in the case of conflict between
Iran and the UAE or its GCC and Western allies. Unlike Bandar Abbas,
which is located in the congested waters of the Straits of Hormuz,
subject to constant US naval patrol, Chabahar is located further east and
is the only Iranian port with direct access to the Indian Ocean." http://t.uani.com/1iJkUyp
Terrorism
Free Beacon:
"An Iranian politician known for his role in planning and approving
the deadly 1994 terrorist bombing of a Jewish center in Argentina has
officially been appointed to helm Iran's top foreign policy shop, a
posting formerly held by current President Hassan Rouhani. Ali Akbar
Velayati, a longtime regime insider who serves as a senior foreign policy
adviser to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was recently
selected to head Iran's Center for Strategic Research (CSR), a think tank
closely tied to the country's Expediency Council, a powerful governing
body that reports directly to Khamenei. Argentinian authorities have
singled out Velayati for helping plan and approve the 1994 Argentine
Jewish Mutual Association (AMIA) bombing, an Iranian-orchestrated assault
that killed 85 people and remains the deadliest terror attack in
Argentina's history." http://t.uani.com/1klY6q8
Reuters:
"Bahrain has named a Bahraini citizen who lives in Iran as a main
suspect in what it called planned 'terrorist acts' and said he and his
collaborators had received training and other help from Tehran. Bahrain,
home to the U.S. Fifth Fleet, said last Monday it had foiled an attempt
to smuggle arms and explosives, some made in Iran and Syria, into the
country by boat... Bahrain's chief prosecutor Osama al-Oufi, cited by the
state BNA news agency, said the suspect behind the smuggling operation,
Ali Mafoudh al-Moussawi, was accused of 'planning to commit terrorist
acts and planting explosives targeting vital installations and sovereign
and security locations'. Moussawi recruited a number of people to be
trained in Iran to carry out attacks and formed a group to smuggle the
weapons and explosives into Bahrain, BNA said. Several members of the
group were arrested and confessed to having been trained by Iranians at
camps for the Islamic Republic's elite Revolutionary Guard, BNA said late
on Thursday." http://t.uani.com/1iac8GQ
Human Rights
ICHRI:
"Forty days after the arrest of Qoran scholar Seyed Ali Asghar
Gharavi, 68, his family was allowed to visit with him at Tehran's Evin
Prison. Gharavi has been in solitary confinement since his November 10,
2013, arrest, after Bahar Newspaper published his article, 'Imam:
Political Leader or Spiritual Role Model?' raising scholarly questions
about the historical event of Eid al-Ghadeer, when Shiite Muslims
celebrate the appointment of Ali ibn Abi Talib by prophet Muhammad as his
successor. Mr. Gharavi's family members, some of whom had traveled long
distances to visit with him, were reportedly shocked to see his poor
physical conditions during their minutes-long booth visit with him after
40 days in solitary confinement. Gharavi suffers from chronic back pain
and prostate problems, and he had been under specialized neurological
care for loss of muscle and nerve health in his legs which have led to
his repeated falls recently." http://t.uani.com/1ef7wfK
ICHRI:
"Lawyer and member of the Defenders of Human Rights Center Mahnaz
Parakand discussed necessary steps for implementing human rights
protections in an interview with the International Campaign for Human
Rights in Iran. 'Before thinking to design a Citizenship Rights Charter,
we must implement the Iranian Constitution, even with all its
shortcomings. Many of the articles of the Constitution that are related
to the people's rights have been dormant for years,' she said... 'I
believe drafting this Citizenship Rights Charter is a propaganda tool,
mostly to show off internationally. I don't believe it was written for
inside Iran, but for outside Iran to show that this government is going
to pay attention to the situation of human rights in Iran. Fixing the
situation of human rights in the country or creating democracy in the
society does not [necessarily] mean that new laws should be added. The
existing laws pertaining to the people's rights should be enforced. We
have laws, they are just not enforced. What need do we have for new laws
that are not any different from the old ones?' Mahnaz Parakand told the
Campaign." http://t.uani.com/1aAKYnh
Domestic
Politics
WashPost:
"At the Garage Grill in an upscale Tehran neighborhood, classic rock
plays from the speakers, and photos of Paul Newman, James Dean and hot
rods line the walls. It could be an old-time American diner, except that
its hamburger prices reflect a wealthier target market here. Right next
door, Dukkan Burger serves its fare on butcher paper, with plenty of
Heinz ketchup and French's mustard supplied on request. The clientele
includes young women clutching designer purses, arriving with their dates
in European luxury cars. Greasy burger joints have been part of Tehran's
fast-food landscape for decades, even in the years just after the 1979
Islamic revolution, when any symbol of U.S. culture was denounced as an
example of 'Westoxification.' Those eateries were mostly in downtown
working-class neighborhoods, serving laborers in need of a blast of calories
or students watching their budgets. Now, though, high-end burger
restaurants are suddenly popping up across the city, making the
gut-busting American institution - and the quest for the best burger -
the latest trend in Tehran dining." http://t.uani.com/1dIQ8Sk
Foreign Affairs
AFP:
"Iran's deputy chief of staff General Mohammad Hejazi said Sunday
the Islamic republic was prepared to provide military equipment and
advice to Iraq to help it battle Al-Qaeda. 'If the Iraqis ask, we will
supply them with equipment and advice, but they have no need of
manpower,' Hejazi was cited by the official IRNA news agency as saying.
Hejazi said there had not been any request from Iraq to 'carry out joint
operations against the takfiri terrorists,' a term used to describe
Al-Qaeda. Iraqi forces are preparing a major attack to retake the city of
Fallujah, which has been taken over by fighters from the Al-Qaeda-linked
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), which is also a major force
in the rebellion against President Bashar al-Assad in neighbouring
Syria." http://t.uani.com/1cGKEDb
Opinion &
Analysis
Mitchell B. Reiss
& Ray Takeyh in Foreign Affairs: "Passionate
supporters of the interim accord recently negotiated between Iran and the
P5+1 countries (the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom,
France, and Germany) see the agreement as a landmark event paving the way
for a full-scale resolution of one of the world's most dangerous
problems. Harsh critics take the opposite view, seeing it as a modern-day
Munich paving the way for an eventual nuclear Iran. Both positions are
overblown. On the plus side, the Joint Plan of Action does place some
temporary constraints on Iran's nuclear activities. But these short-term
palliative measures are embedded in a framework of principles that may
define the final agreement to Iran's definite advantage. As negotiations
proceed over what should follow the current accord, Washington should try
to revisit some of interim agreement's provisions and broaden the scope
of negotiations to include Iran's sponsorship of terrorism and its
systemic violation of human rights. It would be a grave error to allow
the Islamic Republic to emerge from the negotiations with its nuclear
ambitions intact, its terrorist activities undiminished, and its people
denied their basic rights. The new Iranian leadership led by President
Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif is made up of
seasoned and cagey negotiators who have handled Iran's nuclear portfolio
for decades. Their strategy has always been to concede to interim demands
in order to secure principles that will favorably define a final,
comprehensive agreement. In the Geneva talks this fall, Iran secured a
major goal -- the ability to continue to enrich uranium. After decades of
wrangling, the international community has finally conceded Iran's claim
that its nuclear program must have an indigenous enrichment capability.
The Iranians extracted another concession as well -- that the final
agreement will itself be an interim one. The Joint Plan of Action
stipulates that the comprehensive accord will 'have a specific long-term
duration to be agreed upon,' after which the 'Iranian nuclear program
will be treated in the same manner as that of any other non-nuclear
weapon state party to the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty).' This
means that at some point in the future, Iran may be able to construct an
industrial-size nuclear infrastructure that will provide it with a
nuclear breakout capacity. As the talks proceed, the international
community has an opportunity to reconsider these and other concessions.
The restrictions imposed on Iran's nuclear program should be permanent
and foreclose the possibility that at any point Iran can produce nuclear
weapons. Among the measures that should be insisted on are the shuttering
of Iran's heavy-water reactor at Arak, the closing of its fortressed
enrichment installation nestled in the mountains at Fordow, and the
shipping out of the country of all of its enriched uranium. Any
verification agreement should include the so-called additional protocol,
which gives international inspectors the right to examine any facility
they deem suspect, and to do so on short notice, so that proscribed
activities or equipment cannot be moved or hidden. As a further
safeguard, sanctions against Iran should be suspended rather than
dismantled. The UN Security Council resolutions have provided the legal
foundation that made the imposition of EU sanctions possible. These
resolutions, meticulously negotiated over the past decade by two
administrations, should not be 'comprehensively lifted,' as the agreement
suggests, but put on hold, so that they could be resurrected quickly
should Iran violate its pledges. This measure would increase the Obama
administration's leverage and complement the current congressional
legislation that would impose additional sanctions on Iran should the
negotiations not end in a deal... Finally, to succeed in nuclear
negotiations with Iran, the Western powers should be mindful of some
basic realities. Iran needs an agreement more than the United States
does. Its battered economy and disaffected populace constitute important
leverage for its negotiating partners. There is no reason for Washington
to seem more eager than Tehran to reach an agreement, and it should not
fear the possibility of a negotiating breakdown if its legitimate demands
are not met. The only final deal worth signing is one that promises a
better future for the United States, its friends and allies in the
region, and the Iranian people." http://t.uani.com/1bKMUJn
Elliot Abrams in
CFR: "The Obama administration is fighting strongly
to prevent Congress from adopting new sanctions legislation that would go
into effect one year from now if, and only if, the nuclear negotiations
fail or Iran cheats on its commitments. It seems that adopting such
legislation would anger the Iranian regime, and would be contrary to the
spirit of the talks. Or something like that. But while we are told to
walk on eggshells lest we offend the delicate Iranians, they continue to
subvert their neighbors. Not for them this idea that, because there are
talks, they should stop shipping arms. Syria is the obvious case, but now
we have a new one: Bahrain. This week Bahraini authorities
discovered 'plastic explosives, detonators, bombs, automatic rifles and
ammunition' which 'were found in a warehouse and onboard a boat
intercepted as it was heading to the country.' ... It is striking that at
the very moment when the Obama administration is pleading with Congress to
be very careful in its behavior, the Iranian regime has no fears and no
hesitation to engage in this subversion. They must have calculated that
the Obama administration is so committed to these nuclear talks, and so
committed to the 'Rouhani narrative' -that Rouhani is a moderate and we
must help him succeed- that nothing they do will affect administration
policy. Sadly, and dangerously, they appear to be right. Not these arms
shipments to Bahrain, nor shipments early last year to Yemen, nor the
famous plot to blow up the Saudi ambassador in a restaurant in
Washington, D.C. have had the slightest impact on administration policy.
This helps explain why the Arabs are so nervous: they see the United
States hell-bent on a nuclear deal and willing to ignore everything else
the Iranian regime is doing. It's an analogue to Obama policy in Syria,
where we have embraced a deal on chemical weapons that leaves Assad free
to murder as many people as he likes as long as he does not use that one
method. For a couple of years after the protests began in Bahrain, Iran
limited itself to broadcasting nasty material in Arabic, and did not try
to subvert the country. U.S. officials repeatedly told me we simply had
no evidence of armed subversion. Well, now we do. What will the American
reaction be? Nothing- you see, this is a delicate moment and we don't
want to upset the nuclear talks. One can only imagine the satisfied
laughter such a position causes in Tehran. And the fear it engenders in
capitals like Manama, Riyadh, and Abu Dhabi." http://t.uani.com/1iJo2u1
Emanuele
Ottolenghi & Saeed Ghasseminejad in the National Post:
"How much sanctions relief will Iran truly get from the interim deal
signed late last year in Geneva? In his recent appearance before the U.S.
House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs Committee, U.S. Secretary of
State, John Kerry was adamant that the Administration's original
assessment of $7-billion over six months was accurate and that other,
much larger assessments, were 'outlandish.' 'We have red teamed and
vetted and cross examined and run through all the possible numbers
through the intel community, through the Treasury Department, through the
people in charge of sanctions,' Kerry said, 'and our estimates are that
at the end of the six months, if they fully comply, if this holds they
would have somewhere in the vicinity of $7-billion total.' All the same,
there seems to be an excess of optimism in the Administration's
assessments. Take sanctions' relief for Iran's oil sales. The agreement
suspends U.S. oil sanctions, which required current Iran customers to
further reduce their oil purchases from Tehran, and it allows oil sales
at current levels - which, according to the International Energy Agency,
were slightly up, at 850,000 barrels per day (bpd) in November 2013. The
Administration's fact sheet claims that Iran will be able to repatriate
$4.2-billion in installments over the six-month period, provided they are
compliant. But this figure does not account for the additional revenue
Iran will recoup as a result of the suspension of sanctions agreed upon
in Geneva. That is worth $4.5-$5-billion, depending on oil prices.
Technically, this money will be paid in largely restricted escrow
accounts, but given recent revelations from Turkey about how Iran managed
to transfer billions through middle men, these restrictions have proven
hollow. How did we get to such figure? Under sanctions Iran's oil buyers
could still purchase some Iranian oil legally, provided they offered
evidence of considerable reductions. In the 19 months since the U.S. oil
sanctions' implementation, those reductions diminished Iran's production
by 1.65 million bpd, approximately 87,000 bpd monthly or 2,900 bpd daily.
We thus assume a gradual reduction of 2,900 bpd every day: In a six month
period, every day Iran would sell 2,900 barrels less than the previous
day, ending up losing a total of 47.24 million barrels. With sanctions'
relief, it will sell those 47.24 million barrels. Assuming a median oil
price of $95 per barrel, this equals $4.487-billion, which increases to
$4.724-billion if one assumes a median oil price of $100. Combined with
the other sources of relief, this puts the total two billion higher than
Mr. Kerry's red teamed figure, and it does not include gold,
petrochemical, and automotive industry sanctions' relief. It also does
not include the possibility that Iran will successfully circumvent the
remaining oil sanctions by selling more crude under the table. In fact,
courtesy of Iran's new president, Hassan Rouhani, we know that Iran has
no intention to stick to a production quota imposed by Western sanctions
- the 2014 budget he just submitted to Iran's parliament is based on the
assumption that Iran will sell 1.5 million bpd of its oil, rather than
850,000 or even one million. That means that Iran is announcing its
intention to cash in on an additional 500,000 barrels a day in declared
revenue during the next fiscal year starting on March 21, 2014. - to
which one should add that oil smuggling by Iran's Revolutionary Guards,
the smugglers-in-chief of the regime, will not only continue, but
probably grow." http://t.uani.com/1dIUkkZ
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment