Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Eye on Iran: Obama Comes Out Swinging Against New Iran Sanctions








Join UANI  
 Like us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter View our videos on YouTube
   
Top Stories

AP: "President Barack Obama came out swinging Friday against congressional attempts to slap fresh sanctions on Iran, warning such a move would likely destroy nuclear talks and increase prospects for a military showdown. Vowing to veto any sanctions that reach his desk, Obama pleaded, 'Just hold your fire.' In an unusual move by a foreign leader, British Prime Minister David Cameron said he was personally calling U.S. senators to say that new sanctions would drive a wedge through international unity. Standing side by side with Cameron at the White House, Obama said world powers would be sympathetic to Iran and would blame the U.S. if Congress moved ahead with more sanctions while fragile negotiations are under way. At that point, Obama argued, the world would lose its best chance to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. 'Congress should be aware that if this diplomatic solution fails, then the risks and likelihood that this ends up being at some point a military confrontation is heightened - and Congress will have to own that as well,' Obama said in his most impassioned rebuke yet of the sanctions effort... Obama argued that Iran would rightfully interpret any new sanctions - even ones that don't kick in right away - as violating the terms of the interim deal reached in 2013 that made the current talks possible. He said the likelihood that Iran would pull out of the talks was 'very high.' 'They would be able to maintain that the reason that they ended negotiations was because the United States was operating in bad faith and blew up the deal,' Obama said. 'And there would be some sympathy to that view around the world.'" http://t.uani.com/1BaUYCM

Guardian: "The death of prosecutor Alberto Nisman in Buenos Aires this weekend is yet another reminder of how Argentina has over the last two decades been bungling the judicial investigation into one of the deadliest antisemitic attacks anywhere in the world since the Holocaust. The energetic, garrulous Nisman, 51, was driven by a deep passion to bring to justice a small group of Iranian officials his evidence allegedly showed had been behind the terrorist bombing of the AMIA Jewish community centre in downtown Buenos Aires two decades ago. That massive blast, ascribed to a suicide bomber driving a stolen white Renault van loaded with explosives, resulted in the death of 85 people, mainly Jewish. Hundreds of others were injured as the blast sent a ghastly plume of smoke billowing over the city of Buenos Aires on the morning of 18 July 1994... In 2007, on the basis of Nisman's investigation as the case prosecutor, Interpol issued an international arrest warrant for Iranian officials who are suspected of having masterminded the blast. Chief among them was Mohsen Rabbani, the former Iranian cultural attache in Argentina at the time of the blast. Nisman's pursuit of the Iranian lead in the case seemed to give purpose to a case that had been bogged down since its start by incompetence and blatant attempts to bury leads by its previous investigators... Nisman's wiretaps allegedly show that the 'impunity for oil' negotiations were being conducted by phone through a middleman in Buenos Aires with the main suspect in Iran, Rabbani himself... 'Iran admits and even boasts that it carried out the attack,' the prosecutor said of the intercepted calls. 'It's astounding how the attack is admitted.'" http://t.uani.com/15rZ9iu

WashPost: "Lebanon and Israel braced Monday for possible retaliation by Hezbollah for the deaths of six of the group's fighters in an alleged Israeli raid in Syria, as Iran confirmed that one of its senior military commanders was also killed in the attack. The strike on Sunday, in which Israeli helicopters fired missiles at Hezbollah vehicles traveling in a Syrian-controlled portion of the Golan Heights, sent regional tensions soaring at a critical time, prompting fears of another war such as the one that erupted in 2006 with sudden and unexpected ferocity... That one of those killed in the strike was the son of Imad Mughniyah, a revered Hezbollah military commander assassinated in a 2008 bombing also widely blamed on Israel, compounded expectations that Hezbollah would feel compelled to respond... Hezbollah and Iranian commanders reportedly also died in those attacks, but this was the first to kill such senior figures, and also the first to have elicited such a public response from Hezbollah. Israel has neither confirmed nor denied any of the strikes, including this one, which Israeli officials quoted by news agencies have said was intended to preempt a planned Hezbollah infiltration into Israel... The commander was identified as Brig. Gen. Mohammed Aliallah Dadi of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, who was serving as a 'military adviser to the Syrian government,' according to the official Iranian news agency IRNA." http://t.uani.com/1Cea3F7

   
Nuclear Program & Negotiations

Reuters: "Iran and major powers will meet again next month to try to narrow differences over Tehran's nuclear programme after making limited progress on Sunday... All sides agreed to step up efforts to reach a political understanding by the end of March with a view to clinching a full-blown deal by their self-imposed deadline of June 30. 'The mood was very good, but I don't think we made a lot of progress,' France's negotiator Nicolas de la Riviere told reporters as he left the European Union mission in Geneva. Iranian deputy foreign minister Abbas Araqchi said that discussions had been 'good' and 'extensive'... The negotiations, held at the level of political directors, capped five days of diplomacy in Geneva and Paris, including lengthy meetings between U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. 'Substantive progress is limited, experts will continue tomorrow (Monday) morning. It is fair to say that everybody is committed to stepping up efforts,' a diplomat told Reuters." http://t.uani.com/1xPhuw8

AFP: "A complex deal on Iran's nuclear programme can be reached only if global powers stop pressuring Tehran, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif warned Saturday evening. 'If the Western countries want to negotiate with the Islamic Republic of Iran, they must make a political decision, which for some could be difficult, and stop with the pressure,' Zarif told Iranian state television... [Iran's deputy foreign minister Abbas] Araghchi, who has spent three days meeting with senior US officials and has also met with Russian officials in preparation for Sunday's talks, meanwhile told the Fars news agency a deal would depend on Washington showing 'good will'... A Western source close to the talks however said the talks did not seem to be moving forward significantly and that the biggest stumbling block was on the Iranian side. 'The Iranians have not yet made enough gestures to enable us to reach a good deal that would ensure a substantial reduction of their residual (uranium) enrichment capacity, so we collectively can be assured they don't have the technical capacity to rapidly develop a nuclear bomb,' he told AFP." http://t.uani.com/1ujWYUd

AFP: "Iran's foreign minister said Monday that he could hold fresh talks with US Secretary of State John Kerry this week on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos. 'It is possible I will meet Kerry or other ministers from the P5+1 group' of major powers engaged in nuclear talks with Iran, Mohammad Javad Zarif said. Zarif met Kerry twice last week in Geneva and Paris as the two sides seek to speed up the negotiations to reach a comprehensive agreement on Iran's nuclear programme. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani is also travelling to the Swiss ski resort to join world leaders at the annual gathering, which opens on Tuesday. Zarif said he could hold further meetings with his counterparts from the major powers in Germany early next month on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference." http://t.uani.com/1CJN6YR

Al-Monitor: "US and Iranian negotiators have worked intensively all week to try draft a joint document to speed up nuclear deal talks, but are not expected to present the document at a meeting with six world powers on Jan. 18, diplomatic sources told Al-Monitor. 'Not this round,' a diplomat involved in the talks told Al-Monitor Jan. 17, in response to a query whether a document that US and Iranian negotiators have been working on in Geneva this week would be presented to the other members of the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany).The document the United States and Iranians have been working to draft is called the Principles of Agreement, diplomatic sources said, and is evidently an element of the framework agreement that Iran and the P5+1 have sought to complete by March." http://t.uani.com/1807c7w

Military Matters

AP: "Iran and Russia signed an agreement Tuesday to expand military ties in a visit to Tehran by the Russian defense minister. Sergei Shoigu, in remarks carried by Russian news agencies, said Moscow wants to develop a 'long-term and multifaceted' military relationship with Iran. He said that the new agreement includes expanded counter-terrorism cooperation, exchanges of military personnel for training purposes and an understanding for each country's navy to more frequently use the other's ports. Iran's Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan urged greater cooperation as a means of opposing American ambitions in the region. Moscow and Tehran have staunchly supported Syrian President Bashar Assad throughout Syria's civil war, while Washington advocates regime change and supports rebel groups. 'Iran and Russia are able to confront the expansionist intervention and greed of the United States through cooperation, synergy and activating strategic potential capacities,' Dehghan said. 'As two neighbors, Iran and Russia have common viewpoints toward political, regional and global issues.'" http://t.uani.com/1yljMbb

Congressional Sanctions

WSJ: "Two U.S. senators stepped up pressure on both the White House and Iran on Sunday, drafting legislation to impose new sanctions on Iran if U.S.-led talks to curb its nuclear ambitions collapse. Sens. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.) and Robert Menendez (D., N.J.) said their bill would impose the sanctions only if Iran and U.S. diplomats miss a July deadline for a deal to curb Tehran's nuclear program. The Senate Banking Committee is set to debate the bill and possibly hold a vote Thursday." http://t.uani.com/1ykkbL0

AFP: "Supporters of Iran sanctions in the US Senate have unveiled a toned-down bill aimed at gaining enough votes to override a presidential veto... On Thursday, the Senate banking committee will discuss and vote on the re-jigged bill proposed by Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Robert Menedez, two senators who have sponsored previous sanctions bills. Their long-awaited bill was made public Friday but has not been formally introduced in the Senate. It would gradually impose sanctions against Iran if, by July 1, no final deal is reached in the talks under way between Tehran and the so-called P5+1 group -- the United States, Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia. July 1 is the current deadline for the international negotiations, at a stalemate after two previous deadlines passed without a final agreement. The calendar proposed by Kirk and Menendez would kick in a few days later, and escalate over several months... 'The guillotine cuts into the wallet,' but not in one fell swoop, a senior congressional staffer told AFP. 'It cuts through over the next six months.' ... In December 2013, the two lawmakers had proposed a much more stringent law, which set specific and very strict criteria for any final agreement with Iran -- including that Tehran completely dismantle illicit aspects of their nuclear program and stop its support for terrorism. The new proposal would make these conditions non-binding, which leaves Obama with more flexibility." http://t.uani.com/1Bxs2rb

Reuters: "The sponsors of a bill to impose new sanctions on Iran if there is no agreement on its nuclear program by July said on Friday they would push ahead with the legislation, despite warnings that it could torpedo international negotiations. 'All I'm saying is let us put in prospective sanctions that don't get imposed... until July,' Democratic U.S. Senator Robert Menendez said at a news conference in his home state of New Jersey... Kirk also backed action in Congress. 'If anything can stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, it is maintaining the united bipartisan front in Congress to end Iran's uranium enrichment and plutonium paths to the bomb,' he said in a statement." http://t.uani.com/1xsiqHK

Al-Monitor: "The battle between Congress and the White House over Iran begins in earnest next week as the Republican-controlled Senate takes the first step toward passing sanctions legislation critics say could derail nuclear talks. The Senate Banking Committee is set to vote Jan. 22 on new legislation by Sens. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., which would gradually impose sanctions if Iran doesn't agree to a deal by July 6. The senators have greatly watered down their original bill in a bid to get a veto-proof majority of 67 members on board. President Barack Obama is expected to make a forceful case against the new sanctions push in his State of the Union address Jan. 20. The president is also sending some of his top lieutenants - State Department No. 2 Antony Blinken and Treasury sanctions chief David Cohen - to make the case against new sanctions at a Banking Committee hearing Jan. 20, ahead of the bill's markup Jan. 22. Meanwhile, House leaders of both parties are working on their own sanctions effort, Al-Monitor has learned. Blinken and Cohen will be followed at the Jan. 20 hearing by outside experts from pro-Israel think tanks that have been involved in the sanctions effort: Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and Patrick Clawson of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. The two administration officials are also slated to testify on the morning of Jan. 21 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee regarding 'the status of talks and the role of Congress.' It is the first hearing under new Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn." http://t.uani.com/1yE09gM

AP: "A leading Republican critic of President Barack Obama's foreign policy is pushing new sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, unswayed by a White House veto threat and lobbying by Britain's leader. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina did say Sunday that he would be willing to set aside his efforts if Obama would submit any agreement with Tehran to Congress for lawmakers to approve or reject. An Obama adviser scoffed at the idea as an infringement on presidential authority... Graham described congressional efforts as signaling to the Iranians that 'we would like a political negotiation, a diplomatic solution. But please understand in Iran that the Congress is intent on reapplying sanctions if you walk away from the negotiating table and if you cheat,' Graham said. 'I don't think that's a disruptive message.' As an alternative, he said that if Obama 'thinks sanctions is disruptive to a good outcome, I'm willing to forgo that vote with the understanding that any deal he negotiates will come to the Congress for our approval or disapproval as a check and balance.' White House adviser Dan Pfeiffer contended that Graham 'would like to make all the foreign policy decisions of the United States and be commander in chief. ... It's the president's authority.' Pfeiffer added, 'It does not make any sense for Congress to scuttle that deal ... because that would put America in a bad place, not just in dealing with Iran but with the world.'" http://t.uani.com/1um8gge

Sanctions Relief

Reuters: "Mondo TV SpA signs a new agreement for grant of license for transmitting channel Jam-e-Jam around 70 hours of programs distributed by Mondo TV. License is granted for three years in Farsi language, including exclusive free-tv rights via terrestrial means and without exclusivity via satellite." http://t.uani.com/1ykNoFH

Sanctions Enforcement & Impact

AFP: "A government minister launched a rare attack Monday on Iran's downplaying of the impact of international sanctions, saying that 'lying' to the public over the measures had left the country 'backward'. Mohammad Reza Nematzadeh, the industry, mining and trade minister, delivered the broadside at a conference in Tehran, claiming years of statements about sanctions not hurting the country were false. 'Why should we abandon logic and swear instead or have empty gestures?' Nematzadeh asked. 'Do you think the world doesn't get it that our gestures are empty? That our remarks are empty?' The comments alluded to former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose tenure was dominated by tension over Iran's disputed nuclear programme and the sweeping economic sanctions that followed. 'Why should we say war has no effect or sanctions have no effect?' Nematzadeh said. 'Our educated youths can tell if you're lying. Why should we teach young people to lie?' ... He praised current President Hassan Rouhani for taking a different approach to Ahmadinejad. 'We've been subjected to injustice. Mr Rouhani referred to unjust sanctions. I heard this first from him,' he added. 'If we consider sanctions as a blessing, then we should be constantly asking for more sanctions, which in fact happened... we kept saying: sanctions have no effect.' 'Let's put some cotton in their ears, scotch tape on their mouth. Why do you lie? It does have an effect. The country has become backward. There's inflation, recession. Why should young people be unemployed?' he said." http://t.uani.com/1ujXqBN

FT: "Importers of basic commodities in Iran say they are struggling with delays in receiving hard currency from the central bank, caused by the impact of falling oil prices and international sanctions over the country's nuclear programme. 'Tens of ships are now waiting in Bandar Abbas [the main port city in southern Iran], sometimes for several weeks, and refuse to discharge cargoes until they are paid,' said one importer of essential goods. 'This means we pay demurrage of as much as $30,000 per day.' The situation is reminiscent of the chaotic situation before president Hassan Rouhani swept to power in the summer of 2013. The new government quickly adopted policies that restored stability to the currency market and discipline in payments to importers. But importers say that after about a year of orderly payments, where they had to wait for a maximum of a week for currency, they are back to month-long delays, dramatically slowing down the flow of goods into the country... The foreign currency problems come on top of the extra costs incurred as businesses seek to avoid banking sanctions, for example by using traditional transfer systems that rely on intermediaries or trading through middlemen of other nationalities. One businessman involved in shipping transportation said these costs were significant. 'If we want to ship one tonne of commodities from Hamburg now, we have to pay €120. The same cargo costs €42 per tonne if the destination is [the UAE's] Jebel Ali.'" http://t.uani.com/1BynmBt

Reuters: "A shipping insurer has warned that oil cargoes loaded ship to ship at a port in the United Arab Emirates may contain Iranian crude disguised as Iraqi barrels, and that it cannot insure these volumes as they are in breach of U.S. sanctions on Tehran. Insurer West of England sent a letter to its members this week stating that Iranian crude labeled as Iraqi oil was being transferred ship to ship (STS) by smugglers at the Khor Fakkan port in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). 'It appears that such oil may routinely be described as being of Iraqi origin and as having been loaded on board the transferring vessel at Basra some time before the proposed STS operation,' the insurer said in a letter dated Jan. 13. The insurer said it 'cannot provide insurance to vessels which load Iranian cargo in such circumstances and cover will cease in its entirety if such cargo is loaded'... West of England said that documentation of barrels labeled as originating from Basra in Iraq, and which stopped over at Khor Fakkan, should not be taken at face value. 'There is evidence of a sophisticated smuggling operation and those responsible may go to considerable lengths to disguise the true origin of the cargo,' the insurer said in the letter on its website. West of England, which was not immediately available for further comment, insures over 6,000 ships... West of England advised its members 'to exercise extreme caution when engaging in STS operations in the Arabian Gulf'. It also recommended that its members check with port agents to ensure that vessels providing cargo by means of an STS transfer in the region loaded the cargo at the port stated in its documentation." http://t.uani.com/1zt6uLz

Human Rights

Reuters: "Iran's hardline judiciary has banned a reformist newspaper for publishing a picture of Hollywood star George Clooney wearing a 'Je suis Charlie' ('I am Charlie') button, Iranian newspapers reported on Monday. Mardom-e Emrooz (Today's People) had come under criticism after running the image of the U.S. actor at last week's Golden Globes ceremony displaying his support for victims of a deadly attack two weeks ago on the Charlie Hebdo weekly in Paris. A conservative press watchdog revoked Mardom-e Emrooz's permit only three weeks after it started publishing with a pledge to support President Hassan Rouhani in his political and social liberalization program, the official IRNA news agency said, citing board member Allaeddin Zohurian." http://t.uani.com/17ZYRkn

AFP: "Iran's footballers have been warned they could face punishment if they take 'selfie' pictures with female fans who have turned out in large numbers at the Asian Cup. The head of the Iranian Football Federation's moral committee said players risked being used as a 'political tool' if snapped with women fans. Women are banned from attending men's sports events in the Islamic republic but they have flocked to see Iran's games at the Asian Cup in Australia. Ali Akbar Mohamedzade, head of the moral committee of the Iranian Football Federation, issued the warning last week as photos of players with women fans circulated on social media." http://t.uani.com/15pKBAi

IranWire: "Political and civil rights activist Abdollah Momeni has survived an attempt on his life. Momeni was returning to his Tehran home on January 15 when two men attacked him with knives and other weapons. The attack is the latest in a series of violations against human rights activists. Momeni, who previously spent two years in Evin Prison for his activism, succeeded in fighting off the two men. He sustained chest injuries and received medical attention at a Tehran hospital... The incident was not thought to be an attempted robbery, and it is suspected that Momeni was targeted for his work. Abdollah Momeni is a well known figure in Iran's student  movement, and is a spokesman for the NGO Office for Fostering Unity. He has been arrested and imprisoned several times, most recently following the 2009 presidential election, when he faced pressure to confess to his crimes. He was released from prison in March 2014 after serving a five-year sentence. For many, the growing attacks on civil rights activists is a reminder of the chain murders of the 1990s, when a group of Intelligence Ministry agents targeted intellectuals, writers and civil rights activists." http://t.uani.com/1CvGIUB

IranWire: "Authorities forced musician Harir Shariarzadeh off stage during a concert by her husband Salar Aqili in Tarqobeh, Shandiz, on January 12. Shariatzadeh, who was playing the daf, a large Persian frame drum used in popular and classical music, was told to leave the stage at the end of the first song and was not permitted to return thereafter. According to Iscanews, altogether 13 female musicians have been stopped from performing in live concerts according to an 'unwritten law imposed by hardliners and pressure groups' on local branches of the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance." http://t.uani.com/1ykG6ln

IHR: "The first public executions of 2015 were carried out in Shiraz this morning. There were several children among those watching the hangings. Two prisoners were hanged publicly in Shiraz (Southern Iran) today... Tens of people and anti-riot police were present at the execution site. There were many several children among the spectators." http://t.uani.com/15rXvxj

Domestic Politics

NYT: "The low rumble of powerful engines reverberated against the high-rises of Zaferanieh, an upmarket neighborhood, as Porsches and Mercedeses lined up to enter the multistory parking lot of a fancy new shopping mall, the Palladium, the latest addition to Tehran's shopping scene. Iran may be facing a dangerous economic abyss, with an empty treasury, historically low oil prices and the continuing damage of Western economic sanctions, but one indicator is going through the roof: Developers have broken ground on a record 400 shopping malls across the country, 65 in Tehran alone. In part, the malls are a lagging indicator, a testament to a not-so-distant past when Iran was raking in record oil profits, earning more than $700 billion in the last decade. Awash in money, with a relatively strong currency, Iranians developed a taste for luxury, setting off a boom in construction projects to host new shopping experiences... Together with banks, wealthy individuals and powerful foundations, tax-exempt organizations that are supposed to care for the poor, Iran's security forces are building malls with Western-sounding names such as Rose, Mega Mall and Atlas Plaza. Their bright neon letters stand in sharp contrast to the revolutionary slogans painted on murals in surrounding neighborhoods, labeling consumerism a Western illness and taboo under Iran's rigid ideology." http://t.uani.com/1KXcDDp

Foreign Affairs

AFP: "More than 2,000 Iranians protested Monday outside the French embassy in Tehran, chanting 'Death to France' and urging the ambassador be expelled because of a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed. The demonstration was in response to French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo's use of the cartoon in an edition published a week after 12 people were killed by Islamist gunmen at its Paris offices... Iran denounced the Paris massacre but it also condemned the magazine's new cartoon, where the prophet holds a 'Je suis Charlie' sign under the heading 'All is forgiven'. Plans for Monday's protest led the French ambassador to announce that the embassy, located in busy downtown Tehran, would be closed all day." http://t.uani.com/1KXinNo

Reuters: "Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif has postponed a visit to Saudi Arabia in protest against Riyadh's reluctance to cut oil production, a senior Iranian official said on Sunday... 'There is something that caused a delay in our foreign minister's planned visit to Saudi Arabia and that is the fall in the oil price,' Iran's top diplomat for the Middle East, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, told state-run al-Alam television. The two sides have been talking about the visit for about 18 months, and a date had been tentatively set for last October." http://t.uani.com/1zt6fjJ

RFE/RL: "With the end of NATO's combat mission in Afghanistan, Iran has been tightening its grip on the western part of the country. Nowhere is the Islamic republic's influence more visible than in the city of Herat, which has deep historical ties to Iran. Over the past decade, Tehran has remodeled Herat in its own image with new investment and cultural initiatives, partly channeled through the region's Shi'ite minority." http://t.uani.com/15rWx45

Opinion & Analysis

WashPost Editorial: "As negotiations with Iran on its nuclear program resumed last week, President Obama reiterated his opposition to new sanctions legislation. The legislation, which has strong bipartisan support, could 'undermine the negotiations' and isolate the United States from its allies, Mr. Obama said Friday. 'Just hold your fire,' he urged Congress, vowing to veto the bill if it reached him. The logic of that argument has always been a little hard to follow, since the measure the Senate is likely to take up, sponsored by Democrat Robert Menendez (N.J.) and Republican Mark Kirk (Ill.), would mandate new sanctions only if Iran failed to accept an agreement by the June 30 deadline established in the ongoing talks. Common sense suggests the certain prospect of more punishment for an already-damaged economy would make the regime of Ali Khamenei more rather than less likely to offer the concessions necessary for a deal. We gave Mr. Obama's argument the benefit of the doubt when Congress first considered the legislation more than a year ago. But the president's logic has been undercut by the manifest willingness of the Iranians to adopt their own pressure tactics - including steps that are considerably more noxious than the threat of future sanctions. On the day before talks resumed between Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif last Wednesday, Tehran announced that construction has begun on two new nuclear reactors. The next day its news agency reported that the case of Washington Post correspondent Jason Rezaian, who has been imprisoned since July 22, had been referred to the Revolutionary Court for 'processing.' The State Department was quick to explain that Iran is not barred by United Nations resolutions or an interim nuclear agreement from building new reactors. Yet by announcing the construction, the regime is making clear its intention to continue expanding, rather than dismantling, its nuclear infrastructure. It's also demonstrating that it's not constrained from taking provocative steps during the course of the negotiations - even as the Obama administration argues that countervailing pressure would somehow be a deal breaker. The case of Mr. Rezaian is particularly disturbing, as he and his family have been subjected to prolonged and gratuitous suffering that violates humanitarian norms and Iran's own laws. As of Friday, the 38-year-old journalist, who was born and raised in California, had been held for 178 days, longer than any Western journalist arrested by the regime. He has yet to learn the charges against him or be allowed to consult with his lawyer. According to his mother, who was allowed to meet with him last month, he has lost more than 40 pounds... It's difficult to avoid the conclusion that he is being used as a human pawn in the regime's attempt to gain leverage in the negotiations. If tactics such as that do not ruin the chance of an agreement, then neither should action by Congress." http://t.uani.com/1J24888

WSJ Editorial: "'If Iran does not fully meet its commitments during this six-month phase, we will turn off the [sanctions] relief and ratchet up the pressure.' That was President Obama in November 2013, pledging he would not allow an interim nuclear deal with Tehran to become an opportunity for the mullahs to play for time while wringing economic concessions from the West. The President's interpretation of 'six months' turns out to be as elastic as his reading of U.S. immigration law. That became clear on Friday when Mr. Obama warned he would veto any Congressional attempt to impose sanctions on the Islamic Republic if the latest round of negotiations fail... What seems to exercise Mr. Obama is a Congress that holds his Administration to its word. 'The United States and our partners will not consent to an extension merely to drag out negotiations,' wrote Secretary of State John Kerry in a Washington Post op-ed last summer. Yet two deadlines to finalize a deal have come and gone. The next one expires in June. The Administration's latest argument is that a sanctions bill would be interpreted as a hostile act by Tehran, potentially provoking retaliation while spoiling the diplomatic mood. The Administration also frets that it would disrupt unity among the so-called P5+1, referring to the permanent five members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany, while the West would be blamed if negotiations fail. These are remarkable claims about legislation that would penalize Iran only after the current deadline expires and if Iran does not come to terms. The bill that is likely to emerge after the Senate Banking Committee holds hearings Tuesday will be a revised version of last year's bipartisan Kirk-Menendez bill, named after sponsors Republican Mark Kirk of Illinois and Democrat Robert Menendez of New Jersey. It would reimpose the sanctions Mr. Obama suspended when he signed the interim deal, impose visa bans and asset blocks on top Iranian officials, and further tighten oil and financial sanctions. Passing the bill now could help persuade Iranian negotiators that they cannot string the West along indefinitely without paying a price. Would that cause Iran to walk away from negotiations? That's a strange argument coming from an Administration that boasts that Iran agreed to the interim deal thanks to the bite of strong sanctions. As for Western unity, it must not be all that firm if it would collapse following a display of Congressional support for the very goal the P5+1 claim to favor. Russia didn't walk away from Iran negotiations even when it was hit with Western sanctions, so why would it do so on behalf of Iran? The sanctions Tehran really fears-on the purchase of its energy, on its banks, and restrictions on its international financial transactions-depend on action by Washington and its European allies. Moscow is an outlier in this negotiation, if not bidding to be a spoiler. Mr. Obama's real reason for opposing the bill may be that he knows it is also a message to him not to strike a bad deal. The talks have already devolved from a demand that Iran give up its nuclear program to how much of a 'window' Iran will have to build a bomb. Mr. Kerry wants at least a year, as if Iran couldn't disguise its progress." http://t.uani.com/1wn9MZI

NYT Editorial: "As Iran's unjustified and unexplained imprisonment of Jason Rezaian, The Washington Post's bureau chief in Tehran, headed into a sixth month, the government news agency announced Wednesday that he had been indicted. But the mystery continued: No charges were cited, nor was there any sign that the Iranian-American reporter would be allowed to consult a lawyer and Western diplomatic officials for his defense. The announcement said only that the case was referred for 'processing' to Tehran's Revolutionary Court. The development, while far from reassuring, offers an opportunity for judiciary officials to finally introduce an element of fairness into this shameful episode by dismissing all charges against Mr. Rezaian, a widely respected foreign correspondent. In November, Mohammad Javad Larijani, the head of Iran's human rights council, expressed the hope that the case might soon be dropped, with Mr. Rezaian released in 'less than a month.' The Iranian leadership should follow through and show that Iran, at a time of delicate international talks about its nuclear program, can demonstrate that it is worthy of greater trust and credibility. There was no justifiable reason for Mr. Rezaian and his wife, the Iranian journalist Yeganeh Salehi, to have been arrested in July." http://t.uani.com/1KXdlRc

Elliot Abrams in CFR: "After six years in office, President Obama is still unable to accept criticism or dissent from his policies, and labels policy differences as essentially corrupt. Consider this report in The New York Times: 'President Obama and Senator Robert Menendez traded sharp words on Thursday over whether Congress should impose new sanctions on Iran while the administration is negotiating with Tehran about its nuclear program, according to two people who witnessed the exchange... The president said he understood the pressures that senators face from donors and others, but he urged the lawmakers to take the long view rather than make a move for short-term political gain, according to the senator. Mr. Menendez, who was seated at a table in front of the podium, stood up and said he took 'personal offense.' This is a remarkable exchange. Americans have been debating Iran policy for years, indeed decades, and experts, former officials (including officials of his own administration), and academics often differ on what policies will be most effective in stopping Iran from getting the bomb. But Mr. Obama has no respect for those who differ with him, and attributes those opinions to pressure from donors 'and others' and the desire of politicians for 'short term political gain.' Let's leave aside just for a moment who those 'others' might be; a good guess would be that he meant the government of Israel and groups such as AIPAC. Let's just stick to 'donors' and 'short term political gain.' No wonder Sen. Menendez took 'personal offense.'  What does a senior Democrat get from the leader of his party when he spends years working on the Iran file? The accusation that it's all about politics and campaign cash. Mr. Obama remains unable to respect differing views; at bottom he considers them not only wrong, but corrupt. Mr. Obama was not, of course, addressing Sen. Menendez; he was characterizing all those who might favor additional sanctions on Iran. Journalists and academics who write about the 'tone' of politics in Obama's Washington should keep this news story in mind. When a president is fundamentally disrespectful of all those who don't happen to agree with his own views, and sees them as corrupt, it is no wonder that politics in the capital takes on an ugly tone. And remember: Mr. Obama was addressing Democrats here. His views of the opposing party are no doubt even worse." http://t.uani.com/1yDujxr

Lee Smith in The Weekly Standard: "Just as John Kerry was meeting with his Iranian counterpart Javad Zarif in Geneva last week as part of the ongoing negotiations over Iran's nuclear program, Tehran announced it was building two new nuclear reactors in the Bushehr region. That's perfectly okay, said the State Department, since that's allowed under the Joint Plan of Action: They can build as many reactors as they want. It seems the Iranians can get away with a lot under the JPOA-the agreement reached in November 2013 that eased sanctions on Tehran-because the White House has hardly batted an eye over any of Iran's actions.Of course, the notion that it's fine to build more reactors somewhat complicates the Obama administration's claims that the agreement froze the Iranian nuclear program. But in the year since the interim agreement with Iran was signed, it's become clear that the White House defines 'froze' very flexibly. The agreement also acknowledges Iran's right to enrich uranium. It allows Iran unlimited work on its plutonium reactor at complex at Arak, provided Iran does not touch the reactor itself. It ignores Iran's ballistic missile program. All this while the administration has provided sanctions relief that has rescued the Iranian economy and encouraged European businesses to seek opportunities in Iran. Like any competent negotiator, Iran is employing a two-track policy-negotiating while it enhances its leverage by establishing facts on the ground. Why, on the other hand, is the Obama administration forfeiting what leverage it has?An argument commonly made by critics of the White House is that Iranian negotiators have run circles around the Americans. It is easy to think so, but the reality is that Iran, despite its worthy history as a great civilization, to say nothing of its chess masters and master carpet weavers, has not cornered the market on cunning. For every wheeler-dealer at the Iranian bazaar, America produces a dozen corporate lawyers. The Obama administration isn't getting outhustled. If it wanted to negotiate a tougher deal, it surely could. It just doesn't want to. The Iranians understand that they're pushing against an open door-across a threshold that happens to lead to the rest of the Middle East, where Tehran's men are busy empire-building... Maybe there are enough votes in the new Republican Senate to pass more meaningful sanctions legislation. They had better act fast, because the fact is we're soon going to reach the point when sanctions will be largely irrelevant. Sanctions will be an empty threat against an Iranian empire under a nuclear umbrella." http://t.uani.com/15r2W00

Roland Elliott Brown in IranWire: "It was not out of exaggerated respect for De Gaulle's memory that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani avoided naming Charlie Hebdo when he obliquely condemned the Paris attacks last Friday. The killings put Iran in an awkward position. The gunmen's claim to have 'avenged the Prophet Muhammad,' revives memories of the Ayatollah Khomeini's 1988 fatwa calling for the murder of British author Salman Rushdie, who satirized Muhammad's life - and Khomeini's - in The Satanic Verses. The attacks cast into juxtaposition Islamic taboos Iran still hopes to defend, and a revolutionary, anticlerical conception of free speech that may well appeal to Iran's secular youth. They also remind Iran and the West of their common interests, since the gunmen, as Al Qaeda recruits, belonged to a Sunni jihadist movement that threatens both. Thinking about the Paris attacks likely proved a dissonant experience for Rouhani. No friend of free speech, he worked for years a censor on the supervisory board of Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, and sought tips on broadcasting from North Korea. He also supported Khomeini's fatwa against Rushdie. And yet his remarks on Friday were fresh. By saying that 'Those who kill and carry out violent and extremist acts unjustly in the name of jihad, religion or Islam provoke Islamophobia,' he echoed not Khomeini, but Khomeini's rival, Ayatollah Hussein Ali Montazeri, who warned Khomeini that his extremism had 'frightened the world' and made it think that 'our only task here in Iran was to kill.' Montazeri, who was once Khomeini's heir apparent as supreme leader, spent the rest of his life under house arrest for those comments. Historian Michael Axworthy writes in his book Revolutionary Iran that Khomeini's call for Rushdie's murder may in fact have been his response to Montazeri's remarks. While the British government managed to protect Rushdie himself, assassins motivated by Khomeini's fatwa stabbed to death Hitoshi Igarishi, a Japanese scholar of Arabic and Persian literature who had translated The Satanic Verses and tried to kill the book's Italian translator Ettore Capriolo, and its Norwegian publisher William Nygaard. Like the targets of Khomeini's fatwa, the murdered Charlie Hebdo staff had been marked for death prior to the attack - in this case by the Al Qaeda magazine Inspire, which happens also to have included Rushdie on its hit list." http://t.uani.com/1EliXQL

Joel Simon in Columbia Journalism Review: "In the aftermath of the horrific murders of Charlie Hebdo staff in Paris, one might think attacks on journalists tend to be dramatic, galvanizing events in which the fault lines are sharply drawn. But the voice of a free press is most often muffled in far less visible ways; through pressure, intimidation, imprisonment, and exile. Take Iranian journalist Siamak Ghaderi, who demonstrated extraordinary courage in covering the Green Movement that erupted following the disputed 2009 presidential elections in his country. Ghaderi had spent nearly two decades working for the Islamic Republic News Agency, a semi-official news organization. But in the dramatic moments when Iranians took to the streets, he observed a festival of lies from the official media he worked for, and wanted no part of it. Ghaderi created a personal blog he called IRNA-ye maa, or Our IRNA, to provide an honest accounting of events-like the brutal beatings, shootings, and other abuses perpetrated on the demonstrators. 'I was summoned twice by the authorities and told to stop reporting on the shootings, the protests, and other events,' Ghaderi told me in a recent conversation. Ghaderi's refusal to succumb to censorship took him on an agonizing journey, from an Iranian prison to a quiet suburb of Washington DC. He views life in the US as a temporary refuge, one he is anxious to leave behind. But he is caught between his stubborn bravery and a recognition that a return home could lead to his re-arrest and further hardship for his family. His tale shows how the struggle for press freedom is often personal and private and that these battles are seldom surfaced." http://t.uani.com/1C2cuuJ
     

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