|
|
|
Join UANI
Top Stories
Bloomberg:
"U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker says he intends
to introduce legislation Friday giving Congress the power to review any
nuclear deal with Iran, while delaying consideration so it won't coincide
with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to lawmakers next
week. The White House and congressional Democrats have criticized House
Speaker John Boehner's invitation to Netanyahu to speak to lawmakers
March 3 as a breach of protocol, injecting partisan tension into an
already strained relationship between the U.S. and Israel. 'There's a
piece of legislation that we'd like to bring forth in a markup next week
and because Netanyahu is coming, we've been asked to hold back a week
because people don't want it to look as though the legislation is in
response to him being here,' Corker, a Tennessee Republican, said
Thursday at a Bloomberg breakfast in Washington. Corker's proposal would
give Congress the power to block any deal that President Barack Obama's
administration reaches with Iran to curb its nuclear program by voting
before an accord could take effect... Corker, who traveled to Iraq last
week, said the situation there was 'really depressing.' 'It is
disheartening in this way in that every single thing that we're doing
right now in Iraq is to Iran's benefit,' he said." http://t.uani.com/1vFZ86v
The Hill:
"Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Thursday that
Iran poses a threat to its neighbors in the Middle East and faces no
barriers in producing a nuclear weapon. 'We do not know whether Iran will
eventually decide to build nuclear weapons,' Clapper said in the annual
worldwide threat assessment delivered to the Senate Armed Services
Committee. While Iran has temporarily slowed development toward producing
enriched uranium, the assessment notes, the country 'does not face any
insurmountable technical barriers to producing a nuclear weapon.' 'We
judge that Tehran would choose ballistic missiles as its preferred method
of delivering nuclear weapons, if it builds them,' the assessment
reads." http://t.uani.com/18ud8WY
WSJ:
"Nuclear talks between Iran and six major powers are getting close
to agreement after more than a decade of diplomacy, the European Union's
foreign-policy chief Federica Mogherini said in an interview with The
Wall Street Journal on Thursday... Asked if she believed the two sides
were coming close to a deal, Ms. Mogherini said, 'Yes, we are getting
close.' As EU foreign-policy chief, Ms. Mogherini is formal chair of the
six-nation group negotiating with Iran, although she hasn't attended the
regular rounds of talks. Still, she is kept in close touch on the talks
with the EU's political director, Helga Schmid, attending almost all key
meetings... In terms of bilateral ties, she said an agreement 'could open
the way for a normal diplomatic relation.' Tehran is one of the
relatively few capitals where the EU doesn't have a mission. She said a
deal could also allow a regional framework to emerge with Iran that could
tackle the Middle East's many crises. 'If out of a series of crises in
the Middle East...and the Iranian nuclear talks, we manage to get the
opportunity for shaping a different regional framework in the Middle
East, this would be a major game-changer for our security and the
stability of our region,' she said." http://t.uani.com/1auJdPc
Nuclear Program & Negotiations
Reuters:
"Senior officials from Iran and six powers negotiating with Tehran
over its nuclear program will hold more talks in Montreux, Switzerland on
March 5, the European Union said on Friday. The talks between political
directors will be preceded by a series of bilateral meetings, EU
spokeswoman Catherine Ray told reporters. 'The EU continues to make all
possible efforts to facilitate these negotiations so that they end in
success,' she said. The State Department announced on Thursday that U.S.
Secretary of State John Kerry would meet with Iranian nuclear negotiators
in Montreux next week." http://t.uani.com/1JUGAWA
Fox News:
"Just weeks before Secretary of State John Kerry held new nuclear
talks with Iran's foreign minister in Geneva, Iranians were hanging
Kerry's boss in effigy at a huge Tehran-sponsored rally marking the
Islamic Revolution's 36th anniversary, an event that critics say
underscores the absurdity of the ongoing diplomatic effort. The U.S. and
Iran are trying to reach a final nuclear agreement by a March 31 deadline
against a backdrop of ongoing anti-American hatred in the Islamic
republic. Photos posted by the Middle East Media Research Institute this
week show Iranians marching in front of a display depicting President
Obama hanging from a gallows and carrying signs of Kerry, portrayed as a
devious fox. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians took part in the Feb. 11
Revolution Day, which commemorates the 1979 overthrow of the
U.S.-assisted Shah of Iran. The Iranians, as they have in past, chanted,
'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel.' They also burned and trampled
an American flag. MEMRI said other photos from the rally show Iranians
waving posters of Obama looking like Pinocchio." http://t.uani.com/1825TEv
Al-Monitor:
"Nuclear negotiations between Iran and the five permanent members of
the UN Security Council plus Germany (P5+1) will be completed by March
31, says Mohammad Bagher Nobakht, a spokesman for President Hassan
Rouhani's administration. Nobakht, who's considered close to the
president and arguably has a larger role within the administration than
the first vice president, was asked by reporters about the significance
of the presence of Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy
Organization of Iran, and Hossein Fereydoon, brother and adviser to Rouhani,
at the nuclear negotiations in Geneva between Iranian and American
officials. 'This time in the negotiations, from the viewpoint of time, we
are bound to conclude the negotiations by March 31,' Nobakht said. 'Of
course, not just at the level of general agreements but also on the
specifics we have to reach results.'" http://t.uani.com/1FEuCtV
Military
Matters
AP:
"With an eye on U.S.-led nuclear talks, Iran's Revolutionary Guard
on Friday announced it had test fired a 'new strategic weapon' in the final
day of a large-scale naval and air defense drill, saying the system would
play a key role in any future battle against the 'Great Satan.' The claim
was a new show of force by Iran just weeks ahead of a deadline for
reaching a deal over its nuclear program with the U.S. and other global
powers. Iran announced the test on the final day of military drills it is
calling 'Great Prophet 9.' The exercises are being held near the Strait
of Hormuz, a strategic waterway through which about a fifth of the world's
oil passes... Adm. Ali Fadavi, the Revolutionary Guard's naval chief,
said the new weapon would be critical in any future naval war against the
U.S. 'The new weapon will have a very decisive role in adding our naval
power in confronting threats, particular by the Great Satan, the United
States,' he told the guard's website, sepahanews.com." http://t.uani.com/1EUbUyj
Cyber Warfare
Bloomberg:
"The top U.S. intelligence official confirmed for the first time
that Iran was behind a cyber attack against the Las Vegas Sands Corp.
last year. Identifying Iran as the perpetrator came more than a year
after the Feb. 10, 2014, attack against the world's largest gambling
company, which crippled many of the computer systems that help run the
$14 billion operation. Sands' chairman and chief executive officer and
top shareholder is billionaire Sheldon Adelson, a leading U.S. supporter
of Israel and of Republican political candidates. James Clapper, the
director of national intelligence, told the Senate Armed Services Committee
Thursday that the attack by Iran, followed by the hacking of Sony Corp.
by North Korea in November, marked the first destructive cyber-assaults
on the U.S. by nation-states. Iran's role in the attack that crippled
operations at several of Sands' U.S. casinos was reported in December by
Bloomberg Businessweek." http://t.uani.com/1wqx3ve
Sanctions
Relief
Rudaw:
"In order to meet its domestic demand, the Kurdish government
is negotiating to buy Iranian gas and have Kurdish oil refined across the
border, an official from the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) told
Rudaw. The gas will be for household use and to run Kurdistan's power
stations, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity since the
deal has not been made public. He said the KRG also wants Iran to refine
Kurdish oil and send it back for domestic use. Talks on the deals
began this week when an Iranian delegation visited Kurdistan. It was led
by Rostam Ghasemi, head of the Iran-Iraq trade mission and included
Manuchehir Ardistani, advisor to Iran's oil minister and Azizullah
Rafzani, head of Iran's national gas company... The KRG official said
that negotiations were over the route of a pipeline that would carry
Iranian gas, and details of the oil refining deal." http://t.uani.com/1E3Tpuc
Reuters:
"Asian imports of Iranian crude fell nearly 22 percent from a year
ago to below 1 million barrels per day (bpd) in January, led by cuts in
India, where refiners had been asked to curtail orders ahead of a visit
by U.S. President Barack Obama. Imports by Iran's four biggest buyers -
China, India, Japan and South Korea - averaged 982,525 bpd last month,
the first time the level had dropped below the 1 million bpd mark since
October last year, government and trade data showed." http://t.uani.com/1BH0i4A
Human Rights
RFE/RL:
"Ali Yunesi, a senior adviser to Iran's President Hassan Rohani and
a former intelligence minister, has admitted that 'many cases' of human
rights violations are taking place in Iran's courts and prisons, blaming
them on extremists. The human rights situation in the Islamic republic is
often the subject of criticism by rights group and UN rights experts. Yet
Iranian officials very rarely admit that abuses take place in the
country. In a February 26 interview with the semi-official ISNA news
agency, Yunesi said that hard-liners are creating trouble for the Islamic
republic and damaging the country's reputation through their actions...
As an example, he cited the case of Zahra Kazemi, an Iranian-Canadian
photojournalist who died in 2013 from a brain hemorrhage resulting from
beatings after she was detained in front of Tehran's Evin Prison and
interrogated." http://t.uani.com/1JUJfQc
RFE/RL:
"Several U.S. lawmakers criticized the 'atrocious' human rights
situation in Iran, including the high number of executions, the
discrimination against Baha'is and the crackdown on freedom of
expression. They spoke during a joint subcommittee hearing titled 'The
Shame of Iranian Human Rights' where they also expressed concern over the
fate of several U.S. citizens detained or missing in Iran, including
Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian. Republican Congresswoman Illena
Ros-Lehtinen said despite promises of moderation by Iranian President
Hassan Rohani, the rights situation has worsened." http://t.uani.com/1Bmd5HV
Opinion &
Analysis
Charles
Krauthammer in WashPost: "A sunset clause? The news
from the nuclear talks with Iran was already troubling. Iran was being
granted the 'right to enrich.' It would be allowed to retain and spin
thousands of centrifuges. It could continue construction of the Arak
plutonium reactor. Yet so thoroughly was Iran stonewalling International
Atomic Energy Agency inspectors that just last Thursday the IAEA reported
its concern 'about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed ...
development of a nuclear payload for a missile.' Bad enough. Then it got
worse: News leaked Monday of the elements of a 'sunset clause.' President
Obama had accepted the Iranian demand that any restrictions on its
program be time-limited. After which, the mullahs can crank up their
nuclear program at will and produce as much enriched uranium as they
want.Sanctions lifted. Restrictions gone. Nuclear development
legitimized. Iran would reenter the international community, as Obama
suggested in an interview in December, as 'a very successful regional
power.' A few years - probably around 10 - of good behavior and Iran
would be home free. The agreement thus would provide a predictable path
to an Iranian bomb. Indeed, a flourishing path, with trade resumed, oil
pumping and foreign investment pouring into a restored economy.
Meanwhile, Iran's intercontinental ballistic missile program is subject
to no restrictions at all. It's not even part of these negotiations. Why
is Iran building them? You don't build ICBMs in order to deliver sticks
of dynamite. Their only purpose is to carry nuclear warheads. Nor does
Iran need an ICBM to hit Riyadh or Tel Aviv. Intercontinental missiles
are for reaching, well, other continents. North America, for example.
Such an agreement also means the end of nonproliferation. When a rogue
state defies the world, continues illegal enrichment and then gets the
world to bless an eventual unrestricted industrial-level enrichment
program, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is dead. And regional
hyperproliferation becomes inevitable as Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and
others seek shelter in going nuclear themselves. Wasn't Obama's great international
cause a nuclear-free world? Within months of his swearing-in, he went to
Prague to so declare. He then led a 50-party Nuclear Security Summit, one
of whose proclaimed achievements was having Canada give up some enriched
uranium.Having disarmed the Canadian threat, Obama turned to Iran. The
deal now on offer to the ayatollah would confer legitimacy on the
nuclearization of the most rogue of rogue regimes: radically
anti-American, deeply jihadist, purveyor of terrorism from Argentina to
Bulgaria, puppeteer of a Syrian regime that specializes in dropping
barrel bombs on civilians. In fact, the Iranian regime just this week, at
the apex of these nuclear talks, staged a spectacular attack on a replica
U.S. carrier near the Strait of Hormuz. Well, say the administration
apologists, what's your alternative? Do you want war? It's Obama's usual,
subtle false-choice maneuver: It's either appeasement or war. It's not.
True, there are no good choices, but Obama's prospective deal is the
worst possible. Not only does Iran get a clear path to the bomb but it
gets sanctions lifted, all pressure removed and international legitimacy.
There is a third choice. If you are not stopping Iran's program, don't
give away the store. Keep the pressure, keep the sanctions. Indeed,
increase them. After all, previous sanctions brought Iran to its knees
and to the negotiating table in the first place. And that was before the
collapse of oil prices, which would now vastly magnify the economic
effect of heightened sanctions. Congress is proposing precisely that.
Combined with cheap oil, it could so destabilize the Iranian economy as
to threaten the clerical regime. That's the opening. Then offer to renew
negotiations for sanctions relief but from a very different starting
point - no enrichment. Or, if you like, with a few token centrifuges for
face-saving purposes. And no sunset." http://t.uani.com/1LQbwmL
Josh Rogin in
Bloomberg: "With the White House reportedly trying
to negotiate a 10- or 15-year deal on Iran's nuclear program, Republican
leaders in Congress are threatening to unravel the agreement much sooner
-- during President Barack Obama's final months or soon after he leaves
office. According to several news reports based on leaks from inside the
negotiations, the pact being offered to Iran eases restrictions on its
nuclear program and relaxes sanctions on its economy in several phases
over at least a decade. Since Obama does not intend to seek the
Republican Congress's approval for any deal, fearing it would be
rejected, he would instead use executive actions, national security
waivers and his powers to suspend any sanctions that Congress won't
repeal. While Obama could possibly run out the clock until 2017 in this
way, the next president may not be able or willing to use these tools.
And if that next president is a Republican, he or she likely will have
run a presidential campaign based on opposing the deal. This puts the
White House negotiators in a bind: Unless the administration can make a
convincing case that any deal Obama offers can survive well past his time
in office, the regime of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is
unlikely to buy into the phased approach being offered by the so-called
P5+1 countries. 'The supreme leader has said publicly that he is concerned
that if he enters into an agreement that the very next president is going
to change that agreement,' Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman
Bob Corker told Bloomberg reporters at a breakfast on Thursday. How,
then, can the White House possibly persuade Tehran that this deal can
outlast his presidency? Corker said he thinks the administration will
likely make the case that by the time Obama is gone, the momentum of the
deal will have set in and the international sanctions regime will have
crumbled beyond repair, tying the next administration's hands. 'They
believe everything falls apart at that time. I think that's what they are
selling to the Iranians,' said Corker, who is working on a bill with
Senator Lindsey Graham to mandate a Congressional vote on any nuclear
deal with Iran. While it's unclear whether the Iranians will buy that
argument, Corker certainly doesn't: 'If they went through this process
where they actually brought it to Congress and Congress passed muster on
it, it really would be a much more settled issue.' Most Republican
congressional leaders, and some Democrats, agree that Obama is making a
mistake by avoiding Congressional participation. John McCain, chairman of
the Senate Armed Services Committee, told me the administration is leaving
itself and its successor open to several actions by trying to skirt
Congressional oversight. 'I don't think the next president is bound by it
if it is only an agreement and not a formal treaty,' McCain said of any
nuclear pact. 'To allege that this doesn't have all of the marks of a
treaty is an insult to everybody's intelligence.' Graham told me that he
preferred working to push the administration to negotiate a better pact
now as opposed to working to change it after it is signed. 'To begin a
bad deal is a nightmare. Once you set the process in motion it's very
hard to change it,' Graham said. "I don't like the idea of managing
a bad deal, I want to stop it. And I have no desire to stop a deal that
achieves the objectives.' Other congressional Republicans, however, have
little interest in cooperating with the White House, even to the point of
telegraphing to Iran their hopes to scuttle any pact sooner or later. 'If
the deal is not submitted to Congress, I and many others will make clear
that Barack Obama will be in office for 23 months and I will be in office
for 6 years. And the Iranians should take that into their calculation as
they negotiate with Barack Obama's team,' one Republican lawmaker told a
group of reporters Wednesday in a roundtable discussion held on a
background basis. Experts who support the White House's Iran negotiations
say such threats are largely bluster, and that if the Obama
administration is able to reach a deal with Iran now, it will be very
hard for the next president to stand against it. 'If you are planning
something two years down the road, you can do all the planning you want,
but it means very little because who knows what the situation will be
then,' said John Isaacs, executive director of the Council for a Livable
World." http://t.uani.com/18ugiKs
|
|
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