Yesterday, Flynt appeared on Al Jazeera’s Inside Story to discuss Syria, regional politics, and U.S. policy in the wake of Kofi Annan’s resignation as the UN/Arab League special envoy for Syria. Click here to view the segment or on the video above. Flynt argues that possibilities for achieving a political resolution to what has become a civil war in Syria have been undermined not by Russia, China, and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s intransigence, but, first and foremost, by the United States. Washington has been supporting Syrian oppositionists for years; from the outbreak of unrest in Syria in 2011, the Obama Administration has focused not on what might actually benefit Syrians but on the prospect of regime change in Damascus as a way of weakening Iran.
In particular, Annan and his staff understood, from the beginning of their mission, that there needed to be a contact group for Syria, encompassing all the relevant regional and international players. By definition, such an initiative needed to engage the Islamic Republic. But the Obama Administration torpedoed the possibility of Iranian involvement, undercutting the viability of Annan’s contact group idea from the outset. And, of course, the United States has been working with other countries—e.g., Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia—to fund, equip, and arm the Syrian opposition. In effect, Washington is fueling one side in Syria’s civil war—which could only be damaging to Annan’s efforts. It is surely more than coincidence that Annan announced his resignation the day after Obama Administration officials back-grounded the media that President Obama signed a covert action finding authorizing CIA support to Syrian rebels.
Flynt also criticizes Annan directly: while the former Secretary-General verbally advocated a comprehensive and inclusive political process to mediate Syria’s internal conflict, including all relevant Syrian, regional and international players, as the only way to address the problem, he bought into the argument that Assad’s departure had to be stipulated at the outset. This meant that there could not be a serious political process.
The situation in Syria can only become more dangerous—for Syrians, for others in the region, and for America’s real long-term interests—as the United States persists in supporting the sectarianization of Syria’s internal conflict. And Washington is doing this as part of a broader strategy to play a Sunni “card” against the Islamic Republic and its allies.
–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
James Canning says: August 8, 2012 at 6:01 pm
There was no other way.
To be great power one has to learn to act like one.
By the way, your statement: “I don’t think the government of Saudi Arabia is interested in fostering sectarian warfare..” is false.
fyi,
Interesting study by the International Crisis Group that you linked. Quote: “Iran paid a huge price for its decision to enrich at 20 percent and forge ahead at Fordow – - becoming the target of unprecedented economic penalties and losing vast amounts of money.”
Rd.,
London will remain a major insurance market etc even if some alternatives are developed for insuring Iranian oil cargoes.
kooshy,
I don’t think the government of Saudi Arabia is interested in fostering sectarian warfare. There no doubt are individual Saudis who think differently.
If the Saudis decided it would be a good thing for the government of Syria to be overthrown, it was not for “sectarian” reasons.
James;
don’t worry about the 20%.. you need to worry about your 90%..
“Nearly 90% of the world’s tanker fleets are covered by 13 international P&I clubs from the EU. (UK???).
Meanwhile Japan approved providing $7.6 billion insurance coverage for Iranian tankers, while China offered to use its own vessels for delivery. India has given permission to its state-run refiners to import Iranian oil on condition Tehran arranges insurance.”
http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/south-korea-resumes-iranian-oil-supplies/
All:
On Syria (I agree with some but not all conclusions)
http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/Middle%20East%20North%20Africa/Iraq%20Syria%20Lebanon/Syria/128-syrias-mutating-conflict.pdf
On Iran-P5+1 (This too will fall on deaf ears.)
http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/Middle%20East%20North%20Africa/Iran%20Gulf/Iran/b034-the-p5-plus-1-iran-and-the-perils-of-nuclear-brinkmanship.pdf
Davutoglu on the ropes?
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/davutoglu-betting-fall-assad
James Canning says:
August 8, 2012 at 1:13 pm
Gav James
I would say that KSA is no longer stable enough to afford any overt sectarian war of any kind which can possibly further destabilize her and the bordering Arabian mini state lets. and if sectarian wars brakes out you be sure none of western states will be in position to get overtly involved plus Egypt, Yemen, are already out of the equation and would not be capable of getting involved, if this happens KSA will become even more vulnerable by extremist Islamic forces of his own sect which will eventually need to confront Shiehs in east and south west.
Gav in chess term west is currently in Zugzwang setuation, check it out you understand, continue playing.
Bussed in Basiji Aug 8 6:48 am wrote:
“Also read the US’ own strategic assessments in the Eisenhower admin naming Saudi Arabia as the ‘greatest strategic asset in human history’. YOU are dead wrong or just playing the fool.”
====
In 1922, Sam Untermyer and his son Alvin represented the interests of the heirs of the estate of the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II, late Sultan of Turkey. At issue was ownership of vast oil fields in Asia Minor and Mesopotamia with an estimated value (in 1922) of one billion dollars.
“Mr. Untermyer will represent his father and other American and British citizens who are financing eighteen of the twenty-two heirs of the late Sultan Abdul Hamid. The claim is that most of the oil fields now the object of world diplomacy are owned by them in fee simple by inheritance from Sultan Abdul Hamid, who died in 1915. They contend that the Sultan bought the property from funds from his personal estate, paid taxes on it to the Turkish Government, and was the personal owner with a title as good as any person could have for real property.
Hamid was deposed and driven out of power by the Young Turks, but this, it is alleged, did not impair his title to the property nor the right of his heirs to inherit it.”
In Dec. 1922 statements published in New York Times, Untermyer charged that “the Standard Oil Company was attempting to wrest a billion dollars’ worth of oil property in Mesopotamia from these heirs,” a charge that Standard Oil denies.
In its statement denouncing Untermyer’s allegations, Standard Oil said:
“In the published statement, Mr. Untermyer also alleges that the STate Department has espoused the cause of the Standard Oil Company in obtaining rights in Mesopotamia, because the policy of the open door means the Standard Oil Company. This, and a similar attack recently made by Henry Morgenthau, are unpatriotic and unsupported by the facts.
“The State Department has been consistently maintaining the simple proposition that the citizens of the United States should have equal opportunity to engage in commercial pursuits to develop the natural resources of mandated territories, along with the nationals of the respective allied powers which might possess the mandate. This is the policy of the open door for all American interests, and any one conversant with the attitude of the State Department knows that this is the fact and that there is no espousal of the case of the STandard Oil Company alone. Furthermore, the policy of the open door does not mean that preexisting valid rights may be ignored.”
Karl..,
The BBC reported June 8, 2012: “China’s Hu Jintao urges Iran to be ‘flexible’ on nuclear issue”. What do you think the Chinese meant by this?
Karl..,
Once again you dodge my question: do you think Iran should insist on continuing to enrich and to stockpile 20 percent uranium even if this prevents successful negotiations with the P5+1?
If other people who post on this site “agree with you”, why don’t you answer the question so we can see if your contention is correct?
Bussed-In Basiji,
After the First World War, Britain was hard pressed just to maintain control of Iraq. Sufficient resources to occupy and control Persia were not available, even if the UK had wished to occupy the country.
Have you forgotten that a number of provinces of Persia (or dependent territories) were annexed by the Russian Empire?
Bussed-In Basiji,
Do you think the US needs to worry about Iran’s taking control of the Persian Gulf?
Anti-Iran propagandists try to cast Iran as a “threat” to the US, as if Iran were equivalent to the USSR and satellites during the Colf War. Absurd, in my view. But too many Americans buy it.
Bussed-In Basiji,
Where oh where do you get the notion that Britain welcomed the conquest of the Hejaz by Ibn Saud, Sultan of Nejd? In fact, the UK lacked resources to prevent or reverse that conquest.
I am very much aware of the need for the US and its allies to control as much of the energy resources of the Middle East as possible (or at least to prevent the Soviet Union from controlling those resources). But the Cold War is over.
Rd.,
Are you claiming that Saudi Arabia and Qatar would not see the potential benefit of an overthrow of the government of Syria, if war in the Gulf was increasingly likely?
Financial Times leader today: Standard Chatered “bank may have been cavalier in reading the inentions of US authorities determined to squeeze an Iranian regime accused of terrorism and intent on building a nuclear bomb.” This last bit is troubling.
Karl.. says:
August 8, 2012 at 12:09 pm
“New Ottomans” is devoid of any practical or political content.
You have to understand Turkey for what she is: a country that has neither the material wherewithal nor the inner confidence of standing on their own 2 feet.
Economically they are dependent on EU to rescue them from to time through loans from EU banks.
Militarily, they are dependent on NATO structures for their security.
And reading their various commentators and analysts one is struck by the weakness and absence of confidence that they display.
[The way to recognize this is the amount of references of UN, International Law, etc. in their writings. Such references, for example, in Iranian writings have been diminishing since before the end of Iran-Iraq War.
In contrast, Iranian leaders no longer care much about UN, her agencies, International Law, etc. for safeguarding their interests. They are relying on their own capabilities; this has been burnt into them.]
Turkey was revealed, during the mini-World War in Syria, as yet another political dependency of US-EU. She had to conform to what her betters had told her to do; just like she had to go along with the radar station to help protect Israel from Iranian missiles.
I think Iran is the only Muslim country with strategic autonomy, with the longest un-interrupted constitutional dispensation among Muslim polities.
Unfortunately, she is not yet strong enough to eject the political power of Western Christians from the Middle East.
This is the game of states and US-EU are playing it in the Middle East and against Iran, Russia, and China.
I expect the Axis States to be defeated in their war aims for the reasons that I have mentioned numerous times.
Don Bacon,
….Which means they have no proof whatsoever for their new claims. These spokesmen have of course scripts to read from and have absolutely no proof of what they are claiming, im very surpsrised how bad they often answer to normal questions, they get cornered very fast. They are like an advanced bot that could answer some simple questions but nothing more.
And apprently only US are allowed to have allies in the middle east which they prop up and which have a destrucive and malign impact.
In yesterday’s State presser, journalists tried unsuccessfully to learn who Clinton was referring to with her “Those who are attempting to exploit the situation by sending in proxies or terrorist fighters. . .” There was no clear answer although we know that Iran’s charge is correct: “Al-Saud, Qatar, and Turkey.”
And earlier they didn’t get anywhere concerning Iran except a vague comment about “material support” –
QUESTION: You said the Iranians were finding new ways to prop up the regime. What kind of new ways –
MR. VENTRELL: Well, I talked about that earlier today, just now, Jo, when we talked about how they’re intensifying their relationship, exchanging all these high-level visits, and signing economic arrangements and passing a bill in the Iranian parliament to cement their support. So those are the kind of things where –
QUESTION: Are you saying new military ways of propping up the regime?
MR. VENTRELL: Well, suffice it to say we’ve been deeply concerned about their malign and destructive actions inside of Syria, and that includes material support.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/08/196142.htm
Don Bacon,
While such statements shouldnt be vented, Turkey have come out as real hypocrite. They turn its coat whenever it fits. Thus not sure what “principled foreign policy” he refer to.
1. They dont recognize the de facto leader – Assad and his government anymore. Instead they recognize the rebel council which have used various ways to overthrow, including terrorism.
2. They have breached syrian airspace multiple times which clearly is a breach of international law. Yesterday it was reported that they had went in with military vehicles in syrian territory. Another casus belli.
3. They openly support rebels and open their land for smuggling of arms and other significant techniques for the rebel that trying to overthrow the government.
4. They condemn Syria for bombing civilians (code word for insurgents/terrorists, not to say that civilians have been killed though) while just past week they have pounded kurdish groups with heavy weapon, airplanes etc and saying themselves that those are terrorists and not civilians.
Apprently they are trying to reestablish their ottoman powerstructure. The foreign minister have written a book called “Strategic depth” that clearly show the dreams of becoming a islamic super power in the region.
Don Bacon says:
August 8, 2012 at 11:16 am
All sides are now committed to the war in Syria; there is no peaceful way of turning back.
The economic cooperation between Turkey and Iran will continue at the current levels but expansion of economic ties will have to wait for a new government in Turkey.
Turkey, unfortunately, has taken side in the struggle against Iran; she has joined such states as Ba’athis Iraq, India, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Israel, US, and EU.
Years, if not decades of political alienation are ahead.
In the Syria proxy arena, the US is abetting the growing strength of Islamic radicals to augment the inept and failing Free Syria Army gangs. This is also bringing Turkey and Iran into deeper, conflicting involvement.
from Today’s Zaman, Aug 7
Turkey’s Foreign Ministry on Tuesday condemned comments by an Iranian official who blamed Ankara for the bloodshed in Syria and warned Turkey would be next, calling the comments unacceptable and inappropriate and urging Iran to honor its ties as neighbors. The strongly worded statement by the Turkish Foreign Ministry came in response to recent threats and statements by Iranian officials regarding Turkey’s policies on Syria.
“We strongly condemn statements full of groundless accusations and exceptionally inappropriate threats against our country by some Iranian officials,” the Turkish Foreign Ministry statement said on Tuesday. “It is unacceptable and irresponsible that Iranian officials in various posts continue to target our country through their statements, although Turkey’s principled foreign policy is known to everyone.”
Iranian Chief of Staff Maj. Gen. Seyed Hassan Firouzabadi warned Turkey on Monday that “it will be its turn” if it continues to “help advance the warmongering policies of the United States in Syria.” He was also quoted by the Iranian media as saying, “Al-Saud, Qatar, and Turkey are responsible for the blood being shed on Syrian soil.”
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-288897-ankara-strongly-condemns-irans-threats-against-turkey.html
Clinton is scheduled to travel to Turkey next week, possibly to seek a wider Turkey involvement. I hope she knows and appreciates that Iran and Russia provide 2/3 of Turkey’s imported gas and their hands are reaching for the valves. Syria should have control of Aleppo (as well as Damascus) by then, and Turkey will still be confronted by increased domestic Kurdish activity. Turkey is using air bombardment against Kurds in both Iraq and Turkey but of course that escapes any UN interest because Turkey is a US ally. There are no remonstrations against “horrendous slaughter” etc in this case.
James Canning says:
“You don’t see why countries worried about possible war with Iran would consider it beneficial to “take out” an ally of Iran?”
James, your thought come thru very clear.. it I not about a possible war, rather the independence of Iran is the worry….
I think you need to remember the ol’ briteesh adage “carry on and dread nought”
The independence along the resistance counties is the future of the region.. best get used to it.
Don Bacon says:
August 7, 2012 at 8:03 pm
There are not very many secrets in these industrial activities.
I think Iranians were importing a lot because they found it more expedient to do so.
Now, perhaps, they will build an aluminum powder production facility and by the aluminum from Saudi Arabia (may be).
But there is a cost associated with this and it will take time.
Don Bacon says:
August 7, 2012 at 10:50 pm
All of those land communication projects have been on hold since before 2006.
Likewise for IPI.
These projects will not resume until either Shia/Irani defeat or US-Iran accomodation.
The most likely scenario – enduring hostility between Axis Powers and Iran – precludes any movement in those directions for decades.
Iranians do not need India, in the final analysis.
pmr9 says:
August 7, 2012 at 8:31 pm
Highly unlikely; there is an understanding between Pakistan and Iran on Afghanistan; there isn’t any between Iran and India.
Indians put their strategic eggs in the “unlikely” basket that you mentioned.
Now they are at the mercy of Iranians, Chinese and others with influence in Nrothern Afghanistan.
James,
Read the correspondence between Churchill and Roosevelt during WII about having to control the oilfields of Saudi, Iran, Iraq and Kuwait AFTER THE WAR. Also read the US’ own strategic assessments in the Eisenhower admin naming Saudi Arabia as the ‘greatest strategic asset in human history’. YOU are dead wrong or just playing the fool.
And yes therefore Russian sales to old stinky today are “exploiting a business opportunity” while UK sales are the attempt to continue colonial dominance that began in the early 20th century. The fact that Abdul Aziz conquered Hejaz doesn’t prove anything. Maybe the British were happy to get rid of the Sharif of Mecca who wanted to unite the Arabs and preferred a munch of ignorant bedouins as the rulers of Mecca and Madina to- in the words of Lawrence- ‘keep the Arabs as a tissue of small jealous principalities’. Don’t play the fool here James.
Of course Russia has a colonialist history but like I said nothing close to the colonial history that the UK has. And you know the way we see it in Iran is that it was the Russian pressure that prevented the UK from annexing Iran. Barg bar Ingilis!
As always you are asking leading questions and playing word games. Try to answer direct questions to you with statements not with a another question.
James,
I have already responded, obviously you dont know what nuclear rights means and obviously the whole of this comment board agrees with me.
pmr9/Don… interesting, but I think India’s role in Afghanistan is to strengthen its relationship to Afghanistan as well as to strengthen its relationship to the US, as both the US and India work to “contain” Pakistan by gaining greater influence in Afghanistan.
I know that requires two readings, but I don’t know how to put it any more clearly.
However, to remind us of the larger context: Pakistan is a nuclear power which, with ICBMs, can hit anywhere in the middle east it damn well pleases. The US government is acting to both limit and thwart that capability (and the range of the Pakistani ICBMs). It works with India and Israel to do so.
Although India is a large and varied country, always heading off in a number of directions at once, on balance I’d say that India is firmly in the American-Israeli camp.
@ Fiorangela
Atty Joyner: ” . .there are also a number of resolutions adopted by the IAEA General Conference – the highest policymaking body of the IAEA, comprised of representatives from all IAEA member states, today numbering 154 states. . . In a number of resolutions, the IAEA General Conference has explicitly declared . . .”
That’s a bunch of baloney. IAEA General Conference Resolutions have absolutely no standing in law. The highest policymaking body of the IAEA? The IAEA has no authority to make policy.
According to the NPT the IAEA has one purpose, and one purpose only, and that is to verify non-diversion of nuclear fuel to weapons programs which they have consistently done in Iran.
NPT: “Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes to accept safeguards, as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agencys safeguards system, for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.”
That’s it. Preventing diversion, not policymaking. Also not snooping into heavy water plants, missile plants and prattling about smoking laptops. The IAEA can explicitly declare anything they want, it has no standing and Iran is correct in telling the IAEA (now a US puppet) to ‘stick it.’
James Canning says:
August 7, 2012 at 7:31 pm
James, are you saying that Iran’s stated need for 19.75% LEU is only a decoy to mask other intentions?
I am also calling attention to your tactics James. What is your obsession with 20%? Why the constant repetition? All these soundbytes you give off. Have the P5+1 given any indication that 20% is the stumbling issue?
You are being deceitful. If you dispute the hegemony thesis, challenge it directly. There is more to the thesis than the “the Israel Lobby” and has much to do with the vision Americans have of themselves. American ineptitude in foreign policy is directly related to that vision and directly related to the hegemony thesis. America is the problem. 20% is a denial of the problem.
@pmr9
Of course Indians, like all others, have real concerns about post-2014 stability in Afghanistan. India hasn’t had military forces there but htey have has people in Afghanistan. India’s relationship with Taliban isn’t good, but India has a had a long relationship with what was called the Northern Alliance, Uzbeks Tajiks and Hazaras. India is also friendly with Iran, which has good relations in the Afghan west, particularly Herat which is the industrial center of Afghanistan.
Despite concerns India is moving ahead with investments in Afghanistan and working with Iran. It could all change from any number of factors, particularly the presidential election because Karzai has to leave by 2014. Even if this happens, India could be strong through Iran, western Afghanistan and into Turkmenistan, an Iran ally and an important country on Iran’s northern border.
Bottom line — India need to connect to Central Asia and it needs Iran to do it if not through Afghanistan then through Iran, or both. Iran is also a land corridor into Turkey and Europe.
Can the U S or Israel Lawfully Attack Iran’s Nuclear Facilities?
read this paragraph:
“The international lawyers out there may be thinking that this statement of the law, if true even ten years ago, might now be in need of updating in light of state practice through such incidents at the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the 2007 attack by Israel against Al Kibar. And there are arguments to be made here. My own view is that there have been far too few instances of state practice, coupled with an opinio juris seeking to change the underlying rules of use of force law relative to anticipatory self-defense, and far too little evidence of a generalized acquiescence to such a change by the international community, to find that such a substantive change has indeed occurred. It may be in the process of occurring, but my sense is that from a legal perspective, it would be a very risky gamble at this point to rely on the justification potentially afforded such an act through arguing that it was an attempt to progress an emerging rule of customary law. For one thing, I don’t think that either the U.S. or Israel would make such an argument because, at the end of the day, neither one wants the general rules on the use of force to change in that direction. This is one reason why the U.S. official arguments regarding the 2003 invasion of Iraq were not based on counterproliferation-oriented self-defense, but rather on UNSC Resolutions.”
as a counterpoise to Chas Freeman’s comments, here:
“These crimes have been linked to a concerted effort to rewrite international law to permit actions that it traditionally prohibited, in effect enshrining the principle that might makes right.
As the former head of the Israeli Defense Forces’ (IDF) Legal Department has argued:
“If you do something for long enough the world will accept it. The whole of international law is now based on the notion that an act that is forbidden today becomes permissible if executed by enough countries . . . . International law progresses through violations.”
A colleague of his has extended this notion by pointing out that:
“The more often Western states apply principles that originated in Israel to their own non-traditional conflicts in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, then the greater the chance these principles have of becoming a valuable part of international law.”
These references to Iraq and Afghanistan underscore the extent to which the United States, once the principal champion of a rule-bound international order, has followed Israel in replacing legal principles with expediency as the central regulator of its interaction with foreign peoples. The expediently amoral doctrine of preemptive war is such an Israeli transplant in the American neo-conservative psyche. Neither it nor other deliberate assaults on the rule of law have been met with concerted resistance from Palestinians, Arabs, or anyone else, including the American Bar Association. The steady displacement of traditional American values – indeed, the core doctrines of western civilization – with ideas designed to free the state of inconvenient moral constraints has debased the honor and prestige of our country as well as Israel. “
Dan Joyner IS that member of the American Bar who is offering “resistance” to the moral erosion of rule of law.
Don Bacon says:
August 7, 2012 at 12:45 pm
India’s investment in Afghanistan only makes sense if the Indian government is reasonably confident that northern Afghanistan will be secure and politically stable. Unless they expect the US-led forces to stay for a long time (unlikely), or they expect a united Afghanistan under Taliban leadership to be stable (also unlikely), this suggests that they anticipate a de facto partition of Afghanistan in which Iran maintains security (via local proxies) of the northern region against a Pashtun-dominated south.
This implies a long-term partnership between India and Iran far beyond the IPI gas pipeline or the North-South corridor. The US can’t have failed to notice this, but presumably can’t openly object to India’s investment in northern Afghanistan as this would undermine its own declared objective of stabilizing and developing the country. As in Iraq, the US has expended blood and treasure only to extend Iran’s sphere of influence
David Albright and his International Institute for Strategic Studies geniuses have come out with another appraisal of Iran’s internal affairs, as they are paid to do by you-know-who.
The latest is on enrichment — of aluminum (aluminium to islanders).
July 20, 2012 — London’s International Institute for Strategic Studies warned in a July analysis of Iran’s missile program that the ever-tightening sanctions first introduced in mid-2010 “could yet deal a knockout blow to the country’s development of long-range ballistic missiles.”
The IISS said that Western experts who monitor Iran’s compliance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1929 of June 2010, which banned Tehran from developing nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, have reported that vital propellant ingredients are being seized before they reach Iran. These include “the interception in Singapore on Sept. 30, 2010, of 302 drums of pure aluminum powder destined for Iran from China,” the IISS said. “The seized powder was suitable solely for solid-propellant production.
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2012/07/20/Sancti
A knockout blow because Iran can’t get pure aluminum powder. That sounds serious. But two guys from Burma delivered a paper in Thailand a year ago describing how to do it. So couldn’t Iran just read this paper? (extracts follow)
Production of Fine Aluminum Powder from Metallic Aluminum
The First International Conference on Interdisciplinary Research and Development, 31 May – 1 June 2011, Thailand
Hnin Yu Khaing and Tint Tint Kywe, Department of Chemical Engineering, Mandalay Technological University Mandalay Technological University, Mandalay, Myanmar
Abstract- This paper intend to produce fine aluminum powder from metallic aluminum by using hybrid atomization technique. The hybrid atomization system used in this experiment has three main parts: melting unit, hybrid atomization and powder collector. . . . As an advantage of this method, the powder with low content oxygen can be easily produced because the powder is produced in an inert gas atmosphere [6]. This method is easy to control the powder particle size, particle size distribution, powder shape and other characteristics by detail investigation of the relation between the metal physical properties and the rotational speed of the rotary disk [7]. The suitable metals that can be melted and is used commercially for powder production are tin, lead, zinc and aluminum [8]. The primary aim of this paper was to apply for the production of solid rocket propellant.
http://www.inrit2012.com/inrit2011/Proceedings2011/02_65_16D_Hnin%20Yu%20Khaing_%5B6%5D.pdf
Well son of a gun (no pun intended), Iran already has done it.
Sep 29, 2009 — Iran opens ammunition production lines
Iran’s Defense Ministry has inaugurated three major projects that will go a long way towards raising the self-sufficiency of the Islamic Republic’s defense industries. “Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi launched the three projects at the Defense Industries Organization early this morning,”" the ministry said in a statement on Monday. . .
The projects were ammunition production lines for micronized aluminum powder, double-base smokeless powders and high-density nitroguanidine. . . .
“Other than its uses in manufacturing solid fuel missiles, warheads, detonators and emulates… the micronized aluminum powder will also have its civilian applications in mining and construction.
http://old.tehrantimes.com/Index_view.asp?code=204190
David Albright with his IISS lose again, betting against Iran. He’d better take a look at Burma, too. It’s pretty difficult to stop technology.
Karl..,
Easy question that you dodge time and again: do you think Iran should continue to enrich uranium to 20 percent, even if this prevents a negotiated resolution of the nuclear dispute?
Rory Stewart has a very fine piece in the Aug. 16, 2012 issue of The New York Review of Books (“Lessons from Afghanistan”). I recommend it highly. (It is a review of “The Dark Defile: Britain’s Catastrophic Invasion of Afghanistan 1838-1842″, by Diana Preston.
kooshy,
Apparently Russia and China also insist Iran stop enriching to 20 percent. Antagonising Russia and China cannot be in Iran’s true best interests.
Photi,
Has Iran manufactured a single medical isotope, using the fuel plates it apparently has build to re-fuel the TRR?
Why do you object to my pointing out what seems obviously a colossalk blunder by the government of Iran? Is Iran stockpiling 20 percent urasnium to give the false impression that Iran intends to build nukes? This is wise?
James,
“It is not propagamda to say it appears Obama was sincere in his wish to improve relations with Iran. Obama did not know how to do it. Full stop. The man lacked experience, confidence, adequate advice… Maybe the ISRAEL LOBBY had him by the throat (even if Obama is accused time and time again of being inadequately “supportive” of Israel).”
You are again making assertions and offering no examples of genuine, tangible efforts on the part of the Obama administration to reach out for mutual interests with Iran. Where are these efforts James than convince so much of Obama’s sincerity? Is it in his pretty words? Should we start with the Cairo speech then, is that Obama’s effort? It was nice when it happened, but OH what a BUMMER since.
20% is an issue never meant to be resolved by the hegemonists out there. Hegemony is the issue james, and 20% is a dispensable tool of that failing hegemony. If 20% does not produce the downfall of Iran, then something else will. That is their credo and you have to prove it wrong to keep blathering out so called Iranian blunders.
James,
“Iran blundered by enriching to 20 percent, and stockpiling. This does not mean the US is not full of sh*t much of the time, in matters involving the Middle East.”
Iran blundered by developing the ability to produce medicine for patients in need?
Why should patients be prevented from the knowledge and comfort that is provided by medicine? There is barbarity mixed in all of this, and it is not coming from Iran.
I think you are full of sh*t regarding the 20% issue. It is a manufactured issue, and you are helping to manufacture it. So my question naturally is What is in it for you? You are running a 20% propaganda campaign. Are you doing this so you can be “right” in the end? Or are you operating the 20% campaign for hidden interests?
If 20% was not there to be the manufactured “threat”, another threat would have been found. Such as: Holy Crap! Iran is enriching to 2.5 %, what is the world going to do now about this clear and imminent danger? 2.5% TWO POINT FIVE PER CENT. The day is near when Iran will have breakout capability. 2 & 1/2 %, this is getting serious folks. This is a major blunder on Iran’s part. They don’t need nuclear energy, they have oil.
James Canning says:
August 7, 2012 at 4:52 pm
Your Excellency honorable Gavner James of all +5% U’s and beyond
With due respect to your Excellency’s most recent eloquent post, containing list of El president Obama’s deficiencies, one important item of subsequence was missed, if you may, is, rather very small balls for a black man of change.
As ever, we are grateful for your Excellency’s generous permission to produce -5% U’s
May god saves the queen
If US/west can’t get their way in this new world order, you will need the blessing.
Don Bacon,
Hilarious!
Note how hes not not only unnamed, hes a former! And apparently hes to nervous to acknowledge his name.
James,
Yes very easy question, I just responded to it. If you know what nuclear right means. Do you?
http://www.raceforiran.com/flynt-leverett-on-al-jazeera-syria-as-a-proxy-arena-for-the-obama-administration%e2%80%99s-campaign-against-the-islamic-republic-of-iran#comment-87585
@fyi
“You are wrong.”
I like that, straight, to the point, no messing around with irrelevant details like facts, evidence and argument that I would have to take the time to counter. Just “You are wrong.” At least I don’t stand corrected, only falsely evaluated.
James Canning says:
August 7, 2012 at 4:48 pm
Rubbish.
US Government, in 2008 and 2009, continued opposing Iran in any and all international fora.
It was relentless.
His government is now partnering with Al Qaeda in Syria.
American leaders have thoroughly and truly degenerated so much that they have lost touch with Reality.
You have heard of “Reality”; it is that Ocean surrounding a small town called Washington D.C.
“What has been driving the discussion has been the enrichment activity. That’s made everybody nervous. So the Iranians continue to contribute to the suspicions about what they are trying to do. — Unnnamed former intelligence official, quoted by James Risen in the New York Times “
That’s it! We have it from the anonymous horse’s mouth! Or former horse. Whatever. He must know, right? Would the New York Times print the words of somebody stupid? No. The fully-supervised fully-legal enrichment activity in far-off Iran has made everybody nervous. I’m nervous, you’re nervous — I just went to the post office and everybody there is nervous too. There is so much nervousness around that something needs to be done.
If people are nervous about a proper fully-supervised activity then it must be due to an inadequacy of the supervision. So it seems that the IAEA must improve their supervision in Iran. IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano needs a good talking to, because Iran’s enrichment activity has made everybody nervous, according to an unnnamed former intelligence official. The supervision needs to be jacked up.
We have to get back from “everybody nervous” to a lower rate, say twenty percent. Oooops.
Don Bacon says:
August 7, 2012 at 12:45 pm
You are wrong.
Photi,
I have “Lawrence of Arabia” fantasies? Lawrence wanted the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire to be an independent Arab kingdom. France prevented Faisal from setting up an Arab kingdom based in Damascus.
Photi,
I AM NOT PAID TO COMMENT ON THIS SITE.
Photi,
It is not propagamda to say it appears Obama was sincere in his wish to improve relations with Iran. Obama did not know how to do it. Full stop. The man lacked experience, confidence, adequate advice… Maybe the ISRAEL LOBBY had him by the throat (even if Obama is accused time and time again of being inadequately “supportive” of Israel).
Photi,
Yes, for Israel the issue is relentless promotion of US “hegemony” so Israel can continue to oppress the Palestinians, continue to occupy the West Bank and the Golan Heights. So, the Israel lobby promotes US “hegemony”, and the screwing of the American taxpayers, so Isreal can continue oppressing the Palestinians, etc etc etc.
But Iran blunders by making it easier for Israel and the Israel lobby, and other parties, to dupe, deceive, etc etc etc the ignorant American public.
Iran blundered by enriching to 20 percent, and stockpiling. This does not mean the US is not full of sh*t much of the time, in matters involving the Middle East.
Karl..,
Are you arguing that Iran must demand its right to stockpile 20 percent uranium, as a matter of national pride? Or for some other reason? And that Iranian negotiators involved with the P5+1 meetings should refuse to consider ending Iranian enrichment to 20 percent? Or, are you referring to Irnain enrichment to 5% or lower? Easy question.
James,
I am claiming what Iran have the right to, the right to have a nuclear program.
Anyone who doesnt recognize this right or think Iran must bow down is dead wrong.
James Canning says:
August 6, 2012 at 6:38 pm
James, it is not Iran who is unwilling to make a deal. When the US and Israel realize that diplomacy is more than an arrogant attitude and a big stick, maybe we will see progress.
It is shallow and disingenuine for you to keep bringing up the 20% issue as though it is Iran’s fault. You need to prove the issue is NOT hegemony and domination, as that is the thesis of the Leveretts and that is why most of us are all gathered here.
Everything you say is hot air you until you prove your point.
Stating that you have long stated the genuine-ness of President Obama’s intentions means nothing. You think 45 minutes of face time with Iran in the first 3 years of the Obama administration is a genuine attempt? You mean the fake-out with Brazil and Turkey was another attempt at reconciliation? Take your propaganda elsewhere.
And why wont you answer whether or not you get paid to comment here? It is a fair question given the subject matter and dishonesty of many of the players involved.
Would answering “no, i do not get paid to comment here” erase away your Sir Lawrence of Arabia fantasies?
Bussed-In Basiji,
I entirely reject your contention the US and the UK need to control the energy resources of the Persian Gulf. Entirely reject. This is propaganda put out by the Israel lobby and the “military-industrial-Congressional complex” to dupe the American people into supporting grotesquely large “defence” spending by the US.
Bussed-In Basiji,
I agree with you that the Saudi (and other Gulf countries”) purchases of weapons from the UK and the US, have helped to offset the damage caused by much higher oil prices (that of course arose direclty due to US support of Israel in its 1973 war with Egypt and Syria).
Don Bacon,
You think it is “shrewd” for Iran to make a good deal of noise about Bahrain? This is the way to improve relations with the Persian Gulf monarchies?
Don Bacon,
The US and India “have parted ways”? I agree with FYI that this is not going to happen. India has long-term concerns about China.
“What has been driving the discussion has been the enrichment activity. That’s made everybody nervous. So the Iranians continue to contribute to the suspicions about what they are trying to do.” (Unnnamed former intelligence official, quoted by James Risen in the New York Times Feb. 25, 2012.)
Bussed-In Basiji,
The Russians also would have annexed Persia, but for British opposition.
Bussed-In Basiji,
Ibn Saud, as Sultan of Nejd, conquered the British-supported Kingdom of the Hejaz. The British would have preferred that he not do this, but they lacked the resources to prevent or reverse it.
The Russian Empire would have taken over Anatolia, Syria and Iraq, in the 19th Century, if the British had not prevented it.
Are you saying that Russian arms sales to Saudi Arabia are not “colonialist”, but British sales to Saudi Arabia are “colonialist”?
Karl..,
You should be more specific. Are you now claiming Iran will insist on stockpiling hwoever much 20 percent uraanium it wishes, and the P5+1 should just “take a hike” and end any effort to resolve the dispute? Or are you still arguing that Iran gains “leverage” by stockpiling 20 percent uranium, to use in effort to gain suspension of sanctions?
@fyi
Nothing’s in tatters. In Asia the US is sinking (and slinking out of Afghanistan) while India is rising in partnership with Iran. India won’t obey US sanctions and will pay rupees for oil, which will serve to increase Iran-India trade to make up for the EU drops in trade with Iran.
Clinton’s New Silk Road will happen — via Iran.
India has a strong interest in Afghanistan. India has built a children’s hospital in Kabul, the Zaranj-Delaram highway and is currently building Afghanistan’s National Parliament and Salma dam and power projects (done by an Iranian firm). Indian firms are also engaged in repairing power lines and highways, setting up an agricultural university and a mining school, besides restoring the historic Stor palace. It is also involved in training Afghan army officers and policemen.
Steel Authority of India Ltd. has led a consortium of top Indian firms on $1-trillion Hajigak iron ore mine project in Afghanistan. Also Coal India Ltd and Singareni Collieries to explore coal deposits in the country. The ore and steel will be transported through a yet-to-be-built rail route along the Taliban-hit Zaranj-Delaram highway into Iran and on to the Indian-built Chabahar (Iran) port on the Makran coast.
The Zaranj-Delaram highway in Afghanistan was built by India and handed over to the Afghan government on January 22, 2009. Also known as Route 606, is a National Highway in Afghanistan, connecting Zaranj in Nimruz Province, near the Iranian border, with Delaram in Farah Province, and connectivity to other major Afghan cities and on into Central Asia.
India is also increasing commercial ties with Iran, including on wheat, pharmaceuticals, automobiles and auto components.
Don Bacon says:
August 7, 2012 at 10:55 am
You are reading too much into this video.
The so-called North-South Corridor and other such partnerships are all in tatters.
As for oil, the Indians have no choice – they have to bend to US will and, at the same time, keep their economy functioning.
This is no more than the slack that US cut for Japan or South Korea.
Iran in now in Pakistan – the strategic situation has changed and India is out.
@fyi
“India is too far gone to make a course correction now; she must be understood to be firmly in US orbit.”
Not really. India and the U.S.have parted ways and Iran is a big reason. India needs Iran as a source of needed oil and for transportation networks into Afghanistan, where India will develop a major source of iron ore, and also to Central Asia.
It’s in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahq4t3o0pOY&feature=g-user-u
TEHRAN – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will attend an emergency Islamic summit in Mecca August 14-15, an official at the Presidential Office announced on Monday.
Teheran has declared that tops on the agenda should be — Bahrain! Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said on July 24 that the crisis in Bahrain should top the agenda of the Islamic summit. “We will welcome any meeting that brings together Muslim countries and will actively participate in it. But the crises are obvious, and it is also clear which countries are taking interventionist measures. If such a meeting is supposed to be held, resolving the issue of Bahrain” should be top of the agenda”
http://www.tehrantimes.com/politics/100335-iranian-president-to-attend-islamic-summit-in-mecca
Very shrewd. Iran has calculated that Bahrain is the enemies’ weak point in the Gulf and should be exploited, considering the Eastern province next.
kooshy says: August 7, 2012 at 12:47 am
India is too far gone to make a course correction now; she must be understood to be firmly in US orbit.
That policy has been a mixture of Hindu imperial ambitions (all the way to Myanmar), Awe of Israeli Power, Hindu Anti-Muslim sentiment, mercantilism, and fear of China.
In the meantime, Reliance Corporation is waiting for reliable natural gas source in order to build an electricity-generating power plant in Northern India while India – like Pakistan – wallows in brown-out and black-out misery.
[Their Iran policy was predicated on quick US victroy; when that did not happen, they sank deeper and deeper into its morass.]
Strategically, they may be viewed like the stroy of the Pious Man in Mathnavi of Rumi; the fellow who was brought in to cure a princess and eventaully found himself in Hell.
James,
August 6, 2012 at 3:41 pm
Apparently not all people here like the idea of sourcing their statements…
You are simply dead wrong if you think Iran would give up its nuclear rights permanently. Dead wrong.
James,
You play with words to make yourself feel better about having sold out your country to a bunch of arms dealers and ignorant bedouins. You call it “exploiting a business opportunity” which is oh so different than a “colonialist mindset”. Of course the Russians or the Chinese would want to sell weapons to Saudis, the difference is that they are neither countries which claim to be the cradle of the “rule of law” nor do they have a colonialist history in the Persian Gulf anywhere comparable to what the UK has. The Saud would be a stuck in Najd as a second rate bedouin clan if it hadn’t been for UK and later US support throughout the 20th century. The UK and US selling weapons to the bedouins- weapons they do not need at all and with billions of bribes to old stinky Bandar- is key to maintaing US-UK hegemony of the world. It also recycles the dollars and pounds they gave old stinky for oil.
That’s the bloody difference between the UK and US selling weapons to old stinky Bandar and the Russians and Chinese selling them. The UK and US selling weapons is the definition of a colonialist mindset, the Russians and Chinese are indeed only exploiting a business opportunity.
Besides when Bandar makes trips to Russia and China he is not “seriously” considering them as “allies”. He knows that the Ale Saud rule their fiefdom by the grace of he US and UK, he’s just squeezing your nuts to get a better bribe for himself.
James of course you know all this but you think everybody else is stupid and therefore you deem it necessary to justify the unjustifiable with word games. You’ve made a deal with the devil and now you have to rationalize this major breach of your own basic values and justify it to yourself and the world.
James, of course you know that the oilfields in al Ahsa have to be exclusively controlled by the US and UK no matter what, in order to have a strangle hold on everybody else in the world and in order to maintain your domestic political-social-economic order and so you’ve been doing it since the 1940s with the help of Ale Saud for which they are being handsomely rewarded. Check out the correspondence between Churchill and Roosevelt during WWII in this regard.
To keep this system going you’re willing to sell out your mothers. Shame on you.
India must think before it acts on Syria
Prem Shankar Jha
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article3735156.ece
All:
Sanctions on Iran
http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/08/sanctions-iran-salehi-isfahani
[Mr. Isfahani does not yet grasp that US-EU aim to destroy independent Iranian power; just as they did during 1950-1953 period.]
James Canning says:
August 6, 2012 at 1:26 pm
India was not sitting on a lot of oil & gas and was not near to even more oil and gas.
US had defined independent Iran as her enemy.
US and EU have decided to oppose the 150-yer long project of Iranian people’s Will-to-Power.
There is no turning back in what the current crop of US-EU leaders have instigted.
The cold war against Shia/Irani Alliance will go on until Iranians and their allies eviscerate this war as well.
We are only in its second year; 4 more years are ahead, until at least the end of 2016.
All:
An assessment of Syrian situation
http://carnegieendowment.org/2012/08/06/syria-after-aleppo/d8zj
[The war will go on..]
In terms of the failing iranian economy, it might be useful to compare it to the American farming yields of 2012.
This is extremely significant, though of course, not seen as such in the US media.
http://www.countercurrents.org/spencer010812.htm
Photi,
I would sure hope the US would stop threatening Iran, if Iran ceased production of 20 percent uranium. Murderous Israeli schemes might continue? I don’t think Iran can negotiate an end to the Israeli murder schemes, by not making a deal with the P5+1.
Bussed-In Basiji,
Russia would like to join the US and the UK in being a major supplier of arms to the Saudis. Does this reflect a “colonialist” mindset? Or just a wish to exploit business opportunity? Prince Bandar bin Sultan toyed with the notion of having the Russians become a primary ally of Saudi Arabia.
Rd.,
Saudi Arabia and Qatar tried to influence Bashar al-Assad, and to improve their relations with Syria. The UK (and the US, to a lesser degree) tried to improve relations with Syria. But one aspect of this effort was to try to prompt the Syrian government to distance itself from Iran.
You don’t see why countries worried about possible war with Iran would consider it beneficial to “take out” an ally of Iran?
I would just like to point out that neither of the two other guests confronted Flynt Leverett’s statement that the current Syrian government has the support of at least half of the Syrian population, and that the FSA has substantially less support.
It follows that the CIA is involved in the co-ordination of a civil war for the minority side.
The host/presenter should have followed up on this point with the other two guests, to clarify whether or not they agreed with Flynt’s assessment, and if so, how that affected their own positions of supporting military foreign intervention in the struggle.
Then, at least, the path would have been clearer for a discussion as to the intentions of US involvement, which were underplayed by the other guests. It would also have helped clarify the Russian and Chinese positions.
I was somewhat surprised, as well, that the fact of payments from Saudi Arabia to the foreign mercenaries was not mentioned.
A bold presentation by Flynt, and accurate.
I’m assuming everyone here has watched the interview with Sami Ramadani, but if not its certainly worth the time.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=8658
Don,
It’s not surprising that US-UK would want to throw its lot in with an absolute monarchy run by one family like in Saudi over trying to deal with the subtleties, politics and diplomacy of dealing with complex govt system like in the Islamic Republic. This is what colonialist like to do- rather deal with a strongman system than with a republic where the people limit the leaders. That in itself is not surprising.
They even tried to do this in Iran with the Rafsanjani clan- turning the Islamic Republic into the Rafsanjani fiefdom- but the Iranian people who own this revolution and sacrificed for it, gave old stinky Akbar and his western friends the proper response. Notice how pissed off the US has been since their attempt at a velvet revolution after the last prez elections in Iran failed.
It all comes down to whether one thinks the old stinky system a la Saudi Arabia represents the future for the region or whether the new shiny nice-smelling Islamic republican system a la Islamic Republic of Iran does. Obviously my money is on the new shiny nice-smelling Islamic republican system.
The crazy thing is that so far as I can tell, amid the billions of dollars spent and volumes of research conducted in the US security-foreign policy world, only the Leverrets and Bob Baer have had the sense to seriously ask themselves this basic question about what the future model for the region will be. Once you ask yourself this question it becomes as they say, a “no brainer”.
Of course other US “experts” deep down inside know that the old stinky model has no future, but they are not ready to see the merits of the new shiny system. So there current answer is neither the Saudi model nor the Iranian model but rather “the Turkish model”- you know nationalist secular pro-western republic. But there are major problems with this view, in fact the Turkish model is not really a model.
Let’s see if our friends on this forum can guess what the major problems with Turkish “model” for the US is. Hint: it’s black, gooey and flammable and Turkey’s got non of it. Hint: you know the secular pro-western thing in a Muslim society- a contradiction that Erdogan/ Davotuglou thought they had overcome because they are so “popular” not realizing that the majority of there voters do not agree with there Syrian fiasco and are angry about it. Unlike in Saudi there will be elections in Turkey at some point and we will see.
Desperation to implement the Turkish model before the collapse the Saudi model and victory of the Iranian model by the US (and Turkey) will help shed some light on why the Islamist Erdogan and Davutoglou have decided to be part of the Syrian fiasco and making deals with their archenemies the Iraqi Kurds. They want to be on “the winning side” post Syrian conflict and be the model which everyone strives for in the region. In the process they are pissing off there core voters.
Not quite out of control yet, but getting there slowly.
Rd. says:
August 6, 2012 at 4:06 pm
Nah; it is clear that Iran caused the Fall of Man.
James Canning says:
“Did Iran unwittingly in effect bring civil war to Syria? Is the civil war in Syria an after-effect related to Iran’s decision to enrich uranium to 20 percent?”
I think you mean the global warming or the climate change to be PC… :-)
Will Israel and the US stop threatening Iran if they give up 20% enrichment? Will international and (american) domestic sanctions be lifted from Iran? Will Israel stop killing Iranian civilians?
James,
What do you think Iran should get for giving up 20% enrichment? What has the West offered Iran in exchange for the cessation of 20% enrichment? I have not heard any offer on the table by the US.
Karl..,
Hamas denounced the attack on the Israeli soldiers that you refer to. Did the Israeli ambassador mention that?
Karl..,
You apparently have difficulty understanding diplomatic communications.
If you think Iran has not offered to compromise on enriching to 20 percent, I repeat you simply are DEAD WRONG.
Karl.. says:
August 6, 2012 at 2:53 pm
Yes, he truly deserves the epitath “Mr. Twenty Percent”.
That particular horse has left the barn, soon to be joined with the “Regime Change in Syria” horse.
In my estimation, we have to wait for the 2017 and beyond for any hope of change in US posture in the Middle East.
Perhaps not even then.
Someone didnt get the memo-update about not accusing Iran this time?
Israel’s envoy to U.S. blames Iran for Sinai attack, but evidence is lacking
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/diplomania/israel-s-envoy-to-u-s-blame-iran-for-sinai-attack-but-evidence-is-lacking-1.456371
James,
No need to for outbursts, I just exposed your fabrications, Don Bacon even provided a quote where 20% were mentioned. Still you coming here claming otherwhise.
Ali Akbar Salehi “wnt on to say that the Islamic Republic is seriously againsgt the proliferation of nuclear weapons throughout the world.” (April 2012)
http://ann.az/en/?p=35765
Did Iran unwittingly in effect bring civil war to Syria? Is the civil war in Syria an after-effect related to Iran’s decision to enrich uranium to 20 percent?
Don Bacon,
What is “colonial” about the effort to overthrow the government of Syria? Turkey is a would-be “colonial power”, in your view?
Xinhua: Iran “refuses to curb its production of high-grade uranium until the six powers publicly acknowledge that it has a right to enrich urnaium. . .”
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/video/2012-06/19/c_131662983.htm
Karl..,
I will say this yet again: IRANIAN LEADEERS HAVE GIVEN SIGNAL AFTER SIGNAL THAT IRAN IS WILLING TO COMPROMISE ON THE ISSUE OF ENRICHING URANIUM TO 20 PERCENT.
There is ZERO chance the P5+1 will accept Iranian enrichment to 20 percent. ZERO. Why is this fact so difficult for you to grasp?
Don Bacon,
Salehi does insist that Iran has the right to enrich to 20 percent, and he will continue to defend Iran’s right to enrich to 20 percent. But he is well aware there is no chance the P5+1 will accept continuing Iranian enrichment to 20 percent and Iran has made clear it is willing to compromise on this issue.
Why is it that you want Iran to continue stockpiling 20 percent uranium?
Don Bacon,
Delusional neocons thought the US could control the government of Iraq provided the Baath party was extirpated, and the Shia led a “democracy”. This was a delusion.
fyi,
Decades ago, India was a regional power, and obviously independent. Yet the US did not see this as a “threat”. ISRAEL sees Iran as a threat, and supporters of Israel work day and night to convince the American public that any threat to Israel is a threat to the US. Even if this obviously is not true.
US intelligence agencies are sceptical about what will occur in Syria if the Assad government is overthrown. Much more sceptical than the Obama administration, apparently.
All:
The Truth from the proverbial Horse’s Mouth:
“In May 2012, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta publicly accepted al-Qaeda’s presence in Syria (Guardian). And in July, the State Department’s counterterrorism chief, Daniel Benjamin, rather incredulously suggested that the United States will simply ask the FSA to reject al-Qaeda. The unspoken political calculation among policymakers is to get rid of Assad first—weakening Iran’s position in the region—and then deal with al-Qaeda later.”
http://www.cfr.org/syria/al-qaedas-specter-syria/p28782
All:
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/five-myths-about-the-us-iran-conflict-7294
We read:
“..the independence of regional powers—Iran or otherwise— [is] a threat to what the United States perceives as its national interests..”
War or no War, this dynamics, which has been going on for 150 years, will continue.
@fyi
I agree. The expensive, deadly Operation Iraqi Freedom resulted in a de facto Iran Shia victory, much to the disappointment of the U.S. and its despotic Sunni ally Saudi Arabia. (And Egypt piled on top of that.) The Saudis are the chief supporters of terrorism who keep the War on Terror alive for the US war profiteers and they must be placated.
So the U.S. support for the Saudi effort to overthrow Iran-allied Syria. (A disconnect with Hezbollah is also a plus.) The script calls for a new US-controlled puppet leadership in Syria (as it did in Iraq), but the U.S. didn’t count on Saudi support for the crazies who seem bent on extinguishing Alawis and Christians, among others. The Kurds are another wild card. It’s basically out of control now.
rebel says:
August 6, 2012 at 9:19 am
Because of the context of the war in Syria; the Islamic Republic of Iran – the Shia Fortress – has become the de facto protector of the physical safety of religious minorities in Syria, and by extension, in Lebanon.
Now, at the same time, the United States and the European Union – the Axis Powers – are fighting on the same side as the Al Qaeda inspired/affiliated fighters.
This last observation indicates the importance that Axis Powers attach to the destruction of the Shia/Irani power across the Middle East.
I suppose their leaders and planners consider the neo-Salafis and the Jihadists to be the lesser of 2 evils.
This opinion is further supported by Mr. Bush II comments several years ago while visiting UAE; haranguing Iran.
He was apparently oblivious to days of celebrations in numerous UAE cities immediately after 9/11/2001 attacks on the United States.
Make no mistakes here; Axis Powers are playing for very high stakes indeed and a brutal war across the Middle East cannot be ruled out.
from that Austrian interview -
– Speaking in an interview with an Austrian newspaper Monday, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said that at the next round of its nuclear talks with the Security Council’s Permanent Five plus Germany his country will continue to defend its right to enrich uranium to 20%. –Jul 30, 2012
http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_07_30/Iran-will-not-budge/
Syria premier defects to anti-Assad opposition
http://news.yahoo.com/syrian-premier-sacked-assad-forces-pound-aleppo-093020493.html
James,
[I][B]“Ali Akbar Salehi says P5+1 must accept Iran’s enrichment of uranium. This means accepting Iranian enrichment to 5% or less, though Salehi does not say this every time he addresses the issue.”[/I][/B]
-
Nonsense!
1. In the link he says nothing about 5%.
2. When Iran say they want its right to be respected they dont mean that only 5% enrichment should be allowed for them.
3. You trying to fabricate a fact that Salehi usually say that 5% is what they mean when they say “their right to enrichment”.
This follow your usual tactic, you trying to fabricate things and create facts from it. Whats your point?
The thought of swinging from a gallows sharpens one’s resolve.
The Syrian government can survive and battle on so long as NATO doesn’t intervene. I think they are more determined than ever to defeat the rebels no matter what the cost.
William Hague has described the situation in Syria as ‘bleak’ and said that a peaceful solution to the 17 month-long crisis is now unlikely. . . . the Foreign Secretary said that it had proved impossible to persuade Russia and China to back international efforts to find a diplomatic path to peace.
This reminds me of Clinton on Iran, a couple months ago–
The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, has said time is running out for diplomacy over Iran’s nuclear programme and confirmed talks aimed at preventing Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon would resume in mid-April. With speculation over a possible US or Israeli strike adding urgency to the next round of discussions in Istanbul, set for 13 April, Clinton said Iran’s “window of opportunity” for a peaceful resolution “will not remain open forever”.
If Iran and Syria would only just give up and submit to US/UK our diplomacy would be a success, they say. But that isn’t really diplomacy, is it. It is the last dying gasps of western colonialism, in both countries. Diplomacy it ain’t.
Ali Akbar Salehi says P5+1 must accept Iran’s enrichment of uranium. This means accepting Iranian enrichment to 5% or less, though Salehi does not say this every time he addresses the issue.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/07/31/253610/p51-must-respect-iran-enrichment-right/
UK ambassador to Israel says Israel is losing international support due to continuing occupation of the West Bank and its treatment of Gaza.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/08/05/254580/israel-losing-intl-support-uk-envoy
Vladimir Putin and David Cameron discussed situation in Syria for 45 minutes, during Putin’s visit to 10 Downing St. And Ali akbar Salehi is off to Lebanon.
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/the-axis/as-western-diplomacy-dithers-iran-s-foreign-policy-chief-chases-lebanese-support.premium-1.456148
Bussed-In Basiji,
Yes, the Russians and Chinese did not like what happened in Libya (re: stretching of UNSC resolutions), and defeat of the insurgents in Syria would seem to be a defeat for Islamic militants. Russia is not so sure the Syrian gov’t can survive.
rebel says:
August 5, 2012 at 11:06 am
On planet Earth, where Japan is giving Iranian oil tankers insurance to enable the continued sale of oil to it by Iran and continuing to expand other trade ties. Do you want me to go on, with Pakistan and Turkey, or have you put your foot in your mouth enough times for one day?
One excellent indicator that the US has no plans for an air attack against Syria concerns the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, which recently transited the eastern Med and then kept on going.
The Lincoln departed the Arabian Sea July 12, transited the Red Sea and Suez Canal arriving in the Med July 16, visited Antalya, Turkey July 17-21, and cruised in the Mediterranean July 22-25 during which time it dropped from public sight (at least in the U.S.).
Now we have the news that the Lincoln transited the Strait of Gibraltar July 26 and is due in Norfolk Tuesday.
Lysander,
Ramadan Kareem. As it says in the Holy Quran- You plan and Allah plans and Allah is the best of planners. Only He knows what will happen but what is certain is that dhalemeen do not succeed in their plans.
James,
Don’t underestimate how pissed off Russia and China are about Syria after what happened in Libya. They have made a strategic decision to resist US and stooges on this one. Also supporting the Syrian govt in this case would deal a major blow to “Islamic insurgents”.
Everything I know I learned by watching Sesame Street with my kids.
After they finished college and had mastered the wisdom of Burt & Ernie, in an effort to keep up, I started listening to Teaching Company lectures, “the bestest college professors in the known universe,” outside of Big Bird.
Prof. Thomas F. X. Noble teaches the history of western civilization in 24 hours. He had this to say about Herodotus’s assessment of Persia:
“Herodotus was intrigued with the ‘Why’ of the Persian wars. Why did this war come about? How did it happen that tiny underdog Greece defeated the mighty Persian empire?
“Walking backward in his mind, something else I learned from Sesame Street Herodotus settled on the Persian victory over Lydia as the event that set in motion Persia’s ultimate defeat in Greece. The Persian army was ‘in the neighborhood,’ conquering Greece looked like a cake-walk — after all, they had just defeated Croesus, the richest empire other than Persia, hadn’t they?
“Herodotus concluded that the Persians exhibited the ‘arrogance of great states: States that do not bear their capcity to rule with elegance and grace and dignity; who want to throw their weight around. The Persians just thought they had to prove something to the Greeks.
“The Greeks were really no threat to the Persians; they could have been left alone.
Noble continued:
“More interestingly, and I think richer food for thought, Herodotus saw an inevitable clash between East and West.
[At this point it should be mentioned that in Noble's introductory lecture, he emphasized that Western civilization has its roots in the East.]
“All of his great travels led him to believe that world over there is not like our world over here, and these two worlds are not going to live in peace with one another.
“One suspects that for 2500 years, the unfolding course of history suggests that Herodotus may have been more right than wrong. And one suspects that only if that changes are we likely to have a very bright future.
[at this point, I started to draw up two lists; one for the East and one for the West, of those states/continents/peoples invaded, annihilated, supplanted, culturally dispossessed. Maybe Noble will try the same experiment in a future lecture.}
“Herodotus also saw people in the Persian empire as subjects, as virtual slaves to a great king, and not as free men, as he imagined the Greeks to be. So another of his great themes was the inevitable struggle between freedom and tyranny. And his belief was: free men fight for things which they value; slaves fight for nothing. And therefore free men will defeat slaves on every occasion.”
I wonder if Noble is listening to himself.
I wonder if Obama or Hillary Clinton or, god help us Susan Rice, hold the same imaginary vision of the west as Herodotus held of the slave-owning Greeks, whom Herodotus imagined to be free men.
The Greek people today are in a debt crisis brought about by enslavement to Western notions of credit and consumerism. Iran is self-reliant and shuns excessive lending practices.
The grand irony is that Iran’s self-reliant economy is more in tune with the principles of Adam Smith and David Hume that inspired Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin as they laid the foundation for the American Constitutional Republic.
Rd. says:
August 5, 2012 at 12:10 pm
Rd.
It’s interesting that every time that some Iranian pilgrims get kidnaped in Syria, suddenly news of some Turkish military personnel captured a few days’ earlier in Syria surfaces, and next what you hear is that Salehi and Davutoglu have called each call each other for help to release (exchange) the captured.
http://www.mehrnews.com/fa/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=1665745
rebel,
You are apprently quite delusional yourself. Lets break it down.
1. Israel face enormous internal problems, like what will happen demographically when palestinians will become a bigger group inside the israeli borders if not the South African aprtheid structure is gladly anticipated?
What will happen when Israel keep expand on the whole of the West bank thus creating a South African apartheid structure?
What will happen when the Arab spring is over? What will happen when the jordanian regime have to go?
We could go on but my point is, sooner or later Israel need to make peace and therefore reconstructure its state. This is either by the so called one state solution or the so called two state solution. Since Israel have rejected the latter its off to one state solution.
2. If people despise them why havent they been overthrown? I mean the accusation that they are despised have been repeated since the 1979. What about the polls taken back in 2009-2010, even american such showing support for the leadership?
Please provide us with empirical documents showing that you are correct.
3. There were violent groups in Syria from the beginning. Maybe you should study why syrian rebels were quick to use violence compared to other uprisings in the region. Do you also agree that Saudi, Israel, Bahrain, that also have fired on protesters should resign from their leadership?
Comparing what happend in 1979 with Syria 2012 is flawed at best, in 1979 there were mainly peaceful protesters (ok there were some molotov throwed and probably assault on authorities) while many of them were shot still they didnt become violent, in Syria however its not really a popular uprising anymore, its a conflict driven by foreign powers that prop up mainly terrorists because of their hatred of shias, using them only for their geostrategic ideas for the region. Is that legit? Of course not and its called terrorism, state funded.
Or think or two seconds on why arming of protesters havent happend anywhere else by the western states.
Fiorangela,
Yes, many hundreds of thousands of individuals in the US, and expecially in the area of Washington DC, benefit enourmously from bloated “defence” spending. And the Clinton administration succeeded in making significant cuts to “defence” spending, to the great benefit of the American people. The huge sums squandered on unnecessary “defence’ should have been at least partly redirected toward improving public transport, to allow significant reduction in oil imports. Gradually, a shift could have taken place. With G W Bush’s idiotic response to “9/11″, this possibility was thrown into the rubbish bin.
My understanding is that US intelligence agencies continue to believe that if the Syria government is overthrown, the result cannot be predicted. This argues against any military intervention. And Obama does not want more wars in the Middle East.
fyi,
Are you actually arguing that Russia and China would like to see a “western” military intervention in Syria?
I think Russia and China would prefer that the P5+1 give Iran a “clear response” to the latest Iranian proposals regarding how to resolve the nuclear dispute. Obama, on the other hand, for domestic political reasons prefers that the matter be more opaque.
Don Bacon says:
August 4, 2012 at 6:16 pm
Iranians will atten this at the level of Foreign Minister (the most likely).
IOC is useless.
given the number of turkish generals under arrest or under prosecution or forced on early retirement, and now presumably they lost one more.. there must be a shortage of generals in turkey…..
Syria Arrests Turkish Army General in Aleppo
TEHRAN (FNA)- The Syrian Army announced that it has recently apprehended a Turkish general who commanded the terrorists trying to seize control of Aleppo.
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9104252929
This is just nuts. IRINN is reporting Iran’s income from pistachio exports has reached $1 billion! It’s nuts because that’s over 25% of the volume of Iran’s TOTAL non-oil exports during the tenure of Mr. Pistachio himself, Comprador Rafsanjani.
This is also nuts: there are rumors that no one wants to take in the MKO terrorist grouplet, and so Maryam Rajavi has put feelers out to her Israeli buddies who have responded positively to her request to be allowed to settle on stolen land. There can’t be more than 48 or so of them left, so hopefully the al-CIA-duh avatars in Syria will kidnap their bus as it transits through Syria and cut their heads off live on al-Arabia before they realize that they don’t really work for the Revolutionary Guard Corp.
Meanwhile, a couple more Israelis have threatened to immolate themselves if Uncle Kidnapped doesn’t cough up a couple billion more dollars in aid.
NeoconWarmongeringStooge,
What planet do you live on? Iran is not an ally of Pakistan,Turkey, or Japan. That’s pretty funny. Japan has cut oil purchases at the request of the US. Turkey is installing a radar for NATO which is focused on Iran. Pakistan has always been a close ally of Saudi Arabia which is Iran’s rival in the middle east. That’s delusional thinking.
Turkey natural gas imports
imports = 38 Bcm (2010)
(Bcm = billion cubic meters)
Iran 20%
Russia 46%
Azer 12%
http://www.energydelta.org/mainmenu/edi-intelligence-2/our-services/country-gas-profiles/country-gas-profile-turkey
Don Bacon says:
August 4, 2012 at 9:37 pm
Very good point. Iranian foreign policy has allowed it to build key alliances with scores of nations around the world, including many nominally allied with the US (Japan, Turkey, Pakistan, etc). Those nations are now defying the US’ frantic and failing attempt to isolate Iran, and in fact are increasing trade with it.
rebel formerly known as “anonymous” says:
August 5, 2012 at 5:38 am
What a zionist joke you are. Just because you repeat something it does not become true. Let’s see, ordinary people who can actually reason logically know that one nation that hides behind nuclear weapons which it uses to threaten other nations to avoid accountability for its barbaric crimes is the true coward. And just to make it clear to your deluded brain, that cowardly nation is Israel. Iran, unlike the lawless “state” of Israel, actually follows stongly held moral beliefs and as such will not ever develop or use nuclear weapons. It can defend itself from irrational, unprovoked Israeli aggression without them, and Israel knows this very well which is why it will never dare to attack Iran.
Oh you also spout MSM propaganda about Syria as well. Let’s see, is there something that disproves the lies you repeat? Oh that’s right there is. The criminal terrorists you support just tried to invade Damascus to cause as much chaos and destruction as possible and were decisively defeated. So if the Syrian people support those terrorists, why did they not pour out onto the street in millions and overthrow the government when they had the opportunity? Oh that’s right, because they support the government and oppose the terrorist criminals you support. Note the same scenario is playing out in Aleppo, which is another Syrian city where the four million actual Syrian citizens who actually live there oppose the vicious, cowardly, defenseless civilian executing terrorists you support.
Richard Steven Hack says:
August 4, 2012 at 2:49 pm
So what you just did here is simply repeat, word for word, the same argument you made on this site before without actually presenting any evidence to back it up, and once again ignoring the evidence that conclusively disproves it.
1. Neither Turkey or NATO is going to attack Syria. Time to dispense with that delusion once and for all. Note that stating the FSA will not win without airstrike help is not an actual argument for that. Let’s see, did something happen recently that could have been used as a paper thin pretext by NATO if it was really ready to go to war against Syria?
http://world.time.com/2012/06/25/military-intervention-still-unlikely-after-syria-shoots-downs-turkish-jet/
2. And what happened? NATO backed down because and let the opportunity to attack Syria pass by. Why was that? Because NATO knows that (1) it would take huge losses from Syria’s modern and highly capable air defense network (2) it would not guarantee rebel victory anyway and (3) because Iran would intervene, destroying air bases and closing the Persian Gulf if necessary. Let’s watch a video that shows its capacity to do that shall we?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SV8VvEyn9A&list=UUpLzKBlu1YmsKf6eq7w635Q&index=6&feature=plcp
3. Watch that video closely, especially the part between 2:40 and 3:00 because it conclusively disproves your argument that Iran could not aid Syria or that it is militarily helpless against the US. Watch those missiles and how accurate they are. Anyone who thinks Syria does not have a substantial aresnal of similar missiles is deluding themselves.
4. And you than repeat your Hezbollah argument which I already disproved as well. Just because “Israel wants to do something” or believes it “must” do something does not mean it will succeed. Israel “Wanted” to destroy Hezbollah in 2006 and was decisively defeated. As I said before, Hezbollah’s capability’s have grown since it fought and defeated the entire Israeli invasion force with 3,000 men while Israeli capacity, despite its propaganda, has not. Oh, and Iran recently tested a fourth generation of the already very accurate Fateh 110 missile recently.
http://www.voanews.com/content/iran-tests-missile-with-new-guidance-system/1455168.html
Hezbollah won’t be receiving any of those right?
Dan I don’t know if you were asleep for the last fifty years, but Israel is a nuclear weapon state who has shown on numerous occasions they hardly need the protection of others. If Iran wants to hold a gun to their head and pull the trigger then by all means please attack Israel. I’m about tired of hearing their worn out rhetoric about it anyways. Israel isn’t going anywhere. The regime in Iran is in more danger than Israel. Their own people despise them and they are even too frightened to show chicken on TV. If that isn’t a sign of weakness then I don’t know what is.
The war in Syria was instigated when the regime started opening fire on peaceful protestors demanding change from the brutal alawite dictatorship that has lorded over them for forty years with the full support of Iran. You remember how Iranains felt when others propped the Shah? That is how Syrians will feel about Iran who is doing the same exact thing that they’ve spent the last thirty years denouncing others for doing in their country. What a bunch of hypocrites.
James Canning says:
August 4, 2012 at 7:24 pm
Of course I am right.
Chinese and Russians will be stupid to help close the Iranian nuclear file now that they find Axis Powers pursuing yet another adventure in the Middle East.
It serves their interests and the interests of many other states in the world quite eminently; let the Americans and Europeans pit themselves against Muslims, they will be neglecting us and we can be going on our own merry way creating facts on the ground while US and EU are indulging in fantasies.
Let us Veto the Syrian resolutions so that Americans and Europeans by-pass UN and increase their interventions costs…
Persian Gulf,
No need to throw insults!
You asked: “Specifically, what is your position regarding the correctness of the results and the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad’s second term presidency?”
- I admitted my mistake and said Ahmedinejad won. How is that being clever?!
I like to look at Iran as the stalking horse for other countries’ defiance. The model. An example. Also an example of how diplomacy should be done under difficult conditions, how national relationships and alliances are formed and nurtured, with friendship and not by exercising power.
Slavin reported on a seminar in Annapolis, Maryland.
It’s difficult to overstate the number of career military, “double dippers” (military + US civil service) and triple-dippers (double dip + private defense industry) in the DC-Maryland-Virginia area. Just a (cynical) guess — most of these people are not ideologically driven — most likely they haven’t thought about it enough to consider that Iran is/is not a threat to anyone, and that their actions are causing suffering to innocent people. Tomorrow they will go to church and pray, “Give us this day our daily bread,” and not make the connection that they participate in a system that requires that their ‘daily bread’ be provided at the expense of another people about whom they know nothing, but whom they are willing to deprive of daily bread to sustain their own careers. The only calculation is the next paycheck, promotion, and pension.
The representative from Norfolk, VA appeared on C Span the other day to argue against any cuts in the defense budget. Norfolk is a major naval/shipbuilding base; the region’s economy is inextricably tied to bloated defense contracts. (It’s also home to Pat Robertson’s televangelism industry. Go figure.)
When the Cold War ended, and Clinton was in office & cut the defense dept and produced a ‘budget surplus,’ suddenly the reality hit: Peace does not pay Dividends that you can sock away in a bank account. It merely makes a better world.
Bussed-in Basiji says:
August 4, 2012 at 4:54 pm
“The Syrian conflict has become the decisive battle for the future of global relations. Russia, Iran and China have made a strategic and historic decision to resist the US and stooges. It’s the big one and the result will be th end of th Arab monarchies and Israel in their current shape, the departure of the US from the Mideast over the horizon and the strengthening of Iran, Russia and China relative to the US.”
Insha’Allah I pray you are right.
Ramadan Kareem.
“The Magical Neocon Crystal Ball”, by Taki Theodoracopolos
http://takimag.com/article/the_magical_neocon_crystal_ball_taki_theodoracopolos#axzz22cj1kfL9
Bussed-In Basiji,
I think you give too little weight to the very considerable concern on the part of China and Russia regarding any spreading of Islamic insurgency.
fyi,
Admiral Yamamoto, who led the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, believed the attack was a colossal blunder and that defeat for Japan was virutally certain.
The Japanese war with the UK, France, The Netherlands and the US, was in large part a continuation and expansion of the existing war with China.
fyi,
You may very well be right, that the P5+1 will not give a “clear response” to Iran regarding Iran’s latest proposals. That Obama is in a close race for re-election does not help.
@fyi
from the al-monitor link “US War Gaming the Levant” -
*Lt. Col. Scott Crino of the AWG outlined the methodology used for choosing focus areas but said this decision was easy. “You can tie every threat group around the world to the Levant,” he said.*
I guess LTC Crino didn’t get the party-line word that Iran is terrorism central. Good for him, focusing on the Levant including Israel. There’s hope! Promote Crino to general.
Reminds me of a slogan I saw long ago on a fried-chicken store in Newfoundland: “If the colonel had our recipe he’d be a general.”
All:
US War Gameing the Levant
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2012/al-monitor/us-games-how-to-influence-syria.html
this just in-
Aug 4 – The Iranian ambassador to Riyadh said that Saudi Arabia has invited President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to an emergency meeting of Muslim leaders in Mecca.
http://www.mehrnews.com/en/newsdetail.aspx?NewsID=1665585
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) will hold the Fourth Extra-ordinary Session of the Islamic Summit Conference in Makkah Al-Mukarramah, on 26-27 Ramadan 1433H (14-15 August 2012), which was called for by the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz to examine the situation in many countries of the Islamic world, intensify efforts to confront this situation, address the sources of discord and division therein, reunify the Islamic Ummah and promote Islamic solidarity. The Fourth Islamic Summit will be preceded by two meetings, the first at the level of Foreign Ministers to prepare for the Summit and the second at the level of senior officials to prepare for the Ministerial meeting.
http://www.oic-oci.org/topic_detail.asp?t_id=7053
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation is the “Permanent Observer Mission to the United Nations in New York.”
Nasser:
You did not answer the second part of my second question.
Iran’s 2009 election is a very recent history. so still fresh. no need to make it a far distance event. and the burden is still on all of us. not that you don’t get it. rather it’s a matter of being clever too much.
generally we say in Farsi:
نمی تونی هم از توبره بخوری هم از آخور
An Israeli fakes empathy with Iranians.
Aug 4, 2012: The former head of Israel’s intelligence service Mossad Efraim Halevy on Thursday said on Israel Radio he “would be very worried about the next 12 weeks,” if he were Iranian.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/04/us-iran-missile-idUSBRE87304E20120804
Well he’s not. There are 25,000 Persian Jews living peacefully in Iran but Halevy’s not one of them. He ought to consider joining them, all things considered.
Richard,
Iran will not allow Israel to get anywhere in Lebanon nor will it allow Syrian missile capabilities to be weakened. Iran has the capability and desire to directly challenge anyone threatening Syria if it becomes necessary, don’t doubt that for a second. Iran takes it military commitment to Syria very seriously because Syria was the only country in the world that helped us during the war.
Russia will also get directly involved if necessary. Yesterday there was a trilateral meeting in Moscow between the Russian, Iranian and Syrian deputy foreign ministers.
The Syrian conflict has become the decisive battle for the future of global relations. Russia, Iran and China have made a strategic and historic decision to resist the US and stooges. It’s the big one and the result will be th end of th Arab monarchies and Israel in their current shape, the departure of the US from the Mideast over the horizon and the strengthening of Iran, Russia and China relative to the US.
And just to makes things more interesting we have many traditions in Islamic sources that a major, final and apocalyptic conflict in the region will begin with a major war in Syria. Yeah baby!
The hypocrisy knows no limits.
Aug 3, 2012: Gravely concerned by the escalating violence in Syria, the UN General Assembly today strongly condemned Damascus’ indiscriminate use of heavy weapons in civilian areas and its widespread violations of human rights, demanding that all parties “immediately and visibly” commit to ending a conflict that United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called “a test of everything this Organization stands for”.
In other news of a government attacking its own people:
Turkish Army Fighting for 10th Day in Kurdish Town, Radikal Says, Aug 3, 2012: Turkey’s army is using heavy weapons and helicopter gunships in a fight against members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, that’s continuing for a 10th day in a southeastern town, Radikal newspaper reported. The fighting has forced 60 families to flee their homes in the area around Semdinli, the Istanbul-based newspaper said today in a report from the region.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-03/turkish-army-fighting-for-10th-day-in-kurdish-town-radikal-says.html
and this use of bombers against a ten-year insurgency in another country:
The Air Force’s record-breaking B-1 deployment, Aug 2, 2012: The airmen of the 7th kept a bomber in the air over Afghanistan every moment of their deployment, according to an Air Force announcement, in the largest B-1 overseas deployment in 10 years. . .Over the course of the six-plus month deployment, the squadron flew more than 770 combat sorties, encompassing over 9,500 hours, to provide 24 hours of coverage every day. They also responded to more than 500 troops-in-contact situations, with the enemy as close as 300 meters from friendly forces, and another 700 priority air requests, delivering more than 400 weapons on target. . .the B-1 to employ the GBU-54 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition [500-lb bomb], providing Combined Forces Air Component Commander with the first-ever B-1 capability to engage and destroy moving targets.
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/08/02/the-air-forces-record-breaking-b-1-deployment/
The only force that can stop this scheme from proceeding is a revolt of the American people against their government. But that will not happen. American church people — all of them, Catholic, Christian, Evangelical — will support US & Israeli assault on Muslim peoples and nations.
All:
Over the last 100 years, most of those who initiated wars expected a quick and decisive victory with an ending of teh hostilities shortly afterwards and on their own terms.
Such was the case of Axis Powers in Wold War I, Japan’s War agains China in 1933, Japan’s War against USA in 1941, Germany’s War against UK and France in 1939 and so on.
They were all wrong; the wars that they initiated lasted a very long time indeed.
After WWII, the war of North Korea against South Korea, the War in Viet Nam, the Arab-Israli Wars, the Iran-Iraq War,the US Wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq, he Iraq War against Iran, the Soviet War in Afghanistan all took years and years of fighting.
I expect the current mini-World War in Syria to also last for years.
I expect the Siege War against Irn to last for years.
Those who had initiated these war, in US and EU, almost certainly expected quick victories.
Their favorite case was always Libya, a land with no history of statehood for more tha a millenia – another oil-well with a flag.
They will be disappointed.
James Canning says:
August 4, 2012 at 2:04 pm
There will be no clear response from P5+1.
Iran has to help the Syrian Government annihilate the 30,000 or so insurgents there.
She has to eviserate the Siege War against her and Syria.
All of that takes time.
Which means that any movement for peace between Axis States and Iran and her allies will have to wait for the first year of the next next President of the United States.
That is 2017; but possibly not even then.
Richard Steven Hack says:
August 4, 2012 at 2:49 pm
Irn will support Mr. Assad, his Government, and allied ethno-religious groups indefinitely and to the hilt.
Look no further than Iran in Lebano since 1982; Iranians will slug it out against their percieved enemies in Syria for decades.
In my opinion, however, the Srian government will prevail; it will be bloody and ruthless.
Don Bacon: You’re wrong on just about every point.
“Israel isn’t going to invade Lebanon again…”
Yes, they will.
“Hez would whip them again.”
Not certain. In any event, the goal is to push Hizballah far enough north to render most of their missiles arsenal ineffective in an Iran war.
“(Incidentally, Egypt is now a player also.)”
Never a factor.
“And the US isn’t going to attack Syria.”
Yes, they will. The insurgents cannot defeat Assad’s military by themselves without air strike help. More importantly, Syria’s missiles will remain a threat to Israel in an Iran war unless they’re taken out – and no one can do that except the US/NATO.
“Hezbollah has no quarrel with Israel if Israel stays out of Lebanon.”
Sigh… Read what I wrote. Of course Hizballah doesn’t intend to attack Israel. Israel HAS TO attack Hizballah in order to avoid Hizballah missiles being used CONCURRENTLY with Syrian and Iran missiles in an Iran war. Israel has no choice but to try to eliminate Hizballah and Syrian missiles REGARDLESS of the likely success or failure in terms of eliminating either party completely. As I said, the goal is to WEAKEN Syria and Hizballah enough to make an Iran war more feasible and “cheap”. And I also said there’s no guarantee Israel will succeed. I DO expect the US and NATO to succeed in taking out most of Syria’s military command and control and missile systems, at least sufficiently to satisfy Israel that Syria is no longer an effective actor.
Now I DO agree that there is the POSSIBILITY that this may take longer than expected IF the US and NATO intend to let the insurgents and the civil war play out completely. But as I said, there is little evidence that the insurgents can overthrow Assad by themselves, and more importantly, there is no evidence that Syria’s missile systems will be taken out by them or anyone else – which, again, is THE number one goal here (along with taking out Hizballah’s arsenal.)
“The chemical weapons in Syria are a danger only if jihadis, assisted by the US and Gulf states, gain advantage over Syria and access of the chemical weapons. That’s what would endanger Israel, and that’s what Israel ought to be communicating to the US. Not attack, but restraint.”
I never said anything about chemical weapons being a REAL issue. The “chemical weapons” nonsense is only an EXCUSE for Israel to join in the Syrian war in order to enable Israel to justify its operations in Syria, which in fact will be directed against Hizballah in Lebanon more than Syria.
“Syria, Iran and Hezbollah don’t threaten Israel.”
If Israel wants to attack Iran, they certainly do. In any event, Israel has no choice but to ASSUME that Hizballah and Syria will be involved in any attack on Iran – even if that’s not necessarily the case in reality. Both Hizballah and Syria may well stay out of any Israel attack on Iran. But there’s no way Israel can ASSUME that.
My predictions stand so I have no need to continue this discussion.
Fiorangela: “What role will Russia play?”
None – except to complain loudly and perhaps share military intel with Syrian forces. Other than that, there’s zero they can do.
Reza: Iran will do nothing if Syria is attacked, regardless of any treaty, other than perhaps shipping military supplies and military intel to Assad’s forces. Like Russia, Iran can’t afford to challenge the West over Syria directly.
In any event, it won’t matter because once Israel attack Hizballah in Lebanon under the guise of the Syrian war, Iran will be supporting both countries as much as possible, but primarily Hizballah. It depends on how long the war lasts whether Iran can even increase shipments of weapons to either Hizballah or Lebanon. Smuggling takes time and no other means of distribution will be feasible under hot war conditions. Iran will be unable to fly planes into Syria or Lebanon or deliver ships to the relevant ports. All support will have to be overland by truck.
But there is nothing Iran can do *directly* and *militarily* against either the US or Israel if Syria is attacked. And I doubt Iran would attack Turkey if Turkey joins the US and NATO or acts alone against Syria militarily. There’s just no benefit to Iran for doing this when the end result is going to be the same – a weakened Syria – and the result of Iran doing this is likely a full-scale US military attack – with Turkey’s HELP – on Iran. Iran will not risk that just to save Assad’s regime.
Xinhua report: “Iran urges P5+1 for ‘clear response’ over nuclear stand-off” (Aug. 3)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2012-08/03/c_131759483.htm
“Iran demands clear response from P5+1: Jalili”
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/08/03/254162/iran-expects-clear-response-from-p51/
R S Hack,
I think you are dead wrong to claim in effect that Obama did not, and does not, want to avoid war with Iran and that he does not want negoiated resolution of the dispute. However, it does appear that even within his administration, there are those who are doing little to facilitate a negotiated resolution of the dispute.
You ignore entirely the viewpoint of Russia and China, as articulated by the P5+1.
Don Bacon,
Hezbollah has said it will not attack Israel unless Israel attacks Lebanon first. Israel certainly should stay out of Syria. Chemical weapons issue is obviously a key factor here.
fyi,
You claim that Turkey is trying to overthrow the government of Iran, while BiBiJon claims Israel is planning an attack on Turkey. Surely the two viewpoints are not compatible.
Reza,
Isn’t it fair to say that Russia and China will not support a UNSC resolution that obliges the current government of Syria to abandon power? Their wariness about any UNSC resolution is sound, given what happened in Libya.
fyi,
Kissinger writes (in piece you linked) that the US may only be able to influence events in some of the countries caught up in the “Arab Spring”, by means of economic assistance.
rebel says:
August 4, 2012 at 8:24
Nial Cole says:
August 4, 2012 at 8:15 am
If the west did not arm the uprisings, there would not have been so many casualties.
The war in Syria has nothing to do with democracy and freedom for Syrian people.
The war in Syria is instigated by the USA for geopolitical supremacy and the protection of its fantasy project (Israel) in Palestine.
The western colonial project with the help of Qatar and Saudi Arabia(the most repressive regimes on the face of this planet) have give arms to the Syrian oppositions, created a civil war which has result in the massive civilian casualties.
A few years ago, Assad was an eye doctor working in London, now the west is brainwashing the international community through its corrupt media that Assad is a criminal and hell bent on killing his people.
Assad is not responsible for the massacre.
Do not let The Fox news, CNN, BBC, VOA and “the rest of the TV& media news agencies supporting Israel fantasy project” fool you.
Don Bacon says: August 4, 2012 at 11:36 am
In Iran and in Iraq, due to past abuses, people and governments have only contempt for UN.
Likewise among very many in Lebanon.
This type of propaganda from GA makes no difference to them.
An “Act Of War”
Congressman Ron Paul Speaks On The “Obsession With Iran”
Must Watch -Video
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32086.htm
Texas Congressman Ron Paul says the US is “obsessed with” keeping Iran under illegal sanctions, while pushing for furthering the embargoes in, what he calls, an “act of war” against the Islamic Republic.
The United Nations has stuck its nose into this affair in an unhelpful way again. The UN General Assembly has passed a resolution which inexplicably has not been published so we can’t read it. The UN record of the session includes a one-sided anti-Syria diatribe:
“By a recorded vote of 133 in favour to 12 against, with 31 abstentions, the Assembly overwhelmingly adopted a resolution expressing its concern about a raft of gross human rights violations being carried out by Syrian Government forces, systematic attacks against civilians, and the increasing use of “heavy weapons, armour and the air force against populated areas”.
Webster Tarpley had an interesting observation:
“I would point out that this resolution was actually written by the Saudis, written by Saudi Arabia, unbelievable piece of hypocrisy. I don’t know how they can do this with a straight face- an absolute monarchy, a relic of feudal barbarism, one of the most backward regimes in the world is going to give lessons to Syria- a much more advanced country. I think this is absolutely absurd. This was also made possible by the president of the United Nations general assembly who is from Qatar. He represents the royal family there, the Thanis.”
And Syria spoke to it also:
The representative of Syria said it was a strange paradox that the States sponsoring the text were the same ones that were providing weapons to the terrorist groups in Syria.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/ga11266.doc.htm
All:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-meshing-realism-and-idealism-in-syria-middle-east/2012/08/02/gJQAFkyHTX_print.html
Dr. Kissinger admits, in the second to last paragraph, that US is devoid of positive vision of the future in the Middle East.
Implications: More war and blooshed
@rebel
“It’s really quite simple. Syrians are fed up with the brutal forty year dictatorship of the Assad clan propped up by countries such as Iran and Russia for their own geopolitical reasons.”
Not true, for example there have been no popular demonstrations in favor of the FSA. Assad has not been entirely benevolent but a more radical government would be worse.
“All the real massacres in Syria have been committed by the regime and their shabiha militias and Iran has fully backed the slaughter of the Syrian people.”
False. As in every civil conflict atrocities happen. The “massacres” charged to Syria have not been proven. The UN report on the principal one in this category at Houla, which caused western nations to get all exercised and withdraw their ambassadors, is still being worked on — no proof of Syria wrongful acts. No UN report. It was all rebel propaganda.
Persian Gulf,
“Could you clarify your position regarding 2009 election, please?”
- Oh God not this again!
If you would recall that after a thorough thrashing, I admitted my mistake to Eric.
rebel says: August 4, 2012 at 8:24 am
Yes, it is quite simple.
Certain Arab states, Turkey, and Axis States are in the process of trying to destroy both Syrian and Iranian governments.
Axis States are doing it through Siege Economic War and Arabs through money and guns.
Turks are supply the logistics.
You have no idea how ugly things will become as Shia and their allies will commence systematically destroying all ethno-religious based threats to them. Potentially, Lebanon, Iraq, Bahrain, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia could be invoved.
Religious strife in Turkey cannot be ruled out.
Let us be patient and watch for a few more months or years and see the outcome.
There is no margin for Arab states, Trurkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bahrain,Saudi Arabia, and Azerbaijan Republic in any of this.
Fr this reason alone all responsible for this policy course – removal of Iranian power at any cost – must be removed from power.
It would be better for them to do so now.
Nial Cole says: August 4, 2012 at 8:15 am
he reality is that the disaffection with Mr. Assad’s rule has been turned into a min-World War by US, EU, Saudia Arabia, Turkey, Qatar to destroy Iranin power.
Iranians had earlier attempted to induce Mr. Assad to change his ways; to no avail.
Nor the Iranians, under the current circumstances, where they are threatened, have any choice but to upport Mr. Assad to th hilt.
Which thet are now proceeding to do.
Had US and Iran settled in 2010, Mr. Assad could have been eased out of power and a new government been in place peacefully.
But that is not what Axis States wished for; they cannot care less for Syria, Syrian people and other such wogs.
After all, they hav no problems with the venal family rule of Aliyov (sic ?) in the so-called Azerbaijan Republic.
Warning! Here’s what I think
==========================
Lets take their words at face value. “No one is thinking about attacking Iran, or Syria.”
Here’s a plan.
Carve off Syrian, Iraqi and Turkish Kurdistan into a quasi state. Let Israel start a war with Turkey. Let NATO not support Turkey and expel her. Let this coincide with mass deportation of Muslims out most western countries.
Pakistan will be attacked and occupied. GCC countries will be the military staging posts which will defacto be under permanent military occupation.
Diplomatically isolate China and Russia and trumpet the “reputational” costs of doing business with them.
While you’re actually doing all this, distract everyone with your pretend Iran obsession.
Why not Iran? Because that would ruin the distraction. Why not Syria? Because its the same as attacking Iran. Why Turkey? Because Israel said so. Why Pakistan? Because that was always Obama’s target. Why all this? Because if you don’t you’re toast.
It’s really quite simple. Syrians are fed up with the brutal forty year dictatorship of the Assad clan propped up by countries such as Iran and Russia for their own geopolitical reasons. All the real massacres in Syria have been committed by the regime and their shabiha militias and Iran has fully backed the slaughter of the Syrian people. They will pay the price for that. They will pay dearly for attempting to stop democracy in Syria. Wait and see. They will be the primary losers when the Assad regime is finally resigned to ash heap of history. That arab world has finally woken up to the true nature of the regime in Iran. Soon all the revolutionary arab states will be hostile to Iran along with the remaining monarchies.
So now it’s the fault of the US and Kofi Annan? Has nothing to do with the rancid, cruel & corrupt nature of a family-run dictatorship? Or the inherent contradictions of an artificially-created country with deep ethnic and religious differences? C’mon, how about a dose of reality here, guys?
As Flynt says, this is all about Iran. This is indeed a game of chess. According to Washington and London, it doesn’t matter how many Syrians die in this conflict so long as Assad and his security establishment is overthrown and the link between Iran and Lebanon is severed.
Iran has a formal military alliance with Syria that would require it to respond should Turkey and other NATO countries choose to attack the country. That is partly why there will not be a Libya-style intervention but instead more limited support to rebels. However, without airstrikes, the Syrian armed forces will prevail.
What impresses me is that both Russia and China, who have gone along with Western wars against Serbia and Iraq and Libya, not to mention sanctions against Iran, are now drawing a line in the sand and saying enough is enough. That marks a turning point.
The 4th generation Fateh 110 missile with an improved guidance system was successfully test-fired today. It has an internal guidance system as well as GPS. Does anyone know:
1. The new missile’s CEP?
2. Status of non-US GPS systems and Iran’s access to them in the event of war (such as Russian or Chinese)?
I have no doubt in my mind that the conflict in Syria will spread to the surrounding countries..What the pushers of these stupid policies fail to realize is that these things have a life of their own and once they start, it’s hard to control where it ends..
The US wants regime change in Syria but will very much end up fighting to save Israel’s very existence from the fallout of this conflict..It’s been like what, 17 months??? and all efforts short off invasion has failed to topple Assad..To me, that says a lot about the support he has with the people and the army. If the army wanted him gone, they’ll make a deal and bump him off..But they haven’t and are determined to fight the contras coming in from Turkey.
This is not an internal/indigenous revolution..That much is clear…
RSH, long time no see.
good analysis.
Ephraim Sneh mentioned in a panel back in February 2012 that Lebanon would become involved in the Syria war. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/IsraelIra
Question to you, Richard: What role will Russia play?
@Richard Steven Hack
The ENTIRE purpose of the Syrian crisis is to remove Syria and Hizballah as effective actors in an Iran war, and thus to enable the Iran war to proceed.
No.
Israel isn’t going to invade Lebanon again, and only face defeat again. Been there, done that. Totally embarrassing, and totally memorable. Never again. Hez would whip them again. (Incidentally, Egypt is now a player also.)
And the US isn’t going to attack Syria. There is a deep reluctance in Washington to get involved in another ME morass. Again, why repeat failure.
Hezbollah has no quarrel with Israel if Israel stays out of Lebanon. The chemical weapons in Syria are a danger only if jihadis, assisted by the US and Gulf states, gain advantage over Syria and access of the chemical weapons. That’s what would endanger Israel, and that’s what Israel ought to be communicating to the US. Not attack, but restraint.
Syria, Iran and Hezbollah don’t threaten Israel. But Islamic radicals in Syria with chem wpns would threaten Israel. So much for 2006 and Pat Lang.
PS: Here’s read for you.
Four Former Israeli Generals Debate the Future of Syria
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/01/08/stopping-off-in-syria-on-the-way.html
Richard Steven Hack says: August 3, 2012 at 7:54 pm
Your third to last sentence is accurate.
Iran will attack Turkish forces and bases if Turkey attacks Syria.
This has been communicated to Turkey.
Likewise for Israel.
NATO cannot attack without US and US won’t.
And neither will Turkey.
Richard,
Good analysis. Everything hinges on the ifs in point 3 of your analysis and that’s where the s**t will hit the fan for the US and Israel. Israel will not make it Bekaa and US/NATO will not be victorious in Syria. We will not get to the point where they can attack Iran. Also Syria is becoming a military red line for the Russians as well and that will mean NATO indirectly fighting Russia in Syria.
One time post…because no one gets it still…ALL discussions of why this Syrian crisis exists are completely wrong.
Allow me to explain the purpose of the Syrian crisis…
Back in 2006, Bush and Cheney were pushing for Israel to attack Iran. However,
Israeli leaders balked because they believed that attacking Iran would result in
Iranian, Syrian AND Hizballah missiles raining down on Israel, causing Israelis
to hide in bomb shelters for most of every day, damaging the economy, and
possibly causing the electorate to vote out the leaders in the next election.
In short, Israel wanted a “cheap” Iran war where they only had to deal with a
couple hundred missiles from Iran (if that, once the US air strikes had taken
out most of Iran’s missiles or where Iran had used most of its missiles on US
assets in the region.)
So Israel decided with US blessing to attack Hizballah in Lebanon, hoping to
force them far enough north that their (at that time limited-range) missiles
would be ineffective in an Iran war or, ideally, crush the group entirely. As we know, Israel failed miserably due to Hizballah’s superior preparation.
At that point, Middle East expert Colonel Pat Lang pointed out that the only way
Israel could take out Hizballah in southern Lebanon would be to attack Hizballah
in the Bekaa Valley, which provides Hizballah with “defense in depth”.
To do this, however, would require Israeli forces to enter Syrian territory and
engage Syrian forces. Not that Israel couldn’t do this, but it would result in
Israel forces facing Hizballah guerrilla war in their front while the remnants
of Syria’s forces engaged in guerrilla war in Israel’s rear – not a good
position to be in if you want to minimize casualties and get Israel electorate
support.
BUT…IF Syria were ALREADY under attack by the US/NATO/Turkey air strikes for
“humanitarian reasons”, that would make such an attack feasible because large
concentrations of Syrian forces would be suppressed by air strikes.
And this is why Syria is where it is today. And this is what will happen:
1) The US and NATO and Turkey will find a way to bypass the lack of UNSC
Resolution authorization and will attack Syria before the end of this year.
2) In the course of that war, Israel – using the excuse that Syrian weapons are
being sent to Hizballah (already floated in the Israel press as an excuse that
Israel “will have to” attack Syria and Lebanon) – will send one armored division
into Syria to protect a second armored division which will proceed up the
Lebanese/Syrian border and then turn into the Bekaa Valley, while a third
armored division attacks Southern Lebanon as before, in a classic “pincer
movement”.
3) IF Israel succeeds in damaging Hizballah enough (which I am not sure is
feasible but Israel has to try) and IF the US and NATO can damage enough of
Syria’s missile inventory, then in the next year or so Israel and/or the US will
attack Iran.
The ENTIRE purpose of the Syrian crisis is to remove Syria and Hizballah as
effective actors in an Iran war, and thus to enable the Iran war to proceed. It doesn’t even have to do with “regime change” in Syria. As long as Syria can be removed as an effective actor in the Iran war, neither the US nor Israel cares whether Assad remains in power or not.
The same applies to Lebanon, and even in Iran. Regime change is not the minimum goal – damage is. Although of course if they could get a new government in power that is a US/Israeli satrapy, they’d be very happy with that outcome.
So there never was any intent to achieve a peaceful settlement in Syria, nor has there ever been any intent to resolve the Iran nuclear issue peacefully. And there never will be. It is war or nothing.
Bussed-In Basiji,
Turkey does not want an independent Iraqi Kurdistan. However, Turkey appears to be facilitating some oil deals in that region, even if it offends the Iraqi central government.
Nasser:
Could you clarify your position regarding 2009 election, please?
specifically, what is your position regarding the correctness of the results and the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad’s second term presidency?
The US and its stooges can’t directly militarily attack Iran, so over the years they followed a strategy of attacking Iranian allies in order to “weaken” Iran.
First they attacked Hezbollah and got their asses kicked. OK that didn’t go as planned. Then they attacked Hamas in Gaza and despite the devastation were not able to dislodge Hamas. OK next: attack Syria.
To think that they would be successful in attacking an established sovereign government in Syria, when they failed miserably when attacking two political parties that don’t have comparable resources of a government such as the Syrian govt. Now that’s the definition of stupidity!
Gasp! Unlikely that these advanced westerners would be so stupid, this plan could have only sprung from ignorant bedouins like old stinky Bandar and fatty in Doha…no really! (wink wink)
Let’s be clear, they militarized the conflict in Syria against a military government. That’s right: attack your enemy where he’s strongest. That’s effin genius!
My prediction: next attack will be on Shia government Iraq using the Barzanis. Davutoglou went to Iraqi Kurdistan without coordination with Iraqi central govt. In the diplomatic world that is basically equivalent to giving a government the middle finger salute while insulting its mother.
Interestingly, a high level Turkish govt delegation was in Tehran two days ago to discuss “things”. I’m told there are major rifts within the Turkish admin with Dav and Erdogan being hawkish on Syria and the rest of the cabinet very upset at their policies. Apparently Dav and Erdogan thought the Syria thing would be over in a month and are now- as we say in Farsi- “stuck, like a donkey in s**t”.
Sakineh,
Stated another way: Ledeen does not want Iran’s uranium enrichment to be seen as the problem because that problem easily can be solved. Ledeen and Co. continue to do what they can to deceive the public and block an improvement in US-Iran relations. You actually help Ledeen do this! Inadvertently.
Sakineh,
Michael Ledeen wants to convince the American public that the issue is not Iran’s enriching uranium BECAUSE LEDEEN IS AWARE IRAN IS WILLING TO COMPROMI8E ON THAT ISSUE!
Ledeen wants to deceive the public into seeing Iran as a “threat”.
I recommend Philip Giraldi’s “Tightening the noose on Irna”
http:www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/tightening-the-noose-on-iran/
Giraldi sounds another warning about Aipac and its tools in the US Congress.
Sorry, I strayed from the major topic. The video didn’t work for me so I’ll go on the text.
Yes, the US has undermined stability in Syria as in many other places. In Syria (as Russia has said) the US has focused on regime change rather than on a settlement. And that’s because regime change presumably would weaken Iran (although Russia has been mentioned as a potential victim by proxy also).
But then to bring the UN into it as a part of the solution, when (in addition to Annan) Ban Ki-moon is himself calling for regime change, is where I depart. Ban in Slovenia: “We cannot abandon our collective responsibility to enable a peaceful, democratic, Syrian-led transition that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people.” What collective responsibility?
And a big YES to this: **Washington is doing this as part of a broader strategy to play a Sunni “card” against the Islamic Republic and its allies. **
And that includes Iraq as well as Syria.
Iran will retaliate, of course, as it did (probably) in Riyadh with a bomb four days after the Damascus bomb. Intel chief exchange. Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province is particularly vulnerable, and the House of Saud itself has problems. NYTimes: “. .But beneath the veneer of stability and consensus, the House of Saud is facing problems that neither the princes nor the international community are paying much attention to.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/opinion/tensions-in-the-house-of-saud.html
From previous thread. James Canning says:August 3, 2012 at 1:50 pm
Why would you promote the vicious propaganda of Michael Ledeen?
James, apparently you don’t read well, which is why hold certain values so dear.
I was not by any means promoting Ledeen’s propaganda. I was showing, particularly, you, that even an arch-neocon (yes, the chicken hawk who got the US into Iraq) refutes the centrality of the nuclear issue to policy-making. In effect he is saying NO to you. Please re-read the post. In my minimalist way, I packed a lot in that post.
Hey, look how great we are, we’re ruining another country’s economy! Go Team USA!
“Our current sanctions, and a recent European Union ban on purchasing Iranian oil, have already had an impact,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. “In spite of the rhetoric coming out of Iran, the regime is clearly feeling the heat. Oil exports are down by 50 percent, and the Iranian currency has lost nearly 40 percent of its value.”
The jury’s still out on the effect of sanctions on the EU.
The oil export decrease claim is definitely arguable.
Regarding Iran’s loss of currency value, I recently came across an interesting chart on the US dollar, from which one can conclude that the dollar:
–lost 96% of its value, 1914-2012.
–lost half its value 1935-1950, again 1950-1976, again 1974-1984 and yet again 1984-2012.
http://www.caseyresearch.com/sites/default/files/resize/The%24DroppedtoOnly%240.04SincetheFounding_1-490×347.jpg
As mentioned before this proxy conflict in Syria is showing the continued reduction of US/ western’s international power of diplomacy at international forums such as UNSC, it also showed the incapability of the westerners to directly and overtly bring down none western aligned governments around the world, that’s where Syria differs with Libya, Tunisia or Yemen, due to various recent years setbacks for the western alliance side, the international balance of power is becoming more and more even, politically, militarily as well as economically, until the day that the west becomes willing to accept this new international facts there would be more of this kinds of proxy wars on different parts of world. More importantly it’s obvious that KSA is becoming more destabilized due to various proxy wars on her borders, not to forget continued interior uprisings that she has not been able to calm down.
————————-
Choice of time during this Olympic Games, was a good planed timing by the Syrian army to clean up the mess brought up to Syria by the westerners. I just hope this time around the Syrian side (Iran included) wouldn’t be fooled by westerners to allow the insurgency to regroup and be resupplied. I would expect Iranians to put some economic pressure on Iraqi Kurds since 70%+ of Kurdistan’s none oil economy is dependent on passage through Iran.
Rd. says: August 3, 2012 at 2:16 pm
30,000 has been the estimated number of forces fighting the Syrian government.
3000 or more have been killed and and an equal number captured; I would guess.
The war will go on.
The moon affair was a hoax. Somebody hacked Reuters.
@James Canning
I guess you went to the same charm school I did. I used to say “bu****it” and now I say “amazing.” You too. Amazing.
Could Syrian crisis be over???
http://www.moonofalabama.org/
Don Bacon,
You actually make common cause with the neocons and call for “scrapping” the UN? (!) Amazing.
Yes, the Obama administration blocked Iranian participation in any effort to achieve a negotiated resolution of the unrest in Syria. We can thank Israel and the Israel lobby for this colossal blunder.
Flynt said the U.S. (Clinton, Rice) have undermined Kofi Anan’s efforts. Micheal Scheuer has said similar things over at Non Intervention
NPR’s Scott Simon interviewed reporter Kelly McEVers last Saturday. She had been reporting from Syria. She made it sound as if things are not going so well for the Syrian rebels.
Kofi Annan was merely an observer and was never charged with mediating nor seeking ways and means to terminate the conflict.
Apr 14, 2012
Security Council Unanimously Adopts Resolution 2042 (2012),Authorizing Advance Team to Monitor Ceasefire in Syria
The Security Council today authorized an advance team to monitor the ceasefire in Syria . . .the Council also authorized a team of up to 30 unarmed military observers “to liaise with the parties and to begin to report on the implementation of a full cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties”. . .
The Russian Federation’s representative said today’s measure was consistent with his country’s long-held view that stopping the violence in Syria was the primary goal, alongside avoiding external intervention. The text had become much more balanced through extensive negotiation, he added.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/sc10609.doc.htm
Jul 20, 2012
[The UN] Decides to renew the mandate of UNSMIS for a final period of 30 days, taking into consideration the Secretary-General’s recommendations to reconfigure the Mission, and taking into consideration the operational implications of the increasingly dangerous security situation in Syria;
http://un-report.blogspot.de/2012/07/security-council-resolution-2059-on.html
Sorry, the United Nations has no authority to meddle in a nation’s affairs with contact groups or in any other way. The UN effort to mediate Syria’s internal conflict, with or without Iran, was wrongful, which is basically the Russia and China position. I know Russia and China nominally supported Annan, but they are basically against outside interference because they have internal problems too. What country doesn’t?
The basic principle is one of national sovereignty. The US wouldn’t stand for the UN mediating an internal US dispute, even a rebellion, so why is it okay for Syria?
UN Charter, Article 2:
#The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
#Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll. [not invoked for Syria]
The Syria crisis was made worse by foreign influences which the UN overlooked in its mediation efforts. This is the situation that the UN should have corrected, instead of advocating a change in Syria government. The UN had no business facilitating the overthrow of a nation’s president, which the Secretary General did. The UN should have gotten after Turkey, US, Qatar and Saudi Arabia for meddling in another country’s internal affairs and openly supporting insurgents. But the UN is essentially an extension of the US State Department, so what can one expect. Only the Russia and China vetoes, exercised too sparingly, offer any hope.
I agree with John Bolton. The UN should be scrapped. They are a bunch of pampered, useless, overpaid bureaucrats who specialize in pandering to the US, under the “leadership” of the pathetic Ban Ki-moon. I hope I didn’t understate the problem.