One of our longstanding arguments about the folly of American policy on Iran-related sanctions is that it is incentivizing rising powers like China and the other BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and South Africa, along with China) to develop alternatives to U.S.-controlled mechanisms for conducting, financing, and settling the international exchange of goods, services, and capital. As the latest sets of U.S. and European Union sanctions against the Islamic Republic were going into effect, Neelam Deo (a former Indian diplomat who now directs Gateway House, the Indian Council on Global Relations) and Akshay Mathur (head of research and geoeconomics fellow at Gateway House) published a brilliant opinion piece in The Financial Times outlining precisely how such alternative mechanisms are likely to emerge, see here.
Deo and Mathur note at the outset of their article that “two recent developments—the $75 billion bailout contribution from the BRICS countries to the IMF, and the Western push for sanctions against Iran—show how exposed the BRICS economies are to Western financial policies. For decades, they have been successfully co-opted to submit to Western-dominated institutions, leaving them with little motivation to build their own.”
Now, however, “the BRICS must urgently organize to build institutions of mutual economic benefit”; the newest round of Iran-related sanctions from the United States “highlights the urgency of the issue.” The BRICS are “hostage to Western sanctions because the conduits of international finance, trade and transportation use for crude oil trade are controlled by the West. The entire pricing framework is U.S. dollar based. The New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) and London’s International Commodities Exchange (ICE) conduct the largest trade for crude oil futures contracts…There is SWIFT, the global code for electronic banking transactions. In March, SWIFT banned Iran’s banks from conducting business, leaving oil importers like India lurching for payment mechanisms. Ditto with transportation [and insurance] options.”
Deo and Mathur note that “the BRICS are finding creative ways to pay Iran” and to provide insurance coverage for shipments of Iranian crude. But rising powers nonetheless face a daunting structural challenge. Deo and Mathur warn that “the sanctions are an issue for energy exporters like Brazil and Russia too. The Western-dominated system that is strangling Iran, can do the same to others should their geopolitics be deemed inconvenient. Iran today, could be Russia or Brazil tomorrow.”
So what, then, can the BRICS do to rectify these structural imbalances that the United States and its European partners seem all too ready to leverage as a way of keeping rising powers subordinated to Western preferences? Deo and Mathur offer some genuinely creative answers:
“Apart from the already proposed multilateral BRICS Bank, should be a clearing union and insurance club to facilitate international trade, finance and transporation. For instance, though China and India have a deficit with Iran, Braizil and Russia do not. If a new trade settlement system is created—like the Asian Clearing Union establishied in Tehran in 1974 or the International Clearing Union proposed at Bretton Woods in 1944—but with BRICS currencies, Iran can use the Rupees or Renminbi [it earns from exporting oil to India and China] to pay Brazil, and not amass rice and toys. Brazil can use the same system to pay India fdor its bilateral trade, thereby facilitating multilateral local currency swaps for intra- and inter-BRICS trade. New commodity exchanges can be promoted to enable alternate means of price discovery and benchmarking in currencies.”
Deo and Mathur acknowledge that “activating these regimes will require adjustments. China’s reserves are in dollars; it will have to balance preserving that value with internationalizing the Renminbi—a stated Chinese goal achievable under a new system. External partners like Iran will have to make an effort to increase trade with CRICS to avail of the new system’s benefits. Net importer India will have to offer more competitive products and services within BRICS. In return, net exporters China and Russia may have to patiently hold weaker currencies like the Rupee until a balanced equation is achieved.
Deo and Mathur also acknowledge that “there will be resistance from the U.S. and Europe,” out to preserve “the almighty dollar” and their ability to leverage non-Western powers through hegemonic extraterritorial sanctions—in our assessment, clearly illegal, see here [link to June 27 post]. More broadly, Deo and Mathur admit that “the West has dismissed the workability” of BRICS-led international economic institutions. “But,” they conclude, “if 28 countries in NATO could unite to contain Russia, surely the five nations of BRICS can come together to ensure their geo-economic future.”
Read their article and get a glimpse at what is likely to be an important part of the future.
–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
imho says: July 17, 2012 at 5:44 am
Neither Qatar nor Saudi Arabia can pay for a prolonged war and occupation in Syria.
Please use Google to find the estimated reserves that they have and the cost of that war.
It will eat up their reserves very quickly.
Fiorangela says: July 16, 2012 at 2:43 pm
If you mention the Algiers Accords or the Principles of Peace of Westphalia in Washington DC, you will be met with contempt and derision.
This was never about Iranian Enrichment and was always about Iranian power.
Mr. Khamenei stated 2 years ago: “Do not try this nation…”
US-EU leaders evidently ignored his warning and went on their merry way of planning and executing an Economic Siege War against Iran.
And now there is a mini-World War being waged in Syria on whose outcome much depends.
I think Iranians were very very lucky when Western Financial Economy imploded last year and teh Arab Spring began the year before.
Iranian strategy, as far as I can tell, has remained the same over the last 30 years – push US out of the Middle East.
To that now they must have added EU as well.
Azeri says: July 16, 2012 at 7:07 pm
Waste of time.
A grave injustice is being committed against Iran, yet again.
imho says: July 17, 2012 at 5:44 am
I understand that others agree with your point about EU and India.
I do not.
EU and India accepted these harms, expecting quick Iranian surrender.
For India, their miscalculation finally sank in in 2012.
For EU, we are years from that point.
Americans lover Israel and will go to war with the World of Islam before they be willing to re-adjust their policy; in my opinion.
Arabs and Muslims will not forget Palestine.
You go into any Muslim city and pass a plate around and ask for donations for Palestine and you will receive money.
The Arab Spring/Islamic Awakening is harmful to US, to EU, and to Israel.
Religious forces have been unleashed and decades of political instability in ahead.
The new governments, since they are more popular, will not be close to US-EU States; the Allies of Israel.
James Canning says: July 16, 2012 at 2:26 pm
My sincere hope is that EU is hurt even more.
God Willing.
I am looking forward to chaos, poverty and misery – hopefully the Hidden Imam will be obliging in this regard.
Last week, Gabriel M. Scheinmann, a visiting Fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), admitted that the Zionist entity is in fact the winner of the so-called “Arab Spring”.
Both AIPAC and JINSA are behind Washington’s regime change in Tehran.” So far the Israel lobby has failed to make its dream come true, as Vali Nasr, author of The Shia Revival, wrote: “The wars of 2001 and 2003 have fundamentally changed the Middle East to Iran’s advantage.”
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/17/jinsa-israel-is-winner-of-arab-spring/
fyi says:
July 15, 2012 at 11:55 am
I’m not the only one saying the Europeans and Indians are acting against their interests. Everyone say they shoot themselves in the foot. Maybe words aren’t well chosen. Should I say they « think » going along with US is in their interest. In a deal you give something to get something. Giving is often against one’s interest but the overall equation may be different (as they would think).
I agree that Sunni-Shia confrontation is one important goal of the US-UK. But I am not sure that enraging muslims (at least in Pakistan) is due to their siding with Israel. This is the result of the drone war in that country.
In the same time it is clear that the US has always been siding with Israel. However, since the Iranian nuclear file, one can sea that even Israel is subject to, rather than dictate, the US foreign policy which follows the globalist policy.
Otherwise I could not explain how the Arab Spring and the Syrian crisis could benefit Israel. Maybe Arabs will forget the Palestinian issue, but Israel would be safer imo with Mubarak in west and Assad in east. I don’t see how the rise of Muslim Brotherhood in both Egypt and Syria could benefit Israel. And we all know that US is pushing MB everywhere.
How does that make sens when those Arab states subject to that Spring were already the client states of the west ?
Seeing through the Brzezinski’s angle, things begin to make sens. He even recently suggested to shoot down Israeli jets if they were flying above Iraq on their way to bomb Iran. I don’t see any event contradicting that geopolitical view which is the basis for the actual plan.
This is the same logic of divide and rule which benefits Russia and China in the case of Iran as you said just by staying idle. Iran-Iraq war learned them some lessons as they all (almost all countries) made lots of money and now it seems the UK/US is pushing a remake of that scenario in a wider scale: the Sunni-Shia war with the additional benefit of deceiving people into not thinking about their financial situation.
On your question on who would pay that war, why not SA/Qatar ? After all, they seem to push hard the anti Shia front. This time (contrary to the Kuwait/Iraq war) they really think they are in danger of rising Shia. They paid for Libyan war and they pay the mercenaries’ salaries and their arms in Syria.
To complete your statement, I’d say no country, would like an independent Iran for obvious reason.
Back to my questions to Don on July 15, 2012 at 12:10 pm, could you please answer the questions regarding NAM countries and what they can and will do about Iran ?
Can Iran really win this war alone, without any country on its side ? Even in Iran/Iraq war, despite the overwhelming support for Saddam, Israel, NK and even US sold arms to Iran.
Tehran’s International Holy Qur’an recitation competition
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/17/international-holy-quran-recitation-competitions/
In my view the subject of the following post is [very] important.
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2012/07/14/why-iran-should-sue-the-u-s-at-the-international-court-of-justice/0/
It raises challenging questions. What if this is a trap?. What if Iran eventually loses?…and some other difficult questions.
Is Eric around. (I remember he had discussed similar topics before) Can he or other knowledgeable individuals shed some light on this apparently very compelling proposition?
From two different panelists recently I’ve heard the assessment that “Iranians negotiate like rug merchants.”
In a post-Baghdad conference hosted by NIAC, Bijan Khahjapour explained that Iranian negotiating style has these two characteristics: they are rational — like a rug merchant, they know what their bottom line is and how the negotiation will have to proceed to get there; but they are reactionary. This means that if Iran is not granted at least some measure of respect to Iranian concessions, they will react by increasing the activity that is, from the West’s position, objectionable. For example, if Iran gains no concessions for limiting enrichment to 20%, but instead the demand is made that Iran cease enrichment altogether, Iran will react by enriching to 90%. It is the only leverage Iran has that is meaningful to the adversary.
About a month later, Abraham Sofaer spoke at a Koret-sponsored event at the Commonwealth Club of California. George Schultz moderated. Sofaer, who described himself as an Iraqi Jew, said that negotiating with Iran is maddening and demands patience: they haggle like rug merchants– if you demand $100, they will offer $10. Sofaer also repeated the threadbare claims that “Iran’s IRGC is attacking American/NATO soldiers in Afghanistan” and is “friendly with Taliban.” For these reasons, Sofaer urges that US should enter Iranian territory and take out IRGC bases.
But back to the main point, Iran’s negotiating style:
Israel is undoubtedly aware of these patterns — that Iran will increase enrichment whenever it is denied concessions for having constrained its enrichment behavior. Israel’s strategy is summarized by Dennis Ross: he seeks to continue to make offers to Iran that Iran must refuse (and against which Iran will react by increasing enrichment) so that the West can say, “See, we bargained in good faith; Iran chose war; bombs aweigh.” The more Iran reacts, the closer Ross gets to his passionately desired Bombs aweigh moment. (What is it with people like Ross that get such a boost out of inflicting suffering?)
What I wonder is whether Iran is in tune with the lawyerly tricksterism of the West’s negotiators. The US has a pattern of not honoring treaties, not least, the Algiers Accord.
Since Eric Brill hasn’t posted in some time, dare I say, the best strategy Iran could take would be to limit enrichment to 20% and to agree to the Additional Protocol. That would undercut the Dennis Ross tactic.
From two different panelists recently I’ve heard the assessment that “Iranians negotiate like rug merchants.”
In a post-Baghdad conference hosted by NIAC, Bijan Khahjapour explained that Iranian negotiating style has these two characteristics: they are rational — like a rug merchant, they know what their bottom line is and how the negotiation will have to proceed to get there; but they are reactionary. This means that if Iran is not granted at least some measure of respect to Iranian concessions, they will react by increasing the activity that is, from the West’s position, objectionable. For example, if Iran gains no concessions for limiting enrichment to 20%, but instead the demand is made that Iran cease enrichment altogether, Iran will react by enriching to 90%. It is the only leverage Iran has that is meaningful to the adversary.
About a month later, Abraham Sofaer spoke at a Koret-sponsored event at the Commonwealth Club of California. George Schultz moderated. Sofaer, who described himself as an Iraqi Jew, said that negotiating with Iran is maddening and demands patience: they haggle like rug merchants– if you demand $100, they will offer $10. Sofaer also repeated the threadbare claims that “Iran’s IRGC is attacking American/NATO soldiers in Afghanistan” and is “friendly with Taliban.” For these reasons, Sofaer urges that US should enter Iranian territory and take out IRGC bases.
But back to the main point, Iran’s negotiating style:
Israel is undoubtedly aware of these patterns — that Iran will increase enrichment whenever it is denied concessions for having constrained its enrichment behavior. Israel’s strategy is summarized by Dennis Ross: he seeks to continue to make offers to Iran that Iran must refuse (and against which Iran will react by increasing enrichment) so that the West can say, “See, we bargained in good faith; Iran chose war; bombs aweigh.” The more Iran reacts, the closer Ross gets to his passionately desired Bombs aweigh moment. (What is it with people like Ross that get such a boost out of inflicting suffering?)
What I wonder is whether Iran is in tune with the lawyerly tricksterism of the West’s negotiators. The US has a pattern of not honoring treaties, not least, the Algiers Accord.
Since Eric Brill hasn’t posted in some time, dare I say, the best strategy Iran could take would be to limit enrichment to 20% and to agree to the Additional Protocol. That would undercut the Dennis Ross tactic.
fyi,
Lower oil prices would help the EU deal with the euro crisis. Sanctions against Iran tend to keep oil prices higher, perhaps as much as $20 per barrel. Clearly the sanctions hurt the EU (and all countries that import oil, including the US).
“The war in Iraq was not a war for oil, but was a war conceived by the neo-cons and the pro-Israeli lobby in the United States to benefit Israel, and to elevate Israel to a very important position in the Middle East, as a part of a plan to achieve overall US global control. This is what was called for in the document of the “Project for a New American Century” or PNAC. And even though a number of prominent people, politicians as well as military people, have said that this was a war for Israel, the anti-war movement will not consider that at all.
And right at this moment, the only segment of the American society that is pushing the US administration to confront Iran, happens to be the Jewish establishment or the lobby, whose main focus for months – groups like AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, but also other Jewish organizations– has been to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons,” says Jeff Blankfort, an American Jewish journalist and Radio Talkshow host.
http://rehmat2.wordpress.com/2012/07/16/jeff-blankfort-takes-on-chomsky/
All:
From Ha’aretz
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/magazine/ex-idf-general-u-s-missed-chance-for-diplomatic-solution-to-iran-nuclear-issue.premium-1.450766
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/07/11/iranian-canadian-td-accounts269.html
“Several Iranian-Canadians are crying foul after the TD Bank abruptly closed their accounts with little explanation other than to say it had to comply with federal economic sanctions against Iran.
TD began sending letters to some of its clients in May informing them it would no longer be offering them banking services so as to abide with changes made last November to the Special Economic Measures (Iran) Regulations, which prohibit banks from providing financial services that benefit Iran or anyone in Iran.”
—–
TDAmeritrade USA & Ameritrade Canada are separate businesses, but same umbrella company. Ameritrade needs to know that the public will not stand for actions such as this.
I’ve called TDAmeritrade USA to tell them this action is not acceptable and I am closing my accounts.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/07/16/at-the-precipice-of-war/
A reflection of economic doom and gloom and expensive food prices!!!!
looks like someone is creating new business and other opportunities that go along.
any one tried these two places?
http://therealamirtaheri.blogspot.co.uk/
Anonymous Lurker says: July 15, 2012 at 2:24 pm
It was either that or continued power shortages in Korea.
US-EU have aimed to eviscerate 50 to 60 % of Iran’s oil income over time.
That is one of their tactical (economic) war aims.
imho says: July 15, 2012 at 12:10 pm
You are mistaken if you think EU and India are acting against their own interests.
They are not.
Imperial satrapis such as Korea and Japan fit that description better than EU and India.
After 5 years, US-EU planners as well as Indians finally comprehended that the US-Iraq War has increased the Iranian power.
I suppose acknowledging that is in itself an achievement.
But now that they have done so, their policy is one of role-back of the expansion of Shia/Irani power and its containment.
US, EU, and India do not wish to deal with an independent Muslim power in the Middle East.
They wish to destroy it if they can.
They much prefer Turkey – a dependency – or Pakistan, a chaotic country in which nothing gets done and just lurches from one semi-crisis to another.
The existence of the Islamic Republic of Iran – as a the first Muslim state with strategic autonomy in 100 years – is unacceptable to them.
Already, in the absence of rapproachment with Iran, the Axis States’ costs for (military/diplomatic) power projection in the Near East has increased substantially.
They think they can defray those costs when Iranians are defeated.
When that does not happen, they will realize that they are in a costly confrontation lasting many decades.
As of yet, only a few US analysts grasped that.
I recommend Steve Walt’s “The Veil Falls” (July 12th), on Israel’s inexorable virtual annexation of the West Bank.
http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/07/12/the_veil_falls
Don Bacon Says: Iran will come out of this stronger and more self-dependent, as it did on gasoline.
Nazis were to Zionist Jews as Uncle Weasel is to Iranians. They both wanted Jews out of Europe, and we both want Western industry out of the Iranian economy. Except the fools who have kidnapped Uncle Weasel and are riding him for all he’s worth are stupid enough to believe that depriving Iran of dependency is going to hurt her. That’s how much of their own propaganda Kool-Aid they have imbibed.
I don’t know
But I’ve been told
Kool-Aid hangovers
Are mighty cold.
*
B-i-B: Yup. Let us pray God continues His grace upon his humble bondsmen.
South Korea to resume oil imports from Iran:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_SzbEBZnm8&feature=g-all-u
Lots of South Korean companies breathing a sigh of relief, think of all the Korean Won the Iranians will be spending from crude sales.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal July 13th (“How Iran Steams Past International Sanctions”), Claudia Rosett said that the NITC “is taking evasive action, effec tively shielding its role as the main carrier of the oil that fuels Iran’s terror-based, nuclear-aspiring regime.” Not an unusual piece to find in the WSJ.
Don,
I wish I could share your optimism about Iran.
the situation as you said illustrates how Europeans are playing against their interests in siding with US. But they finally did it.
What makes you think that India will not also finally obey the US (against its interest) ?
How about Russia or China making a deal with US/Israel/SA against Iranian interests ?
How could NAM countries resist against US pressure and blackmail ? Are they at a point they could afford saying no to US and its financial blackmail?
Is Iran fighting the US at the right moment ?
BiBiJon says: July 15, 2012 at 6:54 am
Axis states, Russia, China, and India predicated their Iranian nuclear policy on quick victory over Iran.
When that did not transpire, they had to make the best of a worst situation.
For Axis states are not interested in negogiations and settlement; they are actively trying to roll-back the increased Iranian power since the destruction of the Ba’athist state in Iraq.
Their current target is Syria where a mini-world war is being fought.
And they are, with the cooperation of local Arab leaders (the usual fools), actively encouraging Shia-Sunni confrontation.
This persumably to crimp the power of Iran; but Shia-Sunni confrontation is a direct threat to nominal allies of US: Sqaudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkey.
As Shia are murdered by Sunni extremeists; they will coalesce around the Islamic Republic of Iran – the Shia Fortress.
Axis Powers will bring about what they wished to kill; a Shia Cresecent.
Chinese, half a decade agao, arrived at the conclusion that there is only one single funtioning state between them and the Mediterranean Sea; Iran.
Their Iran policy derives from a realstic assessment of that.
Now, they do not have to do much for Iran; Iran does not have very many choices.
But they will also not help destroy Iran, it is not useful to them.
Russia does not wish to have an Iran that is too independent; they are trying to calibrate their policy – so they zig-zag.
Russia and China have achieved also a very good objective for themselves; they have locked Axis States and their local allies in a permanent confrontation with Iran; and as neutral states, they are benefiting by “selling” to both.
For Chinese, they also have achieved the added bonus of the destruction of Iran-Inida strategic understandings.
On the other hand, Pakistan has achieved – in my opinion – strategic understaning with Iran on Afghanistan.
She will not be part of the anti-Shia League; such a posture could destroy the Paksitani State. In the meantime, Pakistan will be forced to import natural gas from Iran – the paksitani leaders’ choice is either that or try to contain massive discontent in Pakistan due to power shortages.
Turkey, also, due to the destruction of the EU finances, has to try to chart an independent economic policy. She has to import energy from Iran and sell to Iran whatever she can – just like during Iran-Iraq War when she made a lot of money by selling to both sides.
US is, in my opinion, in an untenable position – she is supporting Israel to the hilt, enraging Muslim sentiments globally.
[Lates poll suggests that 70% of Paksitanis consider US an enemy of Islam.]
And in Egypt, US is trying to usher in the Muslim Brotherhood into power without a confrontation between the Egyptian Military and MB.
And in Syria, she is trying to destroy that state and create a new one.
I ask to myself, who is going to pay for all of these wars; Saudi Arabai?
I think not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESlzaDaqFzc&feature=player_embedded
worth a quick watch regarding Putin now…
Engdah didn’t discuss India, which recently flipped the U.S. the bird over Iran. India needs petroleum and it needs a road & rail link to Central Asia (and Europe) via Iran. India has built a highway in Afghanistan for this purpose and has plans for a parallel highway. India also has major investment plans in Afghanistan, with its trillion dollar mineral deposits of various kinds.
India isn’t a part of the Russia/China SCO but it’s moving out, and Iran is just a short voyage away.
There are various articles on Iran’s auto production, up and down, many saying that production will be increased, Khodro will introduce a new pickup, etc. There is some news that Peugeot, a partner of General Motors which is partially owned by U.S. taxpayers, will hold up auto parts shipments. This situation illustrates two factors:
1. The sanctions are really on other countries more than on Iran.
2. Iran will come out of this stronger and more self-dependent, as it did on gasoline. The U.S. senate, remember, was threatening gasoline import restrictions on Iran. Real scary. Iran now exports gasoline, and its #1 gasoline customer is — guess who — Afghanistan, right next door under U.S. control. Hah!
On meat, I haven’t eaten any kind of meat in fifteen years (nothing with eyes) and I’m fit as a fiddle at age 75. If I can do it, those Persian cats can also. In fact today I’m off to ten days of backpacking in the mountains, so you characters carry on and — VIVA IRAN! Persians rule.
Mio says:
July 14, 2012 at 10:17 pm
the rail links projects through Eurasia remind me of the Berlin-Bagdad railway which following Engdahl’s other book (oil & geopolitics I think) was the main reason for WWI.
The industrial Germany, upset to pay heavy insurance fees to English insurers for ships exporting its goods did find at last a way to get out of British dominance regarding trade.
The black mailing from the City’s British insurers in the case of Iran today is very similar even if this time the trade embargo applies to oil essentially.
UK, being an island had naturally to be strong on seas, which was the case.
Being master of the seas, thus masters of trade and finance, in order to keep their position, British used to make alliances in Europe with rivals of the greater menacing states that is Germany to prevent any new rising power (the menace and power being about industries not necessary military). This again looks very similar to the new American policy after the collapse of USSR, to prevent any rising power to get close to US power militarily and financially.
The fact that Brezezinsky’s vision rules the American foreign policy today (and maybe beginning from Iranian revolution and Afghan jihad against USSR) is backed by several obvious signs: the arc of crisis from north Africa to the China’s borders, the rise of fundamentalist Islam and the encirclement of Russia and China. That’s why Engdahl believes the Arab Spring is just a plan in order to bring the wanted instability. And I should add that in the same time the plan could be to bring them all completely under the American-English financial dominance (the first thing Libyans rebels did after gaining Benghazi while Qaddafi was still in Tripoli was to setup a central bank !)
fyi says:
July 14, 2012 at 5:51 pm
The angry walrus’ saving grace is that he does not underestimate Iran when it comes her out-planning the western economic siege planners. Why he doesn’t apply the same grasp of reality when it comes to his long hoped for bombing campaign, I don’t know.
fyi says:
July 14, 2012 at 5:22 pm
I have to agree with you, alas with the heavy heart of a world citizen.
After all, Richard Dalton and five other former ambassadors to Iran: Paul von Maltzahn (Germany), Steen Hohwü-Christensen (Sweden), Guillaume Metten (Belgium), François Nicoullaud (France) and Roberto Toscano (Italy) opined that:
- “Iran is not in breach of international law” and that
- “There is no evidence that the country is building nuclear weapons.”
Fat lot of good their published opinion did, NOT!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/09/iran-nuclear-power-un-threat-peace
Maybe 35 years later, the west is still annoyed that we eat meat:
From 1979:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=lnVkAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Nn4NAAAAIBAJ&pg=3416,2366013&dq=meat+prices+iran&hl=en
Related to my previous post,
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=NewsLibrary&p_multi=BBAB&d_place=BBAB&p_theme=newslibrary2&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=112D367BF5655790&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM
Unfortunately, I don’t have the full article, but the doom and gloom about Iran’s rising meat prices existed at least in 2006. Six years later, meat prices are still increasing, always out of reach of…who exactly?
Don Bacon,
I’ve been reading articles like that for the past few years. The articles about Iran’s economics woes are two kinds. There are the one where everyone is suddenly finding it difficult to pay for everything, because meat, eggs, or prostitutes have suddenly increased by 10,000% or business suddenly aren’t making money anymore like before, usually highlighted by a random quote from some individual (convieniently their names ommitted because of government reprisals, as if IRI is going to go after some random grocery store owner) who says that business is down but used to be good.
Iran is the only country in the world that is always used to be great in the recent past, but is a living hell now. In some kind of strange time-space continium, Iran exists not in the same dimension as other countries, but in a strange parrallel universe that, according to the media and nameless quotations, always had a past that was good but a present that is bad, except the past was never the present, and the present never passes.
Its very strange. I remember recently I read an article that said that travel agencies in Iran have no business and the agent said that last year her phone was constantly ringing. But i don’t remember any articles last year about the booming travel agency business. Then again, thats the science fiction element of Iran, if the article was written last year, the business would have been bad, because the past and present don’t make sense in Iran, its a completely different science.
Look at the rising prices. FOr the last several years, maybe even more, articles have always mentioned Iran’s rising prices and how people suddenly can’t afford them anymore. If these events followed normal timeline, then one would think that by now, commodoties like meat would only be a luxurious item affordable only by two or three people in Tehran. But we still have articles about people who suddenly can’t afford meat, probably they can afford meat for some irregular dinner, but what they might mean is that they can’t afford enough meat to make a real life statue of themselves, cook it, and then have children take bites off it to appease some sick fantasy.
By the way, that article mentions meat at 20 dollars a kg. Meat is around 20 toman per kg, so its more like 10 dollars. They probably are using governmental rate for conversion to make it appear more expensive. But if they were talking about people’s incomes, they would have used market conversion rate to make their incomes seem less. The media is one of the worst things in the world today.
UU,
Sheikh Nimr shot and arrested, locals threaten to torch the oilfields, Petraeus goes to Saudi “secretly”…weren’t we just talking about this…
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-14/saudi-security-forces-hurt-by-gunmen-in-oil-rich-province.html
http://www.rajanews.com/detail.asp?id=131696
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-10/saudi-king-crown-prince-meet-with-cia-director-spa-reports.html
Don, maybe it was a hit piece, I hope so but I’m not sure.
http://www.uskowioniran.com/2012/07/iran-auto-production-plunges-by-36.html
Iran’s auto production fell by more than 36 percent over the past three months, ISNA news agency reported today.
The production fell to 241,500 vehicles in the first quarter of the Iranian year (March 21 to June 20). Iran produced more than 1.5 million vehicles in the last calendar year. The decline coincides with the halt of parts deliveries to Iran by French manufacturer Peugeot due to sanctions.
Peugeot is a partner of the main Iranian automaker Iran Khodro (IKCO), which manufactures the 405 and 206 models in Iran, accounting for approximately 40 percent of Iranian automobile production.
The head of the Iranian Association of Automobile Manufacturers, Ahmad Nematbaksh, told ISNA that the drop in production is due to the “lack of money available to the manufacturers” given by the state, which caused a “cash crisis.”
The business daily Donaye Eghtesad said the decline in production is “unprecedented in the past 20 years.”
From Mio’s Engdahl link:
In his now famous 1997 book, “The Grand Chessboard:American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives”, former Presidential adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski noted,
“In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geo-strategy involves the purposeful management of geo-strategically dynamic states…To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geo-strategy are to prevent collusion and to maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to
keep the n****rs from coming together.”
The “n****rs” that Brzezinski refers to are China and Russia and all in between. The Brzezinski term “imperial geo-strategy” refers to US strategic foreign policy. The “vassals” he identifies in the book as countries like Germany, Japan and other NATO “allies” of the US. That Brzezinski geopolitical notion remains US foreign policy today.
*
Wilbur-san says: “Oh please, Mr. Unknown Unknowns, can you please, PLEASE stop using such inflammatory language so that we Christian Weasels can soldier onward with our Full Spectrum N****r Dominance? We would be much obliged, I’m sure.
Following Cyrus Safdari’s very brief preview of “Going to Tehran” by Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett, I’ve taken the time to suggest pre-order Amazon purchases at two of the public libraries I frequent here in northern California.
I suggest Race for Iran regular readers do the same for their local public libraries:
http://www.amazon.com/Going-Tehran-United-Islamic-Republic/dp/0805094199
The economic and financial integration of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization members is what will bring an end to the western domination of world economic system.
Read William Engdahl, to understand SCO’s startegy
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/print/China%20Land%20Bridge%20to%20Turkey%20Europe.pdf
It’s not BRIC that scares the anglo-americans, it’s the Shanghai Cooperation Organization that is keeping them up at night
All:
Ambassador Bolton’ assessment:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/negotiation-delusion_648231.html?page=1
BiBiJon says: July 14, 2012 at 1:12 pm
I think arbitration, ICJ and other such instrumentalities of International Law no longer apply to Iran.
Under the nationalist and liberal government of the late Dr. Mossadeq, Iran scored a legal victory in the Hauge.
But Iran was still defeated and the puppet regime of the Shah was imposed on Iran.
I cannot point to an specific instance that established that; may be it was Russian and Turkish invasions during WWI, or USSR-UK invasion of 1320, or the overthrow of government in 1953, or the shredding of Chemical Weapons Treaty in 1980s….
Iran has been consitently shabbily treated over the last hundred years.
This latest example was shredding of NPT by US, Russia, China, and EU states when it came to Iran.
Iran has received zero benefits from these international instruments; in my opinion.
The issues between Iran and Axis States cannot be settled in a legalistic manner; they have to be settled in the field of battle – economic or otherwise.
Lawyers can be brought after this war ends to codify the ensuing peace.
We are, in my estimation, at least a decade away from that, perhaps longer.
fyi says:
July 14, 2012 at 10:53 am
Thanks fyi. I assume Iran exercised her sovereignty when signing on to NPT under which ‘arbitration’ is the remedy envisaged for resolving safeguard disputes. Regrdlss, do you think submitting to arbitration detracts from Iran’s rights?
Also, what is your opinion of Franklin Lamb’s ICJ idea?
Castellio says:
July 13, 2012 at 3:17 pm
I’ll take Hallinan’s hit piece on Iran with a grain of salt. It’s Reuters-written, so what can one expect.
Counterpunch:
Well boo hoo, meat’s expensive and she’s looking for a job. Have some veggies and do some work — that’s a “normal life” for many people.
The Palestinian Islamic Resistance, Hamas, condemned on Thursday, the kidnapping, torture and murder of 17 soldiers of Palestinian Liberation Army (PLA) by the Zionist collaborators, the Free Syrian Army (FSA) armed thugs. It looks Hamas leaders are learning their mistake of betraying their long-time ally, the Assad regime in Syria.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/14/syria-fsa-ziothugs-murder-17-palestinian-fighters/
BiBiJon says: July 14, 2012 at 6:58 am
Issues of state sovereignity should not be put to arbitration.
Just look at the results of Baluchistan Arbitration which left Eastern Baluchistan in British hands.
Furthermore, IAEA is not sovereign, Iran is; arbitration is meaningless in this context.
Iran should put all her efforts in overcoming the economic sanctions.
At the same time, she should do all that she can to win the mini-World War in Syria for herself and for the Ba’ath state.
US-EU and local allies of them are wagin a war from Hindu Kush to Mediterranean Sea.
Their war aims must be thwarted.
No negogiations with US-EU are possible otherwise.
P.S.
A reminder of Eric’s remedy: Iran should put her nuclear dispute with IAEA to binding arbitration. See http://brillwebsite.com/writings/irannuclearintro.html
Question for the board:
Why doesn’t Iran take up these suggestions? Is Iran waiting for China to complain to WTO first? Are China and Iran worried that obtaining favorable rulings, only to be ignored by the US will once and for all destroy any meaning to ‘international law’, and completely defang international institutions that uphold it?
Franklin Lamb advocates that “Iran should file an application with the International Court of Justice regarding the US led sanctions campaign without further delay.”
He is the former Assistant Counsel, US House Judiciary Committee and Professor of International Law at Northwestern College of Law in Oregon, earned his Law Degree at Boston University and his LLM, M.Phil., and PhD degrees at the London School of Economics. Following three years at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Lamb was visiting fellow at the Harvard Law School’s East Asian Legal Studies Center. Lamb is the author of Israel’s 1982 War in Lebanon, International Legal Responsibility for the Sabra-Shatila Massacre, The Price We Pay. His latest book, The Case for Palestinian Civil Rights in Lebanon, is due out shortly. Currently based in Lebanon, he volunteers with the Palestine Civil Rights Campaign and the Sabra-Shatila Foundation.
From http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/07/12/250560/why-iran-should-sue-us-at-icj/
Castellio says:
July 11, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Truly abhorrent. a lost soul. I think people like him are directly responsible for any kind of hardship incurred on Iranians due to sanctions.
However, he reminds me of Trita Parsi and NIAC standing proudly with Obama to sign the sanction bill and consequently sending congratulatory e-mails for such a remarkable achievement! What a shame.
I think history will judge them harshly.
The US secret service is investigating Holy Qur’an burning fame pastor Terry Jones’ Dove World Outreach Center for hanging a dummy of Barack Obama. Interestingly, when Andrew B. Alder, publisher-editor of Jewish daily, Atlanta Jewish Times, suggested in January 2012, that Israeli Mossad should assassinate Barack Obama for failing to attack Iran – the same secret service looked the other way. In March 2012, intelligence firm Stratfor, founder and CEO, Hungarian-born Zionist Jewish businessman Dr. George Friedman, had claimed that both Netanyahu and Mossad could be planning to assassinate Barack Obama. Fred Burton, the vice-president of Stratfor and a close friend of Netanyahu, wrote in February 2012: “One can look at MOSSAD’s recent covert activities and get a sense of their mindset. I also think they will assassinate A-Dogg. His hello will have a malfunction“.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/14/pastor-jones-obama-dead-in-2012/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/07/13/attacking-iran-through-sanctions/
Worthwhile read
http://my.firedoglake.com/edwardteller/2012/07/11/the-levy-commission-report-and-the-eradication-of-palestine/
Rehmat, FYI, BiBiJon, IMHO.. thank you for your comments re: the comments of the Vice-President of the Iranian-Canadian Council.
Lysander, thank you for your insights on the situation in Egypt. Keep them coming.
Pirouz says: July 13, 2012 at 9:17 am
The late Mr. Khomeini went for where it hurt Americans the most; their self-image as a Righteous Country and people.
That particularly enraged Americans.
Earlier, Americans of Italian, German, and Japanese descent experienced analogous attacks on their persons etc.
I recall a Sikh murdered by a mob after 9/11/2001 attack on US; being mistaken for a Muslim.
The levels of ignorance and prejudice in US are truly astonishing when one considers the amount of resources that the Federal, State, and Local governments in the United States have allocated and spent on primary, secondary, and post-secondary education.
Appalling.
ToivoS says:
July 12, 2012 at 7:30 pm
Those were difficult times, Toivo. Folks who’d been your friends for many years no longer wished any association with you. Businesses denied you service. Employment opportunities weren’t. It was as if the African-American experience were suddenly applied to you, compressed into an instant and lasting years. After my university years I settled back to San Francisco, which fortunately has a civic tradition of tolerance. So it was easier; certainly easier than LA or the east coast.
But things will be even worse if a hot war becomes a reality.
Speaking at a conference in Tel Aviv on July 12, 2012 – former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert admitted that he waged 34-day war against Lebanon in 2006 – not to free the two Israeli soldiers captured by Hizbullah but to destroy Hizbullah as a resistance millitia. He also admitted that the Jewish army failed to defeat Hizbullah.
http://rehmat2.wordpress.com/2012/07/13/olmert-israel-failed-to-defeat-hizbullah-in-2006/
Note to Hatemongers
===================
Push too hard, and you get the opposite result. Oklahoma is waking up!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLNjJ36lOGQ&feature=player_embedded
h/t CASMII
Castellio says:
July 10, 2012 at 10:28 pm
“Lysander, I’m curious as to your take on Cole’s rather negative comments regarding Mursi’s recalling of the Egyptian parliament, which I think an appropriate act.”
Sorry it took so long to get back to you. Morsi’s act (now moot since he’s backed down) is certainly justifiable and would be the right thing to do. That said, Non-Islamists do not like or trust him and for good reason.
Here’s his conundrum(s)
1) To take on the military he needs unified public support and almost half the public voted for Shafik. I don’t think that many people liked Shafik, but a lot of people don’t want on Islamist government and so held their noses and voted for him. Some leftists voted for Morsi, not because they liked him, but because they feared they would be hunted down if Shafik won.
2) And so to make his recall of the parliament stick he needs mass protests, which means more than just the brothers. He needs the original revolutionaries.
3) But here’s the rub. During the past year and a half the MB proved to be the consummate, too clever by half opportunists. From the first mass protests they tried to cut a deal with Mubarak/Suleiman. After that, they avoided most of the big protests last summer and tried to cut a deal with the army. And they thought they had one. All they had to do (they thought) was praise the army, denounce the protesters as threatening the country and the army would let them win. Turns out the army played them for suckers.
4) So now the shoe’s on the other foot. The original revolutionaries are sitting this out (for now) It is true that the parliament was democratically elected, but why would you stick your neck out protesting on behalf of a parliament you really really didn’t want?
Which is why Morsi backed down, looking stupid in the process. Now no one will stick their necks out for him since it is clear he will back down and leave you hanging.
Also, it is a huge mistake to think that the MB has any real anti-Zionist credentials. Rank and file members are certainly anti zionist, but the organization’s leadership will cut any deal needed with ANYONE if they think it will make them win. And so Morsi will spend his term as a figurehead unless the Army makes a huge mistake and gives him an opening.
None of this should suggest I’ve given up hope. Egyptians are much more activist than before and it will be hard to maintain a purely Mubarkist foreign policy. But the shift will be slow.
US-Russia’s ‘War for Jewish books’
The International Olympic Committee has refused Israeli demand to observe a minute’s silence at the London Olympic in memory of eleven Israeli atheletes who were killed in 1972 Olympic in Munich (Germany) as result of Mossad false-flag operation. However, the legendary Russian sailing ship the Krusenstern will not enter the port of London during the Olympic Games for fear of being detained. For the same reason, world’s largest sailing ship, Russian Sedov, which is currently on a round-the-world voyage, will not be able to moor at the US port of San Francisco in November when the bicentenary of Fort Ross is celebrated……
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/13/us-russias-war-for-jewish-books/
imho points out: “Iranians were beaten in US during Iran/Irak war and the hostage crisis.”
In my neighborhood in Brookline MA an Iranian student (Boston College if memory serves me) was beaten to death by local high school students in 1980 or so because of the hostage crisis. My neighbors defended the killers as “good people” who just got a little carried away.
Ooops. A lil’ U turn by/for Erdogan!!
This is getting hilarious.
“Contrary to all other statements made to the public so far, the military referred to the plane as “our aircraft that Syrian authorities claimed to have downed,” immediately raising questions whether the plane’s crash was an accident.”
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-286344-back-to-square-one-as-turkish-jet-incident-turns-into-messy-mystery.html
A very good expose article “Arab Spring Exposed”, it shows how lessons learned from the Iran 2009 elections were finally tuned for the Arab Spring and very shortly for Venezuela. Find article here Arab Spring Exposed It is quite lengthy but worth the read.
Castellio says:
July 11, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Iranians were beaten in US during Iran/Irak war and the hostage crisis.
I expect this type of campaign similar to the Apple story to intensify. Propaganda with a bit of advertising.
Canada is not a sovereign state anyway. American immigration agents check the travelers passports in Canadian soil.
on Syrian disinformation campaign (even if no news for people in this forum):
Covering Syria: The information war
By Aisling Byrne
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NG12Ak01.html
“This is a cold putsch against the constitution”
So says this articulate member of the Die Linke party in Germany, discussing the current actions to “defend the Euro”. You can read her speech and hear her delivery at: http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/663.php
Castellio says:
July 11, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Speechless but not surprised.
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=8538
Castellio says: July 11, 2012 at 7:53 pm
I pity him and those Iranians residimh in Canada; almost uniformly opponents and enemies of the Islamic Republic.
Yet, in Canada, their Paradise that they compare every day to the Hell called Iran, they are now treated in exactly in the same arbitrary and cavalier way as they complained about in Iran.
As for Canadian government; I never expected anything different from them – they are as vindictive as any other government in the world when it comes to her opponents.
Recently, Islamic Republic’s Fars News Agency held an International Occupy Wall Street Cartoon Festival in Tehran to draw global attention to Americas’ popular protest movement against capitalism which only serves 1% of country’s rich and powerful minority (mostly Zionists).
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/12/tehrans-international-ows-cartoon-festival/
Fiorangela, if you haven’t listened to this, it’s worthwhile. I know you have some doubts about Mr. Hedges, but I think his criticisms coherent and well stated.
http://www.realecontv.com/videos/social-costs/brace-yourself-the-american-empire-is-overand-the-descent-is-going-to-be-horriying.html
Castellio – As a Canadian citizen for the last 42 years – nothing surprises me coming from Stephen Harper’s government. Harper is Christian zionist with a Crypto-Jewish wife and Shimon Peres called him “Israel’s loving friend” during his recent Ottawa visit.
TD is not a major Canadian banking institution. Iran-Canadian citizen should transfer their accounts to the Imperial Bank of Commerce, the largest Canadian bank – or to the Bank of India, Bank of China, Bank of Hong Kong, etc.
Britain: ‘It’s not Kosher to criticize Israel’
http://rehmat2.wordpress.com/2012/07/12/britain-its-not-kosher-to-criticize-israel/
BiBiJon, UU, Rehmat, FYI and others, I’d really appreciate and welcome your views on the statements made by the Vice-President of the Iranian-Canadian Council:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/07/11/iranian-canadian-td-accounts269.html
BiBiJon,
Wouldn’t Iran have gained, if Clinton had pushed for a deal (allowing enriching to 5% but ending enriching to 20%)? Domestic politics in the US made this difficult.
American politics today: http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/campaign-2012-1/barack-oromney.html
James Canning says:”Russia and China would want North Korea’s nukes to be destroyed, prior to any reunification of Korea.”
Yes, but neither country wanted North Korean nukes in the first place, did they?
James Canning says: July 11, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Mr. Clinton, during his first term, had directed his government to do all it could to bankrupt the Iranian government.
When Iran did not go bankrupt, during his second term, he started making noises about rapproachment – on US terms – during Mr. Khatami’s first term.
I expect the next President of the United States, elected after 2018, will start making such noises once the inefficacy of the siege war become clear in 5-6 years.
I expect that President, at that time, to equally unable to move due to internal degeneration of the United States.
James Canning says: July 11, 2012 at 12:52 pm
Karl is correct.
No deal is necessary with P5+1 because such a deal will not end the economic siege war against Iran.
That is because US sanctions on Iran will never ever be removed until and unless the Islamic Republic is destroyed.
The removal of UNSC sanctions are not worth that much to Iran.
In other words, no deal is possible therefore no deal is necessary.
James,
Where do I say that Iran shouldnt strike a deal with P5+1? You seems to think that what P5+1 say is legal demands that must be followed. This is a dangerous view.
Pirouz says:
July 11, 2012 at 12:28 pm
I was reading Steven Walt’s report card on Clinton this morning, and thought to myself I would give her F-
The backtracking on Israeli settlements, begging Iraq and failing to convince them to host US troops; ballsing up the Russian reset Lybia-style; being completely flat-footed on Tunisia and then again in Egypt; pushed around by Saudi Arabia to ignore Bahrain not seeing past her nose how that would play on her beloved color revolution in Syria; etc. And the sanctions imposed on the entire planet as an hitherto unsuccessful attempt at strangulating Iran objectively is only an extravagant expenditure of diplomatic capital but failing to stanch geopolitical bleeding. Actually worse. She would have hung on to some credibility had she achieved the same nothingness by doing nothing. Other than her rude utterances — Putin has no soul — masquerading as actual leadership, she has brought nothing to the table.
Seeing as her other accomplishment is her refusal to take a ‘yes’ from Iran, and her uncanny ability to ignore a raft of common interests to turn US relations with Iran as a zero-sum game, I’d have to conclude that her F- is equivalent to an A+ for Iran without Iran lifting a finger.
Thought 4 food
China and the Middle East: Features of a new approach by Izzat Shahrour
http://www.just-international.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5639:china-and-the-middle-east-features-of-a-new-approach&catid=45:recent-articles&Itemid=123
Karl..,
You appear to argue that Iran does not have to make a deal with the P5+1. But making such a deal would be necessary in order to get sanctions relief.
fyi,
Bill Clinton wanted to restore normal relations between Iran and the US.
Joe Biden calls Mitt Romney “George Bush on steroids”. Romney would be a bad thing for Iran.
Castellio,
Russia and China would want North Korea’s nukes to be destroyed, prior to any reunification of Korea.
BiBiJon says:
July 11, 2012 at 10:44 am
In addition to the foreign policy victory of being included in Annan’s diplomatic efforts, Iran scored another recent victory in Iraq, where some U.S. observers were anticipating the removal of Maliki. It didn’t happen, and Iran was at the forefront in maintaining stability in that country.
Castellio: sounds like Juan Cole is turning into a regular Chris Hitchens.
Adam confirms Pepe was right about Clinton
========================================
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is running out of rhetorical ammunition in the US’s Holy War against Syria. Perhaps it’s the strain of launching a NATO war bypassing the UN Security Council. Perhaps it’s the strain of being eaten for breakfast routinely by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Hillary has just called on “Western powers” and their Arab stooges – the NATOGCC compound [1] that passes for the “international community” – to “make it clear that Russia and China will pay a price because they are holding up progress” regarding weaponized regime change in Syria.
h/t Castellio @ July 10, 2012 at 12:19 am http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NG10Ak02.html
———-
China has finally decided to support Kofi Annan’s efforts in Syria, now that he’s calling for action the United States doesn’t like—mainly because it may involve Iran. This is not exactly what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meant when she insisted China and Russia on Friday to “get off the sidelines” in Syrian peace efforts. It may not seem like a huge diplomatic maneuver, but China’s new, vocal support for Kofi Annan’s declaration that Iran “has a role to play” in forging peace in Syria is a role reversal because it has China backing a U.N. effort and the United States opposing it.
From http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/07/china-finally-backs-syria-peace-plan-one-us-hates/54423/
Lysander, I’m curious as to your take on Cole’s rather negative comments regarding Mursi’s recalling of the Egyptian parliament, which I think an appropriate act.
Some more protests in Eastern KSA, in Qatif:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TvyqxGls3MQ
I’ll try posting this over at Juan Cole. I wonder if he’ll publish it.
Egypt and the myth of ‘Arab Spring’
“The Zionist entity is the only country which has benefited from the ‘Arab Spring’,” Maj. Gen. Marwan Charbel, Lebanese interior minister on Russian Television, June 7, 2012.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/11/egypt-and-the-myth-of-arab-spring/
James, you write as if there is a global police force with whom you just had coffee.
It’s only a question of time before both Japan and a unified Korea are both nuclear capable or full out nuclear armed. American “tutelage” won’t be accepted forever.
Comments here about Korea are certainly relevant. I think it would be a mistake to automatically assume that S. Korea will remain (or even is today) an American puppet state. There are some negotiations between the North and Sout, China and Russia that could result in significant economic realignment. Basically, there is a proposal to connect S. Korea to the pipeline and railroad grid by running right of ways through North Korea. If that were to occur South Korea would have access to Russian and Khazack natural gas. Currently South Korea is entirely dependent on oil via ocean delivery. Connections to Chines rails would decrease transportation costs with that country immensely. Perhaps even access to the trans-Siberian railroad would make trade with Europe easier. Of course, North Korea would benefit from transit fees.
This kind of economic integration would have to lead to some degree of political and diplomatic integration.
mes Canning says: July 10, 2012 at 2:28 pm
There is no danger in Mr. Romeny’s election to US Presidency to Iran.
Mr. Obama and before him Mr. Clinton have been most damaging to Iran.
Democrats are bad for Iran, it seems to me.
James,
Thats the problem I just raised that infecting your reasoning. P5+1 is NOT the law. That reasoning is very dangerous, there is international law. You seems to forget this.
fyi,
One might note that the heavy pressure on the euro is partly the result of recession in Europe that higher oil prices earlier this year helped to cause. The danger ofr Iran is that the recession in Europe helps Mitt Romney and injures Obama in the presidential race, because it contributes to the slowing of the American economy.
Castellio,
Re-unification of NK with SK would be part of a deal by which NK nukes were removed and destroyed. If this had not already happened. No chance of unified Korea with nukes.
fyi,
South Korea’s economy is 30 times the size of North Korea’s. Unified Korea would become as rich as Japan. China would want US troops out of the country, as condition of approving re-unification. China might accept US troops if they were not based any further north than current border NK/SK.
1. South Korea is a show-case satrapi of the United States.
Generally, I agree. Certainly the US would like to think so.
2. Without the United States, South Korea does not have the wherewithall to resist the power projections and other machinations of her much more powerful neighbours; Russia, China, and Japan.
That is the Korean fear. However, the US is one of those powerful neighbours, and American power projection is very far from universally welcomed.
3. Even in the event of the Korean unification, the unified Korea will be no match for Chia or Russia.
Yes and no. A unified Korea will quickly become a nuclear nation, which is why the US, China and Japan are hardly rushing to see it happen.
4. So, they stay put with US, they see nothing better and will conform to what US tells them to do.
The strains are real and growing. I’d put a time limit on that.
5. Korea was the Son-in-Law country to China; I expect that will be the case again at sometime into the future.
I agree. And it wasn’t always a difficult place to be, either.
Karl..,
I linked Philip Giraldi’s comments, and agree with them. He thinks the P5+1 must accept Iranian enrichment to 3.5%-5%. Very few, if any, observers think the Six Powers would accept Iranian enrichment to 20%. You apparently think Iran should continue enriching to 20% in order to apply pressure. Very dangerous.
Castellio says: July 10, 2012 at 12:38 am
South Korea is a show-case satrapi of the United States.
Without the United States, South Korea does not have the wherewithall to resist the power projections and other machinations of her much more powerful neighbours; Russia, China, and Japan.
Even in the event of the Korean unification, the unified Korea will be no match for Chia or Russia.
So, they stay put with US, they see nothing better and will conform to what US tells them to do.
Korea was the Son-in-Law country to China; I expect that will be the case again at sometime into the future.
Americans got nothing out of the wars, but as the war debt will never be paid off, US citizens and their descendants will have to pay interest on $6,000 billion of war debt in perpetuity.
Not content with these wars, the Bush/Obama regime is conducting military operations in violation of international law in Pakistan, Yemen, and Africa, organized the overthrow by armed conflict of the government in Libya, is currently working to overthrow the Syrian government, and continues to marshall military forces against Iran.
Finding the Muslim adversaries Washington created insufficient for its energies and budget, Washington has encircled Russia with military bases and has begun the encirclement of China. Washington has announced that the bulk of its naval forces will be shifted to the Pacific over the next few years, and Washington is working to re-establish its naval base in the Philippines, construct a new one on a South Korean island, acquire a naval base in Viet Nam, and air and troop bases elsewhere in Asia.
I promised to examine whether the US economy will collapse before Washington in its pursuit of world hegemony brings us into military confrontation with Russia and China.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31798.htm
By Paul Craig Roberts
Off topic but interesting
The ghost of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat is rising from his grave to haunt Israel and the Americans.
A devastating investigation by Qatar’s al-Jazeera has found mounting evidence that Arafat’s death in 2004 was caused by the poisonous radioactive substance Polonium 210. Arafat’s widow, Suha, is now calling for his body to be exhumed and sent to the Swiss scientific institute in Lausanne that recently discovered traces of Polonium in Arafat’s clothing and personal effects.
She foolishly failed to have her husband’s body autopsied after his mysterious death. The French military hospital at Percy that treated the dying Arafat has never released an adequate report on the real cause of his death.
Soon after Arafat suddenly fell ill, then died, I wrote that he had ‘likely been poisoned’ by a hard to detect poison originally developed in the Soviet Union by the former KBG’s poison laboratory. Even to a non-medical man like myself, Arafat showed signs of drastic poisoning and internal organ collapse.
Polonium 210 is found in nature only in microscopic amounts. The one gram that can kill a man when slipped into his food or drink must be made in an advanced nuclear reactor. It can be carried across borders because it does not alert radiation detectors.
The last known use of Polonium 210 was the murder in London in 2006 of former Russian FSB (KGB successor) agent Alexander Litvinenko. He had defected from Russian security and co-authored a book claiming that Vladimir Putin’s rise to power in 1999 was accelerated by the FSB’s secret bombings of apartment buildings in Russia that were blamed on Chechen ‘terrorists’ – an eerie predecessor to the 9/11 attacks in the USA.
British authorities blamed a former FSB agent for poisoning Litvinenko’s tea, producing a horrible, excruciating death.
In 1997, two Israeli agents tried to murder Hamas leader Khaled Mashal in Amman, Jordan by squirting a poison into his ear. Threats from US President Bill Clinton forced Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu to deliver an antidote to the unknown poison to Jordan.
In 2010, another Hamas chief, Mahmoud al Mabhouh was murdered in Dubai by Israeli agents using a paralyzing drug, acytelcholine.
Yasser Arafat’s death came when the PLO leader was under virtual house arrest in his compound at Ramallah, surrounded by Israeli forces that controlled the compound’s food and water. Arafat had been threatened by death countless times by Israel, notably by PM Ariel Sharon. Most of Arafat’s most able aides had been killed by Israeli hit teams from Mossad. The amazing thing is that Arafat survived so long.
At the time, Israel, backed by the US, was trying to impose a “peace treaty” on the Palestinians that would have left them with an unviable mini-state, chopped up into enclaves by Jewish only security roads and Jewish settlements – in short a new version of South Africa’s notorious “Bantustans.”
Arafat refused all pressure to accept this gunpoint deal. Soon after, he was murdered. Arafat was swiftly replaced by a new PLO leader, Mahmoud Abbas, who was widely seen among Palestinians as a creature of the US and Israel. Abbas’ security forces were CIA-trained; his regime was largely financed by the US and Israel.
As Stalin used to say, “no man, no problem.”
If Swiss forensic investigators do find Polonium 210 in Arafat’s corpse, it will confirm he was indeed murdered, a common view across the Arab world.
If it was murder, who did it? Swiss scientists say that murder by Polonium 210 could only have been done by a scientifically advanced nation – with a specialized reactor. The only Mideast nation in 2004 to have one was Israel. Israel denied being involved and spread the lie that Arafat died of AIDS – a fact disproven by Swiss scientists.
After Arafat’s death, I speculated that former Soviet biowarfare scientists who emigrated to Israel may have been involved. Israel maintains the Mideast’s largest biowarfare laboratories at Nes Ziona with very advanced technology.
Who else could get to Arafat with Israeli forces blockading his compound? PLO rivals, other Arab states? But none had Polonium 210. Russia? Why? Arafat was a longtime friend.
We must ask the old legal question, “qui bono,” who benefits from what appears to be murder most foul.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31804.htm
By Eric Margolis
James,
Thats the problem, you think that what the P5+1 demand, must be followed.
For some reason when I put in the url this post isn’t accepted. However, there’s an article entitled: U.S. strategic pivot toward Asia deepens ties with Seoul in The Korea Herald you might want to look up.
An odd article… meant, I think, to convince the readers that SKorea and the US are in this together, with no light between them. I have my doubts.
“Amid its strategic pivot toward the Asia-Pacific, America’s long-standing alliance with South Korea is expected to deepen to better deal with an increasingly bellicose North Korea and a rising China.
Forged during the 1950-53 Korean War, the alliance, which had focused on deterring the North, has evolved into a more multi-faceted, value-based partnership. It now goes beyond the bilateral level to jointly tackle regional and global challenges such as non-proliferation and anti-terrorism.
“The two countries (Korea and the U.S.) are taking joint action to respond to global issues such as proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, climate change, energy and food crisis, poverty, etc.,” Foreign Minister Kim Sung-hwan said during a speech at the World Affairs Council in Los Angeles last month.
“Korea and the U.S. are sharing not only the interests, but also values.”
In support of America’s global initiatives to tackle threats from terrorism and proliferation of WMDs, South Korea sent its troops to Iraq in 2004 and Afghanistan in 2010.
In March, Seoul also hosted the second Nuclear Security Summit, a premier forum U.S. President Barack Obama has pushed to realize his vision of a “nuclear-free” world. It has joined the U.S.-led anti-Iran sanctions at the expense of its economic ties with the Islamic republic.
The Seoul government is also taking steps to deploy troops to help stabilize South Sudan where another Sino-U.S. competition is emerging over the resource-rich, conflict-laden African state.
Some dismiss Korea’s diplomatic and military moves in sync with America’s global strategy as the “trap” of the alliance. Others, however, say a reliance on the U.S. is inevitable to deal with a growing security uncertainty in the region.
The alliance’s efforts to grow out of the Cold-War era frame have been overshadowed by North Korea’s relentless saber-rattling and China’s growing assertiveness in Asia.
After a series of North Korean provocations in recent years including the sinking in 2010 of the corvette Cheonan, the allies refocused on reinforcing joint deterrence against the belligerent state.
As China did not take any action to discourage Pyongyang’s provocative behavior when its impoverished ally shelled the border island of Yeonpyeong in 2010, Seoul and Washington reinforced their security ties.
“The deepening of the alliance between South Korea and China serves the strategic interests for both countries,” said Kwon Tae-young, advisor to the non-profit Korea Research Institute for Strategy.
“For the South, a stronger alliance could serve to better deter North Korea while the U.S. could think of the alliance from a broader strategic perspective to help keep China in check.”
And it goes on.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NG10Ak02.html
A more recent article by Escobar discussing Syria…
Dorothy says: “…these doctrinair[e] commentators.”
That’s right. You stick to the Doctrine of Non-Doctrine. Its so Zen its hip, except it ain’t the sixties anymore and you’re not in Kansas.
Karl.. says: July 9, 2012 at 7:08 pm
Nevertheless, I expect Iranians to continue supporting the Ba’athis state to the hilt.
James Canning says: July 9, 2012 at 1:42 pm
I am still hopeful that the Hidden Imam would do something.
“Let’s start sledgehammer style. Iran won’t crack. Iran won’t crack. Iran won’t crack,” Pepe Escobar in Asia Times, July 7, 2012.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/10/iran-will-never-submit-to-zog-pressure/
Karl..,
That there was fear in the PG monarchies seems clear. That this fear seems to have helped to bring about the Iraqi invasion of Iran also seems clear. This is not an endorsement of the opportunistic attack made by Saddam Hussein because the thought that Iran would cave in quickly.
Karl..,
The appalling waste, death and destruction of the Iran-Iraq war is to be regretted. And it led, indirectly, to the Gulf War, the 9/11 attacks, and the catastrophic invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Very few observers of the P5+1 negotiations with Iran, would say that there is any chance the Six Powers would accept Iranian enrichment to 20 percent. I think Iran is very well aware of this fact.
So Russia have once cut another tie with Syria.
Now they have invited the opposition to Russia for talks.
They have witheld fighter airplanes that were to be delivered to Syria.
They have witheld conventional arms/weapons.
Earlier they have witheld the S-300 shipment/deal to/with Syria.
What have Russia got in return from the western world? Or do they sense Assad will fall sooner rather than later?
James,
Why did you repeat the thing about 20% again? We all know the warmongers refusal for Iran to enrich.
About the war, well you tell me, it seems that you justify the war on Iran based on a legitimate fear and that turned out to a casus belli.
Goli says: July 8, 2012 at 1:02 am
You are wasting your time with these doctrinair commentators.
The footage and pictures of the harrssment, intimidation, and humiliation of Iranian women are widely distributed in Muslim countries as propaganda against Islamic Iran.
They are shown, for example, in Lebanon to Christians and Muslims alike with the message: “You don’t want to be subject to this, do you?”
A few Iranian mullahs have finally realized the utter futility and stupidity of this; but such men as them are still a minority.
You can count on a friend here called Reality (a.k.a. Expediency).
It will break all these dogmas through bitter learning lessons.
fyi,
The EU will survive the current euro crisis. The EU is about one-quarter of the planet’s economy.
Karl..,
Israel and the Israel lobby in the US oppose Iranian enrichment of uranium. This is the reason Obama cannot openly endorse Iranian enrichment to 5% or lower, even if this is the concession that needs to be made.
Iranian enrichment to 20% will not be accpeted by the P5+1.
To understand the origins of the Iran-Iraq war, one must consider what factors motivated those who pushed for an attack on Iran. Fear, in the PG monarchies, was such a factor. And was this fear based on anything substantial?
Those who intend to objectively study the impasse between Israel/West and Iran on the nuclear issue should not miss the following text compiled by Iranian officials:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/88722748/al-monitor%20document.pdf
Of Topic, but I wanted to repost these videos (I found via Angry Arab) of demos in KSA. I’m trying to post them everywhere since the MSM wont mention them.
There are new demos in KSA since the shooting of Shiite cleric Nimr al Nimr. Live ammo has been used against them. But there have also been demos (very small, but its a start) in Riyadh calling for release of prisoners.
All these videos I found via Angry Arab blog.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwFKnR6ZOiQ&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=btpeKOGgTxc
And this one is in Riyadh, saying the people want freedom for the prisoners.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BleTkx6nsyU&feature=player_embedded
Let us all pray for the fall of the house of Saud
Cyrus_2 says: July 9, 2012 at 6:57 am
Yes, that is true.
But it s also true that Iranian government revenue has gone down over the last 9 months due to the economic war.
Iranians were really really lucky when the Western Financial Empire – like the Communist Empire before it – disintegated in 2011.
20 years past the collapse of Peace of Yalta and we are roughly where the world was in early 1900s.
On Libya, Egypt.
I am, and probably alot of other people are surprised that the Jibril-alliance won the Libya election.
This is a pro-western, liberal, mainly secularist alliance, its the same man/group that led the overthrow of Qadaffi on a political level.
Jibril have great ties with western leadership. I guess the theory that the arab spring would bring states with a foreign policy similar to Iran (independent) isnt correct, in fact even in Egypt, Tunisia I sense the same thing. Mursi doesnt seem to have a particular different view than the earlier regime ruling Egypt. Mubarak were often called a puppet of israeli and american interests, I dont think it will take too much time before Mursi sooner or later getting the same description.
Jibril, Mursi is of course under heavy pressure not to engage with Iran from western leaders.
If true, this is excellent news for Iran and a blow in the face of the US-led sanction regime:
China Shuns US And Invests Direct In Iran Oil-Fields
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/china-shuns-us-and-invests-direct-iran-oil-fields
But the US doesn’t need to worry about cutting Iran off from foreign investments, the international financial system, the oil-marktet, and handing Iran over to China almost for free, because, after all its own economy is in such a wonderful shape:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/economic-report-card-fail
Oh, and despite the banking bailout, Spain’s 10 year bonds just broke through the 7% threshold … again.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/spains-budget-deteriorates-so-much-it-gets-one-year-extension-eu-meet-deficit-targets
James,
Of course you are concerned, you are the ones making the argument, you are playing into the hands of the “enemy”. You even admit that when saying that you support only 5% and that this is not unreasonable. Thats exactly what the warmongers/enemy say too.
Surely you think Iran had a vital part in being attacked, why else mention it if the impact from Iran was minor?
I hope that folks around here will take note of the stark contrast between the hue and cry raised in ‘progressive’ circles, not to mention neo-con circles, about the supposed fraudulent election of Ahmadinejad, and the near total disinterest in the same ‘progressive’ and neocon circles over what appeared to be a blatantly fraudulent Mexican election far closer to home a few years back. Well now we have had what appears to be yet another blatantly fraudulent Mexican election, probably even more so, and still the striking lack of concern amongst the American political classes.
It’s important to understand that people aren’t just being unfortunately credulous when they buy into these blatantly agenda-driven depictions of the global political landscape, nor are they just being irresponsible; in fact, they are complicit with a foreign policy that is misguided and brutal, in the extreme.
Persian Gulf says: July 8, 2012 at 11:00 am
That is only of historical interest now.
“By Way Of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War,” Israeli Mossad’s motto.
The recent the pro-USrael Al-Jazeera investigation into the death of PLO president Yasser Arafat (d. 2004), has claimed that Arafat could have been poisoned using elevated levels of a radioactive isotope (Polonium 210) found in his belongings. Arafat’s belongings were examined by the Institute of Radiation Physics in Lausanne, Switzerland. Arafat’s widow, Suha Arafat, a Catholic born in the West Bank in 1963 – claims that the belongings were put in a secure room at her attorney’s office in Paris after Arafat’s death and stayed there until Al-Jazeera approached the lab on her behalf at the beginning of this year. Watch video below.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/09/why-yasser-arafat-is-back-in-news/
Karl..,
I do not “blame” Iran for the Iraqi attack launched in 1980. Are you claiming Iraq would have attacked if it did not have support from the Persian Gulf monarchies?
Karl..,
Did you read the comments by Philip Giraldi and Pat Buchanan that I linked? They are adamant opponents of any attack on Iran. Why would you think I would promote an insane attack on Iran?
Karl..,
You misunderstand the reason I quoted from the AP story today. I was concerned all along that enemies of Iran would use the 20% enrichment as means of convincing the public Iran must be intending to build nukes – - even if Iran has no such intentions!
I continue to support Iranian enrichment to 5% or lower. This is not unreasonable.
Western science delegation pay visit to Iran.
AAAS Delegation, Led by Nobel Laureate Peter Agre, Makes “Positive” Visit to Iran
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2012/0625iran.shtml
James,
EU/UK/Israel/US say that Iran must do this and do that. Apparently you agree. I am not sure why you are here posting since your views is in a constant clash with Leverett’s analysis and the whole of the commenting users. Not to say that different views are good but when you keep pushing war propaganda and flood this comment section with an agenda the discussion arent moved forward and probably violate the rules of this site when it comes to commenting. Now again you insinuating stuff that Iran have itself to blame for being attacked by Iraq and now again you drag up your 20% argument with insinuations with the intent to show the board that you are right or something (you have earlier made your point that Iran should not be allowed to enrich 20%, fine you are allowed of course to have that view but stop repeating it here please!).
Look while everyone here recognize that EU/US/Israel/UK have demands on Iran, you are the only one accepting, supporting them, justifying them.
Castellio,
Saddam Hussein expected a quick victory over Iran, and an adjustment of the border. He was not planning or expecting a struggle lasting years.
fyi,
Much of the finance for Iraq’s war with Iran came from the Persian Gulf, especially Kuwait.
AP report in many American newspapers today: “A halt [by the EU] in crude oil imports from Iran is intended to increase pressure on the Islamic Republic to stop enriching uranium to the 20 percent level.”
So it appears a consensus is forming that Dennis Ross’ coercive pressure stick diplomacy is a failure. too funny. In June, the US might have received something from Iran for the now known to be flat on their face sanctions. Coercion and diplomacy do not seem to mix so well, or at least Dennis Ross’ version of it.
In other news, BDS has been having success of late. Maybe our American planners should put their focus there.
I have posted this before, with my other post yesterday. apparently, it didn’t go through:
:http://irna.ir/News/80217738/%D9%85%D8%AA%D9%86-%D9%83%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%84-%D9%BE%DB%8C%D8%B4%D9%86%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%DB%8C%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A8%D9%87-%DA%AF%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%87-1-5/%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%8A/
On Tuesday, Israel-Firster Hillary Clinton apologized to Islamabad for the November 2011 US airstrike which killed 24 Pakistani soldiers managing a border-crossing between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari has accepted the apology and one truck carrying essential supply for NATO troops in Afghanistan has crossed the border from Pakistan after Islamabad ended a seven-month blockade.
Pakistan had insisted on an apology from day one – but Washington had previously only expressed regret – something Erdogan has failed to extract from Netanyahu for murdering nine Turks on board Mavi Marmara on May 31, 2010.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/08/us-apologizes-pakistan-reopens-nato-supply-routes/
Goli Khanum:
The whole point of my response to you was to make you aware that in our culture, there is a belief that a distinction obtains between the rights of God (haqq al-lah) and human rights (haqq an-naas): orfiaat and shar’iaat, and that the demarcation line for this distinction goes all the way back to the Imams and the Prophet (with all of whom be peace). In other words, it is not something that is in anyone’s control (once you have attained to faith and self-surrendered to God and his shari’a (broad path back to Him). There have always been antinomian Christian-types in our history that reject the “legalism” of the shari’a (as if it is possible to reject God’s commands, and even if it were, to run society without laws), but commitment to the shari’a is just the way it is here, wa lau karah al-kafirun.
As far as using the topic of intercourse for humorous purposes, it is a cultural thing. If you want to be as rude, crude and socially unacceptable as I am, or if you want your entire gender to be so, then be my guest I guess. There’s no law against it. But if your point was that there are things that are wrong with our culture, my response is: you bet!
Irshad says:
July 5, 2012 at 7:57 am
I guess everybody has a price and Mrs. Rousseff’s is cheaper than that of her predecessor’s. Unfortunate world we live in. The President knows however, that those who truly matter to him, for whom he stands, and with whom he identifies, see the Brazilian behavior for what it is. The Iranian member of Parliament is trying to score a political point.
Unknown Unknowns (Previous Post 10:59 p.m.)
Thanks for your responses to my comment a few posts back. I wonder then if in your view and that of Bussed-in-Basiji’s, it is OK for a woman to make a similar joke as the one you made about intercourse with sexual connotation, or is there something in your Islam that bestows that privilege only upon men?
I think I know enough good Iranian Muslims like you to know the answer, and unfortunately it is rooted in the fundamental hypocrisy your views on women represent.
Anyway, I don’t know why you and a couple of other commenters here (whose identities escape me right now) insists on making sexual comments. It is not a good reflection of you and Iranian men in general, and leaves one with no choice but to speculate as to the its root causes … affirming Western stereotypes about Muslim men. Just a word of friendly advice.
ToivoS says:
July 7, 2012 at 10:02 pm
“Don Bacon has become a veritable and comprehensive source of links,. .”
It’s the least I can do for Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett — patriots both. Perhaps not as extreme though as Edward Abbey:
“I know my own nation best. That’s why I despise it the most. And I know and love my own people, too, the swine. I’m a patriot. A dangerous man.”
ToivoS says:
July 7, 2012 at 10:02 pm
“He has been predicting for months that the sanctions were going to fall flat. I am beginning to agree.”
As does Robert Dreyfuss http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/12713
“But while the new sanctions will inflict a significant measure of pain against Iran’s already struggling economy, virtually no one in Washington believes that they will compel Iran to make unilateral concessions at the bargaining table over its nuclear enrichment program. And, experts say, Iran can get along fine for the foreseeable future with a little belt-tightening.
…
Indeed, perhaps one of the reasons why the United States failed to cite China and other countries in Asia under the law is that the sort of secondary sanctions against Iran that the United States wants may even be illegal under the rules of the World Trade Organization. In any case, by sanctioning China the United States would set off a full-blown diplomatic row that, at the very least, would propel China out of the P5+1 and lead Beijing to escalate its Iranian oil imports.
…
The only way sanctions against Iran make sense is not as policy, but politics.”
————-
I’d say even the naval build up in PG is not a policy of war, but politics of avoiding one.
James Canning says: July 7, 2012 at 7:52 pm
Likewise, I am sure, WWII would noy have happened had Litvinov’s mission was not sabotaged by the ruling class in England.
There soldier from 13 countries among the POWs in Iran.
None from Southern Persian Gulf Arabs, if I recall correctly.
Many from other Arab states; Egypt, Jordan,…
Nah, it is common among the Taiwanese, Koreans, Africans, South Americans and others.
The amazing thing is that Chinese are now oblivious to it.
Don Bacon has become a veritable and comprehensive source of links, let me add one from Escobar: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NG07Ak03.html.
He has been predicting for months that the sanctions were going to fall flat. I am beginning to agree. It is quite amazing how many nations are willing to defy, if not overtly with public announcements but de facto, US mandated sanctions. It does seem that the rest of the world has learned the lesson from America’s wars against Iraq and Afghanistan — poor US really is the paper tiger Mao predicted 50 years back. This is the price that the US is now paying for losing the wars against Iraq and Afghanistan.
James Canning says:
July 7, 2012 at 7:52 pm
“Gratuitous frightening of those [Gulf] Monarchies caused disaster for the people of Iran” and led, apparently, to the Iraq-Iran war. I don’t know what to do with that piece of stand-up comedy. Laugh, I suppose.
If you mean that the Gulf monarchies thought to overthrow the Islamic Republic for its blow against hereditary tyrants and undeveloped economies, a desire shared by a good portion of the populations of the Gulf Monarchies, then why not say that?
Speaking of executive orders, Obama has been a busy little bunny with his dictatorial executive orders, including the continuation of two (2) national emergencies. Obama’s recent executive orders involving Iran — beyond any laws.
Executive Order 12170,National Emergency
Iran – “On November 14, 1979, by Executive Order 12170, the President declared a national emergency with respect to Iran, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706), to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by the situation in Iran. Because our relations with Iran have not yet returned to normal, and the process of implementing the agreements with Iran, dated January 19, 1981, is still under way, the national emergency declared on November 14, 1979, must continue in effect beyond November 14, 2011. Therefore, consistent with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year this national emergency with respect to Iran.”
renewed November 7, 2011 BO
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=97005&st=&st1=#axzz1p86z8eds
November 21, 2011, Statement on Iran
Today my administration has taken yet another step to further isolate and penalize Iran for its refusal to live up to its international obligations regarding its nuclear program. For years, the Iranian Government has failed to abide by its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has violated repeated U.N. Security Council resolutions, as well as its commitments to the International Atomic Energy Agency. In the face of this intransigence, the world has spoken with one voice, at the IAEA, at the U.N., and in capitals, making it clear that Iranian actions jeopardize international peace and stability and will only further isolate the Iranian regime. Today my administration has taken action to impose an additional cost on Iran for its actions. New sanctions target for the first time Iran’s petrochemical sector, prohibiting the provision of goods, services, and technology to this sector and authorizing penalties against any person or entity that engages in such activity.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=97310&st=&st1=#axzz1zsT7Lsu0
Executive Order 12957, National Emergency
Iran – “Because the actions and policies of the Government of Iran continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, the national emergency declared on March 15, 1995, must continue in effect beyond March 8, 2011.”
renewed March 13, 2012 BO
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=100003&st=&st1=#axzz1q9lG2WQ9
April 22, 2012, Executive Order 13606
Iran and Syria – Information Technology — “The commission of serious human rights abuses against the people of Iran and Syria by their governments, facilitated by computer and network disruption, monitoring, and tracking by those governments, and abetted by entities in Iran and Syria that are complicit in their governments’ malign use of technology for those purposes, threaten the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”
initiated April 22, 2012
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=100679&st=&st1=#axzz1v2gmlxep
May 1, 2012, Executive Order 13608
Iran and Syria- Foreign Sanctions Evaders — “efforts by foreign persons to engage in activities intended to evade U.S. economic and financial sanctions with respect to Iran and Syria undermine our efforts to address the national emergencies. . .”
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=100725&st=&st1=#axzz1v2gmlxep
Just think of what this busy bunny could accomplish if his attentions weren’t fixated on little old Persia.
I recommend Pat Buchanan’s “Iran Derangement Syndrome”:
http://www.theamnericanconservative.com/articles/iran-derangement-syndrome/
Persian Gulf,
I’m glad you read Philip Giraldi’s piece I linked (dismantling comments by Yeganeh Torbati of Reuters).
Castellio,
I do not “blame” Iran for the Iran-Iraq war. What I do say is simply that the war likely would not have happened, had Iran not frightened the Persian Gulf monarchies. Thus, the gratuitous frightening of those monarchies caused disaster for the people of Iran.
The US Treasury Department has placed sanctions upon Iran on the grounds that Iran is contributing to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems.
How can Iran, without nuclear weapons, be involved in nuclear weapon proliferation? Not even the AIPAC-drafted US laws regarding Iran claim that, do they? Or the missiles that can deliver nuclear weapons? (which, by the way, includes virtually all missile systems, which are not exactly in short supply in the world.)
For example,
Jan 23, 2012
The U.S. Department of the Treasury today designated Iran’s third-largest bank, Bank Tejarat, for providing financial services to several Iranian banks and firms already subject to international sanctions for their involvement in Iran’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) proliferation activities. With today’s action, 23 Iranian-linked financial institutions, including all of Iran’s largest state-owned banks, have been sanctioned by the U.S. based on their involvement in Iran’s illicit activities. . .Bank Tejarat was designated pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13382
http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1397.aspx
Executive Order 13382, June 28, 2005 GB
. . .any foreign person determined by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Attorney General, and other relevant agencies, to have engaged, or attempted to engage, in activities or transactions that have materially contributed to, or pose a risk of materially contributing to, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or their means of delivery (including missiles capable of delivering such weapons), including any efforts to manufacture, acquire, possess, develop, transport, transfer or use such items, by any person or foreign country of proliferation concern;
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=61475&st=&st1=#axzz1zsT7Lsu0
The executive order and treasury sanctions are beyond any laws, of course. They consist entirely of presidential (dictatorial) orders.
Don, I’d like to thank you for your links regarding currency swaps. It’s useful when someone does that kind of “gathering together”, and pointing to where others have “gathered together” relevant information.
A question: so, we can put in multiple links now, in the same post?
Lets try: an explanation of systemic banker corruption: http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/07.12/corruption.html
and Professor Wolff putting the financial crisis into a larger economic context: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7382297202053077236&ei=fAXuSJLdG5PYrAL9r4zCBg&q=capitalism+hits+the+fan
ExposingNeoConWarmongeringStooges says:
July 7, 2012 at 11:22 am
“Iran has reached agreements with European refiners to sell some of its oil through a private consortium”
Iran can still use the Suez Canal:
May 22, 2012
Egypt will continue to allow Iranian vessels to use the Canal even after July, when the European Union fully moves ahead with an embargo on Iranian crude. “These sanctions are by Europe and the U.S., they’re not sanctions from Egypt,” said Mariee. “There’s no discrimination. Iranian tankers pass through Suez, Israeli tankers pass too.”
http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/3/12/42312/Business/Economy/Less-Iranian-oil-passing-through-Suez-Canal-.aspx
But there’s an attractive alternative–the 220-mile SuMed pipeline, capable of carrying 2.5m barrels a day, serves as a more important conduit for crude oil to Europe than the Suez Canal. The SuMed pipeline follows a very different course from the canal, beginning at the Ain Sukhna terminal on the Gulf of Suez and running north-west, past Cairo to the Sidi Kerir tanker facility on the Mediterranean coast near Alexandria. And Iranian oil blends with Saudi oil.
Mar 2, 2012
The latest shipment data show that most oil loaded on to tankers in Iran during the first two weeks of February was bound for Ain Sukhna in Egypt. Analysts from Lloyd’s List Intelligence noted that the Gulf of Suez port was a terminal for the SuMed pipeline, feeding oil north to the Mediterranean. From the northern Egyptian port, it can be sold on to European countries as it is blended with other Middle Eastern crude oil. . .Saudi Arabia represents 49% of oil pumped through the SuMed pipeline and Iranian crude 46%.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/02/iran-oil-embargo-european-union
–and Iran is cozying up to Egypt:
Jul 6, 2012
Egypt and Iran are set to restart bilateral relations after more than three decades of animosity. Iran will place no limits on the strengthening of relations with Egypt, said President Ahmadinejad in his first phone call with his counterpart. He invited newly-elected Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi to a summit of Non-Aligned Movement nations to be held in Tehran.
The non-Aligned movement is a group of countries that see themselves as set apart from the mainstream politics of the major world powers. “Egypt’s role in this movement is undeniable, and constructive cooperation between Iran and Egypt in this movement can have many positive outcomes,” said Ahmedinejad.
Meanwhile, the ascension of a member of the Muslim Brotherhood party was met with concern by the Israeli press who view an Islamist in the seat of Egyptian power as a potential threat. Morsi announced that he wished to reconsider the terms of the peace treaty with Israel on the grounds that the accords were unequal and made under pressure from the US. In response Israel’s PM Benjamin Netanyahu sent a letter to Cairo, urging the newly elected President to honor Egypt’s contractual agreements with Israel.
http://www.rt.com/news/iran-egypt-relations-limits-549/
—–
major Iran customers in EU, bpd 2011
Italy 204,000
Spain 170,000
Greece 158,000
—–
It is amazing to see how Islamic Republic has an inferiority complex toward its ideological enemies while at the same time discriminating decent Iranians to the hilt (I am referring to autobiography of writer of the Reuters’ article linked here by James Canning: Yeganeh Torbati). it says (http://yjtorbati.tumblr.com/about):
“Originally from Norman, Oklahoma, she has previously reported for The Baltimore Sun, and interned at The New York Times, The South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Jo Magazine, and The Oklahoman, where her articles also appeared.
As a student at Yale University, Yeganeh studied political science and modern Middle East studies, and focused her thesis research on changes in the structure of Iran’s Basij military force over the last thirty years [!!]. In college, she spent a summer in Iran helping to provide HIV/AIDS prevention services to at-risk populations, teaching women’s classes and translating for visiting officials [!]. Additionally, she conducted original research over the course of nine months in Amman, Jordan on mental health resources available to Iraqi refugees. She also reported for an English-language magazine and studied Arabic in Amman, and graduated from Yale in May 2010.
At The Baltimore Sun, Yeganeh led the paper’s coverage of the 2010 Census results, and also reported on crime, health, politics, and courts. Also between 2010 and 2011, Yeganeh conducted research for New York Times reporter David E. Sanger, on his book examining the national security challenges facing the United States [!!] and the Obama administration’s foreign policies. The book’s expected publication date is June 2012.”
This to me is a potential spy. how can she be a translator for visiting officials in Iran?
It turned out that Roxana Saberi was also a translator for the expediency council having access to classified data:
:http://alef.ir/vdcgwq97.ak9qt4prra.html?81143
Bye-Bye petrodollar, hello currency swap and Yuan:
Jul 6, 2012
When Australia signed a bilateral currency-swap agreement with China in March for about $US30 billion it was the 16th country to do so. China quietly began using its special administrative region of Hong Kong as the base for the internationalisation of its currency about a decade ago and has continued with its moves to expand yuan trading through bilateral agreements.
Belarus did a small swap deal with China in March 2009, Indonesia did a $US15bn deal at the same time, Singapore did a $US22bn deal in July 2010 and New Zealand followed in April last year with a deal for $US3.8bn. Others to have signed up are Argentina, Iceland, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Thailand, Pakistan and this year’s signatories the United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, Turkey and Mongolia.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/treasurer-wayne-swan-must-get-to-grips-with-the-yuan-world-order/story-e6frg9of-1226418325946
currency-swapping is catching, weakening the dollar further:
Jul 7, 2012
The National Bank of Ukraine is planning to sign an agreement on currency swap with Russia that will allow bilateral trade without involving third countries’ currencies.
http://www.nrcu.gov.ua/index.php?id=148&listid=174779
Jun 25, 2012
(RTTNews) – The Swiss National Bank and National Bank of Poland on Monday concluded a Swiss franc/zloty swap agreement.
http://www.rttnews.com/1911555/switzerland-and-poland-conclude-currency-swap-agreement.aspx?type=eueco&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=sitemap
and Singapore wants to rival London, but with the Yuan:
Singapore’s stock exchange plans to start listing securities denominated in the yuan as it challenges Hong Kong and Tokyo for a bigger share of equities and currency trading from the world’s second-largest economy. The move is also seen by analysts as a boost to the Chinese mainland’s ambition to internationalize the yuan.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2012-07/07/content_15556904.htm
Don Bacon says:
July 6, 2012 at 7:44 pm
And as for the European “embargo”…
“Iran has reached agreements with European refiners to sell some of its oil through a private consortium, an official said on Saturday, a move designed to circumvent sanctions intended to put pressure on Tehran to halt its disputed nuclear program.”
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/iran-use-private-consortium-skirt-sanctions
Sanctions are now a complete joke.
Don Bacon says: July 6, 2012 at 7:44 pm
In Korea, as of now, there are black-outs and an energy shortage.
In India and Pakistan as ell.
The Axis states cannot make up for these; let me sweat or freeze, as the case may be.
They know the phone numbers to Iranians.
Karim says: July 6, 2012 at 4:50 pm
The Iranian Oil Bourse would have – could have – helped buyers and sellers come together and eliminated the middle men.
That it did not succeed as expected has a lot to do with the power of the middle men as well as the Axis states.
You are quite right that the Axis States are on an economic suicide path; ergo they preferred to sink the Oil Bourse rather than use it.
The closed-ness of the Iranian economy actually is helping it survive.
The theory of (E)verything
=========================
For anyone like myself who is perpetually unsatisfied with various theories that purport to explain the mad behavior of otherwise rational actors, here’s something to munch on.
If the politics of imperialism, hegemony, (pipsqueak) Israel’s designs for a fragmented Mid East, nor the Israel Lobby explain Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria or Iran adequately, try Chris Cook’s Dollar Hegemony and the structural forces poised to neutralize it.
“If Iran and Russia as major producers, and China as the fastest growing consumer, were to link in an “E-3″, this could introduce a completely new dimension to global energy politics.”
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NG04Ak03.html
Don Bacon says:
July 6, 2012 at 2:14 pm
Israel is a terrorist state.
In fact, it is public knowledge that Israel is a state sponsor of terrorism.
There is no doubt Israel government is responsible for killing Iranian scientist and academics.
The only country that deserves sanctions is Israel.
On July 5, 2012 – the Israel Occupation Force’s northern command held a press conference to mark the six year of its military defeat. The IOF Generals used the conference to issue new threats to Lebanese Islamic Resistance, Hizbullah, whose less than 2000 guerilla-fighters defeated 32,000 Jewish soldiers equipped with world’s most deadly weapons in Summer 2006.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/07/israel-marks-its-2006-defeat-by-threatening-hizbullah/
Please make that the top four buyers of Iranian crude.
The Iran oil export situation is ever-changing, but it’s interesting to see how the facts to date compare to the scary Reuters headlines.
Reuters headlines:
-Sanctions cut Iran’s July oil exports to nearly half
-Sanctions cut Iran’s July oil exports to near 1 mln bpd
-Iran losing billions as oil exports extend slump
-Exclusive: Japan to import no Iranian oil in July
——————
news reports:
–One source estimated Sinopec will lift about 500,000 bpd for July 2012
–In all, Indian refiners are scheduled to lift about 300,650 barrels per day (bpd) of Iranian crude oil in July, according to the first source said.
–Japan has been able to continue with the imports as the country’s parliament on Wednesday approved an unprecedented law that allows Tokyo to provide cover of up to $7.6 billion for incidents involving tankers bringing Iranian oil to the country. Japan, which needs more oil to fire power stations after the Fukushima disaster shut the country’s nuclear capacity, nominated loadings of 120,000 bpd for both June and July, sources said, unchanged from May.
–”Korean oil refiners and the Iranian side have been in consultations over the matter of using Iranian-flagged oil tankers to resume oil shipments,. .Using Iranian-flagged ships to import Iranian oil “is not internationally prohibited,” the source pointed out.
———————————-
2011 Iran oil
The top 10 buyers of Iranian crude last year were as
follows.
Country Imports bpd
1. China 543,000
2. India 341,000
3. Japan 251,000
4. South Korea 239,000
fyi,
Yes, Saddam Hussein expected a quick victory. But it remains true that Saddam invaded because of encouragement from countries councerned about subversion, etc.
I reccommend Philip Giraldi’s “Iran guilty, facts be damned”:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/iran-guilty-facts-be-damned/
Giraldi thinks Obama does not want war, but the Obama administration is not making a sensible deal with Iran an easy thing to achieve.
http://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2012/07/03/netanyahu-worked-inside-nuclear-smuggling-ring/
“The FBI referred an additional 164 pages of the Mandatory Declassification Review to another government agency — presumably the CIA — for further review. The additional pages will likely never be released. The CIA has refused requests for similar documents in order to preserve intelligence sources and methods abroad.”
James Canning says:
July 6, 2012 at 1:11 pm
James, you tend to write in one-liners, either dismissive or confirming, but how you can blame Iran for the Iraq-Iran war is beyond me. I am secular and on the left, I imagine I would not have survived the Iranian regime’s take over if I had been there… but having said that, I don’t know why you would fault Khomeini for the war. Any reasons that hold water?
The authors of the FT article and this website are just dreaming. Any article that mentions the so called oil exchange at Kish, loses credibility right away (have you seen it operate? I have and laughed all the way to Shiraz). The authors, obviously, have almost no understanding of modern finance and what it takes to create a viable exchange. There may be a new financial order because of the reckless financial policies of US and Europe, but it will have little to do with Iran, and the Islamic republic will be minor player in that regime given its crumbling and close economy.
My my!! Consider this… apparently proof exists of Netanyahu’s role in the stealing of American made triggers for nuclear weapons for Israel.
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2012/07/natanyahu-spied-on-th-us-irmep.html#comments
Various and sundry journalists regularly reiterate the neocon/AIPAC gospel that Iran is a terrorist state and must quit its support of terrorism as a condition of eliminating economic sanctions.
The US Congress has stipulated that sanctions can be removed only after the president has certified that “the government of Iran has ceased supporting acts of international terrorism and no longer satisfies certain requirements for designation as a state sponsor of terrorism; and [that] Iran has ceased the pursuit, acquisition, and development of nuclear, biological, chemical and ballistic weapons.”
Pursuing ballistic weapons is not an Iranian activity that I’m aware of (chasing those things is a bear), and . . .what international terrorism is supported by Iran?
The US National Counterterrorism Center’s annual report for 2011 released last month includes not one mention of Iran. (excerpts follow)
–Sunni extremists accounted for the greatest number of terrorist attacks and fatalities for the third consecutive year. More than 5,700 incidents were attributed to Sunni extremists, accounting for nearly 56 percent of all attacks and about 70 percent of all fatalities. Among this perpetrator group, al-Qa‘ida (AQ) and its affiliates were responsible for at least 688 attacks that resulted in almost 2,000 deaths, while the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan conducted over 800 attacks that resulted in nearly 1,900 deaths. Secular, political, and anarchist groups were the next largest category of perpetrators, conducting 2,283 attacks with 1,926 fatalities, a drop of 5 percent and 9 percent, respectively, from 2010.
–Attacks by AQ and its affiliates increased by 8 percent from 2010 to 2011. A significant increase in attacks by al-Shabaab, from 401 in 2010 to 544 in 2011, offset a sharp decline in attacks by al-Qa‘ida in Iraq (AQI) and a smaller decline in attacks by al-Qa‘ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and al-Qa‘ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).
–The most active of the secular, political, and anarchist groups in 2011 included the FARC (377 attacks), the Communist Party of India-Maoist (CPI-Maoist) (351 attacks), the New People’s Army/Communist Party of the Philippines (NPA-CPP) (102 attacks), and the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK) in Turkey (48 attacks).
http://www.nctc.gov/docs/2011_NCTC_Annual_Report_Final.pdf
I’d say that while Saudi Arabia and Pakistan might deserve sanctions because of terrorism according to this report, Iran doesn’t.
NOTE: Naturally the report doesn’t include any terrorist attacks and assassinations in Iran, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Palestine, etc. conducted by the U.S. and Israel.
James Canning says: July 6, 2012 at 1:11 pm
You have been listening to the Anglo-Arab propaganda.
Blaming the late Mr. Khomeini is not conducive to the elucidation of historical process.
You have to look at US, USSR, EU and the Arab leaders.
They thought, in the words of Churchill,”In three weeks”, Iran “will have her neck wrung like a chicken.”
Some chicken; some neck.
What they got was a prolonged war in which in order to sustain the aggressor they had to escalate and escalate against Iran.
They pushed Iran too far at that time; they are doing the same thing now.
The effect, regardless of who rules in Tehran now or in the future, is a state as well as a population that will ruthlessly pursue her interests in opposition to US, EU, Arabs, Russia, China or anyone else.
The dreams of most ardent anationalists in Iran has been fulfilled; no one has any leverage on Iran.
fyi,
Iraq’s attack on Iran in 1980 was not inevitable. Khomeini’s fostering of revolution in the Persian Gulf helped to bring about the attack.
Castellio says:
July 5, 2012 at 7:30 pm
Regarding the nebulous meaning of national interest
————————————————-
Bruce Riedel’s article I linked is one of many indications that things will only be allowed to go so far before military/security types will be deemed as the only people that can be trusted with the direction of a nation.
All:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/07/among-those-who-study-international.html
Iran vs Iraq-US war of the 80s
=============================
Bruce Riedel urges President Obama and others to study the past. He correctly points out Iran has learned her lesson.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/06/the-last-time-we-fought-iran.html
Castellio says: July 6, 2012 at 9:17 am
It is not racism; Afghans and Iranians share very many racial characteristics.
Iranians are an insular Shia people surrounded by historical enemies.
Including Afghans who destroyed the Safavids.
And, then there is this: noone likes poor, uncouth people.
Like Mexicans in US.
Iran in Afghanistan.
–Iran has created a sphere of influence and a security buffer zone in the Herat region, the industrial heart of Afghanistan and its most secure region. Most of Iran’s pledged reconstruction assistance, estimated at $660 million, is in Herat.
–Iran exported 123,000 tons of gasoline to different world countries in 2011, showing a 100% growth compared with the previous year. Afghanistan was the top importer of Iran’s fuel in 2011, importing gasoline worth $51.6 million.
–The Mashad-Herat railway which is under construction right now is completed to the city of Khaf near the Afghanistan border. The cheap daily service from Tehran to Khaf near Afghanistan border is about US$5. But Work on the railway from Khaf in Iran to Herat is three years behind schedule. It could take up to another 10 years for the railroad to be completed, linking Herat to Iran’s northeastern city of Mashad and on to Turkey.
–Tavakoli, an Iranian engineer, has built some 400 km (250 miles) of highway and railroad in western Afghanistan over the last six years, paving the ancient trade routes of the Silk Road. His firm is building a dam in rural Herat, with Indian financing, and has just finished laying foundations for a railway that could one day link south and east Asia to the Middle East and Europe, reviving some of the most important ancient overland trade routes in the world.
James Canning says: July 5, 2012 at 7:51 pm
Iraq had been preparing for a war with Iran for at least a decade.
When the Iranian revolution occured, her leaders saw their chance.
And before that, they had consulted with US, USSR, and others.
Their war was predicated on easy and quick victory.
Yes, the late Mr. Khomeini made many blunders; such as getting Iran out of US orbit, destroying the foreign-based state, and briging Iran back to what she has been since Safavids; a polity of teh Shia for the Shia, by the Shia.
Last month, while Netanyahu’s two cabinet ministers were attending a beauty contest to choose Miss Holocaust, some ‘self-hating Jews’ defaced Jerusalem Holocaust memorial, Yad Vashem, built on land stolen from native Palestinian family. Some of the slogans daubed in paint on the walls of the memorial read: “If Hitler had not existed, the Zionists would have invented him” – and “The Zionists wanted the Holocaust“.
http://rehmat2.wordpress.com/2012/07/06/israeli-anti-zionist-jew-wanted-to-bomb-knesset/
Afghans in Iran: http://ajammc.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/afghans-in-iran-contradictory-state-policies-and-a-grassroots-anti-racist-movement/
“Earlier this year, I begun a series highlighting the experiences of Afghan refugees in Iran. By focusing on cultural production, particularly film and literature, I wished to elucidate the conditions of 2-3 million individuals making a living away from their war-torn homeland as well as to explore the various narratives produced by their migration. While the previous posts dealt with Afghan and Iranian cross-cultural production in order to demonstrate an inter-connectivity between peoples, in this post I seek to discuss the contradictions in state policy towards the Afghan refugee population and the grassroots efforts to combat racist enforcement.”
James (blunder) Canning says:
July 5, 2012 at 7:54 pm
“Khomeini blunders helped bring on Iran-Iraq war.
Pirouz,
I agree with you that Iran should not intercept oil tankers headed out of the Persian Gulf to various EU countries.”
James, unfortunately because of Mr Hague’s blunder of putting his hands around the necks of Iranian fixed-income old-aged pensioners to squeeze out all economic life, Iran may well intercept oil tankers headed out of the Persian Gulf to various EU countries.
I have no doubt that you will cite that turn of events as an Iranian blunder that caused HMS Daring to attack Iranian petrol boats in an operation code named ‘floating poodle’.
And, I’m sure I’ll cite right back that attacking Iranian petrol boats in her territorial waters was the blunder that caused the sinking of HMS Daring.
There! We have saved ourselves a whole bunch blunder vs blunder posts here.
James Canning says:
July 5, 2012 at 7:47 pm
“The New York Times reported July 4th that Iran has as much as 40 million barrels of oil stored on tankers in the Persian Gulf. Oil exports by Iran are between 1.6 and 1.8 million barrels per day.”
But, James, it seems despite Mr Hague’s best intentions towards Iran …
“The number of Iranian oil tankers signaling their locations and destinations rose from June, prompting speculation the country facing U.S. and European Union sanctions is selling cargoes that were stored at sea.
Thirty-three ships in the 40-strong fleet of crude carriers controlled by Tehran-based NITC, a tanker company owned by Iranian pension funds, provided signals within the past month, IHS Inc. (IHS) data compiled by Bloomberg showed today. That compared with 21 in the corresponding period to June 11.”
h/t IranAffairs http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-03/iran-oil-tankers-position-signals-spur-export-speculation-1-.html
Pat Buchanan: Why This Obsession with Iran
http://townhall.com/columnists/patbuchanan/2012/07/06/why_this_obsession_with_iran/page/full/
Nine Canadian Senators have warned the United Church of Canada that its report calling for the boycott of goods from illegal Israeli Jewish settlements will further divide country’s Jewish and Christian communities. The nine pro-Israel Senators are members of the United Church of Canada and represent the ruling Conservatives and opposition Liberal parties in the Senate. However, they’re not elected by the Canadian voters but were appointed by successive governments to serve certain lobby groups.
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/06/canadian-church-warned-over-israel-boycott/
BiBiJon says: July 5, 2012 at 5:13 pm
Mr. Fitzpatrick does not have engineering training or experience.
That is, he has no insight on how things are made – in any field.
He is most likely a front-man; spewing propaganda.
To make judgements about Iran’s capabilities you have to know what has been available publicly for the last 30 years in the World market
and
You must know mechanical/chemical/electrical engineering to some extent
Khomeini blunders helped bring on Iran-Iraq war.
Pirouz,
I agree with you that Iran should not intercept oil tankers headed out of the Persian Gulf to various EU countries.
fyi,
Israel is comparatively rich, while great majority of North Koreans live in poverty. Iran is no North Korea, nor should it seek to become like NK.
Iran-Iraq war was not invevitable, and Khomenei made many mistakes that helped to bring about the war.
The New York Times reported July 4th that Iran has as much as 40 million barrels of oil stored on tankers in the Persian Gulf. Oil exports by Iran are between 1.6 and 1.8 million barrels per day.
Pirouz writes: It just makes me shake my head that a foreign interest group could maintain such a grip on our legislative and executive branch that a course of policy so obviously against American interests can be pursued with vigor.
I have just read the book Foreign Policy, Inc. by Larry Davidson. It might interest you. From http://www.tothepointanalyses.com/biography
“In 2009 Davidson published Foreign Policy, Inc.: Privatizing America’s National Interest (University Press of Kentucky). This work locates the source of US foreign policy formulation in the activity of powerful lobbies rather than in the White House or State Department. It shows that, in selective areas, this has been the case since the founding of the nation and flows from the structure of American politics. The argument builds on a number of theoretical constructs such as factocracy, natural localism, the idea of thought collectives and information environments, etc. The work also challenges the notion of national interest, suggesting that in an environment in which strong lobbies influence policy formulation, the concept of national interest cannot really reflect reality.”
If Robert Kelley’s wife worked for CIA, she’d be outed by now
============================================================
http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/12705
Iran’s Persian Gulf gambit takes shape
=====================================
“A militarization of the Iran nuclear crisis seems likelier now than ever before, portending a volatile scenario that will impact on oil prices and the health of the world economy.
The US and its allies are gambling that Iran will refrain from disruptive behavior in Persian Gulf waters simply due to the asymmetry of any conflict. However, this rests on the erroneous assumption that Iran will bear the crippling brunt of sanctions without striking back. This is exactly what Iraq under Saddam Hussein did for a decade and half before his country – weakened considerably by the punitive measures – was subjected to a brutal, illegal invasion.”
From http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/12708
Roger says:
July 5, 2012 at 1:06 pm
“I don’t see how Iran can prevail in this uneven contest when much greater powers have failed.”
This might help the vision http://www.lobelog.com/strait-history/
Here we go again.
===============
Same few good fellows who doubted Iran was capable of operating centrifuges, capable of enriching to 20%, or capable of making fuel plates, now are doubting Iran’s ability to make nuclear powered submarines.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/05/iran-nuclear-submarines-idUSL6E8I51HB20120705
The fact is Mark Fitzpatrick has got so much egg on his face, that neither he, nor anyone else would notice a couple more eggs.
Pirouz says: July 5, 2012 at 3:14 pm
It is already a Cold War.
It will only intensify.
I think we passed the Cuban Missile Crisis moment this past February-March.
Rapproachment with US and EU requires regime change in those states.
Barring that, a Shia/Irani “North Korea” from Hindu Kush to Mediterranean sea seems to be in the cards.
Americans will have their own Jewish “North Korea” by the Mediterranean Sea; completely alienated from the world of Islam and the states surrounding it.
In fact, the more US tries to turn Iran into another North Korea, the more Israel also becomes also a North Korea.
In regards to risks; I think Iranian leaders have accepted those risks.
I think after the Iran-Iraq War, any responsible Iranian government would assume that more wars will come Iran’s way.
fyi says:
July 5, 2012 at 10:45 am
A very risky course of action for the Iranians to undertake.
Really, the sanctions most affect the Iranian middle class, less so the much larger lower class which makes up the bulk of support for the regime.
So the northern Tehranis will find more to gripe about, and the advancement of the lower class will stagnate. In my opinion, the regime will persevere.
But there will ultimately be negative repercussions for the United States and West, as well, some potentially involving the issues put forth by this Financial Times piece. It just makes me shake my head that a foreign interest group could maintain such a grip on our legislative and executive branch that a course of policy so obviously against American interests can be pursued with vigor. And hopefully it won’t escalate from cold war to a hot war.
fyi,
I continue to believe Iran should do what it can to improve relations with various EU countries.
fyi,
I agree the Nato effort in Afghanistan likely will fail. But EU countries did not want bases in Afghanistan. And the US should not keep any, for that matter.
fyi,
Most EU countries also belong to Nato. There is a natural desire to coordinate US-EU actions. Regrettably, the influence of the Israel lobby in the US is leading to injury to the EU given the EU’s wish to stay in step with the US generally.
MHF says: July 5, 2012 at 10:31 am
I think University of Phoenix pays around $ 15.00 an hour.
James Canning says: July 5, 2012 at 2:32 pm
Ask the EU policy makers why they had to be on the “right-side of the United States” when it came to Iran.
Don Bacon says: July 5, 2012 at 1:50 pm
That is mostly to reassure US allies there in the Persian Gulf.
The fact is that US (and NATO) will not be able to remian in Afghanistan; not when Afghans are burning crosses and policemen attack NATO soldiers etc.
NATO has lost Afghanistan and is on its way out; no amount of strategic deal making with Karazai or the Afghans state is going to remedy the fundamental loss of the strategic war.
JohnE,
The sanctions have a great deal to do with Israel and the I lobby in the US. No South American country faces much in the way of sanctions because there is no domestic lobby in the US to bring them into play.
fyi,
Interesting comments by Reza Morashi, that you linked. He says Iran wants acceptance of enrichment to 3.5% and lifting of sanctions. And that Israel lobby and domestic politics cause Obama not to accept a deal.
fyi,
Surely you do not think the EU needs to “crush” Iran, to preserve the financial power it currently possesses?
The BRICS form the basis of forging the wider integration of the SCO (Russia and China as members, and India and Iran as observers) with the MERCOSUR/UNASUR (Brasil centred) countries. As is said, any country could be targeted with Iran-like sanctions within a few years. Venezuela is certainly on the sanctions short list; it is in the South American block and gets along well with the SCO countries. I’m sure the Bolivarian Republic would be gung-ho to bridge the two great blocks into one super BRICSUR block.
Roger,
The USSR collapsed due to internal problems that the system could not cure.
Roger,
The US was defeated in Vietnam. And does Cuba march to a tune called in Washington?
“Bring Iran to heel” – - meaning? No more support for Hezbollah?
Fiorangela,
I agree the US would have left its fixation on the hostages behind, long ago, but for certain factors you put your finger on.
The entire “crisis” was a bit preposterous.
China shifted a very large part of its reserves into euro instruments this past year, only to see the euro fall in value against the dollar.
NYTimes, July 3, 2012
U.S. Adds Forces in Persian Gulf, a Signal to Iran
WASHINGTON — The United States has quietly moved significant military reinforcements into the Persian Gulf to deter the Iranian military from any possible attempt to shut the Strait of Hormuz and to increase the number of fighter jets capable of striking deep into Iran if the standoff over its nuclear program escalates.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/world/middleeast/us-adds-forces-in-persian-gulf-a-signal-to-iran.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
This is silly. Iran has only threatened to close the Strait in case of a military attack, and such an attack would result in Iran closing the Strait with smart mines, which the US couldn’t prevent. Iran has thousands of mines which can be laid by submarines, patrol vessels and commercial vessels. These include the Chinese EM52, a rocket-propelled anti-ship mine, and mines produced by Iran. The Iranian Navy and IRGC regularly exercise laying mines. The US Navy has a limited anti-mine capability.
While closing the Strait, Iran would also employ cruise missile salvos against all those US Navy assets in the Gulf. Iran can attack targeted ships with C-701, C-801, C-802 and Iranian-made anti-ship cruise missiles from its own shores, islands, and oil platforms using relatively small mobile launchers. Hitting Navy ships would be like shooting ducks on a pond. Any carrier (with 5,000+ personnel) particularly would be a target difficult to miss with multiple missiles.
(The event to watch for is the US moving all its assets OUT of the Gulf. That would be portentous.)
The US Navy has lost its marbles since it lost Admiral William “Fox” Fallon. In an interview with al Jazeera television, CentCom Commander Admiral Fallon warned that constant talk of bombing Iran is not helpful. “This constant drumbeat of conflict is what strikes me which is not helpful and not useful,” he said. “I expect that there will be no war and that is what we ought to be working for,” said Fallon. “It is not a good idea to be in a state of war. We ought to try and to do our utmost to create different conditions.” Fallon was subsequently fired by President Bush for his opposition to war with Iran.
Irshad, re Assad and Erdogan,
It is my tin-foil theory that Erdogan was seduced to the dark side — i.e. pivoted from a “Zero Problems” relationship with Iran and Syria and toward Arabs and Israel, — on the promise of support for his vision of creating in Istanbul an international center of finance to surpass even Wall Street.
The question becomes — if Wall Street/London go the way of the Florentine florin in the next 20-30 years, will Erdogan’s visionary city of invisible gold turn into a deserted nightmare, or will Turkey pivot again?
= = = = =
toivo s, Indeed — “Indeed [this article by the Leveretts] raises so many questions that it is difficult to wrap ones mind around what it all means.”
But I would redirect this statement of yours:
“It is amazing that the US is willing to risk so much over such a relatively insignificant county like Iran.”
In my opinion, US is not “willing to risk so much over . . .Iran; rather, US is willing to risk a fruitful relationship with Iran** and “so much” more, over a relatively insignificant county [sic] like Israel.
Gary Sick argues that US anti-Iranian sentiment dates back to the hostage crisis, but I think the US was big enough to get over that without 30 years of perpetuated angst, BUT FOR the wedge of Israel.
**(see Jon Snow, http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Meetings/Meeting%20Transcripts/210612snow.pdf )
Let’s all be realistic and stay with the big picture. The US (short for “The West”, i.e. North America and Western Europr) is going about ruthlessly, methodically, patiently bringing Iran to heal, and will not desist until it has succeeded and despite any costs or setbacks which it may realistically encounter along the way. It took over 40 years but did it with Russia. It took on Germany and Japan simulltaneously and got them both to finally “behave”, use of nuclear arms against Japanese civilians just a means towards the desired end. There are plenty of other examples, from Cuba to Iraq to Vietnam.
I don’t see how Iran can prevail in this uneven contest when much greater powers have failed. The only question left for me is how the end game unfolds: a tragic total destruction, and disintegration of the country a la Iraq and Syria, or a regime change/capitulation whereby Iran loses its foreign policy independence in exchange for end of hostilities, or probably something in between.
India’s Muslim war hero
http://rehmat1.com/2012/07/05/indias-muslim-war-hero/
MHF says:
July 5, 2012 at 10:31 am
“If setting up such a skim (a BRIC IMF?) was easy (even possible) in the short run (and for what, to rescue a murderer gangster group in Iran?) you think Putin of Russia would have waited for you “Einstein’s” advise? You are going totally nuts every passing day.”
Two points:
a) The motivation for ‘counter-balancing’ behavior usually is self-interest, often short term, but also long term. The future financiers are not self-less Mother Teresas coming to the rescue of innocent Iranians from indiscriminate savage sanctions. They’re more likely to be hard-nosed business folk who can smell a combustible mix of profit and opportunity.
b) If there have to be references to renowned physicists, then it is Issac Newton who’s laws of action-reaction are most relevant to this topic. No?
“Take a vacation, look for other jobs for yourselves that pays better (more that $15/Hr you are getting now) to save yourselves. I do not see either of you folks getting any more juicy government jobs ever again– both parties have discovered your nuttiness. So, look for something away from Washington.”
How lucrative is the career advisory profession working out for you?
All:
Full Text of “Chasing a Mirage…”
http://criticalppp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Fatah-2008-Chasing-a-Mirage-The-book.pdf
Those who claim that Islam is Sharia and Sharia is Islam ought to have the intellectual vigor to respond to such challenges.
Pick the winner
(the bankers will, given an opportunity)
GDP growth rates 2011
CIA World Factbook
BRICS
Brazil 2.8
Russia 4.3
India 7.8
China 9.5
South Africa 3.4
NATO
Germany 2.7
France 1.7
USA 1.5
UK 1.1
Spain 0.7
Italy 0.6
All:
A US assessment that admits that there can be no resolution…
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/nuclear-brinkmanship-iran-7158
Irshad says: July 5, 2012 at 8:02 am
I think that the Iranians will use that card when they estimate that its usage will cause the most damage to the other side.
Since summer time is usually the oil-glut season, it stands to reason to expect Iranians using that card sometime in the Winter of 2013.
They are laying the legal foundations of di=oing so; they are emulating US Congress.
Once that card is used, US, UK, Dutch, French, and German warships in the Persian Gulf will have to escort the EU-bound oil tankers. That ties them down and increases their costs; Iranians only need to prevent a couple of tankers from entering or leaving the Persian Gulf to accomplish that.
With that, it follows the rise is maritime insurance rates and price of oil.
This is a relatively cheap way for Iran to retaliate.
All:
It will take years to replace the Western financial institutions; but NAM states will try to develop what they can. The response will almost certainly include bilateral and multi-lateral institutions and mechanism but at modest scales.
For the short term, non-Western states that trade with Iran will have to rely on biltaeral or perhaps trilateral agreements.
I think that the Financial War against Iran will accelerate the disintegration of the Western Financial Empire and its hold on global finance. I also think the Siege War against Iran has killed – finally – the Doha round of trade liberalization negogiations.
Power is devolving from US-EU to others; it just shows you how vital it is for US-EU to crush Iran that they are willing to go to these extremes.
Flynt and Hillary are at it again! Why you two “Rocket Scientists” are not sticking to what you (may) know, and are jumping into high finance and world economics?
If setting up such a skim (a BRIC IMF?) was easy (even possible) in the short run (and for what, to rescue a murderer gangster group in Iran?) you think Putin of Russia would have waited for you “Einstein’s” advise? You are going totally nuts every passing day.
Take a vacation, look for other jobs for yourselves that pays better (more that $15/Hr you are getting now) to save yourselves. I do not see either of you folks getting any more juicy government jobs ever again– both parties have discovered your nuttiness. So, look for something away from Washington.
Good luck!
Interestingly, Cyrus over at IranAffairs is also musing about the same subject, illegal secondary sanctions. He points out precedence exists for reversing such sanctions. He cites US’ successful attempt at annulling the 1973 Arab sanctions against Israel, and the the UK’s enforcement of its Protction of Trading Interests Act in 1982 to thwart US attempts at penalizing UK firms for trading with the Soviet Union.
Here’s another twist to this whole saga.
The single most important ingredient that led to the rise of the City (of London), concentration of reinsurance firms in Europe, and ditto with finance in Wall Street was ‘trust’ in a perverse sense of the word. These financial industries could be ‘trusted’ to be apolitical, and even to a large extent, amoral. E.g. Wall Street and City were doing business hand-over-fist with Nazi Germany even during WWII.
Considering the fact that the financial industry requires hardly any ‘technology’, or intellectual capital of any other kind, and the liquidity it needs (cash) is available in bundles elsewhere, the ground seems fertile for the rapid rise of a competitor. That new competitor only needs to accrue ‘trust’ and facilitating trade with Iran may be an ideal opportunity to do just that.
fyi, UU, Castellio, et al.
What are your views on the proposed bill to stop oil tankers going through the SofH that are taking oil to countries that support the oil sanctions agains tIran? If this is passed is this a sign that war is very near?
Also – have people read the interview President Assad gave to the Turksih media recently – where he criticised Erdagon and called him a puppy of US/Isreal/GCC – is this a sign that things are turning around for the Syrian govt?
http://sana.sy/eng/21/2012/07/04/429127.htm
I cam across Amir Taheri’s blog (use to blog on uskowioniran.com) and he gives an interesting picture of life in Iran – some brilliant pictures too!
http://therealamirtaheri.blogspot.co.uk/
How can Iran work with Brazil, after how Brazilian official treated President Ahmednejad during the Rio 20 meeting recently?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9359432/Iranians-anger-at-Ahmadinejad-over-Brazilian-snubs.html
It seems certain members of BRICS still want to kowtow to the hegemon!
It is articles like this that make RFI such an interesting site. This article raises too many questions and issues that can be dealt with in any short comment. Indeed it raises so many questions that it is difficult to wrap ones mind around what it all means. But to try to summarize some of the implications:
The main point seems to be that sanctions against Iran might very well cause the BRICS to establish parallel economic institutions in order for those countries to insulate themselves against US economic control. What is not explicitly mentioned is that these efforts of insulation might very well be first steps in removing the US dollar as the the international reserve currency. If that were to happen US economic power would be seriously set back. In practical terms the standard of living for every US citizen (at least those in the 99%) would suffer a major decline.
If the Shanghai Cooperative Organization managed to expand at the same time this economic alliance would definitely became a major center that would actively oppose US hegemony. This alliance could very well control over half of the world’s oil and gas reserves. Imagine such an alliance — Russia to the West, China to the east and Iran and Pakistan to the south. They would encompass every nation in between.
Of course, if BRICS managed to create parallel economic institutions then Brazil would likely bring along the rest of South America. South Africa would obviously influence the actions of most of Africa south of the Sahara.
Europe remains today Americas lap dog in all of this but once the full implications of our actions started to become clear, one would think that they would realize the insanity of such policies and cut their own deals with the new international realities.
It is amazing that the US is willing to risk so much over such a relatively insignificant county like Iran. We must ask why? And the only answer that I can perceive is that US policy is being driven by Israel — an even more insignificant country than Iran. What utter insanity.