Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances... Rantburg

Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Stop threats and we'll talk, Iran tells West
2008-03-10
Iran told the West on Sunday that it would only hold talks over its disputed nuclear programme if world powers stopped threatening further punitive measures against Tehran.

“The time of using the policy of the carrot and the stick has ended,” said Javad Vaeedi, a top national security official, said on the sidelines of a security conference in Tehran.

“If they [the West] want to have serious negotiations, in fair conditions and taking into account the interests of the two parties, they must first stop threatening [Iran].” His comments came a week after the UN Security Council tightened sanctions against Tehran over its refusal to heed the world body’s calls to freeze uranium enrichment.

No talks with Solana: Following the UN security council resolution, which tightened sanctions by the UN Security council against Tehran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad rejected any new talks with the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Javier Solana.

Ahmadinejad said Tehran would in future negotiate only with the UN atomic agency and would not sit down with anyone from outside the body, such as Solana. Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, speaking at a conference in Tehran, meanwhile refused to directly answer a question about whether Iran would continue talking to Solana.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran planning to retaliate with al-Qaeda, Hezbollah if nuclear sites attacked
2006-04-02
As tensions increase between the United States and Iran, U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say they believe Iran would respond to U.S. military strikes on its nuclear sites by deploying its intelligence operatives and Hezbollah teams to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide.

Iran would mount attacks against U.S. targets inside Iraq, where Iranian intelligence agents are already plentiful, predicted these experts. There is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would target civilians in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said.

U.S. officials would not discuss what evidence they have indicating Iran would undertake terrorist action, but the matter "is consuming a lot of time" throughout the U.S. intelligence apparatus, one senior official said. "It's a huge issue," another said.

Citing prohibitions against discussing classified information, U.S. intelligence officials declined to say whether they have detected preparatory measures, such as increased surveillance, counter-surveillance or message traffic, on the part of Iran's foreign-based intelligence operatives.

But terrorism experts considered Iranian-backed or controlled groups -- namely the country's Ministry of Intelligence and Security operatives, its Revolutionary Guards and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah -- to be better organized, trained and equipped than the al-Qaeda network that carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The Iranian government views the Islamic Jihad, the name of Hezbollah's terrorist organization, "as an extension of their state. . . . operational teams could be deployed without a long period of preparation," said Ambassador Henry A. Crumpton, the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism.

The possibility of a military confrontation has been raised only obliquely in recent months by President Bush and Iran's government. Bush says he is pursuing a diplomatic solution to the crisis, but he has added that all options are on the table for stopping Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons.

Speaking in Vienna last month, Javad Vaeedi, a senior Iranian nuclear negotiator, warned the United States that "it may have the power to cause harm and pain, but it is also susceptible to harm and pain. So if the United States wants to pursue that path, let the ball roll," although he did not specify what type of harm he was talking about.

Government officials said their interest in Iran's intelligence services is not an indication that a military confrontation is imminent or likely, but rather a reflection of a decades-long adversarial relationship in which Iran's agents have worked secretly against U.S. interests, most recently in Iraq and Pakistan. As confrontation over Iran's nuclear program has escalated, so has the effort to assess the threat from Iran's covert operatives.

U.N. Security Council members continue to debate how best to pressure Iran to prove that its nuclear program is not meant for weapons. The United States, Britain and France want the Security Council to threaten Iran with economic sanctions if it does not end its uranium enrichment activities. Russia and China, however, have declined to endorse such action and insist on continued negotiations. Security Council diplomats are meeting this weekend to try to break the impasse. Iran says it seeks nuclear power but not nuclear weapons.

Former CIA terrorism analyst Paul R. Pillar said that any U.S. or Israeli airstrike on Iranian territory "would be regarded as an act of war" by Tehran, and that Iran would strike back with its terrorist groups. "There's no doubt in my mind about that. . . . Whether it's overseas at the hands of Hezbollah, in Iraq or possibly Europe, within the regime there would be pressure to take violent action."

Before Sept. 11, the armed wing of Hezbollah, often working on behalf of Iran, was responsible for more American deaths than in any other terrorist attacks. In 1983 Hezbollah truck-bombed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241, and in 1996 truck-bombed Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. service members.

Iran's intelligence service, operating out of its embassies around the world, assassinated dozens of monarchists and political dissidents in Europe, Pakistan, Turkey and the Middle East in the two decades after the 1979 Iranian revolution, which brought to power a religious Shiite government. Argentine officials also believe Iranian agents bombed a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994, killing 86 people. Iran has denied involvement in that attack.

Iran's intelligence services "are well trained, fairly sophisticated and have been doing this for decades," said Crumpton, a former deputy of operations at the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. "They are still very capable. I don't see their capabilities as having diminished."

Both sides have increased their activities against the other. The Bush administration is spending $75 million to step up pressure on the Iranian government, including funding non-governmental organizations and alternative media broadcasts. Iran's parliament then approved $13.6 million to counter what it calls "plots and acts of meddling" by the United States.

"Given the uptick in interest in Iran" on the part of the United States, "it would be a very logical assumption that we have both ratcheted up [intelligence] collection, absolutely," said Fred Barton, a former counterterrorism official who is now vice president of counterterrorism for Stratfor, a security consulting and forecasting firm. "It would be a more fevered pitch on the Iranian side because they have fewer options."

The office of the director of national intelligence, which recently began to manage the U.S. intelligence agencies, declined to allow its analysts to discuss their assessment of Iran's intelligence services and Hezbollah and their capabilities to retaliate against U.S. interests.

"We are unable to address your questions in an unclassified manner," a spokesman for the office, Carl Kropf, wrote in response to a Washington Post query.

The current state of Iran's intelligence apparatus is the subject of debate among experts. Some experts who spent their careers tracking the intelligence ministry's operatives describe them as deployed worldwide and easier to monitor than Hezbollah cells because they operate out of embassies and behave more like a traditional spy service such as the Soviet KGB.

Other experts believe the Iranian service has become bogged down in intense, regional concerns: attacks on Shiites in Pakistan, the Iraq war and efforts to combat drug trafficking in Iran.

As a result, said Bahman Baktiari, an Iran expert at the University of Maine, the intelligence service has downsized its operations in Europe and the United States. But, said Baktiari, "I think the U.S. government doesn't have a handle on this."

Because Iran's nuclear facilities are scattered around the country, some military specialists doubt a strike could effectively end the program and would require hundreds of strikes beforehand to disable Iran's vast air defenses. They say airstrikes would most likely inflame the Muslim world, alienate reformers within Iran and could serve to unite Hezbollah and al-Qaeda, which have only limited contact currently.

A report by the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks cited al-Qaeda's long-standing cooperation with the Iranian-back Hezbollah on certain operations and said Osama bin Laden may have had a previously undisclosed role in the Khobar attack. Several al-Qaeda figures are reportedly under house arrest in Iran.

Others in the law enforcement and intelligence circles have been more dubious about cooperation between al-Qaeda and Hezbollah, largely because of the rivalries between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. Al-Qaeda adherents are Sunni Muslims; Hezbollah's are Shiites.

Iran "certainly wants to remind governments that they can create a lot of difficulty if strikes were to occur," said a senior European counterterrorism official interviewed recently. "That they might react with all means, Hezbollah inside Lebanon and outside Lebanon, this is certain. Al-Qaeda could become a tactical alliance."
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran may play oil card
2006-03-11
With the stage set for a high stakes U.N. Security Council debate next week on possible sanctions for Iran's nuclear program, Tehran on Wednesday warned the United States that it too can inflict "harm and pain" and hinted its weapon could be oil.

The sharp statement, which followed a warning this week by Vice President Dick Cheney that Iran could face "meaningful consequences," came on a day when the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency concluded a series of meetings on Iran and forwarded its report to the Security Council.

The report by the International Atomic Energy Agency's director general Mohamed ElBaradei found that after nearly three years of inspections, the nuclear agency remains unable to rule out the possibility that Iran still has secret nuclear activities, which could include work related to uranium enrichment and efforts to adapt weapons to carry a nuclear bomb.

The IAEA board of governors last month reported Iran to the Security Council pending ElBaradei's report. The IAEA demanded, among other things, that Tehran cease all nuclear enrichment activities, answer all outstanding questions about its nuclear program and ratify a protocol that allows more wide-ranging inspections. But Iran ignored the demands.

Economic actions are unlikely in the near-term from the Security Council. And on Wednesday, the foreign minister of Russia, which has veto power, disparaged their use as a diplomatic tool.

However, the referral of Iran's case to the U.N. council in New York opens a chapter Iran has sought to avoid.

A.H. Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the gathered ambassadors in Vienna on Wednesday: "The United States has the power to cause harm and pain, but the United States is also susceptible to harm and pain."

Asked if Iran, the world's fourth largest oil supplier, would use its oil exports as a weapon to punish the West, Javad Vaeedi, deputy head of Iran's National Security Council said that "if the situation changes we will have to review our oil policies."

Meanwhile, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, testifying before Congress, said Iran "directly threatens vital American interests" and Washington planned "a concerted approach (in the council) … that gradually escalates pressure on Iran."

At the same hearing, Robert Joseph, undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, was asked whether the administration was prepared to launch a military effort. Joseph replied that President Bush "has made clear that there are no options off the table."
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Deal on Iran nuclear ambitions could be reached soon — Baradei
2006-03-07
The International Atomic Energy Agency chief said on Monday he hoped a deal to defuse a standoff over Iran's nuclear ambitions could be reached soon, as the IAEA board met in a possible prelude to UN Security Council action. Mohammad Baradei cited a surge of diplomacy involving Russia and EU powers in which Iran has offered not to pursue industrial-scale uranium enrichment for up to two years. But its insistence on doing sensitive research is a key sticking point. "I am still very much hopeful that in the next week or so an agreement could be reached," Baradei said, while acknowledging that Russia's proposal to enrich uranium for Iran had snagged on Tehran's determination to purify nuclear fuel itself.

Javad Vaeedi, deputy secretary of Iran's national security council, highlighted that obstacle when he told Reuters that enrichment "research and development" in Iran was irreversible. Iran seems to be counting on divisions in the Security Council over whether to resort to sanctions mooted by the United States. Wielding vetoes in the council, Russia and China could block sanctions that would disrupt their trade ties to Iran.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran rejects "medieval" Russian offer
2006-02-04
ran rejected a Russian compromise deal aimed at resolving the crisis over its suspect nuclear programme yesterday, dashing hopes for a face-saving outcome to its confrontation with the west.

As the UN nuclear watchdog finalised a decision to report Iran to the UN security council last night, Javad Vaeedi, the deputy head of Iran's national security council, said the US and European countries were making a "historic mistake".

An emergency meeting of the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency is expected to adopt a resolution reporting Iran to the security council this morning. The decision marks a watershed in the three-year dispute.

The Iranians were scheduled to go to Moscow in two weeks to discuss a proposal for Russian manufacture and guaranteed supplies of nuclear fuel for Iran. "If they adopt this resolution, it means to kill the Russian proposal," said Mr Vaeedi.

The decision to take the dispute to New York raises the stakes in the long-running row and heightens the sense of escalating confrontation between a hardline regime in Tehran and the international community united for the first time about how to channel its anxiety over Iran's nuclear programmes.

Reacting furiously, the Iranians also announced they would be restricting UN inspection rights of their nuclear programme and restarting enrichment of uranium at their complex at Natanz.

Senior IAEA officials said Tehran had already told the Russians they were calling off the talks with Moscow.

The Russian proposal was the best hope of defusing the worsening crisis but appeared dead last night, with the war of words raging between Iran and the west extending to involve bad-tempered exchanges between Tehran and Moscow.

The president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, accused Russia of patronising Iran and treating it like a "medieval country". The Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, said Iran should not insult Russia's attempts to perform as an honest broker.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
UK, EU adopting softer line on Iran
2006-01-18
BRITAIN and its European allies yesterday backed away from threatening economic sanctions against Iran if the country is referred to the United Nations Security Council over its controversial nuclear programme.

As Britain, France and Germany began drafting a resolution before the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to refer Iran to the UN, an official at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) said that Britain favoured a gradual, sustained build-up to force Tehran to comply with its international obligations.

“We do not see this leading straight into sanctions,” said the official. “We see a gradual build-up of moves that will take place over time. We are not going to [the UN Security Council in] New York to introduce punitive sanctions against Iran. That is not our approach.”

Although the UN Security Council has the power to impose sanctions, and even authorise the use of force, punitive measures are not being considered by the British.

“The Security Council has weight and authority on the issues,” said the FCO official.

“A country cannot ignore the calls and requirements of the Security Council without cost. It brings together major players acting in concert. It can issue political calls which will have weight.”

British, French and German diplomats had begun drafting the referral resolution before the IAEA. Diplomats said that it called on Iran to “extend full and prompt co-operation to the agency” and called for “additional transparency measures”. But it made no reference to the threat of sanctions.

The softening of the European position seemed to be aimed at wooing Moscow and Beijing, which have strong commercial links with Iran and are deeply opposed to any measures that might harm them.

“The question of sanctions against Iran puts the cart before the horse,” said Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, whose country has a $1 billion (£566 million) contract to build Iran’s nuclear reactor. “Sanctions are in no way the best, or the only, way to solve the problem.”

His view was echoed by a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman who favoured “patience” and the resumption of talks between Iran and the three leading European Union nations. Those talks ended last week when Iran broke a commitment to suspend nuclear research work and resumed enriching uranium, the process needed to make nuclear fuel or the core of an atomic warhead.

Iran wrote to Britain, France and Germany yesterday insisting that a compromise could still be reached. The offer, in a letter written by Javad Vaeedi, the deputy head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, was dismissed as “vacuous” by the British side, which blamed Tehran for creating the conditions that made successful talks impossible.

Neither Moscow nor Beijing have made their final positions public, though how they stand in the coming weeks will be critical to the success or failure of Western diplomacy. Their policy will influence other waverers among the 35 member states of the IAEA, which will vote at an emergency meeting in Vienna in a fortnight.

British diplomats believe that at least 22 nations will vote for referral, nine will abstain and a handful of nations will oppose the move — Belarus, Cuba, Syria and Venezuela. Once that hurdle has been cleared, there will be a new dynamic at the 15-nation UN Security Council.

There is likely to be broad agreement between America, Britain, France and Germany on the need to deal quickly with Iran.

Russia and China, who as permanent members of the Council have veto powers, will be pivotal to the outcome.

It was not clear last night how Europe’s kid-glove diplomacy would be received in Washington. America has been imposing its own unilateral sanctions on Iran for nearly three decades and wants the international community to adopt a robust approach to Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Three Turkish tourists kidnapped in southeast Iran in December have been freed. Turkey’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Abdullah Gul, thanked the Iranian government for helping to win the release of the amateur paragliders. Iran said that a Sunni group had abducted them but Turkey blamed drug traffickers seeking a ransom.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran sounds positive note on Russian atomic plan
2005-12-29
TEHERAN - Iran said on Wednesday it would “seriously and enthusiastically” study a Russian proposal aimed at reducing international fears about its nuclear programme, the ISNA students news agency reported.

The remarks by Javad Vaeedi, deputy head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, were the most positive yet by a senior Tehran official about Moscow’s offer to form a joint venture with Iran to enrich uranium in Russia. The Russian proposal, “will be reviewed seriously and enthusiastically,” Vaeedi told ISNA.
Of course, Vaeedi has no power, so this is just part of the dance.
“In our opinion the Russian proposal could revive some of the unimplemented regulations of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty for transferring nuclear technology to countries which do not have access to this technology and break the scientific monopoly of this issue,” he said.

Striking a much softer tone than recent comments by other Iranian officials, Vaeedi said the Russian proposal could be studied in the framework of an existing agreement with Moscow on supply of enriched uranium for Iran’s first atomic reactor at Bushehr, due to come onstream in late 2006. “The new proposal could be studied and its economic, technical and scientific dimensions clarified. The amount of participation of the Iranian side in this plan will be an important indicator,” he said.
"Yes, we could do all those things, and in the end throw it back into the Europeans' faces, once we have our bomb."
“Whatever meaning the Russian proposal has, it does not mean depriving Iran of its rights,” he added.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran, European Union talks result in agreement for more talks
2005-12-22
Talks between Iran and the European Union's big three powers ended Wednesday with an agreement to hold more negotiations in January aimed at easing concerns about Iran's atomic program, an Iranian official said. Wednesday's "talks on talks" in Vienna between France, Britain and Germany and Iran were aimed at determining whether there was a basis for further discussion between the two sides. "We agreed to continue our talks in January. Regarding the location, we have agreed on Vienna," Javad Vaeedi, head of the Iranian delegation, told reporters.

The head of France's delegation, Stanislav de Laboulaye, was less firm on a meeting next month. "The two sides agreed to consult their respective leaderships with a view to holding another round of talks in January, with the aim of agreeing a framework for negotiations," Laboulaye told reporters. "Both sides set out their positions in an open and frank manner," he added.
Link


Afghanistan/South Asia
Nationwide strike to target Indian administration
2005-09-29
Tensions between India’s Congress-led government and its communist allies are expected to erupt on to the streets on Thursday during a nationwide strike by more than a million bank and airport workers against the administration’s economic policies.

The four Left parties that provide the government with a majority in parliament Wednesday also stepped up their calls for India to reverse its “shameful” and “pro-US” decision to vote against Iran’s nuclear programme at last weekend’s IAEA meeting.
"Nope, nope, can't have none of that cooperation with the 'mer-cans, nope, nope."
Banking unions are protesting against finance minister P. Chidambaram’s call for consolidation among weaker public sector banks, while aviation sector employees are opposed to the private operators taking over Delhi and Mumbai airports. The protests reflect the severe constraints facing economic reformers within the government, which has started to come under attack from business leaders concerned at the apparent policy-making paralysis in New Delhi.

“We are not convinced by the explanation [of the Iran vote] given by the government and our differences remain. India should have abstained,” Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Sitaram Yechury said after meeting Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
"What's wrong with allowing a bunch of mullahs who hate Hindoos to have the bomb?" he added.
Iranian officials had taken the gaspipe reacted strongly to India’s decision to line up with the European Union and US, which drew up the resolution saying Iran’s nuclear activities may cover a weapons programme and require referral to the UN Security Council.

Javad Vaeedi, deputy for international affairs of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said Tehran would review its relations with New Delhi. Ali Larijani, head of the SNSC, earlier linked energy supply to countries stance on the nuclear issue. However, after talks between Shyam Saran, Indian foreign secretary, and Iran’s ambassador to India, the foreign ministry yesterday denied there was any threat to a $22bn gas purchase agreed in June or to a $4bn-$5bn pipeline to India via Pakistan.

It said in a statement: "We're angry but we need dollars." “We have seen remarks made by the Iranian spokesman concerning economic co-operation with countries that had voted in favour of the resolution on the Iranian nuclear programme at the IAEA.”

It added: “We have been given no indication in these interactions of Iran’s intentions to review its long-standing and extensive co-operation with India which is of benefit to and in the interest of both countries.”

India reiterated yesterday that it was not in favour of the Iran nuclear issue being referred to the UN Security Council and that it had persuaded the EU-3 to agree to a resolution providing more time for it to be resolved within the IAEA itself.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
EU wimps out on Iran under Russia, China pressure
2005-09-23
VIENNA - The European Union’s three main powers dropped a demand on Thursday that the UN nuclear watchdog immediately report Iran to the Security Council over its atomic plans, following opposition from Russia and China.

Moscow and Beijing have warned the United States, France, Britain and Germany against stepping up the nuclear standoff with Iran, undermining the Western drive to haul Teheran before the UN’s highest body for possible sanctions. The new draft, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters, carefully omitted any explicit plea threat that the mad mullahs Iran would be referred to the impotent Security Council but cautiously implied that the impotent IAEA board could or could not choose to issue a stern note refer the matter to the Council in the future but we repeat ourselves.

“The history of concealment of Iran’s nuclear activities ... and the resulting absence of confidence that Iran’s nuclear programme is exclusively for peaceful purposes have given rise to questions that are within the competence of the Security Council...,” the draft said.

It also declared that Iran had been in “non-compliance” with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which normally requires the IAEA board to notify the Council.
But not this time.
EU diplomats said they hoped to get unanimous support for what they called a very tough and fair draft resolution. But it was unclear oh it's clear allright if the Russians and Chinese were prepared to support it. If Moscow and Beijing opposed it, EU diplomats said the IAEA board would put the original tougher resolution, which had at least a simple majority of support, to a vote despite Russian and Chinese opposition.

Iranian negotiator Javad Vaeedi said opposition from Russia and China helped stop the EU from taking Teheran to the Security Council. “Our firm stance, China and Russia’s backing and also a lack of legal basis caused the EU’s withdrawal,” the official IRNA news agency quoted Vaeedi as saying.

US Ambassador to the IAEA Gregory Schulte said that “a solid and growing majority of the IAEA board now also agrees on the need to report Iran to the UN Security Council. “We support the European Union’s effort to continue to develop the broadest possible consensus to find Iran in non-compliance and to prepare a report to the UN Security Council,” Schulte said.

China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said there was still room for dialogue to resolve the issue. He called for a resumption of EU-Iran talks that collapsed after two years when Teheran resumed uranium processing work at a plant in Isfahan last month.

Top EU foreign ministers insisted Iran was not off the hook.
And then their lips fell off.
In a letter published in the Wall Street Journal, the foreign ministers of France, Germany and Britain and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said Teheran had shown no sign of flexibility despite repeated offers of cooperation by the EU.
And why should they?
“The spotlight is now on the IAEA Board of Governors to wuss out respond,” the article said.
Link



Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-10 More