Iran issues a warning for America after attacking spy drone

 

An Iranian couple hold a model of the captured US RQ-170 drone during the 33rd anniversary of the Islamic revolution in Azadi (Freedom) square in Tehran on February 11, 2012. (AFP Photo/Atta Kenare)

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/usa/news/iran-drone-us-airspace-360/

Following confirmation from both sides that an American surveillance drone was fired at by Iranian jets, top brass with Iran’s military say the country won’t hesitate to shoot again next time a US craft enters its airspace.

“The defenders of the Islamic Republic will respond decisively to any form of encroachment by air, sea or on the ground," Brig. Gen. Massoud Jazayeri, a senior armed forces commander, told the Fars news agency in a report published on Friday.

One day earlier, the Pentagon admitted that an unmanned aerial vehicle managed by the US Defense Department escaped unscathed from enemy fire during a routine surveillance mission 16 miles outside of Iran on November 1. Iranians do not contest that account entirely, but do dispute America’s claim in regards to where exactly the incident occurred. According to the Pentagon, the drone was targeted last week while flying far enough off of the Iranian coast that it was considered to be in international territory. While Iran has declined to offer an exact number to counter America’s claims of being 16 nautical miles off land, remarks from foreign defense officials suggest that the US could have been closer.

Comments from both Gen. Jazayeri and Brig. Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, Iran’s minister of defense, suggest that the US aircraft was within 12 miles from the Iranian coast, making it fair game for that country’s air force to open fire.

"If any foreign aircraft attempts to enter our airspace our armed forces will deal with them," says Jazayeri, who also serves as the deputy chairman to the country’s chief of staff. Jazayeri failed to specifically imply he was discussing the drone, but made his comments hours after the Pentagon confirmed that their craft was fired at.

According to the New York Times, Iran also disputes where the shooting actually originated from. Initially, the US says two airplanes controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps shot at the drone. As far as Gen. Vahidi, the defense minister, is concerned, that’s incorrect. The Times writes that Vahidi believes “the two Iranian planes, which the Pentagon had identified as Russian-made Su-25 jets known as Frogfoots, belonged to the Iranian Air Force.” The paper notes that America’s insistence that the attack came from the Guard Corps pins the blame on a group “whose activities are routinely more aggressive than the conventional Air Force.”

George Little, Pentagon press secretary, told reporters on Thursday that the United States has every intention of continuing its routine spy missions from international territory outside of Iran.

"The United States has communicated to the Iranians that we will continue to conduct surveillance flights over international waters, over the Arabian Gulf, consistent with longstanding practices and our commitment to the security of the region,” Little said.

Contesting Iran’s claims of being in their own airspace, Little added, "Our aircraft was never in Iranian airspace. It was always flying in international airspace.”

In a briefing released by the Stratfor intelligence group, they suggest that the US will do little to avoid any possible future altercations like last week’s. “It should be remembered that they were shooting at an unmanned aircraft, which was created in part so that no human life would be at risk if it was shot down. That doesn't mean the United States is casual about losing a very expensive piece of hardware. It does mean that the U.S. military is unlikely to suspend operations,” writes Stratfor.“Clearly the United States doesn't mind making the Iranians nervous.”

The assault is believed to be the first time during a 30-year plus standoff between the two countries that Iran opened fire on an American UAV. Last year, Iran hijacked one of those unmanned drones well within their territory during what the US called a routine reconnaissance mission.

 

Read More

Iran threatens to stop oil exports, considers anti-Europe sanctions

 

A general view of Iran's first offshore oil platform, Iran-Alborz, in the Caspian Sea near city of Neka about 392 km (245 miles) north of Tehran (Reuters/Official website of the Iranian Oil Ministry)

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/news/iran-stop-oil-export-sanctions-072/

Iran warns that it could stop exporting oil, driving global crude prices up, should the US and allied Europe tighten sanctions further. For such a case, Tehran says, it has a contingency strategy to carry on without oil revenues.

­“If you continue to add to the sanctions, we will stop our oil exports to the world,” Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi told reporters Tuesday. “The lack of Iranian oil in the market would drastically add to the price.”

Iran is currently under pressure from international sanctions, mainly in oil exports, imposed by the UN Security Council, the US and the EU in order to curb the Islamic Republic’s controversial nuclear program. Washington and some if its allies believe the program is being used to develop a nuclear weapon.

On October 15, the European Union foreign ministers approved a new package of sanctions targeting Iran’s financial, trade, energy, transportation and telecommunications sectors.

Earlier in October, American lawmakers also extended the already tough sanctions against Iran.

The measures have severely hurt the Islamic Republic’s economy.

However, Qasemi said that Iran has a “Plan B” which will enable the country to make due without profits from oil sales. He did not mention how long the economy could function, though, without selling oil.

Iran is still pumping oil at capacity and producing 4 million barrels per day (bpd), Qasemi said, denying OPEC’s report that the country's output has fallen to around 2.7 million bpd. He added that "Iran has been facing US sanctions for 30 years while successfully managing its oil sector."

Iranian Parliament considers sanctions on Europe

­Angered by a new round of sanctions, Iranian lawmakers are working on a “preemptive embargo package” which would hit European states, Press TV reported.

Officials plan to impose sanctions in three phases.

The first will deprive Iran’s enemies of its high-quality light and heavy crude oil. According to the report, 70 European oil-refining plants depend on Iranian oil.

The second phase is a ban on goods transported from European states that participated in imposing the sanctions against Tehran.

And the third would prohibit Iranian citizens from traveling to hostile countries.

Read More

EU bans import of Iranian gas to European countries – German FM

 

Nouri Petrochemical facilities of the South Pars gas field in the southern Iranian port of Assaluyeh (AFP Photo / Atta Kenare)

Source: Press TV

http://rt.com/news/eu-ban-iran-gas-479/

EU governments have agreed to one of the toughest sets of sanctions against Iran's nuclear program. German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle has announced the EU is banning the import of Iranian natural gas into European Union countries.

The set of sanctions also includes a ban on financial transactions between European and Iranian banks, with some exceptions for those involving humanitarian aid, food, and medicine purchases.

"The [EU] Council has agreed additional restrictive measures in the financial, trade, energy and transport sectors, as well as additional designations, notably of entities active in the oil and gas industry," a written statement issued by the European Union council said.

Further export restrictions were imposed on graphite, metals, and software for industrial processes. Restrictive measures were also made relating to Iran's ship building industry.

The move is aimed at putting pressure on Iran to cooperate in talks regarding its nuclear program.

Prior to Monday’s meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg, British Foreign Secretary William Hague said new sanctions would be"a sign of our resolve in the European Union that we will step up the pressure."

The US and its allies have long accused Iran of using its nuclear program to develop atomic weapons, although Tehran says the program is solely for peaceful purposes.

 

Read More

EU set to impose new anti-Iran bans despite UN warning

 

The EU sanctions against Iran come despite a UN warning against the humanitarian upshots of the bans.

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/13/266418/eu-to-impose-new-embargoes-on-iran/

The European Union has provisionally approved new embargoes against Iran over its nuclear energy program, despite a UN warning against the humanitarian repercussions of the sanctions already in place.

The Friday motion will have to be formally ratified on Monday at an EU foreign ministers' session in Luxembourg before coming to effect.

According to EU diplomats, the new measures target Tehran’s banking sector, industry and shipping.

The new embargoes will oblige European traders to obtain the authorizations of their respective governments prior to financing any permitted business transaction with Iran.

The bloc will also ban its member states from selling metals and graphites, a steel component, to Iran and providing the country with ship manufacturing know-how, oil-storage technology as well as flagging and classification services to Iranian tankers.

Based on the new motion, the EU will also freeze the assets of 34 Iranian companies.

The bloc’s new move comes in defiance of the UN chief’s recent remarks about the humanitarian ramifications of the previously-imposed embargoes. Ban Ki-moon warned on October 5 that the West’s sanctions have mainly targeted the livelihood of the ordinary Iranian population.

On Wednesday, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei described the West’s embargoes as “illogical” and “barbaric.”

This is while the Norwegian Nobel Prize Committee awarded its 2012 Peace Prize to the EU on Friday.

Following the West’s embargoes on Iran’s banking, the imports of more than fifty kinds of badly needed medicine for people who suffer from certain diseases such as children’s cancer, thalassemia, multiple sclerosis (MS), and respiratory and heart diseases, have declined drastically.

 

Read More

Obama signs order implementing tougher sanctions on Iran

 

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/266035.html

President Obama on Tuesday signed an executive order tightening sanctions on Iran over its nuclear-enrichment program. The order implements a new Iran sanctions law enacted in August.

The White House said the administration’s actions “have created unprecedented pressure on Iran’s economy.”

Iran policy has become a focus of the presidential election this year. During a speech Monday at the Virginia Military Institute in Lexington, Va., GOP candidate Mitt Romney repeated accusations that Obama is too soft on Iran and too distant from Israel, which views Iran’s nuclear program as a threat to its existence.

Romney has called on Obama to draw a clearer red line for Iran. Critics of this view warn that it could bind the U.S. and force an armed intervention.

The Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act expands the list of those targeted by Iran sanctions, closes loopholes and enhances penalties.

Those targeted include anyone who works in Iran's petroleum sectors or provides goods, services, infrastructure, or technology to Iran's oil and natural gas sector, those who insure or re-insure investments in Iran's oil sector and those who transport refined petroleum to Iran.

This law also tries to stop Iran from repatriating revenue from oil. The Hill

FACTS & FIGURES

The United States has long barred U.S. firms from doing business with Iran, but last December adopted measures that forced international buyers of Iranian oil to cut their purchases. Economic Times

In August, a second package of sanctions added further restrictions for international banks, insurance companies and oil traders. Economic Times

The United States and Israel accuse Iran of having a secret nuclear weapons program and have threatened the country with military action.

Iran insists that its nuclear energy program pursues peaceful purposes only and has warned that it will harshly respond to any foreign attack. Iranian officials say they will reply to U.S. aggression by bombing all American bases throughout the Middle East.

A recent report by the Iran Project, a group of U.S. diplomats and military officials, concluded that U.S. strikes would provoke a war that would last years and cost the U.S. at the very least hundreds of billions of dollars per year.

Iran, as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, says the nation is entitled to develop nuclear technology for civilian use.

Read More

US fiscal cliff, eurozone crisis threaten global economy: IMF

 

The headquarters of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Washington, the United States (file photo)

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/09/265689/imf-warns-of-global-econ-deterioration/

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned that the global economy could get worse due to the eurozone crisis and the US fiscal cliff in the future.

The warning came in an IMF report on Tuesday, ahead of the meeting of finance officials from the world’s leading economies, which will be held in Tokyo later this week.

"A key issue is whether the global economy is just hitting another bout of turbulence in what was always expected to be a slow and bumpy recovery or whether the current slowdown has a more lasting component…The answer depends on whether European and U.S. policymakers deal proactively with their major short-term economic challenges," the report read.

"In the United States, it is imperative to avoid excessive fiscal consolidation (the fiscal cliff) in 2013, to raise the debt ceiling promptly, and to agree on a credible medium-term fiscal consolidation plan,” it added.

The report also shows that the IMF has cut its growth forecast for global output in 2012 to 3.3 percent, down from a July estimate of 3.5 percent, with Asia still leading the group of expanding regions while the countries in the euro area witness a contraction this year by 0.4 percent.

IMF chief economist Olivier Blanchard has also criticized European leaders and the US policymakers for the way they have handled the crisis.

"Worries about the ability of European policymakers to control the euro crisis and worries about the failure to date of US policymakers to agree on a fiscal plan surely play an important role, but one that is hard to nail down," Blanchard said.

Experts say 90 percent of American families are facing unprecedented tax increases because the country is headed toward the edge of what's being described as a fiscal cliff.

Meanwhile, various eurozone member states have been struggling with deep economic woes since the bloc's financial crisis began roughly five years ago.

The worsening debt crisis has forced EU governments to adopt harsh austerity measures and tough economic reforms, which have triggered incidents of social unrest and massive protests in many European countries.

Read More

Nuclear Weapons. Who Needs “Red Lines”: Iran or Israel?

 

By: Nabi Sonboli

Source; Global Research

http://www.globalresearch.ca/nuclear-weapons-who-needs-red-lines-iran-or-israel/

In his September 23, 2012 speech at the United Nations General Assembly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked the United States and its allies to define clear red lines for the Iranian nuclear program, emphasizing that Iran will reach the threshold at which it could manufacture a nuclear bomb by mid 2013. A deep scrutiny of the past and of present events and trends tells a different story.

After Iraq’s defeat in the 1990 war in Kuwait, Israeli officials focused on the Iranian nuclear program as the main threat to Israel security. At first they alleged that Iran had bought nuclear weapon components from the former Soviet Republics. Then they put aside that argument and stressed that Iran was seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, and would reach that target within a few years and requested that the U.S. and EU to do everything possible to prevent Tehran from achieving that goal. Israel had sufficient influence in the U.S. to see sanctions imposed on the Iranian oil industry in mid the 1990s. But European powers that were tired of following the U.S. and Israeli lead after the end of the Cold War were not prepared to accept these arguments. They improved their relations with Tehran and consequently the attempt to apply U.S. laws regarding Iran extraterritorially failed.

However, the Israeli lobby succeeded in convincing the U.S. of the threat posed by Iraq. Sanctions and military attacks against Iraq continued until that country was invaded by a U.S.-UK arranged coalition in 2003. During the presidency of G.W. Bush, Israel benefited from the support of Neo-conservatives who held high office in his administration. Tel Aviv put aside the peace process and launched military attacks against Lebanon in 2006, Syria in 2007 and Gaza in 2009. Israel also encouraged the U.S. to put increased military and economic pressure on Iran. To satisfy Israel, the Bush administration undermined the “EU3’s” negotiations with Tehran, and constantly emphasized that “all options were on the table”[1]. However, the U.S. administration was hamstrung, because of the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Finally, realities weakened the Neoconservatives and brought Realists back to power in Washington. The bipartisan Iraqi Study Group recommended negotiation with Iran to stabilize Iraq.

The Bush administration found a clever method by which to deflect Israeli pressure and Neoconservative rhetoric. After years of emphasizing that “all options were on the table,” the administration had two options- either: (i) to implement their threats or (ii) to take the military option off of the table. The U.S. also gradually began to feel the economic consequences of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq at home and was therefore not able to launch another war. President Bush did not change his position but the U.S. intelligence agencies rather acted to remove the urgency of the Iranian threat. In 2007 the U.S. intelligence community published a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that assessed that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. The NIE paved the way for the U.S. to negotiate with Tehran in Baghdad and to join in the nuclear negotiations with Tehran.

The U.S. intelligence community’s position on Iran’s nuclear program has not changed. Moreover, the current positions of Iran and the U.S. are compatible with one another. The U.S. emphasizes that Iran be prohibited from acquiring nuclear weapons, while Iran emphasizes its right as a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to enrich nuclear fuel. The NPT accommodates both of these sets of interests. Consequently Iran and the U.S. have a common basis for negotiation.

During the Bush administration, the Israeli lobby in the United States succeeded in imposing a red line on U.S. conservative establishment policy that was illegal under international law. And that was to insist that no enrichment take place in Iran. The Obama administration changed this redline to one compliant with international law, whereby Iran not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons. The swap agreement [2] that was proposed and then rejected by the U.S. included tacit agreement to the idea that nuclear fuel could continue to be enriched in Iran. In the recent nuclear negotiations with Iran that took place in Istanbul, Baghdad and Moscow, the EU3+3 have also tacitly accepted that the enrichment of nuclear fuel in Iran can continue; the negotiators have asked that Tehran refrain from enriching nuclear fuel up to the twenty percent purity level—even though such enrichment is legal under the International law.

The Israeli position continues to differ from that of the U.S. and the EU3+3. Tel Aviv emphasizes denying nuclear technology to Iran, but its main target is actually to weaken Iran irrespective of the state of Iran’s nuclear program. Israel’s main problem is not with Iran but with its immediate neighbors. Tel Aviv has lost its control over its neighborhood and cannot influence the situation there. At a minimum, Israel feels besieged by new, unknown forces. By emphasizing the Iranian nuclear issue Israel is pursuing two goals: (i) to create a new (Iranian-Israeli) conflict so that (ii) the world forgets the old (Arab-Israeli) one.

Due to the fact that Arab governments are concerned about the Iranian nuclear program and Iranian regional influence, Israel has somehow been able to create a loose Arab-Israeli alliance against Iran. We should not forget that Arabs did not condemn the Israeli military actions against Lebanon in 2006 and Hamas in 2009. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are more concerned about Iran than about Israel. The Syrian conflict and Saudi-Qatari support for extremists there demonstrate this very clearly. The question is, if the extremists succeed in Syria, who will their next targets be? Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia or the U.S.? This is why the U.S. and EU are hesitant about intervening in Syria.

What Israel fears most is not Iran but being left to its own devices by the West in an instable region. For the first time, Israel really feels isolated in the region. Because of their internal economic problems, the EU and the U.S. are not capable of defending Israel by going to war. Israel has lost both its supremacy in the region and the commitment of its allies. What Israel is seeking to achieve is to keep the U.S. and EU engaged in the region by maneuvering them into launching another war. For Israel, the costs of the war and the degree of success it achieves are secondary issues. The main objective is a long-term U.S. and EU commitment and involvement in the conflict on Israel’s side.

Israeli security is important for the U.S. and EU but not more important than their own interests. The U.S. knows very well that, if the Israelis attack Iran, the U.S. has no option but join them. If they do so, however, they will not be able to defend their own interests. The U.S. has great military power, but many vulnerable interests as well. The EU’s vulnerabilities are even more pronounced than those of the U.S. Consequently, long-term conflict in the Middle East will be too costly for the U.S. and EU to tolerate.

Iranian behavior during the past decade demonstrates that Tehran is not seeking nuclear weapons. By implementing the Additional Protocol to the NPT from 2003 to 2005 and by subsequently resolving outstanding issues with the IAEA, Iran demonstrated that its nuclear program is peaceful. Iran’s religious leader has issued a fatwa against the acquisition of nuclear weapons as a clear demonstration of Iran’s future intentions. This fatwa has the capacity to prevent the proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in Muslim countries and to prevent the use of such a weapons by Islamic groups.

After years of intervention, sanctions, political pressure, covert warfare and cyber- attacks, Iran has much more reason to be concerned about the real intentions of Israel, the U.S. and its allies than the latter have to be concerned about those of Iran. A nuclear capacity has simply provided a minor form of reinsurance of Iran’s security; it does not deter any attack on Iran. But those who intend to attack Iran, should think twice or more. Iranians have now understood the importance attached to such a nuclear capacity in U.S. and Israeli military calculations. This shows that a peaceful nuclear capacity can also contribute to peace and stability—it is not even necessary to have nuclear weapons in order to deter rational enemies.

If we compare the behavior of Iranian and Israeli leaders, we can easily conclude that Iranian behavior has been much more rational. Voluntary cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, implementation of the modality agreement, acceptance of the swap proposal, cooperation and negotiation with the U.S. to bring peace and stability to Iraq and Afghanistan are all clear indicators of rational behavior in Tehran. If any of the Western countries had faced the threats and pressures that Iran faces, they would surely have behaved differently. Israel will not be able to achieve sustainable peace by force in the new Middle East. Regional concerns about Iran’s nuclear program can be solved through regional security dialogue. Iran has always supported bilateral and multilateral dialogue with neighboring countries.

U.S. and Israeli options are limited: accept an Iranian nuclear enrichment capacity under the IAEA control or strike and then accept the reconstitution of the same capacity outside of IAEA control. It took many years for the U.S. to change its position from no enrichment to low enrichment. Israel has not yet been able to make up its mind. Someone needs to go to Tel Aviv and help Israelis comprehend that Iran’s nuclear capacity is a reality and that Iran is a rational player. The existence of such a capacity in the hands of a rational player that has been engaged and integrated at the regional and global levels, will be different from its existence in the hands of a player that has been attacked by all means. Sanctions, cyber attacks, isolation, and the terrorization of Iranian nuclear scientists have simply exacerbated the situation and led to a loss of Western influence on Iran.

The Middle East is already unstable enough. Israel has just one option: accept the new realities, change its behaviors and look for sustainable peace. During the last decade the U.S. and its allies were the main losers due to instability in Iraq and Afghanistan. Economic and social instability paved the way for moderate Islamists to come to power, but if the instability continues to grow, they will not be able to solve problems and keep their positions. Extremists are at the gate from North Africa to Central and South Asia. These developments have limited U.S. and Israeli freedom of action in the Middle East, not the Iranian nuclear program.

If being moderate or extremist is a criterion for being entitled to possess a nuclear capability, then Israel clearly fails, as it currently has a most extreme government. That is why EU and the US should set a red line for Israel and not let it to impose its policies on them. In recent weeks Israeli officials have repeatedly talked about a military strike against Iran and Western countries have mostly remained silent. Extremists in Israel have clearly demonstrated their intention and if they strike Iranian nuclear facilities, Western officials cannot say that they have not been informed. Those who provide all kinds of weapons for Israel have more responsibility. Just as in the case of the ongoing economic war against Iran, innocent people will be the main victims of any military strike. The Iranian nuclear program enjoys strong national support. U.S., Israeli and EU pressures target Iranian nation, nationalism in Iran and will have long-term consequences for the West.

Netanyahu’s request at the UN General Assembly strengthened the well-established belief in the Middle East that Israel and its lobbies determine European and American policies toward the region. With this opinion widespread in the Middle East, Washington and Brussels will not benefit from Arab Spring. It is time for Western countries to stop Israel from intervening in their domestic and foreign policies and for them distinguish between values and interests that they do and do not share with Israel. Netanyahu’s speech in the UNGA demonstrated his arrogant approach toward the West. If Western powers cannot control Israel, it will impose at least another three trillion dollars in costs upon them. During the past decades, Israeli officials have followed one imaginary enemy after another: Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and now Iran are among the list and it will extend to other countries in the Middle East and North Africa. This approach needs to be stopped. The U.S. and EU need to clearly impose the following redlines on Israel:

First: Do not interfere in U.S. and EU politics. Western officials are wise enough to recognize their interests and know how to decide.

Second: Occupation, intervention, violation of Palestinian rights, and the terrorization of scientists are not values and interests that Israel, the U.S. and EU share in common. Tel Aviv must desist from these policies.

Third: A regime which has manufactured nuclear weapons and is not a member of the NPT does not have right to tell an NPT member state what to do.

Fourth: A regime that has repeatedly attacked its neighbors during the past five decades cannot accuse a peaceful nation of having such an intention.

Fifth: Israeli officials should not mislead the international community. It is twenty years that they have been saying that Iran will reach nuclear weapons within a few years. All those years have passed without any nuclear weapon and the next year will also end in the same way.

Sixth: The U.S. and EU are no longer ready to pay the price for Israeli mistakes. Because of past unconditional support, Israel has repeatedly attacked its neighbors and has not learned how to live with them.

Seventh: Preventing war is a global responsibility and the international community will stop Israel from launching another one.

Solving the Iranian nuclear issue has never been complicated. Transparency for recognition is still the best solution. Iran is ready to increase transparency if the other parties to the EU3+3 negotiations negotiate seriously. Iran has not rejected re-implementing the Additional Protocol either. A transparent nuclear program will not endanger anyone’s security. Many countries around the world have such a capacity, including Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea, South Africa and Brazil. Iran has no problem with transparency; the problem is that the U.S. and some of its allies have not been able to recognize Iran’s rights, role and interests. The U.S. has tried to exclude Iran from any regional and international mechanism. They have just tactically engaged Iran in some cases such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Israeli pressure has been an important factor, but we should not neglect other domestic and international elements. Iranophobia is not limited to Israeli extremists. Many people, even some elites, in the West suffer from a distorted image of Iran. Reinforcing closed doors by sanctions, isolation, military threats, and cyber attacks will not lead to transparency and cooperation. All sides need to pave the way for doors to open.

Notes:

[1] i.e. including a possible military attack on Iran

[2] whereby nuclear fuel enriched to twenty-percent purity in Iran would be shipped out of Iran in exchange for enriched nuclear fuel to power the Tehran Research reactor (TRR) supplied from abroad

Read More

Panetta threatens 'most serious sanctions' against Iran

 

US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta (file photo)

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/07/265346/us-threatens-iran-with-fresh-sanctions/

US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has threatened Iran with new, stronger economic sanctions over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear energy program.

Speaking at a media conference in Peru on Saturday, Panetta said Washington and its allies have reached an agreement “to impose probably the most serious sanctions, economic sanctions, that have been imposed on a nation.”

He said Iran should engage with the international community to try to resolve the West's standoff with the country and address their alleged concerns or face additional sanctions.

Panetta said the US and its allies are united in their efforts to stop Tehran’s uranium enrichment activities.

Washington’s sanction threats against Tehran are escalating despite the UN warning against the humanitarian ramifications of the embargoes.

On Friday, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon warned that the West’s embargoes against Iran have significantly targeted the livelihood of the ordinary Iranian population and led to shortage of necessary items, including medicine.

At the beginning of 2012, the United States and the European Union imposed new sanctions on Iran’s oil and financial sectors with the goal of preventing other countries from purchasing Iranian oil and conducting transactions with the Central Bank of Iran.

The sanctions came into force in early summer 2012.

The illegal US-engineered sanctions were imposed based on the unfounded accusation that Iran is pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.

Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

In addition, the IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities but has never found any evidence showing that Iran's civilian nuclear program has been diverted to nuclear weapons production.

Read More

UK we want Iran sanctions to hit people

 

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/07/265364/uk-we-want-iran-sanctions-to-hit-people/

The British Defense Secretary has acknowledged that the western sanctions on Iran are targeted at the livelihood of the ordinary people, which he said are necessary so that Tehran feels an “existential threat” from economic pressure and ends its nuclear activities.

“We can definitely make the pain much greater. Nobody wants to cause the Iranian people to suffer unnecessarily but this mad scheme to build a bomb has to be brought to an end,” Philip Hammond told the Guardian.

“The only thing that is likely to budge the government from its nuclear position is if they see or sense an existential threat. If the level of economic pressure starts to translate into potentially [government]-threatening disruption and dissent on the streets of Tehran, then they may change course,” he added.

Hammond did mention Iranians’ repeated explanation that “they’re enriching uranium for peaceful purposes,” but he blatantly claimed, “Nobody believes them.”

This comes as there are more grounds to believe Hammond is lying rather than Tehran as the latter is pursuing all its nuclear activities under the close inspection of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and that the agency has never offered any evidence on a deviation in Iran’s civilian nuclear activities.

Iran says its nuclear energy program is totally civilian and aimed at power generation adding it needs the 20-percent-enriched uranium it produces for production of fuel for a reactor that produces medicine for cancer and other patients.

His comments come ahead of the Conservative party annual conference and a meeting of EU ministers on October 15, when Britain, France and Germany are expected to push for more sanctions against Iran.

“There is talk of a general trade embargo and of shutting down the remaining access that Iran has to international banking channels,” Hammond said.

Iranian officials have long condemned the US and EU unilateral sanctions on the country as an “economic war” targeted at the people; a war commentators believe would further unify Iranians against their enemies.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has also condemned the western embargoes saying they have affected people’s livelihood and impeded patient’s access to much needed medicine.

“The sanctions imposed on the Islamic Republic of Iran have had significant effects on the general population, including an escalation in inflation, a rise in commodities and energy costs, an increase in the rate of unemployment and a shortage of necessary items, including medicine," Ban said in a report to the UN General Assembly on Friday.

Iran has in the past described the Western propaganda storm against its nuclear energy program as a political game against a democracy Westerners cannot tolerate.

Read More

Syria, Turkey tensions orchestrated by US, Israel: Analyst

Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/07/265387/us-israel-behind-syriaturkey-tensions/

The West, particularly the United States and the Israeli regime, to which Turkey is subservient, orchestrated the tension between Syria and Turkey, an analyst tells Press TV.

The comment comes as tensions between Ankara and Damascus escalated after a mortar shell fired from Syria killed five people in the southeastern Turkish town of Akcakale in Sanliurfa province on Wednesday.

Syria said it had started an investigation into the cause of the mortar attack on the Turkish territory.

However on Thursday, several Syrian soldiers were reportedly killed in a retaliatory attack by Turkish forces on a military post near Syria’s border town of Tel Abyad.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Thursday that Turkey does not plan to wage a war against Syria after the Turkish parliament gave the nod for military operations outside the country.

“We have no intention of starting a war with Syria,” Erdogan said in a joint press conference with the visiting Iranian First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi in Ankara.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Scott Richard, former American Intelligence Linguist, from Orlando to further discuss the issue.

The program also offers the opinion of two additional guests: Moufid Jaber with the Middle East Center for Studies and Research from Beirut and Chicago-based political analyst Joe Iosbaker.

What follows is an approximate transcription of the interview.

Press TV: What about that Scott Richard is it because Ankara is saying on the one hand that it does not want war with Damascus but what we see is an intensification, is Ankara basically listening to the orders of Washington DC or is it something else behind what seems to be motivated to have war with Syria?

Richard: Well, Joe is absolutely correct, Turkey is doing the bidding for NATO. NATO has been very clear about wanting to go to war with Syria. If you look at what they’ve been doing, they’ve been going to the UN over and over again and thank God for China and Russia keeping US out of Syria. There is no doubt that you got western powers here who are on a mission and they’re trying to take out Syria and doing the bidding for NATO right now is Turkey.

Now that being said we’re talking about a few mortars that were launched out of Syria and probably less than a few dozen or less than a dozen or so mortars that were launched back into Syria from Turkey. So it’s a very small event. There is a lot of activity going on around Homs; there is a lot of activity going on around the Bekaa Valley, [in Syrian-controlled eastern Lebanon] and also a lot of activity going on very near Aleppo where they’ve taken out some of the commander positions in Aleppo.

Right now Syria is being very successful in putting down the Western intervention. So the West is becoming desperate. They’re using their relationships with NATO and with Turkey to escalate the war and try to justify it but absolutely Syria is not attacking Turkey and this is something that is being orchestrated by the West.

Press TV: Many political analysts are saying that this is the strategy of the United States basically to let Muslim countries fight it out with each other and wait for the smoke to clear and take care of the rest, how do you see the situation? Is it that the United States really wants Turkey to get in a direct confrontation with Syria?

Richard: Well, Turkey getting into a direct confrontation with Syria is really not the case. They were hoping to use intervention early on and get NATO support coming in at the bid of the UN and Turkey now has to step up and really provide an avenue for them to make even more excuses.

Just as Joe was saying this is a systemic problem with the United States warfare that we’ve conducted across the world and this is something that’s not new. This is something that’s been going on for some time, that’s happened in Libya just recently. They wanted to repeat what they did in Libya and by taking down the organizations it makes them easier to control the countries.

They can use the enemies within the country to fight the wars for them just as Joe described it’s an old strategy, it’s worked for centuries and what they try to do is break down the existing government and they go to the factions within and then weaken the country and by weakening the country it makes it a far less opponent against the Western objectives.

And the Western objectives are clear here, they’re to control the resources and to financially fix their failed banking system. The US is involved in a an incredible banking failure, Europe’s involved in a banking failure and countries like Iran and Libya and other countries that have not depended on the petrodollar [system] are doing just fine.

Press TV: Mr. Richard, what needs to be done in order to deescalate these tensions cause as we’re speaking now there is a military buildup right now on the border with Syria and Turkey by Turkish military. So now what needs to be done to deescalate?

Richard: Well, unfortunately what needs to be done is in the United States, the problem is rooted in the United States, Britain and France and the only country that can actually stop it would be the United States. What you have in Turkey is clearly described here as a nation of people that do not want war. Unfortunately you have a government that’s heavily aligned with the NATO forces and aligned with Israel.

You have to look at Turkish relationships with Israel. There is a lot of trade, military trade and petroleum trade between Israel and Turkey. So the interest from the economic perspective between Israel and Turkey is very strong and also you have to look at the national security advisers in the United States.

We’re talking in the United States the National Security adviser behind Mitt Romney is a guy named Dov Zakheim, Dov Zakheim is an extreme Zionist and also under Obama you have Rich [Richard] Verma; Rich Verma is also another extreme Zionist. So we have a very pro-Israel, a very pro-Zionist and a super control over Turkey where I have to agree with Joe, Turkey is becoming more of a puppet, where in the past they’ve been very closely aligned with Syria.

Turkey, NATO escalating anti-Syria war: Ralph Schoenman

Source Video: Press TV (YouTube)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOJmHybFeJQ

Read More

Turkey pounds targets inside Syria for the fourth day

 

Turkish soldiers stand guard in the southeastern town of Akcakale, near the Syrian border. (file photo)

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/07/265336/turkey-fires-more-mortar-shells-into-syria/

The Turkish military has fired mortar shells into Syria for the fourth day in a row after a number of projectiles slammed into the southern border province of Hatay.

"A mortar landed today (Saturday) at 7:00 a.m. local time (0400 GMT) about 50 meters inside Turkish territory in an open space about 700 meters from the village of Guvecci and about 300 meters from a police station," the office of the Hatay governor said in a statement, AFP reported.

According to the statement, there were no reports of casualties in the incident.

It added that the Turkish army responded by firing four rounds of mortars. The statement also noted that the Syrian mortars had been fired by government forces that were attacking insurgents near the Syrian-Turkish border.

The latest exchange came three days after mortar shells from the Syrian side of the border killed five civilians in the town of Akcakale, which is located in Sanliurfa province in southeastern Turkey.

On October 5, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that Turkey was not far from war with Syria due to the cross-border attacks.

"We are not interested in war, but we're not far from it either," Erdogan told a crowd in Istanbul.

"Those who attempt to test Turkey's deterrence, its decisiveness, its capacity; I say here they are making a fatal mistake," he warned.

On October 4, the Turkish parliament authorized cross-border military action against Syria “when deemed right.”

Tensions have been running high between Syria and Turkey, with Damascus accusing Turkey -- along with Saudi Arabia and Qatar -- of backing a deadly insurgency that has claimed the lives of many Syrians, including security and army personnel.

In an interview with the Turkish daily Cumhuriyet in July, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said Ankara “has supplied all logistic support to the terrorists who have killed our people.”

Read More

Financial Warfare: Destabilizing Iran’s Monetary System

By: Nile Bowie

Source: Global Research

http://www.globalresearch.ca/financial-warfare-destabilizing-irans-monetary-system/

Dramatic fluctuations of the Iranian rial triggered small protests among merchants in Tehran’s grand bazaar on October 3rd, 2012. In an attempt by authorities to prevent further devaluation, Iran’s central bank recently issued new limits on the amount of USD available for purchase at a subsidized rate, leading many to panic as the rial fell 40% against the dollar since the start of October. Although the demonstrations were economic in nature, many took advantage of the moment to voice their grievances against the political system, with many crediting President Ahmadinejad with overseeing fiscal mismanagement that has exacerbated Washington’s unceasing barrage of economic sanctions. Ahmadinejad’s political opponents also blame his administration for economic mismanagement, sentiment that is appearing more frequently among Iranian society.

While combating the challenges that economic sanctions represent is an arduous task for any government, it is important to recognize that these sanctions are not aimed against Iran’s government, but at its poor and merchant population. An unnamed US intelligence source cited by the Washington Postclaims:

”In addition to the direct pressure sanctions exert on the regime’s ability to finance its priorities, another option here is that they will create hate and discontent at the street level so that the Iranian leaders realize that they need to change their ways.”

Washington has long engaged in psychological operations that aim to foment the kind of “hate and discontent” among Iran’s factory workers, merchants, shopkeepers, students, and manufacturers – as part of a series of measures taken to coax widespread social discontent and unrest throughout the country to topple the government.

For the average Iranian business owner and worker, US-led sanctions and currency devaluation have affected everyday transactions that provide paychecks and economic viability for millions of people. From urban shopkeepers to rural restaurant owners, many have been forced to close their businesses because they are unable profit from reselling imported goods purchased with dollars. Isolation from the global banking system has made it increasingly more difficult for Iranian students studying abroad to receive money from their families. Sanctions targeting Iran’s central bank aim to devastate the Iranian export economy, affecting everyone from oil exporters to carpet weavers and pistachio cultivators. By crippling people’s livelihoods and hindering their ability to pursue education and afford necessities such as food and medication, the Obama administration believes such measures will erode public confidence in the government and challenge its legitimacy.

Such policy is not only immoral, but exhibits the fraudulence and dishonesty of the United States toward the values of liberty and the pursuit of happiness it claims to represent. Although western media has gone to great lengths to depict Obama as being reluctant to endorse a tough stance on Iran, it is clear that Washington is quietly pursuing belligerent policy against Tehran – one that has alienated Iranians that seek reconciliation with the United States and greatly escalated tensions and the possibility of war. As demonstrated by the covert measures being taken against Tehran – including sabotage, cyber warfare, and targeted assassinations – Washington is fully committed to preventing Tehran’s independent technological, economic and political development. While US-led sanctions are intended to target all mechanisms necessary for international oil transactions, Iran continues to show defiance by pursuing diplomacy and mutually beneficial economic development with its energy hungry allies across Asia.

China has continued to purchase larger amounts of Iranian oil despite the sanctions regime. While the fledging European Union cuts its ties with Tehran, Beijing has moved closer with Iran to provide credit lines and consumer goods. Additionally, nations such as India, Malaysia and Japan have continued their energy imports from Iran – making efforts to internationally isolate Tehran increasing more difficult. Iran has actively engaged in the modernization of its energy infrastructure, including the construction of fifteen domestic pipelines throughout the country. Furthermore, Iranian firms are planning to construct an electrical power plant and a pipeline to provide energy to Pakistan. In the interest of pursuing mutually beneficially economic development, Tehran has sought further cooperation with its neighbors in Pakistan and Turkmenistan. Iran’s domestic investments emphasize the importance of developing the kind of trade and energy infrastructure needed to continue resistance to hegemony without being internationally isolated.

Tehran has pledged $25 billion to develop its Chabahar port, and an additional $4 billion of investment into several different ports around the country. The expanded trade and energy capabilities that would result from such investment would solidify Iran’s place in the global economy, and its seat among world powers. It is for this reason that “the threat of Iran developing nuclear weapons” is used as a stale pretext to enforce economic sanctions, despite a complete lack of evidence to implicate Iran with weaponizing its nuclear energy program. Tehran must be diligent in finding ways to manage its currency devaluation and economic growth – because of its natural resources and abundant energy wealth, the country is in a unique position to deflect international sanctions and use them to its advantage. By partnering with its international allies, Iran can bolster its domestic manufacturing industries and secure international markets for its products. Policy makers in Washington and Tel Aviv should remember that chess is an Iranian game.

Nile Bowie is a Kuala Lumpur-based American writer, video producer and frequent contributor to Global Research. He explores issues of terrorism, economics and geopolitics.

 

Read More

Shelling resumes at Turkish-Syrian border - reports

 

Turkish soldiers walk as they stand guard on the Turkish-Syrian border near the Akcakale border crossing, southern Sanliurfa province, October 5, 2012 (Reuters)

Source: Russia Today

http://rt.com/news/turkey-return-fire-syria-771/

The Turkish military reportedly fired at Syria on Saturday morning in response to mortars from Syria landing near a Turkish farm. If follows a similar incident on Friday.

­Two mortar shells landed in rural areas near the village of Guvecci in the early morning and at midday.

The exchange occurred near the village of Guvecci in Hatay province according to Turkey's Anadolu Agency.

“It is assessed that the shell was fired by Syrian Arab Republic security forces at opposition forces along the border," the Hatay governor's office said in a statement on its website said.

Earlier on Friday afternoon a mortar shell fell near the town of Yayladagi, some 50 meters away from the Syrian border. The Turkish army immediately “fired back at targets” within Syria, Turkish media report quoting officials.

No injuries were reported in Turkey from either incident.

At the same time RT’s correspondent Paula Slier reports that the shelling of Turkish territory is done from a Syrian region controlled by rebel forces, which prompts some observers to speculate that the rebels are trying to provoke their ally Turkey into a military intervention against the government of Bashar al-Assad.

Meanwhile, the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported that after hours of fights rebels had attacked army positions in the Syrian villages of Khirbet al-Jouz and Darkoush, some 16 kilometers (10 miles) from Guvecci.

The organization reports 25 soldiers and three rebels were killed.

"After seizing the village, the rebels raised the revolutionary flag over a former army checkpoint in the area," AFP quotes the Observatory's chief Rami Abdul-Rahman as saying.

 

Read More

US-led sanctions on Iran, invasion of a nation’s rights: Analyst

US President Barack Obama (R) and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (file photo)

Source: Press TV

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/08/06/254799/iran-bans-invasion-of-a-nation-rights/

A prominent political analyst says illegal US-engineered sanctions against Iran, which have been in place almost since the Islamic Republic's inception, constitute, “an invasion of a nation’s rights.”

“It is transpiring gradually that a country does not need to wage a military war against another nation in an effort to paralyze it and that imposing brutal sanctions or tightening them can be well tantamount to an act of war,” Dr. Ismail Salami wrote in an article published on the Press TV website.

“The US war against Iran has already started,” Salami said, proceeding to catalogue the US hostilities toward the Iranians in the mold of sanctions ever since the early 1980s when the Islamic Republic was in the grip of the Iraqi war.

“Washington has long been making unflagging efforts to push Iran to the farthest margins of political and economic isolation even when Iran was not working on its nuclear energy program,” the Iranian author stressed.

Last week, the US House of Representatives repeated a Senate action in voting for additional illegal sanctions against Iran. The congressional action, pushed by the influential American pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC, intends to further punish all banks, insurance firms and shipping lines involved in Iran’s oil exports.

The so-called compromise bill would supposedly build on the oil trade sanctions signed into law by US President Barack Obama back in late December, expanding penalties on foreign firms that conduct business with Iran’s national oil company and tanker fleet. It intends to make it more difficult for the Islamic Republic to receive payments for the sale of its petroleum products.

Dr. Salami said the West has yet to realize that Iran “is not a country solely dependent on oil resources. Rather, it has at its disposal myriad natural resources to rely on.”

“Ergo, blocking Iran’s oil flow to other countries will not be so damaging to the country as the West imagines. On the contrary, such an act will surely prove irreversibly damaging to world economy; the oil prices will rocket up beyond control; the global economic security will be caught up in an unmanageable whirlpool and the rest of the world including the US and Europe will have to suffer immensely for this strategic folly.”

Many prominent international lawyers, including Franklin Lamb and Francis Boyle, contend that Iran is entitled to file a lawsuit with the International Court of Justice against the US, France, the UK and their allies, on behalf of all Iranian citizens being harmed by illegal and political economic sanctions.

“To a critical mind, the sanctions are to be seen as a metaphorical declaration of war on Iran,” Dr. Salami said, “Albeit the US and its allies will be the ones who will suffer most.”

Read More