WH Ignoring the Expanding Global Shia Crescent?

Iran and the ‘Shia Crescent’

Although the exact posturing and organization of the “Shia Crescent” is debated, there is no doubt a clear network exists of partners associated with Iran (Shia and non-Shia) who openly seek to undermine U.S. interests, and operate globally with increasing zeal and reach. Iran has long vowed, supported and operated alongside these partners like Lebanon’s Hezbollah, using a variety of soft and hard power.

Hezbollah Rockets

From Latin America, to Iraq and Afghanistan, to Bahrain and even Mexico, observers of current events will find the Shia Crescent at work. This term “Shia Crescent” is not an indictment against the moderate Shia believers who renounce radicalism, but it is a stark acknowledgment of the reality that Iran has co-opted many Shia communities, their grievances and legitimate concerns, and continues to orient them toward a radical agenda of confrontation, armed violence, and subversive activities penetrating legitimate political processes as well as criminal enterprises.

The following points are salient:

  1. Tehran’s Objective. Iran has a very clear agenda to use non-state soldiers to undermine Western interests and spread Iranian influence. Iranian constitutional law, high leadership declarations, military organization and posture, and a host of operations of its Quds forces in Iraq and the region and globally, provide overwhelming evidence of this fact. The link between state and non-state soldiers is thus important for our study.
  2. The nuclear threat. If Iran ever obtains nuclear weapons it will not have to use them to be effective. The mere threat of using them will check or checkmate an opponent by thrusting the fight to the level of non-state soldiers (Low Intensity Conflict) where Iran excels. This may prove to be the most important aspect of obtaining nuclear weapons. That said, many experts are convinced that Iran could and would use nuclear weapons.
  3. A Wide and Popular Appeal. Non-state soldiers surface in the Middle East under Iranian patronage and support even though these groups may not be Shia. The fact is Iran has developed an extraordinary ability to capture, partner with, and motivate disaffected young and middle-aged citizens, and partner with disaffected groups like Hamas, which are Sunni in belief. This wide appeal will continue to foster an environment where non-state soldiers thrive.
  4. Bottom up Strategy. The non-state soldiers under the Shia Crescent have aptly exploited the social and culture terrain by creating a social network offering jobs, emergency aid, religious identification and organization, and inspiration. Hezbollah has used this strategy, and developed a militant social movement into a political one, even though it vowed not to form a political party in Lebanon and participate in the parliamentary politics.
  5. Deadly strikes. Non-state soldiers working in this system have accomplished deadly attacks on US and partner personnel and assets. Beyond Iraq and Afghanistan, where Iranian influence and use of non-state soldiers are open and aggressive, we find high profile terrorist attacks like the Khobar Towers, where the regional Hezbollah conducted a major attack on a facility housing US and Saudi personnel.
  6. Geo-politics of the Shia Crescent. In context, it should be understood that the Shia Crescent emanating from Iran seeks to sweep through the Middle East, thrusting through Iraq, Syria, and extending into the Levant and Palestine.

Yet, Iran has a remarkable ability to “leap frog,” or move beyond a regional theater and operate globally. Despite Western efforts to contain Iranian influence and its use of proxies in the Middle East, Iran continues to support the development of hostile forces beyond this region.

The involvement of non-state soldiers in the Shia Crescent will remain a major challenge to U.S. security in the foreseeable future. Understanding these dynamics is essential.

Exploitation and Sanctions Violations

The sanctions on Iran are already falling apart

The Obama administration insists that the November 2013 interim nuclear deal with Iran gave Tehran’s economy only limited sanctions relief and that it can respond to Iranian misbehavior by snapping back sanctions at any time in.

Iran’s economic windfall, however, goes well beyond the monthly cash transfers and temporary easing on trade stipulated in the Joint Plan of Action, or JPOA.

Not only has the JPOA halted Iran’s slide into economic disaster, but the benefits the deal has prompted are a fraction of the dividends the Islamic Republic is set to reap the day a final agreement is reached.

These gains are only partly due to sanctions relief: Iran’s improved position also results from lax sanctions implementation by its neighbors, reluctance by European authorities to discourage their own economies from trading with the Islamic Republic, and Tehran’s fine-tuning of its talent for bypassing sanctions.

As a result, the interim nuclear deal looks increasingly like a slow-motion funeral procession for the sanctions regime.

Overwhelming evidence suggests Iran has successfully overcome banking sanctions to manage overseas payments. For example, email correspondence between a European manufacturer and an Iranian banking official, leaked last year to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, helpfully details how to bypass banking sanctions.

Seven Iranian banks not under EU sanctions can be used to process payments, but in the email, the Iranian banking official admits that European correspondent banks, out of zealous overreach, might refuse incoming funds.

To overcome this problem, he offers three alternative methods of payments: avoiding reliance on Letters of Credit by paying directly into suppliers’ accounts in Europe; using Iranian subsidiaries in Turkey and Dubai for payment and delivery of goods; and using a European company’s subsidiary branch in friendly countries like China, India, South Korea, and potentially Russia to handle sales and payments.

DubaiReutersDubai: Iran sanctions-busting central.

Such payment mechanisms work because they obfuscate the final destination of goods — namely Iran — and rely on banking institutions and Iranian front companies overseas to act as intermediaries for payment and shipment between Iran and Europe.

A recent Reuters article revealed that Iran not only knows how to process overseas payments. It has also regained access to foreign currency.

Tehran was able to repatriate $1 billion in cash through Dubai by relying on local money-exchange houses and moving the cash in hand luggage carried by businessmen flying on commercial flights. Moreover, an Iranian MP has publicly accused Iran’s Central Bank of sending cash suitcases of UAE dirhams outside Iran to buy dollars.

Further evidence points to cash moving out of Iran to enable illicit procurement. According to a Georgia-based Iranian businessman who spoke to us on condition of anonymity, couriers from Iran routinely fly to Tbilisi with cash suitcases (both FlyVista, a low-cost Georgian carrier, and Iran’s ATA air have scheduled Tehran-Tbilisi flights). With no limits on declared financial instruments brought into Georgia, Iran is able to bring foreign currency back into its borders through Dubai and transfer it to Georgia to finance procurement and trade.

Iran is able to run rings around the sanctions regime because of lax implementation of EU and US sanctions in the Islamic Republic’s “near abroad.” From the Persian Gulf through Turkey and the South Caucasus, Iran can rely on its neighbors to allow bilateral trade with Tehran to flow unimpeded. Turkey, for example, is home to more than 3,000 Iranian companies, including US-sanctioned Bank Mellat.

Ankara has cited the JPOA as the basis for loosening restrictions on Iranian banking, and in any case, none of Iran’s neighbors has fully signed on to EU and US sanctions. The interim deal and a looming final agreement are vindicating their approach: having kept their doors half-open to Iran’s business, its neighbors will be the first to gain from the demise of the sanctions regime.

Iran nuclearREUTERS/Brian SnyderU.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (L) holds a negotiation meeting with Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif (R) over Iran’s nuclear programme, in Lausanne March 18, 2015.

Direct trade is also getting a push from the new psychological environment that the interim deal has created. Few in Europe believe the sanctions will remain, and many are exploring future commercial opportunities. In the meanwhile, Europe’s bilateral trade with Iran is climbing back to pre-sanctions levels — further evidence that banking sanctions are no longer effective.

According to Iran’s Press TV, last month the French automaker Peugeot finalized a deal with Iran Khodro, the Islamic Republic’s largest car manufacturer, to launch a new joint venture. This is the latest in a long string of European trading overtures to Tehran, reflected in a steep increase in European exports there. The German-Iranian chamber of commerce has reported a 36%-increase in Germany’s exports to the country for 2014 and Iranian figures show an 18% uptick in exports across Europe.

The Obama administration may still believe it is able to snap sanctions back at any time if Iran cheats on its commitments under a final agreement. Developments thus far under the interim deal suggest otherwise.

 

Child Soldiers Being Trained to Fight Israel

Israel was granted land, of their own for their own. Since that time, Arabs, Islamists and Palestinians have been demanding land back as their own. Israel completely evacuated land called Gaza and turned it over. Jerusalem is divided, portions of the West Bank are off limits to Israelis, then there is the Golan Heights. How much more is to be given up?

The White House on Monday bluntly warned Israel that its “occupation of Palestinian land” must end, dismissing Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s efforts to take back controversial campaign pledges.

In unusually tough language that underscores the fracture in relations between Washington and Israel, AFP reported, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough said “an occupation that has lasted for almost 50 years must end.”

McDonough criticized Netanyahu’s pre-election pledge to block the creation of a Palestinian state and he questioned Netanyahu’s efforts to undo the damage.

“We cannot simply pretend that those comments were never made, or that they don’t raise questions about the Prime Minister’s commitment to achieving peace through direct negotiations,” he said.

“The Palestinian people must have the right to live in and govern themselves in their own sovereign state,” he added.

McDonough is one of President Barack Obama’s closest advisors, and his speech to the liberal pro-Israel lobby group J Street was followed closely in Washington.

Netanyahu’s pledge deepened a long-running disagreement with Obama but his top aide said, the row was not based on “personal pique.”

“America’s commitment to a two-state solution is fundamental to US foreign policy,” McDonough said. “It’s been the goal of both Republican and Democratic presidents, and it remains our goal today.”

The White House and the United Nations have expressed countless times, giving up more land is their immediate demand.

When considering the work of the United Nations, consider the stupid-ness of the United Nations, especially UNRWA.

Not only is Hamas training children but they are recruiting teenagers as well. Video here.

Israeli Group’s documentary accuses Hamas of Training Child Soldiers

A new documentary that shows senior Hamas figures in Gaza unabashedly discussing the training of child soldiers and glorifying suicide bombers at military-style youth camps will be Exhibit A for an Israeli group at a United Nations forum in Geneva Wednesday, where it plans to make the case that the world body’s relief arm is being used by terrorists.

The 11-minute documentary, called “Children’s Army of Hamas” and produced by the Israel-based Center for Near East Policy Research (CNEPR), in association with the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, is aimed at showing the UN that Hamas is breaking international laws, including those barring the training of child soldiers even as it works with the United Nations Relief Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East.

“You are the generation that is being trained to fight – although you are young. You are being trained for jihad [holy war],” senior Hamas official Khala al-Hayya is seen telling young children at a Hamas military training camp.

In another scene, Hamas Interior Minister Fathi Hamad refers to the indoctrination of children and appears to acknowledge they are being trained to do battle.

“We are strengthening their religious awareness and inducing solidarity with their country. This solidifies their jihad, and their commitment to being a warrior, a curse to Israel,” Hamad declares.

According to its own 2014 figures, UNRWA received a budget of $1.32 billion from international donors, of which $409 million was donated by the U.S. alone. It runs 245 schools in Gaza, more than one-third of which were impacted in last summer’s fighting between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, according to UNRWA spokesperson Christopher Gunness. Given that Hamas is in charge of Gaza, and UNRWA’s website makes clear that “Schoolchildren in UNRWA schools follow the host authorities’ curricula and textbooks,” the film suggests that the very group training children in military camps may also be dictating what they are taught in schools.

“You are being trained for jihad.”- Khala al-Hayya, senior Hamas official, talking to kids in Gaza

“Hamas’ relationship with UNRWA is good, very good,” states Ismail Radwan, Hamas’ minister of religious affairs. “The Hamas charter is part of the program we teach – insurrection, faith and education. We’re preparing to liberate Palestine.”

Gunness denied that UN-run schools play a role in training child soldiers.

“I am not aware of any reports of UNRWA schools being used by Hamas to do training courses,” Gunness told FoxNews.com. “Our education system is entirely independent and we have a completely different schooling system. There is no question of Hamas approving anything… We’re educating children after [last summer’s] conflict where hundreds of thousands were displaced. One thing that distinguishes us is that we teach human rights curriculum grades 1 through to 9.”

 

On Sunday, one UNRWA school in Khan Younis in Gaza was re-opened and 1,100 students returned to class, partly as a result of Noble Peace Prize-winner Malala Yousafzai – the Pakistani teenager and child education campaigner who was shot in the head by the Taliban for wanting to go to school – donating her $50,000 award to help fund a swift restoration of the damaged building. Rich Arab nations have pledged more than $5 billion to rebuild Gaza, but thus far only a tiny fraction of the money promised has actually been received.

“Since 2003, UNRWA schoolteachers and workers unions have been in the control of Hamas,” David Bedein, producer of the documentary alleges. “Only Canada has cut back on its donations as a result of the evidence of Hamas’ control. Even if Hamas is the dominant force in Gaza, UNRWA has to operate under the rules and regulations of donors. Countries such as the US, Canada, Australia, the UK, and even the EU, do not allow funds to go to a social service agency where Hamas is on staff.”

“If UNRWA’s money was coming from Qatar or Iran it would be very difficult to talk about the moral responsibility of the donor nations, but many of the donor nations are western democracies,” Bedein concludes.

The documentary shows children as young as five or six being indoctrinated by Hamas. “We train children to use all types of weapons; machine guns, anti-aircraft [guns], tunnel training, in guerilla warfare, to fight the enemy with Allah’s help,” one masked military trainer explains.

“We are being trained to be mujahideen [warriors] to fight the evil Israeli presence,” one boy, aged around 13, proudly says. “They conquered our land and defiled our holy sites. We’ll liberate it all with Allah’s mighty help.”

At the end of the training camp top Hamas leader and former Gazan Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh addresses the children. “This generation is prepared to liberate the land. It will be victorious; it will fulfil the right of return, our independence. Beware! Beware! Jews beware!” Haniyeh cries. “This generation is not afraid to confront you in your centers. This is the generation of the stones. This is the generation of the missiles! This is the generation of the tunnels! This is the generation of the suicide bombers!”

The film is expected to give the UN pause for thought at they consider Hamas’ terrorist organization status and its exploitation of child soldiers. For the avoidance of doubt, and in case anyone wondered if Hamas is preparing to embark on a new direction, Hamas’ Deputy Foreign Minister Ghazi Hamad clarifies, “The principles of Hamas have not changed since its inception. The principles of militancy remain as a way to end the Israeli conquest… We enforce a militant culture in Palestinian society.”

 

Spying Explains Obama Against Israel

Israel spying on the Iran talks is the only sensible and reasonable thing to do to protect a country when allies like the United States fail them.

 

When the leader of the United States has taken power with exclusivity bypassing all checks and balances the results are often nasty. Barack Obama has a history of exempting a doctrine of a cohesive government. The article below reminds me of when several selection members of both houses of Congress knew long in advance of the bin Ladin raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan. They originally received this information from Leon Panetta and never said a word. This operation was held closed for months.

Obama refuses to include Congress in the negotiations process on the Iranian nuclear program and this had led to several behind the curtain actions, meetings, phone calls, intercepts and just plain spying. What is worse is when other global leaders are brought into the growing disputes then sadly the United States under Barack Obama suffers additional hits to its reputation.

This matter between the White House and Israel is defining itself as THE legacy that is Barack Obama. This is getting more pathetic daily.

Israel Spied on Iran Talks

Ally’s snooping upset White House because information was used to lobby Congress to try to sink a deal

By Adam Entous

Soon after the U.S. and other major powers entered negotiations last year to curtail Iran’s nuclear program, senior White House officials learned Israel was spying on the closed-door talks.

The spying operation was part of a broader campaign by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to penetrate the negotiations and then help build a case against the emerging terms of the deal, current and former U.S. officials said. In addition to eavesdropping, Israel acquired information from confidential U.S. briefings, informants and diplomatic contacts in Europe, the officials said.

The espionage didn’t upset the White House as much as Israel’s sharing of inside information with U.S. lawmakers and others to drain support from a high-stakes deal intended to limit Iran’s nuclear program, current and former officials said.

“It is one thing for the U.S. and Israel to spy on each other. It is another thing for Israel to steal U.S. secrets and play them back to U.S. legislators to undermine U.S. diplomacy,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on the matter.

The U.S. and Israel, longtime allies who routinely swap information on security threats, sometimes operate behind the scenes like spy-versus-spy rivals. The White House has largely tolerated Israeli snooping on U.S. policy makers—a posture Israel takes when the tables are turned.

The White House discovered the operation, in fact, when U.S. intelligence agencies spying on Israel intercepted communications among Israeli officials that carried details the U.S. believed could have come only from access to the confidential talks, officials briefed on the matter said.

Israeli officials denied spying directly on U.S. negotiators and said they received their information through other means, including close surveillance of Iranian leaders receiving the latest U.S. and European offers. European officials, particularly the French, also have been more transparent with Israel about the closed-door discussions than the Americans, Israeli and U.S. officials said.

Mr. Netanyahu and Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer early this year saw a rapidly closing window to increase pressure on Mr. Obama before a key deadline at the end of March, Israeli officials said.

Using levers of political influence unique to Israel, Messrs. Netanyahu and Dermer calculated that a lobbying campaign in Congress before an announcement was made would improve the chances of killing or reshaping any deal. They knew the intervention would damage relations with the White House, Israeli officials said, but decided that was an acceptable cost.

The campaign may not have worked as well as hoped, Israeli officials now say, because it ended up alienating many congressional Democrats whose support Israel was counting on to block a deal.

Obama administration officials, departing from their usual description of the unbreakable bond between the U.S. and Israel, have voiced sharp criticism of Messrs. Netanyahu and Dermer to describe how the relationship has changed.

“People feel personally sold out,” a senior administration official said. “That’s where the Israelis really better be careful because a lot of these people will not only be around for this administration but possibly the next one as well.”

This account of the Israeli campaign is based on interviews with more than a dozen current and former U.S. and Israeli diplomats, intelligence officials, policy makers and lawmakers.

Weakened ties

Distrust between Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Obama had been growing for years but worsened when Mr. Obama launched secret talks with Iran in 2012. The president didn’t tell Mr. Netanyahu because of concerns about leaks, helping set the stage for the current standoff, according to current and former U.S. and Israeli officials.

U.S. officials said Israel has long topped the list of countries that aggressively spy on the U.S., along with China, Russia and France. The U.S. expends more counterintelligence resources fending off Israeli spy operations than any other close ally, U.S. officials said.

A senior official in the prime minister’s office said Monday: “These allegations are utterly false. The state of Israel does not conduct espionage against the United States or Israel’s other allies. The false allegations are clearly intended to undermine the strong ties between the United States and Israel and the security and intelligence relationship we share.”

Current and former Israeli officials said their intelligence agencies scaled back their targeting of U.S. officials after the jailing nearly 30 years ago of American Jonathan Pollard for passing secrets to Israel.

While U.S. officials may not be direct targets, current and former officials said, Israeli intelligence agencies sweep up communications between U.S. officials and parties targeted by the Israelis, including Iran.

Americans shouldn’t be surprised, said a person familiar with the Israeli practice, since U.S. intelligence agencies helped the Israelis build a system to listen in on high-level Iranian communications.

As secret talks with Iran progressed into 2013, U.S. intelligence agencies monitored Israel’s communications to see if the country knew of the negotiations. Mr. Obama didn’t tell Mr. Netanyahu until September 2013.

Israeli officials, who said they had already learned about the talks through their own channels, told their U.S. counterparts they were upset about being excluded. “ ‘Did the administration really believe we wouldn’t find out?’ ” Israeli officials said, according to a former U.S. official.

The episode cemented Mr. Netanyahu’s concern that Mr. Obama was bent on clinching a deal with Iran whether or not it served Israel’s best interests, Israeli officials said. Obama administration officials said the president was committed to preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Mr. Dermer started lobbying U.S. lawmakers just before the U.S. and other powers signed an interim agreement with Iran in November 2013. Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Dermer went to Congress after seeing they had little influence on the White House.

Before the interim deal was made public, Mr. Dermer gave lawmakers Israel’s analysis: The U.S. offer would dramatically undermine economic sanctions on Iran, according to congressional officials who took part.

After learning about the briefings, the White House dispatched senior officials to counter Mr. Dermer. The officials told lawmakers that Israel’s analysis exaggerated the sanctions relief by as much as 10 times, meeting participants said.

When the next round of negotiations with Iran started in Switzerland last year, U.S. counterintelligence agents told members of the U.S. negotiating team that Israel would likely try to penetrate their communications, a senior Obama administration official said.

The U.S. routinely shares information with its European counterparts and others to coordinate negotiating positions. While U.S. intelligence officials believe secured U.S. communications are relatively safe from the Israelis, they say European communications are vulnerable.

Mr. Netanyahu and his top advisers received confidential updates on the Geneva talks from Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman and other U.S. officials, who knew at the time that Israeli intelligence was working to fill in any gaps.

The White House eventually curtailed the briefings, U.S. officials said, withholding sensitive information for fear of leaks.

Current and former Israeli officials said their intelligence agencies can get much of the information they seek by targeting Iranians and others in the region who are communicating with countries in the talks.

In November, the Israelis learned the contents of a proposed deal offered by the U.S. but ultimately rejected by Iran, U.S. and Israeli officials said. Israeli officials told their U.S. counterparts the terms offered insufficient protections.

U.S. officials urged the Israelis to give the negotiations a chance. But Mr. Netanyahu’s top advisers concluded the emerging deal was unacceptable. The White House was making too many concessions, Israeli officials said, while the Iranians were holding firm.

Obama administration officials reject that view, saying Israel was making impossible demands that Iran would never accept. “The president has made clear time and again that no deal is better than a bad deal,” a senior administration official said.

In January, Mr. Netanyahu told the White House his government intended to oppose the Iran deal but didn’t explain how, U.S. and Israeli officials said.

On Jan. 21, House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) announced Mr. Netanyahu would address a joint meeting of Congress. That same day, Mr. Dermer and other Israeli officials visited Capitol Hill to brief lawmakers and aides, seeking a bipartisan coalition large enough to block or amend any deal.

Most Republicans were already prepared to challenge the White House on the negotiations, so Mr. Dermer focused on Democrats. “This deal is bad,” he said in one briefing, according to participants.

A spokesman for the Israeli embassy in Washington, Aaron Sagui, said Mr. Dermer didn’t launch a special campaign on Jan 21. Mr. Dermer, the spokesperson said, has “consistently briefed both Republican and Democrats, senators and congressmen, on Israel’s concerns regarding the Iran negotiations for over a year.”

Mr. Dermer and other Israeli officials over the following weeks gave lawmakers and their aides information the White House was trying to keep secret, including how the emerging deal could allow Iran to operate around 6,500 centrifuges, devices used to process nuclear material, said congressional officials who attended the briefings.

The Israeli officials told lawmakers that Iran would also be permitted to deploy advanced IR-4 centrifuges that could process fuel on a larger scale, meeting participants and administration officials said. Israeli officials said such fuel, which under the emerging deal would be intended for energy plants, could be used to one day build nuclear bombs.

The information in the briefings, Israeli officials said, was widely known among the countries participating in the negotiations.

When asked in February during one briefing where Israel got its inside information, the Israeli officials said their sources included the French and British governments, as well as their own intelligence, according to people there.

“Ambassador Dermer never shared confidential intelligence information with members of Congress,” Mr. Sagui said. “His briefings did not include specific details from the negotiations, including the length of the agreement or the number of centrifuges Iran would be able to keep.”

Current and former U.S. officials confirmed that the number and type of centrifuges cited in the briefings were part of the discussions. But they said the briefings were misleading because Israeli officials didn’t disclose concessions asked of Iran. Those included giving up stockpiles of nuclear material, as well as modifying the advanced centrifuges to slow output, these officials said.

The administration didn’t brief lawmakers on the centrifuge numbers and other details at the time because the information was classified and the details were still in flux, current and former U.S. officials said.

Unexpected reaction

The congressional briefings and Mr. Netanyahu’s decision to address a joint meeting of Congress on the emerging deal sparked a backlash among many Democratic lawmakers, congressional aides said.

On Feb. 3, Mr. Dermer huddled with Sen. Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat, who said he told Mr. Dermer it was a breach of protocol for Mr. Netanyahu to accept an invitation from Mr. Boehner without going through the White House.

Mr. Manchin said he told Mr. Dermer he would attend the prime minister’s speech to Congress, but he was noncommittal about supporting any move by Congress to block a deal.

Mr. Dermer spent the following day doing damage control with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a New York Democrat, congressional aides said.

Two days later, Mr. Dermer met with Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the SenateIntelligence Committee, at her Washington, D.C., home. He pressed for her support because he knew that she, too, was angry about Mr. Netanyahu’s planned appearance.

Ms. Feinstein said afterward she would oppose legislation allowing Congress to vote down an agreement.

Congressional aides and Israeli officials now say Israel’s coalition in Congress is short the votes needed to pass legislation that could overcome a presidential veto, although that could change. In response, Israeli officials said, Mr. Netanyahu was pursuing other ways to pressure the White House.

This week, Mr. Netanyahu sent a delegation to France, which has been more closely aligned with Israel on the nuclear talks and which could throw obstacles in Mr. Obama’s way before a deal is signed. The Obama administration, meanwhile, is stepping up its outreach to Paris to blunt the Israeli push.

“If you’re wondering whether something serious has shifted here, the answer is yes,” a senior U.S. official said. “These things leave scars.”

Hey Russia, Give Back Crimea, then Sanctions Lifted

EU policy on sanctions and energy clearer after summit

The RBK business daily sums up the outcomes of last week’s EU summit in Brussels. As was expected, the EU has opted to link its sanctions against Russia to the implementation of the Minsk peace agreements signed on Feb. 12, aimed at a comprehensive settlement of the conflict in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine. A separate provision of the resolution concerns the issue of Crimea. German Chancellor Angela Merkel explained that the sanctions introduced over the takeover of Crimea can be lifted only after “the annexation of the peninsula has been reversed,” the paper notes.


Is this a fool’s errand for Chancellor Merkel to be making these conditional demands? Putin continues his aggressions and even Denmark is in his sights. Putin often includes nuclear weapons in his comments in recent months.

Russia has threatened to target Danish warships with nuclear missiles if Copenhagen joins NATO’s missile-defense system.Russian Ambassador to Denmark Mikhail Vanin told the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten on March 22 that in joining the missile-defense system it would “become a part of the threat against Russia..and relations with Russia will be damaged.”Danish Foreign Minister Martin Lidegaard said Vanin’s statements were unacceptable and said “Russia knows very well that NATO’s missile defense is not aimed at them.”

NATO has said the missile shield is not directed against Russia but rather an attack from a country like Iran.

Denmark said in August it would add a radar capability on some warships for the missile shield, in which Poland and Romania are playing a large role.

NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu said such statements by Vanin “do not inspire confidence or contribute to…peace or stability.”

Vanin added that Russia has missiles that will be able to penetrate the proposed missile shield.

Beyond Denmark there are other nations that Putin is issuing threats using nuclear weapons.

BUCHAREST, Romania — Britain’s defense secretary says NATO members Romania and Britain will not be intimidated by threats against members of the military alliance.

“Neither Romania nor Britain will be intimidated by threats to its alliance or its members,” Defense Secretary Michael Fallon said Monday during a one-day visit.

His remarks came days after Russia’s ambassador to Denmark, Mikhail Vanin, said in a published report that Danish warships could become targets for Russian nuclear missiles if the Danes join the alliance’s missile defense system. Bases are planned in the southern Romanian town of Deveselu and in Poland.

“I do not think Danes fully understand the consequences of what happens if Denmark joins the U.S.-led missile defense. If this happens, Danish warships become targets for Russian nuclear missiles,” Vanin was quoted as saying by the newspaper Jyllands-Posten on Saturday.

Should Danes join “we risk considering each other as enemies,” he added.
NATO decided in January to set up command-and-control centers in Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria by the end of 2016 in response to challenges from Russia and Islamic extremists and to reassure eastern partners.

Romania will also host a multinational division headquarters for the southeast and Poland will have a similar one for the northeast. In an emergency, the centers would help speed up the arrival of the new quick-reaction force.

*** When it comes to the United States, it appears some proactive measures are being taken as well given the Russian threat.

The Air Force says an unarmed Minuteman 3 missile was launched from California in a test of the intercontinental ballistic missile system.

The missile lifted off from Vandenberg Air Force Base at 3:36 a.m. Monday.

Col. Keith Balts says the test will provide accuracy and reliability data for current and future modifications of the Minuteman system.

The missile used in the test was brought from F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming.

 

Veto Proof Position Against POTUS Iran Deal

Of the P5+1 members that have been leading the talks on the Iranian nuclear deal, France appears to be one country that has demonstrated some real concerns on the trigger points inside the negotiations. Israel has many allies in the talks but France appears to be the only member of the P5+1 that Israel can influence.

In recent days, Israel has dispatched a delegation to France with an objective of a more honest dialogue on the implications if a Kerry deal is reached. Future implications of an approved Iran nuclear agreement being reached is a Middle East nuclear arms race. Saudi Arabia has been in talks with South Korea on  nuclear cooperation.

Meanwhile, the Iran Supreme leader, Ali Khamenei continues to call for ‘death to America’ even as these talks remain live, in progress.

Khamenei has cautioned against expectations that an agreement would amend the more than three-decade freeze between the two nations. Relations between the two nations soured after the Shah of Iran fled his nation during the Iranian revolution, which put the Ayatollah Khomeini in power. The following siege of the American Embassy, with Americans held hostage drove a wedge in U.S.-Iran relations.

It should also be noted that once a deal is reached, the Supreme leader does have to also approve it.

In an interview with The Associated Press in Paris, Israeli Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz said Monday that dialogue with France over Iran’s nuclear program “has proven in the past that it was productive” and makes this week’s last-minute diplomatic mission to Paris worthwhile.

France played a key role strengthening an interim agreement with Iran in late 2013 that froze key parts of the Islamic republic’s nuclear program in exchange for some relief from Western sanctions.

The so-called P5+1 group — Britain, China, France, Russia the United States and Germany — is attempting to reach a final nuclear deal with Iran before a deadline expires at the end of the month.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said Saturday “achieving a deal is possible” by the target date. A preliminary accord then is meant to lead to a final deal by the end of June that would permanently crimp Tehran’s nuclear programs in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. Iran claims that its program is only aimed at generating power, but other nations fear it is trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Back in the United States, a robust mission by Congress appears to be gaining success for a veto proof position if Barack Obama fully bypasses Congress to approve the Iran deal.

Washington (CNN)A veto-proof, bipartisan majority of House lawmakers have signed an open letter to President Barack Obama warning him that any nuclear deal with Iran will effectively require congressional approval for implementation.

A group of bipartisan senators have penned a bill mandating that any deal be reviewed and approved by Congress, but the House letter notes that lawmakers have another way to halt an agreement — by refusing to roll back sanctions.

“Should an agreement with Iran be reached, permanent sanctions relief from congressionally-mandated sanctions would require new legislation. In reviewing such an agreement, Congress must be convinced that its terms foreclose any pathway to a bomb, and only then will Congress be able to consider permanent sanctions relief,” they write.

The letter, which was signed by 367 members of the House and released Monday by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, follows a similar one, issued to Iran’s leaders and signed by 47 Republican senators, warning that any deal with Iran could be rolled back by a future president.

That letter sparked fierce criticism from Democrats, who said it was inappropriate meddling in delicate diplomatic talks and meant to undermine negotiations, and even some Republicans expressed reservations over the tactic.

The House letter lays out lawmakers’ concerns in more diplomatic terms, hitting on the potential time restraints as a key sticking point for a final deal. The emerging deal would lift some restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in a decade, which critics say could allow the country to resume its pursuit of a nuclear bomb at that point.

“A final comprehensive nuclear agreement must constrain Iran’s nuclear infrastructure so that Iran has no pathway to a bomb, and that agreement must be long-lasting,” the lawmakers write.

“Any inspection and verification regime must allow for short notice access to suspect locations, and verifiable constraints on Iran’s nuclear program must last for decades.”