Category Archives: Human Rights Violations United Nations

The FBI, Hillary and the Alavi Foundation (Iran)

Posted on by

It was a secret:

The Alavi Foundation says its purpose is “promoting the teaching of Islamic culture, Persian language, literature and civilization.”

The Alavi Foundation’s site, a 36-story midtown Manhattan skyscraper originally built in the 1970s by the Pahlavi Foundation, an entity of the Shah-led government of Iran. After the Shah was overthrown in 1979, the new Iranian regime took it over and renamed it.

Lev L. Dassin, the Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced today that Farshid Jahedi, the president of the Alavi Foundation, was indicted for allegedly destroying documents subpoenaed by a grand jury investigating the Alavi Foundation’s relationship with Bank Melli Iran and the ownership of a Manhattan office building. On December 19, 2008, Jahedi was arrested in New York City on a criminal complaint in this case.

According to the indictment filed yesterday, the criminal complaint, and other documents filed in Manhattan federal court:

On December 17, 2008, in connection with a grand jury investigation concerning the Alavi Foundation and its financial relationship with Bank Melli Iran (Bank Melli) and two offshore entities controlled by Bank Melli—Assa Company Limited and Assa Corporation—Jahedi was served, as president of Alavi, with a grand jury subpoena. The subpoena was directed to the Alavi Foundation and commanded the production to the federal grand jury of financial documents concerning the Alavi Foundation, Assa Corporation, Assa Company Limited, and the building located at 650 Fifth Avenue Company. Jahedi was explicitly cautioned by law enforcement agents not to destroy any documents called for by the subpoena. The next day, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) personnel observed Jahedi discarding torn documents into a public trash can. Further investigation revealed that these documents concerned Assa Limited, Assa Corporation, and 650 Fifth Avenue Company.

Clintons Received Money from ‘Front for the Government of Iran’

As President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry close in on a nuclear deal with Iran, it’s worth remembering that the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation received money from “a front for the government of Iran” called the Alavi Foundation.

The front gave the Clintons $30,000 between April 2005 and March 2006, according to tax forms. This occurred years after law enforcement officials tied the group to Iranian radicals. “The center is funded by the New York-based Alavi Foundation, which law enforcement officials say is closely tied to the mullahs who dominate Iran,” the Washington Post reported in 2003.

“David Cohen, the New York City Police Department’s intelligence chief, said in a recent court document that the Alavi Foundation is ‘totally controlled by the government of Iran’ and ‘funds a variety of anti-American causes,’ including the Potomac center and other mosques. These organizations, said Cohen, a 35-year veteran of the CIA, have affiliates that support Hezbollah and the Islamic Resistance Movement, or Hamas, two groups the U.S. government has deemed terrorist.”

In 2009, U.S. attorney Preet Bharara called the foundation a “front for the government of Iran.” “The Alavi Foundation has effectively been a front for the government of Iran … For two decades, the Alavi Foundation’s affairs have been directed by various Iranian officials, including Iranian ambassadors at the United Nations, in violation of a series of U.S. laws.”

The Clintons pledged in 2009 not to return the donations. “Matt McKenna, a spokesman for both the former president and the William J. Clinton Foundation, which focuses on public health, climate change, and economic opportunity both domestically and internationally, said the Alavi Foundation donated the money to a tsunami relief fund set up by Clinton in 2005 and that the Clinton Foundation had no plans to return it in the wake of Thursday’sgovernment action. He said neither Clinton nor the foundation had any comment on the government’s actions,” Newsweek reported.

Iran’s Fortified Bunker, Why?

Posted on by

Concessions abound as John Kerry is desperate to get a deal.

“We can see a path forward here to get to an agreement, we can see what that path might look like,” the official told reporters, cautioning however that this “doesn’t mean we’ll get there.”

Six world powers negotiating with Iran since late 2013 want Iran to disable parts of its nuclear infrastructure in order to put an atomic bomb out of reach and end a 12-year standoff.

After missing two deadlines in 2014 to turn a interim accord struck in November 2013 into a lasting deal, the parties set March 31 for a “framework” agreement with a full pact to be agreed by July.

But it remains unclear how detailed the framework between Iran and the six powers will be, particularly with the United States and France appearing split on the issue.

 

The US may let Iran run 6,000 uranium centrifuges in a fortified bunker

LAUSANNE, Switzerland (AP) — The United States is considering letting Tehran run hundreds of centrifuges at a once-secret, fortified underground bunker in exchange for limits on centrifuge work and research and development at other sites, officials have told The Associated Press.

The trade-off would allow Iran to run several hundred of the devices at its Fordo facility, although the Iranians would not be allowed to do work that could lead to an atomic bomb and the site would be subject to international inspections, according to Western officials familiar with details of negotiations now underway. In return, Iran would be required to scale back the number of centrifuges it runs at its Natanz facility and accept other restrictions on nuclear-related work.

Instead of uranium, which can be enriched to be the fissile core of a nuclear weapon, any centrifuges permitted at Fordo would be fed elements such as zinc, xenon or germanium for separating out isotopes used in medicine, industry or science, the officials said. The number of centrifuges would not be enough to produce the amount of uranium needed to produce a weapon within a year — the minimum time-frame that Washington and its negotiating partners demand.

The officials spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss details of the sensitive negotiations as the latest round of talks began between U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif. The negotiators are racing to meet an end-of-March deadline to reach an outline of an agreement that would grant Iran relief from international sanctions in exchange for curbing its nuclear program. The deadline for a final agreement is June 30.

One senior U.S. official declined to comment on the specific proposal but said the goal since the beginning of the talks has been “to have Fordo converted so it’s not being used to enrich uranium.” That official would not say more.

The officials stressed that the potential compromise on Fordo is just one of several options on a menu of highly technical equations being discussed in the talks. All of the options are designed to keep Iran at least a year away from producing an atomic weapon for the life of the agreement, which will run for at least 10 years. U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz has joined the last several rounds as the negotiations have gotten more technical.

Experts say the compromise for Fordo could still be problematic. They note it would allow Iran to keep intact technology that could be quickly repurposed for uranium enrichment at a sensitive facility that the U.S. and its allies originally wanted stripped of all such machines — centrifuges that can spin uranium gas into uses ranging from reactor fuel to weapons-grade material.

kerry zarif iran nukeREUTERS/Leonhard Foeger John Kerry, Britain’s Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier (LtoR) pose for photographers before a meeting in Vienna November 24, 2014.

And the issue of inspector access and verification is key. Iran has resisted “snap inspections” in the past. Even as the nuclear talks have made progress, Iran has yet to satisfy questions about its past possible nuclear-related military activity. The fact that questions about such activity, known as Possible Military Dimensions, or PMDs, remain unresolved is a serious concern for the U.N. atomic watchdog.

In addition, the site at Fordo is a particular concern because it is hardened and dug deeply into a mountainside making it resistant — possibly impervious — to air attack. Such an attack is an option that neither Israel nor the U.S. has ruled out in case the talks fail.

And while too few to be used for proliferation by themselves, even a few hundred extra centrifuges at Fordo would be a concern when looked at in the context of total numbers.

As negotiations stand, the number of centrifuges would grow to more than 6,000, when the other site is included. Olli Heinonen, who was in charge of the Iran nuclear file as a deputy director general of the U.N’s International Atomic Energy Agency until 2010, says even 6,000 operating centrifuges would be “a big number.”

Asked of the significance of hundreds more at Fordo, he said, “Every machine counts.”

Iran reported the site to the IAEA six years ago in what Washington says was an attempt to pre-empt President Barack Obama and the prime ministers of Britain and France going public with its existence a few days later. Tehran later used the site to enrich uranium to a level just a technical step away from weapons-grade until late 2013, when it froze its nuclear program under a temporary arrangement that remains in effect as the sides negotiate.

Twice extended, the negotiations have turned into a U.S.-Iran tug-of-war over how many of the machines Iran would be allowed to operate since the talks resumed over two years ago. Tehran denies nuclear weapons ambitions, saying it wants to enrich only for energy, scientific and medical purposes.

Washington has taken the main negotiating role with Tehran in talks that formally remain between Iran and six world powers, and officials told the AP at last week’s round that the two sides were zeroing in on a cap of 6,000 centrifuges at Natanz, Iran’s main enrichment site.

That’s fewer than the nearly 10,000 Tehran now runs at Natanz, yet substantially more than the 500 to 1,500 that Washington originally wanted as a ceiling. Only a year ago, U.S. officials floated 4,000 as a possible compromise.

One of the officials said discussions focus on an extra 480 centrifuges at Fordo. That would potentially bring the total number of machines to close to 6,500.

David Albright of Washington’s Institute for Security and International Security says a few hundred centrifuges operated by the Iranians would not be a huge threat — if they were anywhere else but the sensitive Fordo site.

Beyond its symbolic significance, “it keeps the infrastructure in place and keeps a leg up, if they want to restart (uranium) enrichment operations,” said Albright, who is a go-to person on the Iran nuclear issue for the U.S. government.

 

40 Points Against Israel

Posted on by

The Obama plan to unseat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed, so it appears the mission of Europe is to force a Palestinian versus Israel confrontation.

There is little doubt the White House is fully supportive of this operation. EU plans to pressure Israel as diplomat warns of ‘collision course’ Leaked report outlines 40 suggestions to sway Israeli policy; EU source: more chance of implementation in wake of Netanyahu rejection of Palestinian state. A European Union report obtained by Ynet on Wednesday outlines suggestions on how to pressure Israel into returning to negotiations, in a list of 40 possible decisions. An EU diplomatic source told Ynet that there was a definite chance that the recommendations in the report, which the member states have yet to approve, were more likely to be implemented following Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statement during his election campaign that a Palestinian state would not be created under his rule.

Netanyahu and Merkel. Israel and Europe are at loggerheads. (Photo: Reuters) Netanyahu and Merkel. Israel and Europe are at loggerheads. (Photo: Reuters)

“We are on a collision course,” said the European diplomat. “It’s clear to everyone in Brussels that there must be a response to these statements.”   The diplomat said the EU does not believe Netanyahu’s subsequent backtracking on the creation of a Palestinian state. He added that Europe is interested in having a positive relationship with Israel, but considers Israel to be an entity that does not extend beyond the Green Line – the boundaries of Israel from its founding in 1948 until the 1967 Six-Day War.   “If Israel continues its policy beyond the Green Line, it will affect the relationship between European nations and Israel,” he warned.   The heads of diplomatic missions in Jerusalem and Ramallah recommend several steps in the report, and the majority of the 40 recommendations may be hard for Israel to swallow.   The European source hinted that the election results and expected formation of a right-wing government in Israel mean the recommendations will be taken especially seriously by the EU.

 

The report describes 2014 as one of the tensest years in Jerusalem since the end of the Second Intifada.   Drafted before the end of Israel’s election campaign, the document warns against “a vicious cycle of polarization and violence following the rapid deterioration of the situation on the ground.”

EU seeks to increase involvement in peace process

The EU is keen to bring Israelis and Palestinians back to the negotiating table after peace talks collapsed last year, with the bloc’s new foreign policy chief seeking to reinvigorate European involvement in the negotiations.   Israel should make “every effort to ensure an early resumption of the Middle East peace process,” the EU said in a series of annual reports assessing progress on democracy and human rights in countries close to the 28-nation bloc.   A separate report urged the Palestinian Authority to pursue “positive steps” to restart peace talks.   EU foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini, who took on her position in November, wants to more closely involve Arab states in the work of the Middle East Quartet, which comprises the United States, United Nations, the EU and Russia.   Rather than expanding the Quartet, it would hold more frequent top-level meetings with at least Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, senior diplomats have said.   Last week, the bloc chose veteran Italian negotiator Fernando Gentilini as its special representative to the Middle East.   In its reports, the EU called on Israel to ensure respect for international law and human rights in the Palestinian territories.   While the EU recognized Israel had the right to defend itself, the “devastating effect” of last year’s Gaza conflict on civilians “underlined the significant challenges attached to Israel’s responsibilities in the occupied territories,” it said.   Hamas and other Gaza militant groups fought a 50-day war with Israel last July and August in which more than 2,100 Palestinians, many of them civilians, were killed. On the Israeli side 67 soldiers and six civilians were killed.   The EU also urged the Palestinian Authority to resume full governmental responsibility in Gaza and to organize free and fair presidential and legislative elections.

WH Ignoring the Expanding Global Shia Crescent?

Posted on by

Iran and the ‘Shia Crescent’

By By Dr. Scott Catino
School of Security and Global Studies, AMU

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.

 

Obama Snubs Europe in Favor of Russia

Posted on by

In recent days, Barack Obama has been cozy with the president of Afghanistan, Ghani granted him the favor of extending the deployments of troops in the Afghan theater. Ashraf Ghani is visiting the White House and giving a speech to Congress that is full of gratitude for the United States commitment to the country.

This raises Obama’s reputation in dealing with foreign affairs, but does it really? When applied to matters in the Middle East, the Far East and Europe, his attention to nurturing those relationships continue to dive.

The NATO General Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg is in town for 3 days to deal with the crisis in Ukraine that is spilling over to Europe, the Baltic States and Ukraine. Obama has no time to meet with him, zero. The question is why?

President Barack Obama has yet to meet with the new head of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and won’t see Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg this week, even though he is in Washington for three days.  Stoltenberg’s office requested a meeting with Obama well in advance of the visit, but never heard anything from the White House, two sources close to the NATO chief told me.

The leaders of almost all the other 28 NATO member countries have made time for Stoltenberg since he took over the world’s largest military alliance in October. Stoltenberg, twice the prime minister of Norway, met Monday with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper in Ottawa to discuss the threat of the Islamic State and the crisis in Ukraine, two issues near the top of Obama’s agenda.
Kurt Volker, who served as the U.S. permanent representative to NATO under both President George W. Bush and Obama, said the president broke a long tradition.  “The Bush administration held a firm line that if the NATO secretary general came to town, he would be seen by the president … so as not to diminish his stature or authority,” he told me.

America’s commitment to defend its NATO allies is its biggest treaty obligation, said Volker, adding that European security is at its most perilous moment since the Cold War. Russia has moved troops and weapons into eastern Ukraine, annexed Crimea, placed nuclear-capable missiles in striking distance of NATO allies, flown strategic-bomber mock runs in the North Atlantic, practiced attack approaches on the U.K. and Sweden, and this week threatened to aim nuclear missiles at Denmark’s warships.
“It is hard for me to believe that the president of the United States has not found the time to meet with the current secretary general of NATO given the magnitude of what this implies, and the responsibilities of his office,” Volker said.

Bernadette Meehan, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council, declined to say why Obama didn’t respond to Stoltenberg’s request. “We don’t have any meetings to announce at this time,” she told me in a statement. Sources told me that Stoltenberg was able to arrange a last-minute meeting with Defense Secretary Ashton Carter.
According to White House press releases, Obama didn’t exactly have a packed schedule. On Tuesday, he held important meetings and a press conference with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani at the White House (Ghani will meet with Stoltenberg while they are both in town). But the only event on Obama’s public schedule for Wednesday is a short speech to kick off a meeting related to the Affordable Care Act. On Thursday, he will head to Alabama to give a speech about the economy.

Stoltenberg is in town primarily for the NATO Transformation Seminar, a once-a-year strategic brainstorming session that brings together NATO’s leadership with experts and top officials from the host country. The event is organized by the Allied Command Transformation in Norfolk, Virginia, and the Atlantic Council.

“The focus of this year’s seminar is to think through how best to update NATO’s strategy given real threats in the east and the south, against the backdrop of a dramatically changing world,” said Damon Wilson, a former NSC senior director for Europe who is now with the Atlantic Council. “The practical focus is to begin developing the road map to the next NATO summit, which will take place in Warsaw in July 2016, a summit which will presumably be the capstone and last summit for the Obama administration.”

Last year, the seminar was hosted in Paris, and then-NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen got a separate bilateral meeting with President Francois Hollande of France.

Last Friday, at the German Marshall Fund Brussels Forum, Stoltenberg talked about the importance of close coordination inside NATO in order to first confront Russian aggression and then eventually move toward a stable relationship with Moscow.

“The only way we can have the confidence to engage with Russia,” he said, “is to have the confidence and the strength which is provided by strong collective defense, the NATO alliance.”

Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski told the Brussels Forum that there has been a worrisome lag between NATO’s promises of more defensive equipment for Poland and what has actually arrived, a blow to the alliance’s credibility. “It’s very important and necessary for everyone to have the conviction, including the potential aggressor to have this conviction, that NATO is truly determined to execute contingency plans,” he said.

The White House missed a perfect opportunity to reinforce that message this week in snubbing Stoltenberg. It fits into a narrative pushed by Obama critics that he would rather meet with problematic leaders such as Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, who will get an Oval Office meeting next month, than firm allies. The message Russian President Vladimir Putin will take away is that the White House-NATO relationship is rocky, and he will be right.

*** Putin is taking full advantage of this neglect and the means by which it plays out does not have a positive result. When it comes to Ukraine, we are bound by a long standing agreement to support and protect the country, to date that has not happened. Ukraine is working to increase the size of its forces against continued Russian aggression. Obama has refused to tend to the relationship with Poland. As a gesture, we have deployed 4 A-10’s to Poland. Even the country of Georgia is at risk of Russian juggernaut.

MOSCOW — President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that a recent Russian military exercise has marked the beginning of a series of such drills this year, a show of force that comes amid a bitter strain with the West over Ukraine.

Reflecting the tensions, U.S. and other NATO forces staged maneuvers in the Baltics, and a convoy of U.S. troops has driven through eastern Europe in a bid to reassure the allies.

Last week’s Russian maneuvers that spread from the Arctic to the Black Sea involved 80,000 troops, about 100 navy ships and more than 220 aircraft.

Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported to Putin Tuesday that the maneuvers were aimed at checking the readiness of the newly formed group of forces in the Arctic, as well as the military’s capability to quickly field troops to several theaters of operations.

“I proceed from the assumption that this was just the start of efforts to train the armed forces,” Putin said.

As part of the drills, the state-of-the art Iskander missiles were deployed to Russia’s westernmost exclave of Kaliningrad bordering NATO members Poland and Lithuania, and long-range, nuclear-capable Tu-22M3 bombers were sent to Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula Russia annexed from Ukraine a year ago.

 

The move was intended to demonstrate Russia’s readiness to raise the ante amid a bitter strain in relations with the West, but for now the Kremlin apparently has stopped short of making the deployment permanent.

Shoigu reported to Putin that all troops involved in the maneuvers have returned to their home bases.

Asked specifically if the Iskander missiles also had returned to their location, Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov referred to Shoigu’s statement in comments carried by Russian news agencies.

Even though the latest maneuvers ended last week, the Russian military continued their training.

NATO said it scrambled Danish and Italian jets based in Lithuania early Tuesday to escort four Russian military jets flying with their transponders switched off in international airspace over the Baltic Sea. The alliance said the Russian planes were heading to Kaliningrad.