Category Archives: Iran Israel

Iran, Argentina, Cuba, Venezuela, Nuclear Program and a Dead Body

Posted on by

This is likely going to be the longest and wordiest post on this website, but it is germane to events today when it comes to Barack Obama spiking the football on the Iran nuclear deal.

Alberto Nisman is dead.

I have been tracking this event in Argentina for several months and thanks to New Yorker magazine, several more items are now in better perspective.

After hanging around in WikiLeaks cables, more truth bubbles to the surface with regard to Barack Obama, Iran and inspections but more so, Iran’s further covert operations in Latin America, in our own hemisphere.

GW Bush, told Iran, there will be NO negotiations.

The IAEA could not get access to sites for inspection, yet Barack Obama well full throttle with talks, paying to get Iran to the table and to keep them there. The White House knew quite well about Iran’s black market actions in Cuba, Venezuela and in Argentina and embassy officials put out cables for a call to action.

In 1994, there was a truck bomb at a Jewish Center in Argentina that killed 85 and injured hundreds. Prosecutor Alberto Nisman worked years to prove it was at the request of Nasrallah with the orders given by the top officials in the Iranian regime. The investigation by Nisman led him around the globe to perform interviews, work with the FBI who did the forensic investigation and even Interpol issued ‘red-sheets’.

Alberto Nisman is DEAD. He was shot a day before he was to present his full case to an Argentinian panel of judges.

This WikiLeaks cable explains in short form the events and the complicity of the top government officials in Argentina to cover up the whole history which brings in the White House, Cuba, Venezuela and Iran.

Who knew that Argentina had a nuclear program and was enriching uranium? Well those in the Obama administration did, Iran did, Venezuela did as well as Cuba and the United Nations. Ahmadinejad needed all 3 Latin American country’s cooperation and he got it willingly.

Oh and Reuters knew as well.

Did Venezuela begin a nuclear program? Not yet, but they had uranium and the discussion began as well as clandestine deals including cooperation with Iran.

Alberto Nisman is still dead and no one is paying attention to who killed him, except Iran and Argentina’s President Kirchner, she is paid and is an agent of Iran to cover for Iran’s guilt in the death of Nisman but more on the 1992 AIMA bombing.

Do the Saudis know about all of this? Yes, they are more concerned about Iran than Israel due to the hate going back many more years so they keep pace with all actions of Iran. The Saudis even warned several intelligence services in Latin America.

If you are inclined to see the Iranians in Argentina and who played several nefarious roles there. click here.

Several in President Kirchner’s administration have traveled to the White House to ask Obama and the Department of Justice to influence Interpol to remove sanctions on key Iranian players in exchange for additional information on Iran’s nuclear weapons program in country and in Latin America. The WH said no, the inner circle during the WH lead P5+1 talks was a tight and highly controlled group and those Iranians on the Interpol list may be needed during the negotiations until Iran said NO to John Kerry.

For a full yet shorter explanation of the murder of Alberto Nisman, click here.

As for the New Yorker story which as written should be a Hollywood thriller, click here and enjoy some popcorn during the long read.

Defeat of ISIS in Iraq Remains Elusive

Posted on by

From the Department of Defense:

Coalition Airstrikes Destroy Vehicle Bomb Factory in Iraq

From a Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve News Release

SOUTHWEST ASIA, July 15, 2015 – U.S. and coalition military forces have continued to attack Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve officials reported today.

“In the past 48 hours, coalition airstrikes hit five vehicle-borne [improvised explosive devices] and a factory producing these weapons in Ramadi,” said Army Lt. Col. Thomas Gilleran, task force spokesman. “Removing these weapons from the battlefield is a high priority for the coalition.”

Officials reported details of the latest strikes, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.

Airstrikes in Syria

Attack, bomber, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 16 airstrikes in Syria:

— Near Hasakah, six airstrikes struck an ISIL large tactical unit and five ISIL tactical units destroying two ISIL fighting positions, an ISIL bunker, an ISIL tunnel entrance, an ISIL vehicle-borne improvised explosive device, an ISIL anti-aircraft artillery weapon, an ISIL artillery piece and two ISIL checkpoints.

— Near Aleppo, six airstrikes struck 27 ISIL staging areas.

— Near Raqqah, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

— Near Dayr Az Zawr, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

— Near Kobani, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.

— Near Tal Abyad, an airstrike struck an ISIL large tactical unit and destroyed three ISIL fighting positions.

ISW: ‘ISIS will benefit’ from the Iran nuclear deal

The United States and other world powers struck a landmark deal with Iran over its nuclear program this week, and the agreement might benefit one group that the US hadn’t counted on — the Islamic State.

Hassan Hassan, an associate fellow at the think tank Chatham House and co-author of the recent book “ISIS: Inside The Army of Terror,” told The Wall Street Journal that the nuclear deal could make already-disaffected Sunnis feel even more like the US and Iran are conspiring against them.

“ISIS will benefit a lot from this deal; segments of the Sunni community in the region will see Iran as having won and brought in from the dark,” Hassan said.

The Islamic State (also known as ISIS, ISIL, and Daesh), a Sunni terror group, already capitalizes on Sunni grievances for recruitment and support. ISIS presents itself as the sole protector of Sunni populations in Iraq and Syria, where Shiite-aligned regimes dominate.

And conspiracy theories about US collusion with Iran, a Shiite theocracy, add fuel to the flames as Iran expands its influence across the Middle East.

“ISIS has already convinced a number of Sunni tribes that the Iranians are already establishing the Shia crescent” and Sunni interests won’t be protected, Christopher Harmer, a senior naval analyst at the Institute for the Study of War, told Business Insider last month.

View gallery

.

isis control

(The Institute for the Study of War)

Allowing Iran to maintain its nuclear program, albeit a curtailed and controlled version of it, isn’t likely to make Sunnis rest easy. While the deal is designed to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, some are skeptical about whether Iran will hold up its end of the bargain.

There’s also concern about the sanctions relief that comes with the deal — Iran is already pouring billions of dollars into proxy conflicts in Iraq and Syria, and the extra money that will come with an easing of western sanctions might be used to ramp up Iran’s participation in these conflicts.

President Barack Obama has assured skeptics that the money from sanctions relief will be spent on growing the Iranian economy, but Eli Lake reported last month that Iran is spending much more to support the embattled regime of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad than the Obama administration has ever acknowledged.

.

iran assad Khamenei

(REUTERS/Stringer (IRAN)) Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad meets Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran February 18, 2007.

Iran also puts significant resources into fighting ISIS in Iraq. The Shia militias Iran supports and, in some cases, controls have become one of the most effective ground forces against the Sunni extremists.

Even though the militias are fairly effective at driving ISIS terrorists out of cities, the militia fighters themselves have been accused of burning down Sunni villages and committing atrocities against civilians, which only serves to widen the gulf between Sunnis and Shiites.

And even in some cases where there isn’t outright violence against Sunni civilians, militia members have reportedly refused to let many Sunnis back into their homes after ISIS has left their cities.

This is all what ISIS wants. The group thrives on sectarian chaos and hopes to drive Shias to commit atrocities so that Sunnis who might have previously turned against ISIS will be forced to live with the extremists, lest they make enemies of both ISIS and the militias.

“Much of Iran’s funding in Syria has gone toward arming predominantly Shia proxies—notably the so-called National Defense Force, an IRGC-QF-built super-militia—which fight Sunnis on behalf of Assad,” Michael Weiss and Nancy Youssef wrote for The Daily Beast. “An outgrowth of the sectarianism inherent in the Iranian and Syrian regime’s counterinsurgency has been ISIS, which draws thousands of Sunnis seeking to shield themselves from what they view as Shia jihadists.”

 For a full summary of White House policy to date, click here.

 

 

Iran’s Nuclear Program was Illegal Until it Wasn’t

Posted on by

There have been several UN resolutions with declarations against Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

There have been global sanctions on Iran, until the JPOA was signed on July 14, 2015 where they are being lifted not only by the United Nations and the United States but other nations as well.

Iran was rogue and isolated worldwide until it wasn’t. Iran is now wealthy and will fund future terror around the globe by using the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and dispatched militia teams.

While many are in shock with the text of the JPOA, the matter does not end there, in fact there is a secondary agreement underway.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) cannot perform inspections unless nations involved sign off on reasons as to why, where evidence has to be presented to request and inspection. Then a formal application for inspections in writing must be presented to Tehran where up to one month is granted to Iran for approval and may only apply to one or two of the several nuclear sites.

The roadmap or second agreement is being drafted now for presentation, negotiations and approval and this is the core of the matter of the JPOA. Iran wins still but read one.

IAEA Director General’s Statement and Road-map for the Clarification of Past & Present Outstanding Issues regarding Iran’s Nuclear Program

IAEA Director General’s Statement:

“I have just signed the Road-map between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA for the clarification of past and present outstanding issues regarding Iran’s nuclear programme. The text has been signed on behalf of Iran by the country’s Vice-President, and President of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Mr Ali Akbar Salehi. This is a significant step forward towards clarifying outstanding issues regarding Iran’s nuclear programme.

The Road-map sets out a process, under the November 2013 Framework for Cooperation, to enable the Agency, with the cooperation of Iran, to make an assessment of issues relating to possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme by the end of 2015.

It sets out a clear sequence of activities over the coming months, including the provision by Iran of explanations regarding outstanding issues. It provides for technical expert meetings, technical measures and discussions, as well as a separate arrangement regarding the issue of Parchin.

This should enable me to issue a report setting out the Agency’s final assessment of possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme, for the action of the IAEA Board of Governors, by 15 December 2015. “I will keep the Board regularly updated on the implementation of the Road-map.

Implementation of this Road-map will provide an important opportunity to resolve the outstanding issues related to Iran’s nuclear programme.”

 

Road-map for the Clarification of Past and Present Outstanding Issues regarding Iran’s Nuclear Program:

1. On 14 July 2015, the Director General Yukiya Amano and the Vice-President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, President of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi signed in Vienna a “Road-map for the clarification of past and present outstanding issues regarding Iran’s nuclear program”. The IAEA and Iran agreed, in continuation of their cooperation under the Framework for Cooperation, to accelerate and strengthen their cooperation and dialogue aimed at the resolution, by the end of 2015, of all past and present outstanding issues that have not already been resolved by the IAEA and Iran.

Joint Statement

by the IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano and the Vice-President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, President of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano and the Vice-President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, President of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi agreed on 14 July 2015 the following

Road-map for the clarification of past and present outstanding issues regarding Iran’s nuclear program

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran) agree, in continuation of their cooperation under the Framework for Cooperation, to accelerate and strengthen their cooperation and dialogue aimed at the resolution, by the end of 2015, of all past and present outstanding issues that have not already been resolved by the IAEA and Iran.

In this context, Iran and the Agency agreed on the following:

1. The IAEA and Iran agreed on a separate arrangement that would allow them to address the remaining outstanding issues, as set out in the annex of the 2011 Director’s General report (GOV/2011/65). Activities undertaken and the outcomes achieved to date by Iran and the IAEA regarding some of the issues will be reflected in the process.

2. Iran will provide, by 15 August 2015, its explanations in writing and related documents to the IAEA, on issues contained in the separate arrangement mentioned in paragraph 1.

3. After receiving Iran’s written explanations and related documents, the IAEA will review this information by 15 September 2015, and will submit to Iran questions on any possible ambiguities regarding such information.

4. After the IAEA has submitted to Iran questions on any possible ambiguities regarding such information, technical-expert meetings, technical measures, as agreed in a separate arrangement, and discussions will be organized in Tehran to remove such ambiguities.

5. Iran and the IAEA agreed on another separate arrangement regarding the issue of Parchin.

6. All activities, as set out above, will be completed by 15 October 2015, aimed at resolving all past and present outstanding issues, as set out in the annex of the 2011 Director General’s report (GOV/2011/65).

7. The Director General will provide regular updates to the Board of Governors on the implementation of this Road-map.

8. By 15 December 2015, the Director General will provide, for action by the Board of Governors, the final assessment on the resolution of all past and present outstanding issues, as set out in the annex of the 2011 Director General’s report (GOV/2011/65). A wrap up technical meeting between Iran and the Agency will be organized before the issuance of the report.

9. Iran stated that it will present, in writing, its comprehensive assessment to the IAEA on the report by the Director General.

10. In accordance with the Framework for Cooperation, the Agency will continue to take into account Iran’s security concerns.

 

For the International Atomic Energy Agency:

(signed)

Yukiya Amano

Director General

 

For the Islamic Republic of Iran:

(signed)

Ali Akbar Salehi

Vice-President of the Islamic Republic of Iran

President of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran

 

Place: Vienna

Date: 14 July 2015

Iran JPOA Titled Executive Agreement Not Treaty

Posted on by

Full text of the Iran deal is here.

Official the Joint Plan of Action with Iran is now complete with several items considered just housekeeping matters are still to be worked out. The Parchin plant MAY have allowed inspections while the other locations are off limits. The Fordo plant continues the enrichment work and Bashir al Assad is dancing at Disney. (sarcasm)

It is unclear if the UK Parliament or France votes on the JPOA but it is likely to occur. China and Russia stand with Iran especially on the arms embargo and sanction relief side.

Israel is sounding the alarms for security not only for Israel but for America and Europe.

Lifted sanctions include these individuals:

Embedded image permalink

 

For the full text of the JPOA, click here.

By at Bloomberg:

As the Senate wraps up debate this week on Iran legislation, expect to hear a lot about “hardliners.”

The Senate’s alleged hardliners have tried to add conditions to a nuclear deal the U.S. is currently negotiating with Iranian moderates, but there is little chance the senators will succeed. The majority leader, Mitch McConnell, is expected to call for an end to debate on their meddling amendments.

According to a certain school of thought, all of this is a good thing. Our hardliners, say cheerleaders for the Iran negotiations, empower Iran’s hardliners, who are also wary of a deal.

President Obama views the politics of the Iran deal in these terms himself. Back in March when Senator Tom Cotton and 46 other Republicans sent a letter to Iran’s leaders, reminding them that any deal signed with Obama could be reversed by Congress or future presidents, the president played the hardliner card: “I think it’s somewhat ironic to see some members for Congress wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran.”

There is definitely a political logic to pinning this “hardliner” label on the senators. The White House can artfully shift the conversation away from the contents of the deal it is negotiating. Instead the debate is framed as the Americans and Iranians who seek peace (moderates) versus those in both nations who want war (hardliners).

It’s simple, but deceptive. This tactic understates the power of Iran’s hardliners and dramatically overstates the power of U.S. hardliners.

In Iran, the people inside the system who are negotiating a deal, such as Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, must take the agreement to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, for approval. In Iran, the hardliner approves the deal.

In the U.S. system it’s the other way around. Senators like Marco Rubio, Tom Cotton and Ted Cruz support amendments that would set new conditions before lifting Congressional sanctions on Iran. But there are not enough votes in the Senate to overturn an Obama veto on the legislation if these amendments are attached. In other words, Obama frames the conversation in the U.S., because he has the power to ignore his hardliners whereas Zarif is obliged to placate his.

Then there is the substance of the amendments themselves. Democrats and Republicans have derided certain Republicans’ amendments to the bill as “poison pills,” aimed at making a deal with Iran impossible. But these amendments would require Iran to end its war against its neighbors, release U.S. citizens who have been jailed and recognize the right of the world’s only Jewish state to exist. Outside the context of Iran negotiations, these are hardly radical views. Obama has expressed support for these positions himself.

Compare those demands with those of the Iranian hardliners. Gen. Hassan Firouzabadi, the chief of staff of Iran’s armed forces on Sunday reiterated the red line that no military installations would be accessible for international inspections. This would pose a problem, given that the U.S. and other great powers have agreed to allow Iran to keep most of its nuclear infrastructure in exchange for tough inspections. The Iranian hardliners appear to be putting back in play something Obama’s team believed was already agreed.

The most important distinction between Iran’s hardliners and America’s hardliners however is their political legitimacy. Iran’s people have supported reform, but nonetheless the country’s Revolutionary Guard Corps and domestic spy agency have tightened the grip on power despite elections when reformers won the presidency.

Contrast their ascent with the plight of Iran’s moderates: In 1997, Iranians elected a reformer president, Mohammed Khatami, who promised to open up Iran’s political system. But throughout his presidency he was unable to stop the arrests of student activists or the shuttering of opposition newspapers. By the end of Khatami’s presidency, some of his closest advisers were tried in public for charges tantamount to treason. In 2013, Iranians elected Hassan Rouhani, who ran as a reformer even though under Khatami he had overseen crackdowns on reformers. Rouhani has not freed the leaders of the 2009 green movement from house arrest or most of the activists who protested elections in 2009.

When Obama talks about his Iran negotiations, he glosses over all of this. He emphasizes instead that Rouhani has a mandate to negotiate and that he is taking advantage of this diplomatic window.

Obama had threatened to veto legislation that would give Congress a chance to review, but not modify, any agreement the administration reaches with Iran and five other world powers. Now the president says he will sign the legislation, but only if it doesn’t include the kinds of amendments favored by the so-called hardliners. After all, those amendments are unacceptable to the hardliners who actually have sway — in Iran.

Iran Deal, Deviled Details and $300 Billion

Posted on by

Both sides are saying the others are throwing sand in the gears to publishing a final document of the Joint Plan of Action with Iran and the P5+1.

In part from FarsNews: “We have reached a stage now that the other side should decide if it is seeking an agreement or pressure; we have said many times that agreement and pressure cannot come together and one of them should be chosen,” Zarif told reporters in Vienna.

He reiterated that if the other side shows political will and inclination for a balanced and good deal it will be achievable.

Zarif, however, said that unfortunately the other side is showing change in stances and raising excessive demands which make the conditions difficult, adding, “We are doing our best as Supreme Leader (of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei) and other Iranian officials have said many times we are looking for a good deal and we will continue the negotiations; we have never left the negotiations and we will not in future.”

The Geneva interim deal envisaged the removal of all the UN and unilateral US and EU sanctions against Iran under a final comprehensive deal.

Also, in a framework agreement approved by the six powers and Iran in April known as the Lausanne Statement, the seven nations agreed that a final deal would include removal of all sanctions as well as a UN Security Council resolution which would call all the five UNSC sanctions resolutions imposed against Iran’s nuclear activities as “null and void”.

The first two UNSC resolutions boycotted export of military, specially missile, hardware and software to Iran, a sanction that – along with all the other embargoes imposed against Iran under the five UNSC resolutions – would be automatically removed under the new UNSC resolution that, according to the Lausanne framework agreement, should be issued on the same day that the final deal is endorsed.

Hence, the debate over the removal of the UN Security Council arms embargoes against Iran means US defiance of both agreements.

From the WSJ: If no deal is reached by Monday night, the two sides must again agree to extend the terms of their November 2013 interim nuclear deal or risk seeing two years of high-stakes diplomacy unravel. That accord offered modest sanctions relief for Iran in exchange for Tehran freezing parts of its nuclear program.

Among the final issues to be resolved are disagreements about the timing and sequencing of sanctions relief for Iran and the continuation of a ban on sales of arms and ballistic-missile parts to Iran. Officials have also been toiling over the text of a new U.N. Security Council resolution that would keep some restrictions on Iran and outline steps the country would take to detail its past nuclear activities.

One European official said Sunday there was “no way” negotiations could continue beyond Monday.

“Everything can fail still, but we are really near the end,” said a German official late Sunday. “With the willingness of Tehran to take the final steps, it could now go quickly. We are ready to negotiate all night.”

The matter of lifting sanctions, suspending other over 15 years funds future terrorism by infusing Iran with $300 billion.

From Foreign Policy Magazine: Barack Obama’s administration and the other parties to the interim nuclear deal with Iran now seem to be saying they are willing to release to Iran between a third and a half a trillion dollars over the next 15 years in order for Iran not to give up the program, but to freeze it. In other words, we are not restoring Iran’s assets and income sources in exchange for permanently and irreversibly accepting international standards; we are just renting the country’s restraint, offering it access to hundreds of billions of dollars to make any future nuclear program development the problem of the next U.S. president — or the one after that.

The problem is compounded by the fact that Iran’s nuclear program is not viewed by its neighbors as the main threat the country poses. A systematic, 35-year campaign of regional meddling, destabilization, and extension of Iranian influence is seen as a much bigger issue. And restoring cash flows and assets to Iran, as well as giving the country greater international standing, clearly exacerbates that threat. It gives Tehran the wherewithal to continue to underwrite terrorists like Hezbollah and Hamas, prop up dictators like Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, and buy ever greater influence in places like Iraq and Yemen.

The consequences of Iran’s regional strategy were on display this week in Washington when Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi essentially read from Iranian talking points when addressing the conflict in Yemen. He took a stance against Saudi intervention to stop Iranian-backed Houthis, suggested Iran’s role in Yemen was overstated, and even went so far as to suggest Obama had told him that he was not supportive of the Saudis. The White House immediately denied the last accusation but can’t have been too happy with the rest of the statement that came from the leader of a country the United States had spent hundreds of billions to “liberate.”