Category Archives: Russia

Putin Officially Stakes Exclusive Claim to the Artic

Posted on by

Without even so much as a whimper from anyone in Washington DC, Putin made his final submission to the United Nations in writing claiming expanded sovereignty of Russia for the Artic.

This was tried before by Russia and it was denied in 2001.

The question is why is the United Nations the final approval authority for such a claim under which the matter is governed by the Law of the Seas?

Obama’s feeble position on the Artic

In May 2013, President Obama published the National Strategy for the Arctic Region, defining the desired end state as an Arctic Region stable and free of conflict, where nations act responsibly in a spirit of trust and cooperation, and where economic and energy resources are developed in a sustainable manner. In November 2013, the Secretary of Defense published the Department of Defense Arctic Strategy, identifying two supporting objectives to the National Strategy:

• Ensure security, support safety, and promote defense cooperation;
• Prepare for a wide range of challenges and contingencies.

In support of National and Department of Defense aims, the Navy will pursue the following strategic objectives:

• Ensure United States Arctic sovereignty and provide homeland defense;
• Provide ready naval forces to respond to crisis and contingencies;
• Preserve freedom of the seas; and
• Promote partnerships within the United States Government and with international allies and partners.

Full detail here.

Russia’s Application Summary to the United Nations

INTRODUCTION

The Russian Federation signed 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (“Convention”) on 10 December 1982 (then the USSR) and ratified it on 26 February 1997. The Convention entered into force for the Russian Federation on 11 April 1997. In accordance with Article 77 of the Convention, the Russian Federation proceeds from the fact that the rights of the coastal state over the continental shelf exist ipso facto and ab initio.

This Submission of the Russian Federation, which is made on the basis of Article 76.8 of the Convention, is a partial revised submission and covers the part of the Arctic Ocean region. The area under consideration was included in the first Submission of the Russian Federation (made on 10 December 2001) in respect of the extended continental shelf, which was considered at the 11th session of the Commission from 24 to 28 June 2002.

Recommendations relating to the Arctic Ocean adopted at that session of the Commission (L. Recommendations / D. Summary of recommendations. Central Arctic Ocean) say: 154/166. The Commission recommends that the Russian Federation make a revised submission in respect

of its extended continental shelf in the Central Arctic Ocean based on the findings contained in these recommendations.

155/167. The Commission recommends that the Russian Federation follow the scientific and technical advice contained in its Scientific and Technical Guidelines, and as indicated in the various sections of these Recommendations of the Commission.

156/168. The Commission recommends that according to the materials provided in the submission the Lomonosov Ridge cannot be considered a submarine elevation under the Convention.

157/169. The Commission recommends that, according to the current state of scientific knowledge, the Alpha-Mendeleev Ridge Complex cannot be considered a submarine elevation under the Convention.

Guided by the provisions of the Rules of Procedure and the STG, and also taking into account the practice of the Commission, the Russian Federation reserves the right to introduce amendments and additions to this partial revised Submission that can be based on new or additional research data and may provide changes to the presented OLCS line of the Russian Federation.

1. EXTENDED CONTINENTAL SHELF OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN THE ARCTIC OCEAN

This partial revised Submission of the Russian Federation for establishment of the OLCS in the Arctic Ocean is made to include in the extended continental shelf of the Russian Federation, in accordance with article 76 of the Convention, the seabed and its subsoil in the central Arctic Ocean which is natural prolongation of the Russian land territory.

The basis for the extension of rights to the extended continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean is the identity of the submitted areas to the continental shelf, as well as the OLCS position under Article 76 of the Convention at a distance of more than 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured. In the case of the Russian Federation, this distance coincides with the boundary of the Russian exclusive economic zone. Paragraph 1 of Article 3 of the Federal Act “On the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Russian Federation”(No. 191, dated December 17, 1998) states that:

PARTIAL REVISED SUBMISSION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION TO THE COMMISSION ON THE LIMITS OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF IN RESPECT OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN THE ARCTIC OCEAN

The outer limit of the exclusive economic zone is established at a distance of 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured, unless otherwise is stipulated by the international treaties of the Russian Federation.

Requirements of Paragraph 1 of Article 75 of the Convention provide that:

Subject to this Part, the outer limit lines of the exclusive economic zone and the lines of delimitation drawn in accordance with article 74 shall be shown on charts of a scale or scales adequate for ascertaining their position. Where appropriate, such limit lines or delimitation lines may be substituted by a list of geographical coordinates of points, specifying the geodetic datum.

The line of the Russian exclusive economic zone is shown on the chart of Central Arctic Basin (admiralty No. 91115), publication of the Department of Navigation and Oceanography of the Russian Ministry of Defense in 2014.

The list of straight baseline points was approved by Decree of the USSR Council of Ministers of 15 January 1985 and published in the book “Maritime Legislation of the Russian Federation” (1994) by the Main Department of Navigation and Oceanography (admiralty No. 9055). An English translation of the said list has been officially handed over to the UN Secretary General and placed on the UN website (see List of straight baseline points 4450 “RUS_1985_Declaration”).

The List contains coordinates of the straight baseline endpoints. The position of the normal baselines adjoining the straight baselines in this document is recorded with the text: “onwards along the low-water line up to the base point …. No.”.

The area of the seabed of the Arctic ocean (Fig. 1), considered in this revised partial submission and relevant to the OLCS determination of the Russian Federation under article 76 of the Convention, covers the geomorphological continental shelf of the Russian Arctic marginal seas, part of the Eurasian basin (Nansen basin and Amundsen, the Gakkel ridgeThe Arctic Ocean seabed area considered in this partial revised Submission that for establishment of the OLCS of the Russian Federation under Article 76 of the Convention includes the geomorphological shelf of the Russian Arctic marginal seas, part of the Eurasian Basin (the Nansen, Amundsen basins and the Gakkel Ridge), and the Central Amerasian Basin consisting of the Makarov Basin and Complex of the Central Arctic Submarine Elevations, which includes the Lomonosov Ridge, Podvodnikov Basin, Mendeleev-Alpha Rise, Mendeleev and Chukchi basins, and Chukchi Plateau.

Partial revised Submission of the Russian Federation on the establishment of the OLCS in the Arctic Ocean proceeds from the scientific understanding that the constituent parts of the Complex of the Central Arctic Submarine Elevations, namely the Lomonosov Ridge, Mendeleev-Alpha Rise, and Chukchi Plateau, and separating them the Podvodnikov and Chukchi Basins have the continental origin and belong to submarine elevations that are natural components of the continental margin under paragraph 6 of Article 76 of the Convention, which are not subject to distance limit of 350 nautical miles from the baselines.

The submitted OLCS line under Article 76 of the Convention in accordance with this partial revised Submission is shown on the schematic map included in the Executive Summary (Fig. 1). A more detailed description of the claimed OLCS is given below in the corresponding section of the Executive Summary.

In accordance with Paragraphs 3.2.1 and 3.2.3 of the STG, all distances in the partial revised Submission of the Russian Federation for establishment of the OLCS in the Arctic Ocean are given in nautical miles (M) or metres (m).

Many more details and the full Russian document is found here.

 

 

AQAP New Threat Against America

Posted on by

An al-Qaeda operative freed in a prison assault in Yemen has exploited chaos caused by fighting in the country to take a touristic tour of government buildings and posted photos of the visit online.

Khalid Batarfi, a high-ranking member of the jihadi group’s powerful Yemeni branch al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), is seen posing with a smile inside the local provincial governor palace in the southern port of al-Mukalla, in pictures circulated on social media.

Al Qaeda branch calls for new attacks against United States

(CNN)Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen, which officials have called the terror group’s most dangerous affiliate, has issued two threatening new communiques praising recent lone-wolf style attacks against the West and calling for more of them.

“We urge you to strike America in its own home and beyond,” says a letter attributed to Ibrahim al-Asiri, the master bomb-maker with al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

The letter, according to a translation by SITE Intelligence Group, states, “America is first.”

CNN is unable to independently verify that Asiri himself wrote it, but the letter has drawn the attention of terror trackers such as MEMRI, Flashpoint and SITE.

A U.S. counterterrorism official described the letter as “consistent with rhetoric the new leader stated upon taking over al Qaeda’s most active affiliate that is known to threaten Western interests.”

A big bounty

Asiri has a $5 million bounty on his head, and analysts say if he did write the letter, he may have been putting himself at risk.

“The concern for Asiri would be that somehow the message would be traceable back to him — whether by courier, or some digital stamp inside of the message,” said Katherine Zimmerman of the American Enterprise Institute. “We have seen U.S. drone strikes kill a series of top al Qaeda leaders in Yemen over the past few months.”

But if the letter is genuine, it would indicate that Asiri, who rarely makes public statements, is still alive.

Intelligence officials say Asiri was a key player in the 2009 Christmas Day bomb attempt in which a passenger from Africa almost managed to detonate a bomb aboard a Detroit-bound plane that he’d hidden in his underwear. Asiri was also behind the placing of bombs in printer cartridges aboard planes headed for the United States that were intercepted before they reached their targets.

He even designed a bomb to be carried on the body of his own brother, Abdullah al-Asiri, in attempt to kill Saudi Arabia’s counterterrorism chief in 2009. The bomb killed his brother, but the Saudi minister survived.

A dangerous foe

“He’s without question the most dangerous terrorist operative that the United States faces today,” said CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank. “Intelligence suggests that he is developing a new generation of explosive devices including a new generation of underwear and shoe bomb devices.”

Zimmerman says Asiri is believed to have taught his skills to a cadre of bomb-makers.

“He has trained a series of individuals who are able to do what he does, which is bring imagination and innovation to an explosive device that could make it through U.S. or Western security,” she said.

The video embedding code has been disabled but can be played here.

Another senior AQAP leader, Khalid Batarfi, is featured in a second threatening video.

He praises the July attack in Chattanooga, Tennessee, in which a gunman killed five American servicemen at a military installation, as “a blessed Jihadi operation.” And he also praises two gunmen who tried to mount an attack in Garland, Texas, in May for their “sacrifice and heroism.”

“Blood for blood,” Batarfi says in a speech posted online.

He then encourages further lone-wolf attacks against America and the West. “To the warriors of Lone Jihad: may Allah bless and guide your efforts,” he says.

A U.S. intelligence official said this video is believed to be genuine.

“Batarfi has become a main AQAP media figure since his escape from a Yemeni prison this spring,” the official said.

While a number of AQAP leaders have been targeted by strikes this year, the fighting in Yemen between warring factions has deprived the United States of a partner on the ground to work with on tracking and targeting militants.

James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, recently told a conference in Aspen, Colorado, that “in terms of proximate threat, I would view … AQAP — even though they’re kind of consumed right now with what’s going on in Yemen with the Houthis — as probably our most concerning al Qaeda element in terms of threat to the homeland.”

Microsoft and Their $100 BILLION Offshore

Posted on by

While some domestic corporations do maintain headquarter offices in the United States, their money is often elsewhere to avoid the destructive tax code. But does Microsoft get an official pass or waiver from the Obama administration?

In September of 2014, Obama and Jack Lew at Treasury took decisive action.

Washington Post: The Obama administration took action Monday to discourage corporations from moving their headquarters abroad to avoid U.S. taxes, announcing new rules designed to make such transactions significantly less profitable.

The rules, which take effect immediately, will not block the practice, and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew again called on Congress to enact more far-reaching reforms. But in the meantime, he said, federal officials “cannot wait to address this problem,” which threatens to rob the U.S. Treasury of tens of billions of dollars.

“This action will significantly diminish the ability of inverted companies to escape U.S. taxation,” Lew told reporters. “For some companies considering deals, today’s action will mean that inversions no longer make economic sense.

“These transactions may be legal, but they’re wrong,” he added. “And the law should change.”

Tax analysts praised the new regulations, saying they will make it much harder for U.S. firms to bring cash earned abroad back to the United States tax-free — a major incentive in the relocations known as tax “inversions.” It was not immediately clear, however, whether the new rules would be sufficient to head off a wave of inversions expected to cascade over the American landscape in the weeks before the Nov. 4 midterm congressional elections.

Microsoft’s Offshore Profit Pile Surges Past $100 Billion Mark

Microsoft Corp.’s stockpile of offshore profits rose to $108 billion, with a 17 percent increase over the past year as the company continues reaping profits in low-tax foreign jurisdictions.

The company crossed the $100 billion mark, making it just the second U.S. corporation — after General Electric Co. — to do so, according to a securities filing July 31. Apple Inc. has more cash abroad than Microsoft, but it already has assumed for accounting purposes that it will pay tax on some of the stockpile and thus has less than $70 billion offshore that would affect earnings directly if repatriated.

What’s keeping Microsoft’s cash abroad is the U.S. tax code. The company would be required to pay the difference between its foreign taxes and the 35 percent U.S. corporate tax rate if it brought the money home.

To get its $108.3 billion back, Microsoft would have to pay the U.S. $34.5 billion in taxes. That equals a 31.9 percent rate, which suggests that the company has paid as little as 3.1 percent in taxes on its foreign income, because of operations in low-tax Ireland, Singapore and Puerto Rico.

The Internal Revenue Service and Microsoft are in the midst of an intense legal battle over the company’s transfer pricing, or intracompany transactions. The federal government is auditing the company’s returns as far back as 2004, and Microsoft has challenged the government’s hiring of outside lawyers.

Peter Wootton, a spokesman for Microsoft, declined to comment.

Repatriating Profits

Under current law, U.S. companies owe the full 35 percent rate on profits they earn around the world, but they don’t have to pay the U.S. until they repatriate the profits. That gives companies an incentive to book profits overseas and leave them there, and that’s just what they’ve done.

U.S. companies have more than $2 trillion amassed outside the U.S., according to a Bloomberg News review earlier this year of the securities filings of 304 companies.

Apple has more than $200 billion in cash stockpiled, with almost 90 percent of it overseas. As of its most recent annual report, Apple had $69.7 billion in profits on which it hasn’t assumed taxes.

U.S. lawmakers are looking for ways to get some of that cash back in the U.S. President Barack Obama supports a one-time 14 percent tax on stockpiled profits, with the proceeds going to highways and other infrastructure programs. Some Republicans favor a similar approach and are working on a detailed plan.

The White House Charming Venezuela

Posted on by

Did you consider that normalizing relations with Cuba, which blind-sided everyone was part of the demands by Iran in the nuclear talks? Uh huh…

Did you consider and additional demand for Venezuela?..Hummm

A U.S. State Department lawyer, Tom Shannon has traveled to Caracas to meet with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and there have been other clandestine meet-ups in Haiti to set the table for restoring relations between the two countries.

Strangely enough, the University of Rhode Island was also chosen along with 4 other universities to enhance relationship opportunities through student exchanges.

Barack Obama feels empowered now due to the deal with Iran and the notion that Cuba and the United States have formally opened respective embassies.

Obama is now exploiting the moment where he used Cuba as a springboard when he attended the Summit of the Americas last April. His ‘new chapter’ has been read and accepted as noted in his speech at this summit. Actually he had many secret and formal messages in his speech which sounded much like that of his outreach speech to the Muslim world in his 2009 Cairo speech.

“President Obama indicated our strong support for a peaceful dialogue between the parties within Venezuela,” said Bernadette Meehan, a spokeswoman for the White House’s National Security Council. “He reiterated that our interest is not in threatening Venezuela, but in supporting democracy, stability and prosperity in Venezuela and the region.”
Maduro later described the meeting as frank and cordial, saying the 10-minute exchange could lead the way to a meaningful dialogue between the two nations in the coming days. “I told him we’re not an enemy of the United States,” Maduro said. “We told each other the truth.”

Several charming people and words and being delivered and dispatched, Venezuela is here.

 

Obama Charm Offensive Targets Venezuela After Iranians, Cubans

The Obama administration’s charm offensive with unfriendly states has rolled through Myanmar, Iran and Cuba. Next stop: Venezuela.

Just months after the administration declared Venezuela a threat to U.S. national security, it’s working to improve relations, driven by concern that upheaval there could destabilize the region.

State Department officers have been meeting quietly with officials in the leftist government of President Nicolas Maduro since April to develop what Secretary of State John Kerry has called “a normal relationship.”

The outreach is another test of President Barack Obama’s 2009 inaugural pledge to “extend a hand” to repressive and corrupt regimes if they are “willing to unclench” their fists.

Falling oil prices, plummeting foreign reserves, a 68.5 percent inflation rate and growing political tensions are battering Venezuela. There’s enough at stake that even a Justice Department probe into the alleged drug ties of the lead Venezuelan in the talks hasn’t derailed the diplomacy.

“The U.S. has a broader goal here, no matter what they think about the Venezuelan government,” said Christopher Sabatini, a Latin American studies professor at Columbia University in New York. “The goal is to prevent a black hole that will suck in other Latin American economies.”

One frequent critic of the administration’s foreign policy has cautious praise for the effort. “I’m very glad the administration is trying to deal with them” on political repression and staging fair elections in December, said Senator Bob Corker, the Tennessee Republican who heads the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Toilet Paper Queue

Corker visited Caracas last month and returned dismayed by the sight of Venezuelans queuing outside stores in the early morning hoping that toilet paper might be in stock.

“I don’t think I’ve been to a place that has more potential but is totally blowing it,” Corker said in an interview. “It’s just sad.”

Beyond the hyperinflation that burdens ordinary people and erodes the government’s spending ability, the country’s international reserves fell to a 12-year record low of $15.37 billion on July 27, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The country’s basket of crude oil and petroleum, a major source of national revenue, fell 4.2 percent last week to $45.87 per barrel, according to the Oil Ministry’s website. A year ago, a barrel of oil brought Venezuela about $96.

‘Fear of Contagion’

Venezuela and its state oil company have about $5 billion in bond payments due in the last three months of this year and about $10 billion in 2016, according to Bank of America Corp. estimates.

Harvard Professor Ricardo Hausmann is saying Venezuela will have no choice but to default on its debt next year amid shortages of staples such as medicine and milk.

“One of the fears is contagion,” said Carl Meacham, director of the Americas program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. With the world’s largest proven oil reserves, Venezuela has wielded regional clout by offering neighbors cheap energy and subsidies.

Now, with the country becoming “more and more a hub for international drug cartels,” Meacham said the U.S. effort is about preventing it from becoming a failed narco state. “The spillover won’t just affect folks inside Venezuela, it also has the potential to affect countries all over the region,” he said.

Trading Partner

There also are strategic considerations. The U.S. is Venezuela’s biggest trading partner, the country currently has a vote on the United Nations Security Council as one of 10 nonpermanent members, and it has allied itself with Cuba and other nations hostile to the U.S., sending oil to Syria’s regime despite sanctions in 2012 and last year agreeing to let Russia establish naval and military bases in its borders.

The U.S. “wants Venezuela to relax its international positions on countries like Iran, Russia, Syria and Greece,” said Carlos Romero, an international relations professor at the Central University of Venezuela.

There’s concern, too, that tensions with Venezuela could damp efforts to improve relations with other Latin American nations. Kerry said on July 20 that he and Cuba’s foreign minister had discussed the U.S.-Venezuela relationship, and “our hopes that we can find a better way forward because all of the region will benefit.”

Diplomats Expelled

In the past two years, both nations have expelled diplomats from the other country, and the U.S. has sanctioned Venezuelan officials for human rights abuses.

Maduro, who embraces the socialist rhetoric of his late predecessor Hugo Chavez, called the sanctions the “most aggressive, unjust and disgraceful” action ever taken against Venezuela.

In May, the Justice Department launched its investigation into Diosdado Cabello, the president of the National Assembly, for possible cocaine trafficking and money laundering.

By then, though, there already were signs of change. In March, officials say, Maduro reached out to initiate talks.

“He was afraid of another round of sanctions, and he was afraid of losing support from the rest of Latin America,” said Romero of Venezuela’s Central University. “The majority of Latin American countries, including Ecuador and Bolivia, have been improving ties with the U.S., and Venezuela wants to be recognized as legitimate.

‘Modus Vivendi’

Maduro’s government is eager to reach some sort of ‘‘modus vivendi’’ with the U.S., Romero said. The precarious economy, coupled with the sight of other Latin American countries — particularly Cuba — warming to the U.S., was a spur for Maduro.

Maduro publicly voiced optimism for U.S.-Venezuela relations after speaking with Obama at the Summit of the Americas in Panama in April, an event where Obama and Cuban leader Raul Castro shook hands as their countries’ moved toward normalization.

‘‘There’s a real sense the U.S.-Latin American relationship had been a bit distant and now has new possibilities,” said Harold Trinkunas, director of the Latin America Initiative at the Brookings Institution. “The one thing that could spoil that is the situation in Venezuela, so the administration is looking for ways to manage that.”

So far, the talks have focused on regional issues such as the peace process in neighboring Columbia and Haiti’s elections, and on domestic issues such as jailed opposition leaders and the need to hold credible elections in December with international observers, according to a State Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss diplomatic business.

Immediate aims include finding “an exit to Venezuela’s political crisis” and preventing its “breakdown into lawlessness,” Sabatini said.

Meacham, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is among critics who question the effectiveness of the talks.

“Is it the right approach? Up to now I’d say no,” he said. “We haven’t seen progress with the political prisoners, we haven’t seen them commit to international observers.”

Still, Meacham said, “there is something to be gained from opening the channels of communication.” If things go badly, it will help the U.S. “predict and assess the scope of the damage for the region.”

 

 

 

What the Obama Admin is not Telling you About Iran

Posted on by

In 2012, the U.S. Treasury Department which is responsible for maintaining the global terror list, placed the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Crops Qods Force in the terror database for violations of the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act for trafficking Afghan narcotics in exchange for weapons to the Taliban.

On July 14, 2015, the U.S. Treasury posted the sanctions relief document on their website as a result of the signed agreement known as the JPOA.

From the Daily Beast in part: The bigger, more complicated story, though, is how the deal will go down with the organization that now plays a huge role in running Iran, albeit behind the country’s clerical façade: the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), also known as the Pasdaran, some of whose internationally infamous leaders showed up on the lists in the nuclear agreement annexes as people who will have sanctions against them lifted.

Whether this was an oversight, a sleight-of-hand, or an attempt to win Pasdaran support, it has to be understood that ever since Rafsanjani (ironically, of all people) let the IRGC into the Iranian economy, allowing it to invest in the country’s leading industries, the group has grown to become Iran’s most important financial power.

The IRGC is now the biggest player in Iran’s biggest industries: energy, construction, car manufacturing and telecommunications. A Western diplomat recently told Reuters that the IRGC’s annual turnover from all of its business activities is around $10 billion to $12 billion, which, if accurate, would be around a sixth of Iranian GDP.

From the United Nations 106 page report in part:

Northern Route

There are various supply chain structures in Central Asia. Trafficking through Turkmenistan appears to feed the Balkan route through the Islamic Republic of Iran rather than the Northern route. Turkmenistan is also unique in Central Asia as a destination country for Balkan route opiates.

 Traffickers increasingly utilize Central Asian railways to transport opiates to the Russian Federation and beyond. The size of some loads detected in 2010 suggests that traffickers are operating with a heightened confidence level. Massive seizures of hashish in containers destined to North America are a confirmation that railroad trafficking is also linked to transcontinental trafficking.

 The Customs union agreement between Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Belarus can be misused, as traffickers may opt to re-route opiate deliveries to Europe through the Northern route, as opposed to the traditional Balkan route. There are plans to extend the Customs union agreement to other states such as Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine, and possibly Tajikistan.

 Countering the flow of drugs is complicated by difficulties in co-ordinating efforts between national agencies within Central Asia and between this region and Afghanistan. This is reflected in limited intelligence sharing along lines of supply.

 Drug trafficking and organized crime are sources of conflict in Kyrgyzstan and potentially in the region as a whole. The inter-ethnic clashes that occurred in southern Kyrgyzstan in 2010 have been used by ethnic Kyrgyz criminal groups to assume predominance over ethnic Uzbek criminal groups and to control the drug routes through this part of Kyrgyzstan.

 Rising militancy has been reported across Central Asia, but there are no observed direct connections between extremist groups and drug trafficking. The preoccupation with combating insurgents in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan does, however, hinder counternarcotics efforts by, at least partly, shifting the focus of law enforcement away from drug control.

From the United Nations report in part:

Southern Route

 

Afghan heroin is trafficked to every region of the world except Latin America. The Balkan route (trafficking route through the Islamic Republic of Iran and Turkey) has traditionally been the primary route for trafficking heroin out of Afghanistan. However, there are signs of a changing trend, with the Southern route (a collection of trafficking routes and organized criminal groups that facilitate southerly flow of heroin out of Afghanistan) encroaching, including to supply some European markets.

Unlike the northern or Balkan routes that are mostly dedicated to supplying single destinations markets, the Russian Federation and Europe respectively, the southern route serves a number of diverse destinations, including Asian, Africa and Western and Central Europe. It is therefore perhaps more accurate to talk about a vast network of rouhtes than one general flow with the same direction.

The Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan face a tremendous challenge in dealing with the large flows of opiates originating from Afghanistan to feed their domestic heroin markets and to supply demand in many other regions of the world. The geographic location of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan makes them a major transit point for the trafficking of Afghan opiates along the southern route.

Iran will propagandize a narcotics problem but in truth, it feeds their economy, criminal activity, weapons smuggling and terrorism.

The opium trade and smuggling routes are so successful due to the criminal network and money, females are also trafficked for slave labor and sex.

Officials of the regime in Iran are involved in the “sex trafficking of women and girls”, the U.S. State Department said in an annual report on human trafficking released this week.

“Iran is a source, transit, and destination country for men, women, and children subjected to sex trafficking and forced labor,” the State Department said in its annual ‘Trafficking in Persons Report 2015.’

“Organized groups reportedly subject Iranian women, boys, and girls to sex trafficking in Iran, as well as in the United Arab Emirates and Europe,” the TIP report said.

“In 2013, traffickers forced Iranian women and girls into prostitution in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region. From 2009-2015, there was a reported increase in the transport of girls from and through Iran en route to the Gulf where organized groups sexually exploited or forced them into marriages. In Tehran, Tabriz, and Astara, the number of teenage girls in prostitution continues to increase.”

“Organized criminal groups force Iranian and immigrant children to work as beggars and in street vendor rings in cities, including Tehran. Physical and sexual abuse and drug addiction are the primary means of coercion. Some children are also forced to work in domestic workshops. Traffickers subject Afghan migrants, including boys, to forced labor in construction and agricultural sectors in Iran. Afghan boys are at high risk of experiencing sexual abuse by their employers and harassment or blackmailing by the Iranian security service and other government officials.”

So, back to the question, what is the real reason for the Obama administration aggressive relationship with Iran? With the sanctions lifted, the forecast of future terror activity coupled with smuggling and trafficking women, weapons, slaves and narcotics, the Obama administration has legitimized Iran as a world power forced to be equal on the global stage.