|
July 28, 2010 - No. 141
Oppose Sanctions Against Iran!
No to the Use of Force to Settle Conflicts
between Nations and Peoples!
• Oppose
Sanctions Against Iran! No to the Use of Force to Settle Conflicts
between Peoples and Nations!
• Iranian President Speaks Out Against
U.S.-Israeli War Preparations
• Europe's Iran Sanctions May Backfire
- Kaveh L. Afrasiabi, Asia Times Online
Relations with Russia
• Black Sea Challenge by U.S. Set to Keep
Russia on Edge - Sentaku Magazine
• U.S. and Canada Challenge Borders of Russia's
Continental Arctic Shelf
Oppose Sanctions Against Iran!
No to the Use of Force to Settle Conflicts
between Peoples and Nations!
 TML vigorously opposes the
escalation of the
warmongering against Iran and the increased sanctions issued by the
European Union and Canada on July 26. The EU and Canadian actions
follow those of the U.S. which
also declared increased sanctions against Iran on June 24.
Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon's remarks when he
announced the Special Economic
Measures Act are a virtual
carbon copy of those made by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on
July 21 when threatening the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
(DPRK). Despite this, it is well-known such sanctions have the
expressed aim to foment so-called regime change by inciting the people
to blame their government for the dire conditions which they give rise
to.
These
actions are part of unconscionable activity
by U.S., European and Canadian warmongers to isolate Iran, harm the
sovereignty and well-being of the Iranian people and spread
disinformation. The warmongers think their lies and hysteria about a
"secret nuclear weapons" program will disorient people so as to
surpress their resistance to the war preparations. This must not pass!
The peoples of the world do not accept that in the name of opposing
nuclear weapons, the U.S. wields the world's biggest nuclear arsenal
and threatens any country that does not submit to its unjust dictate
with nuclear annihilation.
Along with sanctions, U.S. officials are continuing to
threaten
Iran with open warfare. Former CIA director Michael Hayden said July 25
on CNN that the chances the United States will attack Iran are
increasing. Hayden's comments come in the context of a group of
Republican lawmakers who are pushing for
passage of a resolution explicitly supporting the "right" of Israel to
use military force against Iran. Forty-seven House Republicans have
already signed on to the legislation, news agencies report.
In related news, on July 27, a Russian Foreign Ministry
spokesperson
decried the application of unilateral sanctions by the EU and U.S.
against Iran outside the authority of the UN. "We categorically reject
all attempts to project internal laws of the European Union and the
United States on third countries, or to apply
sanctions against companies and individuals of states, which
conscientiously fulfill the UN Security Council's resolutions,"
Interfax
news agency quoted ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko as saying.
Nesterenko reiterated Moscow's stance that "using
unilateral or collective action of sanctions on Iran" that goes beyond
the UN Security Council regime was "inadmissible."
"This not only undermines our joint efforts to seek a
political and diplomatic settlement of the situation around the Iranian
nuclear program, but also shows disregard for the carefully monitored
and coordinated UN Security Council resolutions," the spokesman said,
adding that the EU and U.S. moves
were disrespectful of the principles of teamwork.
TML
calls on Canadians to oppose the sanctions and war preparations against
Iran and reiterates its full support for all nations and peoples that
are
fighting
for an independent path
of social, political and economic development.
"[... U]nder the Special
Economic
Measures
Act,
Canada is imposing further sanctions. [...]
"These tough new measures prohibit dealings with
designated persons involved in nuclear, chemical, biological and
missile proliferation. They ban the export of proliferation-sensitive
goods, items for refining oil and gas, all remaining arms, and
technology related to these goods.
"They prohibit any new investment in Iran's oil and gas
sector. These measures bar Iranian financial institutions from
establishing a presence in Canada, and vice versa, while banning
correspondent banking relationships with Iranian financial institutions
and the purchase of Iranian government debt. They are
effective immediately.
"These sanctions are intended to slow the progress of
the Iranian authorities' nuclear, chemical, biological and missile
programs. They are also intended to persuade the Iranian authorities to
resume negotiations with the five permanent members of the UN Security
Council and Germany, with the aim of meeting
Iran's international nuclear obligations.
"Canada believes that these additional sanctions, which
build on United Nations Security Council Resolution 1929, adopted in
June, send a strong signal to Iran: the international community is
united in purpose and commitment. No state can threaten international
peace and security without consequences."
Iranian President Speaks Out Against
U.S.-Israeli War Preparations
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the United
States and
Israel plan to attack two countries in the Middle East as part of a
conspiracy to apply pressure on Iran, Press TV reports.
"We have precise information that the Americans have
devised a
plot, according to which they seek to launch a psychological war on
Iran," Ahmadinejad stated in an exclusive interview with Press TV on
July 26.
"They plan to attack at least two countries in the
region within the next three months," he added, saying the U.S. seeks
to achieve two main objectives with the scheme.
"First of all, they want to hamper Iran's progress and
development
since they are opposed to our growth, and secondly they want to save
the Zionist regime because it has reached a dead end and the Zionists
believe they can be saved through a military confrontation,"
Ahmadinejad explained. He also advised U.S. President Barack Obama not
to follow the policies of George W. Bush.
In addition, he warned Russian officials to avoid
playing into the
hands of U.S. because that would go against their national interests.
Commenting on the nuclear issue, Ahmadinejad reiterated
that Iran
will resume nuclear talks with the West in September, and that it wants
Turkey and Brazil to participate in the negotiations.
Europe's Iran Sanctions May Backfire
- Kaveh L. Afrasiabi*, Asia Times Online,
July 28, 2010 -
The European Union (EU) on Monday adopted a new round of
sanctions against Iran that, if implemented, will have serious
implications not only for the EU as the Islamic Republic's largest
trading partner, but also for its energy security.
The new European sanctions target Iranian shipping and
air cargo companies, impose visa bans on officials and freeze assets
linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, and also include
trade insurance and financial sanctions. They ban new EU investments in
Iran's nuclear and gas sectors as well as any
technical energy assistance -- this from a continent that receives
roughly 29% of Iran's crude oil exports and is increasingly dependent
on its gas exports.
The EU sanctions support curbs under the UN Security
Council Resolution 1929 imposed on June 10, which were followed by U.S.
sanctions. The resolution paved the way for a fourth round of
international sanctions over claims that Iran is building nuclear
weapons. Tehran denies the accusations and says its
nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
In light of Iran's serious need for foreign capital in
its energy sector, the crippling effect of Western sanctions on its oil
and gas is bound to have ripple effects in accentuating Europe's
current energy insecurity, reflected in the 27-member EU's wariness of
undue dependence on Russia and its frantic search to
diversify sources of gas imports.
It may well be that the implicit assumption behind the
new EU sanctions is the comforting assurance that the energy sanctions
will not cripple Iran's ability to export, allowing Europe to continue
to benefit. The crux of Europe's dilemma, however, is that sanctions on
Iran will inevitably translate into economic,
financial and energy losses for the EU.
By imposing sanctions on Iran's energy sector while
expecting business as usual in the delivery of oil and gas, European
politicians are engaging in the self-deluding notion that somehow they
can be at the forefront of the sanctions regime on Iran without
incurring substantial costs.
Already, Iran has warned that it may switch its energy
transactions from the euro to other currencies, above all the dirham of
the United Arab Emirates. The mere threat of such a move simply adds to
the euro's weaknesses at a critical time when the eurozone is grappling
with multiple difficulties in its currency
and financial health.
Not only that, the new EU sanctions, in addition to
switching the EU's so-called two-track diplomacy with Iran almost
entirely to one-track coercive diplomacy, target Europe's own hitherto
reliable source of energy, unlike sanctions from the U.S., which does
not
directly import oil or gas from Iran. A case in
point is the Swiss energy giant EGL, which has signed a U.S.$13 billion
25-year contract with Iran that almost certainly will be hurt by the
new Western sanctions on Iran's energy sector.
Ironically, the EU's decision comes only a few days
after Turkey signed a U.S.$1.3 billion pipeline agreement with Iran
that
calls for gas exports of 2.1 billion cubic feet a day (cf/d) in three
years. No surprise then that Ankara was quick in denouncing the EU's
sanctions and openly stated it would not honor them.
In addition to the proposed 410 mile (660 kilometer)
pipeline, the existing 745 mile Iran-Turkey pipeline, completed in
2001, can transport up to 1.4 billion cf/d of natural gas, although due
to technical and other difficulties it has never operated at optimal
levels and there have been periodic interruptions.
"The EU has foolishly and blindly followed the footsteps
of the United States, which has no vested economic interests with
Iran,'' a Tehran University political science professor told the
author. ''This is going to have negative geo-economic implications for
the European Union, that is, telling Iran that now we
would love to have your oil and gas, but we will do everything possible
to make sure that your energy sectors are crippled. What an irony."
In response, Iran would probably expand its energy ties
with Asian countries such as India, which had increased its oil imports
from Iran by 9% compared to last year, the professor added. Nor is
there any sign that China and Japan, which together account for roughly
one third of Iran's oil exports, are ready
to risk their energy security over the nuclear standoff, as Europe has
now done.
Without doubt, the European and U.S. sanctions will have
a
significant impact on Iran's trajectory as a gas producer in the years
to come. According to senior Iranian energy officials, Iran needs a
minimum of $8 billion in investment in the gas sector, given the fact
that some two-thirds of its gas reserves remain
undeveloped, particularly in the giant South Pars. The gas field
contains roughly half of Iran's gas and is shared with Qatar, which has
far outplayed Iran in its exploitation of the reserve, much to the
chagrin of the Iranians who are worried that Qatar will take advantage
of the Western sanctions.
A big question concerns how the new EU sanctions will
impact on plans for the ambitious "Persian pipeline" that could connect
Iran's South Pars gas to Europe via Turkey?[1] Has
Europe really given
serious thought to these questions or, as the late German Iran
specialist Johannes Reissner once put it, has Europe
fallen into the malady of a "nuclear reductionism"?
Prospects for a Mini-Breakthrough
Meanwhile, in the maddening march of Western governments
toward tougher sanctions on Iran there is the glimmer of a
mini-breakthrough in the area of a nuclear fuel exchange for Iran's
small medical reactor.
After extensive exchanges with the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), there is reportedly a considerable narrowing of
differences between the parties on this issue. By early to
mid-September we may witness the finalization of an IAEA-proposed deal
for a fuel swap.
Iran has now submitted a new letter to the IAEA and the
Vienna Group, consisting of the U.S., Russia, France and the IAEA,
regarding the technical aspects of the fuel swap, urging the other side
not to "waste time."
Reports from Tehran indicate some new signs of
flexibility on Iran's part, such as with respect to the thorny issue of
Iran's production of 20% enriched uranium. Iran may now be willing to
forego this in exchange for a firm commitment from the Vienna group on
the timely delivery of nuclear fuel to the Tehran
reactor.
Not only that, the chances are that Iran, which has
offered a new round of multilateral nuclear talks this September, may
be willing to entertain a deal whereby it would put its enrichment
activities on "standby option" and agree to a temporary freeze without
stopping its centrifuges from "dry spinning"; this in
exchange for the lifting of sanctions.
The "standby option" is, indeed, the most that the West
can expect from Iran at this stage, since the "zero centrifuge" option
is a thing of the past -- and politically unrealistic in Iran.
Thus, a combined nuclear fuel swap with the standby
option, together with other "objective guarantees" regarding Iran's
peaceful nuclear program, may at this point pose the best and most
feasible scenario for ending a crisis that over the past few months has
qualitatively worsened and, indeed, could get a lot
worse.
Note
1. For more on this click here.
Relations with Russia
Black Sea Challenge by U.S. Set
to Keep Russia on Edge
- Sentaku Magazine, July 2010 -
A storm is gathering in and around the Black Sea as
Russia faces a mounting challenge from the United States, which is
beefing up its military presence in former Soviet satellite countries
like Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary.
One look at a map of the region shows the critical
geopolitical importance of the Black Sea, as its southern coast
connects to the Middle East via Turkey and its northern coast adjoins
Ukraine, which is home to Russia's Black Sea Fleet and which houses 80
percent of the pipelines supplying natural
gas from Russia to Western Europe.
In Romania, the U.S. has spent $50 million since last
year to expand bases to accommodate 1,700 troops. The principal
facility is the Mikhail Kogalniceanu Air Base located in Constanta,
facing the Black Sea. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency is said to
maintain a secret detention facility at the
base.
There is nothing new about the U.S. maintaining military
bases in Romania, which dates back to the beginning of the Iraq war.
What is important is Washington's announcement of its intention to use
them indefinitely. In May, a marine corps unit centered around a tank
battalion was dispatched to the
Mikhail Kogalniceanu base for the first time.
In Bulgaria, meanwhile, the U.S. plans to expand bases
there to accommodate 2,500 troops. The core facility is the Bezmer Air
Base, about 50 km from the Black Sea southern coast. When the project
is completed, the U.S. will have a strategic air base in Bulgaria
comparable in scale to the air bases
at Inzirlik in Turkey and Appiano in Italy. Joint American-Bulgarian
air force drills were conducted in May.
The American move to strengthen its defense capability
in countries formerly under Soviet influence is not limited to Romania
and Bulgaria. It is also conspicuous in Hungary, although that country
does not face the Black Sea. For several years the Papa Air Base in
Hungary has functioned as a base
for the U.S. Air Force's state-of-the-art Boeing C-17 transport
aircraft, making it one of the crucial strategic air transport centers
outside of the U.S.
It is important to note that all these moves represent
only the initial step that Washington has taken to expand its military
presence in the Black Sea region. Upon completion of these base
expansion projects in 2012, two-thirds of the highly mobile Rapid
Reaction Corps of the U.S. Army in Europe
will be concentrated in Romania and Bulgaria.
This means that the U.S. front line of defense is
shifting from the eastern border of Germany to the Black Sea, which is
adjacent to the Middle East, the Caucasus and Russia.
Another source of Russian uneasiness is a move to revive
a plan to establish a U.S. missile defense system in Europe. Even
though President Barack Obama is said to have abandoned a project
involving Poland and Czech Republic, it is said that a similar system
will be completed in Romania and Bulgaria
between 2018 and 2020.
Prague, Czech Republic,
April 4, 2009: Demonstration against planned U.S. radar base, that has
now been cancelled.
Romania is ready to accept deployment of 20 SM-3
anti-ballistic missile units, currently installed on American naval
vessels with the Aegis Combat System. These missiles could later be
replaced with the more advanced terminal high altitude area defense
(THAAD) missiles. They will also be deployed
in Bulgaria.
Meanwhile, it has become more likely that the X-band
radar system, which the U.S. originally planned to install in the Czech
Republic, will be set up in Israel.
U.S. destroyers carrying Tomahawk cruise missiles have
made a number of calls on Georgian, Romanian and Bulgarian ports since
the armed conflict between Russia and Georgia in 2008.
A leading official of the Russian Navy stated recently
that an increased U.S. presence in the region would bring about a
"dramatic change in the military balance in the Black Sea" and present
a "serious threat to Russia." He went on to say that Russia would
counter these American moves by further
strengthening the Black Sea Fleet.
Washington responded by bluntly claiming that the
deployment of the missile defense system is designed to prevent Iran
from attacking Europe with its missiles. But anyone with even the most
rudimentary military knowledge would admit that Tehran has neither the
technology to develop long-range
missiles nor the need to attack Europe. Russia's sense of crisis is not
groundless.
The only consolation for Moscow of late came in
Ukraine's presidential election in February, when pro-Western Viktor
Yushchenko lost to pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovych. Subsequently, the
Ukrainian legislature passed a new law, permitting the Russian Black
Sea Fleet to continue using the facilities
in Sevastopol for another 25 years. Even so, Moscow does not have any
effective means of countering Romania and Bulgaria, which seek to
strengthen their military collaboration with the U.S.
The whole world puzzles over Washington's motivation for
seeking a greater military presence in the Black Sea region, since it
hardly can be interpreted as mere expansion of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization.
Nor is it impossible to understand the true motive of
the U.S. by reading the Quadrennial Defense Review, announced in
February. It appears all but certain that the waves of the Black Sea
will only get higher.
U.S. and Canada Challenge Borders of
Russia's Continental
Arctic Shelf
The United States and Canada will conduct a joint Arctic
mission this summer to prove their right for the extended continental
shelf and Arctic seafloor, the U.S. Department of State said in a July
26 statement.
The mission will continue the U.S.-Canada collaboration
begun in 2008, which saves "millions of dollars" for both countries and
increases scientific and diplomatic cooperation on the Arctic issue,
the department said in a statement.
"The mission will help delineate the outer limits of the
continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean for the U.S. and Canada, and will
also include the collection of data in the disputed area where the U.S.
and Canada have not agreed to a maritime boundary," the statement said.
The announcement comes less than two weeks after
Russia's Akademik Fedorov research vessel left the city of St.
Petersburg for an expedition to ascertain the borders of Russia's
Arctic continental shelf.
The vast hydrocarbon deposits that will become more
accessible as rising global temperatures lead to a reduction in sea ice
have brought the Arctic to the center of geopolitical wrangling between
the United States, Russia, Canada, Norway, and Denmark.
Under international law, each of the five Arctic Circle
countries has a 322-kilometer (200-mile) exclusive economic zone in the
Arctic Ocean.
However, under the United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea, if a country can prove its continental shelf extends beyond
the 200-mile limit, it can claim a right to more of the ocean floor,
though the U.S. has not yet signed the treaty.
"Both the U.S. and Canada will be collecting scientific
information to satisfy the criteria for delineating the continental
shelf beyond 200 nautical miles as set forth in the Convention on the
Law of the Sea," the U.S. Department of State said. The claims must be
filed by 2013.
This will be the third U.S.-Canadian Arctic mission. The
first was conducted in 2008 and the second in 2009. This year's
expedition will reportedly cover regions over the Canada Basin, the
Beaufort Shelf, and the Alpha Mendeleev Ridge.
The U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Healy and the Canadian Coast
Guard Ship Louis S. St-Laurent
will participate in the expedition, the
statement said. The joint operations will be conducted from August 7 to
September 14. The two research vessels have worked together to map the
Arctic seabed for three years, but never in the pie-shaped,
21,000-square-kilometre disputed area that is approximately the size of
Lake Ontario.
In 2001, Russia was the first of the five Arctic states
to file a request to extend its continental shelf border beyond the
standard 200-mile limit. The UN turned down the request, citing a lack
of evidence to support the claim. Russia has said it will spend some
1.5 billion rubles ($50 million) to define
the extent of its continental shelf in the Arctic in 2010.
The current expedition by Russia's Akademik Fedorov is
also the third Arctic mission carried out by the country. The two
previous -- to the Mendeleyev underwater chain and to the Lomonosov
Ridge -- were undertaken in 2005 and 2007, respectively.
Read The Marxist-Leninist
Daily
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|
