Archive for the ‘Iran’ Category

Iran accused of helping fund Temple Mount unrest – The Times of Israel

The Islamic Republic of Iran reportedly provided aid to Palestinian protesters demonstrating against new security measures at the Temple Mount last month.

The aid reportedly included boxes of food and drink, which came with a flyer attached depicting the Dome of the Rock and a quote attributed to Irans Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei reading, With the help of God Palestine will be freed. Jerusalem is ours.

While Palestinian media reported that the food packages were provided by an Iranian youth movement, a PA intelligence official said it was clear that the Iranian regime was behind the aid.

It is clear to us that the regime in Tehran, by means of its long arms, is behind this catering operation, the official told the Israel Hayom daily in an article published Tuesday.

The sums come to millions of shekels and the Iranians found an opening to reap the benefits and send a message to the Palestinian public right under Israels nose that it is Iran that looks out for them. The flyer attached to all the food packages and the quotes of Khamenei make clear who is behind these food baskets.

Another Palestinian official told Israel Hayom that while the PA was aware of the Iranian effort, it did not notify Israel because of PA President Mahmoud Abbass decision to freeze security ties in protest of the security measures placed at the Temple Mount following the July 14 terror attack at the holy site, when three Arab Israelis shot dead two police officers with weapons smuggled into the compound.

In the territory under Palestinian control this would not happen, he added. We would not allow the Iranians a foothold like this, because this would come back at us like a boomerang with the reactions of Arab states.

The Iranian involvement also angered senior PA officials, with an unnamed official said to be close to Abbas telling the daily that it was a mistake to allow Iran to reach into the West Bank with its tentacles.

The Islamic Republic has long funded operations against Israel, often through its provision of money and arms to the Hamas and Hezbollah terror groups.

Iran has also made calling for Israels destruction and the liberation of Jerusalem central to its propaganda efforts.

While Israel removed last week all of the new security measures installed at the Temple Mount, a PA official told The Times of Israel that security cooperation will gradually be restored as long as Muslim access to the holy site remains unrestricted.

More here:
Iran accused of helping fund Temple Mount unrest – The Times of Israel

Fair Usage Law

August 1, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Lebanese ‘spy’ held in Iran ends hunger strike – The Times of Israel

BEIRUT The lawyer of a Lebanese man held in Iran since 2015 says his client has ended a 33-day hunger strike.

Majed Dimashkiyeh sent The Associated Press a letter from Nizar Zakka announcing an end to his hunger strike following a request from his children.

Zakka, who has permanent US residency, went missing in 2015, during his fifth trip to Iran. Two weeks later, Iranian state TV reported that he was in custody and suspected of having deep links to US intelligence services.

Last September, Zakka was sentenced to 10 years in prison and handed a $4.2 million fine after a security court convicted him of espionage.

Members of the US House of Representatives issued a resolution this week calling for Zakkas release.

Zakka, 50, was rushed to a hospital earlier this month, where he refused an IV, his brother Ziad told The Associated Press. He said his brother was prepared to die if he is not released, and refused to sign documents in Farsi, a language he doesnt understand.

Ziad Zakka, left, brother of Nizar Zakka who is imprisoned in Iran, speaks with his brothers lawyer Majed Dimshkiyeh in Beirut, Lebanon, Tuesday, July 18, 2017. (AP/Bilal Hussein)

Zakkas family denies the allegations against him. His brother said he had been invited to attend a conference at which President Hassan Rouhani spoke of sustainable development and providing more economic opportunities for women.

He showed the AP a letter of invitation for his brother from Iranian Vice President Shahindokht Molaverdi.

He is completely losing hope in life, and this is the most difficult period a human being might reach, Zakka said in an interview in Beirut earlier this month, adding that he had urged his brother to end the hunger strike when he spoke to him by phone.

The family has urged Lebanese President Michel Aoun to raise Zakkas case when he visits Iran in August. Aoun is a close ally of Hezbollah, a powerful Iranian-backed Lebanese group.

We hope that President Aoun will reach a happy ending in this matter, said Majed Dimashkiyeh, a lawyer for the family who has sent an official letter to Aoun asking him to intervene with Iranian authorities.

Zakka, who used to live in Washington, leads the Arab ICT Organization, or IJMA3, an industry consortium from 13 countries that advocates for information technology in the region.

The Associated Press reported in May last year that IJMA3 had received at least $730,000 in contracts and grants since 2009 from both the State Department and the US Agency for International Development, USAID.

Ziad Zakka said their mother passed away last July. He said she had sent a letter to Irans Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Rouhani through the Iranian Embassy in Beirut, telling them that my dream is to see Nizar.

Follow this link:
Lebanese ‘spy’ held in Iran ends hunger strike – The Times of Israel

Fair Usage Law

July 30, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Trump’s Dangerous Game With Iran – New York Magazine

Trump. Photo: Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images

On Friday, North Korea test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile, leading to an eruption of concern from the security community. The Trump White House, however, has this week focused its belligerence lesson Pyongyang and the weapons it has, and more on Iran, despite the nuclear weapons it is prevented from getting.Last week, Secretary of State Tillerson pleasantly surprised his critics by certifying that Iran is complying with the terms of the 2015 deal that iced its nuclear ambitions and subjected it to intense inspections and restrictions for the next decade and more. This week, his boss fired back:I would be surprised if they were in compliance at the next review in 90 days, PresidentTrump told The Wall Street Journal.

This has less to do with Iran and more to do with Trumps frustration with his own Cabinet for supporting the deal reportedly so great that he commissioned a parallel working group of lower-level, less-experienced officials to advise him before the next review.

So the threat of a major conflict with Iran is high because the administration wants it that way.Mostif not all of the administrations key national security players, and their allies in Congress, see stepped-up U.S. military activity in the region as important to confronting Iran. Far from believing that the Iran deal contained the most serious U.S.-Iran flashpoint, theybelieve Iran, even without nuclear weapons, poses an existential threat to the U.S. and our allies. They believe that regime change switching out Irans theocracy for a (hypothetical) secular democracy is the only way, long-term, to deal with that threat. (Hands up if you recall hearing that one before about a country beginning with I.)

This belief, by itself, isnt the problem. Many, though far from most, Iranians, share their longing for a government that is more liberal and democratic, and less allied with extremist groups elsewhere in the Middle East. And though there is often hyperbole in the accusations, they are grounded in truth: Iran supports armed extremist groups in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel-Palestine, and to a lesser extent Yemen including the worlds most potent non-state fighting force, Hezbollah. Irans government mistreats its people badly though not, say, worse than our Saudi allies. The anti-Tehran faction believes that its worth putting pressure on Irans willingness to comply with the nuclear deal in order to push on these other issues while the Obama administration believed the U.S. and the region could live with problematic behavior but not with nuclear empowerment.

No, the problem is that the combination of a highly militarized standoff, multiple shooting wars across the region, and an administration that combines high rhetoric and low predictability is a recipe for escalation.

Just Tuesday, a U.S. Navy vesselfired warning shotsat an Iranian boat, apparently operated by the hard-line Revolutionary National Guard forces, that came within 150 yards of it. Such incidents had decreased significantly during 2016, but still occur with some regularity.As far as we can tell, the hotline communication Secretary Kerry developed with Iranian foreign minister Zarif has been discontinued.The Iranians are well aware though most Americans are not of the stepped-up tempo of U.S. military operations in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria, and the heightened presence of ground and naval forces.

Add to that the package of new sanctions that the president apparently demanded asthe price for certifying the deal this time. Within 24 hours of the certification, the administration put economic sanctions on 18 new Iranian individuals and corporate entities for a range of alleged offenses including harassment of U.S. naval vessels and attempts to build ballistic missiles or steal U.S. software. Most offenses had no direct connection to the nuclear deal. Tehran responded with rage, saying that these sanctions themselves violated the terms of the nuclear deal.

The White House has help from Congress in ratcheting up tensions. The House andSenate have now eachpassed versions ofa bipartisan sanctions bill. While it has gotten attention for the new penalties it imposes on Russian entities and foreigners who collaborate with them to harm U.S. interests on cybersecurity, energy, human rights, and other areas,it also sets a range of new penalties on Iranians for actions related to ballistic missiles, regional terrorism, or human-rights violations. Now we wait to see whether President Trump will sign or veto legislation thatputs on Moscow the very pressures they hope will bend Tehran to the breaking point.

So anyone in Iran who wants to claim that the U.S. is implacably opposed to Irans existing government and actively seeking to undermine it economically, while challenging it militarily, has plenty of data to point to.

Given Irans regional goals, the means it believes are acceptable to employ, and the groups with which it is allied, defending U.S. interests and the nuclear deal was always going to require both strong regional presence and adroit diplomacy. What we have instead, though, is the unpredictable and bellicose rhetoric of the president and his team. Deterrence theory says that countries can be frightened into remaining peaceful if they know exactly what the consequences for aggression would be.

But the range of tweets, offhand remarks, threats, and past ruminations about regime change leave quite a bit of room for Iranian actors to believe that Washington is determined not just to contain their government, but to remove it from power. Michael Crowley points out at Politico that key Trump officials are on the record as saying that Iran will remain a U.S. enemy until the clerical leaders and military officials who control the countrys political system are deposed. And they have continued to make such statements earlier this spring, Secretary Tillerson sparked a public protest from the Iranian government when he told Congress that the U.S. should work with opposition groups toward the peaceful transition of that government.

The nuclear deal was never intended to resolve all the problems between the U.S. and Iran. It was intended to take off the table the question of nuclear weapons, which all sides had identified as the flashpoint that could most easily flare into war. But given both Washingtons differences with Tehran on key issues from human rights to Syria, and this administrations addiction to incendiary and off-the-cuff rhetoric, thats exactly where we (still) are.

Sundays vote to elect a constituent assembly could further undermine the countrys democracy or unleash large-scale political violence.

The socialist nation is in free-fall. The Times Andes bureau chief lets us know whats going on, why, and what might come next.

The first major legislation passed during Trumps presidency will be a bill he opposed and now has no choice but to sign.

A hack forever tainted in Trumps eyes by his one moment of decency.

The nuclear deal was meant to reduce the risk of war. With the president backing away from it, get ready for fireworks.

Its too early to tell whether Democrats have a real shot at winning back the House next year, but a big jump in candidates running is a good sign.

Donald Trump likes having generals around, and he really likes John Kelly. But can a Marine run a White House whose boss loves chaos above all?

Trump tweeted that he is proud of Priebus and all they accomplished.

Please dont be too nice, Trump told police in Long Island.

If the climactic vote on the skinny repeal had gone the other way, the result would have probably been the same: GOP failure, with much time lost.

The U.S. believes the missile used to send a satellite to space could be a precursor to an ICBM.

Brian Kilmeade says the same dumb thing Paul Ryan said a few months ago.

Republicans came within one vote of passing a health-care bill that they wrote over lunch and admitted was a disaster. Thats a national crisis.

Kasich has never bent the knee to Trump. But viable primary challengers to sitting presidents come from the fever swamps, not the sensible center.

Moscow is taking away a vacation home where U.S. diplomats walk their dogs and have cookouts.

Consider the violence the president has done to the structures of American democracy in just the past seven days.

A proposed zoning change to the area near Grand Central is set to remake the neighborhood for decades. But at what cost?

Republicans couldnt come up with a workable health-care plan, so they kept kicking the can down the road. The road finally ended in the Senate today.

An eight-year crusade to destroy universal coverage has failed, and a social achievement endures.

Three Republicans Susan Collins, John McCain, and Lisa Murkowski voted against the bill.

Read the original post:
Trump’s Dangerous Game With Iran – New York Magazine

Fair Usage Law

July 29, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

US calls Iranian satellite launch ‘provocative’ – Washington Post

The State Department said Thursday that Irans launch of a space satellite was a provocative action that violates a U.N. resolution on ballistic missiles as well as the spirit of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers.

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said Thursday that reports that Iran had launched a rocket carrying a satellite into space violated U.N. Security Council resolution 2231, which calls on Iran not to conduct any activity involving ballistic missiles that are designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons.

Nauert said the United States regards the launch as continued ballistic missile development that is discouraged in the U.N. resolution.

We consider this to be a provocative action, and a provocative action that undermines the security, the prosperity of those in the region and around the world as well.

We believe that what happened overnight in the early morning hours here in Washington is inconsistent with the Security Council resolutions, she added. We believe that what happened overnight and into the morning is in violation of the spirit of the nuclear agreement.

[U.S. slaps new sanctions on Iran, after certifying its compliance with nuclear deal]

The launch of a satellite-carrying rocket was reported by Iranian state media on Thursday, but it was unclear exactly when the launch occurred. Officials in Israel and the United States fear Iran could use the technology to produce long-range missiles that could pose a threat to the region, and beyond, if they help Iran develop intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Irans defense ministry denies that its space program is a vehicle for weapons development, and the head of its space agency has even offered to cooperate with NASA and share its data with other countries.

The Trump administration has been highly critical of Irans ballistic missile tests. This month, the White House certified that Iran was in compliance with its commitments under the nuclear agreement. But while the language on Irans nuclear program is precise and extensive, the language involving missiles is ambiguous.

Resolution 2231 was passed in 2015 to endorse the deal in which six world powers, including the United States, agreed to ease nuclear-related economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for restrictions on its nuclear program. The agreement is officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

The language on ballistic missiles replaced a resolution dating from 2010 that said Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons. The 2015 version merely calls on Iran not to conduct such activity.

Read more:
US calls Iranian satellite launch ‘provocative’ – Washington Post

Fair Usage Law

July 27, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Looks like Rex Tillerson tricked Trump into keeping the Iran deal forever – Washington Examiner

During a week in which all signs point to Republicans enshrining President Obama’s top domestic achievement into law, it’s now looking like Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has tricked President Trump into keeping the main pillar of Obama’s foreign policy legacy in place indefinitely: the disastrous Iran deal.

On Thursday, the Associated Press reported that as part of Trump’s move to certify Iran’s compliance with the deal, the administration is pushing to “test” the deal with more inspections. On the surface, this may seem like a move to step up enforcement and lay the groundwork to unwind the deal theoretically consistent with Trump’s vow to “get tough” on Iran. But in practice, it looks like a stalling tactic designed by Tillerson and Obama holdovers in the State Department to handcuff Trump, with endless bureaucratic delays, from ever being able to pull out of the deal.

Last week, Iran deal supporters in the administration, led by Tillerson, talked Trump into sticking with the deal and certifying Iran compliance for the second time of his presidency, even as he told the Wall Street Journal, “If it was up to me, I would have had them noncompliant 180 days ago.”

Under the agreement that secured his decision recertify the deal, the United States will push for more inspections of Iranian military sites. As the AP puts it, “If Iran refuses inspections, the argument goes, Trump finally will have a solid basis to say Iran is breaching the deal, setting up Tehran to take most of the blame if the agreement collapses. If Iran agrees to inspections, those in Trump’s administration who want to preserve the deal will be emboldened to argue it’s advancing U.S. national security effectively.”

The problem is twofold one logistical, and one more fundamental.

Logistically, the process of requesting inspections of Iranian sites is long and arduous, with plenty of opportunities for international institutions and foreign governments to gum up the works, delaying any firm resolution indefinitely, and thus putting pressure on Trump to constantly renew the deal to let the process play out. The prospect of this has not been lost on opponents of the Iran deal, who have been furiously emailing and texting with each other in despair as they contemplate the implications.

In an email to reporters, Omri Ceren, managing director of the Israel Project and one of the most dogged and informed opponents of the deal, observed that, “The push [for inspections] can drag on literally indefinitely: It requires the State Department to persuade the Europeans to persuade the [International Atomic Energy Agency] to persuade the Iranians to allow inspections, and in between there need to be bilateral and multilateral intelligence exchanges, and anyway the [Iran deal] allows Iran to engage in dialogue with the IAEA indefinitely without ever violating the deal.”

There are a number of scenarios in which this convoluted process can be exploited by Tillerson and his band of Iran deal proponents at the State Department to maneuver Trump into holding off on his desire to escape the Iran deal.

“One scenario: In 3 months, Iran deal advocates will tell the president he has to certify because the deal is still being tested,'” Ceren wrote. “Another scenario: In 3 months, the Europeans (or Iran deal advocates channeling them) will tell the president he has to certify because they’ve bought into the testing,’ and would backlash against decertification while it’s ongoing. These are a half-dozen of these scenarios getting bounced around this morning.”

As I noted, these are the logistical problems with substituting the “more inspections” approach in the place of a more focused strategy specifically unwinding the deal. But there’s also a more fundamental problem: Regardless of whether it’s enforced, the Iran deal is still a really crappy deal.

That is, even if Iran completely complies with the deal, it will still be given space to become a much more dangerous conventional threat while putting it on a glide path to nuclear weapons over time.

One of the main conservative cases for an unconventional outsider like Trump was that at least he was willing to burn things down that needed to be burnt down. But he’s been consistently outplayed by swamp creatures. He vowed to reverse eight years of damaging Obama policies, yet more than six months into the Trump presidency, Obama’s legacy at home and abroad looks increasingly secure.

Link:
Looks like Rex Tillerson tricked Trump into keeping the Iran deal forever – Washington Examiner

Fair Usage Law

July 27, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Iranian hackers used female ‘honey pot’ to lure targets: researchers – Reuters

LAS VEGAS (Reuters) – Hackers believed to be working for the Iranian government have impersonated a young female photographer on social media for more than a year, luring men working in industries strategically important to Tehran’s regional adversaries, according to research published Thursday.

The so-called Mia Ash persona has been active on sites including LinkedIn, Facebook Inc (FB.O), WhatsApp and Blogger since at least April of last year, researchers at Dell SecureWorks said.

The campaign showed Iran engaged in a social engineering plot to ensnare its targets with a “honey pot”, a classic espionage trap often involving seduction, more commonly used by criminal hackers.

Dell SecureWorks observed Mia Ash sending specific malware, concealed as a “photography survey” with an attachment, to a victim that matched malware sent by Iranian hacking group Cobalt Gypsy during an unsuccessful “spearphishing” email attempt to the same victim’s employer in January.

The malware, known as PupyRAT, would give an attacker complete control of a compromised computer and access to network credentials, suggesting government espionage. The researchers did not have visibility into how many targets were compromised or what Mia Ash sought to gain with the access.

The fake profile used publicly available social media images of a real photographer based in eastern Europe to create an identity of an attractive woman in her mid-twenties who lived in London and enjoyed travel, soccer, and popular musicians including Ed Sheeran and Ellie Goulding, Dell SecureWorks said. Her social media biographies appeared to lift details from a New York photographer’s LinkedIn profile.

Dell SecureWorks said it had high confidence Mia Ash was created and operated by the Iranian hacking group known as Cobalt Gypsy.

Iranian officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Mia Ash primarily lured middle-aged men who worked as technicians and engineers at oil and gas, aerospace and telecommunications firms in the Middle East that had been previously targeted by the same group. Those include Saudi Arabia and Israel in addition to India and the United States.

Mia Ash’s victims failed to notice that none of her profiles included a way to contact her for photography services, according to Allison Wikoff, a senior security researcher at Dell SecureWorks who tracked Mia Ash’s activity.

“These guys aren’t hiring her for photography,” Wikoff said. “Their main thing is, ‘Wow, she’s young, she’s cute, she likes to travel, she’s whimsical’.”

LinkedIn removed the fake Mia Ash profile before Dell SecureWorks finished its research, Wikoff said.

Facebook, where Mia Ash listed her relationship status as “it’s complicated,” took down the profile last week after being contacted by Dell SecureWorks.

Cobalt Gypsy, also known as OilRig, has been previously accused of operating a network of fake LinkedIn profiles to pose as recruiters at major companies, including Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC.N) and General Motors Co (GM.N), but the Mia Ash persona showed an elevated level of persistence, Wikoff said.

Western security officials for years have considered Iran to be among the most sophisticated nation-state cyber adversaries, along with Russia, China and North Korea.

Another report released this week by researchers at Tokyo-based Trend Micro and ClearSky of Israel described efforts to impersonate major technology brands including Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) and Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) by another hacking group widely suspected of having links to Iran.

Reporting by Dustin Volz; editing by Jonathan Weber

See the original post:
Iranian hackers used female ‘honey pot’ to lure targets: researchers – Reuters

Fair Usage Law

July 27, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

How Trump should handle Iran – Politico

Last week, the Trump administration recertified that Iran is complying the nuclear agreement, setting off predictable debate between who those want to exit the deal immediately and those who see it as his predecessors signature foreign policy achievement.

But for all the will-he-or-wont-he attention on Trumps decision, the focus on the nuclear deal is missing the point: The administrations real agenda on Iran doesnt hinge on the nuclear agreementa dangerous deal that puts the U.S. in a impossible situation. Instead, the Trump administrations priority should be restoring leverage against Tehran, so that we can dissuade Iran from sprinting toward a bomb and create far more favorable circumstances to negotiate an agreement thatunlike Obamas dealactually prevents a nuclear Iran.

Abiding by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as the agreement is known, will only enable a nuclear and hegemonic Iran. It provides Tehran significant financial, military and geopolitical benefits, both upfront and over time, in exchange for minimal, reversible and temporary concessions on its nuclear program. As the JCPOAs restrictions fall away in coming years, Iran will be legally permitted to produce everything it needs for a nuclear weapon.

Yet, the JCPOA also forfeits what little leverage the United States had in the form of economic sanctions with no way to rapidly rebuild pressure. Thus, leaving the deal would free Iran to sprint for a nuclear weapons capability in a year or less, likely far less time than the United States would need to rebuild the international sanctions regime. Our partners to the deal would be unlikely to go along with us, further undermining our leverage.

This catch-22 stems from earlier failures to develop compelling pressure on Iran, as reported by JINSAs Gemunder Center Iran Task Force, which we co-chair. The Obama Administration created a false narrative that eschewed military options against Irans nuclear program and regional aggression, leaving Congress to focus narrowly on sanctions. These sanctions may have brought Tehran to the table, and helped keep it there long enough hammer out a deal, but alone they could not force it into an acceptable agreement.

Consequently, the JCPOA puts Iran on track to become as intractable a challenge as North Korea is today, and very possibly worse. Threatening the United States and its allies, including with nuclear weapons, is a core ambition of both these rogue regimes. Yet while Pyongyangs relentless pursuit of this goal has only isolated and impoverished it, the JCPOA does the opposite for Tehran.

The Trump administration must not abide this untenable and deteriorating situation. The United States now needs what it clearly lacked before: a comprehensive strategy of robust leverage against all of Irans destabilizing behaviors.

The first step is full enforcement of the JCPOA including potentially re-imposing suspended sanctions in response to Iranian cheating as a clear signal that Tehran can no longer flout its nuclear obligations. However, given the damage already done by the deal and the fact time is not on its side, the administrations ongoing strategic review and threats of renewed sanctions are insufficient.

American policymakers must also rebuild military leverage over Iran. Contingency plans to neutralize Irans nuclear facilities, if it materially breaches or withdraws from the deal, should be updated to reflect its growing nuclear infrastructure and military capabilities under the JCPOA. Just like it already appears to be doing against North Korea, the Pentagon must also develop credible capabilities in preparation for a possible shoot-down of future Iranian ballistic missile tests. U.S. Navy ships must also fully and responsibly utilize rules of engagement to defend themselves and the Persian Gulf against rising Iranian harassment.

It is equally important the United States work with its allies. The recent ten-year Memorandum of Understanding on defense assistance to Israel should be treated as the floor for cooperation, in particular on missile defenses shielding U.S. forces, Israel and its neighbors from increasingly capable arsenals of Iran and its proxies.

Stronger regional collective defense is also needed. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are shouldering the burdens of countering Irans growing footprint around the Arabian Peninsula. Formal U.S. military backing, and possible support from Israel, will raise the costs to Tehran of further aggression while reassuring our worried allies.

Public announcements and military exercises will make these intentions, capabilities and allied unity abundantly clear to Tehran. Strategic communications can also amplify investors continued wariness of the Iranian market and, in combination with human rights, terrorism and missile sanctions, increase internal strains on the regime.

These concentric pressures none of which violate the JCPOA will help deter Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons capability whether it complies, violates or withdraws from the deal.

They also create the most favorable conditions for a renegotiated agreement one enshrining many of the parameters initially demanded by the Obama Administration. This should include: anytime, anywhere inspections to verify the absence of weaponization activities and secret facilities; dismantling Irans nuclear-capable missiles; ensuring Iran could never enrich enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon; and no sunset or end to sanctions or embargoes until inspectors verify the completely peaceful nature of Irans nuclear program.

Neither staying in nor exiting the JCPOA can accomplish Americas overriding priority in the Middle East. Only increased U.S. leverage can prevent a nuclear Iran.

Ambassador Eric Edelman is former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. General (ret.) Charles Wald is former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command. They co-chair JINSAs Gemunder Center Iran Task Force.

Read the original:
How Trump should handle Iran – Politico

Fair Usage Law

July 25, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Gingrich & Bolton are wrong on Iran – WND.com

Iran must be free. The dictatorship must be destroyed. Containment is appeasement, and appeasement is surrender.

Thus does our Churchill, Newt Gingrich, dismiss, in dealing with Iran, the policy of containment crafted by George Kennan and pursued by nine U.S. presidents to bloodless victory in the Cold War.

Why is containment surrender? Because freedom is threatened everywhere so long as this dictatorship stays in power, says Gingrich.

But how is our freedom threatened by a regime with 3 percent of our GDP that has been around since Jimmy Carter was president?

Fortunately, Gingrich has found a leader to bring down the Iranian regime and ensure the freedom of mankind. In our country that was George Washington and the Marquis de Lafayette. In Italy it was Garibaldi, says Gingrich.

Whom has he found to rival Washington and Garibaldi? Says Gingrich, Maryam Rajavi.

Who is she? The leader of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, or Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, which opposed the shah, broke with the old ayatollah, collaborated with Saddam Hussein and, until 2012, was designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. Department of State.

At the NCRI conference in Paris in July where Gingrich spoke, and the speaking fees were reportedly excellent, John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani were also on hand.

Calling Irans twice-elected President Hassan Rouhani, a violent, vicious murderer, Giuliani said, the time has come for regime change.

Bolton followed suit. Tehran is not merely a nuclear-weapons threat, it is not merely a terrorist threat, it is a conventional threat to everybody in the region, he said. Hence, the declared policy of the United States of America should be the overthrow of the mullahs regime in Tehran.

We will all celebrate in Tehran in 2019, Bolton assured the NCRI faithful.

Good luck. Yet, as the New York Times said yesterday, all this talk, echoed all over this capital, is driving us straight toward war. A drumbeat of provocative words, outright threats and actions from President Trump and some of his top aides as well as Sunni Arab leaders and American activists is raising tensions that could lead to armed conflict with Iran.

Is this what America wants or needs a new Mideast war against a country three times the size of Iraq?

After Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen, would America and the world be well-served by a war with Iran that could explode into a Sunni-Shiite religious war across the Middle East?

Bolton calls Iran a nuclear-weapons threat.

But in 2007, all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies declared with high confidence Iran had no nuclear-weapons program. They stated this again in 2011. Under the nuclear deal, Iran exported almost all of its uranium, stopped enriching to 20 percent, shut down thousands of centrifuges, poured concrete into the core of its heavy water reactor and allows U.N. inspectors to crawl all over every facility.

Is Iran, despite all this, operating a secret nuclear-weapons program? Or is this War Party propaganda meant to drag us into another Mideast war?

To ascertain the truth, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should call the heads of the CIA and DIA, and the Director of National Intelligence, to testify in open session.

We are told we are menaced also by a Shiite Crescent rising and stretching from Beirut to Damascus, Baghdad and Tehran.

And who created this Shiite Crescent?

It was George W. Bush who ordered the Sunni regime of Saddam overthrown, delivering Iraq to its Shiite majority. It was Israel whose invasion and occupation of Lebanon from 1982 to 2000 gave birth to the Shiite resistance now known as Hezbollah.

As for Bashar Assad in Syria, his father sent troops to fight alongside Americans in the Gulf War.

The ayatollahs regime, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Basij militia are deeply hostile to this country. But Iran does not want war with the United States for the best of reasons. Iran would be smashed like Iraq, and its inevitable rise, as the largest and most advanced country on the Persian Gulf, would be aborted.

Moreover, we have interests in common: Peace in the Gulf, from which Irans oil flows and without which Iran cannot grow, as Rouhani intends, by deepening Irans ties to Europe and the advanced world.

And we have enemies in common: ISIS, al-Qaida and all the Sunni terrorists whose wildest dream is to see their American enemies fight their Shiite enemies.

Who else wants a U.S. war with Iran, besides ISIS?

Unfortunately, their number is legion: Saudis, Israelis, neocons and their think tanks, websites and magazines, hawks in both parties on Capitol Hill, democracy crusaders and many in the Pentagon who want to deliver payback for what the Iranian-backed Shiite militias did to us in Iraq.

President Trump is key. If he does the War Partys bidding, that will be his legacy, as the Iraq War is the legacy of George W. Bush.

The rest is here:
Gingrich & Bolton are wrong on Iran – WND.com

Fair Usage Law

July 20, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Avoiding War With Iran – New York Times

Congress, which was overwhelmingly opposed to the nuclear deal when it was signed, is working on new sanctions. Republicans in particular have pressed Mr. Trump to toughen his approach. In a recent letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, four senators said Iran continues to wage regional aggression, sponsor international terrorism, develop ballistic missile technology and oppress the Iranian people. Theres truth in that. But the nuclear deal was intended to alleviate only the nuclear threat, and they, like other critics, fail to acknowledge that it represented important progress toward decreasing the risk of war in the region.

Top American officials have turned up their rhetoric and have hinted at support for regime change, despite the dismal record in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Mr. Tillerson accused Iran of seeking regional hegemony at the expense of American allies like Saudi Arabia. Our policy toward Iran is to push back on this hegemony and to work toward support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government, he told a congressional committee. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis recently called Iran the most destabilizing influence in the Middle East.

Since the 1979 revolution that installed a theocracy in Iran, American leaders have periodically toyed with regime change. But some experts say this time is more serious, because Mr. Trump accepts the simplistic view of Sunni-led Saudi Arabia that Shiite-led Iran is to blame for all thats wrong in the region, taking sides in the feud between two branches of Islam.

The Saudis, who were already facing off against Iran-backed rebels in Yemen, have taken an even harsher stance since their leadership change. This month, they created a crisis by mounting a regional boycott against Qatar, which has relations with Iran. Israel also considers Iran a virulent threat, one reason for a deepening alignment between Israel and the Sunni states, and from time to time has reportedly urged America to attack Iran or considered doing so itself.

Anti-Iran voices outside government are trying to push Mr. Trump and Congress toward confrontation with Iran. The head of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a hawkish group that tried to block the Iran nuclear deal, urged Mr. Trump in a recent Wall Street Journal opinion article to systemically dismantle Iranian power country by country in the Middle East and to strengthen Irans pro-democracy forces. Prominent Trump supporters like John Bolton, a former ambassador to the United Nations; Newt Gingrich, former House speaker; and Rudolph Giuliani, former New York mayor, are pressing Mr. Trump to abandon the deal and are speaking out on behalf of the Mujahedeen Khalq, exiled Iranian dissidents who back regime change.

Most Americans are aware of Irans crimes against this country, including the 52 Americans taken hostage in 1979; the 241 Marines killed in the 1983 bombing of their barracks in Lebanon; and the 1996 bombing of the Air Force quarters in Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. Perhaps less known are events that still anger Iranians like the 1953 coup aided by the C.I.A. that ousted Irans democratically elected leader, Mohammed Mossadegh, and Americas intelligence support for Iraq in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.

Irans grievances do not make its recent behavior any less concerning. Tehran continues to fund Hezbollah and other extremists; detain Americans; and work to expand its reach, including in Iraq. Iran and the United States appear to be entering a particularly risky time. As the Islamic State gets pushed out of Iraq and Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia, along with their proxy forces, will be competing for control. Any attempt at regime change in Iran could destabilize the volatile Middle East in even more unpredictable ways.

Irans government continues to be torn between anti-American hard-liners and moderates like President Hassan Rouhani who are willing to engage with America. Mr. Trump would make a grave mistake if instead of trying to work with those moderate forces he led the nation closer to war.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this editorial appears in print on July 20, 2017, on Page A24 of the New York edition with the headline: Avoiding War With Iran.

Read more here:
Avoiding War With Iran – New York Times

Fair Usage Law

July 20, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Iran accused of helping fund Temple Mount unrest – The Times of Israel

The Islamic Republic of Iran reportedly provided aid to Palestinian protesters demonstrating against new security measures at the Temple Mount last month. The aid reportedly included boxes of food and drink, which came with a flyer attached depicting the Dome of the Rock and a quote attributed to Irans Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei reading, With the help of God Palestine will be freed. Jerusalem is ours. While Palestinian media reported that the food packages were provided by an Iranian youth movement, a PA intelligence official said it was clear that the Iranian regime was behind the aid. It is clear to us that the regime in Tehran, by means of its long arms, is behind this catering operation, the official told the Israel Hayom daily in an article published Tuesday. The sums come to millions of shekels and the Iranians found an opening to reap the benefits and send a message to the Palestinian public right under Israels nose that it is Iran that looks out for them. The flyer attached to all the food packages and the quotes of Khamenei make clear who is behind these food baskets. Another Palestinian official told Israel Hayom that while the PA was aware of the Iranian effort, it did not notify Israel because of PA President Mahmoud Abbass decision to freeze security ties in protest of the security measures placed at the Temple Mount following the July 14 terror attack at the holy site, when three Arab Israelis shot dead two police officers with weapons smuggled into the compound. In the territory under Palestinian control this would not happen, he added. We would not allow the Iranians a foothold like this, because this would come back at us like a boomerang with the reactions of Arab states. The Iranian involvement also angered senior PA officials, with an unnamed official said to be close to Abbas telling the daily that it was a mistake to allow Iran to reach into the West Bank with its tentacles. The Islamic Republic has long funded operations against Israel, often through its provision of money and arms to the Hamas and Hezbollah terror groups. Iran has also made calling for Israels destruction and the liberation of Jerusalem central to its propaganda efforts. While Israel removed last week all of the new security measures installed at the Temple Mount, a PA official told The Times of Israel that security cooperation will gradually be restored as long as Muslim access to the holy site remains unrestricted.

Fair Usage Law

August 1, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Lebanese ‘spy’ held in Iran ends hunger strike – The Times of Israel

BEIRUT The lawyer of a Lebanese man held in Iran since 2015 says his client has ended a 33-day hunger strike. Majed Dimashkiyeh sent The Associated Press a letter from Nizar Zakka announcing an end to his hunger strike following a request from his children. Zakka, who has permanent US residency, went missing in 2015, during his fifth trip to Iran. Two weeks later, Iranian state TV reported that he was in custody and suspected of having deep links to US intelligence services. Last September, Zakka was sentenced to 10 years in prison and handed a $4.2 million fine after a security court convicted him of espionage. Members of the US House of Representatives issued a resolution this week calling for Zakkas release. Zakka, 50, was rushed to a hospital earlier this month, where he refused an IV, his brother Ziad told The Associated Press. He said his brother was prepared to die if he is not released, and refused to sign documents in Farsi, a language he doesnt understand. Ziad Zakka, left, brother of Nizar Zakka who is imprisoned in Iran, speaks with his brothers lawyer Majed Dimshkiyeh in Beirut, Lebanon, Tuesday, July 18, 2017. (AP/Bilal Hussein) Zakkas family denies the allegations against him. His brother said he had been invited to attend a conference at which President Hassan Rouhani spoke of sustainable development and providing more economic opportunities for women. He showed the AP a letter of invitation for his brother from Iranian Vice President Shahindokht Molaverdi. He is completely losing hope in life, and this is the most difficult period a human being might reach, Zakka said in an interview in Beirut earlier this month, adding that he had urged his brother to end the hunger strike when he spoke to him by phone. The family has urged Lebanese President Michel Aoun to raise Zakkas case when he visits Iran in August. Aoun is a close ally of Hezbollah, a powerful Iranian-backed Lebanese group. We hope that President Aoun will reach a happy ending in this matter, said Majed Dimashkiyeh, a lawyer for the family who has sent an official letter to Aoun asking him to intervene with Iranian authorities. Zakka, who used to live in Washington, leads the Arab ICT Organization, or IJMA3, an industry consortium from 13 countries that advocates for information technology in the region. The Associated Press reported in May last year that IJMA3 had received at least $730,000 in contracts and grants since 2009 from both the State Department and the US Agency for International Development, USAID. Ziad Zakka said their mother passed away last July. He said she had sent a letter to Irans Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Rouhani through the Iranian Embassy in Beirut, telling them that my dream is to see Nizar.

Fair Usage Law

July 30, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Trump’s Dangerous Game With Iran – New York Magazine

Trump. Photo: Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images On Friday, North Korea test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile, leading to an eruption of concern from the security community. The Trump White House, however, has this week focused its belligerence lesson Pyongyang and the weapons it has, and more on Iran, despite the nuclear weapons it is prevented from getting.Last week, Secretary of State Tillerson pleasantly surprised his critics by certifying that Iran is complying with the terms of the 2015 deal that iced its nuclear ambitions and subjected it to intense inspections and restrictions for the next decade and more. This week, his boss fired back:I would be surprised if they were in compliance at the next review in 90 days, PresidentTrump told The Wall Street Journal. This has less to do with Iran and more to do with Trumps frustration with his own Cabinet for supporting the deal reportedly so great that he commissioned a parallel working group of lower-level, less-experienced officials to advise him before the next review. So the threat of a major conflict with Iran is high because the administration wants it that way.Mostif not all of the administrations key national security players, and their allies in Congress, see stepped-up U.S. military activity in the region as important to confronting Iran. Far from believing that the Iran deal contained the most serious U.S.-Iran flashpoint, theybelieve Iran, even without nuclear weapons, poses an existential threat to the U.S. and our allies. They believe that regime change switching out Irans theocracy for a (hypothetical) secular democracy is the only way, long-term, to deal with that threat. (Hands up if you recall hearing that one before about a country beginning with I.) This belief, by itself, isnt the problem. Many, though far from most, Iranians, share their longing for a government that is more liberal and democratic, and less allied with extremist groups elsewhere in the Middle East. And though there is often hyperbole in the accusations, they are grounded in truth: Iran supports armed extremist groups in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel-Palestine, and to a lesser extent Yemen including the worlds most potent non-state fighting force, Hezbollah. Irans government mistreats its people badly though not, say, worse than our Saudi allies. The anti-Tehran faction believes that its worth putting pressure on Irans willingness to comply with the nuclear deal in order to push on these other issues while the Obama administration believed the U.S. and the region could live with problematic behavior but not with nuclear empowerment. No, the problem is that the combination of a highly militarized standoff, multiple shooting wars across the region, and an administration that combines high rhetoric and low predictability is a recipe for escalation. Just Tuesday, a U.S. Navy vesselfired warning shotsat an Iranian boat, apparently operated by the hard-line Revolutionary National Guard forces, that came within 150 yards of it. Such incidents had decreased significantly during 2016, but still occur with some regularity.As far as we can tell, the hotline communication Secretary Kerry developed with Iranian foreign minister Zarif has been discontinued.The Iranians are well aware though most Americans are not of the stepped-up tempo of U.S. military operations in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria, and the heightened presence of ground and naval forces. Add to that the package of new sanctions that the president apparently demanded asthe price for certifying the deal this time. Within 24 hours of the certification, the administration put economic sanctions on 18 new Iranian individuals and corporate entities for a range of alleged offenses including harassment of U.S. naval vessels and attempts to build ballistic missiles or steal U.S. software. Most offenses had no direct connection to the nuclear deal. Tehran responded with rage, saying that these sanctions themselves violated the terms of the nuclear deal. The White House has help from Congress in ratcheting up tensions. The House andSenate have now eachpassed versions ofa bipartisan sanctions bill. While it has gotten attention for the new penalties it imposes on Russian entities and foreigners who collaborate with them to harm U.S. interests on cybersecurity, energy, human rights, and other areas,it also sets a range of new penalties on Iranians for actions related to ballistic missiles, regional terrorism, or human-rights violations. Now we wait to see whether President Trump will sign or veto legislation thatputs on Moscow the very pressures they hope will bend Tehran to the breaking point. So anyone in Iran who wants to claim that the U.S. is implacably opposed to Irans existing government and actively seeking to undermine it economically, while challenging it militarily, has plenty of data to point to. Given Irans regional goals, the means it believes are acceptable to employ, and the groups with which it is allied, defending U.S. interests and the nuclear deal was always going to require both strong regional presence and adroit diplomacy. What we have instead, though, is the unpredictable and bellicose rhetoric of the president and his team. Deterrence theory says that countries can be frightened into remaining peaceful if they know exactly what the consequences for aggression would be. But the range of tweets, offhand remarks, threats, and past ruminations about regime change leave quite a bit of room for Iranian actors to believe that Washington is determined not just to contain their government, but to remove it from power. Michael Crowley points out at Politico that key Trump officials are on the record as saying that Iran will remain a U.S. enemy until the clerical leaders and military officials who control the countrys political system are deposed. And they have continued to make such statements earlier this spring, Secretary Tillerson sparked a public protest from the Iranian government when he told Congress that the U.S. should work with opposition groups toward the peaceful transition of that government. The nuclear deal was never intended to resolve all the problems between the U.S. and Iran. It was intended to take off the table the question of nuclear weapons, which all sides had identified as the flashpoint that could most easily flare into war. But given both Washingtons differences with Tehran on key issues from human rights to Syria, and this administrations addiction to incendiary and off-the-cuff rhetoric, thats exactly where we (still) are. Sundays vote to elect a constituent assembly could further undermine the countrys democracy or unleash large-scale political violence. The socialist nation is in free-fall. The Times Andes bureau chief lets us know whats going on, why, and what might come next. The first major legislation passed during Trumps presidency will be a bill he opposed and now has no choice but to sign. A hack forever tainted in Trumps eyes by his one moment of decency. The nuclear deal was meant to reduce the risk of war. With the president backing away from it, get ready for fireworks. Its too early to tell whether Democrats have a real shot at winning back the House next year, but a big jump in candidates running is a good sign. Donald Trump likes having generals around, and he really likes John Kelly. But can a Marine run a White House whose boss loves chaos above all? Trump tweeted that he is proud of Priebus and all they accomplished. Please dont be too nice, Trump told police in Long Island. If the climactic vote on the skinny repeal had gone the other way, the result would have probably been the same: GOP failure, with much time lost. The U.S. believes the missile used to send a satellite to space could be a precursor to an ICBM. Brian Kilmeade says the same dumb thing Paul Ryan said a few months ago. Republicans came within one vote of passing a health-care bill that they wrote over lunch and admitted was a disaster. Thats a national crisis. Kasich has never bent the knee to Trump. But viable primary challengers to sitting presidents come from the fever swamps, not the sensible center. Moscow is taking away a vacation home where U.S. diplomats walk their dogs and have cookouts. Consider the violence the president has done to the structures of American democracy in just the past seven days. A proposed zoning change to the area near Grand Central is set to remake the neighborhood for decades. But at what cost? Republicans couldnt come up with a workable health-care plan, so they kept kicking the can down the road. The road finally ended in the Senate today. An eight-year crusade to destroy universal coverage has failed, and a social achievement endures. Three Republicans Susan Collins, John McCain, and Lisa Murkowski voted against the bill.

Fair Usage Law

July 29, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

US calls Iranian satellite launch ‘provocative’ – Washington Post

The State Department said Thursday that Irans launch of a space satellite was a provocative action that violates a U.N. resolution on ballistic missiles as well as the spirit of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said Thursday that reports that Iran had launched a rocket carrying a satellite into space violated U.N. Security Council resolution 2231, which calls on Iran not to conduct any activity involving ballistic missiles that are designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Nauert said the United States regards the launch as continued ballistic missile development that is discouraged in the U.N. resolution. We consider this to be a provocative action, and a provocative action that undermines the security, the prosperity of those in the region and around the world as well. We believe that what happened overnight in the early morning hours here in Washington is inconsistent with the Security Council resolutions, she added. We believe that what happened overnight and into the morning is in violation of the spirit of the nuclear agreement. [U.S. slaps new sanctions on Iran, after certifying its compliance with nuclear deal] The launch of a satellite-carrying rocket was reported by Iranian state media on Thursday, but it was unclear exactly when the launch occurred. Officials in Israel and the United States fear Iran could use the technology to produce long-range missiles that could pose a threat to the region, and beyond, if they help Iran develop intercontinental ballistic missiles. Irans defense ministry denies that its space program is a vehicle for weapons development, and the head of its space agency has even offered to cooperate with NASA and share its data with other countries. The Trump administration has been highly critical of Irans ballistic missile tests. This month, the White House certified that Iran was in compliance with its commitments under the nuclear agreement. But while the language on Irans nuclear program is precise and extensive, the language involving missiles is ambiguous. Resolution 2231 was passed in 2015 to endorse the deal in which six world powers, including the United States, agreed to ease nuclear-related economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for restrictions on its nuclear program. The agreement is officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. The language on ballistic missiles replaced a resolution dating from 2010 that said Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons. The 2015 version merely calls on Iran not to conduct such activity.

Fair Usage Law

July 27, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Looks like Rex Tillerson tricked Trump into keeping the Iran deal forever – Washington Examiner

During a week in which all signs point to Republicans enshrining President Obama’s top domestic achievement into law, it’s now looking like Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has tricked President Trump into keeping the main pillar of Obama’s foreign policy legacy in place indefinitely: the disastrous Iran deal. On Thursday, the Associated Press reported that as part of Trump’s move to certify Iran’s compliance with the deal, the administration is pushing to “test” the deal with more inspections. On the surface, this may seem like a move to step up enforcement and lay the groundwork to unwind the deal theoretically consistent with Trump’s vow to “get tough” on Iran. But in practice, it looks like a stalling tactic designed by Tillerson and Obama holdovers in the State Department to handcuff Trump, with endless bureaucratic delays, from ever being able to pull out of the deal. Last week, Iran deal supporters in the administration, led by Tillerson, talked Trump into sticking with the deal and certifying Iran compliance for the second time of his presidency, even as he told the Wall Street Journal, “If it was up to me, I would have had them noncompliant 180 days ago.” Under the agreement that secured his decision recertify the deal, the United States will push for more inspections of Iranian military sites. As the AP puts it, “If Iran refuses inspections, the argument goes, Trump finally will have a solid basis to say Iran is breaching the deal, setting up Tehran to take most of the blame if the agreement collapses. If Iran agrees to inspections, those in Trump’s administration who want to preserve the deal will be emboldened to argue it’s advancing U.S. national security effectively.” The problem is twofold one logistical, and one more fundamental. Logistically, the process of requesting inspections of Iranian sites is long and arduous, with plenty of opportunities for international institutions and foreign governments to gum up the works, delaying any firm resolution indefinitely, and thus putting pressure on Trump to constantly renew the deal to let the process play out. The prospect of this has not been lost on opponents of the Iran deal, who have been furiously emailing and texting with each other in despair as they contemplate the implications. In an email to reporters, Omri Ceren, managing director of the Israel Project and one of the most dogged and informed opponents of the deal, observed that, “The push [for inspections] can drag on literally indefinitely: It requires the State Department to persuade the Europeans to persuade the [International Atomic Energy Agency] to persuade the Iranians to allow inspections, and in between there need to be bilateral and multilateral intelligence exchanges, and anyway the [Iran deal] allows Iran to engage in dialogue with the IAEA indefinitely without ever violating the deal.” There are a number of scenarios in which this convoluted process can be exploited by Tillerson and his band of Iran deal proponents at the State Department to maneuver Trump into holding off on his desire to escape the Iran deal. “One scenario: In 3 months, Iran deal advocates will tell the president he has to certify because the deal is still being tested,'” Ceren wrote. “Another scenario: In 3 months, the Europeans (or Iran deal advocates channeling them) will tell the president he has to certify because they’ve bought into the testing,’ and would backlash against decertification while it’s ongoing. These are a half-dozen of these scenarios getting bounced around this morning.” As I noted, these are the logistical problems with substituting the “more inspections” approach in the place of a more focused strategy specifically unwinding the deal. But there’s also a more fundamental problem: Regardless of whether it’s enforced, the Iran deal is still a really crappy deal. That is, even if Iran completely complies with the deal, it will still be given space to become a much more dangerous conventional threat while putting it on a glide path to nuclear weapons over time. One of the main conservative cases for an unconventional outsider like Trump was that at least he was willing to burn things down that needed to be burnt down. But he’s been consistently outplayed by swamp creatures. He vowed to reverse eight years of damaging Obama policies, yet more than six months into the Trump presidency, Obama’s legacy at home and abroad looks increasingly secure.

Fair Usage Law

July 27, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Iranian hackers used female ‘honey pot’ to lure targets: researchers – Reuters

LAS VEGAS (Reuters) – Hackers believed to be working for the Iranian government have impersonated a young female photographer on social media for more than a year, luring men working in industries strategically important to Tehran’s regional adversaries, according to research published Thursday. The so-called Mia Ash persona has been active on sites including LinkedIn, Facebook Inc (FB.O), WhatsApp and Blogger since at least April of last year, researchers at Dell SecureWorks said. The campaign showed Iran engaged in a social engineering plot to ensnare its targets with a “honey pot”, a classic espionage trap often involving seduction, more commonly used by criminal hackers. Dell SecureWorks observed Mia Ash sending specific malware, concealed as a “photography survey” with an attachment, to a victim that matched malware sent by Iranian hacking group Cobalt Gypsy during an unsuccessful “spearphishing” email attempt to the same victim’s employer in January. The malware, known as PupyRAT, would give an attacker complete control of a compromised computer and access to network credentials, suggesting government espionage. The researchers did not have visibility into how many targets were compromised or what Mia Ash sought to gain with the access. The fake profile used publicly available social media images of a real photographer based in eastern Europe to create an identity of an attractive woman in her mid-twenties who lived in London and enjoyed travel, soccer, and popular musicians including Ed Sheeran and Ellie Goulding, Dell SecureWorks said. Her social media biographies appeared to lift details from a New York photographer’s LinkedIn profile. Dell SecureWorks said it had high confidence Mia Ash was created and operated by the Iranian hacking group known as Cobalt Gypsy. Iranian officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Mia Ash primarily lured middle-aged men who worked as technicians and engineers at oil and gas, aerospace and telecommunications firms in the Middle East that had been previously targeted by the same group. Those include Saudi Arabia and Israel in addition to India and the United States. Mia Ash’s victims failed to notice that none of her profiles included a way to contact her for photography services, according to Allison Wikoff, a senior security researcher at Dell SecureWorks who tracked Mia Ash’s activity. “These guys aren’t hiring her for photography,” Wikoff said. “Their main thing is, ‘Wow, she’s young, she’s cute, she likes to travel, she’s whimsical’.” LinkedIn removed the fake Mia Ash profile before Dell SecureWorks finished its research, Wikoff said. Facebook, where Mia Ash listed her relationship status as “it’s complicated,” took down the profile last week after being contacted by Dell SecureWorks. Cobalt Gypsy, also known as OilRig, has been previously accused of operating a network of fake LinkedIn profiles to pose as recruiters at major companies, including Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC.N) and General Motors Co (GM.N), but the Mia Ash persona showed an elevated level of persistence, Wikoff said. Western security officials for years have considered Iran to be among the most sophisticated nation-state cyber adversaries, along with Russia, China and North Korea. Another report released this week by researchers at Tokyo-based Trend Micro and ClearSky of Israel described efforts to impersonate major technology brands including Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) and Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) by another hacking group widely suspected of having links to Iran. Reporting by Dustin Volz; editing by Jonathan Weber

Fair Usage Law

July 27, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

How Trump should handle Iran – Politico

Last week, the Trump administration recertified that Iran is complying the nuclear agreement, setting off predictable debate between who those want to exit the deal immediately and those who see it as his predecessors signature foreign policy achievement. But for all the will-he-or-wont-he attention on Trumps decision, the focus on the nuclear deal is missing the point: The administrations real agenda on Iran doesnt hinge on the nuclear agreementa dangerous deal that puts the U.S. in a impossible situation. Instead, the Trump administrations priority should be restoring leverage against Tehran, so that we can dissuade Iran from sprinting toward a bomb and create far more favorable circumstances to negotiate an agreement thatunlike Obamas dealactually prevents a nuclear Iran. Abiding by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as the agreement is known, will only enable a nuclear and hegemonic Iran. It provides Tehran significant financial, military and geopolitical benefits, both upfront and over time, in exchange for minimal, reversible and temporary concessions on its nuclear program. As the JCPOAs restrictions fall away in coming years, Iran will be legally permitted to produce everything it needs for a nuclear weapon. Yet, the JCPOA also forfeits what little leverage the United States had in the form of economic sanctions with no way to rapidly rebuild pressure. Thus, leaving the deal would free Iran to sprint for a nuclear weapons capability in a year or less, likely far less time than the United States would need to rebuild the international sanctions regime. Our partners to the deal would be unlikely to go along with us, further undermining our leverage. This catch-22 stems from earlier failures to develop compelling pressure on Iran, as reported by JINSAs Gemunder Center Iran Task Force, which we co-chair. The Obama Administration created a false narrative that eschewed military options against Irans nuclear program and regional aggression, leaving Congress to focus narrowly on sanctions. These sanctions may have brought Tehran to the table, and helped keep it there long enough hammer out a deal, but alone they could not force it into an acceptable agreement. Consequently, the JCPOA puts Iran on track to become as intractable a challenge as North Korea is today, and very possibly worse. Threatening the United States and its allies, including with nuclear weapons, is a core ambition of both these rogue regimes. Yet while Pyongyangs relentless pursuit of this goal has only isolated and impoverished it, the JCPOA does the opposite for Tehran. The Trump administration must not abide this untenable and deteriorating situation. The United States now needs what it clearly lacked before: a comprehensive strategy of robust leverage against all of Irans destabilizing behaviors. The first step is full enforcement of the JCPOA including potentially re-imposing suspended sanctions in response to Iranian cheating as a clear signal that Tehran can no longer flout its nuclear obligations. However, given the damage already done by the deal and the fact time is not on its side, the administrations ongoing strategic review and threats of renewed sanctions are insufficient. American policymakers must also rebuild military leverage over Iran. Contingency plans to neutralize Irans nuclear facilities, if it materially breaches or withdraws from the deal, should be updated to reflect its growing nuclear infrastructure and military capabilities under the JCPOA. Just like it already appears to be doing against North Korea, the Pentagon must also develop credible capabilities in preparation for a possible shoot-down of future Iranian ballistic missile tests. U.S. Navy ships must also fully and responsibly utilize rules of engagement to defend themselves and the Persian Gulf against rising Iranian harassment. It is equally important the United States work with its allies. The recent ten-year Memorandum of Understanding on defense assistance to Israel should be treated as the floor for cooperation, in particular on missile defenses shielding U.S. forces, Israel and its neighbors from increasingly capable arsenals of Iran and its proxies. Stronger regional collective defense is also needed. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are shouldering the burdens of countering Irans growing footprint around the Arabian Peninsula. Formal U.S. military backing, and possible support from Israel, will raise the costs to Tehran of further aggression while reassuring our worried allies. Public announcements and military exercises will make these intentions, capabilities and allied unity abundantly clear to Tehran. Strategic communications can also amplify investors continued wariness of the Iranian market and, in combination with human rights, terrorism and missile sanctions, increase internal strains on the regime. These concentric pressures none of which violate the JCPOA will help deter Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons capability whether it complies, violates or withdraws from the deal. They also create the most favorable conditions for a renegotiated agreement one enshrining many of the parameters initially demanded by the Obama Administration. This should include: anytime, anywhere inspections to verify the absence of weaponization activities and secret facilities; dismantling Irans nuclear-capable missiles; ensuring Iran could never enrich enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon; and no sunset or end to sanctions or embargoes until inspectors verify the completely peaceful nature of Irans nuclear program. Neither staying in nor exiting the JCPOA can accomplish Americas overriding priority in the Middle East. Only increased U.S. leverage can prevent a nuclear Iran. Ambassador Eric Edelman is former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. General (ret.) Charles Wald is former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command. They co-chair JINSAs Gemunder Center Iran Task Force.

Fair Usage Law

July 25, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Gingrich & Bolton are wrong on Iran – WND.com

Iran must be free. The dictatorship must be destroyed. Containment is appeasement, and appeasement is surrender. Thus does our Churchill, Newt Gingrich, dismiss, in dealing with Iran, the policy of containment crafted by George Kennan and pursued by nine U.S. presidents to bloodless victory in the Cold War. Why is containment surrender? Because freedom is threatened everywhere so long as this dictatorship stays in power, says Gingrich. But how is our freedom threatened by a regime with 3 percent of our GDP that has been around since Jimmy Carter was president? Fortunately, Gingrich has found a leader to bring down the Iranian regime and ensure the freedom of mankind. In our country that was George Washington and the Marquis de Lafayette. In Italy it was Garibaldi, says Gingrich. Whom has he found to rival Washington and Garibaldi? Says Gingrich, Maryam Rajavi. Who is she? The leader of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, or Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, which opposed the shah, broke with the old ayatollah, collaborated with Saddam Hussein and, until 2012, was designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. Department of State. At the NCRI conference in Paris in July where Gingrich spoke, and the speaking fees were reportedly excellent, John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani were also on hand. Calling Irans twice-elected President Hassan Rouhani, a violent, vicious murderer, Giuliani said, the time has come for regime change. Bolton followed suit. Tehran is not merely a nuclear-weapons threat, it is not merely a terrorist threat, it is a conventional threat to everybody in the region, he said. Hence, the declared policy of the United States of America should be the overthrow of the mullahs regime in Tehran. We will all celebrate in Tehran in 2019, Bolton assured the NCRI faithful. Good luck. Yet, as the New York Times said yesterday, all this talk, echoed all over this capital, is driving us straight toward war. A drumbeat of provocative words, outright threats and actions from President Trump and some of his top aides as well as Sunni Arab leaders and American activists is raising tensions that could lead to armed conflict with Iran. Is this what America wants or needs a new Mideast war against a country three times the size of Iraq? After Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen, would America and the world be well-served by a war with Iran that could explode into a Sunni-Shiite religious war across the Middle East? Bolton calls Iran a nuclear-weapons threat. But in 2007, all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies declared with high confidence Iran had no nuclear-weapons program. They stated this again in 2011. Under the nuclear deal, Iran exported almost all of its uranium, stopped enriching to 20 percent, shut down thousands of centrifuges, poured concrete into the core of its heavy water reactor and allows U.N. inspectors to crawl all over every facility. Is Iran, despite all this, operating a secret nuclear-weapons program? Or is this War Party propaganda meant to drag us into another Mideast war? To ascertain the truth, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should call the heads of the CIA and DIA, and the Director of National Intelligence, to testify in open session. We are told we are menaced also by a Shiite Crescent rising and stretching from Beirut to Damascus, Baghdad and Tehran. And who created this Shiite Crescent? It was George W. Bush who ordered the Sunni regime of Saddam overthrown, delivering Iraq to its Shiite majority. It was Israel whose invasion and occupation of Lebanon from 1982 to 2000 gave birth to the Shiite resistance now known as Hezbollah. As for Bashar Assad in Syria, his father sent troops to fight alongside Americans in the Gulf War. The ayatollahs regime, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Basij militia are deeply hostile to this country. But Iran does not want war with the United States for the best of reasons. Iran would be smashed like Iraq, and its inevitable rise, as the largest and most advanced country on the Persian Gulf, would be aborted. Moreover, we have interests in common: Peace in the Gulf, from which Irans oil flows and without which Iran cannot grow, as Rouhani intends, by deepening Irans ties to Europe and the advanced world. And we have enemies in common: ISIS, al-Qaida and all the Sunni terrorists whose wildest dream is to see their American enemies fight their Shiite enemies. Who else wants a U.S. war with Iran, besides ISIS? Unfortunately, their number is legion: Saudis, Israelis, neocons and their think tanks, websites and magazines, hawks in both parties on Capitol Hill, democracy crusaders and many in the Pentagon who want to deliver payback for what the Iranian-backed Shiite militias did to us in Iraq. President Trump is key. If he does the War Partys bidding, that will be his legacy, as the Iraq War is the legacy of George W. Bush.

Fair Usage Law

July 20, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed

Avoiding War With Iran – New York Times

Congress, which was overwhelmingly opposed to the nuclear deal when it was signed, is working on new sanctions. Republicans in particular have pressed Mr. Trump to toughen his approach. In a recent letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, four senators said Iran continues to wage regional aggression, sponsor international terrorism, develop ballistic missile technology and oppress the Iranian people. Theres truth in that. But the nuclear deal was intended to alleviate only the nuclear threat, and they, like other critics, fail to acknowledge that it represented important progress toward decreasing the risk of war in the region. Top American officials have turned up their rhetoric and have hinted at support for regime change, despite the dismal record in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Mr. Tillerson accused Iran of seeking regional hegemony at the expense of American allies like Saudi Arabia. Our policy toward Iran is to push back on this hegemony and to work toward support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government, he told a congressional committee. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis recently called Iran the most destabilizing influence in the Middle East. Since the 1979 revolution that installed a theocracy in Iran, American leaders have periodically toyed with regime change. But some experts say this time is more serious, because Mr. Trump accepts the simplistic view of Sunni-led Saudi Arabia that Shiite-led Iran is to blame for all thats wrong in the region, taking sides in the feud between two branches of Islam. The Saudis, who were already facing off against Iran-backed rebels in Yemen, have taken an even harsher stance since their leadership change. This month, they created a crisis by mounting a regional boycott against Qatar, which has relations with Iran. Israel also considers Iran a virulent threat, one reason for a deepening alignment between Israel and the Sunni states, and from time to time has reportedly urged America to attack Iran or considered doing so itself. Anti-Iran voices outside government are trying to push Mr. Trump and Congress toward confrontation with Iran. The head of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a hawkish group that tried to block the Iran nuclear deal, urged Mr. Trump in a recent Wall Street Journal opinion article to systemically dismantle Iranian power country by country in the Middle East and to strengthen Irans pro-democracy forces. Prominent Trump supporters like John Bolton, a former ambassador to the United Nations; Newt Gingrich, former House speaker; and Rudolph Giuliani, former New York mayor, are pressing Mr. Trump to abandon the deal and are speaking out on behalf of the Mujahedeen Khalq, exiled Iranian dissidents who back regime change. Most Americans are aware of Irans crimes against this country, including the 52 Americans taken hostage in 1979; the 241 Marines killed in the 1983 bombing of their barracks in Lebanon; and the 1996 bombing of the Air Force quarters in Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. Perhaps less known are events that still anger Iranians like the 1953 coup aided by the C.I.A. that ousted Irans democratically elected leader, Mohammed Mossadegh, and Americas intelligence support for Iraq in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. Irans grievances do not make its recent behavior any less concerning. Tehran continues to fund Hezbollah and other extremists; detain Americans; and work to expand its reach, including in Iraq. Iran and the United States appear to be entering a particularly risky time. As the Islamic State gets pushed out of Iraq and Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia, along with their proxy forces, will be competing for control. Any attempt at regime change in Iran could destabilize the volatile Middle East in even more unpredictable ways. Irans government continues to be torn between anti-American hard-liners and moderates like President Hassan Rouhani who are willing to engage with America. Mr. Trump would make a grave mistake if instead of trying to work with those moderate forces he led the nation closer to war. Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter. A version of this editorial appears in print on July 20, 2017, on Page A24 of the New York edition with the headline: Avoiding War With Iran.

Fair Usage Law

July 20, 2017   Posted in: Iran  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."