Interview By Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
TEHRAN, Dec. 15 (MNA) -- James Dobbins, the former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, says Washington supports negotiations with Taliban.
"The U.S. and the NATO will support efforts by Hamid Karzai to engage insurgent leaders and factions and will encourage him to do so when there appear prospects for accommodation,” Dobbins told Mehr News Agency in an interview recently.
He added, “The insurgents of whom the Taliban is only one faction, albeit probably the largest, are not likely to be interested in any such accommodation as long as they believe that they are winning the military struggle.”
The former chief diplomat to Kabul believes that troop expansion in Afghanistan should be considered only a part of the new U.S. strategy for improving the situation in the country.
“The new strategy should have many components, including regional diplomacy, strengthening the Afghan government, working with local and tribal leaders, promoting economic development and even negotiating with the insurgents,” Dobbins explained.
“These are all more likely to succeed in a more secure environment,” said the former diplomat who currently chairs the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation.
On a dispute between Iran and the West over exchanging nuclear fuel for a nuclear reactor in Tehran, Dobbins said, "Iran should confirm the arrangement that its negotiators initially accepted to have its existing stock of low enriched uranium further enlarged abroad."
On Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki disputed the Western claims that Tehran has rejected the proposal to exchange its low-enriched uranium for 20 percent enriched nuclear fuel for the Tehran research reactor.
Mottaki said Iran is ready to exchange 400 kilograms of its low-enriched uranium on Kish Island in the Persian Gulf.
James Dobbins directs the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation and served as Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He was the Clinton administration’s special envoy to Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo, and Somalia and the Bush administration’s first envoy to Afghanistan.
HE/PA
END
MNA
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
Former EU Parliamentarian declares in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz
EU Should Take First Step toward N-Disarmament
Angelika Beer, the co-chairperson of the EU delegation for relations with Iran, in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz criticized EU for not having a united security policy and asked them to bring the first step toward nuclear disarmament.
***
The Lack of EU Security Policy
Angelika Beer, co-chairperson of the East-West-Institutes Parliamentarian Network for conflict prevention and human security in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily criticized the dangerous gap and the lack of a united security policy among EU members and asked them to start the nuclear disarmament from EU.
“After the last enlargement now, we are 27countries, there is a road back inside the EU to a kind of nationalism in the politics, so that means it is more difficult than before to get common positions and we have inside Europe different development rate. Some states are very fast and some states are very low in development” she said.
She described the EU member’s gap extensive.”In my view, the reason of the gap is not Washington policy because after the government change and now we recognize that Barack Obama tries to change the international politics, to get new contents in Islamic world and also in relation with Russia, But EU is not ready to follow that way because it is not unique,” she said.
“The reason is not in Americans, the reason is inside EU and that is a very dangerous situation,” Beer added.
Former member on the delegation for relations with Afghanistan and the Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly spoke about the changes taken place inside EU. “EU has changed. we need a new transatlantic partnership between the Americans, the European as well as Russia and there are some proposals from the president Medvedev and It is necessary to have an open discussion about future of security in the whole world. Obama and Medvedev are ready to do that but the EU union has no confirmed security policy, so there is a lack of policy inside the European Union.
Answering a question about G20 Pittsburg Summit and its results, this former EU parliamentarian pointed to her mission in International Parliamentarian Network for Conflict Prevention in the east-west Institute, and said: We stated an international theory to the leaders from G20 to spend more money on conflict prevention even if they have the economic crisis, so our aim as a parliamentarian network for conflict prevention is not to discuss only about the financial situation but our demand is to spend more money for disarmament and conflict prevention”.
“Of course, conflict prevention can help, we have the experience in Balkans but also in Afghanistan, let me say in Iraq that wars cost much more than the politics”, she said
Turkey Membership in EU; a Success
Answering a question about his idea about Turkey formal membership in EU and the oppositions, she added: “In my view, it might be a success for EU and also for Turkey to become a member of the EU union, because also in the region Ankara plays a very good role and an important one”.
“Some in EU are afraid of and are discussing about Islamic countries membership in EU but this view can not be accepted but in my view, it is totally wrong because for example Kosovo as a country with a Muslim majority has been recognized as a state in Europe and a candidate for EU union membership; so I would perceive to have Turkey as soon as possible as a member of the EU union”, former chair of the EU parliamentarian delegation for relations with Iran stated.
Pointing to Uk Prime Minister, Gordown Brown promises for decreasing Nuclear Submarines, co-chairperson of the East-West-Institutes Parliamentarian Network for conflict prevention and human security.said “ Europeans have to bring the first steps and to be accountable and in this way, other countries can believe that Europe is one of the first partners that will start the nuclear disarmament in their own countries And the second is that running on between Medvedev and Obama, they are negotiating about the start treaty, So there are different ways to reach the aim and that means also to have an instrument against proliferation”.
Speaking about Nuclear Disarmament, he stated: “ In my view, at first I should say that it is possible to have a nuclear free zone for a free world that means also that NPT is experiencing an important period, there will be the decision about the future of our world .
Militarism against Iran;Dangerous
“Our demand from the politicians and international community is that the responsible presidents in the whole world not to think about a military operation against Iran. Moreover, we ask them to support the civil society inside Iran and so that is very clear there is a danger about making the response mistake, I don’t know which one, the situation is unstable in the moment and nobody knows what happens,” she said.
“The first point is that the European union governments stopped the discussion about sanctions because they didn’t want to thread the negotiations before they started, so that means, the first of October negotiations was a great success because the Americans were on the table officially, first time” Beer said, emphasizing on Iran right for gaining Peaceful Nuclear Energy.
Beer, ignoring US unconditional support for Palestine occupiers, admired Americans ME policy and continued: “ Barak Obama tried to bring the Israeli officials and the Palestinians together, that is a step forward which we recognize as a good one because to prevent an arm conflict in the whole area it would much be easier to control the problems for the Palestinians at first that means the tow state solution at least between Palestine and Israel and to speak about the disarmament in the whole region and the nuclear free zone”.
Responding a Question about the reasons behind EU support for Israel Crimes in Palestine Beer said” Because I am a German I should underline that Germany was responsible for the second world war, in the past we have killed most of the Jaudish people living in Germany”.“I think that on the one side the Palestine, the different parties have to formulate a common sense that means the split between Mahmood Abbass and other groups is a problem to solve it in a good form.
Palestine issue has one solution which nobody can ignore.
That is recognizing what obama posed to Syria, that is Syria is not the road state, Syria will be a partner in discussions to find a peaceful solution. That’s important and also the Israeli government have to continue the international standard and to stop the current policy against the Palestinians in Gaza,” former Europe Greens representative in EU parliament said.
This former EU parliamentarian also criticized Iran officials for what he called double standards for supporting Palestine and oppressing their own opposition.
MKO; Undemocratic
Speaking about the EU decision for getting MKO (Iran opposition in exile) from EU black list, co-chairperson of the East-West-Institutes Parliamentarian Network for conflict prevention and human security stated: “
It was a court decision at first, after the European union followed that position. In my view it’s a question for justice and not a political one, because everybody wants to be informed about MKO, understands very well that this organization is neither democratic one nor oppositional one and the most important thing is that we are not to speak about the court decision but to make clear that the MKO can not be a partner for democratic politicians like I am and to isolate them, so that means I think its not important what happened on the justice side but it Is very important to make clear that the MKO, its more organization that is not parting in civil society in Iran and often which claim that Tehran should be attacked ,that’s unacceptable and it is not an organization that one can trust.
Angelika Beer is a German politician and a former Member of the European Parliament for Alliance ‘90/The Greens, part of the European Greens. She was chair of the delegation for relations with Iran and a member on the delegation for relations with Afghanistan and the Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, the Foreign Affairs committee and the Subcommittee on Security and Defense. In January, she was not reelected on a place on the EP election list. She has left the Green Party end of march 2009. Now, he is co-chairperson of the East-West-Institutes Parliamentarian Network for conflict prevention and human security.
Interview By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Angelika Beer, the co-chairperson of the EU delegation for relations with Iran, in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz criticized EU for not having a united security policy and asked them to bring the first step toward nuclear disarmament.
***
The Lack of EU Security Policy
Angelika Beer, co-chairperson of the East-West-Institutes Parliamentarian Network for conflict prevention and human security in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily criticized the dangerous gap and the lack of a united security policy among EU members and asked them to start the nuclear disarmament from EU.
“After the last enlargement now, we are 27countries, there is a road back inside the EU to a kind of nationalism in the politics, so that means it is more difficult than before to get common positions and we have inside Europe different development rate. Some states are very fast and some states are very low in development” she said.
She described the EU member’s gap extensive.”In my view, the reason of the gap is not Washington policy because after the government change and now we recognize that Barack Obama tries to change the international politics, to get new contents in Islamic world and also in relation with Russia, But EU is not ready to follow that way because it is not unique,” she said.
“The reason is not in Americans, the reason is inside EU and that is a very dangerous situation,” Beer added.
Former member on the delegation for relations with Afghanistan and the Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly spoke about the changes taken place inside EU. “EU has changed. we need a new transatlantic partnership between the Americans, the European as well as Russia and there are some proposals from the president Medvedev and It is necessary to have an open discussion about future of security in the whole world. Obama and Medvedev are ready to do that but the EU union has no confirmed security policy, so there is a lack of policy inside the European Union.
Answering a question about G20 Pittsburg Summit and its results, this former EU parliamentarian pointed to her mission in International Parliamentarian Network for Conflict Prevention in the east-west Institute, and said: We stated an international theory to the leaders from G20 to spend more money on conflict prevention even if they have the economic crisis, so our aim as a parliamentarian network for conflict prevention is not to discuss only about the financial situation but our demand is to spend more money for disarmament and conflict prevention”.
“Of course, conflict prevention can help, we have the experience in Balkans but also in Afghanistan, let me say in Iraq that wars cost much more than the politics”, she said
Turkey Membership in EU; a Success
Answering a question about his idea about Turkey formal membership in EU and the oppositions, she added: “In my view, it might be a success for EU and also for Turkey to become a member of the EU union, because also in the region Ankara plays a very good role and an important one”.
“Some in EU are afraid of and are discussing about Islamic countries membership in EU but this view can not be accepted but in my view, it is totally wrong because for example Kosovo as a country with a Muslim majority has been recognized as a state in Europe and a candidate for EU union membership; so I would perceive to have Turkey as soon as possible as a member of the EU union”, former chair of the EU parliamentarian delegation for relations with Iran stated.
Pointing to Uk Prime Minister, Gordown Brown promises for decreasing Nuclear Submarines, co-chairperson of the East-West-Institutes Parliamentarian Network for conflict prevention and human security.said “ Europeans have to bring the first steps and to be accountable and in this way, other countries can believe that Europe is one of the first partners that will start the nuclear disarmament in their own countries And the second is that running on between Medvedev and Obama, they are negotiating about the start treaty, So there are different ways to reach the aim and that means also to have an instrument against proliferation”.
Speaking about Nuclear Disarmament, he stated: “ In my view, at first I should say that it is possible to have a nuclear free zone for a free world that means also that NPT is experiencing an important period, there will be the decision about the future of our world .
Militarism against Iran;Dangerous
“Our demand from the politicians and international community is that the responsible presidents in the whole world not to think about a military operation against Iran. Moreover, we ask them to support the civil society inside Iran and so that is very clear there is a danger about making the response mistake, I don’t know which one, the situation is unstable in the moment and nobody knows what happens,” she said.
“The first point is that the European union governments stopped the discussion about sanctions because they didn’t want to thread the negotiations before they started, so that means, the first of October negotiations was a great success because the Americans were on the table officially, first time” Beer said, emphasizing on Iran right for gaining Peaceful Nuclear Energy.
Beer, ignoring US unconditional support for Palestine occupiers, admired Americans ME policy and continued: “ Barak Obama tried to bring the Israeli officials and the Palestinians together, that is a step forward which we recognize as a good one because to prevent an arm conflict in the whole area it would much be easier to control the problems for the Palestinians at first that means the tow state solution at least between Palestine and Israel and to speak about the disarmament in the whole region and the nuclear free zone”.
Responding a Question about the reasons behind EU support for Israel Crimes in Palestine Beer said” Because I am a German I should underline that Germany was responsible for the second world war, in the past we have killed most of the Jaudish people living in Germany”.“I think that on the one side the Palestine, the different parties have to formulate a common sense that means the split between Mahmood Abbass and other groups is a problem to solve it in a good form.
Palestine issue has one solution which nobody can ignore.
That is recognizing what obama posed to Syria, that is Syria is not the road state, Syria will be a partner in discussions to find a peaceful solution. That’s important and also the Israeli government have to continue the international standard and to stop the current policy against the Palestinians in Gaza,” former Europe Greens representative in EU parliament said.
This former EU parliamentarian also criticized Iran officials for what he called double standards for supporting Palestine and oppressing their own opposition.
MKO; Undemocratic
Speaking about the EU decision for getting MKO (Iran opposition in exile) from EU black list, co-chairperson of the East-West-Institutes Parliamentarian Network for conflict prevention and human security stated: “
It was a court decision at first, after the European union followed that position. In my view it’s a question for justice and not a political one, because everybody wants to be informed about MKO, understands very well that this organization is neither democratic one nor oppositional one and the most important thing is that we are not to speak about the court decision but to make clear that the MKO can not be a partner for democratic politicians like I am and to isolate them, so that means I think its not important what happened on the justice side but it Is very important to make clear that the MKO, its more organization that is not parting in civil society in Iran and often which claim that Tehran should be attacked ,that’s unacceptable and it is not an organization that one can trust.
Angelika Beer is a German politician and a former Member of the European Parliament for Alliance ‘90/The Greens, part of the European Greens. She was chair of the delegation for relations with Iran and a member on the delegation for relations with Afghanistan and the Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, the Foreign Affairs committee and the Subcommittee on Security and Defense. In January, she was not reelected on a place on the EP election list. She has left the Green Party end of march 2009. Now, he is co-chairperson of the East-West-Institutes Parliamentarian Network for conflict prevention and human security.
Interview By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Nuclear technology is Iran’s right: Georgian ambassador
TEHRAN, Oct. 25 (MNA) -- Georgian Ambassador to Iran Giorgi Janjgava here on Sunday called nuclear technology the Islamic Republic’s right and said that his country strongly “supports Iran’s involvement in Nabucco gas pipeline project.”
Visiting the booth of the Tehran Times daily and the Mehr News Agency at the 16th International Press Festival, the ambassador said, “All countries, especially Iran, have the right to have peaceful nuclear activities and make use of nuclear technology.”
“Georgia fully supports Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities,” Janjgava said, calling for eradication of all atomic bombes from around the globe and establishment of a world free of nuclear weapons.
He also referred to the Islamic Republic’s important role in the region and the world, stressing the need for Iran’s more active presence in the Caucasus region.
“There is a great potential for growth of political, economic, and cultural relations between Tehran and Tbilisi,” the ambassador stated, urging expansion of bilateral ties between the two neighboring countries.
Commenting on the Nabucco pipeline project, he spoke of his country’s full support for Iran’s participation in the project.
“Affiliation to Nabucco is an issue upon which Iran can reflect deeply, and also discuss it with the project’s European parties,” he noted.
The Nabucco gas pipeline project is designed to pump Central Asian gas via Turkey to Austria and Germany through Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, bypassing Russia. Gas supplies through the pipeline are expected to start in 2014.
The project will be a continuation of the existing Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipeline and will transport 20 billion cubic meters of gas a year. Two-thirds of the pipeline will pass through Turkish territory.
Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran and Iraq are being touted as potential suppliers.
Iran has the world’s second largest gas reserves after Russia and the second biggest oil reserves in OPEC after Saudi Arabia.
The Nabucco pipeline is seen as a rival to the Moscow-backed South Stream project designed to annually pump 31 billion cubic meters of Central Asian and Russian gas to the Balkans and onto other European countries, with the pipeline’s capacity expected to be eventually increased to 63 billion cubic meters annually.
Europe has expressed concerns about being dependent on Russia, which supplies a quarter of its gas needs. Calls for diversified supplies intensified following a recent bitter price dispute between Russia and Ukraine in early 2009, when Moscow cut off gas to Ukraine, affecting consumers across Europe.
Moscow has argued, however, that South Stream and Nord Stream would cut EU dependence on transit states like Ukraine and improve European energy security.
The 16th International Festival and Fair of Press and News Agencies opened in Tehran on October 20 and will be closed today.
Visiting the booth of the Tehran Times daily and the Mehr News Agency at the 16th International Press Festival, the ambassador said, “All countries, especially Iran, have the right to have peaceful nuclear activities and make use of nuclear technology.”
“Georgia fully supports Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities,” Janjgava said, calling for eradication of all atomic bombes from around the globe and establishment of a world free of nuclear weapons.
He also referred to the Islamic Republic’s important role in the region and the world, stressing the need for Iran’s more active presence in the Caucasus region.
“There is a great potential for growth of political, economic, and cultural relations between Tehran and Tbilisi,” the ambassador stated, urging expansion of bilateral ties between the two neighboring countries.
Commenting on the Nabucco pipeline project, he spoke of his country’s full support for Iran’s participation in the project.
“Affiliation to Nabucco is an issue upon which Iran can reflect deeply, and also discuss it with the project’s European parties,” he noted.
The Nabucco gas pipeline project is designed to pump Central Asian gas via Turkey to Austria and Germany through Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, bypassing Russia. Gas supplies through the pipeline are expected to start in 2014.
The project will be a continuation of the existing Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipeline and will transport 20 billion cubic meters of gas a year. Two-thirds of the pipeline will pass through Turkish territory.
Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran and Iraq are being touted as potential suppliers.
Iran has the world’s second largest gas reserves after Russia and the second biggest oil reserves in OPEC after Saudi Arabia.
The Nabucco pipeline is seen as a rival to the Moscow-backed South Stream project designed to annually pump 31 billion cubic meters of Central Asian and Russian gas to the Balkans and onto other European countries, with the pipeline’s capacity expected to be eventually increased to 63 billion cubic meters annually.
Europe has expressed concerns about being dependent on Russia, which supplies a quarter of its gas needs. Calls for diversified supplies intensified following a recent bitter price dispute between Russia and Ukraine in early 2009, when Moscow cut off gas to Ukraine, affecting consumers across Europe.
Moscow has argued, however, that South Stream and Nord Stream would cut EU dependence on transit states like Ukraine and improve European energy security.
The 16th International Festival and Fair of Press and News Agencies opened in Tehran on October 20 and will be closed today.
Iran not meddling in Afghanistan: Afghan politico
TEHRAN, Nov. 9 (MNA) – An Afghan party chief has rejected Western claims that Iran is interfering in Afghanistan’s internal affairs.
Mohammad Hassan Jafari, the secretary general of the Afghan National Welfare Party, told a roundtable discussion hosted by the Mehr News Agency that such accusations by the West are attempts to cover up their failures in Afghanistan.
“Westerners accuse Iran of interfering in Afghanistan’s affairs while the Islamic Republic itself is a victim of terrorism and even in a single case in 1998 it lost 11 diplomats and a reporter,” Jafari said in a reference to the murder of Iranian diplomats at a consulate in Mazar-i-Sharif by the Taliban.
The party chief said Iran and Afghanistan share 900-kilometer border and “the Islamic Republic is seeking security in Afghanistan because it considers security in the country as security in its borders.”
Pointing to Iran’s support for Mujahedin groups in the fight against the Soviet Army, he said, “Iran’s support for Kabul has been unprecedented and unique.”
Zohouri Hosseini, an expert on Afghanistan, said Iran’s involvement in the reconstruction of the war-stricken country should not be interpreted as interference.
Hosseini said Iran is among major countries which have made some commitments in international conferences to help rebuild the country.
The expert went on to say that the Afghan Shia community, which constitutes about 30 percent of the country’s population, and even half of the Sunnis are interested in Iran.
At a time that Christian missionaries are propagating their religion in Afghanistan it is Iran’s right to interact with a nation which shares language, cultural and religious commonalties.
He said interaction with Afghanistan is different from interference as exercised by the West’s military and political intervention in the Central Asian country.
After the Mujahedin defeated the Soviet Army they intended to establish an Islamic Republic like the Islamic Republic of Iran and in order to prevent such a thing from happening the West supported Taliban to suppress the Mujahedin as a modern Islamists.
Ali Vahedi, also an expert on Afghanistan, also said accusation of interference in Afghanistan is a desperate attempt by the West to justify its failure in Afghanistan.
Vahedi said claims of interference in Afghanistan by Iran are not something new and such accusations were leveled against Tehran during the Soviet occupation of the country in the 1980s.
He said since the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan no government in Kabul has said that Iran has been interfering in the country.
“Contrary to the West’s relations with Afghanistan which have been of colonial nature Tehran’s relations with Kabul has always been fraternal.”
Iran has suffered greatly since the invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 by hosting millions of refuges. Iran has also been the main victim of drug trafficking from Afghanistan.
Mohammad Hassan Jafari, the secretary general of the Afghan National Welfare Party, told a roundtable discussion hosted by the Mehr News Agency that such accusations by the West are attempts to cover up their failures in Afghanistan.
“Westerners accuse Iran of interfering in Afghanistan’s affairs while the Islamic Republic itself is a victim of terrorism and even in a single case in 1998 it lost 11 diplomats and a reporter,” Jafari said in a reference to the murder of Iranian diplomats at a consulate in Mazar-i-Sharif by the Taliban.
The party chief said Iran and Afghanistan share 900-kilometer border and “the Islamic Republic is seeking security in Afghanistan because it considers security in the country as security in its borders.”
Pointing to Iran’s support for Mujahedin groups in the fight against the Soviet Army, he said, “Iran’s support for Kabul has been unprecedented and unique.”
Zohouri Hosseini, an expert on Afghanistan, said Iran’s involvement in the reconstruction of the war-stricken country should not be interpreted as interference.
Hosseini said Iran is among major countries which have made some commitments in international conferences to help rebuild the country.
The expert went on to say that the Afghan Shia community, which constitutes about 30 percent of the country’s population, and even half of the Sunnis are interested in Iran.
At a time that Christian missionaries are propagating their religion in Afghanistan it is Iran’s right to interact with a nation which shares language, cultural and religious commonalties.
He said interaction with Afghanistan is different from interference as exercised by the West’s military and political intervention in the Central Asian country.
After the Mujahedin defeated the Soviet Army they intended to establish an Islamic Republic like the Islamic Republic of Iran and in order to prevent such a thing from happening the West supported Taliban to suppress the Mujahedin as a modern Islamists.
Ali Vahedi, also an expert on Afghanistan, also said accusation of interference in Afghanistan is a desperate attempt by the West to justify its failure in Afghanistan.
Vahedi said claims of interference in Afghanistan by Iran are not something new and such accusations were leveled against Tehran during the Soviet occupation of the country in the 1980s.
He said since the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan no government in Kabul has said that Iran has been interfering in the country.
“Contrary to the West’s relations with Afghanistan which have been of colonial nature Tehran’s relations with Kabul has always been fraternal.”
Iran has suffered greatly since the invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 by hosting millions of refuges. Iran has also been the main victim of drug trafficking from Afghanistan.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Mark Fitzpatrick, IISS Disarmament director declares in an interview with Siasat Rooz:
Missile Defense Shield Has Not Been Canceled
Interview By:Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
The US government approach has been pradoaxical in recent years, and this paradox has grown more intense during Barak Obama’s administration. Different decisions made by Whitehouse policy makers prove this. One of the most important promises made by Obama during and after his election campaign was canceling the deployment of the missile defense shield in Eastern European countries, a promise which has not been really accomplished. However, Obama’s administration has declared officially that the shield plan has been cancelled. But Mark Fitzpatrick, Director of Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program for the International Institute for Strategic Studies and former US assistant secretary of state says this is not true.
In an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily, Fitzpatrick said he believes that the proposed US missile defense shield in Eeastern Europe has not been cancelled but changed, to move it further south.
Fitzpatrick had previously served for four years at the US Mission to International Organization in Vienna and is fully aware of the US foreign policies, and what he says about Iran and its nuclear program in this short interview can be a clear proof of this fact that in contrary to Obama’s Change slogan, the US foreign policies
toward Iran has not been changed.
The proposal of the Deployment of US Missile Defense Shield has intensified the tensions between Russia and the US.
Kremlin believes it is dangerous for its security and threatened to deploy the same system on its borders with Europe. While US has the biggest Nuclear Arsenal and has not decreased them till now.
When he was asked about the new promises made by Obama’s administration in the case of making a world free from Nuclear Weapons, he said: President Obama has stated his commitment to the goal of a nuclear-weapons-free world, and he has taken concrete steps in this direction, starting with the negotiation of a START follow-on treaty under which American and Russian nuclear arsenals would be further reduced. Strengthening the non-proliferation measures of the NPT and the verification tools of the IAEA will also be important aspects of building a stable nuclear-weapons-free world in which no country need fear that another nation will suddenly break out and become the lone nuclear power.
About of the paradoxical statements posed by US officials about canceling the missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, He stated: The missile defence shield in Eastern Europe has not been cancelled, but it will be changed, to move it further south and to concentrate on capabilities to detect and destroy any short- or medium-range missiles fired by hostile countries.
Ansewring a question about making the missile defense shield near Israel he said: I do not think the primary purpose is to defend Israel, which has other means of defense.
While, many times, IAEA inspectors and it’s general secretary in different occasions have reported Iran Nuclear activities peaceful and the remaining ambiguities are not technical and are just some claims made by Israel and its supporters, in Expressing his analysis of the current talks between Iran and the West, Fitzpatrick, ignored Tehran cooperation with IAEA and 5+1 group. “Of all of Iran’s communications with the major powers to date, the 11 September package was the most disappointing. By refusing to even touch on the cause of the dispute, Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability, the package provided no basis for finding a peaceful solution,” he claimed.
This former American official criticized Iran proposed package introduction about ‘peace and justice” and related it to Iran post election events.
Reviewing the past 5+1 group talks about Iran Peaceful Nuclear Energy, Director of IISS added: In New York last Wednesday, I assume the P5+1 expressed their common determination to persuade Iran to suspend the enrichment activity as a first step toward a peaceful solution.
Former US State department Deputy Assistant Secretary for Non-proliferation accused Iran of trying to make Nuclear Weapons and said: 5+1 representatives on 1 October will be united in asking Iran to stop he activity that is causing so much concern.
While Iranian officials had announced the process of building a second enrichment plant at Qom in a letter to Mohammad Albaradei several months befor it was released by media, Fitzpatrick claims that the “astounding news that Iran was secretly building a second enrichment plant at Qom will strengthen 5+1 determination and the revelation of the Qom plant is further proof that the main purpose of Iran’s enrichment program is for weapons-related.”
“ One of the most interesting developments of the past week is that Russia now accepts that further sanctions are inevitable. Now that the world knows about the second enrichment plant at Qom, I expect China, too, will agree to impose additional sanctions if Iran does not demonstrate in the talks that it is serious about meeting their concerns “he added.
Ignoring all the forgotten promises and the “confidence deficit” which has grown between Tehran and West, Fitzpatrick said: Iran had been offered a very good opportunity four years ago to join with Russia in a joint enterprise to produce enriched uranium on Russian soil. The best way forward is a solution such as this that allows Iran to continue to be involved in nuclear technology and does not restrict its ability to produce nuclear power but does limit its ability to produce nuclear weapons. Any solution would also have to involve unfettered IAEA verification, including through implementation of the safeguards Additional Protocol and other measures to overcome what IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei called the ‘confidence deficit’ that Iran has created by its violation of IAEA safeguards and its refusal to fully cooperate with the IAEA.
Speaking about rationality and fairness of allowing some governments and regimes like India, Pakistan and Israel to have Nuclear Arsenals and struggling for preventing Iran from having Peaceful Nuclear Energy, he continued: Iran freely undertook an obligation under the NPT to forgo nuclear weapons and to allow the IAEA to verify that its nuclear activities are peaceful. Iran is being asked to adhere to its obligations. This is hardly unfair. And because Iran violated its safeguards obligations, it was asked to stop producing enriched uranium until the world is persuaded that the nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. It is desirable that all countries sign the NPT. The fact that three of them have not is not a justification for Iran to violate its NPT obligations and to seek a nuclear weapons capability. If Iran seeks to leave the NPT and to produce nuclear weapons, I predict that it will trigger war. I certainly do not want this, and I do not think any reasonable people in Iran do either.
former US State department Deputy Assistant Secretary for Non-proliferation, called Tel Aviv threats against Iran Nuclear Facilities acceptable and said: Iran’s proposal for protecting the IAEA member’s Nuclear Facilities from Airial attacks is obviously self-serving and unacceptable. If Iran is intending to use its nuclear facilities to produce fissile material for weapons purposes, as certainly appears to be the case, then they should not be given international legal status that protects them from military attack.
......................................
Mr Fitzpatrick had previously served for four years at the US Mission to International Organizations in Vienna, including as Charge d’Affairs and as Counselor for Nuclear Policy, in charge of liaison with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Now he is the Director of the IISS Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program.
Interview By:Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
The US government approach has been pradoaxical in recent years, and this paradox has grown more intense during Barak Obama’s administration. Different decisions made by Whitehouse policy makers prove this. One of the most important promises made by Obama during and after his election campaign was canceling the deployment of the missile defense shield in Eastern European countries, a promise which has not been really accomplished. However, Obama’s administration has declared officially that the shield plan has been cancelled. But Mark Fitzpatrick, Director of Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program for the International Institute for Strategic Studies and former US assistant secretary of state says this is not true.
In an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily, Fitzpatrick said he believes that the proposed US missile defense shield in Eeastern Europe has not been cancelled but changed, to move it further south.
Fitzpatrick had previously served for four years at the US Mission to International Organization in Vienna and is fully aware of the US foreign policies, and what he says about Iran and its nuclear program in this short interview can be a clear proof of this fact that in contrary to Obama’s Change slogan, the US foreign policies
toward Iran has not been changed.
The proposal of the Deployment of US Missile Defense Shield has intensified the tensions between Russia and the US.
Kremlin believes it is dangerous for its security and threatened to deploy the same system on its borders with Europe. While US has the biggest Nuclear Arsenal and has not decreased them till now.
When he was asked about the new promises made by Obama’s administration in the case of making a world free from Nuclear Weapons, he said: President Obama has stated his commitment to the goal of a nuclear-weapons-free world, and he has taken concrete steps in this direction, starting with the negotiation of a START follow-on treaty under which American and Russian nuclear arsenals would be further reduced. Strengthening the non-proliferation measures of the NPT and the verification tools of the IAEA will also be important aspects of building a stable nuclear-weapons-free world in which no country need fear that another nation will suddenly break out and become the lone nuclear power.
About of the paradoxical statements posed by US officials about canceling the missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, He stated: The missile defence shield in Eastern Europe has not been cancelled, but it will be changed, to move it further south and to concentrate on capabilities to detect and destroy any short- or medium-range missiles fired by hostile countries.
Ansewring a question about making the missile defense shield near Israel he said: I do not think the primary purpose is to defend Israel, which has other means of defense.
While, many times, IAEA inspectors and it’s general secretary in different occasions have reported Iran Nuclear activities peaceful and the remaining ambiguities are not technical and are just some claims made by Israel and its supporters, in Expressing his analysis of the current talks between Iran and the West, Fitzpatrick, ignored Tehran cooperation with IAEA and 5+1 group. “Of all of Iran’s communications with the major powers to date, the 11 September package was the most disappointing. By refusing to even touch on the cause of the dispute, Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability, the package provided no basis for finding a peaceful solution,” he claimed.
This former American official criticized Iran proposed package introduction about ‘peace and justice” and related it to Iran post election events.
Reviewing the past 5+1 group talks about Iran Peaceful Nuclear Energy, Director of IISS added: In New York last Wednesday, I assume the P5+1 expressed their common determination to persuade Iran to suspend the enrichment activity as a first step toward a peaceful solution.
Former US State department Deputy Assistant Secretary for Non-proliferation accused Iran of trying to make Nuclear Weapons and said: 5+1 representatives on 1 October will be united in asking Iran to stop he activity that is causing so much concern.
While Iranian officials had announced the process of building a second enrichment plant at Qom in a letter to Mohammad Albaradei several months befor it was released by media, Fitzpatrick claims that the “astounding news that Iran was secretly building a second enrichment plant at Qom will strengthen 5+1 determination and the revelation of the Qom plant is further proof that the main purpose of Iran’s enrichment program is for weapons-related.”
“ One of the most interesting developments of the past week is that Russia now accepts that further sanctions are inevitable. Now that the world knows about the second enrichment plant at Qom, I expect China, too, will agree to impose additional sanctions if Iran does not demonstrate in the talks that it is serious about meeting their concerns “he added.
Ignoring all the forgotten promises and the “confidence deficit” which has grown between Tehran and West, Fitzpatrick said: Iran had been offered a very good opportunity four years ago to join with Russia in a joint enterprise to produce enriched uranium on Russian soil. The best way forward is a solution such as this that allows Iran to continue to be involved in nuclear technology and does not restrict its ability to produce nuclear power but does limit its ability to produce nuclear weapons. Any solution would also have to involve unfettered IAEA verification, including through implementation of the safeguards Additional Protocol and other measures to overcome what IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei called the ‘confidence deficit’ that Iran has created by its violation of IAEA safeguards and its refusal to fully cooperate with the IAEA.
Speaking about rationality and fairness of allowing some governments and regimes like India, Pakistan and Israel to have Nuclear Arsenals and struggling for preventing Iran from having Peaceful Nuclear Energy, he continued: Iran freely undertook an obligation under the NPT to forgo nuclear weapons and to allow the IAEA to verify that its nuclear activities are peaceful. Iran is being asked to adhere to its obligations. This is hardly unfair. And because Iran violated its safeguards obligations, it was asked to stop producing enriched uranium until the world is persuaded that the nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. It is desirable that all countries sign the NPT. The fact that three of them have not is not a justification for Iran to violate its NPT obligations and to seek a nuclear weapons capability. If Iran seeks to leave the NPT and to produce nuclear weapons, I predict that it will trigger war. I certainly do not want this, and I do not think any reasonable people in Iran do either.
former US State department Deputy Assistant Secretary for Non-proliferation, called Tel Aviv threats against Iran Nuclear Facilities acceptable and said: Iran’s proposal for protecting the IAEA member’s Nuclear Facilities from Airial attacks is obviously self-serving and unacceptable. If Iran is intending to use its nuclear facilities to produce fissile material for weapons purposes, as certainly appears to be the case, then they should not be given international legal status that protects them from military attack.
......................................
Mr Fitzpatrick had previously served for four years at the US Mission to International Organizations in Vienna, including as Charge d’Affairs and as Counselor for Nuclear Policy, in charge of liaison with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Now he is the Director of the IISS Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Program.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Polish journalists intrigued by Iran’s Muharram rituals
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
TEHRAN -- Among the world’s most unique religious ceremonies, Muharram rituals are extremely fascinating, Polish photojournalist Marcin Kalinski told MNA on Friday.
Polish photojournalist Marcin Kalinski and his brother Piotr, a music specialist from the Dziennik newspaper, traveled Iran to take photos and also to review music performed during the Muharram ceremonies.
They unite Iranians into a single family who mourns for the loss of their most beloved member, namely Imam Hussein (AS).
They expressed their amazement over the continuation of such rituals for centuries in Iran and also lauded the collective nature of the mourning ceremonies.
“The Muharram rituals I observed were very different from Muharram I knew previously through Western media,” Marcin Kalinski mentioned.
“I saw a Reuters photo in which a Pakistani stabbed himself in the chest during a Muharram ceremony but the ceremonies I have witnessed in Iran are intense and meaningful, but without self-mutilation,” he added.
“I had expected to see Iranians injuring their bodies during the rituals but I did not see such a thing. In Iran, the Muharram mourning ceremonies were really quite different from what I expected.
“I have traveled to many countries and took several photos of different religious ceremonies but none of them were as extensive as those here in Iran. It seemed as though my brother and I were the only ones in the whole country not mourning Imam Hussein (AS),” he said.
Marcin Kalinski, who also traveled to Bander Abbas in southern Iran, commented on the Tazieh, Iranian passion plays performed in the street during the mourning period of Muharram. He said that although professional actors perform the Tazieh in Tehran, in other Iranian towns amateur actors perform in them.
Piotr Kalinski said that although he did not understand the liturgy recited during the Muharram rituals, he found that the music compositions performed were intriguing, sorrowful but also tranquil.
Tehran Times Art Desk
TEHRAN -- Among the world’s most unique religious ceremonies, Muharram rituals are extremely fascinating, Polish photojournalist Marcin Kalinski told MNA on Friday.
Polish photojournalist Marcin Kalinski and his brother Piotr, a music specialist from the Dziennik newspaper, traveled Iran to take photos and also to review music performed during the Muharram ceremonies.
They unite Iranians into a single family who mourns for the loss of their most beloved member, namely Imam Hussein (AS).
They expressed their amazement over the continuation of such rituals for centuries in Iran and also lauded the collective nature of the mourning ceremonies.
“The Muharram rituals I observed were very different from Muharram I knew previously through Western media,” Marcin Kalinski mentioned.
“I saw a Reuters photo in which a Pakistani stabbed himself in the chest during a Muharram ceremony but the ceremonies I have witnessed in Iran are intense and meaningful, but without self-mutilation,” he added.
“I had expected to see Iranians injuring their bodies during the rituals but I did not see such a thing. In Iran, the Muharram mourning ceremonies were really quite different from what I expected.
“I have traveled to many countries and took several photos of different religious ceremonies but none of them were as extensive as those here in Iran. It seemed as though my brother and I were the only ones in the whole country not mourning Imam Hussein (AS),” he said.
Marcin Kalinski, who also traveled to Bander Abbas in southern Iran, commented on the Tazieh, Iranian passion plays performed in the street during the mourning period of Muharram. He said that although professional actors perform the Tazieh in Tehran, in other Iranian towns amateur actors perform in them.
Piotr Kalinski said that although he did not understand the liturgy recited during the Muharram rituals, he found that the music compositions performed were intriguing, sorrowful but also tranquil.
Tehran Times Art Desk
ANSWER director: Israeli actions are ‘a crime against the humanity’
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
TEHRAN - The Mehr News Agency has conducted an interview with Brian Becker, the director of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) organization, on Israel’s war on Gaza.
ANSWER is a U.S.-based protest organization that has organized many of the largest anti-war demonstrations in the United States.
Becker believes what is Israel is doing in Gaza is a “war crime”. He says, “It is really a crime against the humanity and war crimes as defined by all international standards including the Nuremberg Treaty, the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention.”
Following is an excerpt of the interview:
Q: What is your view on the UN’s silence about the Gaza tragedy and the killing of women and children?
A: People are demonstrating in the streets and yet the UN does nothing and the reason is that the UN is manipulated by the U.S. It is the exercise of the dictatorship by the U.S. and then other countries of the world because these exercises of power are in the Security Council. The charter of the UN is now a mockery because the UN, rather than bringing peace, allows a war of aggression carried out by Israeli government but supported and financed by United States.
Q: Do you think the crimes committed in Gaza can be classified as war crimes?
A: It is really a crime against the humanity and war crimes as defined by all international standards including the Nuremberg Treaty, the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention. It is illegal to target or even to allow military combatants to target civilians…. That is a violation of international law. Clearly the Israel government is not only targeting the military and governmental centers in Gaza but this is a war against the entire people and this is a war crime and a crime against the humanity.
Q: Some analysts say Israel does not intend to stop the attacks. What do you think?
A: Israel has a goal and its goal is shared with the U.S. The goal is to destroy all organizations… those resistance organizations that reject the colonial projects called Israel. The goal is to destroy Hamas and other organizations that continue to resist against the colonial projects. Israel’s goal is to destroy the (Hamas) movement.
Q: Is there any effort to bring Israeli officials to trial?
A: To be realistic I don’t believe there will be a trial because U.S. and Israel almost represent one entity and they have a great power to stand trial in any court. So the court we are going to is the court of the world public opinion and the people have to rise up against the aggression that has been done by Israel and supported by the U.S.
Q: How will the EU respond?
A: I think the EU too is under the political and military dominance of NATO and I believe that they won’t act independent of the desire of the U.S.
Q: What are you trying to do for Palestine?
A: This (U.S.) government speaks in our name and spends our taxes in our name for policies that are unjust and are harmful and for aggression and we have a moral obligation to stand up and speak to say no. The government speaks in our name but we do not approve it.
Tehran Times Political Desk
TEHRAN - The Mehr News Agency has conducted an interview with Brian Becker, the director of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) organization, on Israel’s war on Gaza.
ANSWER is a U.S.-based protest organization that has organized many of the largest anti-war demonstrations in the United States.
Becker believes what is Israel is doing in Gaza is a “war crime”. He says, “It is really a crime against the humanity and war crimes as defined by all international standards including the Nuremberg Treaty, the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention.”
Following is an excerpt of the interview:
Q: What is your view on the UN’s silence about the Gaza tragedy and the killing of women and children?
A: People are demonstrating in the streets and yet the UN does nothing and the reason is that the UN is manipulated by the U.S. It is the exercise of the dictatorship by the U.S. and then other countries of the world because these exercises of power are in the Security Council. The charter of the UN is now a mockery because the UN, rather than bringing peace, allows a war of aggression carried out by Israeli government but supported and financed by United States.
Q: Do you think the crimes committed in Gaza can be classified as war crimes?
A: It is really a crime against the humanity and war crimes as defined by all international standards including the Nuremberg Treaty, the Nuremberg Trial and the Geneva Convention. It is illegal to target or even to allow military combatants to target civilians…. That is a violation of international law. Clearly the Israel government is not only targeting the military and governmental centers in Gaza but this is a war against the entire people and this is a war crime and a crime against the humanity.
Q: Some analysts say Israel does not intend to stop the attacks. What do you think?
A: Israel has a goal and its goal is shared with the U.S. The goal is to destroy all organizations… those resistance organizations that reject the colonial projects called Israel. The goal is to destroy Hamas and other organizations that continue to resist against the colonial projects. Israel’s goal is to destroy the (Hamas) movement.
Q: Is there any effort to bring Israeli officials to trial?
A: To be realistic I don’t believe there will be a trial because U.S. and Israel almost represent one entity and they have a great power to stand trial in any court. So the court we are going to is the court of the world public opinion and the people have to rise up against the aggression that has been done by Israel and supported by the U.S.
Q: How will the EU respond?
A: I think the EU too is under the political and military dominance of NATO and I believe that they won’t act independent of the desire of the U.S.
Q: What are you trying to do for Palestine?
A: This (U.S.) government speaks in our name and spends our taxes in our name for policies that are unjust and are harmful and for aggression and we have a moral obligation to stand up and speak to say no. The government speaks in our name but we do not approve it.
Tehran Times Political Desk
Israel’s crimes against Palestinians is out of ‘desperation’
By: Hamdollah Emad Heidari
TEHRAN - Sarah Flounder, director of International Action Center Organization in U.S., believes that brutal attacks against Palestinians in Gaza is out of desperation as the Tel Aviv regime has lost support among governments around the world.
Flounder is of the opinion that the resistance by Palestinians cannot be defeated even with the “most powerful weapons” in the world. She also says Israel will “cease to exist” by continuing such a policy.
In an interview with the Mehr News Agency she said the Israeli officials’ crimes against Palestinians is out of “desperation because more and more they have lost support everywhere in the world except from Washington and they have realized that even among Jewish people around the world and their own population they have lost the support they once had.”
She said it has become “impossible” for Israeli officials to “maintain an apartheid state”.
“A state built on racist exclusion is no longer possible in this world today. That is making them desperate to crush any form of resistance.
“They will not succeed although the impact for Palestinian people will be very hard, will be very terrible, but the Palestinian resistance will continue and in the long run Israel will cease to exist because… such a colonial enterprise cannot survive even with support from Washington.”
She stated the “resistance” shown by the Palestinians is “so powerful” that the “most powerful weapons in the world can not destroy it.”
“The bombardment from air, from land, from sea cannot destroy it and still in the impossible conditions Palestinians resist with tunnels with suicide bombs, just like the World War Second which people fought with rocks against the Nazis.
“So today what we see in Palestine is a heroic level of struggle and it has the solidarity of people everywhere in the world. Millions of people are demonstrating around the world… in New York, in Washington, in Boston in Los Angeles…”
She added that people from all major cities have poured into the streets “in support of Palestinian peoples, both Arabs, Muslims, Jews, Christians, secular forces, antiwar forces, peace organizations, trade unions… and this support is growing and growing and Israel is more isolated in its crime against Palestinian people.”
The Israeli criminal action in Gaza with “every form of explosive destruction” largely on “civilian population” is an effort to break any Palestinian resistance, she explained.
“This will not succeed and the whole world stands with Palestinian people against the occupation and the seizure of their land. And we are confident that Israel will not prevail.”
The director of International Action Center Organization said the U.S. is giving political, financial, and military support to Israel in its “great crime” against the Palestinian nation.
Flounder predicted that “this crime can not continue.”
“Israel’s action is genocide,” she noted.
She blasted the U.S. administration for its blind support for Israel.
“Here in U.S. we have a criminal government and it is people that must demand an end to aid for Israel’s military.
Tehran Times Political Desk
TEHRAN - Sarah Flounder, director of International Action Center Organization in U.S., believes that brutal attacks against Palestinians in Gaza is out of desperation as the Tel Aviv regime has lost support among governments around the world.
Flounder is of the opinion that the resistance by Palestinians cannot be defeated even with the “most powerful weapons” in the world. She also says Israel will “cease to exist” by continuing such a policy.
In an interview with the Mehr News Agency she said the Israeli officials’ crimes against Palestinians is out of “desperation because more and more they have lost support everywhere in the world except from Washington and they have realized that even among Jewish people around the world and their own population they have lost the support they once had.”
She said it has become “impossible” for Israeli officials to “maintain an apartheid state”.
“A state built on racist exclusion is no longer possible in this world today. That is making them desperate to crush any form of resistance.
“They will not succeed although the impact for Palestinian people will be very hard, will be very terrible, but the Palestinian resistance will continue and in the long run Israel will cease to exist because… such a colonial enterprise cannot survive even with support from Washington.”
She stated the “resistance” shown by the Palestinians is “so powerful” that the “most powerful weapons in the world can not destroy it.”
“The bombardment from air, from land, from sea cannot destroy it and still in the impossible conditions Palestinians resist with tunnels with suicide bombs, just like the World War Second which people fought with rocks against the Nazis.
“So today what we see in Palestine is a heroic level of struggle and it has the solidarity of people everywhere in the world. Millions of people are demonstrating around the world… in New York, in Washington, in Boston in Los Angeles…”
She added that people from all major cities have poured into the streets “in support of Palestinian peoples, both Arabs, Muslims, Jews, Christians, secular forces, antiwar forces, peace organizations, trade unions… and this support is growing and growing and Israel is more isolated in its crime against Palestinian people.”
The Israeli criminal action in Gaza with “every form of explosive destruction” largely on “civilian population” is an effort to break any Palestinian resistance, she explained.
“This will not succeed and the whole world stands with Palestinian people against the occupation and the seizure of their land. And we are confident that Israel will not prevail.”
The director of International Action Center Organization said the U.S. is giving political, financial, and military support to Israel in its “great crime” against the Palestinian nation.
Flounder predicted that “this crime can not continue.”
“Israel’s action is genocide,” she noted.
She blasted the U.S. administration for its blind support for Israel.
“Here in U.S. we have a criminal government and it is people that must demand an end to aid for Israel’s military.
Tehran Times Political Desk
Phenomenon of Ahmadinejad and Obama
Iran’s Election, Struggle for Dominance in Middle East
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Making the velvet revolution was the only remaining approaches for controlling the Iran developing dominance over ME.
While describing the political situation in the world in US and Iran, we are facing tow phenomena which have effected the world political scene a lot.
Two phenomena which have two character behind, Obama and Ahmadinejad. Each of these two political characters whom the history will remember for their especial effect on the balance of force in the world have their own strategy toward this.
Ahmadinejad as the representative of principalist political groups in Iran, in his four-year ruling over Iran’s diplomatic machine, having the best use of a weak America, dealing with two war in Iraq and Afghanistan and also global financial crisis, changed the balance of forces in the middle east in favor of the resistance under the Islamic Republics hegemony.
Having a good understanding of the world situation, Ahmadinejad resisted against the international pressure on Iran’s peaceful nuclear energy encouraged by Israel and US.Ahmadinejad won both these two difficult games and strengthened Iran position in the region and the world.
On the other part of the world, a different scenario was programmed for arranging the balance of force in this oil-rich region.
Referring to fact that this rich region with great natural resources and good geopolitical situation has been the most important part of the global hegemonies wishes for developing their authority over the world.
Us as a weak superpower after obama presidency tried to correct the mistakes done by George bush, the previous president of US.
Obama decreased the military aspect of the empire and showed its velvety hand to the world.Obama in the case of Iran proposed the straight dialogue and even restarting relations.
The velvety hands of a black President could attract some political characters and groups in Iran, hence, White House tried to bring the Troy Horse to Tehran and along with its traditional ally Britain could effect the presidential election in Iran.
The tenth presidential election in Iran was a real serious struggle between two phenomenons for remaining and effecting the balance of force in middle east.
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Making the velvet revolution was the only remaining approaches for controlling the Iran developing dominance over ME.
While describing the political situation in the world in US and Iran, we are facing tow phenomena which have effected the world political scene a lot.
Two phenomena which have two character behind, Obama and Ahmadinejad. Each of these two political characters whom the history will remember for their especial effect on the balance of force in the world have their own strategy toward this.
Ahmadinejad as the representative of principalist political groups in Iran, in his four-year ruling over Iran’s diplomatic machine, having the best use of a weak America, dealing with two war in Iraq and Afghanistan and also global financial crisis, changed the balance of forces in the middle east in favor of the resistance under the Islamic Republics hegemony.
Having a good understanding of the world situation, Ahmadinejad resisted against the international pressure on Iran’s peaceful nuclear energy encouraged by Israel and US.Ahmadinejad won both these two difficult games and strengthened Iran position in the region and the world.
On the other part of the world, a different scenario was programmed for arranging the balance of force in this oil-rich region.
Referring to fact that this rich region with great natural resources and good geopolitical situation has been the most important part of the global hegemonies wishes for developing their authority over the world.
Us as a weak superpower after obama presidency tried to correct the mistakes done by George bush, the previous president of US.
Obama decreased the military aspect of the empire and showed its velvety hand to the world.Obama in the case of Iran proposed the straight dialogue and even restarting relations.
The velvety hands of a black President could attract some political characters and groups in Iran, hence, White House tried to bring the Troy Horse to Tehran and along with its traditional ally Britain could effect the presidential election in Iran.
The tenth presidential election in Iran was a real serious struggle between two phenomenons for remaining and effecting the balance of force in middle east.
The Real Mission of IAEA
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Developing the civilian nuclear energy and disarming the nuclear powers by IAEA is a just solution for resolving the nuclear race in the world, what has been forgotten under the big powers interference.
Many decades ago, when US dropped two nuclear bombs on Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, human being understood the fact that a new danger had been borne, a danger that could destroy everything in a minute by pushing a button.
Decades passed from that horrible incident but the powers, which had committed those crimes, continue their nuclear ambitions. Today, there have revealed proved evidences about the use of depleted uranium in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan by Israel and US. Although the nuclear weapon race has been speed up among regional and global powers, up to now there has been no other direct use of a nuclear weapon.
The increasing danger of nuclear weapons stocked in North Korea and Israel, the increasing nuclear tension between US and Russia, and India and Pakistan as the owners of the most horrible nuclear arsenals in the world makes the nuclear revolution essential.
World fossil reserves are gradually ran out. Besides, ozone penetration problems which has been caused by fossil energy consumption has made the use of nuclear energy a must. Nuclear energy is a clean, harmless and economic form of energy, so we cannot omit the nuclear option for solving the 21st century’s humankind energy problems. Many analysts call this century the century of struggle for energy. Powers struggle in Middle East, Caucasus, Central Asia, Parts of Africa and even North Pole are the real evidences of this struggle.
Now, in this crazy struggle for energy and crazy struggle for nuclear weapons, the only option forward is to make a distinction between these two, one forbidden and the other recommended.Disarming the countries, which have nuclear weapons without discrimination, and helping all nations for acquiring the civilian nuclear energy can be a good mission for IAEA to revolutionize the world nuclear atmosphere.
IAEA as the sole international powerful organization for controlling the nuclear tests and arsenals around the world can and should differentiate between nuclear weapon and peaceful nuclear energy in both rules and actions.Then, the most difficult and challenging introduction for a world free from nuclear weapons is to have an international nuclear watchdog free from power’s interference and political attitudes.
Developing the civilian nuclear energy and disarming the nuclear powers by IAEA is a just solution for resolving the nuclear race in the world, what has been forgotten under the big powers interference.
Many decades ago, when US dropped two nuclear bombs on Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, human being understood the fact that a new danger had been borne, a danger that could destroy everything in a minute by pushing a button.
Decades passed from that horrible incident but the powers, which had committed those crimes, continue their nuclear ambitions. Today, there have revealed proved evidences about the use of depleted uranium in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan by Israel and US. Although the nuclear weapon race has been speed up among regional and global powers, up to now there has been no other direct use of a nuclear weapon.
The increasing danger of nuclear weapons stocked in North Korea and Israel, the increasing nuclear tension between US and Russia, and India and Pakistan as the owners of the most horrible nuclear arsenals in the world makes the nuclear revolution essential.
World fossil reserves are gradually ran out. Besides, ozone penetration problems which has been caused by fossil energy consumption has made the use of nuclear energy a must. Nuclear energy is a clean, harmless and economic form of energy, so we cannot omit the nuclear option for solving the 21st century’s humankind energy problems. Many analysts call this century the century of struggle for energy. Powers struggle in Middle East, Caucasus, Central Asia, Parts of Africa and even North Pole are the real evidences of this struggle.
Now, in this crazy struggle for energy and crazy struggle for nuclear weapons, the only option forward is to make a distinction between these two, one forbidden and the other recommended.Disarming the countries, which have nuclear weapons without discrimination, and helping all nations for acquiring the civilian nuclear energy can be a good mission for IAEA to revolutionize the world nuclear atmosphere.
IAEA as the sole international powerful organization for controlling the nuclear tests and arsenals around the world can and should differentiate between nuclear weapon and peaceful nuclear energy in both rules and actions.Then, the most difficult and challenging introduction for a world free from nuclear weapons is to have an international nuclear watchdog free from power’s interference and political attitudes.
Will Amano Follow Ambiguity Procedure in IAEA?
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
As the gap between developed and developing countries grows deeper, the selection of another pro-western character as the head of IAEA, means the extension of ambiguity and politicized procedure.
While the Far East Asian characters like Ban Ki-Moon have raised on the top of the UN as the most important international institution, appointing Yukia Amano, a Japanese diplomat as the head of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), shows a new phase in the rise of characters from the Far East.Although Ban Ki-Moon from South Korea has been judged as the most pro- American UN secretary general in UN history, nobody can judge about what the new secretary general will do in his new position in this phase.
It’s too soon to say that Amano like his past predecessors will continue the IAEA procedure in favor of the West and the big powers, however, the serious disagreement of the developing countries with Western countries choice shows a great global doubt about Amano’s approaches.
Of course Amano’s predecessor, Mohammad Albaradei in his last year in office tried to show an impartial stance, particularly about Iran’s nuclear issue and somehow against Israel’s big nuclear arsenal. However, history will remember him mostly for his political and pro-western stance.
Releasing double-edged documents about nuclear activities of Iran, the Egyptian diplomat paved the way for politicizing some technical facts about the peaceful nature of Iran peaceful nuclear program.
Amano’s victory over other campaigners is significant because of the real animosity, which exists between his country and North Korea as the most important part of the US axis of evil.In his previous activities as Japan ambassador in IAEA , Amano had reflected US and Western claims, saying that Iran is may seek for
Nuclear weapons. At the same time he had admitted that there had not been any evidence proving Iran’s deviation from IAEA rules.
Now after this difficult campaign between Abdul Samad Minty, apro-developing countries candidate and the pro-western Amano, what both developed and developing seem to seek is the nuclear justice and peaceful nuclear atomic energy for all.
Giving clear technical reports and judging them on the base of IAEAs protocols, not the veto and nuclear power’s obligations, is what Iranians and all other independent nations expect from the new head of IAEA.
As the gap between developed and developing countries grows deeper, the selection of another pro-western character as the head of IAEA, means the extension of ambiguity and politicized procedure.
While the Far East Asian characters like Ban Ki-Moon have raised on the top of the UN as the most important international institution, appointing Yukia Amano, a Japanese diplomat as the head of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), shows a new phase in the rise of characters from the Far East.Although Ban Ki-Moon from South Korea has been judged as the most pro- American UN secretary general in UN history, nobody can judge about what the new secretary general will do in his new position in this phase.
It’s too soon to say that Amano like his past predecessors will continue the IAEA procedure in favor of the West and the big powers, however, the serious disagreement of the developing countries with Western countries choice shows a great global doubt about Amano’s approaches.
Of course Amano’s predecessor, Mohammad Albaradei in his last year in office tried to show an impartial stance, particularly about Iran’s nuclear issue and somehow against Israel’s big nuclear arsenal. However, history will remember him mostly for his political and pro-western stance.
Releasing double-edged documents about nuclear activities of Iran, the Egyptian diplomat paved the way for politicizing some technical facts about the peaceful nature of Iran peaceful nuclear program.
Amano’s victory over other campaigners is significant because of the real animosity, which exists between his country and North Korea as the most important part of the US axis of evil.In his previous activities as Japan ambassador in IAEA , Amano had reflected US and Western claims, saying that Iran is may seek for
Nuclear weapons. At the same time he had admitted that there had not been any evidence proving Iran’s deviation from IAEA rules.
Now after this difficult campaign between Abdul Samad Minty, apro-developing countries candidate and the pro-western Amano, what both developed and developing seem to seek is the nuclear justice and peaceful nuclear atomic energy for all.
Giving clear technical reports and judging them on the base of IAEAs protocols, not the veto and nuclear power’s obligations, is what Iranians and all other independent nations expect from the new head of IAEA.
Iran's One-Two Punch to Reset Reality
Iran's state-controlled media are waging an all-out propaganda assault to cast post-election unrest in the Islamic Republic as a futile attempt by "the West" to interfere.
From news stories alleging a British Embassy staffer was a ring-leader of the dramatic street protests, to editorial columns deriding a "West that imagined that supporting chaos in Iran would reduce the Islamic Republic's power," the message is clear.
Iran's Fars news agency reported Wednesday, citing unnamed officials, that one of three U.K. Embassy staffers (eight were arrested, five have been freed, all were Iranian nationals) still in detention, "had a remarkable role during the recent unrest in managing it behind the scenes."
Even if Fars, described as a "semi-official" news agency, had named its source in the government, the staffer's role in the protests would be impossible to verify, as Iran has kicked almost every foreign journalist out of the country.
With the street demonstrations largely squashed under the foot of security forces, more energy is being focused on painting Iran's leaders as protectors of the society, under threat from Israel and its alleged surrogates in Washington.
Iran's Press TV has an "exclusive interview" Wednesday with the man who ran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election campaign. He told the network that President Obama, "originally took a soft stance on the results of Iran's presidential election but then was forced by the Zionists and the U.S. neoconservatives to make tough comments about Iran."
Many editorial columns discuss the election upheaval as if it ended weeks ago. One writer declared the United States the primary loser in the aftermath of the protests.
Hamdollah Emadi-Heydari wrote in the newspaper Siyasat-e Ruz that, "The West, under America's leadership, which, nervous of Iran's hazy election climate put all its eggs in [Iranian] rioters' basket, is being considered the main loser in the recent events as the political climate is gradually becoming clearer."
"What is significant now after the unrests have calmed down in Iran is that the West has put all its eggs in the rioters' basket," writes Emadi-Heydari.
CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer was one of the last Western journalists to be forced out of Iran and she maintains contact with sources inside the country, who paint a different picture.
(AP Photo)
At left: Reformist presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi attends a rally in Ghoba Mosque in Tehran, June 28, 2009.
Despite dramatically increased police presence on the streets of Tehran, the opposition movement continues to try and rally against the June 12 election results, which they claim were heavily rigged in favor of Ahmadinejad.
On Sunday, some 5,000 people gathered in central Tehran — they were reportedly met with batons and tear gas.
One man who joined an effort Monday to form a human chain on one of Tehran's main thoroughfares, in defiance of the regime, described what they were up against:
"As soon as more than five people tried to huddle, the groups were broken up. In downtown and midtown I heard people tried to walk in unison but they were beaten by batons and clubs."
Palmer points out that Iran's election has already fallen from the headlines of most Western media, and she says opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi lost his opportunity to try and force real change.
It has been a classic one-two punch from Iran's hard-line rulers: first they hit on the streets with batons, tear gas and arrests of opposition leaders. Now, in the newspapers and television broadcasts, they're striking with their own version of the truth.
If their version is repeated often enough, and dissenting voices are kept silent, it will quickly become the accepted reality for many Iranians. In this manner, the Islamic establishment which has ruled the country for 30 years may be able to sweep this "revolution" under the carpet.
From news stories alleging a British Embassy staffer was a ring-leader of the dramatic street protests, to editorial columns deriding a "West that imagined that supporting chaos in Iran would reduce the Islamic Republic's power," the message is clear.
Iran's Fars news agency reported Wednesday, citing unnamed officials, that one of three U.K. Embassy staffers (eight were arrested, five have been freed, all were Iranian nationals) still in detention, "had a remarkable role during the recent unrest in managing it behind the scenes."
Even if Fars, described as a "semi-official" news agency, had named its source in the government, the staffer's role in the protests would be impossible to verify, as Iran has kicked almost every foreign journalist out of the country.
With the street demonstrations largely squashed under the foot of security forces, more energy is being focused on painting Iran's leaders as protectors of the society, under threat from Israel and its alleged surrogates in Washington.
Iran's Press TV has an "exclusive interview" Wednesday with the man who ran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election campaign. He told the network that President Obama, "originally took a soft stance on the results of Iran's presidential election but then was forced by the Zionists and the U.S. neoconservatives to make tough comments about Iran."
Many editorial columns discuss the election upheaval as if it ended weeks ago. One writer declared the United States the primary loser in the aftermath of the protests.
Hamdollah Emadi-Heydari wrote in the newspaper Siyasat-e Ruz that, "The West, under America's leadership, which, nervous of Iran's hazy election climate put all its eggs in [Iranian] rioters' basket, is being considered the main loser in the recent events as the political climate is gradually becoming clearer."
"What is significant now after the unrests have calmed down in Iran is that the West has put all its eggs in the rioters' basket," writes Emadi-Heydari.
CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer was one of the last Western journalists to be forced out of Iran and she maintains contact with sources inside the country, who paint a different picture.
(AP Photo)
At left: Reformist presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi attends a rally in Ghoba Mosque in Tehran, June 28, 2009.
Despite dramatically increased police presence on the streets of Tehran, the opposition movement continues to try and rally against the June 12 election results, which they claim were heavily rigged in favor of Ahmadinejad.
On Sunday, some 5,000 people gathered in central Tehran — they were reportedly met with batons and tear gas.
One man who joined an effort Monday to form a human chain on one of Tehran's main thoroughfares, in defiance of the regime, described what they were up against:
"As soon as more than five people tried to huddle, the groups were broken up. In downtown and midtown I heard people tried to walk in unison but they were beaten by batons and clubs."
Palmer points out that Iran's election has already fallen from the headlines of most Western media, and she says opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi lost his opportunity to try and force real change.
It has been a classic one-two punch from Iran's hard-line rulers: first they hit on the streets with batons, tear gas and arrests of opposition leaders. Now, in the newspapers and television broadcasts, they're striking with their own version of the truth.
If their version is repeated often enough, and dissenting voices are kept silent, it will quickly become the accepted reality for many Iranians. In this manner, the Islamic establishment which has ruled the country for 30 years may be able to sweep this "revolution" under the carpet.
IPRI Analyst declares in an interview with Siasat Rooz
US and its Allies Are Behind Instability OF the Region
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
An IPRI Analyst told siasat rooz that the expanding instability in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Xinjiang (China) and Central Asian countries is the result of what US and its coalition forces and their intelligence network are doing.
Muhammad Munir*, Islamabad Policy Research Institute Analyst believes that the West and the USA would never like to see a Muslim country such as Iran to develop its nuclear program even if it is for peaceful purposes.
Following is the text of the interview:
How the problematic situation in Afghanistan could be resolved Regarding the neighbors?
The problematic situation of Afghanistan cannot be resolved as long as the neighboring countries do not evolve conenoses on the issue. All the neighboring countries must understand the dangers of presence of Western/US forces in Afghanistan that is considered a destabilizing factor in the region.
The expanding instability in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Xingjian (China) and Central Asian countries is the result what US and Coalition forces and their intelligence network is doing. One thing that must be understood by the neighboring countries is that big powers such as USA are not so naive, they first create a problem and then try to resolve it according
to their interests.
How Iran and Afghanistan can help stability of Afghanistan?
Iran can play a very critical role for the stability in Afghanistan by involving all the important neighbors of Afghanistan for developing a coalition government representing all the ethnic groups in Afghanistan. Efforts should be made that no one be allowed to exploit the ethnic diversity in Afghanistan.
How a Tehran-Washington cooperation in Kabul can be achieved?
The regional approach to resolve the Afghan issue provides an opportunity for Iran to cooperate with USA. Pakistan and Iran are the two key countries for the resolution of the Afghan problems. Both should oppose the involvement of various countries, like India, in negative activities for destabilizing the region.
Can a Tehran-Washington cooperation in Kabul affect other issues like Iran peaceful nuclear activities?
The West and the USA will never like to see a Muslim country such as Iran to develop its nuclear program even if it is for peaceful purposes. I personally think US-Iran cooperation on Afghanistan would not change the approach of USA toward Iran’s nuclear program.
What is your prediction of the 5+1 group recent session on Iran nuclear activities?
The 5+1 group in its session on Iran’s nuclear activities has threatened Iran of more sanctions if it does not stop uranium enrichment. It seems to be pressure tactics for stoppage of Iranian nuclear program.
-----------------------------------------------------
*Muhammad Munir is working at IPRI as Administrative officer since July 26, 2000. He holds Masters in Defense and Strategic Studies from Quaid –i-Azam University of Islamabad and M.A (Political Science ) from Islamia University, Bahawalpur, Pakistan.
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
An IPRI Analyst told siasat rooz that the expanding instability in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Xinjiang (China) and Central Asian countries is the result of what US and its coalition forces and their intelligence network are doing.
Muhammad Munir*, Islamabad Policy Research Institute Analyst believes that the West and the USA would never like to see a Muslim country such as Iran to develop its nuclear program even if it is for peaceful purposes.
Following is the text of the interview:
How the problematic situation in Afghanistan could be resolved Regarding the neighbors?
The problematic situation of Afghanistan cannot be resolved as long as the neighboring countries do not evolve conenoses on the issue. All the neighboring countries must understand the dangers of presence of Western/US forces in Afghanistan that is considered a destabilizing factor in the region.
The expanding instability in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Xingjian (China) and Central Asian countries is the result what US and Coalition forces and their intelligence network is doing. One thing that must be understood by the neighboring countries is that big powers such as USA are not so naive, they first create a problem and then try to resolve it according
to their interests.
How Iran and Afghanistan can help stability of Afghanistan?
Iran can play a very critical role for the stability in Afghanistan by involving all the important neighbors of Afghanistan for developing a coalition government representing all the ethnic groups in Afghanistan. Efforts should be made that no one be allowed to exploit the ethnic diversity in Afghanistan.
How a Tehran-Washington cooperation in Kabul can be achieved?
The regional approach to resolve the Afghan issue provides an opportunity for Iran to cooperate with USA. Pakistan and Iran are the two key countries for the resolution of the Afghan problems. Both should oppose the involvement of various countries, like India, in negative activities for destabilizing the region.
Can a Tehran-Washington cooperation in Kabul affect other issues like Iran peaceful nuclear activities?
The West and the USA will never like to see a Muslim country such as Iran to develop its nuclear program even if it is for peaceful purposes. I personally think US-Iran cooperation on Afghanistan would not change the approach of USA toward Iran’s nuclear program.
What is your prediction of the 5+1 group recent session on Iran nuclear activities?
The 5+1 group in its session on Iran’s nuclear activities has threatened Iran of more sanctions if it does not stop uranium enrichment. It seems to be pressure tactics for stoppage of Iranian nuclear program.
-----------------------------------------------------
*Muhammad Munir is working at IPRI as Administrative officer since July 26, 2000. He holds Masters in Defense and Strategic Studies from Quaid –i-Azam University of Islamabad and M.A (Political Science ) from Islamia University, Bahawalpur, Pakistan.
Hong Cong analyst:
Iran Has Legitimacy over his Efforts in ME
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Spokesman for universal humanism in Hong Kong told Siasat Rooz that Iran has legitimacy and lawfulness in its efforts to claim a strong role in the affairs of the ME as it’s physical situation impels it to look to these local affairs.
Tony Henderson, Spokesperson for the Asia-Pacific Region - Universal Humanism, in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily, described the real reasons behind US interventions in ME and Central Asia. “Oil and gas is the reason why the US is interested in the Middle East. The entire industrial west is dependant on access to and the price of oil and gas,” he said.
Referring to Iraq, he added: baghdad is sitting on immense volumes of oil and Afghanistan is a strategically situated stronghold of independent minded people unaffiliated with the USA or the West thus posing a threat if alliances are made by Afghanistan with competing nations such as Russia or India or China.
“Iraq is more complex but still oil is at the base of the military action. The universally condemned Saddam was in charge of an oil rich nation and that left an open door target for sufficiently sanctioned military operations that would leave the US-plus British and the West in general - or the developed industrialized nations altogether - in position allowing strategic leverage over events in the Middle East,” he said.
This analyst called the situation in Iraq a chance for Israel and said: Control over Iraq is a trump card, which also plays-in armed-to-the-teeth Israel, granting political space to that occupying power - put in place by the same forces - to expand and consolidate its territory at the expense of the divided forces of Palestine.
He described Afghanistan as a gate for Central Asia and said: “While there is no oil in Afghanistan, that country’s territory forms a direct route to take the oil and gas from deposits in Central Asia to the Indian Ocean for transshipment. That would sidestep dependence on oil from the so far irresolvable problems of the ME.
American oil companies have acquired rights to a large percent of the output of the new fields in Central Asia, and the US and western governments see the area around the Caspian and in Central Asia as an alternative to dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf region. US troops followed the signing of these contracts. US Special Forces began joint operations with Kazakhstan in 1997 and with Uzbekistan a year later, training for intervention especially in the mountainous southern region that includes Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan.”
Referring to Iran geopolitical importance for US, Henderson said: How to get the oil and gas from that landlocked region to the world market, that’s the question: not wanting to rely on either the Russian pipeline system or - the easiest available land route - to unconditionally befriend Iran and have access to the Persian Gulf. Oil companies have explored alternative pipeline routes - westward through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey to the Mediterranean; eastward through Kazakhstan and China to the Pacific; and, southwards from Turkmenistan across western Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean.
Explaining reasons behind the Obama administration willingness for talks with Iran, he said: Obama’s willingness to talk is a hopeful sign but governments and countries are not monolithic or static - recent events in Iran show this and the US election. The military industrial complex and the financial powers are still deeply entrenched, even though recent events have damaged their image a lot, So the outcome will depend on the balance of progressive-conservative forces in each country. Iran poses a problem to those assuming rightful dominance in that the country is striking a highly independent stance that radically opposes US and western hegemony in the ME. Iran has legitimacy and lawfulness in its efforts to claim a strong role in the affairs of the ME as it’s physical situation impels it to look to these local affairs.
Spokesperson for the Asia-Pacific Region - Universal Humanism said: Iran has a cultural depth. This brings its peoples through its government to demand the same rights any nations would expect. It could not be walked over with impunity, unlike its famed carpets.
After explaining Iran right for having a regional function, he referred to outside power interference and said: the US, the British and the French, are acting far from home and anyone would wonder just why they have such pretensions far from the fold, veiled by democratic and humanitarian posturing. It is oil, its accessibility and its transport, and securing an uninterrupted supply that provides the reason providing reason for the militaries of the more powerful nations to by camp in the homes and on the doorsteps of Afghanistan and Iraq. However, that oil is bypassing equally deserving though disadvantaged not-yet-economically developed nations, and that is a situation that needs mentioning.
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
Spokesman for universal humanism in Hong Kong told Siasat Rooz that Iran has legitimacy and lawfulness in its efforts to claim a strong role in the affairs of the ME as it’s physical situation impels it to look to these local affairs.
Tony Henderson, Spokesperson for the Asia-Pacific Region - Universal Humanism, in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily, described the real reasons behind US interventions in ME and Central Asia. “Oil and gas is the reason why the US is interested in the Middle East. The entire industrial west is dependant on access to and the price of oil and gas,” he said.
Referring to Iraq, he added: baghdad is sitting on immense volumes of oil and Afghanistan is a strategically situated stronghold of independent minded people unaffiliated with the USA or the West thus posing a threat if alliances are made by Afghanistan with competing nations such as Russia or India or China.
“Iraq is more complex but still oil is at the base of the military action. The universally condemned Saddam was in charge of an oil rich nation and that left an open door target for sufficiently sanctioned military operations that would leave the US-plus British and the West in general - or the developed industrialized nations altogether - in position allowing strategic leverage over events in the Middle East,” he said.
This analyst called the situation in Iraq a chance for Israel and said: Control over Iraq is a trump card, which also plays-in armed-to-the-teeth Israel, granting political space to that occupying power - put in place by the same forces - to expand and consolidate its territory at the expense of the divided forces of Palestine.
He described Afghanistan as a gate for Central Asia and said: “While there is no oil in Afghanistan, that country’s territory forms a direct route to take the oil and gas from deposits in Central Asia to the Indian Ocean for transshipment. That would sidestep dependence on oil from the so far irresolvable problems of the ME.
American oil companies have acquired rights to a large percent of the output of the new fields in Central Asia, and the US and western governments see the area around the Caspian and in Central Asia as an alternative to dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf region. US troops followed the signing of these contracts. US Special Forces began joint operations with Kazakhstan in 1997 and with Uzbekistan a year later, training for intervention especially in the mountainous southern region that includes Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan.”
Referring to Iran geopolitical importance for US, Henderson said: How to get the oil and gas from that landlocked region to the world market, that’s the question: not wanting to rely on either the Russian pipeline system or - the easiest available land route - to unconditionally befriend Iran and have access to the Persian Gulf. Oil companies have explored alternative pipeline routes - westward through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey to the Mediterranean; eastward through Kazakhstan and China to the Pacific; and, southwards from Turkmenistan across western Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean.
Explaining reasons behind the Obama administration willingness for talks with Iran, he said: Obama’s willingness to talk is a hopeful sign but governments and countries are not monolithic or static - recent events in Iran show this and the US election. The military industrial complex and the financial powers are still deeply entrenched, even though recent events have damaged their image a lot, So the outcome will depend on the balance of progressive-conservative forces in each country. Iran poses a problem to those assuming rightful dominance in that the country is striking a highly independent stance that radically opposes US and western hegemony in the ME. Iran has legitimacy and lawfulness in its efforts to claim a strong role in the affairs of the ME as it’s physical situation impels it to look to these local affairs.
Spokesperson for the Asia-Pacific Region - Universal Humanism said: Iran has a cultural depth. This brings its peoples through its government to demand the same rights any nations would expect. It could not be walked over with impunity, unlike its famed carpets.
After explaining Iran right for having a regional function, he referred to outside power interference and said: the US, the British and the French, are acting far from home and anyone would wonder just why they have such pretensions far from the fold, veiled by democratic and humanitarian posturing. It is oil, its accessibility and its transport, and securing an uninterrupted supply that provides the reason providing reason for the militaries of the more powerful nations to by camp in the homes and on the doorsteps of Afghanistan and Iraq. However, that oil is bypassing equally deserving though disadvantaged not-yet-economically developed nations, and that is a situation that needs mentioning.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Former US Assistant Secretary Of State:
By: Hamdollah Emadi Heidari
It’s Iran right to question Israel N-Arsenal
James Dobbins, Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W.Bush Presidents and the director for the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily said:” I think it’s perfectly appropriate for Iran to raise questions about Israel Nuclear Arsenal.
Following is the text of the interview:
Can the proposed Iranian package solve the Nuclear Struggle between Iran and the West?
It depends very much on what the Iranian proposals consists of, if the Iranian proposals contain new elements it could lead to serious dialogue. I think the Obama administration would like to enter in to a serious dialogue on these issues and indeed on other issues with Tehran but if the Iranian package does not contain new elements there would be a sense of disappointment and I expect the 5+1 group will begin to consider further economic sanctions.
Are sanctions useful for stopping Iran from continuing his peaceful nuclear activities?
I think it depends on what one mean by economic sanctions do they work, certainly economic sanctions were very important in denying Saddam Hussein capacity to threaten his neighbors and the economic sanctions extended from 1991 till 2003 very severely weekend Saddam military capacity, so they can work provided they are generally applied that is that they have brought international support. Unilateral sanctions by only the US and some small countries are likely to be much less effective.
Do you see any real differences between Obama approach and the former presidents’ approaches?
I think that Obama has made clear that he is prepared for an unconditioned dialogue with the Iranian government and I think that is different from the Bushed administration’s approach which was to establish conditions for such a kind of dialogue although, I think the objectives are largely the same but there is a greater openness to dialogue and perhaps to compromise.
Why talks between Tehran and US halted during the past 6 month’s?
Unfortunately at least for the first half of this year, the government in Tehran was not ready to engage in such a kind of dialogue, it was probably focused on internal politics preparations for the Iranian presidential elections. It, therefore postponed any serious response to Obama’s overtures; since then the Controversy over the presidential elections has probably further complicated any discussions within the Iranian government and how to response to Obama’s overtures. So I think every body would be very interested to see whether this new Iranian proposal contains new elements. I think that the allegations against US and other countries were instrumental and the protests which took place in Iran over the recent elections in Tehran were much exaggerated. I think that there is absolutely no bases for believing that US has that kind of influence or is capable of projecting and controlling that kind of influence in to Iran. Certainly Washington supports in a general way the promotion of democracy not just in Iran but eventually in all countries.
Why US do not accept the IAEA reports about the peaceful identity of Iran’s nuclear activities?
The IAEA has raised questions about Iranian nuclear activities and has not be fully satisfied by the Iranian responses and that the assessment in Washington and other capitals is that Iran is at the minimum trying to develop the technology and sophistication and level of sophistication which would allow it to build nuclear weapons if its to choose to do so. Actually, the question of whether it has chosen to make a nuclear bomb is uncertain and there is concern about that not in Washington but much more generally. In terms of whether or not to require Iran or to ask Tehran to avoid certain activities, basically there are Security Council resolutions which are the force of low.Iran had signed the UN charter the UN charter allows the security council to make resolutions which all nations are required to adhere to by the terms of the un charter which IRI assigned.So the Iran is bound not only by the NPT agreement but by the UN charter and the UN charter requires it to conform to Security Council resolutions.
What is your idea about the current nuclear discrimination against Iran and in favor of Israel?
I think its perfectly appropriate for Iran to raise questions about Israel Nuclear Arsenal, on the other hand ,Israel is not an NPT signatory,It never promised not to manufacturing nuclear weapons but IRI is a signatory and It did promised not to manufacture nuclear weapons, so the legal requirements on Islamic Republic are unfortunately more stringent than the legal requirements on Tel Aviv but it is a perfectly legitimate argument for Iran to ask that Israel should give up its nuclear weapons and if Tehran wanted to propose and pursue the creation of a nuclear free zone that encompass the entire ME including Israel, that would be a reasonable position for Islamic Republic to take.
What is your idea about making a Regional Concretion for enrichment in Iran?
I think if Iran were to propose that the enrichment facility run by a Concretion that would be a positive step in negotiations. I don’t know whether it finally would be accepted but I think it would be regarded as a positive move by Iran.I think, neither side is prepared in this stage to say what its final positions is and what it ultimately accepts. The real question is whether both sides are prepared to begin to make small Concertinos which ultimately can lead to agreement.
Does the Iranian political position for supporting resistance toward Israel, affected Iran and US Nuclear Conflict?
I think in judging and in the assessment of any potential thread that is always a combination of capabilities and that is what is the potential adversary capability and what is the potential adversaries intent; if the capabilities are high but the intent is benign then its not only a concern if the capabilities is low but the intents is not benign but malign then it not again a great concern because the capabilities are low; when the capability is high and the intent is negative, is considered malign, the concern is very high; so naturally any assessment of IRI’s potential thread is a combination of What Iran’s capabilities are and what Tehran intents are; And so Iranian statements and Iranian support for Hamas and Hezbollah, the statements of Iranian leaders that they want to eliminate the state of Israel, this kinds of indications of intent naturally factor in any assessment regarding the potential thread ,Tehran might pose along with capabilities.It’s the combination of the tow so yes there is countries like for instance Japan that could make a Nuclear Weapon, if it chose, it has that level of technology but nobody think It is likely to do so, it’s not considered a serious problem.other countries which have more questionable intents are more serious concerned and I am afraid Iran is in that custard.
Does a new sanction against Iran possible, while China and Russia support it?
China and Russia has both accepted security council resolutions which demands Iran stop enrichment, so China and Russia don’t support the enrichment, infract, they support association of enrichment. To agree of which they are prepared to and they had also accepted, a number of sanctions on IRI by reason of refusal to conform to those security council resolutions and now whether China and Russia will support more sanctions, we don’t know but they accepted sanctions that exist today and as far as I know they are planning the sanctions.
Iran President declared the Nuclear Struggle is finished, what is your idea?
In term’s of Ahmadinejad presented intentions ,first of all, The decision to whether go a head or not in Iranian nuclear program is not a decision for the president of Iran but for the supreme leader as I understand the Iranian constitutional, but that issue aside , I think the question is whether or not Islamic Republic and the courtiers with which negotiate can begin to make more steps that brings them together toward some compromise, if theIranian side position is this, no compromise will be possible and no further discussion is useful and then of course we won’t have an agreement. If IRI is willing to begin to make some small steps then I would hope that there would be movement on other side and perhaps an agreement.
What steps do you suggest for solving the Nuclear Struggle between Iran and the West?
There has been some suggestions that there should be a temporally halt in further enrichment and further sanctions to allow negotiations could resume.There are also,the idea of putting the enrichment facility under the control of a broader concretion.
As the first American Special Envoy for Afghanistan after 2001 attack, what’s your idea about the given up Washington-Tehran talks for cooperation in this region?
I think American and Iranian interest in Afghanistan are largely coincident and the same and US and IRI did cooperate quite closely in 2001; I think it was a mistake for the US to have rejected Iranian cooperate and further assistance in 2002 and I would hope that Iran and US could have a serious discussion about how to further stabilize Afghanistan.Iran has much to offer, It is a major aid donor to Afghanistan and its assistance is quite helpful.Iran, obviously has influence in Afghanistan which it can be used in a positive direction that help stabilize this country. Iran has strong trade relations with Afghanistan which again can help to stabiles that country and of course, Tehran has a strong interest in combating Afghan drug trade which is another possible area for cooperation.Iran and US, both have interests in stabilized peaceful Afghanistan and not because one is going to pay another one to cooperate but because both have the similar interests.
James Dobbins directs the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation and served as Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He was the Clinton administration’s special envoy to Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo, and Somalia and the Bush administration’s first envoy to Afghanistan
It’s Iran right to question Israel N-Arsenal
James Dobbins, Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W.Bush Presidents and the director for the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation in an exclusive interview with Siasat Rooz daily said:” I think it’s perfectly appropriate for Iran to raise questions about Israel Nuclear Arsenal.
Following is the text of the interview:
Can the proposed Iranian package solve the Nuclear Struggle between Iran and the West?
It depends very much on what the Iranian proposals consists of, if the Iranian proposals contain new elements it could lead to serious dialogue. I think the Obama administration would like to enter in to a serious dialogue on these issues and indeed on other issues with Tehran but if the Iranian package does not contain new elements there would be a sense of disappointment and I expect the 5+1 group will begin to consider further economic sanctions.
Are sanctions useful for stopping Iran from continuing his peaceful nuclear activities?
I think it depends on what one mean by economic sanctions do they work, certainly economic sanctions were very important in denying Saddam Hussein capacity to threaten his neighbors and the economic sanctions extended from 1991 till 2003 very severely weekend Saddam military capacity, so they can work provided they are generally applied that is that they have brought international support. Unilateral sanctions by only the US and some small countries are likely to be much less effective.
Do you see any real differences between Obama approach and the former presidents’ approaches?
I think that Obama has made clear that he is prepared for an unconditioned dialogue with the Iranian government and I think that is different from the Bushed administration’s approach which was to establish conditions for such a kind of dialogue although, I think the objectives are largely the same but there is a greater openness to dialogue and perhaps to compromise.
Why talks between Tehran and US halted during the past 6 month’s?
Unfortunately at least for the first half of this year, the government in Tehran was not ready to engage in such a kind of dialogue, it was probably focused on internal politics preparations for the Iranian presidential elections. It, therefore postponed any serious response to Obama’s overtures; since then the Controversy over the presidential elections has probably further complicated any discussions within the Iranian government and how to response to Obama’s overtures. So I think every body would be very interested to see whether this new Iranian proposal contains new elements. I think that the allegations against US and other countries were instrumental and the protests which took place in Iran over the recent elections in Tehran were much exaggerated. I think that there is absolutely no bases for believing that US has that kind of influence or is capable of projecting and controlling that kind of influence in to Iran. Certainly Washington supports in a general way the promotion of democracy not just in Iran but eventually in all countries.
Why US do not accept the IAEA reports about the peaceful identity of Iran’s nuclear activities?
The IAEA has raised questions about Iranian nuclear activities and has not be fully satisfied by the Iranian responses and that the assessment in Washington and other capitals is that Iran is at the minimum trying to develop the technology and sophistication and level of sophistication which would allow it to build nuclear weapons if its to choose to do so. Actually, the question of whether it has chosen to make a nuclear bomb is uncertain and there is concern about that not in Washington but much more generally. In terms of whether or not to require Iran or to ask Tehran to avoid certain activities, basically there are Security Council resolutions which are the force of low.Iran had signed the UN charter the UN charter allows the security council to make resolutions which all nations are required to adhere to by the terms of the un charter which IRI assigned.So the Iran is bound not only by the NPT agreement but by the UN charter and the UN charter requires it to conform to Security Council resolutions.
What is your idea about the current nuclear discrimination against Iran and in favor of Israel?
I think its perfectly appropriate for Iran to raise questions about Israel Nuclear Arsenal, on the other hand ,Israel is not an NPT signatory,It never promised not to manufacturing nuclear weapons but IRI is a signatory and It did promised not to manufacture nuclear weapons, so the legal requirements on Islamic Republic are unfortunately more stringent than the legal requirements on Tel Aviv but it is a perfectly legitimate argument for Iran to ask that Israel should give up its nuclear weapons and if Tehran wanted to propose and pursue the creation of a nuclear free zone that encompass the entire ME including Israel, that would be a reasonable position for Islamic Republic to take.
What is your idea about making a Regional Concretion for enrichment in Iran?
I think if Iran were to propose that the enrichment facility run by a Concretion that would be a positive step in negotiations. I don’t know whether it finally would be accepted but I think it would be regarded as a positive move by Iran.I think, neither side is prepared in this stage to say what its final positions is and what it ultimately accepts. The real question is whether both sides are prepared to begin to make small Concertinos which ultimately can lead to agreement.
Does the Iranian political position for supporting resistance toward Israel, affected Iran and US Nuclear Conflict?
I think in judging and in the assessment of any potential thread that is always a combination of capabilities and that is what is the potential adversary capability and what is the potential adversaries intent; if the capabilities are high but the intent is benign then its not only a concern if the capabilities is low but the intents is not benign but malign then it not again a great concern because the capabilities are low; when the capability is high and the intent is negative, is considered malign, the concern is very high; so naturally any assessment of IRI’s potential thread is a combination of What Iran’s capabilities are and what Tehran intents are; And so Iranian statements and Iranian support for Hamas and Hezbollah, the statements of Iranian leaders that they want to eliminate the state of Israel, this kinds of indications of intent naturally factor in any assessment regarding the potential thread ,Tehran might pose along with capabilities.It’s the combination of the tow so yes there is countries like for instance Japan that could make a Nuclear Weapon, if it chose, it has that level of technology but nobody think It is likely to do so, it’s not considered a serious problem.other countries which have more questionable intents are more serious concerned and I am afraid Iran is in that custard.
Does a new sanction against Iran possible, while China and Russia support it?
China and Russia has both accepted security council resolutions which demands Iran stop enrichment, so China and Russia don’t support the enrichment, infract, they support association of enrichment. To agree of which they are prepared to and they had also accepted, a number of sanctions on IRI by reason of refusal to conform to those security council resolutions and now whether China and Russia will support more sanctions, we don’t know but they accepted sanctions that exist today and as far as I know they are planning the sanctions.
Iran President declared the Nuclear Struggle is finished, what is your idea?
In term’s of Ahmadinejad presented intentions ,first of all, The decision to whether go a head or not in Iranian nuclear program is not a decision for the president of Iran but for the supreme leader as I understand the Iranian constitutional, but that issue aside , I think the question is whether or not Islamic Republic and the courtiers with which negotiate can begin to make more steps that brings them together toward some compromise, if theIranian side position is this, no compromise will be possible and no further discussion is useful and then of course we won’t have an agreement. If IRI is willing to begin to make some small steps then I would hope that there would be movement on other side and perhaps an agreement.
What steps do you suggest for solving the Nuclear Struggle between Iran and the West?
There has been some suggestions that there should be a temporally halt in further enrichment and further sanctions to allow negotiations could resume.There are also,the idea of putting the enrichment facility under the control of a broader concretion.
As the first American Special Envoy for Afghanistan after 2001 attack, what’s your idea about the given up Washington-Tehran talks for cooperation in this region?
I think American and Iranian interest in Afghanistan are largely coincident and the same and US and IRI did cooperate quite closely in 2001; I think it was a mistake for the US to have rejected Iranian cooperate and further assistance in 2002 and I would hope that Iran and US could have a serious discussion about how to further stabilize Afghanistan.Iran has much to offer, It is a major aid donor to Afghanistan and its assistance is quite helpful.Iran, obviously has influence in Afghanistan which it can be used in a positive direction that help stabilize this country. Iran has strong trade relations with Afghanistan which again can help to stabiles that country and of course, Tehran has a strong interest in combating Afghan drug trade which is another possible area for cooperation.Iran and US, both have interests in stabilized peaceful Afghanistan and not because one is going to pay another one to cooperate but because both have the similar interests.
James Dobbins directs the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corporation and served as Assistant Secretary of State under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. He was the Clinton administration’s special envoy to Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo, and Somalia and the Bush administration’s first envoy to Afghanistan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)