Deja vu all over again: Iran takes 10 US sailors hostage
It's 1979-80 all over again. Iran has seized two US Naval boats and has taken the 10 sailors on board hostage. But it's worse than 1979-80 - the Obama administration is already blaming the sailors.
Iran detained two small Navy craft
and was holding 10 American crew members Tuesday in the Persian Gulf, U.S.
officials said, an incident that seized the attention of Congress just hours
before President Barack Obama planned to deliver his final State of the Union
address.
Defense officials scrambled to determine what
happened, saying they were looking into whether a mechanical issue caused the
incident. Officials also said one or both of the small boats may have veered
into Iranian territorial waters near Iran’s Farsi Island. The U.S. Navy had lost
contact with the two boats, U.S. officials said.
A senior administration official said the U.S.
has received assurances that the two small boats and their crew were to be
released “promptly.” The Iranians held 10 U.S. sailors, who were on board the
two craft on a trip to Bahrain from Kuwait, officials said.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called his
Iranian counterpart, Javad Zarif, on Tuesday to try and arrange the release of
two U.S. boats, according to a second senior administration official. The second
official said the U.S. expected the American personnel to be released
soon.
Geir Lundestad, who served as Director of the Nobel
Institute for 25 years, wrote in a newly released memoir that although
the five-strong Norwegian Nobel Committee had all agreed to give Obama
the award, his record in office since receiving the prize had shown it
to be a mistake.
According to Lundestad, the argument which swayed the committee was that the prize would help him achieve his goals.
“In hindsight, we could say that the argument of giving Obama a
helping hand was only partially correct,” he wrote, according to VG
newspaper.
…Lundestad was not the only person to have misgivings about the Obama
award, the American president himself said he was “surprised”.
“Even many of Obama’s supporters thought that the prize was a
mistake. In that way, the committee did not achieve what it had hoped,”
Lundestad writes.
He claims that Obama’s advisors even discreetly asked if it would be possible for the US President to avoid the award.
“His cabinet had already asked whether anyone had previously refused
to travel to Oslo to receive the prize,” Lundestad said. “In broad
strokes, the answer was no.”
And the Nobel Committee may be about to repeat the same mistake.
Some are lobbying for Secretary of State John Kerry and his Iranian
counterpart Foreign Minister Javad Zarif to receive the next prize.
Maybe they ought to wait to see how the sellout to a nuclear-armed Iran works out first? It seems silly to give prizes for reaching an agreement before seeing whether the agreement is actually meaningful (see: Kissinger - Le Duc Tho, Rabin - Peres- Arafat, etc.).
#ThanksObama Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif meets Hezbullah's Nasrallah in Beirut - UPDATED
Now that Iran doesn't have the United States to counterbalance it, the Mullahcracy is doing all the things it always wanted to do - like Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif meeting openly with Hezbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah for the first time since 2010. This is from the first link.
Sayyed Nasrallah received Dr. Zarif and the associating delegation,
said a statement released by Hezbollah Media Relations, adding that the
meeting was attended by the Iranian ambassador in Lebanon Mohammad
Fatahali.
Hezbollah S.G. and Zarif discussed latest developments in Lebanon and the region, the statement said.
The meeting also tackled efforts aimed at finding solutions to the
current crises in several countries, as well as the outcomes of the
nuclear agreement reached between Iran and the world powers last month
in Vienna, the statement added.
Actually, it's more like Lebanon is being treated as an Iranian vassal state. An impressive array of Lebanese politicians is lining up to meet with Zarif.
Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif arrived in
Beirut on Tuesday, highlighting the importance of coordination among the
countries in the region to face challenges.
He said: “We hope that the nuclear deal will pave the way to opening a new chapter of ties between countries in the region.”
He made his remarks upon his arrival at Rafik Hariri International Airport on Tuesday afternoon.
He emphasized that his talks with Lebanese officials will tackle cooperation between Beirut and Tehran.
“We are in great need of dialogue and cooperation to confront regional challenges,” added the foreign minister.
Earlier, media reports said that he will stress to
Lebanese officials that Tehran's stance towards Syria and Hizbullah has
not changed.
Diplomatic sources told al-Joumhouria daily that Zarif
will send a clear message to the parties claiming Iran will turn its
back on Syria and Hizbullah that Tehran continues to back its allies in
the region.
Many critics have said that a nuclear deal signed
between Iran and major powers in Vienna last month will lead to a change
in the Iranian stance.
During his two-day official visit, Zarif is scheduled to
meet with Speaker Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Tammam Salam, Foreign
Minister Jebran Bassil and Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.
It was not clear if the Iranian Foreign Minister would also visit Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun in Rabieh.
Hussein Obama's dream come true - Iran is behaving like a regional power. What could go wrong? #ThanksObama.
The Iran nuclear deal presents an “historic opportunity” to combat
Israeli “threats,” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif told
Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah during a Tuesday meeting in Beirut,
Hezbollah’s al-Manar television station said Wednesday.
“Zarif said from Beirut that the nuclear
agreement between Tehran and the world powers created a historic
opportunity to [sic] for regional cooperation to fight extremism and
face threats posed by the Zionist entity,” al-Manar reported.
Along with the Syrian regime, the
Lebanon-based terror group Hezbollah is funded by Iran. Hezbollah has
dispatched thousands of fighters to support embattled Syrian President
Bashar Assad in the country’s five-year civil war.
Ah yes, greetings from the 'Zionist entity'....
Zarif is headed for Damascus later today where they have quite a greeting waiting for him.
Rebels fired dozens of rockets at central Damascus on Wednesday, a
monitor and state media said, ahead of an expected visit to the Syrian
capital by Iran's foreign minister.
The bombardment killed at
least one person and injured more than 20 others, the Syrian Observatory
for Human Rights, a British-based monitor, said.
Foreign
Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif was expected to head for Damascus from
Beirut later in the day, according to Iranian state media. An Iranian
Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said he would be discussing a new plan to
resolve the war.
I can think of one thing that might go a long way in 'resolving the war.' A well-aimed rebel rocket that kills both Assad and Zarif.
Kerry also said that his chief Iranian interlocutor, the foreign
minister, Javad Zarif, and Zarif’s boss, the (relatively) reformist
president, Hassan Rouhani, would be in “serious trouble” at home if the
deal falls through. Zarif, Kerry told me, explicitly promised him that
Iran will engage with the United States and its Arab allies on a range
of regional issues, should Congress approve the deal. “Zarif
specifically said to me in the last two weeks, ‘If we get this finished,
I am now empowered to work with and talk to you about regional
issues.’” Kerry went on, “This is in Congress’s hands. If Congress says
no, Congress will shut that down, shut off that conversation, set this
back, and set in motion a series of inevitables about what would happen
with respect to Iranian behavior, and, by the way, the sanctions will be
over.”
You mean that if Congress says yes to the Iran sellout, Iran will want a seat at the table on the 'peace process,' and if Congress says no, Iran will stay away. Sounds to me like another reason to say no.
Iran's foreign minister Javad Zarif says that the nuclear deal he negotiated with US Secretary of State John Kerry permits cheating and puts the 'Zionist regime' in irrecoverable danger. Israel also believes it is endangered by this deal. Obama-Kerry say 'don't worry, be happy.' Whom to believe?
Iran’s foreign minister and lead negotiator in nuclear talks said
that under the terms of the recently inked accord, the Islamic Republic
is permitted to violate current embargoes on the shipment of arms and
construction of missiles, according to recent comments made before
Iran’s parliament.
Zarif, who spoke to the country’s parliament about the terms of the
nuclear deal, also bragged that the finalization of the accord “puts the
Zionist Regime in an irrecoverable danger,” according to an independent
translation of his Persian language remarks provided to the Washington Free Beacon.
Zarif insisted that “violating the arms and missiles embargo” placed
on Iran by the United Nations “does not violate the nuclear agreement.”
Is it possible to say that someone was fleeced on purpose?
1. U.S. Nuclear Inspectors Are Banned From Inspecting Iran’s Nuclear Sites
...
The administration’s claim that the deal provides inspections “anytime,
anywhere” is also false. Obama’s deal allows Iran to block inspector
access to any undeclared nuclear site. As Charles Krauthammer notes,
“The denial is then adjudicated by a committee—on which Iran sits. It
then goes through several other bodies, on all of which Iran sits” and
the whole process may take up to 24 days.
2. Obama’s Iran Nuclear Deal Lifts Economic Sanctions that Could Boost Iran’s Economy with $150 Billion in Revenue
As the Washington Post
reports, “Yet another worry is that the lifting of tough economic
sanctions on Iran would provide it with as much as $150 billion in
revenue. Some of that money would be spent on infrastructure and the
Iranian people. Some of it, critics say, would go to the likes of
Hezbollah, Syrian Bashar al-Assad and Iraqi militias that no long ago
were killing Americans.”
3. The Obama Administration Admits That ‘We Should Expect’
Iran Will Spend Some of the $150 Billion in Revenues Obama’s Deal Gives
Them On Their Military and Possibly Terrorism
...
4. On the Very Week Obama Brokered His Iran Nuclear Deal, Large
Crowds Across Iran Could Be Heard Chanting “Death to America”—And Iran’s
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Declared ‘Death to America’ Just Months Ago
...
5. Obama’s Iran Nuclear Deal Does Not Require Iran to Release Any American Prisoners
...
6. Obama’s Deal Allows Russia and China to Supply Iran with Weapons
...
Krauthammer argues that “the net effect of this capitulation will be
not only to endanger our Middle East allies now under threat from Iran
and its proxies, but to endanger our own naval forces in the Persian
Gulf.” He added, “Imagine how Iran’s acquisition of the most advanced
anti-ship missiles would threaten our control over the Gulf and the
Strait of Hormuz, waterways we have kept open for international commerce
for a half century.”
7. 77 Percent of Americans Oppose Obama’s Lifting of Sanctions Against Iran
Why did Obama-Kerry negotiate such a bad deal? Because they wanted a deal at all costs. The New York Times published a shocking story last week that shows just how Kerry and Wendy Sherman were defeated every step of the way.
At
one point last week the simmering tension between the two negotiators
boiled over when Mr. Zarif felt his American counterpart was pressing
too hard. “Never threaten an Iranian!” he shouted. At the other end of
the table Sergey V. Lavrov,
the Russian foreign minister, who has had his share of disputes with
Mr. Kerry, tried to break the tension. “Or a Russian!” he said, as the
room broke out in nervous laughter.
But
during a break on one particularly discouraging March day in Lausanne,
Switzerland, where negotiations were held before adjourning to Vienna,
Mr. Zarif struck a different tone as he invoked the names of the key
figures on two sides, including Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and
the top energy officials of the United States and Iran, Ernest J. Moniz and Ali Akbar Salehi.
“We
are not going to have another time in history when there is an Obama
and a Biden and a Kerry and a Moniz again,” he said, according to notes
of the conversation. “And there may be no Rouhani, Zarif and Salehi.”
[The Iranians] understood all along that their bargaining position was superior,
because Obama needed a deal at any cost — as his critics have said all
along, he would take a bad deal over no deal, especially as he got
deeper into the process, and it became more obvious that both Obama’s
ego and political needs made backing away from the table unthinkable.
Obama and Kerry doubled down with every losing hand, until the Iranians
cleaned them out.
The NYT
is essentially saying that Obama’s top priority was collecting some
good press and personal accolades for a deal, and dumping the Iran
problem into someone else’s lap while he gets through his lame-duck
years.
Late
in the article, it is mentioned that Obama grew embarrassed about how
obvious his thirst for a deal had become, and tried telling his aides,
“I don’t need this.” The aides guessedthat he meant Supreme
Court wins on ObamaCare and gay marriage had given him enough political
cover to make delaying the Iran deal feasible.
One way to appreciate how badly America lost in this lousy deal is to look at how many side issues it doesinclude
– every last one of them a win for Iran. “Imprisonment of dissidents
and even some Americans” does not directly relate to nuclear weapons…
but neither does ICBM technology, and Iran won concessions there.
Obama’s
apologists are spinning this debacle by claiming the only alternative
was a huge, bloody war, beginning immediately. Secretary of State Kerry
actually wound up sobbing about how he had managed to avert another
Vietnam. Meanwhile, Iran is boasting about defeating “unfair” sanctions
that never should have been leveled against it, forcing the Great Satan
to acknowledge its Allah-given right to atomic power, and rather openly
stating it is still unafraid of fighting a war against what the
Ayatollah describes as the nexus of “global arrogance” in America.
I can't get YouTube from 38,000 feet, or I would have embedded a video of the song. But all I can say to this tweet is 'oy... May God Have mercy on us.'
While Kerry cuddles with Zarif, Iran goes to work in the Strait of Hormuz
US Secretary of State John Kerry and chief 'negotiator' Wendy Sherman became the first US officials to set foot on Iranian soil since 1979 on Monday, when they popped into the Iranian Ambassador to the UN's New York office for a meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif.
The Pentagon said at least five Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
Navy patrol vessels approached the Marshall Islands-flagged Maersk
Tigris cargo ship at 4 a.m. eastern time as it was transiting the
Straight of Hormuz and directed the ship to proceed further into Iranian
waters.
When the ship’s master declined, the Iranian ship fired
shots across the bridge of the cargo vessel, Pentagon spokesman Col.
Steve Warren said. After shots were fired, the ship proceeded into
Iranian waters near the vicinity of Larak Island. It was boarded by
members of the Iranian coast guard and is now being held in Iranian
waters with about 30 people aboard.
...
The Maersk Tigris issued a distress call, prompting U.S. Naval Forces
Central Command to send the U.S. destroyer Farragut to the site as well
as aircraft to observe the interaction, Col. Warren said. The destroyer
is currently on the way, with no clear timetable of when it will arrive
on the scene.
The U.S. assets are being sent to “monitor the
situation,” Col. Warren said. Naval Forces Central Command have been
communicating with representatives from the shipping company, he said.
The
shipping route through the Strait of Hormuz is in Iranian territorial
waters, but ships typically pass through with no issues under rules of
innocent passage, which allow ships to pass through as long as they
follow international law.
There are no Americans aboard the cargo
ship and currently no injuries reported among the crew, Col. Warren
said. It is unclear what sort of cargo the ship is carrying.
It should be an interesting briefing at the State Department today.... What could go wrong?
Nuke deal signed, Obama to threaten Netanyahu later today
Obama says he’ll be speaking with Netanyahu later today.
— Blake Hounshell (@blakehounshell) April 2, 2015
An agreement has been signed between Iran and the P 5+1, and President Hussein Obama is calling Prime Minister Netanyahu later today to make sure that Netanyahu will not take matters into his own hands (see the tweet above - what else could it mean? Obama detests Netanyahu...). Except that it's not much of an agreement, and Iran is laughing all the way to the bank.
After failing to meet a March 31 deadline for the announcement of a
firm political agreement, Secretary of State John Kerry and Javad Zarif,
his Iranian counterpart, said that the sides had agreed in principle to
let Iran continue running major portions of its nuclear program.
Despite threats from Obama administration officials that the United
States would abandon talks if Iran continued to demand greater
concessions, Kerry extended his trip and conducted a series of meetings
aimed at hashing out a statement of progress—a far cry from the detailed
document officials vowed would be finalized by now.
The sides continue to disagree over Iranian demands that it be
permitted to continue key nuclear research and granted the ability to
ramp its program up to industrial capacity after a decade.
However, Zarif said many of these issues are closer to being resolved.
“None of those measures” that will move to scale back Iran’s program
“include closing any of our facilities,” Zarif said. “We will continue
enriching; we will continue research and development.”
“Our heavy water reactor will be modernized and we will continue the
Fordow facility,” Zarif said. “We will have centrifuges installed in
Fordow, but not enriching.”
...
Zarif said that once a final agreement is made, “all U.S. nuclear
related secondary sanctions will be terminated,” he said. “This, I
think, would be a major step forward.”
Zarif also revealed that Iran will be allowed to sell “enriched
uranium” in the international market place and will be “hopefully making
some money” from it.
...
The United Nations also will move to endorse the ongoing Joint Plan of
Action interim deal and terminate all of its previous security council
resolutions on Iran.
...
Zarif told
reporters late Wednesday amid extensive meetings with the United
States and other P5+1 one nations that he was “all smiles” after days of
intensive talks in which Tehran has given little ground on American
efforts to reduce the size of its nuclear program and uranium
stockpiles.
Zarif emphasized that no progress could be made in the talks due to continued United States “pressure” and lack of respect.
Iran in recent days went
back on earlier promises that it would export its stockpiles of
enriched uranium, the key component in a nuclear weapon. This
requirement continues to remain one of the key sticking points to
progress.
With the talks slated to continue through June, a majority of Americans say Congress “should be required” to approve the agreement, something the Obama administration has opposed.
Around 55 percent of those surveyed by Fox News said the United
States cannot “trust anything” Iran promises on the nuclear front.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ RT @richtpau: Iran's Araqchi says this round talks will end with press statement not agreement, Iran press reports
— Omri Ceren (@cerenomri) April 1, 2015
Late last night, Iran and the P 5+1 decided to 'stop the clock' to allow 'negotiations' to continue beyond midnight on March 31. While US Secretary of State John Kerry is currently meeting with Iranian chief negotiator Javad Zarif, the bottom line is, according to Bloomberg's Eli Lake, that Iran has already won.
With a final announcement due any moment from negotiations over
Iran's nuclear program in Lausanne, Switzerland, Iran appears to be
doing quite well for itself.
After all, before the real negotiations began, Iran won vague
recognition -- from the U.S. and five other great powers -- that it has a right to enrich uranium.
Between 2008 and 2012, the United Nations Security Council passed five
resolutions sanctioning Tehran for violating the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty by operating centrifuges at facilities it had
not bothered to tell the International Atomic Energy Agency about.
Now, if press leaks turn out to be correct, Iran is on the brink of
securing an agreement to allow it to keep thousands of those
centrifuges, and also to operate its laboratory at Fordow, a facility
burrowed deep into a mountain for the production of what Zarif assures
us are medical isotopes. When U.S. spies smoked out that facility in
2009, Obama demanded that Iran come clean about all of its past nuclear
activities. Last week, the IAEA reported that Iran continues to
stonewall the agency on the possible military dimensions of its nuclear
program before 2003.
Zarif's ability to negotiate concessions despite Iran's shaky past
would be impressive enough for any foreign minister. But consider that
he was able to do so even as his bosses in Tehran waged a successful
proxy war against Western allies throughout the Middle East. In Yemen,
a pro-American government fell this month to Iranian backed Houthi
fighters, and prompted Saudi Arabia to launch an air war to beat them
back. In Syria, Iranian support has been vital to the survival of Bashar
al-Assad, the dictator Obama used to say had to go.
How does Zarif do it?
Read the whole thing. Part of how Zarif does it is the milquetoast negotiating style of Kerry and Obama, who have overdosed on seeing these negotiations from the Iranian point of view.
For months now, President Obama has been appealing to Congress not to impose additional sanctions on Iran because it would spoil the 'Spirit of Geneva.' Well, just what is the 'Spirit of Geneva'? This will give you some idea.
On Wednesday morning, while US Secretary of State John Kerry was meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, Iranian President Rohani announced that Iran will build two more nuclear power plants. For 'peaceful' purposes, of course.
Iran's
President Hassan Rouhani said the country would build two more nuclear
plants in the southern city of Bushehr in line with the peaceful use of
nuclear energy.
The president made the remarks on Tuesday while visiting the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, Press TV reported.
"The Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant is different from the power plants of
other countries since this power plant is the symbol of a nation's
resistance," he said.
"The construction of this power plant and
making it operational showed the world that should a nation have a will
to attain a goal, it would take steps in that direction, stand up for
its rights and attain its goal."
The Iranian chief executive
said the plant is an example that shows Iran "is only after peaceful use
of nuclear energy and electricity production.
A bit later in the day, while the meetings in Geneva were still going on, Iran announced that it would place a Washington Post reporter whom it has been holding for months on trial for undisclosed crimes.
A Washington Post journalist detained in Iran
for months has been indicted and will stand trial, Iran's state news
agency reported Wednesday, without elaborating on what charges he faced.
The report by the official IRNA news agency came the same day as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry
met with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif before talks
with world powers resume over the Islamic Republic's contested nuclear
program.
It wasn't immediately clear if the two events were connected, though
Zarif earlier said he hoped the case against reporter Jason Rezaian
could be "resolved."
"We will have to wait for the judiciary to move forward, but we will try
to provide all the humanitarian assistance that we could," Zarif told
journalists in Geneva. "We hope that this issue could be resolved but
unfortunately there are judicial issues involved which the judiciary has
to deal with."
IRNA quoted Tehran prosecutor Abbas Jafari Dowlatabadi saying Rezaian,
the newspaper's bureau chief in Tehran since 2012, had been indicted. He
was previously charged last month, but the bill of indictment clears
the way for his trial.
Rezaian, an Iranian-American who holds dual citizenship, has been held
since July 22. The IRNA report did not disclose what charges he faces.
However, the report says he will stand trial in Iran's Revolutionary
Court, which mostly hears cases involving security offenses.
Given all this 'spirit,' it's not too surprising that Congress is about to defy the Obama administration and take up sanctions.
The US House of Representatives has begun working on its own Iran
sanctions bill rather than simply agreeing to pass whatever the Senate
comes up with, Al-Monitor has learned.
...
"We feel very strongly that the House needs to play an important
role, not just rubber-stamp whatever the Senate decides to do," the top
Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs
panel, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., told Al-Monitor. "So we're going to
put our heads together [with Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif.] and see what's
the best way to proceed."
The two lawmakers are expected to hunker down next week to decide on a
strategy for moving forward, Engel said. Separately, Royce told
Al-Monitor that he was planning to sit down Jan. 15 with Senate Foreign
Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., for an update on the
Senate strategy.
...
The Senate bill will largely replicate 2013 legislation
from Sens. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., that would
trigger new sanctions on Iran's energy sector if the country doesn't
agree to a nuclear deal that's acceptable to Congress. The two senators
are said to be tweaking their legislation, which never came up for a
vote while Democrats controlled the Senate, to try to sign up a
veto-proof majority of 67 senators before unveiling it.
In a sign of how quickly things are moving, the Senate Banking Committee,
which would have jurisdiction over such legislation, has announced a
hearing Jan. 20 on the "perspectives on the strategic necessity of Iran
sanctions."
Menendez and Kirk hope to get most of the remaining 10 Democrats who
originally co-sponsored their bill back on board as well as Senate
Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., according to sources close to the
issue. One potential change could be a weakening of the bill's ban on uranium enrichment,
those sources say; the 2013 version would have prevented President
Barack Obama from suspending the bill's new sanctions unless he
certified that Iran had agreed to a deal that would "dismantle Iran's
illicit nuclear infrastructure, including enrichment and reprocessing
capabilities and facilities."
...
"I believe that sanctions have brought Iran to the bargaining table,"
Engel told Al-Monitor. "I respect and understand the White House arguing
that sanctions — even triggered sanctions — could be counterproductive
or even harmful. That's their judgment. It's not necessarily mine."
In 1976, after Israel’s daring hostage rescue
operation at Entebbe, Chaim Herzog cracked up the Security Council when
he pointed out the blatant hypocrisy of the Soviet Union accusing Israel
of violating another country’s sovereignty. “On these subjects, I defer
to [them], having regard to the Soviet Union’s very considerable record
in these respects in Hungary, in Czechoslovakia, and in other countries
in Eastern Europe,” he said, eliciting laughter from the assembled
delegates.
For reasons explained here, current Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Ron Prosor may have a similar reaction to Russia's claim to be 'deeply worried' by the alleged Israeli strike on Syrian military facilities.
"Moscow is deeply worried by this dangerous development, the
circumstances of which demand an explanation," Russian foreign ministry
spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said.
In a letter to the United
Nations, Russia complained about Israel's "aggressive action" and
demanded that such attacks should not happen again, the spokesman said.
Syria also complained to the UN about the strikes, demanding that the
Security Council "severely condemn the Israeli attack and impose
punitive sanctions on Israel due to its support of Syrian terrorist
organizations."
'Deeply worried'? Well, Cry Me a River, Vlad.
But there's another gem in this Haaretz article: It seems that the airport was not the only target hit last night.
The Lebanese official, who requested anonymity because he was not
authorized to speak to the media, said a Hezbollah convoy heading to
Lebanon had been hit in another set of strikes at Dimas, approximately
half-way between Damascus and the Lebanese border.
The strikes
hit an air base at Dimas where advanced Iranian drones were stationed
along with Syrian troops and Hezbollah forces, the Syrian official said.
There have been several reported observations of Iranian drones during the Syrian conflict.
Yeah, the Russians are 'deeply worried,' alright. Their clients just took one on the chin. Heh.
With the P 5+1 talks on the verge of collapse and the US seeking an extension beyond today's deadline, the Wall Street Journal cites American fears that the talks' collapse will lead to Iran ramping up its nuclear production.
American officials have said in recent weeks that they believe Tehran
could quickly ramp up its production of nuclear fuel, and potentially
sabotage U.S. efforts to combat Islamic State militants in Iraq and
Syria, if the negotiating process ends.
The Journal also reports on American skepticism whether Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif is empowered to make any concessions to cut a deal.
Some senior Western diplomats involved in the Vienna talks also
doubted Tehran would be willing to significantly change its position in
the coming months.
“The [Iranian] negotiating team that is in
Vienna—they are open, nice people, who are doing the best they can,”
said the official. “The problem is that you have some who I’m not sure
have the mandate to get to the place they need.”
Mr. Kerry held
four hours of negotiations on Sunday with his Iranian counterpart,
Javad Zarif,
in a bid to push the diplomatic process forward, according to
U.S. officials. The foreign ministers of the U.K., France, Russia,
Germany, and Saudi Arabia also visited Vienna, and China’s top diplomat,
Wang Yi,
is expected to arrive Monday morning.
...
U.S., European and Iranian officials said they have made progress over
the past year in negotiations that have crisscrossed the world from Oman
to New York. But Obama administration officials increasingly are
questioning whether Iran’s most powerful political player, Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has empowered Mr. Zarif and other
negotiators to make the necessary concessions for a deal. Mr. Zarif has
repeatedly said he’s empowered to negotiate but that Mr. Khamenei is the
ultimate decision maker.
That, of course, was utterly predictable.
Obama will ultimately face the choice of taking military action or allowing Iran to attain nuclear weapons status on his watch. I don't think he really cares any more. He has his Nobel Peace Prize and he's a lame duck facing two houses of Congress that won't pass his agenda but have very little power to force him to act on the foreign policy front.
Before the Iran nuclear talks for a permanent agreement even start, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton has decided that five months is not enough time to reach a permanent agreement, and is calling to extend the talks.
Comprehensive negotiations between world powers and Iran over its nuclear program officially begin in Vienna on February 18, at which point diplomats will have just over five months to reach an accord ending the longstanding impasse once and for all.
That
cutoff was agreed upon, and is self-imposed, by the parties directly
involved in the talks. Yet given the stakes of failure, Catherine
Ashton, the European Union's chief diplomat, is already discussing an
extension of that deadline.
"Everyone will say to you, and rightly so, this is extremely difficult," Ashton told The Wall Street Journal
at a strategic conference in Munich on Sunday. "We have no guarantees
in this and we will take the time that is necessary to get this to be
the right agreement."
Speaking on the condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the negotiations, US officials have told The Jerusalem Post they too fear the talks will require more time than has been officially acknowledged.
Anyone want to bet that Iran has nuclear weapons before the talks reach a conclusion?
Whatever else happens, Iran is confident that there won't be any more sanctions regardless of how long the talks drag out. Here's Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif.
"With good will we can reach an agreement within six month," he said in a
speech to the German Council on Foreign Relations. "I don't fear a
decision in the US Congress ... The US president has promised to veto
it."
And of course, the US President always keeps his promises... well, at least to Iran.
Iran is threatening to walk away from its agreement with the P 5+1 if the US Senate passes sanctions, even if the sanctions don't take effect until after the 'interim deal' has ended.
In a transcript of the interview, which was conducted on Saturday and posted online on Monday, Time said it asked Zarif what happens if Congress imposes new sanctions, even if they do not go into effect for six months.
According
to the magazine, he replied: "The entire deal is dead." Zarif was
referring to a Nov. 24 agreement with six world powers under which
Tehran would curb its nuclear program in exchange for limited relief
from economic sanctions.
"We do not like to negotiate under
duress," Zarif added. "If Congress adopts sanctions, it shows lack of
seriousness and lack of a desire to achieve a resolution on the part of
the United States.
Zarif's comments had little effect on US
Senators who are preparing legislation to impose new sanctions on Iran
in six months if the deal reached in Geneva goes nowhere.
Here's hoping the Senate kills the deal. It's a lousy deal anyway.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
