On Friday, November 27 the highest-ranking scientist behind Iran’s nuclear programs Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was mysteriously ambushed and killed in a small city in northern Iran. For decades, the United States and Israel have regarded him as the key figure secretly spearheading Tehran’s country’s efforts to develop an atomic warhead.

Who Was Behind the Fakhrizadeh Assassination?

A number of American officials — including sources from the US secret services — have said that Israel was behind the assassination of Iran’s leading nuclear scientist, as he had long been on the Mossad’s list of top targets. The ambuscade, which consisted of reportedly five or six men, was set up in Absard, a small city in Iran’s northern Damavand region, where Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was travelling in his car. According to Iranian reports, an explosion preceded gunfire.

“Terrorists murdered an eminent Iranian scientist today,” Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif reacted on Twitter. “This cowardice — with serious indications of Israeli role — shows desperate warmongering of perpetrators.” 

Iran soon vowed to take retaliatory action. The country’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that Iran will pursue those behind the assassination and punish both “its perpetrators and those who commanded it.” Echoing him, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said the Iranian people “are braver than to leave this criminal act unanswered” and promised a response “in due time” as he blamed Israel.

Project 110 and Fakhrizadeh’s True Identity

Iran had long depicted Mohsen Fakhrizadeh as a mere academic who taught at the Imam Hossein University, a public university in Tehran which is under the authority of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

But as early as the 2000s, at least, intelligence reports in the United States focused on the mysterious figure and disclosed key information about him. In 2007, a CIA assessment made for the Bush Administration revealed that Fakhrizadeh’s academic profession was a cover story.

In fact, Fakhrizadeh had been running what Iran labelled “Project 110” and “Project 111” — a complex endeavor aimed to create a nuclear warhead that is small enough to fit into a missile but which holds out against the pressure of re-entering into the atmosphere.

“He was their senior-most nuclear scientist and was believed to be responsible for Iran’s covert nuclear program,” a former Pentagon Middle East policy top official told the New York Times. “He was also a senior officer in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and that will magnify Iran’s desire to respond by force.”

2018: Israel Names Fakhrizadeh Enemy Number One

In 2018, Israel’s Mossad stole documents from an Iranian warehouse that held documentations of a program named the “Amad Project”. Relying on those documents in a televised presentation, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also revealed Fakhrizadeh’s role to be of extreme significance and named him Israel’s public enemy number one.

Netanyahu said that even after the Amad Project was abandoned Fakhrizadeh had kept it secretly alive. He added that the project was now run by an organization within Iran’s defense ministry known as the Organization of of Defensive Innovation and Research (Sazman-e Pazhouheshhaye Novin-e Defa’i or SPND) which was also led by Fakhrizadeh.

Why Was Fakhrizadeh Killed Now?

On November 12, President Donald Trump told senior advisers in the Oval Office that he wanted to strike Iran’s nuclear site in Natanz, but his advisers soon dissuaded him, fearing the beginning of an unprecedented armed conflict. The day before, Trump had dismissed his then Pentagon chief Mark Esper.

As he is expected to concede the American election in January, Trump is now focused on sabotaging any possible diplomacy between the United States and Iran under President-elect Joe Biden and a prospective return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the 2015 nuclear deal from which Trump withdrew in 2018).

Had it taken place earlier this month, the strike would have wrecked that possibility beyond repair. But the killing of Fakhrizadeh — which occurred shortly after Netanyahu met Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman for the first time — certainly sought to reach the same end goal. 

By baiting Iran into retaliation, Israel — along with its regional allies — is trying to escalate already fuming tensions i the region and impede any negotiation with Iran in the future. Still, the targeting and killing of Iranian nuclear scientists — and others — in Iran is nothing new.

While many Iranians mourned the death of Fakhrizadeh and took to the streets to demand severe retaliation, some blamed the killing on repeated breache in Iran’s national security. Indeed, on August 7, al-Qaeda’s second-highest leader, Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah (who went by the nom de guerre Abu Muhammad al-Masri), was gunned down in broad daylight in the streets of Tehran by Israeli agents on a motorcycle.

A History of Israeli Breaches of Iranian Security

“Over the current decade, several top Iranian scientists have been targeted and assassinated in terrorist attacks and our firm evidence clearly indicates that certain foreign quarters have been behind such assassinations,” Majid Takht-Ravanchi, the Ambassador of Iran to United Nations, wrote in a letter addressed to UN leader Antonio Gueterres and the UN Security Council following the death of Fakhrizadeh.

Almost precisely 10 years ago, on November 29, 2010, two Iranian nuclear scientists were targeted in coordinated bomb attacks, when attackers rode motorcycles and stuck bombs on their cars. However, only one of them, Majid Shahriar, was killed in that specific attack. 

A number of other targeted killings happened later, while Stuxnet — a computer virus believed to be an Israeli and American creation — destroyed Iranian nuclear centrifuges, including in Natanz.

In July of this year, an mysterious explosion took place at a nuclear research and development center at Natanz. Israel, which vowed to destroy Iran’s hopes to develop nuclear weapons at all costs, also has a history of bombing plants in Syria and Iraq.

Will Iran Strike Back?

Germany, which is a key US ally in Europe, urged the two sides not to allow the last weeks of the Trump administration to obliterate hopes for new negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.

“A few weeks before the new US administration takes office, it is important to preserve the scope for talks with Iran so that the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program can be resolved through negotiations,” the German foreign ministry said in a statement. “We therefore urge all parties to refrain from any steps that could lead to a further escalation of the situation.”

But Iran, which has suffered two major killings this year — the first being the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, then the highest-ranking individual in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps — seems to be more intent on revenge than ever before.

“We assure you that we will not rest until we track down and take revenge on those responsible for the assassination of martyr Fakhrizadeh,” Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff for the Iranian armed forces, said in a statement responding to the assassination.

Meanwhile Israeli and American missions in neighboring countries have been put on high alert since the killing.

L'articolo Killing of Iran’s Top Nuclear Scientist Escalates Middle East Tensions proviene da InsideOver.

Following a meeting in New York last year, French President Emmanuel Macron was the only global leader who almost managed to persuade US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to meet last September. Unfortunately, it never happened as both leaders failed to agree on whether US sanctions should be lifted before the gathering. Politico’s Rym Momtaz says this is one reason why he faces ‘tough odds’ in acting as a referee for the conflict.

However, Macron is the one European leader who could be pivotal in urging both the US and Iran to either reform the 2015 Iran Deal or succeed in persuading both nations to reach a completely new agreement. He is one of the few politicians who has a direct channel of communication with both Rouhani and Trump. When Tehran reacted to the US killing of Iranian General Qassam Soleimani, he phoned the Iranian leader to convince him not to respond too harshly towards the US President’s decision to eliminate the general.

Furthermore, the Iranian Government has invited France to assist with the investigation into the crash of Ukraine International Airlines flight 752, which crashed shortly after taking off from Tehran Airport last Tuesday night, killing all 176 people aboard. In contrast, they have refused to cooperate with US investigators and have rebutted Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s claim that the plane was shot down by an Iranian surface-to-air missile.

The French President reassured Trudeau that he would ensure that France provides assistance in establishing the facts over the crash, although news reporters who visited the crash site said that nearly all traces of the aircraft have been removed, and Tehran has so far refused to share any information retrieved from the plane’s black boxes. This suggests that Macron could be taking some risks by cooperating with Tehran. If they fail to demonstrate full transparency during the investigation, it could be a humiliating diplomatic blow for the French leader.

Macron has also spoken to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Saudi Crown Prince Mohamad bin Salman and Iraqi President Barham Saleh since Soleimani’s death. He is also collaborating with the UK and Germany on preserving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, despite Trump’s demands that these European nations abandon it. The French President is in a unique position of being able to bring all sides together.

If both Trump and Rouhani want to avoid war, they should abide by the four-point plan that the French President persuaded both leaders to support. According to the document, Tehran would never acquire a nuclear weapon and will seek genuine peace in the Middle East through negotiations.

In return, the US would agree to lift all the sanctions re-imposed on Iran since 2017. They will also have full ability to export their oil throughout the world. Although Tehran’s ballistic missile programme is not mentioned in the document, French officials said the language of the text was understood by all sides to mean it would be part of the negotiations.

Both Trump and Rouhani can claim victory if they agree to Macron’s four-point plan. The US President can inform voters during his 2020 campaign that he managed to stop Iran from expanding its ballistic activities, while Iran’s leader can claim he achieved full US sanctions relief.

With all the advantages the French President has in his favour, Macron is the only leader who has produced a sensible solution in the past to ending US-Iranian hostilities. He is the one politician with direct channels of communication to all sides. The only problem he has is that if Rouhani cancelled his meeting with Trump once, he can do it again if Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei convinces the Iranian President to do so. Either way, this is a huge gamble for the French leader.

L'articolo Why Macron’s 4-point Plan Could Ease US-Iranian Tensions proviene da InsideOver.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said that his country had concluded its attacks on American forces and did not seek an escalation of war after launching more than 20 ballistic missiles at two military bases in Iraq.

Although senior Iraqi defence officials who work with the US command said that no Americans or Iraqis had been killed in the attacks, Bloomberg’s Karen Leigh, Iain Marlow and Michael Arnold argue that Tehran’s retaliatory strikes could provide the Trump administration with an excuse to avert war. This is because no Americans were killed during the attacks and they were carefully orchestrated by the Iranian Government to ensure US President Donald Trump did not have a reason to start a new conflict. Faysal Itani, a deputy director at the Center for Global Policy in Washington, called it a ‘measured response.’

However, there is still an opportunity for other nations to play their part in easing the crisis. Russia seems to be the only country that has criticised the US’s actions. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov condemned the US killing of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani.

Meanwhile, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi described the US’s action last Friday as ‘unacceptable’, but has refused to condemn Washington’s actions. With Beijing currently in the midst of concluding its trade negotiations with the US, they have much to lose by upsetting the Trump administration. Also, they depend upon both Saudi Arabia and Iran for oil, so they are aware that choosing sides in the Middle East is not in their best interests.

If Iran is intent upon avoiding war now that it has engaged in retaliatory attacks against the US following Soleimani’s killing, this is an opportunity for more NATO states to help ease the situation. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has stated that he will not ‘lament’ the Iranian general’s death, but he is also keen to ensure Britain does not participate in another US-led conflict.

French President Emmanuel Macron asked Iranian President Hassan Rouhani not to escalate tensions during a phone call on Tuesday. He urged his Iranian counterpart to respect the 2015 Iran Deal.

Rouhani told Macron that the US cannot be immune from retribution, but said that Iran would return to full compliance with the nuclear deal as soon as other participant countries meet their own obligations under the terms of the deal.

The French President could be a useful ally to Trump regarding Iran. Unlike Washington, he has a direct channel of communication with the Iranian Government and he almost persuaded Trump and Rouhani to meet following the G7 meeting last August, until the US President cancelled at the last minute. Therefore, NATO states like France can make a difference.

The US has no intention of abiding by the 2015 deal, but they do not want another conflict either. The Trump administration should aim to replace Obama’s agreement with one that prevents Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and ease its sanctions in return.

NATO countries can help both sides conclude a new deal by opening up direct channels of communication with Iran, like Macron has, but they should also support Trump more. The 2015 deal failed to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons altogether and it allowed Tehran to continue to sponsor terrorist groups. It is in few nations’ best interests to allow the Islamic Republic to continue to do this and they know that the end result could be war if the Obama deal is not replaced.

NATO knows that Russia intends to play a more direct role in Middle Eastern politics. It is unclear how Moscow would react if it came to war, which is why Western countries should be collaborating with Trump more to prevent Putin from manipulating this situation to his advantage.

Western states have much to gain by supporting the Trump administration because if they do not, they are aware that the consequences would be devastating.

L'articolo What role can NATO play to ease the Iranian crisis? proviene da InsideOver.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani announced Oct. 14 that Tehran would continue with a plan to downscale its commitment to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly referred to as the Iranian nuclear deal. The march toward its complete withdrawal from the framework has been gradual and well-publicized by the Iranian government in order to hopefully convince European powers to intervene. By giving the international community advance notice of its nuclear moves, Iran has tried to force a sense of urgency upon it, although by most accounts the strategy has not worked. 

In May, the government began the first steps of extricating itself from the agreement by exceeding nuclear stockpile limits. It was authorized under the accord to possess up to 300 kilograms for uranium. Then it breached the enrichment cap, which was set at 3.76 percent. Now, according to Rouhani, Iran is preparing to begin the development of advanced centrifuges, which were limited to 6,104 IR-1 level equipment. Prior to the Obama-era deal, Iran had over 10,000 centrifuges, but it rapidly shuttered half of them to comply with the JCPOA. 

In September, Iran spun up 20 IR-6 centrifuges and 20 IR-4 models, producing enriched uranium 10 times and five times faster, respectively. Rouhani’s announcement signaled a continuation of his recent policy to pressure the world to do something, anything, to come to its economic defense as the Iranian economy hit rock-bottom. Senior members of the Iranian Parliament echoed his sentiment while taking it a step further by declaring that international inspectors would have reduced access to Iran’s nuclear program. 

“We will certainly take the fourth step of reducing commitments to the JCPOA; Europeans have not honoured their part of the commitments and we have not seen any practical step taken by the other side, said Hossein Naghavi-Hosseini, spokesman for the Iranian Parliament’s national security committee. “When the other party doesn’t fulfill its commitments, there is no necessity for us to meet our part of commitments.”

Until this point, International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors have had unprecedented access to Iranian nuclear sites and before May, each of their verifications confirmed Tehran was in full compliance with the JCPOA. The French foreign ministry called on Iran not to proceed with these “particularly worrying steps,” but as Rouhani has said recently, he has only heard words from European leaders without seeing any action. 

The problem Iran faces is that regardless of whether or not it complies with the nuclear deal, it still must endure American sanctions. While the European Union and United Nations have yet to reimpose sanctions for violating terms of the agreement, Iran has already faced severe economic hardship because international businesses and governments fear doing business in Iran will lead to retaliation from the United States. Therefore, it is essentially already operating under international sanctions for all intents and purposes. 

According to Tehran, inflation has soared to 43 percent, but the real figure may be much higher as the cost of food and medicine has increased 43 to 60 percent as the EU reported. Housing prices have also doubled and the GDP has shrunken.

For Iran, outside of downscaling its adherence to the nuclear deal, its options are fairly limited. The most obvious tactic it could employ is to clamp down on the Strait of Hormuz. The shipping channel is vital to the global oil industry as 25 percent of shipments pass through it. In the past, Tehran has issued vague threats about the possibility of closing the channel, but the reality is doing so would almost certainly turn into armed conflict. Given Iran’s relationship with its neighbors, primarily Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, a military conflict would be unlikely to go in Iran’s favor. 

Alternatively, Iran could turn to more-friendly powers such as Russia and China for recourse. Both have publicly spoken out against the US sanctions in support of Tehran and China has economical power it could wield to rival America. As China is already aligned against the US in terms of trade, it would simply be a continuation of Beijing’s policy to buck Washington. 

Iran could also look to regional governments for improved relations. Rouhani said discussions with UAE diplomats have went well and it is currently negotiating with Saudi Arabia to end hostilities. If it were to also bring Qatar onboard, which has become more open to Iran following the blockade, Iran could broker some sort of regional economic plan to stabilize itself. 

However, when ti comes to negotiating with the US, there are few options for Tehran. Even exceeding the nuclear deal limitations is a card being played against the EU, not America. Despite this, Rouhani said he is open to negotiating with Washington, however sanctions must be removed first. For the US, it is Iran which must make the first move and it appears neither will budge anytime soon. 

L'articolo Iran To Limit Nuclear Inspection Access proviene da InsideOver.

After the collapse of a potential peace deal between the United States and Taliban, the focus in Washington might be turning back to securing a new agreement with Iran. Since American President Donald Trump restored sanctions on the Middle Eastern nation last year, its economy has borne the brunt of the consequences, especially as its oil shipments have fallen to a fraction of their ordinary levels. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has appealed to the international community, in particular to European leaders, for an economic solution. Now, thanks to French President Emmanuel Macron, Trump is possibly considering a $15 billion stimulus package for Tehran.  

Macron Effect

The relief would be extend as a line of credit and would account for half of Iran’s year oil revenue prior to the sanctions. Additionally, the Trump administration would resume issuing waivers which would allow companies to do business once again with Iran without fear of retaliation by the U.S. government. Trump has reportedly been convinced to at least consider the option after several conversations with Macron. The French president has maintained one of the more-nuanced stances on the issue with his government often calling for both sides to reach a peaceful resolution. Together with his counterparts across Europe, Macron helped create INSTEX, a barter system allowing for goods to flow between the European Union and Iran that went online last month.

Tehran has made clear that its economy is top priority and it has expressed a continued willingness to discuss options. Even so, Hassan Rouhani has kept a dignified posture when speaking on the issue, refusing to beg for help. 

“The enemy imposed ‘maximum pressure on us. Our response is to resist and confront this,” Rouhani told his advisors on Wednesday. “The Americans must understand that bellicosity and warmongering don’t work in their favor. Both … must be abandoned.” 

Trump’s campaign to cripple the Iranian economy has led to the seizure of oil tankers and the cancellation of business deals from companies and nations spanning the globe. Even governments that were initially granted waivers sometimes refused to use them out of fear of Trump targeting them. ‘Maximum pressure’ has worked, to say the least.

Bolton Out

With the firing of National Security Advisor John Bolton, the power dynamic within Trump’s inner circle could quite possibly shift. Bolton, an ardent war-hawk, once penned a New York Times opinion piece titled “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.” Accounts from diplomats who experienced working with Bolton in the past painted a picture of a stubborn man hell-bent on creating war with Iran. 

Discussions between Trump and Macron have evolved over the past few weeks, a timespan in which Bolton was still lingering around the Oval Office. It is likely that Trump may have been leaning towards offering a concession to Rouhani, but Bolton’s guidance was preventing him from making that step. Now that he is gone, Trump is free to either follow his own instinct or listen to more diplomatic voices, such as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo who was widely-rumored to have disagreed with Bolton on foreign policy ranging from Iran to North Korea. 

Bolton’s firing comes at a critical time: Rouhani announced Saturday that it would breach a third limit of the Iranian Nuclear Deal by start work on advanced centrifuges. Previously, Tehran exceeded both enrichment and stockpile caps which were set by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Crossing these redlines is not something Iranian leadership takes lightly, nor do they come unexpectedly. They are clear measures broadcast well in advance that Tehran takes in an effort to force European governments to provide relief and, hopefully, to bring America back to the JCPOA. 

European leadership has repeatedly condemned the moves by Tehran, but has so far refused to activate measures within the 2015 deal to punish Iran. However, heads of state such as Macron have pleaded with Rouhani to return to compliance if he expects sanctions to be removed. Perhaps that will not be necessary as Trump weighs the option of providing $15 billion worth of relief and possibly even reducing some of the sanctions in order to convince Rouhani to return to the negotiating table. When asked about the possible shift in tactics, Trump shied away from confirming or denying reports and only replied, “We will see what happens.”

L'articolo Trump Considering $15 Billion Relief Package For Iran proviene da InsideOver.

United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned on Tuesday that Iran will be “unshackled to create new turmoil” once a United Nations arms embargo on Iran and a travel ban on its senior officials expires next year.

Speaking at a UN Security Council meeting on security challenges in the turbulent Middle East, Pompeo, advised members against lifting sanctions against Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani and 22 other senior Iranians in October 2020. The Trump administration has ratcheted up the rhetoric and its own unilateral sanctions on Tehran after pulling out of a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and six major world powers, saying the accord did not do enough to curb Tehran’s military ambitions.

“We are already tracking very closely the JCPOA provisions expiring in October 2020, namely, the UN arms embargo and the travel restrictions on Qasem Soleimani,” Pompeo told the council, using an acronym of the nuclear deal’s official name.

“The international community will have plenty of time to see how long it has until Iran is unshackled to create new turmoil, and figure out what it must do to prevent that from happening.”

Under the 2015 nuclear deal, a UN arms embargo on the country and a travel ban on Soleimani, who runs the overseas arm of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), and 22 other officials, are due to expire in October next year. The 2015 deal featured a timetable for normalizing Iran’s relations with world powers, including the gradual lifting of travel bans, asset freezes and other sanctions after Tehran had demonstrated compliance with the accord.

Since the US slapped unilateral sanctions on Iran’s oil sector in April, Tehran has run a “campaign of extortion diplomacy” by test-firing ballistic missiles, ramping up uranium enrichment and seizing oil tankers, said Pompeo. The US State Department has put a “countdown clock” on its website that runs down until October 18, 2020, when Iran would be able to sell weapons abroad and buy new supplies from the likes of Russia and China, its website says.

Speaking with reporters before the Security Council meeting on Tuesday, the US special envoy for Iran, Brian Hook, said members of the 15-nation body needed to start planning for what happens in October 2020 now.

“It is important for the international community to understand that the Iran nuclear deal is going to start expiring next year, and it will continue to expire,” said Hook.

“We believe that the UN Security Council has an important role to play to ensure that the arms embargo and the travel ban are continued.”

In the council chamber, Majid Takht Ravanchi, Iran’s UN ambassador, accused the US of fomenting instability with its military footprint and “unbridled flow of American weaponry into this region, which has turned it into a powder keg.”

“While we are not seeking confrontation, we cannot and will not remain indifferent to the violation of our sovereignty. Therefore, in order to secure our borders and interests, we will vigorously exercise our inherent right to self-defense,” Ravanchi told the council.

It remains unclear whether the council will take any further action on Iran. The deal’s European signatories, Britain, Germany, and France, have tried to salvage the accord. Russia and China could shield Tehran from any action.

L'articolo Pompeo Warns Of “Turmoil” When UN Sanctions On Iran End proviene da InsideOver.

A Middle Eastern arms race could be brewing according to Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs. Zarif, the face of Tehran’s foreign affairs, gave an interview with Al Jazeera on Monday in which he contemplated the current levels of military spending by neighboring states while taking into consideration current geopolitical issues that have seen increased involvement of western powers. 

Spending Surge

Zarif’s main point fixated on the spending levels of his nation contrasted with that of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. The divide between Iran and states like Saudi Arabia and the UAE stretches back to the death of Prophet Mohammad, after which there was a split in who would be the rightful successor. This conflict saw the rise of two opposing sects of Islam, each following a different leader: Shia (Iran) and Sunni (UAE and Saudi Arabia, among others). 

Fast-forward to modern times, and Iran stands largely on its own, although China and Russia are common vocal allies. The United States and its allies have largely backed two major powers within the region, Saudi Arabia and Israel, and both are incredibly opposed to Tehran. It is this support with particular regard to weapons sales that Zarif blames for a potential arms race breakout. 

“Let’s make a comparison; Iran spent last year $16 billion on all its military with almost one million people in the army,” Zarif stated. “The UAE with a total population of one million spent $22 billion, Saudi Arabia spent $87 billion.”

He also made a point of America’s contribution to the region: $50 billion worth of weapons sales. US President Donald Trump appeared very eager to drum up more business with Riyadh when Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman toured the US. During a White House Meeting, the American leader spent a majority of the press conference boasting about selling more arms to Riyadh and even had graphs illustrating the increased revenue for the US Supposedly, this would lead to an increase in jobs as well, although analysts dispute those claims.

Nuclear Shift

Deploying weapons to the Middle East is nothing new and Trump is not the first president to do so, even if he is the first to lament lavishly on the weapons agreements. However, he is the first to begin the transferring nuclear expertise to an Arab state. His administration has approved seven permits authorizing American companies to lend nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. In a deliberate and clear attempt to keep these permits under the radar, the White House did not broadcast them with the same flair that Trump praised weapons purchases, most likely because they knew the backlash that would come from it. 

That backlash came, but the US Senate is far from having a veto-proof majority when it rebukes Trump. The Yemen Civil War, murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, arms sales, and now nuclear technology transfer to Riyadh have turned many in Washington against Trump on the issue of the support of Saudi Arabia in particular, yet they seem powerless to a president who simply does whatever he pleases. 

When it comes to Saudi Arabia and Iran, the shift to nuclear could have irreversible consequences. By bypassing the legislature and perhaps even advisors, Trump’s support of a nuclear Saudi Arabia could very well push Iran to develop its own program. It is already much farther along than Saudi Arabia and could be under a year away from having a nuclear warhead. It was bad enough that Trump walked out of the Iran Nuclear Deal, but by giving Tehran more reasons to pursue nuclear weapons, he is drastically raising the probability of more conflict in the region. As a businessman who has time and time again emphasized the value of weapon sales, perhaps this is what the American president desires: more war and conflict are good for American weapon manufacturers. 

Shipping Protection 

As the US continues to arm Iran’s regional enemies, to say nothing of Israel’s suspected nuclear stockpile, Washington is also designing a naval operation to secure the Strait of Hormuz and Persian Gulf for oil shipments. Naturally, Iran is heavily opposed to the idea of an increased US military presence directly off its coast and some European allies have even admitted to the potential for the increased tension as a result. Germany backed out of Operation Sentinel and, lacking European support, the US has reportedly turned to Israel to join the maritime strategy. 

The idea of Israel patrolling waters next to Iran is entirely unacceptable to Zarif and would most certainly lead to military confrontations. Israel is already happy to boast about killing Iranian militias in Syria and Iraq, so it has no qualms about going to war against Tehran. The combined threat of Israel in the Strait of Hormuz, nuclear technology going to Saudi Arabia, and its regional adversaries outspending it on weapons create a situation which backs Iran into a corner. With the walls closing in, Tehran may have no choice but to increase its own stockpiles and possibly go nuclear, a capability that the UAE and Saudi Arabia do not yet have. 

“If you are talking about threats coming from the region, the threats are coming from the US and its allies who are pouring weapons in the region, making it a tinderbox ready to blow up,” Zarif said.

That tinderbox may be great for the American military-industrial complex, but will likely guarantee future Middle Eastern conflicts. Right now, a war between Israel and Iran, Iran and Saudi Arabia, or a combination of the two grows more likely as US allies continue to provoke it.

L'articolo US Weapons Sales to Middle East Puts Iran In A Corner proviene da InsideOver.

In the absence of a new Iranian nuclear deal, a prospect that appears more elusive by the day, Tehran has a couple options at its disposal. As Hamid Dabashi, professor of Iranian studies at Columbia University, opined for Al Jazeera on Sunday, there are alternatives by which Iran could take its future into its own hands. Dabashi distinguishes them as the Egyptian option and the Israeli option. Taken together, they could best be described as polar opposite extremes which already makes them both unlikely. However, the present stalemate is something Iran is unlikely to tolerate for much longer and both options would afford Tehran a way out. 

Extreme Options

The first option, and perhaps the least likely, is the Israeli option. Dabashi stated that Iran could “withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and build with haste a nuclear arsenal to match Israel’s.” While Israel has never officially admitted to or denied having nuclear weapons, its possession of them is perhaps the worst keto secret in the Middle East. By this point, most states operate under the assumption that it has an advanced programme featuring both land and sea-based capabilities. 

Israel built its programme by stealing nuclear secrets through a spy programme known as Lakam. Through Lakam, powerful figures arose in industries such as Hollywood, but these people were secretly in the employ of Israel’s government as they worked to siphon nuclear secrets. Due to the persecution of the Jews during the Holocaust, Israel’s nuclear programme, and its spies within America, grew beyond reproach. If one were to accuse an Israeli spy, the common defense would be to argue that the accuser is antisemitic, a defense which would shift the argument from claims, no matter how justified. Similarly, Israel’s not-so-secret nuclear programme continues to exist without international condemnation due to its unique status. 

Iran could argue against the unfairness of the situation while covertly developing its own arsenal. While this would be a relatively easy – Israeli intelligence estimates that Iran is less than a year away from producing a nuclear weapon – it would have far-reaching and perhaps irreversible consequences. So far, Iran has only breached a couple of limits that were set by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and all of those actions can simply be undone, said Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman for Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization. If a deal is not reached by September, Tehran will break another provision of the agreement, but that too will be painless to rollback should a deal be reached. 

Going the Israeli route, however, and extricating itself from the nonproliferation treaty would undoubtably draw intense international backlash, particularly from Israel, the United States, and Saudi Arabia. Already, Israel is engaging Iranian soldiers and proxy groups across Syria and Afghanistan, so it would have little hesitation with starting a full-scale war.

The Egyptian option is more intriguing because of its broader implications for the region. In 2015, Egypt pushed the United Nations to consider a weapons of mass destruction ban for the Middle East. The measure would have brought together representatives from the region’s governments for a conference to discuss the idea, but the idea was killed by former US President Barack Obama and his Secretary of State, John Kerry. Why would they have argued against it? Dabashi points to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who coincidentally thanked both of them after the idea was shot down. 

Iran could renew Egypt’s call by arguing that it would bring about more regional stability and peace. Once again, Israel and Saudi Arabia would likely oppose it as the latter is in the process of building out its own programme, thanks to US help. But by offering to put an end to its own programme, Iran would undoubtedly earn some good will among its neighbors, a vast majority of whom have no nuclear capabilities nor even ambitions. 

Backed into a Corner

Recent developments with Iran’s geopolitical situation are going to force Tehran to at some point make a move. While US President Donald Trump renewed sanction waivers, an unexpected move which Iran is likely to appreciate, its economy has slipped too far for it to be enough at this point. Continued action in the Strait of Hormuz, with Iran threatening to take complete control of the shipping channel, is one of the only cards Iran has left to play. It has been unsuccessful in convincing European leaders to give it some economic relief despite two meetings last week. 

Therefore, Irani leadership is likely reaching its breaking point. Faced with an international community that seems to have no intention of providing economic support, Tehran will hit back by exercising greater control over oil shipments. However, this action is designed to pressure the opposing powers into coming to the discussion table or taking favorable action, but neither seem to be happening anytime soon. Therefore, it is worth considering what will happen if the JCPOA completely falls apart. In this event, Tehran has two paths it could follow, one being the successful covert Israeli nuclear program, and the other the failed Egyptian attempt at a nuclear-free Middle East. 

L'articolo Iran Has Options if Nuclear Deal Completely Falls Apart proviene da InsideOver.

Diplomats representing the Iran Nuclear Deal signatories held two meetings this week solely to discuss the ongoing Iranian nuclear issue. On Sunday, representatives from Germany, France, Great Britain, Russia, China, and the European Union met with counterparts from Iran. While nothing solid came from the Sunday gathering in Vienna, they did leave in agreement on two key points and resolved to hold higher-level discussions in the near future. 

According to Fu Cong, lead negotiator for Beijing, all parties in attendance agreed that salvaging the 2015 nuclear agreement was in the best interests for all involved. Since US President Donald Trump imposed wide-ranging sanctions on Iran, the nation’s economy has been in a free fall. In response, the Irani government broke two conditions of the accord by exceeding enrichment levels and stockpile limits in early July. Those actions have failed to bring the US back to the negotiating table, but European leaders are more than willing to hold talks with representatives from Iran. 

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi said that his nation would continue to downscale its honoring of the nuclear deal’s conditions until a fair solution is met. For Tehran, that solution involves economic relief and most pertinently, a means to resume its oil sales across the world. Oil is the primary driver of the Iranian economy and, since US sanctions, exports have fallen to nearly 10 percent of their previous levels. While he did not receive any assurances on Sunday, Araghchi was pleased with the discussions and said “the atmosphere was constructive.” 

Upon leaving the summit, Fu said that there was unanimous objection to the US sanctions and their application outside of America. While the sanctions come from neither the EU or United Nations, many companies and nations have chosen to cancel their business with Iran for fear of repercussions from Washington. Trump has displayed a willingness and ability to retaliate against nations by way of tariffs and even to target individual companies as in the case of Chinese telecom giant Huawei. 

China is one of the few states still purchasing Iranian oil, an action that the diplomats commended, but their decision not to join China is an obvious sticking point. From Iran’s point of view, it could be argued that Beijing is still working with Tehran, so if European powers approve of this, why shouldn’t they do the same? 

At another meeting in Brussels on Monday, European representatives expressed hope that Iran will return to compliance by abiding by the 2015 accord, but it is clear that time is running out. In a few weeks, the deadline for Trump to extend sanctions waivers will pass. The waivers are currently used by several nations across Europe, Russia and China. They are targeted towards the nuclear industry and the conversion of Iranian reactors as a coordinated effort to limit its nuclear production capabilities. Once the waivers expire, provided Trump decides not to renew them, diplomats at the meeting are worried it might push Iran to increase its nuclear efforts. Currently, Iran still allows inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency to verify its nuclear production, but the door is open for it to revoke their access. 

As an interim measure to help the Iranian economy, Europe launched INSTEX, which is essentially a trade platform with Iran that operates on a barter system as opposed to the US dollar. Critics of the program point out that the products currently offered on it are not sanctioned, thereby reducing its usability, but leaders on Monday discussed the idea of allowing oil to be traded on it as well. If they take that step, the move would certainly receive condemnation from Washington. Thus far, the American position has relied on a “maximum pressure” approach, according to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. This means stifling Iranian oil exports by strong-arming other nations to cancel their imports. 

Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iranian foreign minister, was still in New York this weekend where he attended the UN Economic and Social Council. Europe must turn its words into actions, he said when speaking about the ongoing battle to save the nuclear deal. A desire to keep the deal “is totally different from being ready to make the investments required to save the deal,” Zarif said. 

Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman Geng Shuang put the onus on Washington to resolve the dispute. Both China and Russia are in agreement that the US has created the crisis by leaving Iran with no other options. 

It is “better for the one who made the trouble to fix it,” Shuang stated. He also preached that both sides must remain calm and committed to diplomacy. 

In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered harsh words for European diplomats working to save the nuclear deal, comparing it to the “European appeasement in the 1930’s” of Hitler’s Germany. For Israel, an Iranian nuclear program is viewed as wholly unacceptable, despite the regular IAEA inspections and Tehran’s insistence that it is not aiming to produce nuclear weapons. 

As all signatories to the deal, aside from the US, work to save it, there is a growing feeling that there must be definitive action. The meetings this week could be viewed as a step in the right direction, but until they produce results, the Iranian economy remains in limbo. 

L'articolo Global Powers Hold Talks with Iran to Mitigate Crisis proviene da InsideOver.

Israel is stepping up its military campaign against Iranian assets located in Iraq, according to the Asharq Al-Aswat newspaper in London. The primary targets of the attacks, which were carried out by an F-35 aircraft, were warehouses which contained arms shipments from Iran. The Israel Air Force struck the Camp Ashraf military base and a nearby storage facility twice in the past two weeks, with the most recent strike occuring on Sunday. The pinpoint attacks on Camp Ashraf, which is located near the Iran – Iraq border, was part of a broader Israeli strategy of hunting down Iranian targets spread across the region, as well as Iranian-backed proxy militias such as Hezbollah.

In Sunday’s attack, several Iranian advisors were listed among the injured. It appeared to be a coordinated effort to neutralize deployment of ballistic missiles. Locations in Syria have also been hot targets, such as a Syrian army base in Tel Al-Hara. This Golan Heights target was identified by intelligence sources as hosting Iranian-supported militias. The Israeli effort to combat Tehran’s expansion across the region is notable because it is the only state to openly attack Iran’s military.

“Israel is the only country in the world that has been killing Iranians for two years now,” said Tzachi Hanegbi, Israel’s regional cooperation minister.

Axis of Resistance

As a response to Israel’s military aggression, Iran has been focused on bringing together several regional powers to counter it. Alongside Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and the Gaza Strip. Amir Al-Moussawi, an Iranian diplomat, recently gave an interview for Felesteen al-Yawm, an Egyptian news outlet. It was then that he revealed the idea about creating a united opposition to Israel. As a large part of Tehran’s power is extended through its proxy network, it should come as little surprise that Hamas leaders recently visited Iran as part of the discussions surrounding the ‘axis of resistance.’

Hamas’ relationship with Tehran soured during the Syrian Civil War, which saw Iran back Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad. At the time, Hamas was based out of Syria and opted to side with the rebels. The situation quickly deteriorated and forced the group to abandon the country for Turkey. However, with the Israeli threat growing and the issue of Palestinian persecution on the West Bank, leaders from both sides now believe working together would be in their best interests. Few things unite nations stronger than a common enemy, and Israel has worked hard to stay at the top of their lists. The recent attacks in Iraq and Syria will most likely continue as the Israelis work to stifle the threat of a resistance movement before it gains any sort of momentum, and they have no qualms about continuing military strikes.

“We still didn’t see the Iranians backing off from their intention to entrench themselves militarily in Syria, and this campaign isn’t over” Hangebi said. “But they know exactly who to mess with, and who can be annoyed. We can’t.”

Tensions surrounding Iran have run high this year, as both Israel and the United States have engaged it in a war of words. More than anything, aggressive messages from all three parties have led many to speculate that an actual war could break out. The fallout from the Iran Nuclear Deal has added another component to the already volatile situation. While Israel has nuclear weapons, Iran does not and it would be unthinkable for Israel to ever allow Tehran to pursue them. Consequently, as Iran began to exceed limits set in the 2015 agreement, Israeli leaders have become even more vocal than usual.

Stealth Capabilities

Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu toured an air force base earlier this month and posed in front of recently-delivered F-35 jets while filming a message for Tehran.

“Recently, Iran has been threatening the destruction of Israel. It would do well to remember that these planes can reach anywhere in the Middle East, including Iran and certainly Syria,” Netanyahu warned.

This week, Iran cautioned that its defense capabilities are able to detect stealth fighters, but it’s unclear whether or not that includes the new aircraft. Last year, several F-35s successfully navigated across Iran airspace even flying across military bases without Tehran noticing. A major sponsor of the F-35 program, Israel has received 16 out of the 50 planes it will operate by 2024.

The continued onslaught of Israeli airstrikes on Iranian targets spread across the region will continue as long as Israel feels threatened. Tehran’s attempts to disburse equipment to proxy militias and to create an ‘axis of resistance’ make it clear that the situation will not improve in the near future, especially while Iran operates outside of the nuclear deal.

L'articolo How Israel is Countering Iran in Iraq and Syria proviene da InsideOver.