Coming War With Iran - All Iran News Here

[bigron]

Iran Vows Mideast Without US, Israel
By

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27452.htm

February 11, 2011  -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that a new Middle East will be created in the near future without the United States and Israel. "I assure you that despite all evil and complicated plans, and thanks to the resistance of nations, there will be a new Middle East but without the US and the Zionist regime [of Israel]," he told the Iranians gathering at Tehran's Azadi Square to mark the 32nd anniversary of the Islamic Revolution.

The Iranian president also urged the arrogant powers not to interfere in the internal affairs of the region's countries such as Egypt and Tunisia.

"What are you doing in Afghanistan? What are these military bases in the region for? Are you compassionate or hypocrite?" Ahmadinejad asked.

He also argued that the West is deceitful in claiming that with the two-state slogan it can pave the way for Israel to dominate the region.

Hailing the revolution in Egypt, the Iranian president warned the Egyptian people to be vigilant, insisting that "It is your right to be free. It is your right to decide your government, and it is your right to freely express yourself about your country and global issues."

"Be united and do not fear corrupt governments, and victory is near," he added.

In Egypt, thousands of people gathered outside the presidential palace in Cairo on Friday after President Hosni Mubarak refused to step down amid repeated calls for his resignation.

Tensions are expected to escalate further on the eighteenth day of pro-democracy protests as millions are to come together at mosques for Muslim communal prayers on Friday

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27452.htm

[bigron]

Iran - Khiaban No. 82: On February 14 Demonstrations


by Reza Fiyouzat

Revolutionary Flowerpot Society, February 13, 2011



See Below for a lead article from the latest Khiaban newspaper, #82 (Saturday, February 12, 2011).


After the revolutionary movements by the people of Tunisia and Egypt succeeded in starting the process of transformation of their societies, the winds of revolutionary possibilities have blown across the region. Although the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions are nowhere nearly finished, and indeed everybody involved in them knows well that the long and hard work has just begun, as first steps go, the first steps of the revolutionary process have now been successful. As a result, the people have learned what they are capable of doing. The next steps are far more complicated, but even at this stage, the audacity of the Tunisian and the Egyptian people has inspired millions across the region.


Iran is no exception. The reactions of the dictators in Tehran have been farcical at best. But deep down they know they are on notice, too.


Iranian people saw their 2009 post-electoral-coup movement brutally suppressed, with thousands arrested, hundreds put on show-trials, tortured confessions aired on national TV, they watched their children raped, threatened to get raped, or they watched their heros suffer virtual death sentences in macabre dungeons for daring to peacefully demonstrate in the streets and to demand their rights (like Osanloo, the leader of Tehran's bus drivers' union, who very recently suffered a heart attack, simply because prison authorities had been deliberately ignoring his deteriorating health conditions).


This year, people of Iran have seen an unprecedented number of executions of political activists, while on the economic front they have observed the removal of subsidies of one essential product after another, meaning the people in Iran must now eat at world market prices while earning (very low) Iranian wages. All these social and economic factors were spreading a deep sense of despair among the Iranian people. The defeat of their movement at the hands of the brutal government was the wound, and the salt was all the executions and the economic punishment.


The winds of possibilities for change, however, have come a-blowing, thanks to the courage and ingenuity, as well as the spontaneity, of the Tunisians and the Egyptians. There are protests organized in Iran, for Monday, February 14, in support of the people of Egypt and Tunisia, and hopefully in support of the annihilated rights of the Iranian people!


Long live the revolution in Egypt and Tunisia!
Long Live People's Self-Organized Free Associations!


On February 14 Demonstrations

by: Alef

The revolution in Tunisia and the insurrection in Egypt have affected the Iranian political atmosphere as well. The organized movement of the people against dicatatorships, which took the form of street uprisings, led in Tunisia to the dictator fleeing, and in Egypt to the fracturing of the system. In Algeria, Jordan, Yemen and some other Arab countries too, we are witnessing vast masses of the people taking to the public arena. Masses are revolting against misery and the suffocating political systems, and are demanding other forms of social organization for their countries. In this regional revolutionary wave, a multi-layered movement has taken shape: the youth (whether unemployed or as social actors from layers that are educated and employed) and dominated social classes, particularly working classes, are among those in the frontlines of the battles against political monopoly of the few and capitalist-dictated [endless] profit accumulation.

In Iran, the effects of this wave have been swift and vast. The society, which has been witnessing the endless executions of its socially conscious actors at the hands of the blood drenched system, deep in the midst of hopelessness and despair, suddenly found a new hope. Our society objectively saw the real possibility of revolution and transformation; and that, merely based on the collective will and solidarity, and despite all the superpowers. "Tunisia could!" The insurrections by the Arabic speaking people have helped spread a critical view of ruling ideas and ideologies. The [reformist] idea that revolutions are dangerous -- and that the only available path is to convince the rulers to change their ways -- melted away as swiftly as a snowflake in August sun.

A new critical self-questioning began: Why and how come we didn't have the slightest achievements, while with demonstrations comprising fewer people and in a short time, both Tunisia and Egypt started taking steps towards transforming their societies, yet Iran is still living with the rule of a macabre gang of murderers? This political atmosphere brought with it a wave of re-thinking of reformist ideas and [the actions of reformist] leaders. People had to rely on their own power and had to think of new paths. The idea of restarting the struggle again was spreading. There arose murmurs of organizing demonstrations in support of the people of Egypt and Tunisia.

In such an atmosphere, Moussavi and Karroubi announced for demonstrations on Bahman 25/February 14; a step that up to this moment has resulted in the arrests of political activists. However, everybody knows that these arrests cannot stop the flood that will come. Moussavi has tried, in his planned action, to not fall behind the social political body, and at the same time impose his own leadership. Additionally, if possible, he wants to prevent the transformation of people's self-questioning into a new movement. However, the reality is that no other social force had the capability or the organization to determine a day to take to the streets. This fact cannot be concealed or denied.

Yet, the people who will participate on February 14 will this time bring to the streets the seeds of new self-organizational forms in their collective consciousness. People have learned from Tunisians and the Egyptians that without your own social fabric, without connections and organization, it is not possible to escape the trap of the deals made by the men of ruling systems. New self-organizational forms are needed in order to bring forth new ideas and to fight for them. Today, the old world is dying. A new world is learning to fly in these days of rage in the region.

 
http://revolutionaryflowerpot.blogspot.com/2011/02/on-february-14-demonstrations.html

[bigron]

Published on Monday, February 14, 2011 by The Guardian/UK


Iran Protests: Reinvigorated Activists Take to the Streets in Thousands

Riot police and basiji militia use teargas on protesters, with reports that one demonstrator was killed in clashes


by Saeed Kamali Dehghan

Thousands of defiant protesters in Iran's capital have clashed with security officials as they marched in a banned rally. One person was reported killed, with dozens injured and many more arrested.

MORE

https://www.commondreams.org/sites/commondreams.org/files/imagecache/headline_image/article_images/an-anti-government-protes-008.jpg

[bigron]

Middle East
Feb 16, 2011 
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB16Ak04.html 
   
Now Iran feels the heat


By Kaveh L Afrasiabi

On Monday, as Tehran once again became the scene of clashes between the security forces and demonstrators defying the government's ban on street rallies, the paradoxical impact of the Arab world's democratic awakening on Iran became glaringly obvious.

External, that is, geopolitical gains, may go hand-in-hand with political losses at home, and much depends on the government's political savvy to close a credibility gap, as reflected in its open embrace of Egypt's revolution while, simultaneously, trying to shut down the opposition movement on its streets known as the Green movement.

Thousands of protesters took to the streets in answer to calls from opposition parties in support of the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt that have led to the leaders in those countries stepping down. They met strong resistance from the security forces, who fired into the air and used tear gas in the streets near Azadi (Freedom) Square, the announced site of the rally. At least one person was reported killed and many injured.

The rally soon turned into an anti-government demonstration, as happened in the 2009 street protests following disputed elections that saw President Mahmud Ahmadinejad earn a second term.

Notably on Monday, though, rather than anger being directed at Ahmadinejad and his administration, sections of the crowd were heard shouting against Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the heart of power in the Islamic Republic. This is an unusual development.

In contrast to muted comments on the weeks-long street unrest in Egypt, United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed support for "the aspirations of the people" who took to the streets in Iran on Monday.

With important parliamentary and presidential elections due next year and the year after, respectively, the struggle for free and unfettered voting has taken on a new significance in light of the apparent cascading effect of the Arab revolutions on Iran.
 
 
MORE

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB16Ak04.html

[bigron]

Middle East
Feb 17, 2011 
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB17Ak02.html 
 
THE ROVING EYE


Iran's post-Islamist generation


By Pepe Escobar

What has just happened in Iran?

There's no question the military dictatorship of the mullahtariat - that conglomerate uniting President Mahmud Ahmadinejad's faction, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his clerical circle, and the military/business complex ruled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) - very much followed to the minute the extraordinary chain of events in Egypt.

And then suddenly they are confronted by a potential remix of Tahrir Square right in their own backyard (Azadi Square in Tehran).

What to do? They could not possibly relax their iron grip on the rules of their game; so to deal with their own protests, they resorted to the usual package of tactics - pre-emptive detention and repression, but stopping short of a bloodbath.

Thus, since early last week at least 30 Iranian activists and journalists got that knock on the door in the dead of night and then "disappeared". A threatening wave of text messages warned people not to attend the rallies. Internet speed was reduced to a crawl and search engines blocked from searching the words "25 Bahman", the date of February 14 according to the Iranian calendar.

This Monday saw hordes of anti-riot police and Bassiji militia on motorbikes riding two-by-two clutching clubs; an orgy of tear gas and paint ball guns; state media tarnishing the mostly young protesters as "seditionists", "spies" and "counter-revolutionaries" who should be crushed; and at least 1,500 people arrested and transferred to sinister Evin prison, plus two confirmed dead. Shades of Mubarakism, anyone?

Former prime minister Hossein Mousavi is part of the old school establishment. His brand of opposition wants reform from within - not revolution; in this aspect, Iran is definitely not Egypt. Mousavi was very smart. He scheduled a march of solidarity with Tunisia and Egypt on the same day Turkish President Abdullah Gul was visiting Tehran.

Any hardcore repression would seriously shatter Tehran's regional reputation with the Arab street, to the benefit of Turkey - especially with Khamenei claiming that the 1979 Islamic Revolution was a key source of inspiration for Tahrir Square.

Which brings us to the key question of allowing the rally to proceed. The government said the demonstration was illegal. But then there were insistent rumors that Gul had asked the government to issue a last-minute permit - and that was accepted. Central Iranian state news confirmed it. But then Deputy Interior Minister Mahmoud Abbaszadeh Meshkini denied it.

The key point is that this time protesters went all out - targeting Khamenei himself, not Ahmadinejad. The most popular chant was Mubarak, Ben Ali! Nobateh Seyyed Ali! ("Mubarak, [Tunisia's] Ben Ali! Now is Seyed Ali [Khamenei's] turn!) And next in line was Khamenei haya kon! Mubarak ro negah kon! ("Khamenei, shame on you! Look at Mubarak!")

Estimates about the size of the crowds vary wildly, from only a few hundred involved in what could be characterized as a rebellion of wealthy north Tehran students, to no less than 350,000 people from all walks of life - as quoted by a Tehran bureau correspondent (affiliated to the US Public Broadcasting Service network), filling "a radius of about half a kilometer to 400 meters on both sides of Enghelab Avenue".
 
MORE

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB17Ak02.html

 
 

[bigron]

Iran confirms arrest of 1500 protesters


Radiozamaneh



February 15, 2011

http://www.radiozamaneh.com/english/content/iran-confirms-arrest-1500-protesters

The Iranian judiciary today announced the names of 1,500 people arrested in yesterday’s demonstrations and transferred to Evin Prison, the Human Rights Reporters Committee reports.

Families of detainees gathered in front of the Revoutionary court, where the detainees' files were being initiated, but they were attacked by Special Guards of the security forces and dispersed.

The authorities are refusing to inform families about what’s happening to individual detainees.

The announcement of the 1,500 names comes after security commander Ahmadreza Radan confirmed to the media that 150 people had been arrested. He said the protests had been carried out by a handful of seditionists.

Gholamhosein Mohseni Ejei, a spokesman for the judiciary and Iran’s prosecutor, told Fars news agency that yesterday’s events were "designed and supported by the U.S. and anti-Revolutionaries including the monafeghin."

Iranian authorities refer to the dissident political group People Mojahedin Organization as monafeghin.

"In view of earlier warnings," Mohseni Ejei said, "the judiciary will deal quickly and firmly with the main perpetrators and those who disturbed public order and peace."

Yesterday Iranians took to the streets of Tehran and major cities in response to an opposition rally call. The mass demonstrations confirmed that post-election spirit of protest remains strong.


http://www.radiozamaneh.com/english/content/iran-confirms-arrest-1500-protesters



 

[bigron]

Four Myths About Iran's Clerical Regime

Is Ahmadinejad an anti-imperialist, or really a deceptive populist?


by Saeed Rahnema

Ahmad Chalabi, left, with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran.

February 15, 2011

http://www.themarknews.com/articles/3660-four-myths-about-iran-s-clerical-regime?page=6

First Posted: Jan 07 2011

Is Ahmadinejad an anti-imperialist, or really a deceptive populist? Let's address the illusions that lead people to support the Iranian president and his regime.

The Iranian Revolution of 1979, with its original demands for national independence, democracy, political freedom, and social justice, was one of the most important events of the 20th century.

It was initiated by secular intellectuals, men and women, writers, artists, academics, students, civil servants, and workers. Yet, paradoxically it gave rise to a repressive and religious obscurantist regime.

Years of suppression by the Shah’s regime had left a vacuum that was effectively used by the clergy. Khomeini’s rhetoric from exile fooled us into thinking that the clergy would be engaged only in religious and spiritual matters and that the democratic demands of the Iranian people would be respected. The takeover of the American Embassy by Khomeini’s followers and the Iraqi invasion created an illusion that the clerical oligarchy was progressive and anti-imperialist.

In the incredible and lengthy three decades of Islamist rule in Iran, the country regressed in all aspects of life – the political, the social, the cultural, and the economic – and the Islamic regime itself went through various phases of transformation.

In the first phase, which coincided with the Iran-Iraq war and the increasing influence of Islamist militarists, the regime consolidated its power by co-opting or eliminating all opposition.

The second phase, following Khomeini’s death, was eight years of the neo-liberal policies of Rafsanjani – himself a billionaire cleric – under whose leadership a new class of capitalists emerged, consisting of clerics, their family members, and military/Islamic Guard officers. The gap between the rich and the poor widened extensively. Many Islamists who were waiting to go to heaven discovered heaven on earth in north Tehran.

The third phase was eight years of another cleric, Khatami, with the promise of reform. Although no major reform took place, the relatively lax political atmosphere revitalized the civil society on the one hand and angered the fundamentalists and the far right on the other.

The fourth phase started in 2005, and a military-clerical alliance pushed back the "traditional right" clerics and established the most obscurantist version of Islamic fundamentalism in post-revolutionary Iran with the election of Ahmadinejad as president. With the collapse of Khatami’s reformist agenda, the marginalized masses had rallied around the crude populism of Ahmadinejad.

Among other things, Ahmadinejad and his associates are firm believers in their mission to expedite the return of the Shi’i messiah, Mahdi, who they believe resides in a well in the village of Chamkaran near Qum. A cabinet member regularly drops a copy of Ahmadinejad’s policies in the well to get his approval (this is not a joke).

Each of these phases attracted attention from various individuals and groups in the West. Rafsanjani attracted that of the neo-liberal right and those interested in investing in Iran. Khatami attracted that of the liberal intellectuals in the West and those Iranians who had illusions of the regime reforming itself. Ahmadinejad, with his anti-Israeli, anti-American rhetoric, gained the support of a portion (not all) of the left intellectuals in the West.

Focusing on the present, I want to decode and discuss the myths that lead certain individuals in the face of American and Israeli threats to support, implicitly or explicitly, Ahmadinejad and the regime. What are these myths?

Myth No. 1: The regime is democratic.

One of the main demands of the revolution of 1979 was democracy, and Khomeini and his supporters, who believed in the "absolute sovereignty of the jurist," could not openly ignore this. That’s why there is an elected parliament in Iran. But all candidates must be verified by an unelected 12-member ultra-conservative religious council (the Guardianship Council), which decides who can or cannot run, without any explanation.

The same body that is appointed by the Supreme Leader acts as an upper house and can reject or accept any bill passed by the parliament. That body also chooses who can run for the presidency. It usually selects several trusted candidates from within the establishment and lets the public pick one. Even in this process they cheat, as they did in the last election in June 2009.

The Supreme Leader is the most important position. He is selected for life by an all-Mullah Assembly of Experts. He controls the armed forces, the Islamic guards and militia, foreign policy, and state media. He also controls massive religious endowments, receives a share of oil revenues to be spent at his discretion, and oversees a most dreadful network of parallel security and intelligence establishments and an incredible repressive apparatus.

A crucial aspect of democracy and democratic rights relates to gender. Islamist gender politics is openly and unapologetically against gender equality. Had it not been for the brave women of Iran and their loosely organized groups, most women would have by now been pushed back from the public sphere.

The youth of Iran cannot even decide what dress to wear. University students lack any freedom, and their demands are brutally suppressed. Through a bizarre star- or negative-point system, student activists are expelled easily from the university.

Another major aspect of democracy relates to the rights of ethnic and religious minorities. The Kurdish, the Baluch, the Turkmen, and other national minorities have been brutally suppressed. Under the regime of the Mullahs, Iran is being depleted of its religious minorities. Here I give you the latest figures extracted from the government’s own statistics. In the period of 1996-2006, Iran’s Jewish population – the largest in the Middle East after Israel – was reduced by 25 per cent, from 12,700 to 9,200. During the same period, the number of Zoroastrians, the original religion of Iran, was reduced from 27,900 to 19,800. Those not identifying their religion increased from about 89,000 to over 205,000 (these include Bahá'ís, atheists, etc.). Only the number of Christians has increased, which is another story, partly related to conversions.

As we speak, leaders of the women’s movement, the labour movement, students’ movements, and religious minorities are in jail. So much for the illusion of democracy.

Myth No. 2: The regime is anti-imperialist.

Some call Ahmadinejad "the anti-imperialist president." The basis of their claim is nothing but Ahmadinejad’s anti-American, anti-Israeli, and pro-Palestinian rhetoric. Anti-imperialism is a progressive attribute and does not apply to a reactionary regime that itself has dreams of expanding its influence beyond its borders.

Ahmadinejad shrewdly uses his anti-American, anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian rhetoric to attract attention and gain support from the people who are actually suffering from wrong and oppressive policies of the U.S., Israel, and other powers in the Middle East. The plight of the Palestinian people is very real, but what has the Iranian regime done in their support, other than utter empty words and support like-minded Islamists in the region?

Ironically, Ahmadinejad has played anti-imperialism in reverse, by providing ammunition to the most hawkish and reactionary fundamentalist factions of Israel. Ysrael Beitenu of Avigdoor Liberman owes much of its 15 seats in the Knesset to Ahmadinejad. A right-wing Israeli analyst said it well: Ahmadinejad is god-given!

Had it not been for misguided American foreign policy from the time of Reagan to George W. Bush, this same regime would have been much closer to the Americans. The Mullahs are very pragmatic; they got help from Reagan and Israel during the Iran-Iraq war. Israel was among the main providers of arms, such as Katyusha shells, anti-tank missiles, air-to-surface missiles, and crucial spare parts for Phantom jets to Iran, worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

After the American invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Iranian regime collaborated with the Americans in the Bonn Agreement and since then has continuously supported Hamid Karzai. Iran also implicitly supported the American invasion of Iraq.

Anti-imperialism should also be reflected in a state’s economic policies. Ahmadinejad has been very pragmatic in relation to foreign capital. While foreign direct investment (FDI) has remained limited since the revolution and has declined in recent years (now as low as $1.5 billion), Ahmadinejad has lifted some of the original restrictions on FDI, and for portfolio investments has even allowed foreign companies, for the first time, to buy shares of Iranian companies on the TSE (the Tehran Stock Exchange).

Amazingly, Ahmadinejad signed a colonial-type oil-concession agreement with Chinese companies (Sinopac and later China Petroleum). The conditions of the concession offered by the Chinese were so outrageous that the former president, Khatami, did not sign it – but Ahmadinejad did, and he even added to the concession ( 35-year concession on the basis of 55/45 revenue share – the lesser figure for Iran – for one million barrels per day, for which the costs of explorations are based on 40/60 – the bigger share of the costs for Iran. Iran can sell only 30 per cent of the extracted oil from fields assigned independently, and Iran has to use 45 per cent of its revenues for purchasing goods from China. Many rightly compare this to the 1906 D’Arcy and later the BP concession).
 
MORE

http://www.themarknews.com/articles/3660-four-myths-about-iran-s-clerical-regime?page=6

[bigron]

Hypocritical opportunism

Morning Star Online


http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index.php/news/content/view/full/101125

February 15, 2011


If US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has the interests of the Iranian people at heart, she should stop claiming the brave campaigners on the streets of Tehran, Isfahan and other cities as her allies.

Her opportunism is used by Iran's Supreme Leader regime to falsely paint the demonstrators as US stooges.

Clinton claims that the Obama administration took a consistent line as revolutionary events unfolded in Egypt.

It was against violence, it supported universal human rights for the Egyptian people and it backed political change that would guarantee positive outcomes.

And she insists that Washington is committed to those three principles for Iran.

For some reason, the secretary of state sees no need to include the peoples of Yemen, Bahrain, Algeria, Jordan, Libya and Saudi Arabia in this festival of peace, human rights and positive outcomes.

If she had not already rewritten history, she would recall that Washington was paralysed in the face of Egyptian mass resistance to the brutal Mubarak dictatorship that the US had succoured for three decades.

Against violence?

Mubarak's Egypt was Washington's partner in crime in torturing extraordinary rendition victims.

It routinely brutalised its own citizens while its thugs murdered hundreds of people during the Liberation Square protests.

When Clinton observed today: "History has shown us that repression often sows the seeds for revolution down the road," she could have been speaking of Egypt, but she wasn't.

As usual, she was referring to Iran, with which the US is obsessed.

While Mubarak's brutality was rewarded with a £1.5bn US annual arms handout, Tehran has faced decades of sanctions, leading many to imagine mistakenly that the Iranian regime is an anti-imperialist stronghold.

Consider Khamenei's response to the popular upsurges in Tunisia and Egypt, which he saw as drawing their inspiration from Iran's regime and opening the way to an Islamic state.

Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood rejected this interpretation, speaking of "the Egyptian people's revolution not an Islamic revolution."

It stressed that all strands of religious belief, Muslim and Christian, together with secular political groups were involved.

The insincerity of Khamenei's welcome for revolutionary change in north Africa was exemplified by his government's ban on a demonstration proposed by opposition figures Mir-Hussein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi.

MORE

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index.php/news/content/view/full/101125

 

[bigron]

Middle East
Feb 24, 2011 
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB24Ak03.html 
 
Iran on new voyage of discovery


By Kaveh L Afrasiabi

"The Americans try hard to not be the target of these huge popular uprisings, but will fail because people have realized that the policies of Americans and their cronies are the causes of humiliation and division among nations. As a result, the key to resolving people's problems rests on ending America's arrangement in the region."
- Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei

On Monday, with two Iranian warships about to sail through the Suez Canal - much to the chagrin of Israel which viewed the move "with utmost gravity'" - Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei addressed a group of foreign dignitaries from the Muslim world and confidently spoke of the dawn of a new era in the Middle East, reflecting a "new Islamic awakening".

With the fall of two pro-West dictators in Tunisia and Egypt and the rapidly evolving protests in the largely Shi'ite Bahrain, home to the US's Fifth Fleet, Iranian leaders have ample justification for their confident assertion of a "new Middle East" that is increasingly less subservient to Western interests and more and more independent and assertive.

An Iranian frigate and a supply ship passed through the Suez on the way to Syria after receiving approval from Egyptian authorities - the first time such vessels had navigated the waterway since before the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Iran was trying to exploit instability across the region.

Under international law, only ships from countries at war with Egypt are barred from passing through the Suez Canal. But military ships need prior permission from Egypt's Defense and Foreign Ministries.

"I think that today, we can see what an unstable region we live in, a region in which Iran tries to exploit the situation that has been created in order to expand its influence by passing warships through the Suez canal," Netanyahu was reported as saying. The Israeli Foreign Ministry called the ships "a provocation" that should be "dealt with by the international community".

The consensus among Iran's foreign policy experts is that the Egyptian military's decision to allow the passage of the Alvand and the Khargh was a significant ice-breaker that sets a positive tone for a much-needed improvement in Iran-Egypt relations.

Accused by the Israeli media of "conniving" with Iran over the ships' passage, the Egyptian military leaders - who now effectively run the country following the ouster of president Hosni Mubarak in January - may now accelerate the process of normalization of relations with Iran ahead of elections scheduled for September. This is irrespective of the fact that they have pledged that the government will stick to all previous foreign obligations, including the Camp David peace treaty with Israel.

According to the Israeli paper Ha'aretz, Israel can no longer guarantee that Egypt will remain an ally against Iran. A more accurate interpretation might be that Israel fears Egypt becoming Iran's ally against Israel, thus denoting a change in the balance of forces to the detriment of the conservative bloc spurred by the United States and Israel to isolate Iran.

In the tumultuous times in the Middle East and North Africa, it is now pro-US regimes that are either being toppled or seriously contested by their own populations, giving the Iran-led bloc, that includes Syria, Lebanon's Hezbollah and Hamas in Gaza, the unique momentum to harvest a great deal of (geo) political gain. This would especially be the case if the present "domino effect" gives rise to a significant transformation of Bahrain's archaic political system.

Although Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US military, in his latest interview implicitly accused Iran of stirring the troubles in Bahrain, the fact is that many Bahraini Shi'ites look to Iraq's holy city of Najaf and the spiritual leadership of Ayatollah Ali Sistani, while a minority emulate the guidance of Khamenei.

Regardless, the inevitable empowerment of Bahrain's Shi'ites - who outnumber the ruling Sunnis - one way or another (such as through outright revolution or the government-proposed "national dialogue") , will be widely interpreted as an important gain for Iran. This will cause both Bahrain and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to demonstrate greater deference to Iran's rapidly rising power in the region. The GCC, created in 1981, comprises the Persian Gulf states of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

This recognition of the changing political tides favoring Iran, America's bete noir in the Middle East, can already be seen in Saudi Arabia's unprecedented decision to allow a port visit by Iran's warships (that traversed the Red Sea and the Suez en route to the Syrian port city of Latika). However, the olive branch to Iran might also have been motivated by Riyadh's fear of an uprising by its own discontented Shi'ites (about 2 million out of a population of 26 million).

This raises new questions regarding the future of US-Iran relations, in light of the uneasy coexistence of conflicting as well as shared interests between the two countries in the Middle East cauldron and beyond.

The US may now need to revise its coercive approach toward Iran over its nuclear program and refrain from further sanctions and the hitherto futile politics of isolating Iran, in order to get Tehran's confidence that cooperation on shared or parallel interests, such as containing the triple threats of the Taliban, Wahhabi extremism and drug trafficking, is feasible, not to mention regional stability.

In terms of the nuclear standoff, a prudent US move would be to consent to a nuclear fuel swap for Tehran's medical reactor, and to throw its weight behind the current United Nations-led efforts in the realm of a Middle East nuclear weapons free zone.

Also, the US may want to drop its objection to India's participation in an Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline; the economic logic of interdependence, in fueling political moderation, cannot and should not be ignored.

However, it is unlikely that Washington will ever recognize Tehran's prominent place in overall Middle Eastern affairs. Instead, as reflected by Mullen, the US continues to guide its policy through an Iran-phobic lens, as a result of which the grey area of "mutual interests" remains largely unexplored and untapped
 
MORE

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB24Ak03.html

[bigron]

Middle East
Feb 24, 2011 
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB24Ak04.html 
 
Tehran steps up crackdown


By Omid Memarian

SAN FRANCISCO - On Monday night, Iranian security agents raided the home of opposition leader Mehdi Karroubi, separating him from his wife, searching his house and arresting his son, Ali Karroubi, according to the local media outlet Saham News.

Karroubi's own website reports that percussion grenades were also detonated inside the house.

Meanwhile, Iran's other primary opposition leader, Mir Hossein Mousavi, has been cut off from the outside world under house arrest for at least the past two weeks, indications that the struggle between the Iranian government and its opponents is reaching new heights as popular uprisings sweep the region.

However, even putting their leaders under house arrest did not keep thousands of opposition supporters from turning out in city streets lined with police officers for two surprise gatherings on February 14 and 20.

Two years ago, protesters were demanding nullification of the presidential election that returned Mahmud Ahmadinejad to power. Today, their ire is largely aimed at Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. They chant that "After [president Hosni] Mubarak in Egypt and [Tunisian president Zine al-Abidine] Ben Ali in Tunisia, it is now Seyed Ali's [Khamenei] turn."

An informed source and former Iranian government official told Inter Press Service (IPS) that right after the February 14 protests, Heydar Moslehi, Iran's intelligence minister, attended a meeting with the supreme leader in which he asked for permission to arrest Karroubi and Mousavi. At the meeting, however, Khamenei criticized the Ministry of Information for its reports, asking why its analysis of popular participation in the gatherings had been so wrong.

"Iran's supreme leader routinely receives independent reports about the current state of affairs from the IRGC [Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps] commander, minister of information, armed forces commander, head of the Basiji [pro-government militia], and head of the Islamic Republic Broadcasting System," the source said on condition of anonymity.

"It appears that the reports he has received have contradicted the intensity of the protests. Therefore, though several extremist members of the parliament have demanded execution of the opposition leaders, official authorities' rhetoric only attempts to express support for the regime, and no further demands for their arrests or execution seem to be uttered publicly," the source said.
During his February 18 Friday prayer sermon, Ahmad Jannati, the head of Iran's conservative Guardian Council, called for isolating the two opposition leaders. "The doors to their homes must be shut. Their comings and goings must become limited. They must no longer be able to send and receive messages. Their telephones and Internet must be cut off and they must become prisoners inside their homes," he said.

Thus far, Iranian authorities have stopped short of arresting Mousavi and Karroubi, afraid that such action would only galvanize the opposition further.

Officials in Tehran usually call the protesters "rioters" and state their numbers as "a few hundred". Some sources reported that during Monday's gatherings, they observed many boys who appeared 15 to 16 years old among the police lining major squares, clad in bullet-proof vests and holding clubs in their hands.

A student activist who was present at last week's protests told IPS that people were a lot angrier than before. "During last year's gatherings, no matter how much the plainclothes, Basiji, and police forces beat up the people, they wouldn't reciprocate. But during the recent two protests, people are determined to react in kind whenever the police engage in violence and beatings," he said
 
MORE

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB24Ak04.html

 

[shipgeek]

How can we trust news about Iran coming from U.S. sources?

Me thinks I will never trust it.

[skyfind]

How can we trust news about Iran coming from U.S. sources?

Me thinks I will never trust it.

But you can understand the propaganda within and somehow predict what will happen next

Here is some more news, let´s see what it says:

'No chance for coup in Iran'

Renewed protests in Iran have the world asking whether the ayatollah regime will meet with the same fate as those of Tunisia and Egypt, but an Iranian journalist who spoke to Ynet Monday says the answer is no.
 
"Iran is not Egypt; the regime has various councils to determine policies and plans for such a contingency," the 28-year old journalist from Tehran, who asked to remain anonymous, explained.

 He claimed that, unlike Egypt, the opposition would not just have to topple the president but rather the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In addition, he said, the ayatollah regime is well-guarded by the loyal Revolutionary Guard.
 
"Egypt had a president, we have a regime," he explained. "If Khamenei falls, he will be replaced by someone exactly like him."
 
The journalist conversed with Ynet's reporter via Google chat, which was blocked on Monday by the Iranian government in efforts to prevent information from leaving the country. But many Iranians have found ways to bypass the attempt at censorship.

At least two people were killed during renewed anti-government protests Monday in Tehran, though the turnout seemed lower than last week's revolt.

Last week a British newspaper published a letter suggesting that Revolutionary Guard officers have pledged not to fire at protestors.
 
The Iranian journalist addressed the possibility that the officers will join the anti-regime protest. "Is that a joke? Nothing could not be further from the truth. It’s like saying that people in Israel want to tear down the Western Wall like the Berlin Wall. It will never happen."

The difference between the Revolutionary Guard and the average Iranian is quite substantial, he explained.

The only way to topple the Iranian regime is by a military coup which is unlikely, he added. "Should Iran be attacked the Revolutionary Guard will start a third world war," he noted.
 
Israel's President Shimon Peres was previously quoted as saying "Iran will be stopped by the people."
 
At least two people were killed during renewed anti-government protests Monday in Tehran, though the turnout seemed lower than last week's revolt.

Full article: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4032190,00.html

---> The Jasmine Revolution may be used to "try" to overthrow Iran government, that the world see it as a real enemy, a final reason to attack it.

[skyfind]

Projecting the New Bogeyman: Iran

Weekend Edition - February 25 - 26, 2011
By TOURAJ DARYAEE

This month a new film was released in the US entitled Iranium, which is a combination of name of the country Iran with uranium. In the past Hollywood had made a number of movies such as Not Without My Daughter, filmed in 1991 in Neve Ilan, Israel and more recently the more nuanced movie 300 which tried to demonstrate the notion that Iran (Persia) has been at war with the “peaceful” and “free-loving” West for the past 2500 years. That movie too was the work of conservative and neocons projecting current problem in the Middle East onto the past in the guise of a graphic-novel. What makes Iranium different from the above mentioned Hollywood films is that it claims to be a powerful report or a documentary on Iran on what has been happening for the past 30 years and its nuclear program. Indeed this film is as serious and report-worthy as the movie Star Wars is on the state of our galaxy. Still facts and fiction have been cemented together for one aim and that is the bombing of Iran, so that it becomes prosperous, free and democratic like Iraq and Afghanistan of today.

Nowadays a new boogieman has entered the American public life and that is Islam, and even those who are born in the Middle East. However, what makes the movie Iranium different from those mentioned above is that it has a clear message and intention and it is paid for by certain interested entities for a very clear reason. The movie emphasizes the hate that supposedly Iran has for the US and the international community and the danger of the destruction of the world (more precisely, Israel). The movie suggests that the US has not done anything to contain Iran, a sign of its weakness. This is of course in clear ignorance of the fact that Iran has been surrounded by US forces in Iraq, Republic of Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and a host of Persian Gulf Arab States and that it has been under heavy sanctions for decades. The film suggests that from the Iranian hostage crisis to Obama’s administration, the US has been soft against Iran in the past 30 odd years.

Iran is blamed for every bombing in Africa and the Middle East. From the bombings in Beirut in 1983 to the bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 to Yemen in 2000, to even the 9/11, there are innuendos that Iran was involved in some way. The movie suggests Iran is behind every mischief that is taking place in the world in the past 30 years. Some of these allegations are documented and some are unclear, but many more is so far from the truth that one wonders why people with big titles and representatives of the US or other countries would make such claims that “Iran gave support to hijackers” of the 9/11 bombings. This claim is as accurate as stating that Darth Vader from outer space helped the hijackers in their aim.

Full article: http://www.counterpunch.org/daryaee02252011.html

---

Israel could still strike Iran, despite Mideast unrest

Latest update 08:30 25.02.11
By Aluf Benn

The uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya have focused Israeli attention on the west, and overshadowed the disturbing news from the east: Iran has succeeded in repairing its uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, whose functioning had been disrupted by the Stuxnet computer worm. The 1,000 centrifuges that were destroyed - about one-tenth of those in the installation - have been replaced by new ones. The Iranians are maintaining their rate of production and continuing to stockpile enriched uranium.


Full article: http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/israel-could-still-strike-iran-despite-mideast-unrest-1.345608

[bigron]

   
 

Iran And The Bomb

US Spying Detects No Iranian Nukes


By Sherwood Ross

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28231.htm

June 02, 2011 "Information Clearing House" ---  The former Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) said in a new published report that he had not seen “a shred of evidence” that Iran was “building nuclear-weapons facilities and using enriched materials.”

Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient who spent 12 years at the IAEA, told investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, “I don’t believe Iran is a clear and present danger. All I see is the hype about the threat posed by Iran.”

El Baradei, who is now a candidate for the presidency of Egypt, added, “The core issue is mutual lack of trust. I believe there will be no solution until the day that the United States and Iran sit down together to discuss the issues and put pressure on each other to find a solution.”

El Baradei’s remarks are contained in an article by Hersh titled “Iran And The Bomb,” published in the June 6 issue of The New Yorker magazine.

Hersh points out that the last two U.S. National Intelligence Estimates (N.I.E.s) on Iranian nuclear progress “have stated that there is no conclusive evidence that Iran has made any effort to build the bomb since 2003.”

An N.I.E. Report supposedly represents the best judgment of the senior offices from all the major American intelligence agencies.

The latest report, which came out this year and remains highly classified, is said by Hersh to reinforce the conclusion of the last N.I.E. Report of 2007, that “Iran halted weaponization in 2003.”

A retired senior intelligence officer, speaking of the latest N.I.E. Report, told Hersh, “The important thing is that nothing substantially new has been learned in the last four years, and none of our efforts—informants, penetrations, planting of sensors—leads to a bomb.”

Hersh revealed that over the past six years, soldiers from the Joint Special Operations Force, working with Iranian intelligence assets, “put in place cutting-edge surveillance techniques” to spy on suspected Iran facilities. These included:

–Surreptitiously removing street signs and replacing them with signs containing radiation sensors.

–Removing bricks from buildings suspected of containing nuclear enrichment activities and replacing them “with bricks embedded with radiation-monitoring devices.”

–Spreading high-powered sensors disguised as stones randomly along roadways where a suspected underground weapon site was under construction.

–Constant satellite coverage of major suspect areas in Iran.

Going beyond these spy activities, two Iranian nuclear scientists last year were assassinated and Hersh says it is widely believed in Tehran that the killers were either American or Israeli agents.

Hersh quotes W. Patrick Lang, a retired Army intelligence officer and former ranking Defense Intelligence Agency(DIA) analyst on the Middle East as saying that after the disaster in Iraq, “Analysts in the intelligence community are just refusing to sign up this time for a lot of baloney.”

The DIA is the military counterpart of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

Hersh writes that Obama administration officials “have often overstated the available intelligence about Iranian intentions.” He noted that Dennis Ross, a top Obama adviser on the region, told a meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee that Iran had “significantly expanded its nuclear program.”

Hersh noted further that last March, Robert Einhorn, the special arms control adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, told the Arms Control Assn. The Iranians “are clearly acquiring all the necessary elements of a nuclear-weapons capability.”

Additionally, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Connecticut, a strong Israel supporter, told Agence France-Presse, “I can’t say much in detail but it’s pretty clear that they’re(Iran) continuing to work seriously on a nuclear-weapons program.”

Hersh recalled that “As Presidential candidates in 2008, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton had warned of an Iranian nuclear arsenal, and occasionally spoke as if it were an established fact that Iran had decided to get the bomb.”

But last March, Lieutenant General James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence which creates the N.I.E. Assessments, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Iran had not decided to re-start its nuclear weapons work. When asked by Committee Chairman Carl Levin, “What is the level of confidence that you have (in that estimate)? Is that a high level?” Clapper replied, “Yes, it is.”

At a round of negotiations in Istanbul five months ago, Iranian officials told Western diplomats that the United States and its allies need to acknowledge Iran’s right to enrich uranium and that they must lift all sanctions against Iran.

Clinton adviser Einhorn has said that because of those sanctions Iran may have lost as much as $60 billion in energy investments and that Iran had also lost business in such industries as shipping, banking, and transportation. “The sanctions bar a wide array of weapons and missile sales to Iran, and make it more difficult for banks and other financial institutions to do business there,” Hersh writes.

However, Hersh says, “The general anxiety about the Iranian regime is firmly grounded” even if there is no hard evidence it is working to build a nuclear weapon. “President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly questioned the Holocaust and expressed a desire to see the state of Israel eliminated, and he has defied the 2006 United Nations resolution calling on Iran to suspend its nuclear-enrichment program.”

He goes on to write that while IAEA inspectors “have expressed frustration with Iran’s level of cooperation and cited an increase in production of uranium…they have been unable to find any evidence that enriched uranium has been diverted to an illicit weapons program.”

One approach to resolving the Iran nuclear issue has been suggested by former ranking American diplomat Thomas Pickering, a retired ambassador who served in Russia, Israel, Jordan and India, and who has been active in the American Iranian Council, devoted to the normalization of relations with Iran.

According to Hersh, Pickering has been involved “in secret, back-channel talks with…some of the key advisers close to Ahmadinejad” and has long sought a meeting with President Obama.

Hersh quotes one of Pickering’s colleagues as saying if Obama were to grant a meeting, Pickering would tell him: “Get off your no-enrichment policy, which is getting you nowhere. Stop your covert activities. Give the Iranians a sign that you’re not pursuing regime change. Instead, the Iranians see continued threats, sanctions, and covert operations.”

Politico.com reported on May 31 that a senior administration intelligence official asserted Hersh’s article was nothing more than “a slanted book report.”

Sherwood Ross is a Miami, Fla.-based public relations consultant who also writes on political and military affairs. Contact him at sherwoodross10@gmail.com

See also Scott Horton Interviews Seymour Hersh: Seymour Hersh, award winning investigative reporter for The New Yorker magazine., discusses his article “Iran and the Bomb: How real is the nuclear threat: http://antiwar.com/radio/2011/06/01/seymour-hersh-5/

   
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28231.htm
 

[bigron]

The WH/Politico Attack on Seymour Hersh


By Glenn Greenwald

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28233.htm

June 02, 2011 "Salon" -- - Seymour Hersh has a new article in The New Yorker arguing that there is no credible evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons; to the contrary, he writes, "the U.S. could be in danger of repeating a mistake similar to the one made with Saddam Hussein's Iraq eight years ago -- allowing anxieties about the policies of a tyrannical regime to distort our estimates of the state's military capacities and intentions."  This, of course, cannot stand, as it conflicts with one of the pillar-orthodoxies of Obama foreign policy in the Middle East (even though the prior two National Intelligence Estimates say what Hersh has said).  As a result, two cowardly, slimy Obama officials ran to Politico to bash Hersh while hiding behind the protective womb of anonymity automatically and subserviently extended by that "news outlet":

MORE

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28233.htm

[bigron]

Russia: No proof Iran making N-bombs


Fri Jun 3, 2011 5:25AM



Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov challenges US claims against Iran's nuclear activities, stressing there is “no proof” that Iran is developing a nuclear weapons program.

MORE

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/182976.html

[bigron]

Iran refutes IAEA military claims

Fri Jun 3, 2011 8:27AM



Iran's Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Ali Asghar Soltanieh

Iran dismisses as “unfounded” military allegations leveled by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), saying there is no evidence that the country's nuclear activities pursue military aims.


MORE

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/182993.html

[bigron]

Seymour Hersh: Despite Intelligence Rejecting Iran as Nuclear Threat,


U.S. Could Be Headed for Iraq Redux


By Democracy Now!

Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh says the United States might attack Iran based on distorted estimates of Iran’s nuclear and military threat—just like it did with Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq. Hersh reveals that despite using Iranian informants and cutting-edge surveillance technology, U.S. officials have been unable to find decisive evidence that Iran has been moving enriched uranium to an underground weapon-making center.

Posted June 03, 2011

WATCH VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT HERE :

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28243.htm

[bigron]

Middle East
Jun 7, 2011 
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MF07Ak02.html 
 

Is an attack on Iran in the works?


By Victor Kotsev


TEL AVIV - In contrast to, say, a year ago, few analysts now dare to consider a military strike on Iran in the near future as a serious possibility. On the contrary, most are dismissive of the idea, especially in as much as Israel is concerned. "One of the great bluffs in the foreign policy community in the previous decade was that Israel would have no choice but to attack Iran's nuclear facilities unless Washington stepped up and took military action first," writes Trita Parsi in Foreign Policy, offering a lucid analysis to explain why such an option is not feasible. [1]

Yet, despite all the good arguments, the Iranian front is becoming more complicated every week and month. Israel is by far not the only foreign threat to the ayatollahs, and its silence and apparent weaknesses can be misleading, as the past 44 years (since the 1967 war) have taught. It is seldom safe to call what may appear to be an Israeli bluff.

The advice of a prominent military historian stands out in this respect. Two years ago, during a period of heightened Israeli rhetoric against the Islamic Republic, I asked him privately for his opinion. He responded: "What seems to be different this time is all the [Israeli] public arm-waving in advance of any action. Usually they act first, as they did recently [in 2007 against an alleged nuclear reactor] in Syria, and say very little afterward. This inclines me to believe that there is more rhetoric than reality here."

In the past month or so, there has been some important debate in Israeli political and media circles about a strike on the Islamic Republic, but as a whole, it has been remarkably muted compared to the bluster of, say, a year ago. Back then, Jeffrey Goldberg, among others, stirred the spirits by predicting that "there is a better than 50% chance that Israel will launch a strike by next July". He drew that conclusion on the basis of his discussions with Israeli politicians and defense officials. [2]

In the past few months, ostensibly in the wake of the Arab Spring, discussion of a war with Iran has been relegated to the back-burner. The logic of waiting to see what happens prevailed, and more pressing problems, such as Egypt's instability and the Palestinian intention to declare statehood this year, took the center-stage in Israel. Splits on the Iranian issue became increasingly visible inside the Israeli establishment, and even some politicians previously seen as hawks, such as the influential Defense Minister Ehud Barak, softened their rhetoric.

It is worth noting, however, that Goldberg's deadline has not yet passed, and could even be stretched due to unpredictable circumstances such as the Arab Spring. The most important red flag since the beginning of the year came in the form of an emphatic warning issued a month ago by Mossad's legendary former chief Meir Dagan, who said that an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities was "the stupidest thing I have ever heard". He later added, "If anyone seriously considers [a strike] he needs to understand that he's dragging Israel into a regional war that it would not know how to get out of. The security challenge would become unbearable." [3]

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also alluded to the possibility of striking Iran, for example in his speech before the US Congress last month. "When I last stood here, I spoke of the consequences of Iran developing nuclear weapons," he said. "Now time is running out. The hinge of history may soon turn, for the greatest danger of all could soon be upon us: a militant Islamic regime armed with nuclear weapons." Subsequently, Deputy Prime Minister in charge of strategic affairs, Moshe Ya'alon, said that "the civilized world" must take action against Iran, including military action "if necessary".

As mentioned above, heating up the rhetoric could mean a delay in any Israeli timeline for an actual strike. At present, discussion is muted, but it could escalate any moment. It could also subside, perhaps in anticipation of a strike. It is important to watch the warning signs.

Israeli analyst Amir Oren argues that "between the end of June and [US Defense Secretary Robert] Gates' retirement, and the end of September and [chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike] Mullen's retirement, the danger that Netanyahu and Barak will aim at a surprise in Iran is especially great, especially since this would divert attention from the Palestinian issue." [4] Right now, Oren's arguments and his conclusion appear speculative, but it is important to watch the Palestinian-Israeli sub-plot, among others.

Even speculation about an imminent prisoner swap deal for the release of captive Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit [5] can be interpreted to point to a danger of conflagration. In the past, Israeli analysts have speculated that the government would try very hard to free Shalit before any attack on Iran, because a regional war could mean that a deal is put off indefinitely.

It is important to mention that a couple of months ago, Israel released detailed maps of Hezbollah bunkers in South Lebanon , in what was widely seen as a warning to the militant organization to stay out of any confrontation with the Jewish state [6]. Hezbollah is widely perceived as a fundamental part of Iran's deterrent against Israel.

Both Dagan's comments, the release of (perhaps outdated) Hezbollah maps, and the Shalit negotiations serve their own complex goals; they do not necessarily come in genuine anticipation of a strike on Iran. Taken together, they raise significant questions, but these can also be interpreted in different ways.

It could be, for example, that Israel is preparing for the eventuality of somebody else's attack on the Islamic Republic and the repercussions that would almost inevitably reach it. Dagan could also be warning against Israeli involvement with a strike rather than the possibility of unilateral action.

From a more global perspective, tensions involving Iran are clearly at a high, even though the known facts fail to implicate convincingly the Jewish state. A source close to Russia reports that the Kremlin has started to pull out significant numbers of nuclear technicians and other specialists from the Islamic Republic; if confirmed, this information could mean that Russia anticipates a military campaign in the near future.

The same source speculates that a military operation against Iran could be seen as a necessity in order to suppress the Arab Spring, or to further the interests of the alleged counter-revolution. "A hit against a big country could do the job," he says.

Some analysts have applied a similar logic to the campaign against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, but the Libyan debacle has clearly not done the job. Moreover, the now increasingly possible ouster of Yemen's President Ali Abdullah Saleh could rekindle the protests throughout the Arab world. As a prominent figure in the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood told Reuters, "The departure of Saleh is a turning point not just for the Yemeni revolution but also is a huge push for the current changes in the Arab region and is the start of the real victory."

Necessarily, this shifts the focus of the discussion to the fabled maestro of the counter-revolution, Saudi Arabia. Much has been made of the Saudi Arabian foreign legion and the Gulf Cooperation Council's militancy. In an extensive analysis for Asia Times Online, Brian Downing discusses the recruitment of Sunni former Pakistani and Iraqi soldiers for the Saudi private army. [7]

Saudi Arabia's bitter feud with Iran is long-known, as is the "cut off the head of the snake" comment that Saudi Arabian King Abdullah made to American officials a few years ago. [8] It is hard to imagine that Saudi Arabia is militarily prepared for an imminent attack on Iran, and a full-blown private war involving Pakistan seems much to speculative to be discussed in detail, but in this part of the world, it is good to expect the unexpected.

Moreover, it is equally hard to imagine that, should hostilities break out, the United States would be able to stay out of the fray for long. The reality is that its dependence on Saudi oil is simply too high.

It does not help that the Iranian nuclear crisis is deepening. Despite assurances by Iran's nuclear envoy Ali Ashgar Soltanieh that building a nuclear weapon would be a "strategic mistake", the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued warnings last month that one of its seals in the "feed and withdrawal area" of the Natanz enrichment plant was broken. This would mean, according to experts, that Iran is trying to conceal how much enriched uranium it has on stock. Last month, the IAEA also accused Iran of hacking into its inspectors' computers and cell phones during visits to the facilities. [9]

Moreover, the Arab Spring has clearly failed the expectations of some observers, including Israeli experts, that it could spread to Iran and topple the regime. The internal rifts in the Islamic Republic have only deepened recently, but this may actually make the nuclear stand-off more entrenched. According to a recent report by the Institute for Science and International Security:
Much has been made in the media about the power struggle between Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei - with the backing of the Iranian parliament (Majlis) - and President Mahmud Ahmadinejad. The struggle may make less likely the prospect that Iran will be able (if it is indeed willing at all) to negotiate a diplomatic deal over the nuclear crisis in the near future, though it may still be willing to meet with the P5+1 [Five permanent members of the United Nations Security Councils plus Germany]. Iran has thus far been unwilling to suspend its enrichment program as called for by the United Nations Security Council or answer questions about its past work on nuclear weapons ... ince the Supreme Leader has shown a willingness to publicly and forcefully assert his authority over Ahmadinejad, and appears unwilling to negotiate an end to the nuclear issue, any deal is unlikely. This could make any meetings with the P5+1 simply an empty exercise on Iran's end. [10]
In brief, while there are many good reasons why a war with Iran is unlikely at the moment, dark clouds are quietly gathering, and in the Middle East, appearances could be misleading. Both the Iranian and the anti-Iranian camps are arming and preparing themselves militarily, and in military science as in theater, Anton Chekhov's maximum often applies that a gun in the first act is bound to go off at some point later.

Rhetoric, in fact, is often inversely proportional to the probability of action. Summer is the time to watch, both because it has historically been the season of war in the Middle East, and because according to most experts, this summer Iran will likely reach the nuclear point of no-return. So will, in all likelihood, the Arab revolutions.

Notes
1. Freeing Israel from its Iran bluff, Foreign Policy, 11 May 2011.
2. The Point of No Return, The Atlantic, 11 August 2010.
3. Israel won't withstand war in wake of strike on Iran, ex-Mossad chief says, Ha'aretz, 1 June 2011.
4. Obama's new security staff may approve attack on Iran, Ha'aretz, 1 June 2011.
5. Egypt's Tantawi, Barak discuss Shalit deal , ynetnews 5 June 2011.
6. Israeli military maps Hezbollah bunkers, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/Israeli-military-information-on-Hezbollah.html, The Washington Post, 30 March 2011 7. Pakistan marches to Saudi tune, Asia Times Online, 2 June 2011.
8. "Cut off head of snake" Saudis told U.S. on Iran, Reuters, 29 November 2010.
9. Iran may have hacked computers of UN nuclear inspectors, report says, Ha'aretz, 18 May 2011.
10. The Iranian Power Struggle and its Implications for the Nuclear Crisis, ISIS, 2 June 2011.

Victor Kotsev is a journalist and political analyst based in Tel Aviv
 
 
VISIT PAGE FOR LINKS

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MF07Ak02.html

[bigron]

   
 

Israeli Stealth Ships in Raids on Iran


A shipping company accused of breaking sanctions was
really ferrying commandos for operations inside Iran


By Uzi Mahnaimi

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28257.htm

June 05, 2011 "The Times" - - Tel Aviv  - Cargo vessels owned by Israel’s richest man, who died on Friday, had been used to ferry elite Israeli forces for operations inside Iran, according to defence sources.

The death in Tel Aviv of Sammy Ofer, 89, came just days after the United States accused his company of breaching sanctions by selling an oil tanker to Iran. It has mystified Israelis why a company with close links to the government was allegedly breaching sanctions.

Military experts suggested the cargo ships had carried Black Hawk helicopters, hidden in modified containers, for use by commando teams in reconnaissance missions against Iran’s secret nuclear sites. Israel is conducting a massive intelligence operation to monitor Iran’s nuclear weapons programme.

By using giant freighters with helicopters and men hidden in containers on their decks, the Israeli forces would possess a logistical platform similar to a helicopter assault warship and one that could approach the Iranian coast without suspicion.

Defence sources said some ships from the group controlled by Ofer and his brother Yuli were known to have given Israeli forces access to Iranian waters.

At least 13 ships owned by the Ofer Brothers Group have docked in Iran over the past decade, using the port of Bandar Abbas on the southern coast and the Kharg Island oil terminal in the Gulf, according to Equasis, a shipping information database.

The Raffles Park, a ship sold to Iran by the Singapore-based Tanker Pacific, had docked off the Iranian shore four times between September 2002 and January 2010, according to Equasis records. The US State Department said Tanker Pacific was owned by the Ofer Group but the company has said this is “a mistake” and denied any wrongdoing.

Israel has said the matter is one between the company and the State Department and it will not back Ofer’s efforts to be removed from the American blacklist of companies found trading with Iran.

Ofer, whose fortune was estimated at $10bn (£6bn) by Forbes magazine, and Yuli built up Israel’s biggest industrial conglomerate from a ship’s chandlery business founded in the 1950s.

Last week Richard Silverstein, an American blogger who specialises in breaking Israeli defence secrets, claimed Mossad, Israel’s national intelligence agency, used Ofer Group cargo ships to smuggle its agents into Iran.

Last year Mossad agents allegedly assassinated Mahmoud al-Mabhuh, a senior Hamas militant, in his Dubai hotel room. It is now believed some of the agents left Dubai hidden in one of Ofer’s ships.

Zodiac Maritime Agencies, one of the group’s main shipping businesses, is based in London and many of its 150 vessels, which operate under charter to leading container lines, are registered in Britain.

Israeli reports suggested the Ofer Group’s contacts with Iran may have been authorised, but this was denied by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. “There was no permission for any contact or delivery to Iran. We have clear policies on this matter,” he said last week.

However, in a statement after Ofer’s death, Netanyahu praised him as a “Zionist through and through”.

Meir Dagan, the recently retired head of Mossad, intervened in the controversy in a clear attempt to defend the Ofer brothers, saying “the case had been blown out of proportion”.

Israeli commandos are known to have used cargo ships before. In April 1988 an elite force left Haifa on a container ship concealing helicopters. Off the coast of Tunisia, pre-installed hydraulic doors opened and two helicopters loaded with special forces took off under the command of Moshe “Bogi” Ya’alon, now the Deputy Prime Minister.

Mossad agents waiting on shore ushered the commandos into rented cars and drove to a beachside villa where Khalil el-Wazir, the deputy leader of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, was working in his study.

Within minutes he was gunned down in front of his wife and children. The soldiers then returned to a different location to be flown to the ship.

Haaretz, the Israeli newspaper, reported that sources close to the Ofer family had revealed that last year the company had instructed all its ships to stay away from Iran. This was interpreted as implying they had previously docked in Iranian ports.

The domestic scandal took a new turn last Tuesday when Carmel Shama-Hacohen, a member of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, cancelled a televised debate on the allegations after receiving a handwritten note, widely thought to be from state security, which warned that such a discussion could harm Israel’s interests.

While he refused to discuss the note’s contents, Shama-Hacohen stoked speculation with a cryptic statement: “Let’s just be clear, the note is not from a political figure and not from a business figure. It turns out reality is much more complex, much more complicated and touchy than the average imagination can handle.”

Maritime magnate gave millions to Britain

Sammy Ofer, the billionaire founder of the Ofer shipping line, who died last week aged 89, was an Israeli who spent much of his life in Monaco but showed enormous generosity to Britain.

Born in Romania, his family emigrated to Haifa when he was two. Ofer volunteered with the Royal Navy in the Second World War and later helped found the Israeli navy.

He created Israel’s biggest holding company, whose interests include the London-based Zodiac shipping company, and 16.5% of the Royal Caribbean line. In 2008 Ofer was made an honorary Knight of the British Empire. He gave £20m to the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich — one of the largest private donations made to a British cultural institution. He also gave £3.3m towards the restoration of the Cutty Sark.

 
 http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28257.htm

[bigron]

Researcher: Without Military Occupation Iran to Have Nuke in Two Months

RAND Researcher's Claim of Iranian Nuke Doesn't Stand Up to Scrutiny

by Jason Ditz, June 06, 2011

A five page article from RAND researcher Gregory S. Jones released late last week reaches a grim conclusion: that without an immediate US military occupation of Iran, the Islamic Republic will have a nuclear weapon in two months.

MORE

http://news.antiwar.com/2011/06/06/researcher-without-military-occupation-iran-to-have-nuke-in-two-months/

[bigron]

Weekend Edition
June 17 - 19, 2011
http://www.counterpunch.org/hallinan06172011.html

Will Iran Explode?

Turmoil at the Top

By CONN HALLINAN

On the surface, the recent turmoil in Teheran looks like a case of the clerical elite, led by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, slapping down an independent minded President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, though the battle is couched in vocabulary that does more to obscure than to reveal: accusations of "sorcery" and "witchcraft" get equal billing with charges of corruption and violations of the constitution. But if the language can at times seem odd, the players and the stakes are hardy abstruse.

There is, indeed, a struggle between Ahmadinejad and the clerics around Khamenei, and while it may play out in arguments over obscure religious issues—one critic of the President accused him of recruiting an army of genies—at its heart the fight is over political and economic power: who wields it and to what purpose? Some of the players, like the President and the Supreme Leader, perform in the spotlight. Others, like the powerful Revolutionary Guard and an increasingly restive population hammered by economic difficulties, maneuver in the wings.

The current crisis was sparked off when Ahmadinejad dismissed his Minister of Intelligence, apparently because the latter was tapping his chief-of-staff's phones and gathering intelligence on the President's plans for the upcoming round of parliamentary elections in 2012 and the presidential election in 2013. Khamenei forced Ahmadinejad to rehire the Minister, which caused the President to boycott cabinet meetings for 11 days, what Iranians are calling the "long sulk."

What followed were a series of maneuvers by both sides. The President reorganized his cabinet, dropping several ministries, fired the Oil Minister, and put himself in charge. The Majilis, or parliament, claims the act was illegal and, by an overwhelming vote, sent the matter to the Iranian judiciary. No one is talking about impeachment yet, but that straw is in the wind.

There is, indeed, a conflict between Kharmenei, the clerics, and Ahmadinejad. While not mentioning the Supreme Leader, the President told a Teheran press conference on June 7, "It is very clear now that we are 180 degrees away from them. We are actually on opposite sides." In a political system dominated by Ayatollahs, it was a bold statement and reflects Ahmadinejad's judgment that the clerics are no longer all-powerful, and that the Supreme Leader—old and unwell according to most sources—has less authority than the late Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the first leader of the Islamic Republic.

Presidential confidant and advisor Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei, currently under fire and accused of "deviancy," once remarked, "the era of sovereignty of religion is over," and that "An Islamic government is not capable of running a vast and populous country like Iran." Mashaei, a former intelligence officer in the Revolutionary Guard, has a strong nationalist streak in him—"Iran first" as opposed to "Islam first""—and word is that Ahmadinejad was maneuvering to pass on the presidency to him or another non-cleric in 2013, thus marginalizing the religious establishment.

The clerics are also suspicious that the President's prediction that the "hidden Iman," who disappeared in the ninth century AD, would soon emerge was actually an effort to sideline them and shift power to Ahmadinejad's clique of ultra-nationalist veterans from the 1980-88 war with Iraq.

Certainly removing a mullah from control of the Oil Ministry would have amounted to a public slap-down of a cleric at a time of unprecedented tension between the President and the clerical establishment. While Ahmadinejad was eventually forced to give back the ministry, he ended up appointing an ally, Mohammad Aliabadi, the former head of Iran's Olympic Committee.

So far, the Revolutionary Guard has come down on the side of Khamenei and have even issued a veiled warning to the President that the Guard might consider releasing records from the disputed 2009 election that saw Ahmadinejad re-elected. However, the Guard is being discreet about how it intervenes, concentrating instead on gathering greater economic power.

The Guard recently acquired control of two large natural gas fields in Fars Province, and its engineering and construction firm, Khatam-ol-Anbia, has become the largest contractor for government projects. The guard also has major interests in mining, telecommunications, dam building, and trade. The sanctions leveled at Iran over its nuclear program prevent outside companies from investing, thus allowing the Guard to expand into the energy field. Iran has 150 billion barrels of oil reserves, third largest in the world, and 948 trillion cubic feet of gas, second only to Russia.

According to the Green opposition, the Guard also smuggles goods in and out of Iran to the tune of $12 billion a year.

While the Guard is currently backing Khamenei, according to the trade union activist Homayoun Poorzad, "the Guard is an independent force and not in the pockets of the clerics. They [the Guard] would love to see Ahmadinejad and Khamenei fight it out" while they gather more power.

The sanctions have taken a bite, but the main cause of economic turmoil are the policies of the Ahmadinejad government, which has systematically cut up to $100 billion in yearly subsidies for everything from gasoline, food, and water, to education and electricity. Many Iranians see half their paychecks go to pay utility and gas bills.

Coupled with the austerity drive has been the brutal suppression of the trade union movement and the shift from a stabilized workforce to temporary, contract labor. The percentage of workers with benefits has gone from 70 percent of the workforce to 30 percent over the past 15 years. The law provides for unemployment benefits, but only for permanent employees.

While suppression is a major reason for the lack of widespread strike activity, the 14.5 percent unemployment rate also plays a role. "The jobless rate makes it easier to break strikes," says Poorzad, adding, "Last year was the worst year for the working class since World War II."

The lack of widespread, organized response is partly due to the government's repression, including firings, arrests, torture and the occasional execution of leaders. But it is also a testament to Ahmadinejad's ability to funnel money to the poor. "He is almost a genius," says Poorzad, "and he is always looking to build his social base and weaken his rivals." The labor activist says that cutting the subsidies means that "now the President has tens of billions of dollars " to hand out. It is not clear how long he can continue to do that.

While much the U.S. media has begun to write off Ahmadinejad, "I don't see him as being on the ropes," says Jamie Webster, a consultant for PFC Energy.

But the economic situation is inherently unstable. So far the government has managed to keep unrest under control by cash outlays and forcing the merchant class—many of whom support the Green opposition—to keep prices artificially low. This forces many merchants to operate at a loss. "Eventually prices will have to be allowed to float," says Poorzad, "and when that happens inflation will go up sharply."

The "Greens" opposed Ahmedinejad in the 2009 elections and mobilized hundreds of thousands of people to protest what they charged was widespread fraud in the outcome.

Will the situation explode?

According to Poorzad, the trade union movement is just trying to keep its head above water. "Unions are facing the worst repression in many years," he says, "we are just trying to stay out of prison. It is very dangerous."

So far, the government has managed to drive a wedge between the more affluent and middle class Green opposition and the urban and rural poor. But if the economy worsens and living standards continue to plummet, that wedge may give way, as it did in 2009 when the urban working class made common cause with Teheran's middle class. Ultimately "Things are going to get out of hand," says Poorzad.

It is important to remember that Iran is the only country in the Middle East that changed its ruling class through mass demonstrations. It may end up that Egypt and Tunisia will do so as well, but so far both countries have simply deposed their rulers.

Iran's government has enormous repressive powers at its fingertips, from the million-member Basij militia to the powerful Revolutionary Guard and the secret police. But its centers of power are hardly united, and it harbors a large population with a memory of what it accomplished in 1979 by taking to the streets.

Conn Hallinan can be read at Dispatchedfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com
 

http://www.counterpunch.org/hallinan06172011.html

[Brocke]

Iranian commander: US carriers target if attacked

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press – 10 hours ago

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — A senior Revolutionary Guard commander threatened Saturday that U.S. aircraft carriers would be targeted if Iran came under attack amid a standoff with the West over Tehran's nuclear program.

Iran has often warned of major retaliation if they faced a military strike from Israel or the West, but the latest comments appear tailored to emphasize the expanding range of Iranian missiles following 10 days of war games. The exercises included unveiling underground missile silos that Iran says is capable of multiple launches.

"Aircraft carriers ... are moving targets. If the enemy threatens us, we will target them," said Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the Guard's aerospace force, in comments broadcast on state TV.

Hajizadeh also confirmed that Iran secretly conducted missile tests earlier this year that he claimed hit targets at the "mouth of the Indian Ocean" — an apparent reference to areas near the Strait of Hormouz at the southern end of the Gulf.

Hajizadeh said two missiles with ranges of 1,140 miles (1,900 kilometers) were fired during the Iranian month of Bahman, from Jan. 21 to Feb 19, from Semnan province in northern Iran. He gave no further details, but at maximum range the missiles could have reached deep into the Arabian Sea.

In April, the commander of the Revolutionary Guard said Iran's arsenal is capable of striking "remote regions outside the Persian Gulf."

more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iPrtSecovBkRBNAsfsGNGqrbOMAA?docId=7911bc222d22400da39f4135fb601456

[bigron]

Middle East
Jul 14, 2011 
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MG14Ak01.html   

 
US targets Iran - via Iraq


By Barbara Slavin


WASHINGTON - Reviving United States-Iran friction over Iraq may have more to do with deteriorating relations over Iran's nuclear program than with uncertainty over US troop levels in Iraq beyond the end of this year.

In recent weeks, a chorus of US officials has accused Iran of providing lethal weapons to Iraqi Shi'ite militias that have targeted US soldiers and caused a spike in US death tolls. Similar charges have been made against Iran in the past.

Last month, Robert Gates, then US defense secretary, said Iran-backed Shi'ite militias were responsible for the deaths of five US
soldiers on June 6, the single-largest toll for the US in two years. Overall, 15 US servicemen were killed in Iraq in June, also a two- year record.

Gates' successor, Leon Panetta, repeated the charges this week during his first trip to Iraq as defense secretary.

"We're seeing more of those weapons going in from Iran, and they've really hurt us," Panetta told reporters in Baghdad on Monday. He threatened Iran with unspecified retaliation if the attacks did not cease.

Panetta did not reveal any concrete evidence for the charges. US officials and military experts say he was referring to rocket-assisted mortars.

"The main mass casualty producer for US troops has been the IRAMS [improvised rocket-assisted munitions] which have been around for several years, and which I believe are used exclusively by Iranian-supported groups," said Michael Eisenstadt, an Iraq expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a think-tank closely tied to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

"There are indications that they may have gotten more lethal lately, though I don't know if this is a function of modifications to the weapons or to improved training," he said.

United States accusations are hard if not impossible to prove given the fact that Iraq is awash with weapons and smuggling across the border with Iran is rampant. Iran denies the allegations.
"I believe the Americans are trying to make excuses, create Iranophobia, and cause doubt and anxiety among Iraqi officials and society," Iranian ambassador to Iraq Hassan Danaeifar told Press TV, an Iranian state-owned channel. "The Americans are trying to suggest that if they leave Iraq, Iraq will be threatened by Iran."

Analysts say the clashes - both rhetorical and real - may have more to do with Iranian anger at mounting US economic sanctions than they do with Iraqi security. Iraq - and Afghanistan - are convenient venues for Iran to target US forces.

"It's not about Iraq at all, it's about US-Iran relations," Vali Nasr, professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and a former State Department adviser, told Inter Press Service (IPS).

"There is no doubt that the Iranians are escalating" to retaliate for US sanctions over Iran's nuclear program, Nasr said.

The Barack Obama administration has been increasing economic penalties against Iran for the past year and pressuring foreign entities to boycott Iranian banks, shipping and airlines. The latest blow came on June 30 when Maersk, a major Danish shipping line, ended operations at Iran's three largest ports. A week earlier, the US had stated that the company operating the ports was controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.

Iran has refused to suspend uranium enrichment although it is required to do so by six United Nations Security Council resolutions. Attempts to negotiate a resolution with the US and the other permanent members of the council plus Germany have failed due to internal Iranian political divisions and a lack of creativity and political will on both sides.

The fallout of the nuclear dispute is landing in Iraq, compounding political problems for Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki who has struggled to form a stable coalition government more than a year after parliamentary elections.

United States officials, concerned about the logistics of withdrawing troops on short notice, have been pressuring Maliki to make up his mind about keeping a residual US force. Under a 2008 Status of Forces agreement, all remaining US troops - which currently number 46,000 - are to be out by December 31.

"Do they want us to stay? Don't they want us to stay?" Panetta complained on Monday before a US military audience in Baghdad. Panetta also urged Maliki, who has been serving for months as interim defense and interior minister, to name full-time officials to head those key ministries.

"Damn it, make a decision," Panetta said.

United States officials have expressed concern over whether Iraq will be able to defend itself against terrorists and foreign intruders eight years after US invaders toppled Saddam Hussein's regime. No matter what Maliki decides, a few hundred US troops are likely to remain as military trainers for US weapons. Some special forces are also likely to stay as well as forces based in semi-autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan, where the US presence is popular.

A smaller US military footprint would be in line with phasing out counter-insurgency doctrine, once in vogue in the Pentagon, in favor of counter-terrorism.

"There's been a shift in thinking in Washington," Nasr said. "You don't need as many troops. You need trainers and access to bases where you can use drones and Special Forces."

Testifying before the US Congress last month, Eisenstadt suggested keeping 1,500 troops in Kurdistan to prevent clashes between the Iraqi military and the Kurdish Peshmerga paramilitary force.

He told IPS that in addition, "a small Joint Special Operations Command task force would be essential for hunting down members of al-Qaeda. and Iranian-supported special groups. You might also need troops to serve as quick reaction forces to help Iraqi security forces deal with insurgent groups, and civilian contractors providing protection for US diplomats. Some military might serve as military movement teams for US diplomats and civilians as well."

However, a smaller US force will remain vulnerable to attack by Shi'ite militias. That in turn could cause clashes between the United States and Iran.

"The US is suggesting that the gloves will come off" if attacks on US forces continue, Nasr said. "The question is, 'Who will blink?' This is very dangerous."

(Inter Press Service)
 
 
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MG14Ak01.html

[bigron]

War With Iran?


US Neocons Aim to Repeat Chalabi-Style Swindle



By Ali Fatemi and Karim Pakravan


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28595.htm

July 15, 2011 "Truthout" -- In 1991, Iraqi exiles set up the Iraq National Congress (INC) with funding from the CIA. Under the leadership of Ahmad Chalabi, and flush with tens of millions dollars in US government funding, the INC allied itself with the neoconservatives in Washington and unceasingly beat the drums of war, presenting itself as the popular democratic alternative to Saddam Hussein and feeding faulty intelligence to an eager media and Bush administration. Eventually, they succeeded in dragging the United States into disastrous war that cost Americans and Iraqis their lives and caused incalculable damage to American prestige and power.

Now, history may be repeating itself.

A segment of our political establishment that is chafing at the bit for a military attack on Iran has found their INC, in the form of the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (also known as the MEK, or MKO), a radical Islamic terrorist group with Iranian roots that has been designated a terrorist organization since the State Department created the Foreign Terrorist Organization list in 1997.

Appearing before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on June 24, John Bolton, the former ambassador to the UN under President Bush, reiterated his calls for military action against Iran and openly expressed his support for the MEK. Weeks later, former Bush attorney general Michael Mukasey appeared before the Oversight and Investigation Subcommittee and called for the US to delist the MEK. Mukasey was even photographed prior to the hearing receiving counsel from the leadership of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the MEK's political wing, which is also designated as a terrorist organization.

Bolton and Mukasey are not alone in their avowed public support for this known terrorist group. They have been joined by a number of former senior Bush administration officials, other hawks and advocates of the whatever-it-takes war on terror - luminaries such as Rudy Giuliani, former CIA director James Woolsey, and former head of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, as well as a number of Republican and Democratic legislators.

Why would some of the most vocal advocates for prosecuting the war on terror now take an Islamic terrorist group under its wing and persistently lobby the State Department and the US Congress to have the group removed from terrorist list? Simply put, they say the enemy of the enemy is our friend. Maryam Rajavi, the MEK leader and self-proclaimed president of Iran, is their new Chalabi.

The MEK is an Islamic radical organization that was formed in the 1960's as an urban guerilla movement against the shah of Iran. During the 1970's, the group targeted and successfully killed US military personnel and American civilians based in Iran. It played a major role in the overthrow of the shah in 1979, eventually fell out with the Khomeini regime and fled to Iraq. There, they regrouped under the patronage of Hussein, and fought alongside him against Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. As documented by the CIA, the MEK was later used by a beleaguered Hussein to crush the Kurdish rebellion that came immediately after Iraq's defeat in the Persian Gulf war. Following Hussein's ouster, the Iraqi government has been working to try to expel the reviled group from Iraq.

Over the course of the last two decades, a well-funded MEK has developed a powerful propaganda machine that has sought to depict the group as a formidable military force, as well as the genuine democratic representative of the Iranian people. These claims have been proven to be groundless. The naked reality is that the MEK are neither a force nor a democratic representative of Iranians, but simply a well-funded militaristic cult with shadowy leaders. They are widely despised by Iranians for having betrayed Iran by siding with Hussein. These facts have been extensively documented, as can be seen in a recently released FBI report that presents evidence of ongoing terrorist activities by the MEK.

Despite their claims to the contrary, the MEK had no role in the popular uprising of June 2009. The leaders of the Green Movement, the Iranian democratic movement, have nothing to do with this traitorous cult. In fact, the MEK claim to a role has helped enable the Islamic regime to tar the whole Green movement with a treasonous label.

Pressure to remove the MEK from the State Department's Foreign Terrorist Organizations list is a cynical ploy by the neocons that can have only negative consequences for both the United States and Iran. It would allow an Islamic radical terrorist group to operate freely in the United States and eventually get funded by the US taxpayer, courtesy of a clueless Congress. The proponents of war with Iran simply want another INC, and another Chalabi, to promote and start a military conflict with Iran. This country does not need another war, and we need not make that mistake once again.

Instead of legitimizing the MEK, we call on the law-enforcement agencies to investigate the illegal activities of this group, their funding and their allies. After all, they are still on the US State Department terrorist list. So, why are they allowed to lobby our lawmakers in the Senate and the House? The FBI should treat the MEK like all others terror-listed groups, and help protect the American people from these terrorists in our midst - and from another attempt to hijack the country and steer us into a disastrous war of choice.
   
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28595.htm

[Dok]

U.S. accuses Iran of pact with al-Qaida to move money, arms, fighters to Afghanistan, Pakistan -

The U.S. for the first time formally accused Iran of forging an agreement with al Qaeda, a pact in which Tehran helps move money, arms and fighters through Iranian territory to the terrorist group's bases in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The U.S. Treasury Department outlined on Thursday what it said was an extensive fund-raising operation devised by al Qaeda that utilizes Iran-based ...

rest: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904888304576474160157070954.html

[bigron]

Demonizing Iran

U.S. Debt Crisis Sidelines an Emergency Attack on Iran

America's national debt crisis and Pentagon budget cuts are pushing to the margins emergency plans for an operation against Iran.

By Amir Oren

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28801.htm

August 09, 2011 "Haaretz" - -The American trigger finger is itchy. Itchy, but flinching - the wallet is emptier than the magazine. Iran is provoking. It is pressing ahead with its nuclearization and upping the rate of its assaults on U.S. forces in Iraq, as well as their lethality.

To this end, Iran is enlisting the help of local Iraqi organizations that receive equipment, training and guidance from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' elite Quds force; and it is using them to strike at the rearguard of the American forces, which are supposed to be leaving Iraq by the end of the year.

The American trigger finger is itchy. Itchy, but flinching - the wallet is emptier than the magazine. Iran is provoking. It is pressing ahead with its nuclearization and upping the rate of its assaults on U.S. forces in Iraq, as well as their lethality.

To this end, Iran is enlisting the help of local Iraqi organizations that receive equipment, training and guidance from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' elite Quds force; and it is using them to strike at the rearguard of the American forces, which are supposed to be leaving Iraq by the end of the year.

Iran wants to depict the planned U.S. withdrawal as a frightened escape under fire (in the same vein as the withdrawal of American forces from Lebanon following the terror attack on the Marines headquarters in Beirut in 1983 ); it wants to push pro-Iranian political elements into putting pressure on the Iraqi government not to ask the Americans to extend their stay in the country - a move that would require legislation to grant immunity to the foreign forces. Once forces do leave, it wants to make sure Tehranian influence is supreme.

During a recent Congressional hearing, Gen. Martin Dempsey, who will take over as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the end of September, warned that the nuclearization and indirect assaults on the U.S. forces in southern Iraq could lead Tehran to err gravely in underestimating America's determination to mount a strike against Iran.

But Dempsey also advocated caution. He stressed that he preferred the path of sanctions and diplomacy and would advise the president to launch a preemptive attack only in the event of a clear and present threat - to a high degree of certainty - of an Iranian strike against vital U.S. national interests.

Dempsey's statements appeared to indicate that based on the current pace of Iran's nuclearization - without any weapons development or the transferal of arms to a terror organization - such conditions have yet to be met. A preemptive strike, as far as Dempsey is concerned, must be focused, must serve a broad political initiative involving America's allies, and must rely on a broad plan for the period following the operation.

Under the current economic and political circumstances, the Obama administration will not be in any hurry to do Israel a favor and pull the nuclear chestnuts out the Iranian fire by means of a preemptive strike against Tehran's nuclear facilities, material storage locations and missile sites.

America's national debt crisis and Pentagon budget cuts are pushing to the margins emergency plans for an operation against Iran.

Ehud Barak got this message during his meetings in Washington last week with senior administration officials: While discussing the goings on in the region, their minds were clearly more focused on more worrying and pressing matters at home.

When it comes to a choice between nuclear and deficit, deterrence and austerity, economics wins out. Security can wait.

Obama's hands are tied by the economic and leadership crises. He will not embark on a head-on collision course with Iran, aside from acute responses to the killing of his soldiers.

Election season looms; his personal approval rating has been compromised. With the list of tasks ahead topped by Al-Qaida, Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran will have to fight for a place between North Korea, Libya (where NATO appears to be treading water and getting nowhere ), Yemen and even Somalia.

According to the current head of the Joint Chiefs, Adm. Michael Mullen, the U.S. national debt is the greatest security risk facing the country. This is an allusion to the direct blow to America's economic strength and the political implications of Obama's compromise with Congress that seeks to find the missing dollars in the Pentagon budget.

If indeed there is a certain degree of American deterrence against Iran, it is only enough to prevent Tehran from using nuclear arms, which it doesn't yet have. Activity in Iraq and the gradual progression to nuclearization is not being deterred.

On the eve of his retirement last week, Mullen's deputy, General James Cartwright, complained that the United States does not have non-nuclear arms that can be readily and reliably deployed within 24 hours. Conventional warheads are now being developed for the inter-continental ballistic missiles that fly fast and do not penetrate the airspace of countries whose consent may be required. Until then, for testing, they are using concrete warheads.

The scenario: Mass fatalities among U.S. soldiers in Iraq as a result of an attack by pro-Iranian forces leads to the launch of a concrete missile into the Iranian desert, as a final warning. But it won't be a precursor to the realization of the hopes of Barak and Netanyahu - just a meager and cheap substitute, in the spirit of the times.

   
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28801.htm

[Brocke]

Explosion hits Iran-Turkey gas pipeline

PKK fighters suspected of sabotaging pipeline in east of Turkey, as blast halts flow of Iranian gas into the country.

Last Modified: 12 Aug 2011 17:09


An attack on a pipeline in eastern Turkey has halted the flow of Iranian gas into the country, Turkey's energy ministry has said, adding that it may take up to a week before it will be operating again.

"Work continues to put out the fire," the governor's office in Agri province said in a statement quoted by the Anatolia news agency.

"It has been established that the incident was caused by a terrorist attack."

The governor's office said Kurdish fighters, who are seeking autonomy in Turkey's southeast, were suspected of sabotaging the pipeline.

Firefighters were sent to the site of the explosion, which took place at 11:10 pm on Thursday, and the pipeline was shut off.

A Turkish energy ministry official speaking on condition of anonymity told the AFP news agency that repairs on the pipeline had started and would last about a week.

more: http://aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/08/201181210383932716.html

[Optimus]

Imperial overdrive: Red alert over Iran

Published: 30 December, 2011, 19:05

2011 will be remembered as the year the US, Britain, France and Israel went into Imperial Overdrive in North Africa and the Middle East. Will 2012 be remembered as the year those same Western Allies unleashed World War III?

­It is not news anymore to say that the West will soon attack Iran, maybe Syria. They have been threatening to do that for years now, certainly ever since the failed Israeli invasion into Southern Lebanon in mid-2006, when they were routed by Hezbollah.

So what is different today? For starters, general circumstances have changed dramatically in the Region. Genuine popular dissent inside key Muslim countries has been used by the Western Allies to train, fund and arm local criminal and terrorist organizations, dubbed “freedom fighters”, as their proxies.

Country after country has fallen victim to the CIA’s, MI6’s and Mossad’s “dirty tricks departments”, and other Western-style terrorist organizations. Results range from moderate “regime change” in Tunisia and Algeria; via horrendous “violence by our boys” in Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain; all the way to outright military attack, civil war and political assassination. Such as the one in Libya, where Hillary Clinton boisterously laughed when she learned Muammar Gaddafi had been murdered live on TV by “her thugs”.

The whole region has been set on fire. Not that other regions of the world are not on fire too; however the pyrotechnics used by the Global Power Elite vary in nature in each geography. For example, Europe, the US and Britain are being set alight using financial terrorism resembling a neutron bomb, which kills people off while leaving assets and banks standing. 

Now in Iran the stage seems set for a final show-down. It has taken so long only because Israeli, British and US planners are not stupid; they know that messing with Iran is not like messing with Iraq or Pakistan or Afghanistan or Libya. Messing with Iran will bring Western Allies very dangerously close to messing with Russia and China. If I were in their shoes, I would not do that. Unless…

More: http://rt.com/news/iran-us-war-military-005/

[Cryptvill]

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0113/Anti-US-chants-as-slain-Iran-nuclear-expert-buried

"Thousands of mourners chanted "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" on Friday during the funeral of a slain nuclear expert whom Iranian officials accuse the two nations of killing in a bomb blast this week as part of a secret operation to stop Iran's nuclear program."




As the war drums continue to bang.....

[Femacamper]

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0113/Anti-US-chants-as-slain-Iran-nuclear-expert-buried

"Thousands of mourners chanted "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" on Friday during the funeral of a slain nuclear expert whom Iranian officials accuse the two nations of killing in a bomb blast this week as part of a secret operation to stop Iran's nuclear program."




As the war drums continue to bang.....

You reap what you sow.

[Brocke]

Swift to Ban Blacklisted Iranian Banks, Companies

By JAY SOLOMON

WASHINGTON—Belgium's Society for Worldwide International Financial Telecommunication, or Swift, is preparing to ban sanctioned Iranian banks and companies from using its financial communications and clearing system, the organization said Friday.

The move will drastically curtail Tehran's ability to conduct global trade, as virtually all of Iran's largest state and trade banks are on U.S. and European Union blacklists for allegedly supporting Iran's nuclear program and for supporting Middle East-based militant groups.

U.S. lawmakers have alleged that sanctioned Iranian banks have been using Swift's services to evade these sanctions. And both chambers of the U.S. Congress have drafted legislation that could lead to penalties against Swift's board of directors and owners if the body doesn't cut off the proscribed Iranian entities from the Swift system.

"Swift is ready to implement sanctions against Iranian financial institutions," the organization said in a statement. "A clear multilateral legal framework in relation to international financial sanctions against Iran is emerging."

The Obama administration, France and other European countries have been pressing the EU to formally call on Swift to cut off the sanctioned Iranian banks and companies. EU financial regulators are expected to make such a ruling either later this month or in early March, according to European officials.

Swift said on Friday that it would comply with the EU's ruling.

"Swift stands ready to act and discontinue its services to sanctioned Iranian financial institutions as soon as it has clarity on EU legislation currently being drafted," the organization said.

Many of Iran's largest financial institutions, which are currently facing U.S. and EU sanctions, have continued to use Swift's services in recent months, according to its public records. Among them are Banks Sepah, Saderat and Mellat.

A spokesperson for Swift wouldn't comment on whether its actions would include cutting off Iran's central bank from using the organization's services. Such a move is seen as almost completely freezing Iran out from the global financial system. Virtually all of the world's largest banks use Swift to conduct financial wire transfers.

More: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204059804577229023989829592.html?mod=WSJASIA_hpp_MIDDLESecondNews

[Letsbereal]

As Pentagon Sends Reinforcements To Straits Of Hormuz, Iraq Redux Looms
25 February 2012, by Tyler Durden (Zero Hedge)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/pentagon-sends-reinforcements-straits-hormuz-iraq-redux-looms

A few days ago, before the latest breakout in crude sent Brent to all time highs in GBP and EUR (and Asian Tapis in USD just shy of all time highs), we said that:

"we hope our readers stocked up on gasoline. Because things are about to get uglier. And by that we mean more expensive. But courtesy of hedonic adjustments, more expensive means cheaper, at least to the US government."

This was due to recent news out of Iran:

"where on one hand we learn that IAEA just pronounced Iran nuclear talks a failure (this is bad), and on the other Press TV reports that the Iran army just started a 4 day air defense exercise in a 190,000 square kilometer area in southern Iran (this is just as bad). The escalation "ball" is now in the Western court."

We were not surprised to learn that the "Western court" has responded in precisely the way we had expected.

The WSJ reports:

"The Pentagon is beefing up U.S. sea- and land-based defenses in the Persian Gulf to counter any attempt by Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz.

The U.S. military has notified Congress of plans to preposition new mine-detection and clearing equipment and expand surveillance capabilities in and around the strait...

The military also wants to quickly modify weapons systems on ships so they could be used against Iranian fast-attack boats, as well as shore-launched cruise missiles"

Which means the escalation slider was just shifted up by one more level, as Iran will next do just what every actor caught in an Always Defect regime as part of an iterated prisoners' dilemma always does - step up the rhetoric even more, as backing off at this point is impossible.

Which means that crude will go that much more higher in the coming days, as now even the MSM is starting to grasp the obvious:

From the Guardian:

"The drumbeat of war with Iran grows steadily more intense. Each day brings more defiant rhetoric from Tehran, another failed UN nuclear inspection, reports of western military preparations, an assassination, a missile test, or a dire warning that, once again, the world is sliding towards catastrophe. If this all feels familiar, that's because it is. For Iran, read Iraq in the countdown to the 2003 invasion."

And the most ironic thing is that the biggest loser out of all this, at least in the short-term is.... Greece.

[Letsbereal]

As Pentagon Sends Reinforcements To Straits Of Hormuz, Iraq Redux Looms
25 February 2012, by Tyler Durden (Zero Hedge)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/pentagon-sends-reinforcements-straits-hormuz-iraq-redux-looms

My ‘deep throat’ sources tell me that the domestic political climate inside Iran have reached such levels of intensity that Iran will be provoked by it’s own population to show some muscle and to indeed close the Strait of Hormuz.

Personally I have my doubts if ‘the country of chest’ will be stupid enough to give the Zionist aggressors a stick to beat them with in mass hysteria Iran acquisitions in provoking a war which will be portrait as such in the MSM while in fact the covert war started years ago.

More strategic in my opinion would be to await a first strike but meanwhile immediately close all oil to Greece to speed up and ensure an European debt implosion which at same time will raise some eyebrows and big question marks around the whole oil sanction debacle which is only just beginning.

‘Deep Throat’ also thinks that a major objective of the planned Iran bombings is to speed up and partly protect an Iranian revolt by targeting the so-called ‘Special Guard’ forces which supposedly will shoot on their own populous when needed.

‘Deep Throat’ are Special Forces peeps is all I can say

[Letsbereal]

Well here you have it namely; That's exactly what I would do:

Iran stops oil flow to Greece - report
26 February 2012, (RT)
http://rt.com/news/iran-oil-ban-greece-247/

Iran has denied shipment of crude oil to Greece, following similar moves against Britain and France.

The moves are pre-emptive to a set of sanctions imposed by the EU, which forbids buying oil from Iran after several months of grace period.

The first oil tanker denied loading of the expected 500,000 barrels of oil in Iran has returned home, a Fars news agency report says.

The shipment was meant for Hellenic Petroleum refinery.

No official comment on the failed delivery was available immediately.

Western powers have been putting pressure on Iran by crippling its oil export since December, when a ban on Iranian oil was issued by the US.

The EU, which unlike the US buys considerable amount of crude from Iran, joined the sanctions in late January.

But it allowed import to continue for six months to allow European refineries find new supply routes and possibly to adjust to different brands of crude.

Tehran however pulled the rug from under European’s feet by banning export to some EU countries ahead of the scheduled cut.

On February 19, it officially denied export to Britain and France, the two key sponsors of the EU sanctions.

On Monday, Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Qassemi warned that other European countries may be sanctioned by Tehran in a similar way, "if the hostile acts… continue”.

Back then the news sent oil prices to a nine-month high.

Greece opposed the EU move, because switching to other source of crude would cost its already debt-ridden economy dearly.

However eventually it agreed to the ban along with other EU members.

The economic sanctions against Iran are meant to arm-wrestle it into abandoning its uranium enrichment program.

The West accuses the Islamic Republic of secretly trying to build a nuclear weapon.

Tehran denies the allegations and insists that its nuclear program is purely civilian.

[spinner]

"we hope our readers stocked up on gasoline. Because things are about to get uglier. And by that we mean more expensive. But courtesy of hedonic adjustments, more expensive means cheaper, at least to the US government."   Just great I own a Ram 1500 with the 360 magnum engine, guess I'll be pulling my work trailer by hand soon cause I can't afford the gas now.

[shipgeek]

You cannot eat gasoline.

Stock up on food.

Gasoline price hyke = food price hyke

 

[spinner]

Still doing that. My point is for now though I still have to work.

[jerryweaver]

http://www.pinalenergyllc.com/  right here in AZ  $ 2.25 gallon fuel.

Three pumps are retailing this fuel in Pheonix. you heard that right three.http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/6281/pinal-energy-to-trademark-arizona-e85

So I talk to folks around town about this and that Red White and Blue thing in their butts and the kids back at the VA with all kinda parts blown off for ME Oil.

Anyhow these ethanol producers have export this fuel off shore to sell most of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

[Letsbereal]

But no matter how you slice and dice it, oil will go up!!!

Well the info is that the Iranians have been more helpful in keeping oil flowing to Greece than the EU has because they refused to for-finance Greece’s oil payments.

This has resulted in driving the Greeks into the Iranian oil supply arms who did provide for-financing.

Now indeed Greece will be again the proverbial sacrificial lamb on the block since they are the most depending on Iranian oil.


Athens News reports:

"Greece relied on Iran for more than half of its oil imports during some months last year after traders and oil majors pulled the plug on supplies and banks refused to provide financing for fear that Athens would default on its debt."


And here more from Zero Edge:

Excerpt:

Hellenic acknowledged earlier this week that it was buying oil from Iran and paying for the shipments later, terms known in industry jargon as open credit terms.

Part of the reason for swapping crude oil for products is that Hellenic is unable to obtain letters of credit from banks because of lingering default fears.

“They have liabilities and banks could come in and demand payment,” said a London-based trading head who decided not to enter talks with Hellenic, saying it was too risky for his firm.


Hellenic said that replacing Iranian oil would be “easy” with supplies from Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Russia.

Traders expect however the terms offered by alternative oil suppliers to be far less generous, as many are still unable to enter into agreements with Greece because of the risk associated with the country’s debt.

But “If something were to happen, it would be unlikely before summer,” one source said.


Bottoms-UP-Line:

In other words, war or no war, Greece better pray that Europe at least pretend to fund the second bailout agreed upon on July 21, 2011, as otherwise, the country will be out of crude by the summer.

Of course, if there is no bailout, the country will also be broke by then too, with rioting and bank runs a daily occurrence.

FROM: As Pentagon Sends Reinforcements To Straits Of Hormuz, Iraq Redux Looms http://www.zerohedge.com/news/pentagon-sends-reinforcements-straits-hormuz-iraq-redux-looms