Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Trump Targets Turkish Economy, Gov’t Officials With Possible Sanctions Over Syria Invasion – Mnuchin

Sputnik – October 11, 2019

President Trump has called Turkey’s operation against Kurdish forces in northern Syria a “bad idea,” and said that in addition to possible sanctions, he would like to see something “much tougher” done against Ankara. Earlier, a group of senators said they were working on a package of “deep and devastating” “sanctions from hell” against Turkey.

President Trump will be signing an executive order giving US officials new powers to target Turkey and its government officials with “very significant sanctions,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has announced.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, the official clarified that the “very significant” powers to sanction Turkey had been authorised, but not yet activated.

“I just met with president Trump, and he has authorised and will be signing a new executive order giving the treasury department, in consultation with himself and Secretary [of State Mike] Pompeo, very significant new sanctions authorities that can be targeted at any person associated with the government of Turkey, any portion of the government,” Mnuchin said. “This will be both primary sanctions and secondary sanctions that will be applicable.”

Mnuchin warned that the US would be able to “shut down” Turkey’s economy if necessary amid Ankara’s ongoing campaign against US-allied Syrian Kurdish forces in northern Syria.

“The president is concerned about the ongoing military offensive and potential targeting of civilians, civilian infrastructure, ethnic or religious minorities. Also, the president wants to make very clear that Turkey not allow even a single ISIS [Daesh] fighter to escape,” the secretary stressed.

On Thursday, lawmakers in the House of Representatives announced that they would support efforts by the Senate to impose sanctions on Turkey, with House Republican Conference chairwoman Liz Cheney saying “President [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan and his regime must face serious consequences” for the attack against Washington’s Syrian Kurdish allies.

Also on Thursday, President Trump told reporters that he was considering doing “something very, very tough with respect to sanctions and other things” over Turkey’s Syria operation.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu later responded to Trump’s string of statements and tweets on the Turkish operation in Syria, saying Washington would not be able to change Ankara’s policy. On Friday, the foreign minister blamed the US for the Syria crisis, saying Ankara was forced to start its operations in part due to the supply of US arms supplies to the Kurds.

Turkey launched its new Syria campaign, dubbed ‘Operation Peace Spring’, on Wednesday, saying its aim was to clear the border area of Kurdish militants and Daesh (ISIS) terrorists and to establish a security zone. Turkey has repeatedly clashed with Syrian Kurdish forces during the long war in Syria, and classifies the YPG People’s Protection Units as ‘terrorists’, accusing them of having links with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, a Turkish Kurdish militia and political movement which has been waging a guerilla campaign against the Turkish state for decades.

On Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Moscow and other countries in the former Soviet space were concerned with the “real threat” potentially posed by the escape of Daesh fighters currently being held in Syrian Kurdish-controlled areas. “I’m not sure if the Turkish army can quickly take control of it,” he said, speaking at a Commonwealth of Independent States summit in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan. Putin and Erdogan held telephone talks on Wednesday, with the Russian president reportedly urging Ankara to assess the situation and to not harm the efforts to settle the crisis in Syria.

On Thursday, Iran, another co-guarantor of the Syrian peace process, called on Turkey to halt its offensive immediately and to pull out of Syria.

Damascus has repeatedly called on all uninvited forces operating in Syria to withdraw immediately, and accused Turkey of “aggressive intentions” and a “disgraceful breach of international law and UN resolutions that respect Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity” with its norther Syria operation.

October 11, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Iranian oil tanker hit by two blasts in Red Sea

Press TV – October 11, 2019

Two separate explosions, possibly caused by missile attacks, have hit an Iranian oil tanker operated by the National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) near the Saudi port city of Jeddah, in what Tehran calls a “dangerous adventure”.

The incident took place some 60 miles from Jeddah early Friday, according to a statement by the NITC.

The explosions have hit the vessel’s hull, causing heavy damages to the vessel’s two main tanks, which has resulted in an oil spill in the Red Sea. The spill is currently stopped, according to officials.

Technical experts are currently investigating the cause of the explosion. They believe it was a “terrorist attack”, unnamed sourced told the Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA).

The statement by NITC said the SABITI tanker was hit by two separate explosions at 5:00 and 5:20 am Friday, probably after being struck by missiles.

It said the crew members are currently safe and none of them has been harmed in the explosions. The tanker is currently in a stable condition, the statement added.

The NITC later dismissed the reports that the vessel had caught fire, according to the Iranian Ministry of Petroleum’s official news agency SHANA.

‘Dangerous adventure’

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman later described the attack as “a dangerous adventure”, warning that all the responsibilities fall on those behind it.

“The investigations conducted by the National Iranian Tanker Company indicate the Iranian tanker has sustained damages after being targeted twice, at half-hourly intervals, from a place near its shipping route in the east of the Red Sea,” Abbas Mousavi said Friday.

He expressed concern about the maritime pollution caused by the massive oil spill in the region after damages inflicted on the vessel’s tanks, and said, “All the responsibilities for the act, including the extensive environmental pollution in the region, fall on those behind the dangerous adventure.”

He also noted that a probe is being conducted on the details of the attack and those behind it, and the results will be announced once it’s done.

Earlier in the day, the US Navy’s Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet announced it is aware of media reports about the blast but had no further information.

“We are aware of the reports but we don’t have any further information,” a spokesman said.

The blasts have caused oil prices to jump by over 2 percent, media reports said.

The explosions came a few months after Iranian oil tanker Happiness-1 faced “engine failure” and lost its control with 26 on board off the Red Sea port of Jeddah, and was later transferred to the port city for maintenance.

According to Iranian officials, the incident had occurred on April 30 while Happiness I was on its way to the Suez Canal, and that water had leaked into the tanker’s engine room.

The Saudis refused to let the vessel leave and demanded that Iran pay $200,000 a day for maintaining the vessel in the port, some $10 million in total. It was finally released on July 20 and returned home.

October 11, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Russian Foreign Ministry Voices Strong Protest Over FBI Questioning Of Russian Lawmaker

Sputnik -October 6, 2019

MOSCOW – Earlier today, the Russian Embassy sent a note of protest to the US State Department over FBI questioning of Russian parliament member Inga Yumasheva upon her arrival to the United States, where she planned to participate in the Fort Ross Dialogue forum.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has strongly condemned the FBI interrogation of Russian parliament member Inga Yumasheva.

In a statement, the government agency said the incident represents another hostile action by the United States against Russia, aimed at further souring the relations between Moscow and Washington.

“The decision-makers in Washington need to think where this systematic fomenting of tensions in US-Russian relations could lead. These policies are shortsighted and dangerous. At the same time, the genuine interest of the US public in the Fort Ross Dialogue forum strongly indicates that American citizens support bilateral interaction, rather than confrontation between our two nations,” the statement said.

Earlier, Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of the Russian parliament’s lower house, called on Saturday the behaviour of US intelligence services toward Russian parliamentarian Inga Yumasheva a “cynical provocation.”

“The US actions are yet another example of a violation of their international obligations. State Duma member Inga Yumasheva received an invitation to participate in the international forum, the US embassy issued her a visa. Inga Yumasheva coordinates communications with US Congress in the State Duma, interacts with colleagues, takes part in a difficult dialogue. And the behaviour of US intelligence services in this regard can only be assessed as a cynical provocation,” Volodin said.

According to the speaker, there are forces in the United States who want to further aggravate relations between Moscow and Washington.

“Actions that create a negative atmosphere in the relations between our countries are unacceptable and deserve condemnation,” Volodin stressed.

Earlier in the day, Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov said that Yumasheva, who was heading to the Fort Ross Dialogue forum, had been detained upon arrival at the airport in New York, and an FBI officer asked her “obscure and unacceptable questions” for an hour, and then offered to continue communication in a cafe in an informal setting. The Russian Embassy in the US sent a note of protest to the US State Department, demanding to explain the incident.

October 6, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Shot down? Testimony by Trump’s Ukraine envoy seems to skewer Democrats’ impeachment narrative

RT | October 4, 2019

Another transcript has poked a hole in the narrative of House Democrats trying to impeach President Donald Trump, as former US special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker testified he never pushed Kiev for ‘dirt’ on former VP Joe Biden.

Volker was grilled for nine hours in a closed-doors session of the House Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, and Oversight committees on Thursday. Democrats on the committees claimed that he was instrumental in pushing the Ukrainian government to reopen a corruption investigation into Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s business dealings in Ukraine.

House Intelligence chair Adam Schiff (D-California) – one of the loudest voices calling for impeachment on Capitol Hill – did not release a transcript of Volker’s testimony. Instead, the Democrats published a select few text messages provided by Volker, amid grim pronouncements that the envoy engaged in a “shadow shakedown,” and helped Trump pressure “a foreign power to investigate a political rival,” to quote Schiff and fellow Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-California).

However, a transcript of Volker’s testimony was obtained by investigative reporter John Solomon and the The Federalist on Friday, and the document paints a rather different picture. In the transcript, Volker describes providing more text messages than those released by Schiff and co, in which “Vice President Biden was never a topic of discussion.”

Another Democrat claim – that Trump ordered military aid to Ukraine withheld in exchange for an investigation into the Bidens’ affairs – was also absent from Volker’s testimony, with the envoy stating that he was only made aware of the suspension of military aid through media reports.

Instead, he described facilitating talks between officials in Kiev and Washington to allow the Ukrainians a shot at refuting a “negative narrative” that had formed in the US on corruption in the country.

“I did so solely because I understood that the new Ukrainian leadership wanted to convince those… who believed such a negative narrative about Ukraine, that times have changed, and that, under President Zelensky, Ukraine is worthy of US support,” he told the hearing.

Volker abruptly resigned last week, after the Democrats announced they would be summoning him to testify.

Prior to the transcript’s release, House Republicans had called for it to be made public, and accused Schiff and his fellow Democrats of “releasing cherry-picked documents” to further his impeachment effort.

President Trump was more blunt, calling Schiff a “lowlife” and demanding he be “questioned at the highest level for Fraud & Treason.”

The transcript is the second such document to cast doubt on the argument for impeachment. Democrats accused Trump of pressuring Zelensky into reopening the investigation in a July phone call, using military aid as leverage. When the White House released a transcript of the call revealing no quid-pro-quo arrangement, that argument too began to look shaky.

Nevertheless, the party has pushed ahead with an impeachment inquiry, albeit without a full vote in the House of Representatives to make it official. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s top prosecutor announced on Friday that his office will reopen the investigation into Burisma, an energy firm whose board Hunter Biden sat on, but denied that the investigation was politically motivated.

October 4, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Ukraine gains from Trump’s impeachment inquiry

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | October 2, 2019

The controversy swirling around the phone conversation between the US President Donald Trump and Ukraine President Vladimir Zelensky regarding the business interests of former vice-president Joe Biden’s son is having a salutary effect on the conflict in Ukraine.

The US Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker has resigned from his official position once it transpired that his name appeared in the whistleblower complaint about Trump’s dealings with Zelensky. (Meanwhile, Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, also implicated Volker saying that the latter encouraged him to speak to Ukrainian officials regarding Biden and his son Hunter Biden.) Volker is expected to testify in the Congress’ impeachment inquiry on Thursday.

Now, Volker also enjoys an impeccable reputation as a Russia hawk with extensive diplomatic experience on that front in NATO previously. He recently said that “there is a long way to go before there would be any normalisation between the two countries (Russia and Ukraine). Russia’s invasion, occupation, and claimed annexation of Crimea will never be accepted by Ukraine.”

Volker’s exit is the surest sign that for the foreseeable future, US-Ukraine relations have become toxic. Put differently, for the first time after the “regime change” in Ukraine in 2014, no US official worth his salt will want to risk hobnobbing with the powers that be in Kiev.

This “hands-off” phase gives Zelensky a free hand to handle his country’s relations with Russia. The same holds good for Moscow which gets an opportunity to deal with Kiev without the Americans breathing over the neck of the Ukrainian president.

It is in this backdrop that we need to asses the outcome of the meeting of the Trilateral Contact Group on Ukraine – Ukraine, Russia and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe — in Minsk on October 1. The meeting agreed to a peace process known as the “Steinmeier Formula,” green-lighting local elections in the Russian-controlled regions of Donbas.

The meeting agreed that the warring parties will withdraw their military and equipment in Donbas, dismantle fortifications, and conduct de-mining. The agreement envisages that the separatist regions will get a special self-governing status after they hold local elections. (The pro-Russia separatists are seeking a special status allowing for self-governance in the Donbas region, large parts of which have been under their control since April 2014.)

In preparation for the election, the Ukrainian government and separatist leaders will withdraw troops from two locations in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions next week. No doubt, this development signifies a major step by Zelensky toward resolution of the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

The “Steinmeier Formula” is a concept attributed to then German Foreign Minister (presently president of Germany), Frank-Walter Steinmeier dating back to 2015-2016, designed to implement the political clauses of the Minsk “accords” (2014 and 2015) to settle the conflict in Donbas.

However, the concept could not be implemented due to Kiev’s reservations (under American pressure.) Washington persuaded Kiev that Steinmeier’s Formula in effect served to legitimise Russia’s “proxies” in the separatist regions by means of staging local elections, which in turn aimed at allowing Russia’s de facto control of that territory, even if the territory were to be notionally reinserted into Ukraine.

The former pro-US Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko simply refused to work with Russia, Germany and France to codify Steinmeier’s Formula. Indeed, the US strategy aimed at preventing any “thaw” between Kiev and Moscow.

Poroshenko maintained that holding democratically valid elections in Donbas under the shadow of a Russian presence there was unthinkable. Volker too repeatedly articulated this stance. In early September, Volker was quoted as saying that a secure environment would have to be established in Donbas before implementing the political and technical procedures for holding elections.

Volker underscored that as minimal preconditions to a secure environment, the Russian military must withdraw from Donbas, the Russian-backed separatist forces must be dissolved, and the Ukrainian side of the border has to be brought under non-Russian control.

The Russian interpretation of the Minsk accords has been that all solutions (special status, elections, border control, etc.) be negotiated between Kiev and the separatist leaders in Donbas. Germany and France do not challenge the Russian interpretation.

Therefore, the breakthrough on Tuesday must be equally attributed to the political transition in Kiev leading to the election of Zelensky (on a mandate of resolving the conflict in Donbas and normalising relations with Russia) as well as the elbow room he is getting lately to shake off American pressure. Volker’s exit will do a world of good for resolving the Donbas conflict.

The agreement on October 1 paves the way for a summit between Zelensky and the leaders of Russia, France and Germany within the ambit of the “Normandy Four” (France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine). Russia had previously refused such a meeting, unless Ukraine agreed to hold local election in the Donbas region.

On Tuesday, Zelensky said that nothing should stand in the way of the summit, and that a date would be announced soon. The French President Emmanuel Macron said he expected the summit in the coming weeks.

Germany, which authored the Steinmeier Formula, feels gratified. The German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said, “I am glad that the constructive atmosphere at the session of the Contact Group in Minsk has led to long-awaited progress. This makes way for the Normandy Four summit and further steps in the implementation of the Minsk Agreements.”

The Kremlin concurs, too.

The “big picture” is that Russia’s relations with the European powers are looking up, finally. The close consultations between Macron and Russian President Vladimir Putin in the recent weeks and months are resulting in a determined effort to address the frozen conflict in Ukraine, which had led to the EU sanctions against Russia. (See my blog Eurasian politics on the cusp of change.)

On the other hand, liberated from the clutches of manipulative American diplomats, especially following Volker’s exit, Zelensky can be expected to advance his strategy to improve relations with Russia. In fact, Zelensky has lost no time to initiate the first steps to introduce legislation giving “special status” to Donbas.

“We will have a new law, that will be drafted by the parliament in close cooperation with the public after a public discussion. No red lines will be crossed in it, and that is why there will be no capitulation,” Zelensky said on Tuesday.

October 3, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

Hamas: We are ready for comprehensive general elections

Palestine Information Center – September 28, 2019

GAZA – The Hamas Movement has announced its acceptance of calls for holding a comprehensive general elections for the presidency, the Palestinian Legislative Council and the National Council.

However, it stressed the need for a national consensus on the mechanisms for the success of these elections.

“We followed Mahmoud Abbas’s speech at the UN General Assembly, in which he conveyed the Palestinian people’s suffering from injustice as a result of the Israeli occupation and its ongoing crimes and the blatant American bias in favor of the occupation and expressed his rejection of the American deal of the century,” Hamas said in a press release on Thursday.

Hamas criticized Abbas for clinging to the peace process and the illusion of negotiation with the occupation, urging him to renounce the disastrous accords of Oslo and to leave what it called the square of political settlement which proved failure and caused damage to the Palestinian cause.

“In light of what Mahmoud Abbas said about his intention to call for general elections after his return to Ramallah and out of the national need to pool the efforts in the face of the current serious challenges, especially the deal of the century, Hamas declares its readiness for comprehensive general elections,” its statement underlined.

September 28, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

House Intelligence Committee releases whistleblower report on Trump-Zelensky call

RT | September 26, 2019

The whistleblower complaint that led to the impeachment inquiry against US President Donald Trump has been released. In it, the leaker admits he did not actually hear the phone call at the center of the scandal.

Released by the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday, the complaint details the circumstances surrounding Trump’s July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Democrats argue that Trump attempted to pressure Zelensky into reopening a corruption investigation into 2020 candidate Joe Biden’s son Hunter, and his business dealings in the country.

The complaint reveals little new about the call itself. In it, the whistleblower – believed to be a member of the intelligence community – admitted that they had not actually been privy to the call, but went on secondhand accounts from those who were. They also detailed a series of contacts between US and Ukrainian officials, some pertaining to the investigation into Hunter Biden’s business dealings.

Though Trump himself released a transcript of the call on Wednesday – which did not reveal a quid-pro-quo arrangement as Democrats alleged – the party has still pressed ahead with an impeachment inquiry. As the complaint was released, the committee prepared to interview Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire about his handling of the complaint.

According to the whistleblower, Trump’s mention of the investigation in the phone call amounted to soliciting “interference from a foreign country in the 2020 US election.”

Accompanying the report was a letter from Maguire, who said the complaint “appears credible” and determined it to be an “urgent concern.”

President Trump responded angrily to the release, accusing Democrats of “trying to destroy the Republican party and all that it stands for.”

The complaint adds little of value to the Democrats’ case against Trump. Much of it is built on the concerns of anonymous officials who viewed the call as a “flagrant” abuse of office. The whistleblower also expressed concern that the White House apparently attempted to block the release of the call transcript. However, Trump’s release of the record on Wednesday rendered this concern moot.

Much of the whistleblower’s story surrounding the call is built on media reports. According to one of these reports, Ukrainian officials close to Zelensky claimed to have “evidence” that other officials in Kiev had “interfered” with the 2016 US election on behalf of the Democratic Party. Another report alleged that Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, planned to travel to Kiev to pressure Zelensky to investigate this supposed “evidence.”

Giuliani’s trip never happened, and these reports, alongside the whistleblower’s “general understanding of the state of affairs” make up the bulk of the complaint.

Also cited as evidence against Trump is his statement to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos earlier this summer, in which he said that he would “listen” to dirt on his political rivals from a foreign country. The president later said: “They all do it, they always have, and that’s the way it is.”

Whether the transcript will be enough to sustain an impeachment inquiry against Trump remains to be seen. Unless House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-California) can solicit more damaging information from the whistleblower in a committee hearing, the call transcript itself remains the only piece of hard evidence against Trump, but doesn’t detail the level of abuse the whistleblower alleged.

Furthermore, while a majority of House members back impeaching Trump, the American public does not share their opinion. A Quinnipiac University poll released on Wednesday shows that only 37 percent of voters support impeachment, the vast majority of them Democrats.

Though many Democrats long to see Trump impeached and removed from office, more fear that impeachment would strengthen the president’s chances come 2020, and would give credence to his argument that the effort to remove him is “the single greatest witch hunt in American history.”

September 26, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | | Leave a comment

Iranian President’s multifaceted UNGA speech, directed at President Trump, falls on deaf ears

By Sarah Abed | September 26, 2019

All eyes this week are on the events taking place at the 74th annual UN General Assembly (UNGA) which kicked off on Monday at UN Headquarters in New York. Hundreds of meetings, speeches, and events are planned to take place with representatives and world leaders from around the world.

In an entirely predictable move to appease the US, a joint statement was issued on Monday, by France, Germany, and the U.K, parroting Washington’s position of blaming Iran for the September 14th missile and drone strikes on Saudi Oil infrastructure.

In the joint statement they wrote, “it is clear for us that Iran bears responsibility for this attack. There is no other plausible explanation.” They reiterated their commitment to the JCPOA but called for new talks on a more comprehensive long-term agreement that deals with nuclear, regional, and missile activities.

In response to the statement, Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said that the three nations should muster the will to forge their own path rather than parroting absurd US claims and making requests which are inconsistent with established JCPOA terms. He also stated that there will be no new deal without compliance with the current one.

In reviewing a lot of the side conversations that have been taking place between President Rouhani and other world leaders from France, Germany, the U.K., Switzerland, Sweden, Pakistan, etc. it appears that in the US’s absence these nations seem supportive of Iran’s efforts to keep the JCPOA deal alive. However, threats from Washington to sanction countries that do business with Iran like China, are worrisome and causing them to peddle back.

In a speech given on Wednesday, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani said, “The Middle East is burning in the flames of war, bloodshed, aggression, occupation and religious and sectarian fanaticism and extremism.” President Rouhani spoke about Iran’s desire to solve and not create problems. He stated the United States was openly violating its responsibilities under the JCPOA and invited the US to come back to the negotiating table if they are willing to end sanctions and threats which violate principles of ethics and international law.

President Rouhani stressed that his proposal is clear they are not interested in war, in threats, in bullying, and want everyone involved to act according to the law and fulfill their obligations. President Rouhani spoke about Iran’s decades-long fight against terrorism and how on the contrary the US has been supporting and arming terrorist groups for decades. He spoke about the US’s involvement in Syria, Yemen, and Israel’s crimes against Palestinians.

Iranian President spoke about the need for the US to pull its troops out of the Middle Eastern region, saying that the ultimate way to achieve peace, security and independence is for the neighboring countries to work things out without foreign interference, which is fueling insecurity rather than bringing peace.

President Rouhani spoke about his new initiative the Coalition of Hope or Hormuz Peace Endeavor (HOPE) which he is proposing at the UNGA and encouraging cooperation in providing collective energy security, freedom of navigations and free flow of oil and other energy resources from and to the countries off the Strait of Hormuz and beyond.

President Rouhani said that this initiative is based on a commitment to UN principles, objectives, mutual respect, mutual interests, dialog, understanding, respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, peaceful resolution of conflicts and most importantly non-aggression and non-interference in the domestic affairs of each other.

“The issues of the region are too big and important for the United States to deal with. A country that has failed to resolve the issues of Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, and has been the spearhead of extremism, Talibanism and Daeshism will never be able to resolve more sophisticated issues,” stated Iranian President Rouhani.

On Wednesday, a meeting chaired by the European Union’s top diplomat, Federica Mogherini took place with representatives of those same three European countries along with Russian and Chinese representatives and Iran’s Foreign Minister Mr. Zarif. It was agreed upon that all participants wanted to see the deal fully implemented and that they were determined to continue all efforts to preserve the agreement.  Participants were reminded that the agreement was endorsed by the U.N. Security council and that the pact “remains a key element of the global nuclear nonproliferation architecture, and a significant achievement of multilateral diplomacy.”

President Trump’s decision last year to not only unilaterally withdrawal from the JCPOA but also enforce a “maximum pressure campaign” is seen by the Iranian government as “economic terrorism”. Harsh sanctions not only target financial establishments and government officials but the most vulnerable Iranian civilians who as a result are having trouble accessing food and medicine.

Underneath all the grandstanding both nations are not genuinely interested in war. Iran understands Trump’s distaste with the JCPOA being that it was negotiated by former president Barak Obama’s regime. They are willing to make some modifications and give him his own deal even though the previous one took a decade of negotiations, but for that to happen they need relief from crippling sanctions. They need the United States to show a genuine interest in coming back to the negotiating table. We’ve all seen how in the course of a day or a tweet tensions can suddenly flare up.

President Rouhani’s speech was an invitation to President Trump to come to the negotiating table. He outlined what needs to be done and Iran’s willingness and desire to choose peace over war. Washington has expressed similar sentiments at times but has then quickly reverted to rebuking and enforcing stricter sanctions rather than alleviating them. It’s in everyone’s best interest that all parties involved keep a cool head and come to agreeable terms, for the sake of humanity.

Sarah Abed is a political analyst with BRICS.

September 26, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Beware of blowback from Afghan policies

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | September 25, 2019

During an exclusive interview with the Associated Press this week, the former Afghan president Hamid Karzai has severely questioned the rationale behind the presidential election which is due to take place in his country on September 28. Those who drive the Afghan policy in the Indian establishment should take careful note.

Karzai’s opinion runs completely contrary to the Indian stance. Delhi must be probably the only world capital that is enthusiastic about the Afghan presidential election. Delhi has exhorted Afghan people (“brothers and sisters”) to turn out in large numbers to cast their ballots

The Indian calculus is that by rigging the election, the incumbent president Ashraf Ghani and his group will be able to secure another 4-years in power. What brings the Indian establishment and Ghani’s group on the same page is their common interest in preventing the Taliban from holding the levers of power in Kabul, no matter what it takes. India has emerged in the most recent years as the main patron of Ghani’s group.

Ghani’s group comprising figures like the country’s security czar Amarullah Saleh maintain a policy trajectory that is hostile toward Pakistan, which helps Delhi’s hardline policies toward Pakistan. In this ‘Chanakyan’ thinking, India stands to gain if Pakistan is bogged down in a seamless war of attrition, sandwiched between its two hostile neighbours.

A hostile regime in Kabul will never compromise on the Durand Line, which implies that Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity will remain under challenge for the foreseeable future if Ghani and his group remain in power.

Delhi blithely overlooks that the Afghan situation also impacts regional security and stability and that India’s medium and long term interests lie in the stabilisation of Afghanistan. Hopefully, the views expressed by Karzai, who is a close and longstanding friend of India, would have a salutary effect on the Indian establishment and prompt it to rethink.

Karzai is spot on in his assessment that the prevailing politico-security situation in Afghanistan is not at all conducive to the holding of a free and fair election. Ironically, the security situation in Jammu and Kashmir is nowhere near as precarious as in Afghanistan and yet the elections in the Indian state have been postponed indefinitely.

The outcome of Saturday’s election will be severely contested by the other Afghan (non-Taliban) groups and we are going to witness a replay of the 2014 charade when Ghani’s ‘victory’ under extremely controversial circumstances marred by cheating on an industrial scale stalled the transition. Washington finally deputed then US senator John Kerry to Kabul to cajole the warring factions to accept the idea of a so-called national unity government.

The spectre that is facing Afghanistan is a highly problematic political transition. Considering that more than half the country is under Taliban control and that the Taliban are viscerally opposed to the charade of election on Saturday, Ghani’s legitimacy to rule for another term is in serious doubt. Delhi should ponder over the emergent scenario.

Only through an inclusive democratic process can the Afghan transition be peacefully managed. And that is only possible if the transition is predicated on a peace agreement with the Taliban, followed by inter-Afghan dialogue (including with representatives of Ghani’s ‘government’) on a political settlement, which would be put before a Loya Jirga for approval. The elections should be held only thereafter.

On the contrary, the US President Trump’s impetuous decision to call off the negotiations with the Taliban (although a draft agreement was initialed in Doha) has been seized by Ghani’s group to front-load the presidential election. This is like putting the cart before the horse.

What will happen now is that Ghani’s group will rig the election and win it and proceed to claim a mandate to rule for another 4 years, while other Afghan groups — Taliban and non-Taliban — will not accept Ghani and his coterie for a second term.

There are signs that even Washington has distanced itself from Ghani’s government by withholding assistance to the tune of $160 million. The US state department statement announcing this was highly critical of the Ghani government.

Equally, the USG-funded Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty in a commentary on Monday was frankly skeptical of the entire exercise of Saturday’s election. It sounded a warning that “many Afghans remain wary of the landmark presidential vote, fearing Taliban violence aimed at disrupting the vote and disillusioned at the widespread fraud and corruption that has tainted other elections since the U.S.-led invasion in 2001.

“Analysts say voter fatigue and safety concerns could depress turnout to undermine the legitimacy of the vote and give any winner only with a weak mandate to rule a country reeling from economic turmoil, an escalating war, and political infighting.”

Where does all this leave India? Clearly, Delhi’s backing for Ghani’s group is a cynical, self-serving attempt to exploit an unstable Afghanistan to India’s advantage. It does not constitute an Afghan policy. It reflects a pitiless mindset to keep Afghanistan in civil war conditions for as long as possible. It is indifferent towards the long-suffering Afghan people (here and here.) How is such a ‘policy’ any different from Pakistan’s?

Surely, the Indian embassy in Kabul would have reported on the meeting in Kabul on Monday of prominent Afghan political figures including Mujahideen leaders and erstwhile Northern Alliance stalwarts — former President Karzai, former Vice President Yunus Qanooni, former Balkh governor Atta Mohammad Noor, former Minister of Energy and Water Mohammad Ismail Khan, former National Security Advisor Rangin Dadfar Spanta and so on — which issued a formal statement calling for the deferment of the presidential election and an immediate resumption of the US-Taliban negotiations.

The statement highlighted that the Afghan people do not trust in the electoral management organisations to prevent “widespread manipulation” of the presidential election. It said, “There are many realities which show that the election will not reduce the crisis in the country, instead it will double the crisis, fuel division among the people, weaken institutions and affect the trust in democracy and political partnership.”

September 25, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

EU Assures US Brussels Will Not Act Toward Iran Without Washington’s Consent – Treasury

Sputnik – September 25, 2019

US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said Wednesday that the European Union has assured the United States that Brussels would not do anything – with regard to sanctions against Iran – without Washington’s consent.

The situation in the Persian Gulf region worsened after the United States walked out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran nuclear deal, in May 2018 and reinstated harsh sanctions on Iran.

Exactly one year after the US withdrawal, Tehran announced that it would be gradually reducing its nuclear obligations every 60 days until EU signatories to the accord ensured Iran’s interests amid US sanctions. Earlier in September, Tehran embarked on the third stage of its rollback plan.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said during a speech at the UN General Assembly on Wednesday that the only way Tehran would enter negotiations with Washington is if it returns to the JCPOA and stops imposing sanctions against the country.

US Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook said earlier that Washington would like to see Brussels impose sanctions on those who support what he described as Iran’s missile and drone programs, adding that there must be an international effort to counter Iran’s activities in the Middle East.

The EU, meanwhile, has established the INSTEX (the Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges) trade mechanism to ease non-dollar trade with Tehran in the wake of the US sanctions and in an effort to save the JCPOA.

Earlier this month, Brussels agreed to contribute $15 billion to the INSTEX fund. In September, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that the country would resume compliance with the Iran nuclear deal if it received the $15 billion tranche before the end of the year.

On 14 July 2015, Iran and six international mediators — China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States — ratified the historic JCPOA, more commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, aimed at preventing Iran from designing and manufacturing nuclear weapons.

The deal provides for the gradual lifting of economic and financial sanctions imposed on Iran by the United Nations Security Council, the United States, and the European Union in exchange for Tehran’s guarantees that the country’s nuclear program would remain peaceful.

US President Donald Trump announced on 8 May 2018 that the United States would withdraw from the JCPOA and restore its sanctions on Iran, lifted by Washington as part of the nuclear deal. The restrictions target not only Iran but also other countries that continue to do business with Iran.

The remaining JCPOA signatories slammed the United States’ move and reaffirmed their commitment to respect their obligation under the deal.

September 25, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Iran’s tango with Europe is rooted in its traditions and culture

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | September 24, 2019

The joint statement issued by the leaders of France, Germany and the United Kingdom on September 23 indicting Iran for the attacks on the Saudi Aramco plants two weeks ago is at once consequential and declaratory.

The joint statement may seem a serious diplomatic setback for Tehran, as the joint French-German-UK (E3) stance may transform as the European Union position. If that were to happen, only Russia and China, among world powers who are signatories to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, continue to maintain that there isn’t evidence yet to establish Iran’s culpability.

Prima facie, Iran’s dependence on Russian and Chinese goodwill would further increase. Both Moscow and Beijing harbour misgivings about Iran’s nuclear and missile development programmes and some of its regional policies, and have so far played coy refraining from frontally assaulting the US sanctions against Iran, while rhetorically critical. It’s a set pattern.   

Secondly, Iran’s diplomatic thrust projecting itself as a factor of regional stability suffers a PR setback if it is perceived as undermining regional security and risking a major conflict involving the US. Thirdly, the joint statement brings on board other related issues. These are, principally three.

One, the three E3 have repeated their call on Iran “to reverse its decisions to reduce compliance with the deal and to adhere fully to its commitments under it… [and] to cooperate fully with the IAEA.”

Two, the E3 underscored that Iran should “accept negotiation on a long-term framework for its nuclear programme as well as on issues related to regional security, including its missiles programme and other means of delivery.” Three, they have urged Iran to engage in “with all relevant partners interested in de-escalation of tensions in the Middle East” and “refrain from further provocation and escalation.”

Clearly, this is a one-sided statement.  Tehran insists that its compliance with the 2015 deal is part of mutual commitments, but not only the US but also the E3 failed to fulfil their part of the commitments, which in turn compelled Iran to react in accordance with the stipulated provisions of the deal (which allow Tehran to take steps if other parties are defaulting.)

Again, Tehran has also repeatedly stated that its missile programme constitutes a “red line” and it is not open to discussions / negotiations. Suffice to say, the joint statement marks a calibrated distancing from Iran on the part of the European powers.

The joint statement smacks of the “Boris Johnson effect” — London acting as the US’ junior partner. It cannot be a coincidence that Britain pushed for a European stance critical of Iran at a juncture when the US and UK are stepping up efforts to assemble a politico-military coalition to address maritime security in the Persian Gulf (basically, to isolate and provoke Iran in its backyard.)

Britain is considering participation in the US-led military coalition alongside Saudi Arabia and the UAE. France and Germany remain lukewarm about the Anglo-American enterprise.

Having said that, the E3 are also highly vulnerable to pressure from petrodollar states of the Persian Gulf, and in this case Saudi Arabia and UAE have high stakes.

Conceivably, the Trump administration can derive satisfaction that the European stance on the Iran question has edged closer to its policies (although E3 do not subscribe to the maximum pressure approach.)

How Tehran perceives this E3 shift is important. Iran’s diplomacy is supple and Tehran will unlikely deny itself the diplomatic usages of the European conduit.

The point is, Iran greatly values its strategic autonomy and factors in that Russian and Chinese support comes with strings attached. Besides, Iran’s ambitions as a regional power demand the creation of an advanced economy with innovation, which is only possible if it has access to western technology and capital.

Therefore, while the “Look East” and multipolarity of the world order remain key templates of Iran’s world view, that cannot come at the cost of Iran’s integration into the western world.

Arguably, the mildly worded European statement leaves the door open still for further cogitations between France and Iran over the diplomatic negotiations initiated on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Biarritz recently.

Just a few hours before releasing the E-3 statement, French President Emmanuel Macron had warned that “one must be very careful in attributing responsibility” for the Aramco attacks.

“There are clusters of clues, but this bombardment is a new military event that changes the region’s ecosystem,” he said, stressing that caution was needed in apportioning blame for the attack. Since then, Macron also has had a meeting with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in New York on September 23.

Given the “westernism” in Iran’s psyche and considering the European powers’ manifest keenness to have a productive relationship with Iran, both Iran and the E3 will ensure that life moves on.

Historically, Britain has a profound understanding of Iran’s politics, culture and traditions and it is hard to see even PM Boris Johnson identifying with US’ maximum pressure approach, although he has taken a position closer to Trump.

For the present, London feels somewhat humiliated over the “tanker war” with Iran, but it cannot be the new normal. Johnson is due to meet Rouhani today and may even be transmitting messages from Trump.

September 24, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

US refusal to issue visas to Russian UN General Assembly delegates is ‘political move’ – senator

RT | September 24, 2019

The chairman of the Russian Federation Council’s international affairs committee, Konstantin Kosachyov, has described the US’ refusal to issue entry visas to a number of Russian delegates to the UN General Assembly session as a political decision.

“The US deliberately took a move to delay the issuance of visas. This is obviously a political, not a technical decision,” he was quoted as saying. The Russian delegation had asked for visas 55 days ago, the senator noted. “Such actions by the American side require a ‘painful’ response from Russia,” Kosachyov told reporters.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said earlier that the US has broken international rules by failing to issue visas to Russian senators, adding that a tough response from both Moscow and the United Nations is needed.

September 24, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »