Iran says has still not received any initiative from other side in Vienna talks
By Homa Lezgee – Press TV – December 13, 2021
Vienna – Iran’s lead negotiator at the Vienna talks aimed at reviving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the JCPOA, says his team has not yet received any proposal or initiative from the other side to help resolve the outstanding issues.
In the past days questions have arisen about the drafts being discussed and whether the Iranian team’s amendments and proposals, offered in the form of two written drafts at the beginning of the seventh round, are still on the table.
Iran says it will only go back to full compliance after the full and verifiable removal of US sanctions and while some sources say the Iranian demands are stalling progress, others like Russia’s lead delegate maintain that the atmosphere is positive amid intensive dialogue.
On Sunday, a third Working Group focusing on the sequencing of compliance by all parties was held for the first time during the seventh round of the talks. That was followed by a trilateral meeting between Iran, Russia and China. There’s still no official word on the duration of the current round of negotiations.
US and Iran are getting ever closer to war. Washington has only itself to blame
By Scott Ritter | RT | November 9, 2021
A tense US-Iranian naval standoff appears to be related to the US enforcement of unilateral oil sanctions targeting Iran. Iran’s response suggests that Tehran may not be willing to play this game for much longer.
Amid growing tensions in the region, the United States and Iran carried out tit-for-tat naval exercises in the Persian Gulf designed to send a signal to the other – mess around at your own risk. The US exercises comprising six coastal patrol boats, supported by an expeditionary mobile base platform ship and a guided-missile destroyer, involved live fire exercises using surface-to-surface missiles. Iran followed this display of US military prowess with a demonstration of its own in the form of the annual Zolfaqar military exercise, which included live-fire drills involving anti-ship missiles, drone swarms, and submarine-launched torpedoes.
The dueling drills come nearly two weeks after a confrontation in international waters between the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and the US Navy. While the specific circumstances surrounding this confrontation remain unclear, with both Iran and the US providing competing narratives, one thing is for certain – on October 24, 2021, Iranian and US naval forces faced off in a tense environment, loaded weapons pointed at one another, while Iranian forces boarded and took control of a Vietnamese-flagged oil tanker, which was then sailed into Iranian territorial waters, ending the face-off.
The Iranians claim that the US was engaged in an act of “piracy,” trying to seize a shipment of Iranian oil that was loaded onto the MV Southys, owned by the Hanoi-based OPEC Petroleum Transport Company. Iran was compelled to board the vessel, using helicopter-borne commandos, and then sail the ship and its 26-person crew to the Persian Gulf port city of Bandar Abbas. The US denies the Iranian accusations, instead claiming that US Navy vessels in the region responded to reports of a ship in distress and were simply monitoring the situation.
History suggests that the Iranian version of events is closer to the truth. The US has a reputation for seizing Iranian petroleum shipments on the high seas, part of what it claims to be the lawful enforcement of US sanctions targeting Iran (it should be noted that the sanctions in question are unilateral in nature, and have no enforceable status under international law.) In August 2020, the US seized four Liberian-flagged vessels (the M/T Bella, M/T Bering, M/T Pandi and M/T Luna) carrying approximately 1.116 million barrels of fuel. No military force was used by the US in the seizure of the cargo. Instead, the US worked with the assistance of foreign partners to threaten ship owners, insurers, and captains with sanctions to force them to surrender their cargo to US control. In the case of the four Liberian-flagged tankers, the ships sailed to the US port of Houston, where their cargo was offloaded.
On the same day that the US affected the seizure of the four Liberian-flagged tankers, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps boarded another Liberian-flagged tanker, the M/T Wila, off the coast of the United Arab Emirates, using tactics which mirrored those that had been used against the MV Southys – a special forces team was inserted onto the deck of the tanker using a helicopter, while Iranian patrol boats circled nearby. After five hours, the Iranians departed the ship. The US confirmed that the Iranian seizure of the M/T Wila was related to the US seizure of the four tankers. “They [the Iranians] were looking for their gas,”a US spokesperson noted.
According to Iranian sources, the boarding of the MV Southys was related to the August 2020 seizure of the four tankers carrying Iranian oil. An analysis of the events leading up to the seizure of the MV Southys by Iranian forces suggests that this indeed may be the case. According to an anti-Iranian advocacy group, United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), satellite imagery from June 2021 shows the MV Southys engaged in what is known as ‘ship-to-ship’ transfer of oil from an Iranian tanker, the Oman Pride. In August 2021 the US Treasury Department named the Oman Pride as an asset of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps Quds Force, which was part of a larger scheme to raise funds for the Quds Force by selling Iranian oil in violation of sanctions. According to UANI, most of this oil ends up being sold to China.
According to the Tankers Trackers website (affiliated with UANI), the MV Southys was supposed to make a delivery of some 700,000 barrels of crude oil to a Chinese port. For some reason, the shipment was rejected, and the MV Southys headed back to the port of Sohar, Oman. The timing of the rejection of the MV Southys’ cargo coincides with a letter sent by UANI to the Vietnam Maritime Administration, which detailed its analysis of satellite photos it claimed showed the MV Southys received a ship-to-ship transfer of oil from the Oman Pride. Given the high-profile composition of the leadership of UANI, which includes many former US government officials and heads of foreign intelligence services, it is likely that this letter was sent in conjunction with outreach by UANI to the US government, which in turn could have put the Vietnamese government on notice that it could be subjected to sanctions for doing business with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. If this scenario is accurate, the Vietnamese government could have ordered the MV Southys not to offload its cargo, leaving it no choice but to return to the Persian Gulf.
When the MV Southys approached Iranian waters, it was shadowed by a US guided-missile destroyer, the USS Sullivans. Perhaps fearing that the US would seek to take control of the MV Southys and its contents, and uncertain as to the loyalty of the vessel’s captain, the Iranians opted to take control of the tanker and divert it to Bandar Abbas, where its contents could be offloaded. By taking control of the MV Southys in this manner, Iran also avoided the logistical difficulties of attempting a ship-to-ship transfer of oil to an Iranian tanker while under the watchful eyes of the US Navy.
The truth about what transpired with the MV Southys will undoubtedly emerge in the weeks to come. What is certain, however, is that the Iranians have long classified US sanctions against them as violations of international law, and US efforts to seize Iranian oil shipments acts of piracy. The seizure of the MV Southys by Iranian forces, and the aggressive way the US Navy was confronted by Iranian patrol boats, suggests that Iran is determined to forcefully confront any future attempts by the US to enforce its unilateral sanctions. One of the major roadblocks to restarting the Iran nuclear deal, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), is the issue of the US ending its sanctions regime against Iran. If anything, the delay in restarting the JCPOA has shown that there is a military risk attached to the political, and that any continued delay in the negotiations could result in war.
Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ‘SCORPION KING: America’s Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.’
US continues to defy International Court of Justice’s orders in cases filed by Iran
Press TV – October 28, 2021
Iran’s permanent ambassador to the United Nations says the US administration continues to disregard orders issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which have been handed down in cases filed by Iran against US and vice versa.
Majid Takht-Ravanchi made the remarks in an address to the UN General Assembly on Thursday, emphasizing that Iran acknowledges “the vital role of the ICJ in the prevention of hostilities and mitigation of crises through peaceful settlement of disputes as well as in strengthening the rule of law, preserving international order and tackling unilateral measures.”
“Due to adoption of a number of legislative and executive acts in the United States in flagrant violation of international law, the immunity of states and their properties from suit before US courts as well as immunity from jurisdiction and enforcement have been removed against Iran,” he added.
Takht-Ravanchi noted that as a result of the filing of cases in the US courts against Iran as well as its officials and the Central Bank (CBI), “the assets of the CBI have been subjected to execution in order to satisfy a default judgment.”
“The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that such asset blocking and enforcement proceedings against the CBI and certain Iranian companies and banks in the US is in violation of provisions of ‘Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights of 1955’ between the two countries,” Iran’s UN envoy said.
Takht-Ravanchi said following the unilateral withdrawal of the US from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and the unlawful re-imposition of sanctions against Tehran, Iran filed an application instituting proceedings against the US with regard to violations of multiple provisions of the Treaty of Amity.
He said on October 3, 2018, the ICJ issued an order unanimously requiring the US to remove any impediments on the importation of foodstuffs as well as medicines and medical devices to Iran and also ordered Washington to ensure that the licenses and necessary authorizations are granted and that payments and other transfers of funds are not subject to any restriction in so far as they relate to the aforementioned goods and services.
“Regrettably, the United States has not only failed to comply with the Court’s Order but, by imposing new sanctions, especially during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, has also deliberately defied that Order,” Takht-Ravanchi said.
Iran, he noted, has on several occasions brought the US non-compliance with the Order to the Court’s attention and the answer provided by the US in this regard has always been a repetition of its previous contentions; that humanitarian transactions are exempt from its sanctions.
However, Takht-Ravanchi added, “through tightening the grip of sanctions after the Court’s Order, the US … violated this Order which requires that ‘Both parties shall refrain from any action which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve’.”
Tehran has on multiple occasions called on the United Nations court to order the immediate lifting of the sanctions, and demanded compensation for damages incurred in their wake.
Sanctions had been lifted under the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers- the US, Germany, France, Britain, China and Russia.
Former President Donald Trump unilaterally pulled the US out of the deal with Iran in May 2018 and reimposed draconian sanctions as part of the so-called maximum pressure campaign against the country.
Earlier this year, the ICJ ruled that it can take on Iran’s bid to overturn illegal US sanctions re-imposed by Trump after he pulled Washington out of the nuclear deal.
The United States had tried to argue that Iran could not base claims at the ICJ on the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between the two countries. However, a majority of a panel of 16 judges found the treaty could be used as a basis for the ICJ’s jurisdiction.
The new US administration said it is “disappointed” by the ruling, despite President Joe Biden’s criticism of his predecessor for reinstating the bans on the Islamic Republic after leaving the landmark accord.
Israel to Attack Iran? Washington Gives the Green Light to the ‘Military Option’
By Philip Giraldi | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 28, 2021
Some might recall candidate Joe Biden’s pledge to work to rejoin the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) which was a multilateral agreement intended to limit Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon. The JCPOA was signed by President Barack Obama in 2015, when Biden was Vice President, and was considered one of the only foreign policy successes of his eight years in office. Other signatories to it were Britain, China, Germany, France, and Russia and it was endorsed by the United Nations. The agreement included unannounced inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities by the IAEA and, by all accounts, it was working and was a non-proliferation success story. In return for its cooperation Iran was to receive its considerable assets frozen in banks in the United States and was also to be relieved of the sanctions that had been placed on it by Washington and other governments.
The JCPOA crashed and burned in 2018 when President Donald Trump ordered U.S. withdrawal from the agreement, claiming that Iran was cheating and would surely move to develop a nuclear weapon as soon as the first phase of the agreement was completed. Trump, whose ignorance on Iran and other international issues was profound, had surrounded himself with a totally Zionist foreign policy team, including members of his own family, and had bought fully into the arguments being made by Israel as well as by Israel Lobby predominantly Jewish groups to include the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Trump’s time in office was spent pandering to Israel in every conceivable way, to include recognizing Jerusalem as the country’s capital, granting Israel the green light for creating and expanding illegal settlements on the West Bank and recognizing the occupied Syrian Golan Heights as part of Israel.
Given Trump’s record, most particularly the senseless and against-American-interests abandonment of JCPOA, it almost seemed a breath of fresh air to hear Biden’s fractured English as he committed his administration to doing what he could to rejoin the other countries who were still trying to make the agreement work. After Biden was actually elected, more or less, he and his Secretary of State Tony Blinken clarified what the U.S. would seek to do to “fix” the agreement by making it stronger in some key areas that had not been part of the original document.
Iran for its part insisted that the agreement did not need any additional caveats and should be a return to the status quo ante, particularly when Blinken and his team made clear that they were thinking of a ban on Iranian ballistic missile development as well as negotiations to end Tehran’s alleged “interference” in the politics of the region. The interference presumably referred to Iranian support of the Palestinians as well as its role in Syria and Yemen, all of which had earned the hostility of American “friends” Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Israel inevitably stirred the pot by sending a stream of senior officials, to include Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, Defense Minister Benny Gantz and Prime Minister Naftali Bennett to discuss “the Iranian threat” with Biden and his top officials. Lapid made clear that Israel “reserves the right to act at any given moment, in any way… We know there are moments when nations must use force to protect the world from evil.” And to be sure, Biden, like Trump, has also made his true sentiments clear by surrounding himself with Zionists. Blinken, Wendy Sherman and Victoria Nuland have filled the three top slots at State Department, all are Jewish and all strong on Israel. Nuland is a leading neocon. And pending is the appointment of Barbara Leaf, who has been nominated Assistant Secretary to head the State Department’s Near East region. She is currently the Ruth and Sid Lapidus Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), which is an AIPAC spin off and a major component in the Israel Lobby. That means that a member in good standing of the Israel Lobby would serve as the State Department official overseeing American policy in the Middle East.
At the Pentagon one finds a malleable General Mark Milley, always happy to meet his Israeli counterparts, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, an affirmative action promotion who likewise has become adept at parroting the line “Israel has a right to defend itself.” And need one mention ardent self-declared Zionists at the top level of the Democratic Party, to include Biden himself, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and, of course, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer?
So rejoining the JCPOA over Israel objections was a non-starter from the beginning and was probably only mooted to make Trump look bad. Indirect talks including both Iran and the U.S. technically have continued in Vienna, though they have been stalled since the end of June. Trita Parsi has recently learned that Iran sought to make a breakthrough for an agreement by seeking a White House commitment to stick with the plan as long as Biden remains in office. Biden and Blinken refused and Blinken has recently confirmed that a new deal is unlikely, saying “time is running out.”
And there have been some other new developments. Israeli officials have been warning for over twenty years that Iran is only one year away from having its own nukes and needs to be stopped, a claim that has begun to sound like a religious mantra repeated over and over, but now they are actually funding the armaments that will be needed to do the job. Israel Defense Force Chief of Staff Aviv Kohavi has repeatedly said the IDF is “accelerating” plans to strike Iran, and Israeli politicians to include former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have regularly been threatening to do whatever must be done to deal with the threat from the Islamic Republic. Israeli media is reporting that $1.5 billion has been allocated in the current and upcoming budget to buy the American bunker buster bombs that will be needed to destroy the Iranian reactor at Bushehr and its underground research facilities at Natanz.
In the wake of the news about the war funding, there have also been reports that the Israeli Air Force is engaging in what is being described as “intense” drills to simulate attacking Iranian nuclear facilities. After Israel obtains the 5000 pound bunker buster bombs, it will also need to procure bombers to drop the ordnance, and one suspects that the U.S. Congress will somehow come up with the necessary “military aid” to make that happen. Tony Blinken has also made clear that the Administration knows what Israel is planning and approves. He met with Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid on October 13th and said if diplomacy with Iran fails, the U.S. will turn to “other options.” And yes, he followed that up with the venerable line that “Israel has the right to defend itself and we strongly support that proposition.”
Lapid confirmed that one of Blinken’s “options” was military action. “I would like to start by repeating what the Secretary of State just said. Yes, other options are going to be on the table if diplomacy fails. And by saying other options, I think everybody understands here … what is it that we mean.” It must be observed that in their discussion of Iran’s nuclear program, Lapid and Blinnken were endorsing an illegal and unprovoked attack to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon that it is apparently not seeking, but which it will surely turn to as a consequence if only to defend itself in the future.
In short, U.S. foreign policy is yet again being held hostage by Israel. The White House position is clearly and absurdly that an Israeli attack on Iran, considered a war crime by most, is an act of self-defense. However it turns out, the U.S. will be seen as endorsing the crime and will inevitably be implicated in it, undoubtedly resulting in yet another foreign policy disaster in the Middle East with nothing but grief for the American people. The simple truth is that Iran has neither threatened nor attacked Israel. Given that, there is nothing defensive about the actions Israel has already taken in sabotaging Iranian facilities and assassinating scientists, and there would be nothing defensive about direct military attacks either with or without U.S. assistance on Iranian soil. If Israel chooses to play the fool it is on them and their leaders. The United States does not have a horse in this race and should butt out, but one doubts if a White House and Congress, firmly controlled by Zionist forces, have either the wisdom or the courage to cut the tie that binds with the Jewish state.
EU energy crisis hitting poorest citizens hardest
By Jerome Hughes | Press TV | October 21, 2021
Brussels – European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, warns the EU’s energy crisis is hitting the poorest hardest and businesses are at risk of closing. EU officials say the 27-nation bloc could benefit from Iran’s vast energy reserves if US sanctions against the Islamic Republic are removed.
The weather is becoming more inclement in the EU and while temperatures are dropping, energy costs are soaring. The crisis has just been discussed in the European Parliament.
The main factors driving prices upwards are consumer demand after COVID-19 lockdown restrictions were eased and gas stockpiles were depleted last winter as it was particularly cold. Then we used a lot of electricity during a warmer than usual summer. Half of the gas used in the EU is imported from Russia. We raised the issue of alternative suppliers with the European Commission.
Question: “Is it the case that the EU would like to be getting more energy from Iran?”
The commission says US sanctions are impeding Iranian energy sales but that won’t be a problem if the JCPOA Iran nuclear deal can be brought back on track.
The EU could import liquefied natural gas from various places, such as the United States, but experts say it would not make sense.
Von der Leyen confirmed to the European Parliament on Wednesday that Russia has fully honored its energy contracts with the EU. She says Moscow has so far not increased supply. Energy consultants say the bloc will still need Russia’s gas for at least another 20 years.
While this dependency exists they suggest it would be prudent of the bloc to improve relations with Moscow.
The Iran Nuclear Saga: US-Israel Hammer Out a “Plan B”
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 18.10.2021
Even though the presidential candidate Joe Biden had vowed to “move quickly” to re-join the Iran nuclear deal, this has not happened. The Biden administration’s deliberate strategy to kill the previous deal by following the framework of talks it inherited from the Trump administration has contributed massively to the present deadlock, leading the US and Israel to devise a “Plan B” to force Iran into submission. While Iran has been insisting – and its demands are not illegitimate – that the US must lift its sanctions first to create the path for reviving the JCPOA, Washington’s (and Israel’s) insistence on including Iran’s ballistic missile programme into the deal has become an additional source of tensions and the ensuing deadlock. Including a new agenda in the deal does not mean reviving the deal; in fact, it is actually involves a bid to push Tehran for an altogether new deal – a goal that the US and Israel have been pursuing ever since the Trump administration withdrew from the deal and Israel started sabotaging Iran’s legitimate nuclear production though cyber attacks and by murdering its top nuclear scientist.
While a simple revival of the deal is increasingly looking impossible, the talk of the town is the ‘military option’ if the ‘diplomatic option’ fails to produce the desired outcome, that is a one-dimensional result that favours the US and Israel only.
While it is already hard to argue against the fact that Israel, by engaging in active sabotage, has been using proper military options to coerce Iran into submission, there is still no gainsaying that the US and Israel are actively contemplating the military option to actually upgrade the military resources they have used so far. In doing so, both the US and Israel will be relying on the precedent set by the Trump administration when it killed Iran’s top military official, General Suleimani, last year in a drone air-strike in Iraq.
While the Biden administration may not itself want to start a new fully fledged war against Iran when it has just ended the US’ “endless war” in Afghanistan, there is no gainsaying that the US defense establishment may provide all the support, both diplomatic and military, Israel needs to carry out a military strike on Iran’s nuclear production capabilities. At the same time, it remains that the US may not be fully opposed to actually coordinating with Israel a military strike on Iran. During his latest meeting with Biden, the Israeli prime minister, Naftali Bennett, was a happy man when he received Biden’s reassurance that “all options” were on the table, should the on-goings talks fail. Now that the prospects of JCPOA’s revival through US participation look extremely bleak, other options, including a military/air strike, could become a possibility.
For Israel, resorting to military actions has an added political – electoral advantage. According to a recent survey conducted by Israel’s Democracy Institute, more than 50 per cent of Israeli Jewish population believes that Israel should have launched a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities in the very early phase of its development. Launching a military strike, therefore, does not have political consequence for Naftali who sits on a multi-party coalition government.
Accordingly, Israel is building the momentum for its “Plan B” at both regional and international levels. The Israeli activity to build this momentum flows from its previous attempts at derailing the whole process to revive the JCPOA. Last week, in a joint press conference with his US and Emirati counterparts, Israel’s foreign minister, Yari Lapid, said that they “reserve” the right to act in self-defence. In Israeli geo-strategic parlance, the ‘right to self-defence’ has always meant a pre-emptive military operation. Lapid himself operationalized the definition of the so-called ‘right to self defence’ when he said that “If a terror regime is going to acquire a nuclear weapon, we must act. We must make clear the civilized world won’t allow it.” Antony Blinken reciprocated, saying that “we are prepared to turn to other options if Iran doesn’t change course.”
In his meeting with Biden’s National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, Lapid shared, without himself publicly revealing, with him details of Israel’s “alternative plan” against Iran. But some of the details of this plan have already been revealed by Israel’s military chief, when he said that Israel and its intelligence community “is working against Iranian regional entrenchment throughout the Middle East.” “Operations to destroy Iranian capabilities will continue — in various arenas and at any time”, he added.
Echoing Israel’s discourse, US Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley said last week that
“We will be prepared to adjust to a different reality in which we have to deal with all options to address Iran’s nuclear program if it’s not prepared to come back into the constraints of 2016.”
While the US officials continue to project that Iran is refusing to return to JCPOA, the fact remains that the deadlock is not an outcome of Iran’s refusal to revive the JCPOA, but its insistence on reviving the same agreement that was agreed in 2015 and lifting all sanctions the US has imposed, or failed to lift right after the deal. In refusing to lift sanctions, the Biden administration is essentially following in the footsteps of the Obama administration, which, while it did make the deal, continued to delay the lifting of all financial sanctions and unfreezing of the Iranian assets as well.
Therefore, the roots of the “Plan B” are impossible to find in the Iranian intransigence. It must be found in the US withdrawal from the treaty and its illegitimate insistence on negotiating a new deal, a demand that the other signatories of the deal – especially, China and Russia – do not support. A military action against Iran will thus be an avid example of how both the US and Israel have been staging wars to consolidate their regional and international dominance, respectively.
There’s a wide range of factors causing massively increased gas prices in Europe, but Russia is not one of them: Kremlin
By Jonny Tickle | RT | October 6, 2021
Russia has nothing to do with the rapidly rising gas prices in Europe, and the country is providing as much as it possibly can to the rest of the continent, the Kremlin said on Wednesday, amid accusations that Moscow is to blame.
Speaking to journalists on Wednesday, spokesman Dmitry Peskov rejected the idea that Russia is playing any part in the rising prices. Earlier that day, the price of gas in Europe once again reached a historical record of $1,900 per 1,000 cubic meters.
“The first and most important thing is that we not only believe, but we insist that Russia is playing no role in what is happening on the gas market in Europe,” Peskov said, noting that Gazprom is pumping as much gas as it can “within the framework of the existing contracts.”
According to the Kremlin spokesman, Russia has avoided huge gas prices due to a well-thought-out strategy, while Europe has made mistakes.
“It’s all very simple. If you bet on the development of wind energy, you create the appropriate infrastructure,” Peskov explained. “But different climate processes happen and suddenly there is less wind. This is what is happening this year in Europe. There is less wind and generation is down.”
Some have accused Moscow of intentionally limiting gas supplies to Europe as a means to speed up the launch of the controversial pipeline Nord Stream 2, which was recently completed.
On Tuesday, the European Commission announced it would look into suggestions that Moscow is trying to boost gas prices. However, according to European Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson, Russia is “fulfilling its long-term contracts.”
Lift Iran sanctions if you seek end to global energy crisis: Minister
Press TV – October 4, 2021
Iranian Oil Minister Javad Owji says removing sanctions from Iran’s hydrocarbon sector would be key to resolving a global energy crisis that has affected supplies in many Western countries.
Owji said on Monday that people in the United States and some European countries have been paying the price for the unwise policies of their leaders who have banned crude exports from Iran as one of the leading energy suppliers of the world.
The minister made the remarks while speaking after a meeting of OPEC+ alliance of oil exporting nations.
He was referring to fuel, natural gas and electricity problems reported on both sides of the Atlantic amid rising prices and increasing demand caused by the global recovery from the coroanvirus pandemic.
“My recommendation to the decision-makers in these countries is that they should take a lesson from the current circumstances and lift sanctions from Iran so that people in all regions can benefit from cheap and accessible energy,” said Owji.
Iran has seen its oil exports slashed to levels much lower than those reported in mid-2018 when a former US administration pulled out of an international agreement on Iran’s nuclear program and imposed sanctions on the country.
A new US government has been pressing for a revival of the 2015 nuclear deal that would lift sanctions from Iran’s energy exports.
Beside its huge crude production capacities, Iran is also a leading supplier of natural gas with a current production of over 1 million cubic meters per day.
Owji said Iran has repeatedly declared that it would be able to swiftly increase its crude production to help alleviate the global shortage of fuel.
He said the current shortages could have larger implications on the livelihoods of people in the West in future if policymakers do not properly tackle supply issues.
Iran And Venezuela Strike Oil Swap Deal
By Irina Slav | Oilprice.com | September 27, 2021
Iran and Venezuela have struck a deal to swap heavy Venezuelan crude for Iranian condensate, Reuters has reported, citing unnamed sources familiar with the deal.
According to these sources, the swaps are set to begin this week and last for six months, although they could be extended. The imports of Iranian superlight crude will help Venezuela revive its falling oil exports amid U.S. sanctions that, among other problems, have cut off the country’s access to the light oil that is used to blend with its superheavy to make it exportable.
For Iran, the deal will bring in heavy crude it could sell in Asia, the Reuters sources also said. The diluted Venezuela crude will also likely go to Asian buyers.
Reuters also reported that, according to the U.S. Treasury Department, the deal could constitute a breach of sanctions, to which both Venezuela and Iran are subjects.
“Transactions with NIOC by non-U.S. persons are generally subject to secondary sanctions,” the Treasury Department said in response to a Reuters request for comments on the deal. It added that it “retains authority to impose sanctions on any person that is determined to operate in the oil sector of the Venezuelan economy.”
Despite the sanction noose, Venezuela has been ramping up its oil exports, generating vital revenue. According to a recent Reuters report, the country, which is home to the world’s largest oil reserves, exported more than 700,000 bpd of crude in July—the highest daily export rate since February.
Most of the oil went to China and Malaysia, although the latter is usually only a stop along Venezuelan oil’s trip to China. The same report noted that three of the five crude oil blending facilities in the Orinoco Belt were operational, and another crude upgrader was preparing to restart operations after a year’s pause.
Iran, meanwhile, recently revealed plans to attract some $145 billion in oil and gas investments from both local and foreign sources.
“We plan to invest $145 billion in the development of the upstream and downstream oil industry over the next four to eight years, hence I welcome the presence of domestic and foreign investors in the industry,” Javad Owji, Iran’s new oil minister, said during a meeting with executives from China’s oil giant Sinopec.
Door Is Closing on an Iran Nuclear Deal
BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • SEPTEMBER 14, 2021
Critics of the foreign and national security policies of the Joe Biden regime were quick to note that the American soldiers being pulled out of Afghanistan were no doubt a resource that will be committed to a new adventure somewhere else. There was considerable speculation that the new model army, fully vaccinated, glorious in all its gender and racial diversity and purged of extremists in the ranks, might be destined to put down potentially rebellious supremacists in unenlightened parts of the United States. But even given an increasingly totalitarian White House, that civil war type option must have seemed a bridge too far for an administration plagued by plummeting approval ratings, so the old hands in Washington apparently turned to what has always been a winner: pick a suitable foreign enemy and stick it to him.
It is of course generally known that when Joe Biden was running for president, he committed himself to making an attempt to reenter the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) of 2015 which placed limits on the Iranian nuclear program and also established an intrusive inspection routine. In turn, the Iranians were to receive relief from sanctions related to the program. In 2018 President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement based on the false argument that Iran was cheating on the arrangement and was secretly engaged in developing a weapon. Trump’s neocon supporters on the issue also argued without any evidence that Iran was intending to use the agreement as cover for its efforts to accumulate enriched uranium, guaranteeing that they would be able develop a weapon quickly when the inspection regime expires in 2025.
The Trump move was, of course, backed by the Israel Lobby and it was widely seen as deferring to Israeli interests at a time when the agreement was actually good for the United States as it blocked an unfriendly country’s possible nuclear proliferation. Unfortunately, a US government’s bowing to Israel is not exactly unusual and the withdrawal was subject to only limited criticism in the mainstream media.
Joe Biden, who has described himself as a Zionist, is no less prone to pandering to Israel than is Trump. When he raised the issue of JCPOA during his campaign in a bid to appeal to his party’s progressives, he also caveated the move by indicating that the agreement would have to be updated and improved. The talks in Vienna, which Iran and the US are indirectly engaged in, have been stalled for several months due to Iranian elections and over Washington’s insistence that Iran include in the agreement restrictions on the country’s ballistic missile program while also ceasing its alleged interference in the political turmoil in the region. The interference charge relates to Iranian support of the completely legitimate Syrian and Lebanese governments as well as of the Houthi rebels in Yemen who have been on the receiving end of Saudi Arabian aggression supported by Washington.
As Iran insists that any return to status quo ante be based on the existing agreement without any additions, to include relief from sanctions which Washington has rebuffed, it has been clear from the beginning that there is nowhere to go. Recently it has been argued in neocon and media circles (essentially the same thing) that the new conservative president of Iran Ebrahim Raisi means that no arrangement with Iran can be trusted and they point to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports that suggest that Iran has started to enrich admittedly small amounts of uranium. To add to the confusion, there have been some reports suggesting that Israel deliberately targeted and destroyed IAEA monitoring equipment in a June raid to make clear assessments of nuclear developments more difficult to obtain.
To finish the charade, which was not expected to result in anything, Secretary of State Tony Blinken, traveling Germany to mend fences over the Afghanistan debacle, has now warned that the US is getting “closer” to giving up on renegotiating the Iran nuclear deal. Blinken declared to reporters that “I’m not going to put a date on it but we are getting closer to the point at which a strict return to compliance with the JCPOA does not reproduce the benefits that that agreement achieved.”
When Blinken refers to benefits he is now of course meaning the full package of demands being made by Washington, which, as noted above, go far beyond the original intention of the agreement. As Iran has repeatedly insisted that it is only willing to discuss the original formulation which would provide for them some sanctions relief, something that Blinken certainly knows, he evades the issue of Washington being the spoiler in the Vienna talks.
Now that Afghanistan has fallen with considerable blowback to the fortunes of the Biden Administration, the situation with Iran becomes potentially more important, even while recognizing that Iran does not threaten the United States or its actual interests in any way. Biden-Blinken are clearly interested in sustaining a purported vital interest in the Middle East so troop levels throughout the region can be maintained. There is a commitment with Baghdad to remove all US “combat troops,” however that will be defined, by year’s end, but there are also American soldiers in Syria fighting a war and large military bases in Kuwait, Doha, and Bahrain. The US also maintains a skeleton presence of air force personnel in Israel as well as large arms supply depots.
To justify all that an enemy is essential and Iran fits the bill. And it should surprise no one that steps are now being taken to confront the evil Persians in their home waters. The United States Navy’s Bahrain-based 5th Fleet announced last week that it will create a special new task force that will incorporate airborne, sailing and underwater drones to confront Iran. In the announcement the spokesmen revealed that in coming months drone capabilities would be expanded to cover a number of chokepoints critical to the movement both of global energy supplies and worldwide shipping, to include the crucial Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of all oil passes. It also will presumably include the Red Sea approaches to the Suez Canal as well as the Bab el-Mandeb Strait off Yemen.
The systems being deployed by what has been dubbed the 5th Fleet Task Force 59 will include some recently developed innovative technologies, to include underwater, long range, and special surveillance drones. Armed drones will use the same platforms and some of the drones will be small enough to be fired from submarines, which will confuse points of origin and permit plausible denial by Washington if they should be used to deter or intimidate the Iranians.
So, the fall of Afghanistan might be seen as welcome after all these years of mayhem, but it may have opened the door to heightened tension in the nearby Persian Gulf. Washington-Biden-Blinken are intent on proving to the world that in spite of Afghanistan the United States is nobody’s patsy. Unfortunately, putting the screws to Iran yet again is no solution to Washington’s inability to perceive its proper role in the world. The lesson that might have been learned in Afghanistan and also Iraq apparently has already been forgotten.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org
