radiofree.asia

Category: iran

  • Israel Says Iran Likely Behind Explosion On Israeli-Owned Cargo Ship

    Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz said on February 27 that Iran is likely behind an explosion earlier this week on an Israeli-owned cargo vessel in the Gulf of Oman.

    The MV Helios Ray, a vehicle carrier, was traveling from the Saudi port of Dammam to Singapore when it was struck by an explosion on February 25.

    “The location of the ship in relative close proximity to Iran raises the belief that Iran was responsible, but it must still be verified,” Gantz told Israeli state television Kan.

    “Right now, at an initial assessment level, given the proximity and the context that is my assessment,” Gantz said.

    Iran blamed Israel for the assassination of its top nuclear scientist in November and vowed to retaliate.

    Gantz said it was known Iran was looking to target Israeli infrastructure and citizens.

    Kan television reported later that top Israeli defense and political leaders on February 28 would discuss a response to the apparent attack, citing officials as saying it “crossed a red line.”

    The explosion did not cause any casualties but left two 1.5-meter diameter holes in the side of the vessel, the ship’s Israeli owner, Rami Ungar, told Kan on February 26.

    Tracking data on Marinetraffic.com showed the Bahamas-flagged vessel currently docked in Dubai. The ship is registered in the British Isle of Man.

    Dryad Global, a British maritime security company, suggested a “realistic probability” Iran was behind the explosion.

    “Such activity would be commensurate with current tensions and Iranian intent to exercise forceful diplomacy through military means within its immediate area of interest,” Dryad said.

    The explosion occurred around the same time as U.S. air strikes on February 25 targeted Iran-backed militia groups in eastern Syria believed to be behind a spate of recent rocket attacks on U.S. interests in Iraq.

    It also comes amid rising tensions between the United States and Iran over the fate of the 2015 nuclear deal.

    President Joe Biden says his new administration is open to diplomacy with Tehran after his predecessor Donald Trump withdrew from the nuclear accord and reimposed sanctions, prompting Iran to gradually breach its commitments.

    But the two sides remain locked in disagreement over which country must move first, with Iran wanting immediate sanctions relief and the United States demanding Iran first return to compliance with its nuclear commitments.

    Israel has been one of the most vocal opponents of the nuclear accord.

    Iran or its regional proxies are believed to be behind a number of attacks on shipping in the strategic Persian Gulf in recent years, including incidents involving two Saudi oil tankers in May 2019. Iran has denied carrying out those attacks.

    With reporting by AFP, dpa, Kan Television, and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Biden’s Reckless Syria Bombing Is Not the Diplomacy He Promised

    Photo: CODEPINK

    The February 25 U.S. bombing of Syria immediately puts the policies of the newly-formed Biden administration into sharp relief. Why is this administration bombing the sovereign nation of Syria? Why is it bombing “Iranian-backed militias” who pose absolutely no threat to the United States and are actually involved in fighting ISIS? If this is about getting more leverage vis-a-vis Iran, why hasn’t the Biden administration just done what it said it would do: rejoin the Iran nuclear deal and de-escalate the Middle East conflicts?

    According to the Pentagon, the U.S. strike was in response to the February 15 rocket attack in northern Iraq that killed a contractor working with the U.S. military and injured a U.S. service member. Accounts of the number killed in the U.S. attack vary from one to 22.

    The Pentagon made the incredible claim that this action “aims to de-escalate the overall situation in both Eastern Syria and Iraq.” This was countered by the Syrian government, which condemned the illegal attack on its territory and said the strikes “will lead to consequences that will escalate the situation in the region.” The strike was also condemned by the governments of China and Russia. A member of Russia’s Federation Council warned that such escalations in the area could lead to “a massive conflict.”

    Ironically, Jen Psaki, now Biden’s White House spokesperson, questioned the lawfulness of attacking Syria in 2017, when it was the Trump administration doing the bombing. Back then she asked: “What is the legal authority for strikes? Assad is a brutal dictator. But Syria is a sovereign country.”

    The airstrikes were supposedly authorized by the 20-year-old, post-9/11 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), legislation that Rep. Barbara Lee has been trying for years to repeal since it has been misused, according to the congresswoman, “to justify waging war in at least seven different countries, against a continuously expanding list of targetable adversaries.”

    The United States claims that its targeting of the militia in Syria was based on intelligence provided by the Iraqi government. Defense Secretary Austin told reporters: “We’re confident that target was being used by the same Shia militia that conducted the strike [against U.S. and coalition forces].”

    But a report by Middle East Eye (MEE) suggests that Iran has strongly urged the militias it supports in Iraq to refrain from such attacks, or any warlike actions that could derail its sensitive diplomacy to bring the U.S. and Iran back into compliance with the 2015 international nuclear agreement or JCPOA.

    “None of our known factions carried out this attack,” a senior Iraqi militia commander told MEE. “The Iranian orders have not changed regarding attacking the American forces, and the Iranians are still keen to maintain calm with the Americans until they see how the new administration will act.”

    The inflammatory nature of this U.S. attack on Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, who are an integral part of Iraq’s armed forces and have played a critical role in the war with ISIS, was implicitly acknowledged in the U.S. decision to attack them in Syria instead of in Iraq. Did Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi, a pro-Western British-Iraqi, who is trying to rein in the Iranian-backed Shiite militias, deny permission for a U.S. attack on Iraqi soil?

    At Kadhimi’s request, NATO is increasing its presence from 500 troops to 4,000 (from Denmark, the U.K. and Turkey, not the U.S.) to train the Iraqi military and reduce its dependence on the Iranian-backed militias. But Kadhimi risks losing his job in an election this October if he alienates Iraq’s Shiite majority. Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein is heading to Tehran to meet with Iranian officials over the weekend, and the world will be watching to see how Iraq and Iran will respond to the U.S. attack.

    Some analysts say the bombing may have been intended to strengthen the U.S. hand in its negotiations with Iran over the nuclear deal (JCPOA). “The strike, the way I see it, was meant to set the tone with Tehran and dent its inflated confidence ahead of negotiations,” said Bilal Saab, a former Pentagon official who is currently a senior fellow with the Middle East Institute.

    But this attack will make it more difficult to resume negotiations with Iran. It comes at a delicate moment when the Europeans are trying to orchestrate a “compliance for compliance” maneuver to revive the JCPOA. This strike will make the diplomatic process more difficult, as it gives more power to the Iranian factions who oppose the deal and any negotiations with the United States.

    Showing bipartisan support for attacking sovereign nations, key Republicans on the foreign affairs committees such as Senator Marco Rubio and Rep. Michael McCaul immediately welcomed the attacks. So did some Biden supporters, who crassly displayed their partiality to bombing by a Democratic president.

    Party organizer Amy Siskind tweeted: “So different having military action under Biden. No middle school level threats on Twitter. Trust Biden and his team’s competence.” Biden supporter Suzanne Lamminen tweeted: “Such a quiet attack. No drama, no TV coverage of bombs hitting targets, no comments on how presidential Biden is. What a difference.”

    Thankfully, though, some Members of Congress are speaking out against the strikes. “We cannot stand up for Congressional authorization before military strikes only when there is a Republican President,” Congressman Ro Khanna tweeted, “The Administration should have sought Congressional authorization here. We need to work to extricate from the Middle East, not escalate.” Peace groups around the country are echoing that call. Rep. Barbara Lee and Senators Bernie Sanders, Tim Kaine and Chris Murphy also released statements either questioning or condemning the strikes.

    Americans should remind President Biden that he promised to prioritize diplomacy over military action as the primary instrument of his foreign policy. Biden should recognize that the best way to protect U.S. personnel is to take them out of the Middle East. He should recall that the Iraqi Parliament voted a year ago for U.S. troops to leave their country. He should also recognize that U.S. troops have no right to be in Syria, still “protecting the oil,” on the orders of Donald Trump.

    After failing to prioritize diplomacy and rejoin the Iran nuclear agreement, Biden has now, barely a month into his presidency, reverted to the use of military force in a region already shattered by two decades of U.S. war-making. This is not what he promised in his campaign and it is not what the American people voted for.

    The post Biden’s Reckless Syria Bombing Is Not the Diplomacy He Promised first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Biden’s Reckless Syria Bombing Is Not the Diplomacy He Promised

    by Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies / February 27th, 2021

    Photo: CODEPINK

    The February 25 U.S. bombing of Syria immediately puts the policies of the newly-formed Biden administration into sharp relief. Why is this administration bombing the sovereign nation of Syria? Why is it bombing “Iranian-backed militias” who pose absolutely no threat to the United States and are actually involved in fighting ISIS? If this is about getting more leverage vis-a-vis Iran, why hasn’t the Biden administration just done what it said it would do: rejoin the Iran nuclear deal and de-escalate the Middle East conflicts?

    According to the Pentagon, the U.S. strike was in response to the February 15 rocket attack in northern Iraq that killed a contractor working with the U.S. military and injured a U.S. service member. Accounts of the number killed in the U.S. attack vary from one to 22.

    The Pentagon made the incredible claim that this action “aims to de-escalate the overall situation in both Eastern Syria and Iraq.” This was countered by the Syrian government, which condemned the illegal attack on its territory and said the strikes “will lead to consequences that will escalate the situation in the region.” The strike was also condemned by the governments of China and Russia. A member of Russia’s Federation Council warned that such escalations in the area could lead to “a massive conflict.”

    Ironically, Jen Psaki, now Biden’s White House spokesperson, questioned the lawfulness of attacking Syria in 2017, when it was the Trump administration doing the bombing. Back then she asked: “What is the legal authority for strikes? Assad is a brutal dictator. But Syria is a sovereign country.”

    The airstrikes were supposedly authorized by the 20-year-old, post-9/11 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), legislation that Rep. Barbara Lee has been trying for years to repeal since it has been misused, according to the congresswoman, “to justify waging war in at least seven different countries, against a continuously expanding list of targetable adversaries.”

    The United States claims that its targeting of the militia in Syria was based on intelligence provided by the Iraqi government. Defense Secretary Austin told reporters: “We’re confident that target was being used by the same Shia militia that conducted the strike [against U.S. and coalition forces].”

    But a report by Middle East Eye (MEE) suggests that Iran has strongly urged the militias it supports in Iraq to refrain from such attacks, or any warlike actions that could derail its sensitive diplomacy to bring the U.S. and Iran back into compliance with the 2015 international nuclear agreement or JCPOA.

    “None of our known factions carried out this attack,” a senior Iraqi militia commander told MEE. “The Iranian orders have not changed regarding attacking the American forces, and the Iranians are still keen to maintain calm with the Americans until they see how the new administration will act.”

    The inflammatory nature of this U.S. attack on Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, who are an integral part of Iraq’s armed forces and have played a critical role in the war with ISIS, was implicitly acknowledged in the U.S. decision to attack them in Syria instead of in Iraq. Did Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi, a pro-Western British-Iraqi, who is trying to rein in the Iranian-backed Shiite militias, deny permission for a U.S. attack on Iraqi soil?

    At Kadhimi’s request, NATO is increasing its presence from 500 troops to 4,000 (from Denmark, the U.K. and Turkey, not the U.S.) to train the Iraqi military and reduce its dependence on the Iranian-backed militias. But Kadhimi risks losing his job in an election this October if he alienates Iraq’s Shiite majority. Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein is heading to Tehran to meet with Iranian officials over the weekend, and the world will be watching to see how Iraq and Iran will respond to the U.S. attack.

    Some analysts say the bombing may have been intended to strengthen the U.S. hand in its negotiations with Iran over the nuclear deal (JCPOA). “The strike, the way I see it, was meant to set the tone with Tehran and dent its inflated confidence ahead of negotiations,” said Bilal Saab, a former Pentagon official who is currently a senior fellow with the Middle East Institute.

    But this attack will make it more difficult to resume negotiations with Iran. It comes at a delicate moment when the Europeans are trying to orchestrate a “compliance for compliance” maneuver to revive the JCPOA. This strike will make the diplomatic process more difficult, as it gives more power to the Iranian factions who oppose the deal and any negotiations with the United States.

    Showing bipartisan support for attacking sovereign nations, key Republicans on the foreign affairs committees such as Senator Marco Rubio and Rep. Michael McCaul immediately welcomed the attacks. So did some Biden supporters, who crassly displayed their partiality to bombing by a Democratic president.

    Party organizer Amy Siskind tweeted: “So different having military action under Biden. No middle school level threats on Twitter. Trust Biden and his team’s competence.” Biden supporter Suzanne Lamminen tweeted: “Such a quiet attack. No drama, no TV coverage of bombs hitting targets, no comments on how presidential Biden is. What a difference.”

    Thankfully, though, some Members of Congress are speaking out against the strikes. “We cannot stand up for Congressional authorization before military strikes only when there is a Republican President,” Congressman Ro Khanna tweeted, “The Administration should have sought Congressional authorization here. We need to work to extricate from the Middle East, not escalate.” Peace groups around the country are echoing that call. Rep. Barbara Lee and Senators Bernie Sanders, Tim Kaine and Chris Murphy also released statements either questioning or condemning the strikes.

    Americans should remind President Biden that he promised to prioritize diplomacy over military action as the primary instrument of his foreign policy. Biden should recognize that the best way to protect U.S. personnel is to take them out of the Middle East. He should recall that the Iraqi Parliament voted a year ago for U.S. troops to leave their country. He should also recognize that U.S. troops have no right to be in Syria, still “protecting the oil,” on the orders of Donald Trump.

    After failing to prioritize diplomacy and rejoin the Iran nuclear agreement, Biden has now, barely a month into his presidency, reverted to the use of military force in a region already shattered by two decades of U.S. war-making. This is not what he promised in his campaign and it is not what the American people voted for.

    This article was posted on Saturday, February 27th, 2021 at 9:05am and is filed under Bombs, Democrats, Iran, Iraq, Joe Biden, Militarism, Syria, US War Crimes.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Biden Says U.S. Air Strike In Syria A Warning To Tehran

    U.S. President Joe Biden says the air strike against an Iran-backed militia in eastern Syria should be seen by Tehran as a warning against any further aggressive actions.

    “You can’t act with impunity,” he told reporters on February 26 when asked what the message was from the air strikes announced a day earlier.

    “Be careful,” he added during a stop in Houston as part of a tour to inspect relief efforts in the storm-ravaged state of Texas.

    The U.S. Defense Department on February 25 announced the air strikes in response to rocket attacks earlier this month on an Iraqi base housing U.S. and coalition troops, saying they sent “an unambiguous message [that] President Biden will act to protect American and coalition personnel.”

    The Pentagon said two F-15E warplanes dropped seven precision-guided munitions on sites in eastern Syria used by the militias believed to be behind the rocket attacks on U.S. and other troops.

    The Pentagon said the strikes, the first military action undertaken by Biden’s administration since he was sworn into office last month, hit “multiple facilities” at a control point on the Syria-Iraq border used by several Iran-backed militias, including the Iraqi Shi’ite groups Kaitib Hizballah and Kaitib Sayyid al-Shuhada.

    “This location is known to facilitate Iranian-aligned militia group activity,” spokesman John Kirby said, describing the site as a “compound” that previously had been used by the Islamic State (IS) terror group when it controlled the area.

    The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a war monitor, said 17 members of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) were killed after the strike hit three trucks loaded with munitions coming from Iraq.

    The PMU is an umbrella paramilitary force composed of a number of mostly Shi’ite Iraqi militia groups.

    Tehran condemned the attack, saying it would further destabilize the region. The Foreign Ministry called the action “illegal attacks” in “clear violation of human rights and international law.”

    Damascus labeled it “cowardly American aggression.”

    “It is a bad sign regarding the policies of the new US administration which should adhere to international [norms],” the Syrian Foreign Ministry said.

    Russia, a key Syrian ally, also condemned the attack, saying its troops stationed in Syria were given little advanced warning.

    Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the action called into question the U.S. administration’s plans in Syria.

    “It is very important for us to understand the United States’ strategic line on the ground,” Lavrov said.

    Pentagon spokesman John Kirby responded to Lavrov’s criticism that Moscow had been notified just a few minutes before the U.S. attack.

    “We did what we believe was the proper amount of notification for this,” he said. “It shouldn’t come as a shock to anybody that we’re going to do what we have to do to notify, but we’re also going to do what we have to do to protect our forces.”

    Along with Russia, Iran has provided crucial military support to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad during Syria’s civil war, which began with a crackdown on anti-government protesters in March 2011. More than 400,000 people have since been killed and millions displaced.

    The U.S. military has also been active in Syria in support of a coalition of Syrian Arab and Kurdish opponents of Assad.

    The strikes came after three recent rocket attacks. A February 15 rocket salvo on a military base at Irbil International Airport in the capital in Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdistan region killed one civilian contractor and wounded a U.S. service member and other coalition troops.

    Another rocket attack on a base hosting U.S. forces north of Baghdad days later hurt at least one contractor. Yet another rocket barrage targeted the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad earlier this week.

    A little-known Shiite militant group calling itself the Guardians of Blood Brigade claimed responsibility for the attack in Irbil. Some experts say Kaitib Hizballah has used separate militant cells as a cover to absolve itself of responsibility for attacks on U.S. forces.

    With reporting by AP, AFP, and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Biden Says U.S. Air Strike In Syria A Warning To Tehran

    U.S. President Joe Biden says the air strike against an Iran-backed militia in eastern Syria should be seen by Tehran as a warning against any further aggressive actions.

    “You can’t act with impunity,” he told reporters on February 26 when asked what the message was from the air strikes announced a day earlier.

    “Be careful,” he added during a stop in Houston as part of a tour to inspect relief efforts in the storm-ravaged state of Texas.

    The U.S. Defense Department on February 25 announced the air strikes in response to rocket attacks earlier this month on an Iraqi base housing U.S. and coalition troops, saying they sent “an unambiguous message [that] President Biden will act to protect American and coalition personnel.”

    The Pentagon said two F-15E warplanes dropped seven precision-guided munitions on sites in eastern Syria used by the militias believed to be behind the rocket attacks on U.S. and other troops.

    The Pentagon said the strikes, the first military action undertaken by Biden’s administration since he was sworn into office last month, hit “multiple facilities” at a control point on the Syria-Iraq border used by several Iran-backed militias, including the Iraqi Shi’ite groups Kaitib Hizballah and Kaitib Sayyid al-Shuhada.

    “This location is known to facilitate Iranian-aligned militia group activity,” spokesman John Kirby said, describing the site as a “compound” that previously had been used by the Islamic State (IS) terror group when it controlled the area.

    The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a war monitor, said 17 members of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) were killed after the strike hit three trucks loaded with munitions coming from Iraq.

    The PMU is an umbrella paramilitary force composed of a number of mostly Shi’ite Iraqi militia groups.

    Tehran condemned the attack, saying it would further destabilize the region. The Foreign Ministry called the action “illegal attacks” in “clear violation of human rights and international law.”

    Damascus labeled it “cowardly American aggression.”

    “It is a bad sign regarding the policies of the new U.S. administration which should adhere to international [norms],” the Syrian Foreign Ministry said.

    Russia, a key Syrian ally, also condemned the attack, saying its troops stationed in Syria were given little advanced warning.

    Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the action called into question the U.S. administration’s plans in Syria.

    “It is very important for us to understand the United States’ strategic line on the ground,” Lavrov said.

    Pentagon spokesman John Kirby responded to Lavrov’s criticism that Moscow had been notified just a few minutes before the U.S. attack.

    “We did what we believe was the proper amount of notification for this,” he said. “It shouldn’t come as a shock to anybody that we’re going to do what we have to do to notify, but we’re also going to do what we have to do to protect our forces.”

    Along with Russia, Iran has provided crucial military support to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad during Syria’s civil war, which began with a crackdown on anti-government protesters in March 2011. More than 400,000 people have since been killed and millions displaced.

    The U.S. military has also been active in Syria in support of a coalition of Syrian Arab and Kurdish opponents of Assad.

    The strikes came after three recent rocket attacks. A February 15 rocket salvo on a military base at Irbil International Airport in the capital in Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdistan region killed one civilian contractor and wounded a U.S. service member and other coalition troops.

    Another rocket attack on a base hosting U.S. forces north of Baghdad days later hurt at least one contractor. Yet another rocket barrage targeted the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad earlier this week.

    A little-known Shi’ite militant group calling itself the Guardians of Blood Brigade claimed responsibility for the attack in Irbil. Some experts say Kaitib Hizballah has used separate militant cells as a cover to absolve itself of responsibility for attacks on U.S. forces.

    With reporting by AP, AFP, and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Biden’s Syria Airstrike Prompts Demands for Answers From Social Media, Lawmakers

    President Biden answers a reporter's question as he departs with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Vice President Kamala Harris at the Pentagon on February 10, 2021, in Washington, D.C.

    Democratic lawmakers and anti-war activists have slammed the Biden administration for carrying out illegal airstrikes in Syria while abandoning progressive policy priorities.

    The United States carried out an airstrike in Syria on Thursday, claiming it was targeting militias allegedly backed by Iran in what is the first known military action by President Joe Biden since he was sworn into office.

    “We didn’t flip Georgia Blue for Biden to air strike Syria. We flipped Georgia Blue for our $2,000 Stimulus Checks,” said Ja’Mal Green, a civil rights advocate and former surrogate for Bernie Sanders’ campaign for president.

    Anti-war organization CODEPINK similarly criticized the Biden administration for failing to de-escalate U.S. foreign policy while rejecting policies such as student debt relief.

    The Pentagon has stated that “multiple facilities” were destroyed in the attack, which was ostensibly ordered in response to a rocket attack against U.S. and other coalition personnel in Iraq earlier this month, which killed a civilian contractor.

    While the militia attacked by the U.S. said that just one individual had died, a separate war monitor suggested there were at least 22 fatalities, the BBC reported.

    Syria has condemned the attack, calling it a “bad sign” for the new administration. The Pentagon justified the airstrike as a “proportionate military response” that was taken in consultation with allies in the region.

    Rep. Ro Khanna (D-California) criticized the Biden administration for authorizing a unilateral strike that keeps the U.S. entangled in conflicts overseas.

    “There is absolutely no justification for a president to authorize a military strike that is not in self-defense against an imminent threat without congressional authorization,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-California) said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-California) said in a statement. “We need to extricate from the Middle East, not escalate.”

    Mainstream analysts said that the new administration launched the airstrike to demonstrate its willingness to use military force in its rivalry with Iran.

    “It is sending a message: The bottom line is that we won’t tolerate this and will use military force when we feel you’ve crossed the line,” Maha Yahya, director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, said to The New York Times regarding Biden’s possible motivations for the airstrike.

    Stephen Kinzer, former foreign affairs correspondent for The New York Times, noted that Biden is now the third successive president to have bombed Syria.

    “Syria is a sovereign country with which we are not at war,” Kinzer added. “Therefore we have no legal or moral right to bomb its territory. Yet the bipartisan attitude in DC seems to be ‘We’re the USA, we bomb wherever we want.’”

    Iraq War veteran and former lawyer for the Brennan Center for Justice Chris Deluzio lambasted the Biden administration for failing to get congressional authorization, and noting that the justification for the attack would likely lean on an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that dates back to nearly 20 years ago.

    “Reminder: the Congress never authorized military action in Syria,” Deluzio said. “Relying for nearly two decades on the 2001 AUMF passed after 9/11 is part of how we find ourselves mired in Forever War, with no end in sight.”

    Adil Ahmad Haque, a Rutgers law school professor who writes on the ethics of armed conflict and international criminal law, said the airstrikes were “almost certainly” in violation of international law.

    “The airstrikes did not repel an ongoing armed attack, halt an imminent one, or immediately respond to an armed attack that was in fact over but may have appeared ongoing at the time,” Haque wrote in a blog post for Just Security. “And the airstrikes were carried out on the territory of another State, without its consent, against a non-State actor,” which Haque argued is unlawful when there isn’t an ongoing attack.

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • US Bombs Syria And Ridiculously Claims Self Defense

    On orders of President Biden, the United States has launched an airstrike on a facility in Syria. As of this writing the exact number of killed and injured is unknown, with early reports claiming “a handful” of people were killed.

    Rather than doing anything remotely resembling journalism, the western mass media have opted instead to uncritically repeat what they’ve been told about the airstrike by US officials, which is the same as just publishing Pentagon press releases.

    Here’s this from The Washington Post:

    The Biden administration conducted an airstrike against alleged Iranian-linked fighters in Syria on Thursday, signaling its intent to push back against violence believed to be sponsored by Tehran.

     

    Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the attack, the first action ordered by the Biden administration to push back against alleged Iranian-linked violence in Iraq and Syria, on a border control point in eastern Syria was “authorized in response to recent attacks against American and coalition personnel in Iraq, and to ongoing threats.”

     

    He said the facilities were used by Iranian-linked militias including Kaitib Hezbollah and Kaitib Sayyid al-Shuhada.

     

    The operation follows the latest serious attack on U.S. locations in Iraq that American officials have attributed to Iranian-linked groups operating in Iraq and Syria. Earlier this month, a rocket attack in northern Iraq killed a contractor working with the U.S. military and injured a U.S. service member there.

    So we are being told that the United States launched an airstrike on Syria, a nation it invaded and is illegally occupying, because of attacks on “US locations” in Iraq, another nation the US invaded and is illegally occupying. This attack is justified on the basis that the Iraqi fighters were “Iranian-linked”, a claim that is both entirely without evidence and irrelevant to the justification of deadly military force. And this is somehow being framed in mainstream news publications as a defensive operation.

    This is Defense Department stenography. The US military is an invading force in both Syria and Iraq; it is impossible for its actions in either of those countries to be defensive. It is always necessarily the aggressor. It’s the people trying to eject them who are acting defensively. The deaths of US troops and contractors in those countries can only be blamed on the powerful people who sent them there.

    The US is just taking it as a given that it has de facto jurisdiction over the nations of Syria, Iraq, and Iran, and that any attempt to interfere in its authority in the region is an unprovoked attack which must be defended against. This is completely backwards and illegitimate. Only through the most perversely warped American supremacist reality tunnels can it look valid to dictate the affairs of sovereign nations on the other side of the planet and respond with violence if anyone in those nations tries to eject them.

    It’s illegitimate for the US to be in the Middle East at all. It’s illegitimate for the US to claim to be acting defensively in nations it invaded. It’s illegitimate for the US to act like Iranian-backed fighters aren’t allowed to be in Syria, where they are fighting alongside the Syrian government against ISIS and other extremist militias with the permission of Damascus. It is illegitimate for the US to claim the fighters attacking US personnel in Iraq are controlled by Iran when Iraqis have every reason to want the US out of their country themselves.

    Even the official narrative reveals itself as illegitimate from within its own worldview. CNN reports that the site of the airstrike “was not specifically tied to the rocket attacks” in Iraq, and a Reuters/AP report says “Biden administration officials condemned the February 15 rocket attack near the city of Irbil in Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdish-run region, but as recently as this week officials indicated they had not determined for certain who carried it out.”

    This is all so very typical of the American supremacist worldview that is being aggressively shoved down our throats by all western mainstream news media. The US can bomb who it likes, whenever it likes, and when it does it is only ever doing so in self defense, because the entire planet is the property of Washington, DC. It can seize control of entire clusters of nations, and if any of those nations resist in any way they are invading America’s sovereignty.

    It’s like if you broke into your neighbor’s house to rob him, killed him when he tried to stop you, and then claimed self defense because you consider his home your property. Only in the American exceptionalist alternate universe is this considered normal and acceptable.

    This sort of nonsense is why it’s so important to prioritize opposition to western imperialism. World warmongering and domination is the front upon which all the most egregious evils inflicted by the powerful take place, and it plays such a crucial role in upholding the power structures we are up against. Without endless war, the oligarchic empire which is the cause of so much of our suffering cannot function, and must give way to something else. If you’re looking to throw sand in the gears of the machine, anti-imperialism is your most efficacious path toward that end, and should therefore be your priority.

    In America especially it is important to oppose war and imperialism, because an entire empire depends on keeping the locals too poor and propagandized to force their nation’s resources to go to their own wellbeing. As long as the United States functions as the hub of a globe-spanning power structure, all the progressive agendas that are being sought by what passes for the US left these days will be denied them. Opposing warmongering must come first.

    Standing against imperialism and American supremacism cuts directly to the heart of our difficulties in this world, which is why so much energy goes into keeping us focused on identity politics and vapid energy sucks which inconvenience the powerful in no way whatsoever. If you want to out-wrestle a crocodile, you must bind shut its mouth. If you want to take down a globe-spanning empire, you must take out its weapons. Opposing warmongering and killing public trust in the propaganda used to justify it is the best way to do this.

    _____________________________

    Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at  or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on , following my antics on , or throwing some money into my tip jar on  or . If you want to read more you can buy my new book Poems For Rebels (you can also download a PDF for five bucks) or my old book . For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, . Everyone, racist platforms excluded,  to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    This post was originally published on Caitlin Johnstone.

  • ‘Prisoners Of Conscience’: A Look At Some Of The Biggest Names On The List

    Russian opposition politician Aleksei Navalny’s time as an Amnesty International “prisoner of conscience” was short-lived — but not because he was released from detention.

    Navalny received the designation on January 17 following his arrest at a Moscow airport by Russian authorities who said he had violated the terms of a suspended sentence stemming from a 2014 embezzlement conviction. Navalny and his supporters say that both the conviction and the alleged violation are unfounded, politically motivated, and absurd.

    The subsequent conversion of the suspended sentence into more than 30 months of real prison time promised to keep the ardent Kremlin critic away from street protests for the near-term, even as he stayed in the focus of anti-government demonstrators and human rights groups such as Amnesty.

    But on February 23, Amnesty withdrew the designation, citing what it said were past comments by the 44-year old anti-corruption activist that “reach the threshold of advocacy of hatred.”

    The term “prisoner of conscience” is widely attributed to the founder of Amnesty International, Peter Benenson, who used it in 1961 to describe two Portuguese students who had each been sentenced to seven years in prison simply for making a toast to freedom under a dictatorial government.

    The label initially came to apply mainly to dissidents in the Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc satellites, but over the years expanded to include hundreds of religious, political opposition, and media figures around the world, including countries of the former Soviet Union and others in RFE/RL’s immediate coverage region.

    According to Amnesty’s current criteria for the designation, prisoners of conscience are people who have “not used or advocated violence but are imprisoned because of who they are (sexual orientation, ethnic, national, or social origin, language, birth, color, sex or economic status) or what they believe (religious, political or other conscientiously held beliefs).”

    Navalny’s delisting has been tied by Amnesty to comments he made in the mid-2000s, as his star as a challenger to President Vladimir Putin and as an anti-corruption crusader in Russia was on the rise, but also as he came under criticism for his association with ethnic Russian nationalists and for statements seen as racist and dangerously inflammatory.

    And while the rights watchdog acknowledged that the flood of requests it received to review Navalny’s past statements appeared to originate from pro-Kremlin critics of Navalny, Amnesty ultimately determined that he no longer fit the bill for the designation, even as the organization continued to call for his immediate release from prison as he was being “persecuted for purely political reasons.”

    The “prisoner of conscience” designation is a powerful tool in advocating for the humane treatment of people who hold different religious, political, and sexual views than the powers that be — in some cases helping to lead to the release of prisoners.

    Here’s a look at some of the biggest names who have been or remain on the list.

    In Russia

    Russia is a virtual cornucopia of prisoners of conscience, with formidable political opposition figures, journalists, LGBT rights activists, and advocates for ethno-national rights gracing the list.

    Political Opposition

    Boris Nemtsov

    Boris Nemtsov

    Boris Nemtsov, the opposition politician who was shot dead in 2015, received the designation in 2011, along with activists Ilya Yashin and Eduard Limonov, after they attended a rally in Moscow in support of free assembly.

    Big Business

    Former Yukos owners Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s and Platon Lebedev’s listing the same year relating to what Amnesty called “deeply flawed and politically motivated” charges that led to their imprisonment years earlier drew sharp condemnation from the Russian Foreign Ministry.

    ‘Terror Network’

    In February 2020, Amnesty applied the designation to seven men standing trial in central Russia on what it called “absurd” charges relating to membership in a “nonexistent ‘terrorist’ organization.”

    Days later, all seven members were convicted and sentenced to prison for belonging to a “terrorist cell” labeled by authorities as “Network” that the authorities claimed planned to carry out a series of explosions in Russia during the 2018 presidential election and World Cup soccer tournament.

    Religious Persecution

    Aleksandr Gabyshev — a shaman in the Siberian region of Yakutia who has made several attempts to march on foot to Moscow “to drive President Vladimir Putin out of the Kremlin” — was briefly placed in a psychiatric hospital in September 2019 after he called Putin “evil” and marched for 2,000 kilometers in an attempt to reach the capital.

    “The Russian authorities’ response to the shaman’s actions is grotesque,” Amnesty said. “Gabyshev should be free to express his political views and exercise his religion and beliefs just like anyone else.”

    In May 2020, riot police raided Gabyshev’s home and took him to a psychiatric hospital because he allegedly refused to be tested for COVID-19. Amnesty called for his immediate release.

    But in January, Gabyshev was again forcibly taken to a psychiatric clinic after announcing he planned to resume his trek to Moscow to oust Putin.

    In Ukraine

    Prominent Ukrainian filmmaker and activist Oleh Sentsov made the list after he was arrested in Crimea in May 2014 after the peninsula was illegally annexed by Russia.

    Oleh Sentsov

    Oleh Sentsov

    Amnesty repeatedly called for the release of Sentsov after he was sentenced to 20 years in prison on a “terrorism” conviction in what the rights watchdog declared was an “unfair trial on politically motivated charges.”

    After five years in prison in Russia, Sentsov was released in a prisoner swap between Kyiv and pro-Russia separatists fighting in eastern Ukraine.

    Sentsov was far from the only Ukrainian to be taken down for criticizing Russia’s seizure of Crimea, prompting Amnesty to call for the release of all “all Ukrainian political prisoners” being held in Russia.

    Among them is the first Jehovah’s Witness to be sentenced by Russian authorities in the annexed territory, Sergei Filatov. The father of four was handed a sentence of six years in prison last year for being a member of an extremist group in what Amesty called “the latest example of the wholesale export of Russia’s brutally repressive policies.”

    In Belarus

    In Belarus, some of the biggest names to be declared “prisoners of conscience” are in the opposition to Alyaksandr Lukashenka, the authoritarian leader whose claim to have won a sixth-straight presidential term in August has led to months of anti-government protests.

    Viktar Babaryka

    Viktar Babaryka

    Viktar Babaryka, a former banker whose bid to challenge Lukashenka was halted by his arrest as part of what Amnesty called a “full-scale attack on human rights” ahead of the vote, went on trial on February 17 on charges of money laundering, bribery, and tax evasion.

    Fellow opposition member Paval Sevyarynets, who has been in custody since June, was charged with taking part in mass disorder related to his participation in rallies during which demonstrators attempted to collect signatures necessary to register presidential candidates other than Lukashenka.

    Syarhey Tsikhanouski

    Syarhey Tsikhanouski

    The popular blogger Syarhey Tsikhanouski was jailed after expressing interest in running against Lukashenka and remains in prison. Three of his associates went on trial in January on charges of organizing mass disorder in relation to the mass protests that broke out after the election.

    Tsikhanouski’s wife, Svyatlana Tsikhanouskaya, took his place as a candidate and considers herself the rightful winner of the election.

    In Kazakhstan

    Aigul Otepova

    Aigul Otepova

    Aigul Otepova, a Kazakh blogger and journalist accused of involvement in a banned organization, was forcibly placed by a court in a psychiatric clinic in November, prompting Amnesty to declare her a “a prisoner of conscience who is being prosecuted solely for the peaceful expression of her views.”

    Otepova has denied any affiliation with the Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan (DVK) opposition movement, which has been labeled an extremist group by the Kazkakh authorities, and Otepova’s daughter told RFE/RL that the authorities were trying to silence her ahead of Kazakhstan’s parliamentary elections in January.

    Otepova was released from the facility in December.

    In Iran

    Nasrin Sotoudeh

    Nasrin Sotoudeh

    Iranian human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh, who has represented opposition activists including women prosecuted for removing their mandatory head scarves, was arrested in 2018 and charged with spying, spreading propaganda, and insulting Iran’s supreme leader.

    She found herself back in prison in December, less than a month after she was granted a temporary release from her sentence to a total of 38 1/2 years in prison and 148 lashes.

    Amnesty has called Sotoudeh’s case “shocking” and considers her a “prisoner of conscience.” In its most recent action regarding Sotoudeh, the rights watchdog called for her to be released “immediately and unconditionally.”

    In Kyrgyzstan

    Amnesty International in August 2019 called the life sentence handed down to Kyrgyz rights defender Azimjan Askarov a “triumph of injustice.”

    Azimjan Askarov

    Azimjan Askarov

    The ethnic Uzbek Askarov was convicted of creating a mass disturbance and of involvement in the murder of a police officer during deadly interethnic clashes between local Uzbeks and Kyrgyz in June 2010 when more than 450 people, mainly Uzbeks, were killed and tens of thousands more were displaced.

    Askarov has said the charges against him are politically motivated, and the UN Human Rights Committed has determined that he was not given a fair trial and was tortured in detention.

    In May, after the Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s decision to not review Askarov’s sentence, Amnesty said the ruling “compounds 10 years of deep injustice inflicted on a brave human rights defender who should never have been jailed.”

    In Pakistan

    Junaid Hafeez

    Junaid Hafeez

    Amnesty has called the case of Junaid Hafeez “a travesty” and in 2019 called on Pakistan’s authorities to “immediately and unconditionally” release the university lecturer charged with blasphemy over Facebook uploads.

    Hafeez was charged under the country’s controversial blasphemy laws, which Amnesty has called on the country to repeal, describing them as “overly broad, vague, and coercive” and saying they were “used to target religious minorities, pursue personal vendettas, and carry out vigilante violence.”

    Hafeez has been in solitary confinement since June 2014.

    In Azerbaijan

    Leyla and Arif Yunus

    Leyla and Arif Yunus

    Human rights activists Leyla Yunus and Arif Yunus were arrested separately in 2014 and convicted of economic crimes in August 2015 after a trial Amnesty denounced as “shockingly unjust.”

    After Leyla Yunus was sentenced to 8 1/2 years in prison, and her husband to seven years, Amnesty said that the rulings showed the “continuous criminalization of human rights defenders in Azerbaijan.”

    After the two were released on health grounds in late 2015 and their prison sentences reduced to suspended sentences, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ordered Azerbaijan to pay them approximately $45,660 for violating their basic rights.

    In April 2016, they were allowed to leave the country and settled in the Netherlands.

    In Uzbekistan

    Azam Farmonov

    Azam Farmonov

    In 2009, Amnesty called for the immediate release of rights activists Azam Farmonov and Alisher Karamatov, who were detained in 2006 while defending the rights of farmers in Uzbekistan who had accused local officials of extortion and corruption.

    Amnesty said the two men had allegedly been tortured and declared them “prisoners of conscience.”

    In 2012, Karamatov was released after serving nearly two-thirds of a nine-year prison sentence.

    Farmonov served 10 years before his release in 2017, but reemerged in March when his U.S.-based NGO representing prisoners’ rights in Uzbekistan, Huquiqiy Tayanch, was successfully registered by the country’s Justice Ministry.

    Written by Michael Scollon, with additional reporting by Golnaz Esfandiari

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Biden Nominee To Head CIA Sees Russia As Potent Threat

    U.S. President Joe Biden’s nominee to run the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has told lawmakers that the “biggest geopolitical test” the United States faces comes from China but said Russia remains a familiar threat.

    William Burns, a former ambassador to Russia and Jordan, spoke on February 24 during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

    He called China “a formidable, authoritarian adversary” that is strengthening its ability to steal intellectual property, repress its people, expand its reach, and build influence within the United States.

    But he said there may be room for cooperation with Beijing in areas such as climate change and nuclear nonproliferation.

    He said Russia remained a disruptive and potent threat, although it is in many ways a declining world power.

    “As long as Vladimir Putin is the leader of Russia, we’re going to be operating within a pretty narrow band of possibilities, from the very sharply competitive to the very nastily adversarial,” he said.

    A recent hack of corporations and U.S. government departments believed to have been the work of Russians laid bare the perils of underestimating the Kremlin and served as a “very harsh wake-up” call about the vulnerabilities of supply chains and critical infrastructure, he said.

    Burns said the Biden administration would soon produce an assessment of Russian-related issues, including the hack. Russia has denied involvement.

    “I think it’s essential for the CIA in particular to work even harder to develop our capabilities to help detect these kind of attacks when they come from external players from foreign players,” he told the committee.

    Burns, who was a lead negotiator in the secret talks that paved the way to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal under former President Barack Obama, also commented on Iran, saying it can never be trusted with a nuclear weapon.

    Burns has said he would restore the nuclear deal with other major global powers that former President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of in 2018.

    Burns, 64, is expected to win confirmation and become the first career diplomat to lead the CIA. He has been confirmed by the Senate five times for his stints as ambassador to Jordan and Russia and three senior State Department positions.

    With reporting by Reuters and AP

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • UN Rapporteur: Iran Tried To ‘Mislead’ After Shooting Down Ukraine Passenger Jet

    A UN special rapporteur has accused Iran of misleading denials and inadequate investigations after the accidental downing of a Ukrainian passenger jet after takeoff from Tehran’s international airport in January 2020.

    Agnes Callamard, a special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions, said in a 45-page letter on the findings of a six-month inquiry on February 23 that “Iran committed multiple human rights violations in shooting down Ukraine International Airlines flight PS752 and in the aftermath of the deadly attack.”

    “The inconsistencies in the official explanations seem designed to create a maximum of confusion and a minimum of clarity,” Callamard said in the text, which was reportedly delivered to Iranian officials two months ago. “They seem contrived to mislead and bewilder.”

    After days of official denials following the crash, Iran admitted that its forces had inadvertently shot down the Kyiv-bound plane, killing all 176 people on board, after firing two missiles amid heightened tensions with the United States.

    But Iran’s civilian aviation authority in its final report from July 2020 cited “human error,” saying a broken radar system created communication problems with a military unit.

    “The Iranian government claims it has nothing to hide, yet it has failed to carry out a full and transparent investigation in line with its international obligations. As a result, many questions are left unresolved,” the UN rapporteur said.

    The majority of the victims were Iranians and Canadians, but Afghans, Britons, Swedes, and Ukrainians were also among the dead.

    Ukraine said last month in connection with the first anniversary of the tragedy that all five of those governments would “hold Iran to account to deliver justice and make sure Iran makes full reparations to the families of the victims and affected countries.”

    Iran announced in December 2020 that the government had allocated $150,000 for the families of each of the victims — an offer rejected by the Ukrainian and Canadian governments, as well as some of the families of the victims, who see it as an attempt to close the case and escape accountability.

    Human Rights Watch (HRW) marked the anniversary of the crash by accusing Iranian authorities of harassing and intimidating the victims’ families instead of conducting a “transparent and credible” investigation.

    Flight 752 was downed the same night that Iran launched a ballistic-missile attack that targeted U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Tehran’s air defenses were on high alert in case of retaliation.

    Iran’s missile attack was in response to a U.S. drone strike that killed the powerful commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Major General Qasem Soleimani, in Baghdad five days earlier.

    With reporting by dpa

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • European Powers Condemn Iran Over Inspection Curbs

    Britain, France, and Germany on February 23 criticized Iran’s decision to abandon a snap-inspections regime and reduce transparency as part of a mounting standoff over the fate of a 2015 nuclear agreement with world powers.

    Iran confirmed a day earlier that it had ended its implementation of the Additional Protocol allowing for surprise inspections of nuclear-related sites.

    That move signaled a further disintegration of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA) among Iran and world powers that the previous U.S. administration abandoned in 2018.

    “We…deeply regret that Iran has started, as of today, to suspend the Additional Protocol and the transparency measures under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” the British, French, and German foreign ministers said in a joint statement.

    “We urge Iran to stop and reverse all measures that reduce transparency and to ensure full and timely cooperation with the IAEA,” they added.

    Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also vowed “not to back down on the nuclear issue” and floated the possibility of dramatically escalating uranium enrichment.

    Washington and its Western partners have been scrambling to salvage the JCPOA since U.S. President Joe Biden took office in January vowing a return to the deal while preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapons capability.

    Meanwhile, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on February 23 laid out details of a deal he worked out with Iranian officials last weekend to preserve some monitoring for up to three months beyond Tehran’s deadline for nixing the snap inspections.

    Rafael Grossi described a system whereby data and “key activities” would be monitored and stored but not made available until after the period in question.

    “In other words, we will know exactly what happened, exactly how many components were fabricated, exactly how much material was processed or treated or enriched and so on and so forth,” Grossi told an event hosted by the U.S. think tank called the Nuclear Threat Initiative.

    In a sign that the nuclear issue is further pitting hard-liners against President Hassan Rohani’s administration, lawmakers in Iran’s parliament on February 22 objected to the government’s decision to allow the continued IAEA monitoring.

    The state-run newspaper Iran countered on February 23 by suggesting that the parliamentarians’ tough line could leave Iran “alone as in the past” on the international stage.

    The White House has said that its European allies are awaiting a response from Iran on an offer to host an informal meeting of current members of the JCPOA.

    The United States and other governments have accused Iran of secretly trying to build a nuclear-weapons capability, a charge that Tehran has consistently rejected despite years of what the IAEA said was obfuscation and deception.

    Based on reporting by Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S. Says It Won’t ‘Lash Out’ After Blaming Iran For Rocket Attack On U.S. Embassy In Baghdad

    A State Deparment spokesman said the United States will hold Iran “responsible” for a rocket barrage on February 22 that targeted the U.S. Embassy in the Iraqi capital.

    But it said it won’t “lash out” in response.

    Iraq’s army said earlier that there were no casualties when the embassy, within Baghdad’s heavily fortified Green Zone, was targeted by the rockets.

    It said there was only minor property damage, including a damaged vehicle.

    Iraqi security officials said three rockets were fired at the U.S. Embassy. They said one rocket fell within the perimeter of the vast embassy complex and another fell in the nearby residential neighborhood of Harthiya just outside of the Green Zone.

    Iraqi officials said the rockets had been launched from the Al-Salam neighborhood to the southwest of the Green Zone.

    There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack.

    Baghdad’s Green Zone houses foreign embassies as well as the seat of Iraq’s government.

    The rocket barrage was the third attack to target the U.S. presence in Iraq in a week.

    A contractor working for the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq was killed and several other civilians were wounded by a rocket attack outside Irbil International Airport in northern Iraq on February 16.

    A little-known Shi’ite militant group that calls itself the Guardians of Blood Brigade claimed responsibility for that attack.

    On October 20, rockets wounded employees of a U.S. defense company at Balad Air Base in Salahaddin Province about 70 kilometers north of Baghdad.

    The U.S. Embassy had been a frequent target of rocket attacks during the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump. The pace of attacks slowed during the weeks before President Joe Biden took office. But attacks recently have become more frequent.

    Based on reporting by AP and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S. Says It Won’t ‘Lash Out’ After Blaming Iran For Rocket Attack On U.S. Embassy In Baghdad

    A State Department spokesman has said the United States will hold Iran “responsible” for a rocket barrage on February 22 that targeted the U.S. Embassy in the Iraqi capital.

    But it said it won’t “lash out” in response.

    Iraq’s army said earlier that there were no casualties when the embassy, within Baghdad’s heavily fortified Green Zone, was targeted by the rockets.

    It said there was only minor property damage, including a damaged vehicle.

    Iraqi security officials said three rockets were fired at the U.S. Embassy. They said one rocket fell within the perimeter of the vast embassy complex and another fell in the nearby residential neighborhood of Harthiya just outside of the Green Zone.

    Iraqi officials said the rockets had been launched from the Al-Salam neighborhood to the southwest of the Green Zone.

    There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack.

    Baghdad’s Green Zone houses foreign embassies as well as the seat of Iraq’s government.

    The rocket barrage was the third attack to target the U.S. presence in Iraq in a week.

    A contractor working for the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq was killed and several other civilians were wounded by a rocket attack outside Irbil International Airport in northern Iraq on February 16.

    A little-known Shi’ite militant group that calls itself the Guardians of Blood Brigade claimed responsibility for that attack.

    On October 20, rockets wounded employees of a U.S. defense company at Balad Air Base in Salahaddin Province about 70 kilometers north of Baghdad.

    The U.S. Embassy had been a frequent target of rocket attacks during the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump. The pace of attacks slowed during the weeks before President Joe Biden took office. But attacks recently have become more frequent.

    Based on reporting by AP and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Germany Urges Iran To Comply With Nuclear Pact

    German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas has called on Iran to fully comply with the 2015 nuclear pact with world powers which he said was in Tehran’s interest.

    Addressing the UN-sponsored Conference on Disarmament in Geneva on February 22, Maas noted U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration’s stated readiness to rejoin the pact, adding: “It is in Iran’s best interest to change course now, before the agreement is damaged beyond repair.”

    Maas said that Germany expected “full compliance, full transparency, and full cooperation” from Iran with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), whose chief Rafael Grossi returned on February 21 from a trip to Tehran.

    Iran on February 22 hailed the outcome of Grossi’s visit and a temporary agreement the two sides reached on site inspections as a “significant achievement.”

    That deal effectively bought time as all sides try to salvage the agreement, which was pushed to the brink of collapse when former U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew from it in 2018.

    Tehran is demanding that Washington remove punishing sanctions Trump reimposed in 2018, while Washington has called on Iran to first return to all of its nuclear commitments.

    In the standoff, Iran’s conservative-dominated parliament has demanded that the country limit some inspections by the IAEA from February 23.

    Grossi hammered out a temporary technical deal with Tehran during his visit, whereby Iran will continue to allow access to UN inspectors to its nuclear sites — but will for three months bar inspections of other, non-nuclear sites.

    Grossi said afterwards that the “temporary solution” enables the IAEA to retain “a necessary degree of monitoring and verification work.”

    Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Saeed Khatibzadeh, said on February 22 that the talks had “resulted in a very significant diplomatic achievement and a very significant technical achievement.”

    Khatibzadeh stressed that the outcome was “within the framework of parliament’s binding law.”

    Under the agreement reached over the weekend with the IAEA, Iran will temporarily suspend so-called “voluntary transparency measures” — notably inspections of non-nuclear sites, including military sites suspected of nuclear-related activity.

    Tehran will for “three months record and keep the information of some activities and monitoring equipment” at such sites, Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization said.

    This means that cameras will keep running at those sites, “but no footage will be given to the IAEA,” Khatibzadeh said.

    The footage will be deleted after three months if the U.S. sanctions are not lifted, Iran’s atomic body has said.

    With reporting by Reuters, AFP, and dpa

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Iran Says Imprisoned Dervish Activist Dead After Hospitalization

    Authorities in Iran said on February 21 that an imprisoned activist from the Sufi Gonabadi dervish religious minority died days after being hospitalized for what they say was poisoning caused by drug consumption.

    Behnam Mahjubi had been jailed after taking part in a demonstration along with other members of the Gonabadi order in 2018 and started serving a two-year prison sentence in June.

    Mahjubi was reportedly taken from the notorious Evin Prison and admitted to a local hospital on February 16.

    The Gonabadi order strongly opposes the use of drugs.

    Mahjubi’s wife, Saleh Hosseini, told RFE/RL’s Radio Farda last week after being allowed to see her husband in the intensive care unit of Loghman hospital in Tehran that he had been denied timely medical care and that contributed to his falling into a coma.

    Mahjubi’s mother said last week that her son was breathing with the aid of a ventilator while handcuffed to a hospital bed in the hospital’s intensive care unit.

    The Gonabadi dervishes have spent years clashing intermittently with Iranian authorities, with critics saying Iran’s leadership regards them as a threat to its monopoly on religion.

    Some conservative clerics have called the Sufis a danger to Islam.

    “Special medical care was administered after he was hospitalized, but despite the medical team’s efforts, the prisoner unfortunately passed away,” Iran’s judiciary said on an official website on February 21.

    Security troops have destroyed Gonabadi houses of worship and detained members en masse on a number of occasions.

    Amnesty International says the persecution of dervishes in Iran increased after an October 2010 speech by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who denounced “newly created circles of false mysticism.”

    Based on reporting by RFE/RL’s Radio Farda and AFP

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Sullivan: U.S. Has ‘Begun’ To Talk With Iranians About Detained Americans

    President Joe Biden’s national-security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said on February 21 that the new administration has “begun to communicate with the Iranians” on the issue of detained Americans.

    Speaking on a weekend current-affairs program, Sullivan said Washington’s “strong message to the Iranians will be that…we will not accept a long-term proposition where they continue to hold Americans in an unjust and unlawful manner.”

    The United States has repeatedly called on Iran to help locate former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared when he traveled to the Iranian resort of Kish Island in 2007 and is presumed dead.

    At least four other American-Iranians are thought to still be in Iranian custody.

    “It will be a significant priority of this administration to get those Americans safely back home,” Sullivan said.

    The United States and other Western governments have long accused Tehran of detaining dual nationals who visit Iran and other foreign nationals — frequently on dubious espionage charges — in order to use them as bargaining chips for prisoner swaps.

    “We intend to very directly communicate with the Iranians about the complete and utter outrage, the humanitarian catastrophe that is the unjust, unlawful detention of American citizens in Iran,” Sullivan said on CBS’s Face The Nation program. “We have begun to communicate with the Iranians on this issue, yes. And we will continue to do so as we go forward.”

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Head Of UN’s Nuclear Watchdog Meets Iranian Nuclear Chief In Tehran

    The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, has met with Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the civilian Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, ahead of Tehran’s February 23 deadline to reduce United Nations inspections of the country’s nuclear facilities if U.S. sanctions are not lifted, Iranian media reported on February 21.

    Iran has said that it would stop implementing “voluntary transparency measures” under the 2015 nuclear agreement with major powers, including the so-called Additional Protocol, which allows IAEA inspectors to visit undeclared sites in Iran at short notice. Tehran has said that the steps are reversible.

    The International Atomic Energy Agency said last week that Grossi’s visit to Tehran was aimed at finding “a mutually agreeable solution for the IAEA to continue essential verification activities in the country.”

    Iran has stressed it will not cease working with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) or expel its inspectors.

    Iran and six major powers struck a landmark nuclear deal in 2015 that called for curbs on Iran’s uranium-enrichment program in return for the lifting of international sanctions.

    But President Donald Trump in May 2018 pulled his country out of the accord and reimposed crippling sanctions on Iran, saying the terms were not strict enough.

    In response, Tehran has gradually breached the deal by building up its stockpile of low-enriched uranium, refining uranium to a higher level of purity, and using advanced centrifuges for enrichment.

    The administration of President Joe Biden is exploring ways to return to the deal.

    The White House said on February 19 that the European Union has floated the idea of a conversation among Iran and the six major powers that signed the deal.

    On the same day, Biden said that Washington is prepared to reengage with the international partners that signed the deal on Iran’s nuclear program.

    Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on February 20 that his country is considering the European Union’s offer to host a meeting between Iran and the other parties to the 2015 nuclear deal.

    “Now we are considering [the offer],and are engaged in consultations with our other friends and partners like China and Russia,” Araqchi was quoted as saying by Iranian media.

    “However, we believe a U.S return to the nuclear accord does not require a meeting and the only way for it is to lift the sanctions,” Araqchi said.

    With reporting by AFP, AP, PressTV, and IRNA

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S. Says It Plans No Additional Steps On Iran Ahead Of EU-Proposed ‘Diplomatic Conversation’

    The United States plans no additional actions in response to pressure from Tehran ahead of proposed talks on a return to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the White House said on February 19.

    The White House has “no plan to take additional steps” on Iran in advance of having a “diplomatic conversation” about a possible U.S. return to the deal, spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.

    Psaki noted the European Union has floated the idea of a conversation among Iran and the six major powers that struck the agreement: Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia, and the United States, known as the P5+1.

    “The Europeans have invited us and…it is simply an invitation to have a conversation, a diplomatic conversation,” she said, speaking to reporters on Air Force One as President Joe Biden flew to Michigan.

    The European Union is working on organizing an informal meeting with all participants, a senior EU official said on February 19.

    In an address the same day to the Munich Security Conference, Biden said that Washington is prepared to reengage with the international partners that signed the deal on Iran’s nuclear program.

    Biden also said his administration is going to work with Europe and “other partners” to address Iran’s “destabilizing activities across the Middle East.”

    In 2015, the P5+1 — the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, plus Germany — signed a landmark agreement with Tehran that called for curbs on Iran’s nuclear program in return for the lifting of international sanctions.

    But in 2018, U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the accord and reimposed crippling sanctions on Iran. In response, Tehran has increasingly breached limits it had agreed to under the pact.

    The United States on February 19 also notified the UN Security Council that it had withdrawn Trump’s September 2020 invocation of the so-called “snap-back” mechanism under which it insisted that all UN sanctions against Iran were to be reimposed.

    The United States said earlier this week that it was ready to talk to Iran about both nations returning to the deal. But the countries have been at odds over which one should make the first step.

    Iran has said the United States must first lift sanctions, while Washington says Tehran must first return to compliance with the deal.

    Iran said on February 19 that it would “immediately reverse” actions that contradict a 2015 nuclear agreement once U.S. sanctions are lifted.

    When sanctions are lifted, “we will then immediately reverse all remedial measures. Simple,” Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Twitter.

    With reporting by Reuters and AFP

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • How To Write About Iran

    Whether you are working from your DC office or your home in LA or New York, here’s all you need to know to become an expert on Iran.

    1. Always refer to Iran as the “Islamic Republic” and its government as “the regime” or, better yet, “the Mullahs.”

    2. Never refer to Iran’s foreign policy. The correct terminology is its “behavior.” When U.S. officials say Iran “must change its behavior” and “behave like a normal country,” write those quotes down word for word. Everyone knows that Iran is a delinquent kid that always instigates trouble and must be disciplined.

    3. Omit that Iran has a population of 80 million with half a dozen ethnicities, languages, and religions. Why complicate when you can do simple?

    The post How To Write About Iran appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • U.S. Says Ready To Meet With Iran If EU Issues Invitation For Nuclear Talks

    The United States, in apparent moves to tamp down tensions with a bitter rival, says it is prepared to meet with Iran over its nuclear program and it eased “extremely restrictive” limits on movements of Iranian diplomats accredited at the New York-headquartered United Nations.

    The U.S. administration on February 18 also notified the UN Security Council that it had withdrawn then-President Donald Trump’s September 2020 invoking of the “snapback” mechanism under which it insisted that all UN sanctions against Iran were to be reimposed.

    Richard Mills, the acting U.S. ambassador to the UN, said in a letter that sanctions purported to be reinstated in August “remain terminated.”

    Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at the time insisted the United States was technically still a part in the 2015 accord and that it was triggering UN sanctions for Iranian violations.

    However, even U.S. allies dismissed Pompeo’s argument and the UN said no such sanctions would come into effect.

    The series of moves represents a change in tenor with regards to relations between Washington and Tehran.

    Trump had taken a hard line with Iran, accusing it of fomenting extremist violence in the Middle East and of attempting to develop nuclear weapons, allegations Tehran has denied.

    In May 2018, Trump pulled the United States out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and reimposed crippling sanctions on Tehran. In turn, Iran began breaching terms of the accord.

    President Joe Biden has expressed a willingness to reengage with Tehran, although he has insisted it must return to the terms of the 2015 deal before it would discuss the possibility of easing sanctions.

    The State Department said the United States would accept an invitation from the European Union to attend a meeting of the signees of the nuclear deal.

    Washington has not participated in such meetings since Trump withdrew from the deal.

    “The United States would accept an invitation from the European Union High Representative to attend a meeting of the P5+1 and Iran to discuss a diplomatic way forward on Iran’s nuclear program,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said.

    An invitation has not yet been issued, but one is expected shortly, following discussions on February 18 among top U.S., British, French, and German diplomats.

    Meanwhile, the U.S. mission to the UN said the United States was easing tough restrictions imposed by the Trump administration on movements of Iranian UN diplomats.

    “The idea here is to take steps to remove unnecessary obstacles to multilateral diplomacy by amending the restrictions on domestic travel. Those had been extremely restrictive,” a State Department official told reporters.

    Trump in 2019 barred Iranian diplomats from all but a few blocks around the UN headquarters and their mission.

    Iranian diplomats will still be subject to restrictions on diplomats linked to nations with poor relations with the United States, such as North Korea, the State Department said. Those require authorization to travel beyond a 40-kilometer radius from Manhattan.

    With on reporting by AP, AFP, and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S., European Diplomats Hold Talks On Iran Nuclear Deal

    The top diplomats from the United States, Germany, France, and Britain are holding talks on ways to revive the landmark 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, which Washington pulled out of in 2018.

    The deal signed by Tehran with the four Western powers, along with China and Russia, called for curbs on Iran’s uranium-enrichment program in return for the lifting of sanctions.

    President Donald Trump in May 2018 pulled his country out of the accord and reimposed crippling sanctions on Iran, saying the terms were not strict enough to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons.

    Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is strictly for civilian purposes.

    The other signatories have been attempting to save the accord. But since the U.S. pullout, Tehran has increasingly breached limits it had agreed to under the deal.

    German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas and British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab met France’s Jean-Yves Le Drian for talks in Paris on February 18. New U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken joined through a video link.

    “The recent steps of Iran are not helpful at all, they endanger the return of the Americans” to the deal, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas told reporters in Paris.

    “Apparently Iran is not interested in easing the tensions, but in escalation. They are playing with fire,” he said.

    U.S. President Joe Biden has indicated more willingness to deal with Iran than his predecessor did, but he has publicly stated Tehran must adhere to its commitment under the 2015 deal before his administration will discuss the possibility of lifting sanctions.

    Blinken said last month he wants to coordinate with U.S. allies to get to a “longer and stronger agreement” with Iran.

    Based on reporting by AFP and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Biden, Netanyahu Finally Talk, Discuss ‘Iranian Threat’

    U.S. President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have spoken by phone amid reports of a strained relationship between the two countries following Netanyahu’s close ties to the Trump administration.

    A statement released on February 17 by the Israeli leader’s office said the two leaders discussed the “Iranian threat” as well as other issues, including the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Netanyahu was one of the last leaders of a U.S. ally to receive a call from Biden since the U.S. president’s January 20 inauguration.

    Netanyahu had close ties with Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, who pushed what was seen as a heavily pro-Israel agenda that angered many Arab nations, along with some U.S. allies in Europe and elsewhere.

    The prime minister is facing a tough fight in a legislative election scheduled for March 23. The relationship with Washington is of crucial importance to Israeli voters.

    Netanyahu’s office was the first to announce the conversation and released a photo of a smiling prime minister holding a phone to his ear. The one-hour conversation was “warm and friendly,” his office said.

    “The two leaders noted their long-standing personal connection and said that they would work together to continue strengthening the steadfast alliance between Israel and the U.S.,” the statement said.

    It added that topics included “the Iranian threat” of developing nuclear weapons, efforts to fight the coronavirus pandemic, and the desire to expand Israel’s new deals establishing relations with Arab nations.

    During his presidential campaign, Biden criticized Trump’s decision to pull out of the landmark 2015 nuclear accord that Iran signed with world powers. Netanyahu adamantly backed Trump’s move, which involved reinstating crushing sanctions on Iran, Israel’s main rival in the region.

    Biden has publicly stated that Iran must adhere to its commitment under the 2015 deal before his administration will discuss the possibility of lifting sanctions.

    Tehran, under the deal with the United States, China, Russia, Germany, France, and Britain, agreed to curbs on its uranium-enrichment program in return for the lifting of sanctions. Iran has always denied pursuing nuclear weapons, saying its nuclear program is strictly for civilian purposes.

    Since Trump abandoned the agreement and reimposed sanctions, Tehran has gradually breached the deal’s terms.

    With reporting by AP and AFP

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Injuries Reported As Earthquake Shakes Southwestern Iran

    An earthquake with a magnitude of 5.6 shook southwest Iran near the town of Sisakht late on February 17, with at least 10 people reported to be injured.

    Iranian state TV quoted an official in the region as saying, “People in Sisakht and the town of Yasuj left their homes in panic. Water and electricity have been cut off in Sisakht.”

    “Rescue teams and ambulances have been dispatched to the area. So far, 10 people have been injured,” the official added.

    Sisakht, a farming area with a population of around 6,000 people, is about 500 kilometers south of the capital, Tehran.

    State news agency IRNA said the temblor struck at a depth of 10 kilometers at around at 10 p.m.

    IRNA added that there were no immediate reports of fatalities, but the Fars news agency reported that at least two of the injured were in critical condition.

    Regional officials also reported heavy rain in the region and said many people were suffering in extreme cold weather.

    Iran sits on top of major tectonic plates and experiences frequent seismic activity.

    A 7.3-magnitude quake in the western province of Kermanshah killed 620 people in November 2017.

    In 2003, a 6.6-magnitude quake destroyed the ancient mud-brick city of Bam in Iran’s southeast, killing at least 31,000 people.

    Iran’s deadliest was a 7.4-magnitude quake in 1990 that killed 40,000 people, injured 300,000 others, and left half a million homeless in the country’s north.

    Based on reporting by RFE/RL’s Radio Farda, Reuters, IRNA, and AP

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S. To Discuss Iran Nuclear Deal With France, Britain, Germany

    The top diplomats from the United States, Germany, France, and Britain will hold talks on February 18 to discuss the future of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, which Washington pulled out of in 2018.

    The deal signed by Tehran with the four Western powers, along with China and Russia, called for curbs on Iran’s uranium-enrichment program in return for the lifting of sanctions.

    However, President Donald Trump in May 2018 pulled his country out of the accord and reimposed crippling sanctions on Iran, saying the terms were not strict enough to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

    Iran has always denied seeking to develop nuclear weapons, saying its nuclear program is strictly for civilian purposes.

    Trump also said Iran had violated the spirit of the accord by financing extremist activity in the region, an allegation Tehran has denied.

    The other signees have been attempting to save the accord. Since the U.S. pullout, Tehran has increasingly breached limits it had agreed to under the deal.

    German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas and British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab are scheduled to meet France’s Jean-Yves Le Drian for talks in Paris. New U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken will take part through a video link.

    U.S. President Joe Biden has indicated more willingness to deal with Iran than his predecessor did, but he has publicly stated Iran must adhere to its commitment under the 2015 deal before his administration will discuss the possibility of lifting sanctions.

    Blinken said last month he wants to coordinate with U.S. allies to get to a “longer and stronger agreement” with Tehran.

    Based on reporting by dpa and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S. To Discuss Iran Nuclear Deal With France, Britain, Germany

    The top diplomats from the United States, Germany, France, and Britain will hold talks on February 18 to discuss the future of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, which Washington pulled out of in 2018.

    The deal signed by Tehran with the four Western powers, along with China and Russia, called for curbs on Iran’s uranium-enrichment program in return for the lifting of sanctions.

    However, President Donald Trump in May 2018 pulled his country out of the accord and reimposed crippling sanctions on Iran, saying the terms were not strict enough to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

    Iran has always denied seeking to develop nuclear weapons, saying its nuclear program is strictly for civilian purposes.

    Trump also said Iran had violated the spirit of the accord by financing extremist activity in the region, an allegation Tehran has denied.

    The other signees have been attempting to save the accord. Since the U.S. pullout, Tehran has increasingly breached limits it had agreed to under the deal.

    German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas and British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab are scheduled to meet France’s Jean-Yves Le Drian for talks in Paris. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken will take part through a video link.

    U.S. President Joe Biden has indicated more willingness to deal with Iran than his predecessor did, but he has publicly stated that Iran must adhere to its commitment under the 2015 deal before his administration will discuss the possibility of lifting sanctions.

    Blinken said last month he wants to coordinate with U.S. allies to achieve a “longer and stronger agreement” with Tehran.

    Based on reporting by dpa and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Is Biden Committing Diplomatic Suicide Over The Iran Nuclear Agreement?

    As Congress still struggles to pass a COVID relief bill, the rest of the world is nervously reserving judgment on America’s new president and his foreign policy, after successive U.S. administrations have delivered unexpected and damaging shocks to the world and the international system. 
     
    Cautious international optimism toward President Biden is very much based on his commitment to Obama’s signature diplomatic achievement, the JCPOA or nuclear agreement with Iran. Biden and the Democrats excoriated Trump for withdrawing from it and promised to promptly rejoin the deal if elected. But Biden now appears to be hedging his position in a way that risks turning what should be an easy win for the new administration into an avoidable and tragic diplomatic failure.

    The post Is Biden Committing Diplomatic Suicide Over The Iran Nuclear Agreement? appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Iran Wants ‘Action Not Words’ From Parties To Nuclear Deal

    Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says Iran wants to see “action not words” from the signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal, after the new U.S. administration said it could return to the pact that was abandoned by former President Donald Trump.

    “We have heard many nice words and promises which in practice have been broken and opposite actions have been taken. Words and promises are no good. This time [we want] only action from the other side and we will also act,” Khamenei said in a televised speech on February 17.

    U.S. President Joe Biden has said Washington will return to the nuclear pact abandoned by Trump in 2018 if Tehran first resumes full compliance. Tehran says Washington must act first.

    Under the deal with the United States, China, Russia, Germany, France, and Britain, Iran agreed to curbs on its uranium-enrichment program in return for the lifting of sanctions.

    Iran has always denied pursuing nuclear weapons, saying its nuclear program is strictly for civilian purposes.

    Since Trump abandoned the agreement and reimposed sanctions, Tehran has gradually breached the deal’s terms.

    On February 16, the International Atomic Energy Organization (IAEA) confirmed that Iran had informed it that it plans to reduce its cooperation with the UN atomic watchdog’s inspectors as of February 23.

    The Vienna-based agency said that Tehran had told it that it would stop implementing “voluntary transparency measures” including the so-called Additional Protocol, which allows IAEA inspectors to visit undeclared sites in Iran at short notice.

    Based on reporting by Reuters, AFP, and dpa

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Bulgaria Says 400 Kilos Of Heroin Found In Cargo From Iran

    Bulgarian authorities say they have confiscated more than 400 kilograms of heroin from a ship traveling from Dubai that was transporting construction materials from Iran.

    Prosecutor Vladimir Chavdarov said on February 16 that the drugs were divided into 487 packages and hidden among asphalt rollers, which the ship was carrying.

    Customs officials in the Black Sea port of Varna valued the seized heroin at about $22 million.

    Prosecutors said the owner of the importing company and a customs official had been detained and charged with drug trafficking.

    The two men could face up to 20 years in prison, if convicted of the charges.

    Bulgarian police believe the heroin was not intended for the domestic market but rather destined to be sold in Western Europe.

    Bulgaria is on the so-called Balkan drug-trafficking route, which is used to supply Western Europe with drugs from Asia and the Middle East.

    With reporting by AP, Reuters, and dpa

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Iran, Russia Start Naval Drill In Indian Ocean

    Iran and Russia have embarked on a joint naval drill in the northern part of the Indian Ocean that they say has been designed to “enhance the security” of maritime trade in the region, Iranian state media reported.

    State television said on February 16 that the exercise dubbed Maritime Security Belt will cover an area of about 17,000 square kilometers and include units from the Iranian Navy, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ (IRGC) Navy, and the Russian Navy.

    Iranian Rear Admiral Gholamreza Tahani said its purpose was to “enhance the security of international maritime trade, confront maritime piracy and terrorism, and exchange information.”

    The Indian Navy will also join the exercise, in a message of “peace and friendship for neighboring and regional countries,” Tahani said.

    Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency reported that the drill was scheduled to last three days.

    This is the second joint Russian-Iranian naval exercise since December 2019, when the two countries plus China held a drill in the Indian Ocean and Gulf of Oman.

    Iran and China also participated in military exercises held in Russia in September 2020.

    Tehran has been seeking to step up military cooperation with Beijing and Moscow amid tensions with the United States.

    Iran has also increased its military drills in recent weeks as tensions built during the final days of the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump.

    Tehran is now trying to pressure U.S. President Joe Biden’s new administration to reenter a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers.

    Last week, the IRGC conducted a ground forces drill in the southwest of Iran near the Iraqi border.

    Trump withdrew the United States from the nuclear pact in 2018 and reimposed crushing sanctions on Iran.

    In response to the U.S. moves, which were accompanied by increased tensions between Iran, the United States, and its allies, Tehran has gradually breached parts of the pact saying it is no longer bound by it.

    The Biden administration has expressed willingness to return to compliance with the accord if Iran does, and then work with U.S. allies and partners on a “longer and stronger” agreement, including other issues such as Iran’s missile program and its support for regional proxy forces.

    Iranian officials insist that the United States should make the first move by returning to the agreement, which eased international sanctions in exchange for curbs on Tehran’s disputed nuclear program.

    They also say that the country’s missile program and regional policies are off the table.

    With reporting by AFP, AP, and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Iran Says It Will End IAEA Snap Inspections Of Nuclear Sites

    Iran says it will block snap inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) beginning next week if other parties to the 2015 nuclear deal do not uphold their obligations under the accord.

    Under legislation enacted last year, the Iranian government is obliged to limit IAEA inspections to declared nuclear sites starting next week if other parties do not fully comply with the deal.

    The move will end the agency’s sweeping inspection powers granted under the nuclear pact to have short-notice access to any location seen as relevant for information gathering.

    Iran’s envoy to the IAEA said on February 15 that Tehran has informed the IAEA about its plan.

    Kazem Gharibabadi, said on Twitter that the law “will be executed on time,” giving February 23 as the date.

    Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said, however, that the move does not mean all inspections by the UN nuclear watchdog will end.

    “All these steps are reversible if the other party changes its path and honors its obligations,” he said, alluding to the United States.

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement in 2018 and reimposed punishing sanctions against Iran.

    In response, Tehran has gradually breached parts of the pact, saying it is no longer bound by it. Last month, it resumed enriching uranium to 20 percent — a level it achieved before the accord.

    The Biden administration has expressed a willingness to return to the deal but has insisted that Iran move to full compliance with the deal first. Tehran has rejected any preconditions and called for the immediate lifting of sanctions.

    Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani, who said last week that Doha was in consultations to help salvage the deal, met in Tehran with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif on February 15.

    The minister also met with President Hassan Rohani and delivered a message from the emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani.

    “We welcome efforts by friendly countries like Qatar,” Khatibzadeh said, confirming that there have been consultations between Tehran and Doha at various levels.

    Under the deal — reached by Iran, the United States, China, Russia, Germany, France, and Britain — Iran agreed to curbs on its uranium enrichment program in return for the lifting of sanctions. Iran has always denied pursuing nuclear weapons, saying its nuclear program is strictly for civilian purposes.

    With reporting by AFP and Reuters

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.