Author Archives: Paul Woodward

Election law stalls in Iraqi parliament

Election law stalls in Iraqi parliament
By Anthony Shadid and Nada Bakri, Washington Post, October 20, 2009

The Iraqi parliament failed for a second time Monday to vote on an election law crucial for organizing elections in January that will choose a new parliament and serve as a milestone in American plans to withdraw combat troops from the country.

As is often the case in Iraq, deadlines come and go. But election officials face a logistical challenge ahead of the Jan. 16 vote, the first national election since 2005. They say they need the law passed now to give them roughly three months to prepare for the vote, although they could gain a week or two if the election is delayed. But after that, parliament’s term expires, throwing Iraq’s nascent political system into an unconstitutional limbo, just months before the U.S. military wants to begin withdrawing troops in earnest.

“If they don’t pass a new law, a curse is going to fall on the political parties,” warned Safia Sahhal, a secular lawmaker. “Why? Because this is what Iraqis want.” [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Kurdish rebels surrender as Turkey reaches out

Kurdish rebels surrender as Turkey reaches out
By Nicholas Birch, Wall Street Journal, October 20, 2009

In the first concrete sign that months of efforts by Turkey’s government to end a 25-year Kurdish insurgency could bear fruit, eight Kurdish rebels crossed over the border from Iraq on Monday to give themselves up.

Accompanied by 26 Kurdish villagers who fled Turkey more than a decade ago, the members of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, were detained by police and taken in for questioning by Turkish prosecutors.

Though not the first time such a gesture has been made, it comes months into what Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has described as his government’s “democratic opening” to Turkey’s Kurdish population, who make up about a fifth of Turkey’s 70 million inhabitants. The PKK has fought a guerrilla war aimed at separating Kurdish areas from the rest of Turkey. Tens of thousands of people, mostly Kurds, have been killed since the fighting began in 1984. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Eavesdropping sparks fresh border tension between Lebanon and Israel

Eavesdropping sparks fresh border tension
By Mitchell Prothero, The National, October 20, 2009

Hizbollah’s discovery of at least three eavesdropping devices planted in southern Lebanon by the Israeli military last weekend has inflamed an already tense border situation as the Lebanese armed forces fired anti-aircraft weapons at unmanned Israeli drones sent to survey the situation.

The situation began in the border village of Houla, a Hizbollah stronghold, on Sunday night, when, according to a statement by Hizbollah’s military wing, the Islamic Resistance discovered devices planted underground by Israel to spy on the group’s internal communications. One of those devices exploded on Sunday night.

“The Islamic Resistance has discovered a spying device installed by the Israeli enemy on a cable between the villages of Mays and Jebel after the 2006 war,” the Lebanese militant faction said in a statement. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Jordan king warns over US Mideast policy

Jordan king warns over US Mideast policy
AP, October 19, 2009

Jordan’s king said in comments published Monday that the U.S. administration seems to be focusing more of its attention on Iran and less on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying time was running out to make peace.

In an interview with Italian daily La Repubblica, King Abdullah II said the region’s hopes for peace were huge at the start of the Obama administration, but now sees the “goal getting farther away.”

“I’ve heard people in Washington talking about Iran, again Iran, always Iran,” Abdullah was quoted as saying. “But I insist on, and keep insisting on the Palestinian question: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the most serious threat to the stability of the region and the Mediterranean.” [continued…]

Editor’s Comment — Having just won the Nobel Peace Prize for advancing global diplomacy, President Obama should reflect some more on how engagement really works. The United States will talk to its adversaries, Obama boldly declared before getting elected. So far so good.

But engagement is sure to lead to a dead end unless it functions effectively as a two-way street. Washington has shown its readiness to talk, but is it ready to listen? Engagement can be as boneheaded as non-engagement if it doesn’t involve listening.

Abdullah, Erdogan and others are telling the US that this administration’s approach to the Middle East is failing. Is the administration listening?

Stop Palestinian suffering for Mideast peace, says Erdoğan
Hürriyet Daily News, October 19, 2009

Peace cannot be established in the Middle East when the suffering of the Palestinians continues and the Gaza Strip remains a wreck, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said Monday.

Speaking at the Istanbul Forum organized by Stratim, Seta and the German Marshall Fund, Erdoğan said the Palestinian question is at the center of all problems in the Middle East. The prime minister recalled that Turkey vocalized its disapproval of the previous year’s bombing of the Gaza Strip, adding: “We criticized steps that were serving no purpose, but which increased suffering and sabotaged the peace process. We will continue to criticize it today, too. We will criticize anything similar taking place in other areas.” [continued…]

Turkish president: ‘Brave criticism’ of Israel to continue
AFP, October 19, 2009

Turkey will continue to criticize its ally Israel with “courage” if it engages in “mistakes”, Turkish President Abdullah Gül said Sunday, continuing the verbal sparring between the two countries over the situation in Gaza.

Turkey is one of the “rare” countries to have good relations with both Arab countries and Israel, Gul said during an interview with public teleivision TRT.

“But this does not mean that Turkey will not raise its voice against errors if they are made. We should not think that Turkey will keep silent,” he said. [continued…]

How do Turkey and Israel measure each other’s love?
By Zvi Bar’el Haaretz, October 18, 2009

…in Israel’s eyes, Turkey is seen as two states – one in the form of the military, twin sister of Israel, the other political, leaning toward Islam and making friends with Syria and Iran. Thus, insolent Israel decided in a typical manner not to take Turkey’s politicians seriously and to adopt the Turkish army. Israel was also certain all these years that Turkey, backward and poor, needed its sole friend in the Middle East because it was not accepted in the region due to its Ottoman history and close ties with Israel and the United States, and therefore could not do without Israel.

So in Israel, people have been quick to conclude that “something went wrong” in Turkey. Suddenly the government rules the army instead of the army, Israel’s loyal friend, telling the government what to do. Israelis did not think for a minute that the Turkish army might also have had enough.

Turkey has changed; inwardly, for the most part. In a long and difficult process it has become a more democratic country. The army is still dominant, but less public in its role in the civilian domain. Turkey has overcome most of its economic problems and has been transformed into a regional economic power. It is a real strategic asset for the United States, increasing its importance after the Iraq war. It has also developed a different regional strategy.

Whoever reads what Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu says recognizes that Turkey aspires to become an influential player not only in the Middle East but also in the Caucasus and Asia. It is involved in the fighting in Afghanistan, is forming an economic alliance with Iraq, plans to invest billions of dollars in Egypt, and its annual trade with Iran stands at $9 billion, with Syria at $1.5 billion.

And here is the paradox. This is the only Muslim country that is not harshly criticized, whether by Iran or any Arab state, for having such close ties with Israel. As such, it could have served as an excellent mediator between Israel and the Arab countries had Israel not considered it an obvious satellite state. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Goldstone: My mission – and motivation

Goldstone: My mission – and motivation
By Richard Goldstone, Jerusalem Post, October 18, 2009

Israel and its courts have always recognized that they are bound by norms of international law that it has formally ratified or that have become binding as customary international law upon all nations. The fact that the United Nations and too many members of the international community have unfairly singled out Israel for condemnation and failed to investigate horrible human rights violations in other countries cannot make Israel immune from the very standards it has accepted as binding upon it.

Israel has a strong history of investigating allegations made against its own officials reaching to the highest levels of government: the inquiries into the Yom Kippur War, Sabra and Shatila, Bus 300 and the Second Lebanon War.

Israel has an internationally renowned and respected judiciary that should be envy of many other countries in the region. It has the means and ability to investigate itself. Has it the will? [continued…]

Editor’s Comment — The Netanyahu government’s stonewalling of the Goldstone inquiry does not appear to have purely been an act of self-protection; it also seems to reflect a national spirit of impunity rooted in the conviction: “We had no choice.”

Having turned this declaration into a battle cry, violence was cleansed of doubt as Israel embarked on its own jihad. “We went into Gaza and God went into Gaza with us,” was how one Israeli Special Forces soldier put it.

When the enemy’s homes have been flattened, their bodies incinerated, their land defiled and their water poisoned and all of this is being done under God’s watchful eye and under His protection, the killers return to their homes expecting glorification, not to become the targets of an international inquiry.

Facebooktwittermail

Iran says U.S., Britain behind attack

Iran says U.S., Britain behind attack
By Michael Slackman, New York Times, October 19, 2009

Iranian officials claimed Monday that they had evidence of American and British involvement in the country’s worst suicide bombing attacks in years, raising tensions as Iran meets with Western nations for another round of delicate talks on its nuclear program.

At least five commanders of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps were killed and dozens of other people were left dead and wounded on Sunday in two bombings in the restive southeast along Iran’s frontier with Pakistan, according to Iranian state news agencies.

The coordinated strike, one of the largest against the Guards in the region, appeared to mark an escalation in hostilities between Iran’s leadership and the Baluchi ethnic minority. Iranian officials accused foreign enemies of supporting the insurgents, singling out the intelligence agencies of United States, Britain and Pakistan. [continued…]

Iran accuses Pakistan over attack
BBC, October 19, 2009

Iran’s president has accused Pakistani agents of involvement in a suicide bombing in south-east of the country targeting a group of the elite Revolutionary Guards force.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called on Pakistan to arrest the attackers, who he said had entered Iran from Pakistan. [continued…]

Volatile Sistan-Baluchistan Region Is Base for Insurgents
By Chip Cummins, Wall Street Journal, October 19, 2009

Sunni insurgency in Sistan-Baluchistan has presented Tehran with one of its most vexing domestic security problems. The region, which is located in Iran’s southeast corner, borders Afghanistan and Pakistan and is one of the largest and poorest of Iran’s 30 provinces.

Sistan-Baluchistan is home to a large concentration of Sunni Muslims. Ethnic Baluchi tribes are prevalent in the region, which straddles all three countries. The province’s border areas are considered key smuggling routes for products including opium.

Increasingly, Tehran has grown worried about the influence of the Taliban and al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan on criminal and militant groups operating on the Iranian side of the border. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Iran ‘doubts’ over nuclear deal

Iran ‘doubts’ over nuclear deal
BBC, October 19, 2009

Iran appears to be backing away from a proposed deal to resolve the crisis over its nuclear programme, Iranian media reports suggest.

A state TV channel said Iran wanted to import fuel for its research reactor, without sending its own enriched uranium out of the country. [continued…]

Russia worries about the price of oil, not a nuclear Iran
By Garry Kasparov, Wall Street Journal, October 18, 2009

Last Wednesday in Moscow, the remaining illusions the Obama administration held for cooperation with Russia on the Iranian nuclear program were thrown in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s face. Stronger sanctions against Iran would be “counterproductive,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, just days after President Dmitry Medvedev said sanctions were likely inevitable. This apparent inconsistency should remind us that Mr. Medvedev is little more than a well-placed spectator, and that Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who discounted sanctions in a statement from Beijing, is still the voice that matters.

This slap comes after repeated concessions—canceling the deployment of missile defenses in Eastern Europe, muted criticism of Russia’s sham regional elections—from the White House. Washington’s conciliatory steps have given the Kremlin’s rulers confidence they have nothing to fear from Mr. Obama on anything that matters.

And nothing matters more to Mr. Putin and his oligarchs than the price of oil. Even with oil at $70 a barrel, Russia’s economy is in bad straits. Tension in the Middle East, even an outbreak of war, would push energy prices higher. A nuclear-armed Iran would, of course, be harmful to Russian national security, but prolonging the crisis is beneficial to the interests of the ruling elite: making money and staying in power. [continued…]

Iran will up uranium enrichment ‘if Vienna talks fail’
AFP, October 18, 2009

The Iran Atomic Energy Organisation said on Monday it will continue to enrich uranium up to the five percent level or even to the higher 20 percent grade if talks on a third-party enrichment deal fail.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran… will continue its enrichment activities inside Iran up to the five percent level,” the official IRNA news agency quoted the organisation’s spokesman Ali Shirzadian as saying.

“But if the negotiations do not yield the desired results, Iran will start enriching uranium to the 20 percent level for its Tehran reactor. It will never give up this right.” [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Decision on Afghan troops may wait

Decision on Afghan troops may wait
By Peter Baker and Sabrina Tavernise, New York Times, October 19, 2009

The White House signaled Sunday that President Obama would postpone any decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan until the disputed election there had been settled and resulted in a government that could work with the United States.

As an audit of Afghanistan’s Aug. 20 election ground toward a conclusion, American officials pressed President Hamid Karzai to accept a runoff vote or share power with his main rival, Abdullah Abdullah, a former foreign minister. Although Mr. Karzai’s support appeared likely to fall below 50 percent in the final count, together he and Mr. Abdullah received 70 percent, in theory enough to forge a unity government with national credibility.

The question at the heart of the matter, said President Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is not “how many troops you send, but do you have a credible Afghan partner for this process that can provide the security and the type of services that the Afghan people need?” He appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” and CBS’s “Face the Nation.” [continued…]

Karzai backers take harder line on recount
By Anand Gopal, Wall Street Journal, October 19, 2009

Supporters of incumbent President Hamid Karzai demonstrated to protest “foreign interference” in Afghanistan’s drawn-out election process, as results of a vote recount were postponed and Karzai campaign officials suggested his camp may not accept the official results.

As they await the recount, which aims to throw out fraudulent votes, officials from the Karzai campaign cast aspersions on the process, centering their criticism on the United Nations-backed Electoral Complaints Commission, which is re-tallying the numbers.

Although the ECC finished its audit Thursday, it said it was reviewing the results to ensure there were no mistakes before releasing it to the Independent Electoral Commission in coming days; the ECC didn’t give a precise date. The Independent Electoral Commission will then subtract from the total count the votes disqualified by the ECC. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Yes, the Taleban are being thumped but . . .

Yes, the Taleban are being thumped but . . .
By Anatol Lieven, The Times, October 19, 2009

The Pakistani Government and Army have finally decided to heed the words of a former ruler: “No patchwork scheme — and all our recent schemes, blockades, allowances etc are mere patchwork — will settle the Waziristan problem. Not until the military steamroller has passed over the country from end to end will here be peace.”

Did Pervez Musharraf, the former President, say that? No, it was Lord Curzon, Viceroy of India, more than 100 years ago. And for both strategic and humanitarian reasons Curzon added: “I do not want to be the person to start the machine.”

The inhabitants of Waziristan have resisted outside conquest since time immemorial. That is why Pakistan continued the British tradition of indirect rule, and kept only minimal forces in the region.

So crushing the local Taleban and establishing Pakistani authority in South Waziristan is going to be a long, bloody business in the face of bitter opposition backed by much of the local population — a population motivated as much by old tribal traditions of resistance as by support for the Taleban. This operation will cause great suffering to civilians and lead to deep unhappiness among many Pashtun troops in the Pakistani Army. That is why, like Curzon’s government of India, Pakistan has hesitated for so long before “starting the machine”. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Awakening leader’s tale illustrates Iraq’s volatility

Awakening leader’s tale illustrates Iraq’s volatility
By Ned Parker, Los Angeles Times, October , 2009

The Sunni Muslim paramilitary leader’s campaign slogan holds the promise of imminent rescue: “Hold on, we are coming.”

But the aspiring parliamentary candidate, Mustafa Kamal Shibeeb, may not be in a position to deliver on his slogan: He’s a fugitive, with murder charges hanging over his head from events at the height of the U.S. troop buildup two years ago.

Already, police commandos have tried to grab him twice, only to be blocked by an Iraqi army unit, with tacit support from U.S. forces.

Shibeeb’s story reveals the volatility of today’s Iraq, where Sunni-Shiite tensions are just one of the conflicts at play. His vulnerability illustrates how the Iraqi government and security forces remain subject to competing political and tribal pressures, and score-settling, that risk igniting new violence. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Questions about al Qaeda’s next move

Questions about al Qaeda’s next move
By Greg Miller, Los Angeles Times, October 19, 2009

The plot for the Sept. 11 attacks was set in motion in late 1999 from a cluster of Al Qaeda training camps near Kandahar.

In those dusty Afghan compounds, Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants signed off on the plan, set up a special training program, and selected lead members of the hijack team.

Ten years later, could Al Qaeda return to Afghanistan and use it again as a launching pad for terrorist strikes?

The question has taken on heightened urgency as the Obama administration searches for a new war strategy, and Pakistan carries out its first major military offensive in the tribal region that Al Qaeda has called home since the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

At NYU, devilish Shlomo Sand predicts the Jewish past and pastes the Zionists

At NYU, devilish Shlomo Sand predicts the Jewish past and pastes the Zionists
By Philip Weiss, Mondoweiss, October 17, 2009

When Sand said that Israel was not a democracy, and a Zionist called out, “It is a flawed democracy,” Sand bellowed. No: a democracy is founded on the idea that the people are the sovereign, that the people own the state. That is the first principle of a republic going back to Rousseau. Liberalism and civil rights are not the core [of Israel]. Yes, Israel is a liberal society. It tolerates Shlomo Sand’s heresy, for instance, and puts him on TV. But it is a liberal ethnocracy.

Down the row from me were two Arabs. I recognized the man from other events I have been to. I noticed how fulfilled they were by the talk, how quietly approving, and it was in this connection that we saw Sand’s passion: on behalf of the Palestinians. This part of the lecture brought tears to my eyes, it was so forceful and unapologetic. The idea that Joe Lieberman has a right to move to Israel tomorrow and a Palestinian whose ancestors have lived there for centuries cannot is an outrage, Sand said. But for 50 years the Palestinian Israelis were afraid to speak out.

“They were afraid because of the Nakba. They were afraid because of the military regime. Today this is a generation of young Palestinian Israelis that stop to be afraid. They become more anti-Israel in their politics the more they become Israelis.” [continued…]

The Invention of the Jewish People is now available from Amazon.

Facebooktwittermail

Kerry: Obama would be ‘irresponsible’ to send more troops to Afghanistan now

Kerry: Obama would be ‘irresponsible’ to send more troops to Afghanistan now
CNN, October 17, 2009

Sen. John Kerry cautioned President Obama Saturday against raising troop levels in Afghanistan, saying it would be “entirely irresponsible” to do so while the Afghan government remains in turmoil following national elections.

“It would be entirely irresponsible for the president of the United States to commit more troops to this country, when we don’t even have an election finished and know who the president is and what kind of government we’re working in, with,” Kerry told CNN’s John King in an interview set to air Sunday at 9 a.m. on State of The Union. [continued…]

‘Brick wall’ feared in Afghan election
By Joshua Partlow, Washington Post, October 18, 2009

There is a growing fear among Western officials in Afghanistan that President Hamid Karzai and the nation’s Independent Election Commission will not accept the findings of a United Nations-backed fraud investigation that is expected to call for a runoff to settle Afghanistan’s disputed presidential election.

Such a decision by Karzai would deepen Afghanistan’s political crisis and leave no clear method for resolving the allegations of massive fraud that have undermined the credibility of the election, which was held nearly two months ago. It would also be a setback for the Obama administration, which has urged the candidates to follow the electoral process to yield a legitimate winner.

“That’s the brick wall,” said one Western official in Kabul familiar with the process. “It’s going to be quite chaotic and confusing.” [continued…]

Allies press Karzai to accept election audit results
By Sabrina Tavernise and Mark Landler, New York Times, October 18, 2009

There were also reports that foreign envoys were pressing both sides to work out a power-sharing deal. A senior American official noted that Mr. Karzai and Mr. Abdullah together won more than 70 percent of the votes cast in the first round, enough to give a unity government credibility.

But the Obama administration is adamant that it is not pushing for a deal.

“We’re not trying to prevent a second round,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the matter. “The issue is not about a runoff. The issue is getting a legitimate president.”

It was unclear how seriously either candidate was taking the idea of a unity government. Neither candidate has completely ruled it out, but each insists that the current process play out first.

Meanwhile, preparations for a second round of voting are well under way. Ballots for a second round were printed in London and shipped to Kabul, the American official said. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Gaza costs Israel another friend: there aren’t many left

Gaza costs Israel another friend: there aren’t many left
By Tony Karon, The National, October 18, 2009

For years Israel has acted as if the unconditional support of the US would be enough to shield it for ever from the consequences of its behaviour – which is why last week was an unusually traumatic one for them.

No suicide bombers detonated themselves and no rockets or mortar shells fell, but the double whammy of a Turkish snub and a UN Human Rights Council vote shook Israelis even more than any aimless shelling would have done. Those two events signal profound changes that leave Israel paying a growing political price for the attack last winter that killed some 1,400 Palestinians and reduced Gaza to rubble.

It was the brutal pummelling of Gaza that prompted Turkey’s democratically elected government to break the silence among the region’s moderates and stand up for the Palestinians. At the time, the prime minister, Recep Erdogan, condemned the Israeli actions as war crimes, in language deemed intemperate and inappropriate by western leaders.

Curiously, Erdogan’s “intemperate” language was endorsed by the findings of a UN Human Rights Council investigation headed by the Jewish South African judge Richard Goldstone, known as a friend of Israel – findings that were adopted by the Council on Friday despite the efforts of the US and France to shield Israel from being formally accused of war crimes in an international body. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Mitchell the man for the job?

Mitchell the man for the job?
By Steve Clemons, Al Jazeera, October 10, 2009

Senator George Mitchell is one of America’s most impressive public servants.

He has served the state of Maine well, chaired any number of commissions for various presidents since his senate retirement and patiently plodded through years of work and negotiations with historically opposed foes in the Northern Ireland peace process and achieved peace.

However, he may not be the right envoy to restart Israeli-Palestinian talks.

Mitchell telegraphed the problem from the day that Barack Obama, the US president, announced his appointment on the first work day of the new administration.

Mitchell said that all parties would have to be patient and that it takes years for a process such as the one being envisioned – to create peace between two eventually viable states of Israel and Palestine – to come to fruition.

However, he failed to acknowledge that the negotiations over what Palestine would eventually become have been taking place for decades and have involved many US presidents.

He is not starting at zero and there is not much time left to achieve a new and more constructive ‘equilibrium’ between Israel and Palestine. I prefer the term ‘equilibrium’ over the more hopeful and naïve goal of ‘peace’. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Talks on Iranian reactor deal show divisions on sanctions

Talks on Iranian reactor deal show divisions on sanctions
By Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, October 18, 2009

A team of Obama administration officials, joined by officials from France and Russia, will begin negotiating in Vienna on Monday with Iranian diplomats over terms of an unusual deal that could remove a significant amount of Tehran’s low-enriched uranium from the country.

The administration views the deal — which would convert the uranium into fuel for a research reactor used for medical purposes — as a test of Iranian intentions in the international impasse over the nation’s nuclear program. The reactor is running short of fuel, according to Iran, and so the administration proposed that 80 percent of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile be sent to Russia for conversion into reactor fuel. France would then fashion the material into metal plates, composed of a uranium-aluminum alloy, used by this reactor.

U.S. officials argue that if Iran fails to follow through on a tentative agreement on this deal, then it will help strength the case for sanctions. But the negotiations already have highlighted splits between the United States and two of the key players — Russia and China — in the effort to restrain Iran’s nuclear ambitions. [continued…]

A hitch in Iran’s nuclear plans?
By David Ignatius, Washington Post, October 16, 2009

Since you’re probably not a regular reader of the trade publication Nucleonics Week, let me summarize an article that appeared in its Oct. 8 issue. It reported that Iran’s supply of low-enriched uranium — the potential feedstock for nuclear bombs — appears to have certain “impurities” that “could cause centrifuges to fail” if the Iranians try to boost it to weapons grade.

Now that’s interesting. The seeming breakthrough in negotiations on Oct. 1 in Geneva — where Iran agreed to send most of its estimated 1,500 kilograms of low-enriched uranium abroad for further enrichment — may not have been exactly what it appeared. Iran may have had no alternative but to seek foreign help in enrichment because its own centrifuges wouldn’t work. [continued…]

Reading Mark Hibbs in Washington
By Joshua Pollack, ArmsControlWonk, October 16, 2009

As discussed previously, the Iranians can still enrich to any level they want, but if a certain level of impurities remains in the product, that makes the process more laborious. The product would have to be hauled back to the UCF [Uranium Conversion Facility] for further purification after partial enrichment, then returned for further enrichment, and so on. That really does put a kink in rapid breakout scenarios.

On the other hand, compared to the technical hurdles that the Iranians have already overcome, perfecting purification at the UCF doesn’t seem like a great challenge, and we should expect the AEOI [Atomic Energy Organization of Iran] to solve that one sooner or later, if they haven’t already.

One other point is worth considering, too. If the Iranians were to build a parallel fuel cycle, they’d probably be smart enough to collocate the parallel UCF with the parallel enrichment facility, which would make it a lot easier to do backing-and-forthing if necessary. Certainly, it will be interesting to learn what turns up at Qom during the inspections later this month, although we’re unlikely to learn before the next Board of Governors meeting, scheduled for late November. [continued…]

Five myths about Iran’s nuclear program
By Joseph Cirincione, Washington Post, October 18, 2009

Iran’s expanding nuclear program poses one of the Obama administration’s most vexing foreign policy challenges. Fortunately, the conditions for containing Tehran’s efforts may be better today than they have been in years. The recent disclosure of a secret nuclear facility in Iran has led to an apparent agreement to allow in U.N. weapons inspectors and to ship some uranium out of the country, and the United States and Europe seem to be closing ranks on the need for sanctions and engagement.

Of course, the matter is far from resolved; Russia and China are sending mixed signals on their position, while even a weakened Iranian regime remains duplicitous. But the prospects for developing a strategy with a solid chance of success improve if we dispose of five persistent myths about Iran’s nuclear program: [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Iran Guard commanders said to be killed in blast

Iran Guard commanders said to be killed in blast
AP, October 18, 2009

A suicide bomber killed five senior commanders of the powerful Revolutionary Guard and at least 26 others Sunday near the Pakistani border in the heartland of a potentially escalating Sunni insurgency.

The attack — which also left dozens wounded — was the most high-profile strike against security forces in an outlaw region of armed tribal groups, drug smugglers and Sunni rebels known as Jundallah, or Soldiers of God.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad promised sharp retaliation. But a sweeping offensive by authorities is unlikely. [continued…]

Maziar Bahari released
Newsweek, October 17, 2009

Newsweek reporter Maziar Bahari, imprisoned in Tehran since June 21, was released from Evin Prison on bail Saturday. Iranian authorities did not specify the reasons behind the release, but Bahari, 42, is expecting his first child on Oct. 26 and the mother has experienced serious health complications. Humanitarian considerations were presumed to have played a role in the decision. In a statement, the magazine said, “We are relieved that Newsweek journalist Maziar Bahari is home with his family today. We would like to thank all of those who supported Maziar through this long and uncertain period.” [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Obama’s bad influence

Obama’s bad influence
By Naomi Klein, The Nation, October 14, 2009

Now that Europe and the United States are officially reunited, it seems worth asking: is this necessarily a good thing? The Nobel Committee, which awarded the prize specifically for Obama’s embrace of “multilateral diplomacy,” is evidently convinced that US engagement on the world stage is a triumph for peace and justice. I’m not so sure. After nine months in office, Obama has a clear track record as a global player. Again and again, US negotiators have chosen not to strengthen international laws and protocols but rather to weaken them, often leading other rich countries in a race to the bottom.

Let’s start where the stakes are highest: climate change. During the Bush years, European politicians distinguished themselves from the United States by expressing their unshakable commitment to the Kyoto Protocol. So while the United States increased its carbon emissions by 20 percent from 1990 levels, the European Union countries reduced theirs by 2 percent. Not stellar, but clearly a case where the EU’s breakup with the United States carried tangible benefits for the planet.

Flash forward to the high-stakes climate negotiations that just wrapped up in Bangkok. The talks were supposed to lead to a deal in Copenhagen this December that significantly strengthens the Kyoto Protocol. Instead, the United States, the EU and the rest of the developed countries formed a unified bloc calling for Kyoto to be scrapped and replaced. Where Kyoto set clear and binding targets for emission reductions, the US plan would have each country decide how much to cut, then submit its plans to international monitoring (with nothing but wishful thinking to ensure that this all keeps the planet’s temperature below catastrophic levels). And where Kyoto put the burden of responsibility squarely on the rich countries that created the climate crisis, the new plan treats all countries the same. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail