By Alissa J. Rubin and Kim Murphy
LA Times Staff Writers
May 4, 2006
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-russiran4may04,1,4134896.story?coll=la-headlines-world&track=crosspromo
VIENNA — As the U.N. Security Council meets this week to discuss how best to stop Iran's march toward nuclear weapons capability, Russia has the potential to serve as a bridge between the West and the Islamic Republic. But Moscow's complex motives may make it a difficult partner.

Russia, a permanent member of the council and one that has had close ties to Middle Eastern countries since the Soviet era, now views the volatile, oil-rich region as the key to regaining its position as a world leader, diplomats and analysts say. Moscow also has strong economic ties to Tehran: Two-way trade topped $2 billion in 2004, and Iranian officials predicted recently that it would double in coming years.

This is "a moment of truth for Russia," when the nation will choose whether to throw its lot with the West or keep the U.S. and its allies at arm's length, said Radzhab Safarov, director of the Iranian Studies Center in Moscow.

The two Western European permanent members of the council, Britain and France, share the United States' goal of persuading Iran to halt uranium enrichment, and they are willing to back sanctions, and perhaps ultimately military action, to obtain that goal. On Wednesday, the United States, Britain and France introduced a draft Security Council resolution ordering Iran to halt its nuclear enrichment activities.

Although Moscow shares the West's desire to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear state, it has other interests as well, chief among them enhancing its own status as an alternative power to the United States, diplomats and experts say.

"Russia has a bunch of motives…. Coming back as one of the world's superpowers is definitely one — counterbalancing the U.S., but also counterbalancing China and India," said a senior European diplomat with experience in the former Soviet Union who declined to be identified because he was not authorized to speak on the Iran debate.

"Even with 25 nuclear warheads, Iran would never be a threat to Russia, which could readily retaliate. So accepting that Iran might have a small nuclear capability and combining that with potential Russian economic successes in Iran and the Russian capability to influence or even to lead Iran — that is really something" for Moscow, the diplomat said.

Russia is particularly worried that the U.S. experience in Iraq will be repeated — a concern shared by much of the world.

"Of course the Russians don't want the Iranians to develop nukes, but they are much more concerned about confrontation leading to sanctions and war, and that's much more of a threat to their interests," said Gary Samore, a nonproliferation official in the Clinton administration who now serves as head of global security for the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. He recently visited Moscow to discuss diplomacy on nuclear issues.

Sanctions could limit Russian exports to Iran and war would almost certainly destabilize the region, disrupting Russian business not only with Iran but also throughout the Middle East.

Safarov, the Russia analyst, said that beyond economic concerns, regaining ascendancy on the world stage was paramount for Russia. If Moscow can define itself as the world's broker on Iran, he said, it will be the "go to" country for the West in dealing with the Islamic Republic.

"Russia has a unique and historic chance to return to the world arena once again as a key player and as a reborn superpower," Safarov said. "If Russia firmly stands by Iran's interests in this conflict … Russia will immediately regain its quite lost prestige in the Muslim world and on the global arena at large.

"Of course, that will result in a serious cooling of relations between Russia and the United States. But Russia and the United States are destined to be competitors," he said, "and no lucrative proposals from the United States can change this situation strategically."

On Wednesday, the Security Council began to discuss a legally binding resolution to require Iran to stop its enrichment activities. But the resolution will avoid any mention of sanctions, which Russia and another permanent member, China, oppose. U.S. and European officials expect Russia to sign on to it after some bluster — or at least abstain and allow it to pass because it merely formalizes a previous council statement, backed by Russia, which demanded that Iran suspend its uranium enrichment activities. All five permanent members of the United Nations council have veto power.

"I'm sure we can find the right language that will assure everyone that this resolution is not about sanctions," U.S. Ambassador John R. Bolton said.

Even as Russian officials repeat Iran's mantra that it has a right to peaceful nuclear power, Moscow is adamant that Iran should not produce a bomb or, as Russian diplomats frequently put it, "violate the nonproliferation regime."

"Our position is always [the same], and it's conditioned by two basic principles, which are the integrity and inviolability of the nonproliferation regime — this is absolutely fundamental, absolutely essential," said Nikolai Spassky, deputy secretary of the Russian Security Council, speaking to reporters recently in Moscow.

"On the other hand, we've got to recognize and to acknowledge the undeniable right of Iran, like any other country in the world, to peacefully pursue its peaceful nuclear program, peaceful nuclear energy.

"Of course, it's not an easy thing to reconcile these two basic positions, but we do think that it's still possible," Spassky said.

Russia has laid the groundwork for its ascendancy with ever-increasing economic ties. Besides the oil products that it has to import, Iran also buys conventional arms and missile defense systems from Russia.

Russia sold Iran at least $4 billion of military and dual-use equipment in the 1990s, and just this year Tehran concluded a nearly $1-billion deal to buy 30 missile defense systems, intelligence sources say. Those systems could make it harder for the United States and its allies to bomb Iran's nuclear installations.

Russia has expressed interest in expanding its involvement in helping Iran build up its civilian nuclear power industry. It helped Iran build its sole nuclear power plant at Bushehr, a $1-billion project that is almost complete, and is well-positioned to assist if the Islamic Republic proceeds with its stated goal of building more nuclear plants. Russia is one of just a handful of countries that have the technological know-how to build such facilities, and is the one with the best relations with Iran.

U.S. officials have pressed Russia to halt its assistance with the Bushehr plant and hold back on sending the Iranians the nuclear fuel rods it has agreed to provide to operate the reactor. Russia has not formally responded, but it has yet to send the fuel rods, which are necessary to run the plant.

Russia also has a political interest in Iran, which has helpfully remained silent in the face of Moscow's efforts to suppress Muslim separatists in the republic of Chechnya. Iran has also refrained from encouraging Islamic fundamentalists to stir up Russia's Muslims, who make up about 15% of its population.

The country's focus on the Middle East as a way to regain its global stature began not long after the former Soviet Union broke up.

First, Russia joined the Conference of Islamic States as an observer, reaching out again to the Islamic world. Then, in 1992, Russia and Iran set up a joint economic committee to encourage business ventures between the two countries.

The cozy relationship between the two states means that there is probably regular consultation between Moscow and Tehran, and Russia's decisions are carefully calibrated to avoid alienating either the Iranians or the West.

"Knowing the Russians and knowing their relationship, I think they are telling Iran how far they are prepared to go," said a senior diplomat in Europe for a Middle Eastern country who declined to be identified because questions surrounding Iran are so sensitive.

As negotiations over the Security Council's next steps proceed, the Russians probably will review their moves before making them with all players, the European diplomat said.

"Every step they discuss with the five [permanent Security Council members] is balanced with steps they discuss with Iran," the diplomat said. "They get a kind of silent agreement with Iran that they might go along … because of their political interests. But they have to talk with Iran — it's in their backyard, and no matter what happens, they have to live with it."

Western powers draft text on Iran for UN

By Evelyn Leopold

Wed May 3, 2006

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-05-03T175357Z_01_N20226640_RTRUKOC_0_US-NUCLEAR-IRAN-UN.xml

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States, Britain and France prepared on Wednesday to brief the U.N. Security Council on a draft resolution aimed at pressuring Iran to curb its nuclear program, but faced an uphill task in gaining support from Russia and China.

The three intended to distribute a text of their proposed resolution to all 15 council members at the closed meeting. It would give Iran another chance to obey international calls to stop uranium enrichment, which the Western states fear could be used to build nuclear weapons.

Russia and China, which could kill any resolution by using their veto power, are reluctant to endorse anything that might be seen as a step toward sanctions or military action against Iran, although the draft will not threaten either measure.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said the council meeting would help "to apply greater pressure on Iran."

The plan was to introduce a resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which would be legally binding on Iran under international law.

Iran would be given a deadline to comply but the measure would not threaten any action. Chapter 7 allows for sanctions or even military action but a separate resolution is necessary to specify either step.

So far, little headway has been made with Russia and China. The foreign ministers the five permanent Council members -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China -- plus Germany, are to meet on Iran in New York on Monday.

Iran maintains its nuclear program is legal and peaceful.

Its officials argue that the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, after three years of scrutiny, has not found a weapons program.

"We will not give up our legitimate right (to nuclear technology) because of America's bullying and pressure," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said, according to Iran's state television.

"America is trying to impose its policies on its allies by humiliating them and bullying," he said. "Iran's nuclear issue can only be resolved through diplomatic channels."

THREAT TO PEACE

The resolution was expected to declare Iran's nuclear program a threat to "international peace and security" -- a phrase that frequently used in council documents.

As a follow-up, the Western allies have considered targeted sanctions to ratchet up the pressure if Iran continues to defy the council.

These could include a ban on export of technology with civilian and military uses, a travel ban on Iranian officials and a possible ban on arms sales, but not oil sanctions, said Nicholas Burns, a senior State Department official.

Burns spoke in Paris where senior foreign ministry officials of the five permanent council members and Germany held a strategy meeting on Tuesday but made no headway.

He expressed frustration with Russia and China, saying it was time for countries with close ties to Iran "to take responsibilities."

Russia and China fear too much pressure on Iran would be self-defeating or precipitate an oil crisis. They also worry also the United States could use a tough council resolution to justify military action.

In Tehran, Gholamreza Aghazadeh, the director of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, said on Tuesday Iran had succeeded in enriching uranium to 4.8 percent, a higher level of purity than it had previously stated.

Iran and Pearl Harbor syndrome

03/05/2006

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20060503/47177837.html  

MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Romanov) - The Paris meeting on Iran, which the media dubbed "secret" because journalists were barred from it from start to finish, ended in failure as expected.

The positions of the sides remained the same. The United States wants the UN Security Council to pass the toughest possible resolution on Iran's nuclear file. By and large, the Europeans are leaning toward the U.S. proposal, while permanent members of the Security Council Moscow and Beijing insist on talks. The negotiators were trying hard to conceal what has long become an open secret.

Trying to help Beijing and Moscow out of the predicament, U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton has suggested that they should abstain from voting on the problem at the Security Council. If the Council is torn apart by contradictions and fails to exert pressure on Iran, the U.S. and other countries may themselves punish Iran. Other U.S. officials have expressed the same opinion. U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack has just made another statement to this effect.

Moscow also has to adjust its position. Chairman of the Duma committee on international affairs Konstantin Kosachyov has just declared that Iran's ostentatious refusal to comply with the Security Council requirements was fraught with serious consequences. He did not rule out sanctions against Iran.

It is even more interesting to hear the opinions of intelligence officers, military men and independent experts. U.S. intelligence spokesmen openly admit that they know very little about Iran; such statements, however, should not calm Tehran down because they clearly show that the U.S. and its foremost allies are channeling all the necessary financial, material and intellectual resources into the effort. It is hardly a coincidence that when U.S.-Iranian dispute reached its peak, the military announced successful testing at the Eglin air base in Florida of the 10-ton Massive Ordnance Air Burst (MOAB), which the press immediately dubbed the Mother of All Bombs. The use of tactical nuclear arms, primarily anti-bunker weapons, has not been ruled out, either. It is not surprising that Moscow insists on negotiations - it does not want a nuclear war near its borders, all the more so since nuclear issue is no bluff. Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said that the American military should analyze all options against Iran, including the use of nuclear weapons.

It is not merely the doctrine of a preventive strike that is pushing the U.S. to be tough. In effect, the doctrine itself reflects the painful Pearl Harbor syndrome, and a highly dubious assumption that it was possible to nip Hitler in the bud if the U.S. had intervened in Europe earlier. The trauma inflicted on the U.S. by the barbarous hostage seizure in Iran has not healed, either. Good old Freud is here again.

Finally, the Americans are worried by some forecasts. Zbigniew Brzezinski thinks that the U.S. will wage war with Iran for 30 years and lose its world supremacy as a result. This prediction suggests the conclusion - either not go to war at all, or strike without mercy and win a quick victory. Thus, the American Eagle is now looking around with particular attention and is ready to nip in the bud anything it perceives as an attack. Invasion of Iran on the basis of unverified data may be just a prelude, all the more so since presumption of innocence does not apply to Iran. Defending its right to a civilian nuclear program, Tehran has already said too much and got bogged down in contradictions.

Even some independent Russian experts believe that war is inevitable. Chairman of the Presidium of the Institute of Globalization Problems Mikhail Delyagin said: "I think that the actions, which have been taken, and the propaganda accompaniment, which we have been hearing, give us enough grounds to predict that the decision on a missile attack... has been made. Considering the election race, this should happen in late spring or summer."

It is rumored that in Yerevan, capital of Armenia, wealthy Iranians of Azeri background have already rushed to buy housing, just in case...

In turn, the press is trying to predict what Iran will do in return. Quoting its sources in Tehran, the British Sunday Times writes that Iran is ready for an adequate reply. There are 40,000 trained suicide bombers, who will attack American, Israeli and British targets, 29 of which have already been selected. The Iranian president is talking about an asymmetrical blow at Israel. Tehran has also repeatedly threatened to blockade the Strait of Hormuz.

To sum up, Pearl Harbor and the good old Freud are spelling a lot of trouble.

Iran Tops Bush, German Chancellor's Talks

The Associated Press
Thursday, May 4, 2006

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/04/AR2006050400241.html

WASHINGTON -- In their second meeting at the White House, President Bush and German Chancellor Angela Merkel vowed to keep pressing Iran on its nuclear program as other allies took the issue to the United Nations.

"We will continue to consult with our partners as to how to achieve a diplomatic solution to this issue." Bush said after his Oval Office meetings with Merkel on Wednesday.

"Under no circumstances must Iran be allowed to come into possession of nuclear weapons," Merkel said.

Merkel was going to New York on Thursday for a meeting with business leaders. She was to return to Washington later Thursday to address the American Jewish Committee's gala marking the organization's 100th anniversary. No other German chancellor has addressed the AJC.

Her comments with Bush on Wednesday came as Britain and France introduced a U.N. Security Council resolution, with U.S. and German backing, that would be legally binding and set the stage for sanctions against Iran if it does not abandon uranium enrichment.

Russia and China, permanent members of the Security Council with veto power, oppose sanctions against Iran, while Britain, France, Germany and the United States say they will seek to make the demand on uranium enrichment compulsory.

Iran, meanwhile, continued to publicize the nuclear weapons work it insists it's doing to produce energy, not weapons.

The resolution asserts that Iran "shall suspend all enrichment related and reprocessing activities," according to the text presented to the council.

Bush also announced that he would be traveling to Germany in July as part of a trip to Europe for the Group of Eight summit in Russia.

This was Merkel's second visit with Bush in four months. Other issues on their agenda were Iraq, trade, the Middle East, Darfur peace talks, Merkel's scheduled visit to China next month and the G-8 summit.

Merkel and Bush had a friendly meeting during the chancellor's first trip in January, despite her criticism of the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It was a sharp contrast to the chill that existed between Bush and Merkel's predecessor, Gerhard Schroeder, who was a vigorous critic of the war in Iraq.

MSNBC.com

Iran has terrorism fears for World Cup team
German event officials also say U.S., Saudi Arabia, England could be targets

The Associated Press

May 3, 2006

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12616886/  

BERLIN - Iran fears its soccer team could be the target of a terrorism during the World Cup.

Iranian officials are worried that dissident groups opposed to president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his regime, such as the People’s Mujahadeen, could become violent during the tournament, which runs from June 9 to July 9.

“They have told us they believe their team could be the victim of a terrorist attack,” German Interior Ministry spokesman Christian Sachs said Wednesday. “We have no indication anything is planned, but we take this very seriously.”

The three other teams causing the most security concerns are Saudi Arabia — also afraid of anti-government groups — and the United States and England, because of their alliance during the Iraq war.

“I have great hope the World Cup will go off without harm,” Deputy Interior Minister August Hanning said. “We can’t rule out surprises, but we have taken every precaution.”

Michael P. Jackson, deputy secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security, said he had “every reason to believe” that Germany was taking “prudent measures” ahead of the tournament.

If asked to do so, Jackson said the United States would “be open to doing what would be most helpful” to assist Germany on the security front. However, this would likely be in the area of technical assistance and not in the form of law enforcement officers, he added.

Jackson made his comments during a briefing with reporters at the U.S. embassy in Vienna ahead of several days of meetings on security issues hosted by Austria, which currently holds the European Union’s rotating presidency.

Exactly how many police officers or security personnel will be used at games is hard to determine because the nine German states where matches will be played are responsible for their own security.

The 32 teams at the tournament will send a combined 500 law-enforcement officers from their own countries, with 300 more coming from the European Union. England leads with 40 officers, who will act as “spotters” and report on any hooligans they recognize from home.

Prostitution has also been in the spotlight because it is legal in Germany, where it is argued that women are better protected from pimps and disease.

Large TV screens all across Germany will broadcast games and there are concerns that hooligans or terrorists will target them. But the German states have recently adopted tight controls — assigning them police officers and requiring fencing, backpack checks and security guards — at the public viewing areas.

While Iranian dissident group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, has vowed to demonstrate in the unlikely prospect of Ahmadinejad coming to Germany.

“We have no indication the Iranian president plans to come,” Hanning said. “From past tournaments, we have noticed that heads of state and other officials get more interested with their team’s success. The further they advance, the more requests we get.”

Germany's Honored Guest

May 01, 2006
The Jerusalem Post
Caroline Glick

link to original article

Last Thursday Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made a friendly gesture to Germany. Speaking on state television, Ahmadinejad said the Germans should not feel guilty because, "a certain number of Jews were killed during World War II." He bemoaned that "today an intelligent people is still a hostage of World War II," arguing that Germany "still doesn't have the right to have independent policies or proper defenses."

It is possible that Ahmadinejad's statement absolving Germany of guilt for its liquidation of European Jewry in the Holocaust is part of a general charm offensive on his part towards Germany. Two weeks ago, Germany's Deputy Minister of the Interior August Hanning returned from discussions in Teheran with the announcement that ahead of the World Cup soccer championship next month, Iran will release a German citizen it has held since he inadvertently entered Iranian territorial waters last year.

Perhaps in exchange for Iran's presidential pardon for the Holocaust and the release of his German hostage, Germany has agreed to host Ahmadinejad in Germany if he decides to attend the Iranian national team's opening game against Mexico in Nuremberg. Germany has also agreed to coordinate its actions to secure the games with the Iranian government. As Hanning told Tagesspiegel newspaper last month, "When the Iranians fear a threat, they will tell us their reasons. Then our evaluation will flow back to Teheran."

Iranian regime opponents in Germany are concerned that in negotiating this agreement, the Iranian regime is working to delegitimize its exile opponents by spreading misinformation about them. Former Iranian soccer players, who represented Iran in the 1978 World Cup had planned to protest Iran's inclusion in the games. Speaking to the Associated Press, former soccer player Hassan Nayeb-Agha said, "Don't let the Iranian regime misuse the World Cup [to gain international legitimacy] in the same way that Hitler did with the Olympic Games in 1936."

While Germany's Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said last month that Ahmadinejad would be welcome to come to Germany to watch his team's matches, he has also made clear that - except from the man who is working to make Hitler's dream of a world without Jews or America come true, his entourage and press corps - Germany will take a strong stand against anyone who endangers the order and honor of the games.

To this end, Germany has suspended the Treaty of Schengen that abolishes border obstacles for EU citizens traveling among EU member states in order to prevent fanatical soccer fans from Britain, Poland and Holland from entering Germany for the games.

In addition, while as Schaeuble put it, Ahmadinejad can "naturally… come to the matches," Ahmadinejad's German supporters will be prevented from demonstrating their support for him. Indeed, in spite of Germany's problems with its large and increasingly radical Muslim minority, Iran's radical Muslim leader enjoys a considerable support base among white Germans. Germany's fascist NPD party enthusiastically supports Ahmadinejad and the Teheran regime for their Holocaust denial and their calls for Israel's destruction. Last month NPD's office in Leipzig announced its members' intention to rally in support of Iran during Iran's game against Angola scheduled to take place in Leipzig on June 21. But against these German neo-Nazis, the German government will show no tolerance. Shaeble himself angrily announced, "Germany will fight with might and main against rightist extremist ambitions before, during and after the World Cup!"

GERMANY'S refusal to isolate Ahmadinejad goes hand in hand with its appeasement of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Last Thursday Germany's Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier restated his country's position that the US should open direct negotiations with Teheran about those ambitions. His statement came two days after Iran's official news agency reported that in a meeting with Sudanese President Omar al Bashir, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that Iran "is prepared to transfer the [nuclear] experience, knowledge and technology of its scientists."

That is, Germany again tried to get Washington to commit itself to ruling out taking military action against Iran's nuclear installations two days after Iran announced its intention not only to develop nuclear weapons, but to share those weapons with others.

From a strictly legal perspective, Ahmadinejad should be arrested when he sets foot on German soil. As Israeli attorney Ervan Shahar noted in his petition to Germany's federal prosecution this past February, Ahmadinejad commits a felony under German law every time that he denies the Holocaust. Shahar requested that the prosecutors enforce German law and indict Ahmadinejad in abstentia. Doing so would force Germany to issue an international arrest warrant against the Iranian leader and so make him liable for arrest any time he stepped foot on European soil. Unfortunately, as Germany has shown both by not acting on Shahar's request, and by refusing to bar Ahmadinejad entry to Germany next month, Berlin is unwilling to levy any sanction against Iran for its pursuit of nuclear weapons which, as Ahmadinejad has repeatedly made clear, it seeks in order to annihilate Israel - that is, to finish the job that Hitler started.

Germany's refusal to place any sanction on Iran is disturbing, because as German political scientist Matthias Kuntzel argued in the Transatlantic Intelligencer last December, "If there is a western nation today that has the means to confront [Iran's nuclear weapons program] with effective sanctions, it is Germany."

Kuntzel notes, "Germany is today by far the most important supplier of goods to Iran and its exports are increasing at a steady 20 percent per year. In 2004, German exports to Iran were worth some €3.6 billion. At the same time, Germany is the most important purchaser of Iranian goods apart from oil and Iran's most important creditor."

GERMANY'S behavior toward Iran is a clear sign that for all its Holocaust memorializing, for all its anti-Nazi legislation, and for all its protestations of friendship with Israel and the Jewish people, Germany has not learned the lessons of the Holocaust.

The main lesson of the Holocaust is not that war is bad and must therefore be avoided at all costs. The main lesson of the Holocaust is that evil is bad and must be fought with every effective means. By trading with Iran and protecting Iran from those who point out its obvious dangers not only to Israel but to the entire world, Germany is protecting evil and thus advancing its cause.

The Germans are acting in a morally blind and thus immoral fashion when they apply the lessons to the Holocaust only against neo-Nazis. In pretending that the only way that the Holocaust can repeat itself is for Adolf Hitler, Jr. to become Chancellor of Germany, the Germans give themselves license to ignore Hitler's actual reincarnations. In mindlessly - yet patronizingly - squawking that all violence is bad and all peace is good, the Germans allow themselves the odious privilege of impugning the honor, nobility and morality of Israelis and Americans who fight Islamiofascists by pretending there is no moral distinction between our soldiers and Islamofascist fighters who incinerate innocent people. They pretend it is possible to appease a murderer like Ahmadinejad, just as 70 years ago, at the 1936 Olympics others maintained that Hitler was someone who could be trusted to keep his word.

TODAY, ON Remembrance Day, we bow our heads in gratitude as we commemorate the thousands of Israeli soldiers who have died protecting the people of Israel. As we reflect on their service and sacrifice for our freedom and safety, we need look no farther than Germany - to the cowardly and treacherous behavior of our former oppressors, who claim today to have learned the lessons of their evil while they shield new evil - to know how precious and sacred are the memories of our fallen warriors and how crucial the strength of our people, our state, our society, and our army are today, to ensure that our survival will never again be dependent on the goodness of others.

Football-mad President May Fall Foul of Holocaust Law

May 04, 2006
The Times
Roger Boyes in Berlin

link to original article

Forget football hooligans. The thorniest dilemma facing Germany as it prepares to host the World Cup is what to do about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s hardline President, if he insists on coming to watch his team play next month.

Germany is obliged to admit the head of state of a participating nation, and the tournament’s official motto is “A Time To Make Friends”. But Mr Ahmadinejad has demanded Israel’s destruction and has repeatedly denied the Holocaust — a crime in Germany.

Iran’s first match is in Nuremberg, used by Hitler for his mass rallies, and German neo-Nazis are planning a march in support of Mr Ahmadinejad. Israel, Iranian exiles and German politicans are demanding he be kept away. “The question is whether Germany as host can prevent the visit of a head of state who has shown himself to be a repulsive and embarrassing anti-Semite,” Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, said.

“The spirit of the World Cup is in absolute contradiction to the spirit that he represents.”

An editorial in the Jerusalem Post accused Germany of trading with Iran and appeasing its nuclear ambitions: “Germany’s behaviour toward Iran is a clear sign that for all its Holocaust memorialising, for all its anti-Nazi legislation, and for all its protestations of friendship with Israel and the Jewish people, Germany has not learnt the lessons of the Holocaust.”

Edmund Stoiber, prime minister of Bavaria, said: “Such a man is not welcome.” But the German Government is pressing ahead. Wolfgang Schäuble, the Interior Minister, says that the President “can naturally come to the matches”. Differences of opinion over the Holocaust, Israel and nuclear power could be aired during the visit.

Herr Schäuble’s deputy, August Hanning, a former head of the Security Service, has agreed with Tehran that there should be no political demonstrations in the stadiums. The two states will also exchange intelligence on possible threats.

For Iranian exiles, expected to attend the matches against Mexico, Angola and Portugal in large numbers, that smacks of appeasement. “Naturally we are worried that information from the Germans will be used against our families in Iran,” said Hassan Nayeb-Agha, who played as a midfielder for Iran in the 1978 World Cup.

“We must not let the Iranian regime misuse the World Cup in the same way that Hitler did with the Olympic Games in 1936.”

Iran is expected to take a final decision on whether Mr Ahmadinejad should travel to Germany within the next few days, but there is little doubt that he wants to go. “Our President loves soccer,” said Muhammad Ali Dadkan, the head of the Iranian Football Association, as he inspected the Nuremberg pitch last month.

One Israeli lawyer living in Germany has lodged an application with the federal prosecutor to issue an international arrest warrant on the President as soon as he gets off the plane.

He would, however, probably enjoy diplomatic immunity and some lawyers doubt his denial of the Holocaust breaches German law as his comments were made abroad.

Britain, France Introduce Iran Resolution

May 03, 2006
The Associated Press
Nick Wadhams

link to original article

UNITED NATIONS -- Britain and France introduced a U.N. Security Council resolution Wednesday demanding that Iran abandon its uranium enrichment program, possibly setting the stage for sanctions if Tehran does not comply.

Diplomats said they hoped the sharply worded resolution, backed by the United States, will be adopted before a meeting of foreign ministers in New York next Monday.

That could force a showdown with Russia, which has arms and technology deals with Iran, as well as China. Both nations have said they adamantly oppose tough council action, and could use their veto-power on the council to block it.

"I don't think this draft as it stands now will produce good results," China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya said as he emerged from the Security Council meeting where the draft was introduced. "I think it's tougher than expected."

The resolution mandates that Iran suspend enrichment and warns that the council would "consider such further measures as may be necessary to ensure compliance" language that opens the door to sanctions.

But Iran nuclear chief Gholamreza Aghazadeh said Wednesday his nation had enriched uranium to the upper end of the range needed to make fuel for reactors, further defying U.N. demands. Iran announced April 11 it had enriched uranium for the first time.

The resolution calls on Iran to stop construction of a heavy-water reactor and demands that nations "exercise vigilance" in blocking the transfer of goods and technology that could help Iran's uranium reprocessing and missile programs.

It will seek a report back from the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, on Iran's compliance.

"Once again, the key to this lies in Iran's hands," U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said. "If they give up the pursuit of nuclear weapons, a lot of things are possible. If they continue to bluster and to threaten and obfuscate and try to throw sand in our eyes, then we're onto a different circumstance."

No timeframe has been set for that report but France's U.N. Ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere said he wants that report no later than early June.

Iran says its nuclear program is confined to generating power, but the United States and France accuse the country of secretly trying to build nuclear weapons.

The resolution was written under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which makes any demands mandatory and allows for the use of sanctions and possibly force if they are not obeyed. Any sanctions would require another resolution.

President Bush has stressed that the United States will continue to focus on diplomacy. However, he refuses to rule out military action if necessary.

When asked last month whether U.S. options regarding Iran "include the possibility of a nuclear strike" if Tehran refuses to halt uranium enrichment, Bush replied, "All options are on the table."

The resolution was drafted by Britain, France and Germany, the three European Union nations that have led negotiations with Iran. Ambassadors said discussions between the three EU nations, the United States, China and Russia were only beginning over the resolution.

"On the strategic objective, there's nothing between the six of us. We do not want to see an Iran with a nuclear weapon capability," Britain's Ambassador Emyr Jones-Parry said. "On the detail of the resolution, there have been exchanges of views and those will continue."

Wang, China's ambassador, said he also opposed language that refers to the "proliferation risks presented by the Iranian nuclear program" and "the threat to international peace and security."

Last month, the Security Council issued a nonbinding statement that Iran comply with previous demands to abandon enrichment. That statement asked for a report from IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei in 30 days on Iran's compliance.

As had been widely expected, ElBaradei issued a report Friday saying Iran had not complied, laying the groundwork for Wednesday's resolution.

Western nations say the statement and the resolution are part of a gradual process of increasing pressure on Iran..

What to do with the Islamic Regime?

May 02, 2006
Iran Press Service
Hosein Bagherzadeh

link to original article

London -- The stage is set for a showdown between the western powers and the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI). The leaders of the IRI have made sure by their rhetoric in the last few days that the report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to the UN Security Council will be negative and give enough ammunition to western governments to call for action by the Council.

At the same time, the talk of American military action against Iran has been intensified, apparently as a means by Americans to pressure reluctant China and Russia into toeing the line. The question is: what action the Security Council will possibly take and how may that affect the behaviour of the Iranian regime?

The leaders of the IRI have lost no time in threatening retaliation against any sanction or military action by the West. They threatened to increase the uranium enrichment activity and leave the NPT agreement altogether and hence stops all inspections by the IAEA inspectors.

They also alarmed the western community by declaring their readiness to share their nuclear know-how with other sympathetic governments like Sudan. And as a direct response to any American military action against Iran, the regime’s Supreme Leader threatened in an unmistakable terms that they would target American interests anywhere in the world. These are not idle threats. The Iranian leaders know a thing or two about how to create problems around the world and fight their enemies by proxy.

Now the Security Council is meeting to consider the IAEA’s report and make a decision on how to respond. The Americans and their European allies would have liked to press ahead with economic sanctions, but that’s not going to happen at this stage (China and Russia will oppose it). So initially, they aim for a softer option, the so-called “smart sanctions”. These are meant to put more pressure on the IRI leaders and less on the ordinary people in Iran. This may not necessarily be good news.

As the case has been more often than not in recent years, the less effective the Security Council to act collectively in dealing with world crises, the greater has been the chance of member states (especially the big powers) going it alone. The threat of American/Israeli military action against Iran will increase, rather than decrease, by the Russian/Chinese reluctance to agree on effective measures to resolve the Iran crisis. So no matter what the Security Council does, it seems that the Iranian people are going to pay a high price for the folly of their leaders’ policies.

At any rate, the people of Iran can only hope and pray that the West deals with the Iranian regime in ways that harm their own interests the least. After all, they have been subject to the oppressive policies of the Islamic regime for over two decades, and cannot understand why they should pay the price for its international adventurism too. One measure that they would most certainly welcome is to open the file on human rights record of the Islamic Republic and start proceedings, in an international criminal court, against those responsible for crimes against humanity. This will have the exact effect of putting pressure directly on the Iranian regime and at the same time helping the struggle of the Iranian people for democracy and human rights.

Such a measure will not be hard to undertake. The record of the Islamic Republic of Iran is bulging with all forms of crimes against humanity from torture to execution of political prisoners on large scales, to extra judicial killings both inside and outside Iran, and to crimes against religious minorities. Many of the high-ranking officials of the present regime have been involved in these crimes.

The Supreme Leader of the regime, Mr. Ali Khameneh’i and the regime’s strongman Mr. Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani have been presiding over many of these atrocities over the last 2-3 decades and are indicted by a German court for authorising the assassination of 4 opposition leaders in Berlin. At least three of current ministers (namely, Interior, Intelligence and Islamic Guidance Ministers) are accused of being involved in some of the crimes inside Iran. One, Mr. Mostafa Pourmohammadi the Interior Minister, was directly involved in hundreds (if not thousands) of executions of political prisoners in 1988.

The evidence against them is also overwhelming and their indictment should not create any problem. There are many witnesses to these crimes who can attest at any international court. Indeed, some of the very top Iranian personalities are among the witnesses. The crimes associated with Mr. Pourmohammadi have been best detailed by non other than Ayatollah Montazeri the heir apparent to the late Ayatollah Khomeini until just before these atrocities took place. The involvement of the Intelligence Minister Mr. Mohseni Ejehi in extra judicial killing of at least one dissident is documented by the celebrated Iranian journalist Akbar Ganji.

Such a measure will expose the pillars of the regime to the public opinion both at home and abroad, and discredit them in the eyes of the international community. It will strip them of some of the reverence and supports they enjoy in the Islamic communities. It will also give a great boost to the struggle of the Iranian people for democracy and human rights. Internationally too, such a measure will be supported by human rights organisations and will have a moral pull that few who may claim any respect for humanity can resist supporting it.

The international community is gearing itself to punish the Iranian regime for its non-compliance with the demands of the UN Security Council. The Iranian people have had no choice in electing their government and cannot be held responsible for its actions and punished for it. The measures the West is taking to deal with this crisis will be a test of how much they are genuine in their claim that they like to help the Iranian people in their struggle for democracy and human rights.

One measure that will serve this purpose is proposed here: set up an international criminal court and indict all those in the Iranian regime who have been involved in crimes against humanity over the last 27 years and rest assured that not many of them will be left unstained! Remember the old Yugoslavia and its indicted warmongering leaders let the Iranian authorities run for cover as fugitives too!

Iran's Latest

May 03, 2006
The Wall Street Journal
Review & Outlook

link to original article

A funny thing happened on the way to the Iranian bomb: The more alarming the mullahs' behavior, the more nonchalant the rest of the world seems to be about it. But one development may give even the most adamant pooh-poohers pause.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last month announced that Iran had enriched uranium to reactor-grade levels in a 164-centrifuge cascade, a major technical achievement that puts Iran within hopping distance of an actual bomb. Mr. Ahmadinejad followed this up by announcing that Iran was working on an advanced centrifuge of Pakistani design, the possession of which Iran had previously denied to inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Next, Iran rebuffed IAEA requests to inspect the new centrifuges, a violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to which Iran is a signatory. Iran then threatened to withdraw from the NPT altogether if the United Nations imposed sanctions for its violations thereof. Iran ignored Friday's deadline from the U.N. Security Council to stop enriching uranium. Instead Tehran simply repeated a long-standing offer to allow additional inspections if the Security Council drops the issue.

Israeli intelligence also reports last week that Iran has purchased an upgraded version of the Soviet SS-6 ballistic missile from North Korea, which is capable of carrying a nuclear payload and has a range of about 1,600 miles, putting parts of Europe well within range.

And the international community's response? Russia and China, both veto-wielding members of the Security Council, are adamantly opposed to U.N. sanctions on Iran. Their view is mainly shared by Richard Lugar, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Committee, who thinks President Bush "ought to cool this one" by negotiating directly with Tehran.

In Europe, British Foreign Minister Jack Straw has reportedly told Cabinet colleagues that it would be "illegal" for Britain to participate in any prospective military action against Iran. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier agrees: "We will not stop Iran with war," he recently told the news weekly Der Spiegel.

Which brings us to Iran's latest. Last week, the Associated Press reported that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader, offered to share the nuclear genie with Sudan. "The Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to transfer the experience, knowledge and technology of its scientists," Mr. Khamenei told visiting Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. Mr. Bashir, whose government abets the massacre of Darfuris, says Sudan could use a nuclear reactor to generate electricity. Uh huh.

How so many apparently thoughtful people can face the idea of an Iranian bomb with relative equanimity remains a mystery to us. Whether they are as "cool" with the idea of fissile material in Mr. Bashir's hands is another matter. Whatever the case, they should consider that acquiescing to a bomb for Iran may also mean agreeing to one for many more of the world's worst actors.

Terrorism Still Iran's Most Feared Trump Card

By MARC PERELMAN
May 5, 2006

http://www.forward.com/articles/7741

A senior commander in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards warned this week that any strike against his country by the United States would be met with a severe missile attack against Israel. History suggests, however, that Tehran's most menacing threat is its vow to carry out retaliatory terrorist strikes against American interests around the world.

In comments last week, Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said that Tehran would "give a double response to any strike."

"The Americans should know that if they launch an assault against Islamic Iran, their interests in every possible part of the world will be harmed," said Khamenei, who has the last word on security and foreign policy issues in Iran.

Indeed, the mullah regime does boast a record of international terrorist action spanning from Lebanon to Saudi Arabia to Europe to South America, and could reactivate its sprawling network of operatives in the event of American military strikes against its nuclear facilities.

Iran has not been linked to major terrorist attacks in the past decade. But the regime's vow to strike back, combined with media reports of Iran's training of suicide bomber squads and renewed ties with senior terrorist operatives, has fueled concern that Iran might attempt to hurt more than American interests in the Gulf or in neighboring Iraq.

"Iran is very capable of carrying out several deathly terrorist strikes," said Daniel Benjamin, a counterterrorism official at the National Security Council during the Clinton administration. Benjamin is now a senior fellow at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies "If they are in a retaliatory mode, the constraint that they had in the [past] decade would not be there anymore."

In addition to using Iranian government intelligence services and paramilitary forces like the Revolutionary Guards and the Bassijis, Tehran could preserve some deniability by acting through proxies, first and foremost Hezbollah in Lebanon.

"Iran has multiple options for employing terrorism," said Paul R. Pillar, the recently retired top CIA official in charge of the Middle East. Pillar is now a visiting professor at Georgetown University. "Their own operatives, particularly in the Revolutionary Guard Corps, constitute one such option. Allies and surrogates would be another. Premier among those is Hezbollah, which retains its close alliance with Iran and probably would still retaliate on behalf of Tehran even though it is far more self-sufficient now than it was when Iran helped to organize it in the 1980s."

In 1983 Hezbollah bombed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241, and in 1996 Saudi Hezbollah, allegedly directed by Iran, bombed Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. soldiers. The Clinton administration retaliated for the Khobar Towers bombing by exposing Iranian intelligence operatives around the world, prompting Tehran to stop targeting Americans, according to a 2004 report in USA Today recently confirmed in an article by former American antiterrorism officials Richard Clarke and Steven Simon.

Germany accused Iran of fomenting an attack on Kurdish opponents in the early 1990s; Argentina accused the country of ordering the bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994. Argentinean investigators have long argued, and Israeli officials recently acknowledged, that the attack, which killed 85 people, was retaliation for an Israeli operation against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

In recent years, several reports of Iranian casing of Jewish institutions have emerged in Britain and in Canada, and senior Israeli officials have raised concerns repeatedly that different terrorist groups were planning attacks against Jewish targets. No indication has emerged that Iran or Hezbollah was involved in strikes in recent years against Jewish sites in Tunisia, Turkey and Morocco, which were blamed on Al Qaeda and affiliated groups.

In addition to its network of intelligence cadres posted at worldwide embassies, Iran has a footprint in the United States. In recent years, Iranian diplomats working for the United Nations mission in New York City have been expelled for allegedly casing the subway and other potential targets; Iranians have been deported on visa violations because of their ties to various Iranian security services. Moreover, several alleged Hezbollah operatives have been arrested, most prominently members of two smuggling rings in North Carolina and Michigan.

This past March, nine men were arrested in the Detroit area for reportedly smuggling cigarettes, Viagra pills, toilet paper and baby formula. That same month, FBI director Robert Mueller told a Congressional panel that his agency busted a Hezbollah smuggling ring that had operatives cross the Mexican border to carry out possible terrorist attacks inside the United States. Terrorism experts estimate that Hezbollah raises $20 million to $30 million a year through criminal activities in America.

Michael Rubin, an Iran expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute who recently worked for the Pentagon, said that Hezbollah could easily use those networks to carry out terrorist attacks.

Last week, the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported that eight fundamentalist Islamist groups had received large sums of money in the past month from Iran's intelligence services as part of a project to strike American military and economic installations across the Middle East, as well as the interests of British, Arab and Muslim allies. The paper, which is owned by Saudis, cited a senior source in the Iranian joint chief of staff as describing a series of visits by leaders of groups in Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon, as well as by the heads of Hezbollah cells in the Persian Gulf, Europe and North America. The article also described weapons shipments to Palestinian Islamic Jihad and to Hezbollah, and contended that about 80 operatives underwent training to carry out suicide operations from the air and undersea. According to the source, in case the American military attacks continue, more than 50 Shehab-3 missiles will be targeted against Israel. Revolutionary Guards would be given the go-ahead for more than to allow more than 50 terrorists cells in Canada, the United States and Europe to attack civil and industrial targets in those countries.

A few weeks ago, London's Sunday Times reported that firebrand Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had held a January meeting in Damascus with the Lebanese commander of Hezbollah's overseas operations, Imad Mugniyah, the man generally assumed to coordinate the group's terrorist attacks. The topic was reportedly to discuss retaliation against Western targets in the event of any strike by the United States on Iran's nuclear facilities, the article stated, citing American and Israeli sources. The same paper had earlier reported that the Revolutionary Guards had trained 40,000 suicide bombers to strike in Britain and the United States if Iran's nuclear facilities were attacked, and also cited a Guard official as saying that 29 Western targets had been identified.

Tainted alcohol kills 15 in Iran

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4969762.stm

 

Fifteen people have died and another has been left blind after drinking contaminated alcohol in Iran's southern province of Kerman, media reports say.

The alcohol was apparently laced with methanol, the Keyhan newspaper said.

Trade in alcohol has been illegal since the 1979 revolution and is strictly punished. However non-Muslims are allowed to drink in private.

Correspondents say that in practice there is a thriving trade in home brews and smuggled alcohol.

However sometimes ignorant or unscrupulous dealers mix in methanol, which can kill, blind or cause serious damage to major organs.

Contaminated alcohol killed more than 20 people in the southern city of Shiraz in June 2004.

A man was jailed for three years for organising the distribution of toxic alcohol and ordered to pay $25,000 (£13,600) in "blood money" to the families of 14 people who died and pressed charges against him.

Fifteen others were jailed over the deaths and given 154 lashes each.

Iran says Gulf is no longer safe for U.S.

 

 

Tehran, Iran, May 03 – Iran said on Wednesday that the Gulf region was no longer safe for the "enemy" and that the people of Iraq had rejected the United States' political model for their country.

"The Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman are the hunting ground for the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran. If any [foreign] force with any military might tries to maneuver in this region, it will not be out of range of our armed forces and weaponry", Iran's Interior Minister Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi said.

In April, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards held naval war-games in the Persian Gulf, which they said served as a warning to the U.S. and Israel.

"The Persian Gulf is no longer a safe place for our enemies", Pour-Mohammadi said.

"Our enemies can not tolerate this situation", the radical Shiite cleric added.

"Less than three years into the occupation of Iraq, not only have the Iraqi nation rejected them but have also said that they will choose a political model that is actually the [U.S.’s] enemy. They have chosen the same path that the Iranian people have gone down and have taken the first steps", he said.