|
|
|
Join UANI
Top Stories
AP:
"Amid accelerated international efforts to reach a nuclear deal with
Iran, the U.N. atomic agency on Friday reported that work on a key
element - an assessment of allegations that Tehran worked on atomic arms
- remains essentially stalled. The report from the International Atomic
Energy Agency also reiterated that more cooperation is needed by Iran for
full clarity on its present activities. Without it, the IAEA said it
cannot 'conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful
activities.' ... Obtained by The Associated Press, the report said that
Tehran had recently shared some information sought by the agency but
continues to hold back on the next stage of the IAEA probe. A senior
diplomat with knowledge of the issue said the material was related to
nuclear modeling and calculations that the agency suspects could be
linked to arms... The IAEA report, issued to the agency's 35-nation board
and the U.N. Security Council, said it remains 'concerned about the
possible existence in Iran of undisclosed nuclear-related activities
involving military-related organizations, including activities related to
the development of a nuclear payload for missiles.' 'Iran is required to
cooperate fully with the Agency on all outstanding issues.'" http://t.uani.com/1EEkqPv
Reuters:
"The U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Friday it had made incremental
progress but no breakthrough in its inquiry into whether Iran may have
researched an atom bomb, a sobering message that may dim chances for a
deal between Tehran and big powers next month. Diplomats view Iran's
reluctance to open up to investigators from the International Atomic
Energy Agency as a sign of its reluctance to cooperate fully until
punitive sanctions imposed on it are lifted as part of any settlement
with the powers. A confidential, quarterly report issued by the IAEA said
the Islamic Republic had provided some information about one of two open
items in the investigation into possible military dimensions to its
nuclear energy program 'The Agency and Iran agreed to continue the
dialogue on these practical measures and to meet again in the near
future,' said the report, which was obtained by Reuters. A diplomat
familiar with the IAEA's update played down the development. He described
as 'useful' and 'relevant' the information Iran had provided on computer
modeling that might be used in bomb research, but this did not go far
enough." http://t.uani.com/1eDektS
IranWire:
"Iranian painter and women's rights campaigner Atena Farghadani was
sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment today, May 28. The 29-year old, who
was charged with spreading propaganda against the regime and other
offences, attended court on Tuesday, May 19 in connection with both her
activism and art. Revolutionary Guards arrested Farghadani in January
2015 after she posted a cartoon on Facebook that mocked politicians who
supported an anti-contraception bill by drawing them with animal faces.
The bill also set out to criminalize voluntary sterlization. Farghadani
was first arrested in November 2014 and detained for two months before
being released. However, she was soon re-arrested after she spoke to the
media about her incarceration and posted a video on YouTube about prison
conditions. During that time, she went on hunger strike, and suffered a
heart attack as a result. As punishment for refusing to eat, Farghadani
was moved from Evin Prison to a detention center." http://t.uani.com/1AyxxqI
Yemen Crisis
Reuters:
"An Iranian plane carrying aid for Yemen landed in Djibouti on
Friday and the cargo will be inspected by the United Nations before it
moves on, Iran's Fars news agency reported. The plane would be the first
Iranian aid flight to land in Yemen since conflict broke out there in
March between Iranian-backed Houthi rebels and the government supported
by Saudi Arabia. Two Iranian cargo planes carrying food and medicine to
Yemen were forced by Saudi jets to leave Yemeni airspace in April. 'The
aid plane landed early Friday morning in Djibouti safely,' said the head
of Iran's Red Crescent delegation, Sarem Rezaie, quoted by Fars. 'The
cargo will be delivered to the WFP (World Food Programme), which will
give it to the Yemeni Red Crescent to distribute it among innocent Yemeni
people,' said Rezaie, who was onboard the plane." http://t.uani.com/1eDcEk5
Human Rights
WashPost:
"A piece of evidence introduced in the Tehran trial of Washington
Post reporter Jason Rezaian is an online job application for a position
in the Obama administration that the journalist submitted unsuccessfully
in 2008, The Post's executive editor said Thursday. In a statement,
Martin Baron cited recent accounts in Iranian and U.S. news media that
the Revolutionary Court where Rezaian is being tried on espionage and
other charges is weighing correspondence between Rezaian and the
administration after Obama was first elected. Rezaian at the time was
working in Iran as a freelance journalist. Baron said that the reports
were 'incomplete' and that he wanted to set the record straight." http://t.uani.com/1AyyaQZ
IHR:
"Three prisoners were hanged publicly in Mashhad with a crowd
including children were watching. Last month the Iranian authorities in
response to the UN Special Rapporteur's condemnation of the executions in
Iran stated that 'people are seldom hanged in the public and when that
happens we take measures so that children don't see the execution
scene.'" http://t.uani.com/1LO1LqB
Opinion &
Analysis
Michael Doran in
Mosaic: "At the core of the Netanyahu-Obama grudge
match is one issue and one issue only: the president's long-sought
détente with the Islamic Republic of Iran... Next, Obama has fallen out
with or pulled away from almost every traditional American ally in the
Middle East-a development that, even if it did not create the chaos now
engulfing the region, has certainly played a major role in abetting it.
The president's relations with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and
Turkey are nearly as strained as his relations with Netanyahu. While
these leaders may shrink from disagreeing with him in public, they have
unmistakably signaled their conviction that the president's deal with
Tehran will not achieve its stated goal of stopping Iran's progress
toward a nuclear weapon and that, in his obsessive pursuit of this deal,
American policy is actively helping to turn the aggressively hostile
regime of the mullahs into the dominant power in the Middle East. Which
brings me to the third point. In the course of extolling the virtues of
his emerging nuclear deal, the president paused to express his unyielding
commitment to shielding Israel from the threat of Iranian expansionism.
Or did he? ... This gauzy rhetoric may sound reassuring but it is
deliberately devoid of content-for good reason. The plain fact is that
the United States is doing nothing to arrest the projection and expansion
of Iranian power in the region; quite the contrary. In Lebanon, for
example, Washington has cut funding for Shiite figures who remain
independent of Iran's proxy Hizballah. In Iraq, the United States,
through the Iraqi armed forces, is actually coordinating with
Iranian-backed militias and serving as their air force. Indeed, wherever
one looks in the Middle East, one can observe an American bias in favor
of, to say the least, non-confrontation with Iran and its allies. The
pattern is most glaring in Syria, where the president has repeatedly
avoided conflict with Bashar al-Assad, Iran's closest ally. The tendency
surfaced again a few weeks ago in connection with mounting evidence that
Assad has routinely attacked his own people with gas. If true, this fact
should trigger a sharp American response in keeping with the president's
famous 'red line' on the use of chemical weapons. But when questioned on
this matter at a press conference, he contrived to find a loophole.
Assad's forces, he said, have been deploying chlorine gas, which
'historically' has not been considered a chemical weapon. The president's
sophistry demonstrates a simple but profound truth: his commitment to the
progressive values of tikkun olam is governed by its own 'red lines,' and
is entirely utilitarian. Which again raises the question: what was his
purpose in stressing this shared progressive commitment in his address to
you, and what was his purpose in subtly reminding you of the costs of
failing to abide by its terms? The answer, I hope, is obvious. On June
30, Obama will likely conclude a nuclear deal with Iran. This will spark
a faceoff with Congress, which has already declared its opposition to the
deal. Congress will inevitably pass a vote of disapproval, which Obama
will inevitably veto. In order to defend that veto from a congressional
override, however, he must line up 34 Senators-all Democrats. This calls
in turn for a preemptive ideological campaign to foster liberal solidarity-for
which your support is key. If the president can convince the liberal
Jewish community, on the basis of 'shared values,' to shun any suspicion
of alignment with congressional Republicans or Benjamin Netanyahu, he
will have an easier time batting down Congress's opposition to the deal
with Iran. Progressive values have nothing to do with what is truly at
stake in this moment of decision. Only one final question really matters:
in your considered view, should the Islamic Republic of Iran be the dominant
power in the Middle East, and should we be helping it to become that
power? If your answer is yes, then, by all means, continue to applaud the
president-loudly and enthusiastically-as he purports to repair the
world." http://t.uani.com/1G7uGay
Yishai Schwartz in
Lawfare: "In the last few weeks, nuclear
negotiations with Iran have taken on an aura of inevitability. Even as
critics of the forthcoming deal have successfully highlighted its
flaws-the sunset date, the unfeasability of 'snapback' provisions, the
empowerment of the major source of regional instability-they have failed
completely in convincing the public that an alternative exists. Opponents
lamely protest that there is still a 'better deal' to be had, but they
are dismissed as wishful thinkers detached from reality. There is a
simple reason for this: Rarely do any of the deal's critics articulate
how they intend to get from point A (now) to point B (a better deal). It
is too easy to suggest that if our strategy were different, if our
negotiators push harder, if we tighten sanctions a little further, a
better offer should up on the table. But without specific arguments and
explanations for why and how an alternative is achievable, the
president's way seems like the only way. After a number of conversations
with some of these critics, however, I'm increasingly convinced that
there is an alternative, albeit a poorly articulated one. To be sure, it
has question marks and uncertainties-and the deal currently being
hammered out may yet offer the best balance of risks and benefits. But
there is another side of the ledger. Here, then, is a roadmap to that
alternative path. First, American negotiators would have to allow the
current round of negotiations to fail, but without blowing up or reneging
on any already-made commitments. Doing so should not be too difficult.
There are enough unresolved issues that adopting a hard (and reasonable)
line on, say, the timing of sanctions relief or the reach of inspections
would either force Iranian capitulation (good) or lead to an
impasse-which from this perspective would be fine as well.
Simultaneously, the US would have to engage energetically with other
members of the P5+1 to ensure that a such an impasse doesn't result in
the unraveling of existing sanctions. Given current relations with Russia
in particular, significantly expanding international sanctions would
likely be a stretch, but with the help of the French and the Gulf states,
maintaining the existing regime should still be possible. Certainly, it
is more likely (and vastly simpler) than re-implementing sanctions in
response to an Iranian violation, five or ten years down the line. The
major question, of course, is what Iran will do if a deal is not signed
by June 30. It is on this point that the warnings of the forthcoming
deal's backers have been at their most alarming. On their account,
failure to reach a deal will inevitably lead to crisis: a rapid end to
the (currently extensive) inspections regime, followed by a hasty ramp-up
in the Iranian nuclear program, and thus eventually, war. When this is
the alternative, the current deal-even with its myriad problems-looks
attractive. Vice President Joseph Biden's speech last month at the
Washington Institute for Near East Policy, is instructive here: 'They already
have paved a path to a bomb's worth of material,' Biden told the
audience. 'Iran could get there now if they walked away in two to three
months without a deal. Under the deal we're negotiating now, we radically
alter that timetable.' But these doomsday predictions aren't
gospel." http://t.uani.com/1eDgrhf
Phillip Smyth in
FP: "Both rebel forces and the Islamic State are on
the march in Syria. Islamist opposition groups have advanced in the south
near Daraa and in the north in Idlib; the Islamic State, meanwhile, last
week conquered the central city of Palmyra. President Bashar al-Assad's
regime is clearly under strain, but rumors of its impending demise are
greatly overstated. While Assad and his Iranian allies are increasingly
struggling to field enough forces to protect strategically important
areas, they have nonetheless moved aggressively to prevent regime
collapse. Using cash and coercion, Assad has launched new efforts to
bolster troop levels and engender further loyalty. Just last week, the
Syrian regime announced its hope for a $1 billion credit line from Tehran
to continue the fight. More importantly, Iranian-backed foreign-fighter
recruitment and deployment have increased dramatically. With these
efforts, the wheels are now in motion for the regime not only to contain
rebel advances, but also to push them back. Early in 2014, the deployment
of pro-Assad foreign fighters hit a significant snag when thousands of
Iraqi Shiite militiamen started returning to Iraq following the Islamic
State's gains there. However, the crown jewel of Iran's proxy network -
the Lebanese paramilitary group Hezbollah - soon picked up the slack for
the redeployed Iraqis. Hezbollah recruitment has increased, both within
Lebanon and via the group's affiliated proxies in Syria... Hezbollah's
military deployments within Syria have expanded along with its increased
numbers. Not only is the group maintaining its advisory role with
pro-Assad militia groups, but it has a significant combat presence in
vital strategic areas... Tehran also turned to entire new communities of
foreign fighters to bolster the Assad regime. Starting in 2013, reports
emerged of the funerals of tens of Afghan Shiite fighters in Iran, most
originating from the Afghan Hazara refugee population in Iran. Some reports
stated that the Iranian commanders viewed the Afghan Shiite troops as
mere cannon fodder, reportedly sending criminals and paying them paltry
sums. Regardless, since 2014 they have been active across Syria - in the
Qalamoun region, Damascus, Latakia, Daraa in the south, and the restive
city of Aleppo. There have also been sporadic claims of Pakistani Shiite
involvement in Syria since 2013. Only in the fall of 2014 was it
confirmed, following funerals for three Pakistani Shiite fighters in
Iran. Iraq saw the first publicized losses of Pakistani Shiite foreign
fighters, with the first funeral occurring in June 2014. Iraqi Shiite
groups backed by Iran have also escalated their recruitment efforts
targeting Pakistani Shiites. Starting in September 2014, the Iraqi Shiite
Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, an Iranian-backed front group tied to the
Asaib Ahl al-Haq militia, launched an Urdu-language recruitment program,
calling on 'the faithful brothers who wished to defend Iraq and the
doctrine of Ali' to join the fight. The appeals for these volunteers were
repeated in January 2015. These Shiite fighters are not just more bodies
for Iran to throw into the conflict - they also highlight Tehran's
growing geopolitical reach. Their presence indicates that Iran is trying
to project its influence deep into communities in Central Asia. Its
influence in Pakistan is particularly noteworthy, as the country is a
close ally and potential nuclear partner of Iran's regional nemesis,
Saudi Arabia. While many Iraqi Shiite fighters are still fighting in
their home country, new organizations have also stepped in to recruit for
the Syrian front. Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada (KSS), an Iranian proxy group
announced in early 2013, picked up much of the slack for the Syrian war,
launching Internet- and ground-based recruitment drives less than a month
after the Islamic State's conquest of Mosul, Iraq... The mechanisms put
in place by Assad and Iran will allow for the continued survival of the
regime. Attrition is taking its toll, but Tehran and Damascus are doing
their best to stave off collapse and strike back at their foes." http://t.uani.com/1FI7zzY
|
|
Eye on Iran is a periodic news summary from United Against
Nuclear Iran (UANI) a program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear
Iran, Inc., a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code. Eye on Iran is not intended as a comprehensive
media clips summary but rather a selection of media elements with
discreet analysis in a PDA friendly format. For more information please
email Press@UnitedAgainstNuclearIran.com
United Against Nuclear
Iran (UANI) is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a
commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a
regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons. UANI is an
issue-based coalition in which each coalition member will have its own
interests as well as the collective goal of advancing an Iran free of
nuclear weapons.
|
|
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment