|
TOP STORIES
The U.S. military launched cruise missile strikes on
Thursday to knock out three coastal radar sites in areas of Yemen
controlled by Iran-aligned Houthi forces, retaliating after failed
missile attacks this week on a U.S. Navy destroyer, U.S. officials said.
The strikes, authorized by President Barack Obama, represent
Washington's first direct military action against suspected
Houthi-controlled targets in Yemen's conflict. Still, the Pentagon
appeared to stress the limited nature of the strikes, aimed at radar
that enabled the launch of at least three missiles against the U.S.
Navy ship USS Mason on Sunday and Wednesday. "These limited
self-defense strikes were conducted to protect our personnel, our ships
and our freedom of navigation," Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook
said... "These radars were active during previous attacks and
attempted attacks on ships in the Red Sea," including the USS
Mason, one of the officials said, adding the targeted radar sites were
in remote areas where the risk of civilian casualties was low... The
missile incidents, along with an Oct. 1 strike on a vessel from the
United Arab Emirates, add to questions about safety of passage for
military ships around the Bab al-Mandab Strait, one of the world's
busiest shipping routes.
A U.S. warship operating off the coast of Yemen was
targeted a second time Wednesday by what appeared to be Iranian-backed
Houthi rebels in southern Yemen... Officials said the USS Mason, a
destroyer, wasn't hit or damaged when two missiles were fired from a
Houthi-controlled area known as al-Hudaydah. Iran backs the Houthi
rebels in Yemen, who have been engaged in a bloody civil war that pits
them against a Saudi Arabia-led coalition that is backed by the U.S. It
was the second such attempted attack since Sunday, when missiles fired
from the same region missed the Mason... Pentagon officials stressed
that the Mason was operating in international waters off the Red Sea
coast of Yemen about 6 p.m. local time Wednesday when the second attack
occurred.
The Obama administration is breaking with a group of
Senate Democrats who want to renew expiring sanctions that target
Iran's energy sector, arguing that it has the muscle to apply new
penalties administratively if needed. At issue is the Iran Sanctions
Act of 1996, which punishes investments in Iran's energy sector and was
meant to deter Tehran's pursuit of a nuclear arsenal. Set to expire on
Dec. 31, the law has been a "pivotal component of U.S. sanctions
against Iran's energy sector ... since enactment in 1996," the
Congressional Research Service has noted, adding that its reach has
"been expanded to other Iranian industries." ... Some
Democrats are urging Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to schedule
votes on reauthorizing the law during the lame-duck session... But the
administration has other ideas, setting up a potential clash in the
lame-duck session. "Right now, we are focused on ensuring that
Iran continues to fully implement its nuclear-related commitments under
the [nuclear pact]," a White House official said. "The
expiration of the Iran Sanctions Act ... will not affect our ability to
continue to issue sanctions designations when warranted, as we have
ample authorities to target missile-related actors, as well as activity
related to human rights violations, malicious cyber activity, and other
activity of concern," the official said.
U.S.-IRAN RELATIONS
Defense experts say the missile firings are part of
Iran's campaign to drive the U.S. out of the region. "It's clear
that Iran has made a conscious decision to escalate its general
strategy of confronting U.S. power and influence in the region by using
the fact that these missiles allegedly came from Houthi territory, as a
way to mask their broader strategic goal of diminishing U.S. presence
in the region," said Washington Institute defense fellow Daniel R.
Green. Iran has also increased its harassment of U.S. naval forces in
the Persian Gulf from last year. But no doubt, the firings are related
to U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen, experts say. "They've
found an opportunity through U.S. Navy ships going close to their
coastline to retaliate against the U.S. for its support of the Saudi
war in Yemen," Green. "That conveniently lines up with Iran's
strategic interest in continuing to push back U.S. influence in the
region."
Iran's government has long tried to keep out American
pop culture, but it seems happy to let Iranians watch the backstabbing,
deceitful machinations of fictional U.S. politician Frank Underwood in
"House of Cards." Iran's hard-liners point to the show and
say: This is what America is really like. The sudden arrival of the
Netflix series, which stars Kevin Spacey as a South Carolina
congressman who connives his way to the presidency, illustrates the
reach and popularity of Western television and film. It also offers a
window into the thinking of Iran's censors, who have approved the dark
portrayal of power politics and even murder in the corridors of
Washington - but not the bedroom scenes. "It shows how politics is
dirty in the United States," said Mohammad Kazemi, a student of
mechanics at Tehran's Azad University. "They do anything to reach
power."
BUSINESS RISK
Nine months after sanctions on Iran were lifted, some of
the world's biggest traders have yet to strike major oil deals with the
OPEC member, stymied by Tehran's tough stance on marketing its crude
and restrictions on dollar trades. Top executives from Vitol, Glencore,
Trafigura and Gunvor told the Reuters Commodities Summit this week that
while they are keen for a slice of the business, hurdles remain.
"It's still very difficult," Ian Taylor, chief executive of
commodity trading house Vitol, said. He cited the lack of a usable
dollar system to conduct transactions with the country, making
transfers of the U.S. currency troublesome and hindering trading...
Limits on where crude can be sold remains a sticking point as it
reduces a trader's ability to maximise profit margins, particularly in
an oversupplied market.
Amid the snake-infested marshlands on Iran's border with
Iraq, the control room monitoring North Azadegan oil field is manned
entirely by Chinese technicians. In central Tehran, hundreds of Chinese
pour out at noon from the telecommunications company Huawei to its
canteen. There are now so many Chinese expatriates here, some say they
outnumber all other nationalities combined. A decade of international
sanctions aimed at blocking Iran's nuclear program has left China the
country's dominant investor and trade partner. Now, with those
restrictions formally lifted, a more pragmatic Iranian government has
been trying to ease dependence on China, only to find itself stymied by
hard-line resistance and residual U.S. sanctions... Western investors
have been slow to arrive, forcing Iran back into the arms of the
Chinese. That's especially true in the energy sector, where pressure to
increase production is intense.
SANCTIONS RELIEF
India has received the first parcel of Iranian oil to
partly fill its strategic storage in southern India, Mangalore Refinery
and Petrochemicals Ltd, which imported the very large crude carrier
(VLCC), said on its website. MRPL shipped in 2 million barrels of
Iranian oil in the VLCC Dino. India will fill half of the storage with
6 million barrels of Iranian oil while continuing talks with United
Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia for the remainder.
Iran's potential role in instigating or encouraging the
attacks is unknown. Houthi relations with the Islamic Republic resemble
the Iran-Hamas relationship more than the Iran-Hezbollah relationship
-- that is, the Houthis are autonomous partners who usually act in
accordance with their own interests, though often with smuggled Iranian
arms and other indirect help. Although the attacks on the Mason were ineffective,
they demonstrate the urgency of sending strong signals that
antishipping attacks must cease immediately. The United States and
other countries need to show the Houthis in no uncertain terms that
they cannot attack U.S. or allied interests with impunity. A strong
message must also be sent that Iran cannot use the Houthis to attack
international shipping; inaction would likely send the exact opposite
message. The Iranian regime has observed the weakness of Washington's
response to its hostile proxy actions in the past, including
Hezbollah's 1983 bombing of the U.S. embassy and Marine barracks in
Beirut, the Iranian-commissioned 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi
Arabia, and the 2011 assassination plot against the Saudi ambassador in
Washington.
In the final stretch of the P5+1 negotiation with Iran
over a nuclear deal, the Obama administration and its staunch
supporters began highlighting Israeli security establishment figures
who expressed support for the pending deal. In a clear bid to undercut
Prime Minister Netanyahu's very vocal criticism, and to produce the
ultimate "proof" that the administration was on the right
track, quotes of some key Israeli security figures began to feature
prominently in the US debate. There were a few Israeli assessments of
the pending deal that were indeed quite positive and that also carried
weight. But other notable quotes came from security figures without the
credentials for making that call. Lacking the deep knowledge and
understanding of nuclear issues and nonproliferation efforts, Iran's
nuclear ambitions and activities, and the history of negotiations with
this determined proliferator - essential prerequisites for offering
authoritative assessments of the complex, often confusing and nuanced
text of the JCPOA - some of these assessments were no more significant
than the opinions of non-security figures. An equally disturbing trend
was when comments and assessments of members of Israel's security
establishment were brought into the US debate without regard to the
context in which they were delivered. Significantly, most of the
security figures commenting on the deal were doing so in Israel, and
with domestic audiences in mind. As such, assessments often contained
emphases and nuances that were meant for Israeli public consumption,
and could easily be misconstrued when pulled out of their context, and
incorporated directly into American discussions. So for example, an
authoritative commenter might play down the defects in the deal in
order to emphasize that despite the weaknesses and flaws in the JCPOA,
Israel cannot afford to confront the US administration in a manner that
risks putting US-Israeli relations in jeopardy. Others sought to remind
make clear that whatever the flaws in the deal, Israel is strong and
can defend itself. These assessments were not intended as endorsements
of the deal; rather, they were more often an attempt to refute
Netanyahu's rhetoric that equated the Iran nuclear issue with the
threat of Nazi Germany, or they sought to counter Netanyahu's actions,
such as his address to Congress, in a manner that could cause further
deterioration in bilateral relations. The message in these cases was
not that the deal is a good one, but that Israel must take into account
other factors as well, first and foremost the importance of US-Israel
relations to Israel's security.
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment