Archive for the 'Iran' Category

Bucharest, Romania:  The final fronteer.

It was the first NATO summit where the US failed to get what it publicly asked for - granting Ukraine and Georgia a next step in the NATO-accession process, the so-called "Membership Action Plan" or MAP.  MAP does not mean automatic NATO membership and can take 5-10 years to complete because the requirements laid out in MAP are dependent on the reformist drive of the respective governments. In the battle over whether to grant MAP to Ukraine & Georgia, French President Sarkozy, whom Bush qualified as "the last reincarnation of Elvis", suddenly switched sides and joined the opposition led by German chancellor Angela Merkel, who was against MAP from the very beginning.

After bitter quarrels at a working dinner hosted by the Romanian president Traian Basescu, the leaders of Old Europe prevailed. Bush and Brown got a measly compromise - a second chance in December, when NATO foreign ministers could decide to give MAP to the two former Soviet countries. But German Foreign Minister Frank Walter Steinmeier already qualified as "unconceivable" the prospects of changing his mind by December, when, in his view, there will only be a "first assessment". Followed by a second, third, etc. until Ukrainians and Georgians give up hope of ever joining NATO.

The real winner of the NATO summit in Bucharest was none other than Vladimir Putin. It was he who delivered the final speech on the last day of the summit, it was he whom Germany and France were thinking of as these two stalwarts of "Old Europe" fought to keep Georgia and Ukraine out of NATO. Self-confident and pleased that "our concerns were heard", Putin gave the audience at the Summit a condescending discourse which seemed as if the West was already at his disposal and he, the "Tsar of the Kremlin" didn’t feel the need to bully his loyal servants.  If the result of the NATO Summit are any indication, Putin was right.

During the closed-door NATO-Russia Council in Bucharest, Putin threatened the statehood of Ukraine in the event that it would become a NATO member.  Putin noted that "there are 17 millions Russians there" and that "Ukraine is a patchwork of territories from other states". But in the following press conference he refrained himself form directly attacking Ukraine or Georgia. The argument against NATO enlargement, in Putin’s public speech, was that "NATO is not a democratizer", but "a powerful military block whose appearance on our borders will be considered by Russia as a direct threat to our country’s security.

He also stressed that no threat - from terrorism to proliferation of WMD, from cyber attacks to energy - can be tackled without Russia. NATO was set up during the Cold War against an "evil empire" - the USSR - "but it remains to be seen who was right then", Putin said. That statement alone should set off alarm bells among military strategists and historians throughout the West. 

Putin also mentioned Iran and that, although Russia opposes a military nuclear program, it is "fully committed to honor its contractual obligations in terms of civilian technology and fuel for the civilian Iranian nuclear program".  No comment.

So what will be the future of NATO after Bucharest, after Russia got a veto right through its advocates in the NATO Alliance, especially Germany?

Hopefully Russia will make another mistake, the way it cut off gas to Ukraine in 2006 and let German consumers shiver. And hopefully we’ll have a strong leader in the White House next year. One who knows Russia from the Cold War and sees the new threat it has become. One who doesn’t look Putin or Medvedev in the eyes and thinks he has "seen into their soul", as George W. Bush famously stated after meeting with Putin. That would be the only hope for the transatlantic community. It cannot rely on a reincarnation of Elvis in France and a jello-like chancellor in Germany, too weak to break the will of her half-socialist, pro-Russian government. 

It is a sad indication of where the power truly lies in Europe when Bush and Sarkozy, both hawkish on foreign policy in general, are not able to secure the nomination of two former Soviet satellites to one of the most important military blocs in the world.  Perhaps, in the end, Putin smiles because he knows the truth:  Putin has also looked into the West’s eyes to see its soul and has found that the West is lacking both a soul and a backbone. 

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The New European

America's tax dollars hard at work:

  • The Energy Department is subsidizing two Russian nuclear institutes that are building important parts of a reactor in Iran whose construction the United States spent years trying to stop, according to a House committee.
  • The institutes, both in Nizhny Novgorod, gave American officials copies of sales presentations that listed the Bushehr reactor, which Russia has agreed to fuel, as one of their projects. One institute is providing control systems, including control room equipment, and the other, hundreds of pumps and ventilation fans.
  • The Energy Department is subsidizing the institutes under the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention, a program set up in 1994, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The program was intended to prevent newly impoverished scientists and their institutions from selling expertise to states or terrorist groups that want nuclear weapons.  (Doesn't Iran fall into the category of a "state or terrorist groups" that we want to prevent from obtaining nuclear weapons?!?)
  • Rep. John Dingell, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, said in a telephone interview, that the State Department has accused Iran of using the Bushehr reactor as a cover for obtaining nuclear technology useful in a weapons program. And, he said, “We’ve got a bunch of federal laws that impose sanctions on U.S. companies that develop Iran’s oil.”
    But under the nonproliferation program, he said, “We’ve got U.S. money providing assistance to help develop a reactor that we’re busy denouncing.” (Duh.)

Boneheads. 

Perhaps if America's federal government weren't quite so large, such "oversights" wouldn't happen (or wouldn't take years to uncover)…

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Global American
Janusz Bugajski, director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies New European Democracies Project and chair of the South Central Europe Area Studies program for U.S. Foreign Service Officers at the Foreign Service Institute speaks in an interview for the Romanian daily newspaper "Romania libera" about the recent takeover of the Romanian oil company Rompetrol by the Kazakh state company KazMunayGaz.
 
Q: “Better the Kazakhs than the Russians” seems to be the general view regarding the Rompetrol-KazMunayGaz deal. Do you share this view?
A: Let’s put it this way: on paper it looks like a good idea for Romania or for any other country to diversify its energy links with countries other than Russia. And I’m sure that the Europeans will approve it. The question is what lies behind it. I don’t know exactly KazMunayGaz’s structure or relation with the Russians. What I do know though is that the Kazakhs are very much dependent on transit through Russia – either they go through Russia or they ship it across the Caspian. They have to go across Russian territory in order to get to Novorossiisk, the Black Sea and into Romania. There is always some susceptibility, even if there is no Russian backing behind this, that Russians will cut off the supply. So if it crosses Russian territory and uses a Russian port, it is still susceptible to Russian political pressure.
 
Q: So you wouldn’t believe Dinu Patriciu’s (the CEO of Rompetrol) theory that the deal is building a “Nabucco of oil”, an alternative route to Russia?
A: It would be an alternative to Russia, if it bypassed Russia. The Nabucco pipeline was supposed to bypass Russia, but there seem to be problems with it – lack of investments, Russia’s preemptive pipelines like the one across the Baltic Sea, or the Black Sea. Russia is also trying to tie in the Central Asian countries, to buy most of their oil and gas at a cheap, but a guaranteed price. In other words, locking them in over a long period. This is classic colonialism: buy resources very cheap in your colony and sell them elsewhere – this is exactly what Russia is doing – now it’s trying to raise the prices with Germany and other Western European consumers and at the same time it keeps the prices extremly low for Kazakh and Turkmen oil and gas. So I hope the Central Asians are beginning to wake up. The question is how do they get out of it, because they’re landlocked. There are two possibilities: one would be across the Caspian Sea to Azerbaijan and then across Georgia, Turkey and so forth. The other one would be across Iran, which is sanctioned by the US. So that’s a huge problem. That’s why I think Russia is playing the Iranians. They don’t want Iran to have good relationships with the West, if not for anything else, then for its energy interests.
 
Q: The Western oil companies that are developing the Kashagan oil field in the Caspian Sea are trying to build a trans-Caspian pipeline to connect with the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipe that bypasses Russia. But somehow there is very little progress there.
A: That’s the problem. There’s a lot on paper during these grand schemes, but there is no progress if the Europeans and the Americans can’t get their act together on this. And Russia of course exploits the situation. The question is whether this will help Kazakhstan to get the money to develop an alternative route to bypass Russia. I can’t predict that at the moment.
 
Q: On the deal itself, there are numerous question marks. It’s not clear why he had to sell, he bought it for 615 million dollars and sold it for over two billion. A great profit, but then the question is what’s the price for it and if Romania is actually winning or losing from this deal?
A: For a company this size, it is important for these details to be disclosed. It may be a private deal, but if this is going to affect so many people in so many jobs, in taxation, political, strategic as well as economic matters – I think we need to see exactly what this deal was. With all the articles, the clauses, all these sorts of things are very important. This has to be an open process. Even if this is absolutely clean, one suspects that there is something behind it.
 
Q: Can this deal also be read in the context of the Russia-US row over the military bases and the anti-missile shield in Eastern Europe?
A:That is why it is so important to know who is behind KazMunayGaz. Remember the case with the Ukrainians, the person who was put in charge over the gas supply company – I think a similar process of clarification has to be taken here. Who stands behind KazMunayGaz? I know it’s a state owned company, but what are the other interests in it. And then to look at the deal, what happens in terms of supply – is it going to increase, how much is there going to be invested in modernizing, in new pipelines, in shipping – all these things have to be investigated.
 
Q:The Russians are pressuring full speed on the Burgas-Alexandroupolis pipeline. Could KazMunayGaz-Petromidia be linked to the latter pipe?
A:The pipeline Burgas-Alexandroupolis designed to bypass the Bosphorus can be built pretty quickly and is surely on. Both Bulgaria and Greece signed up to this. It’s a very good question if Romania might plug into what will be a Russian controlled transportation network. Even though it might be a Kazakh-Romanian bilateral deal. It’s a very good point – again, one has to look on what the plans on transportation will be. This pipeline will be put together much more quickly than anything else across the Balkans and link up with Italy. There are so many dotted lines and competing interests, particullarly Russians against the alternatives.
 
Q: And the Russians are pressuring the Bulgarians and Greeks to sell their participation in the Burgas-Alexandroupolis pipeline, although Russia owns 51% of this pipeline.
A: That’s grand strategy. Not only do they want to control the supplies, including the supplies from Central Asia they’re trying to monopolize, but also the transportation, distribution and refinery network in different parts of Europe. Particullary in key-points and on the functioning of the whole economy. That’s what it amounts to.
 
Q: The EU is issuing a package of measures on September 19, set to restrict the access of non-EU companies on the energy market. Is this move coming too late?
A: One thing is to write the package, another to implement it. There are so many diverse country interests. The Russians have been trying to play with different countries – Germany, Austria, France, Italy – there are all sorts of deals going on that bypass the EU channels. So there’s no EU policy on this and Russia is exploiting it.
 
Q: Russia called the initiative a “hysterical reaction”.
A: (Laughs) then the EU is on the right track. If Russia criticizes something, they’re worried. If they’re ignoring it, then it doesn’t matter. It’s a positive sign.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The New European

A pretty incredible piece in The Washington Times about how China is secretly sending arms to Iraq & The Taliban militia in Afghanistan through Iran:

New intelligence reveals China is covertly supplying large quantities of small arms and weapons to insurgents in Iraq and the Taliban militia in Afghanistan, through Iran…

Some arms were sent by aircraft directly from Chinese factories to Afghanistan and included large-caliber sniper rifles, millions of rounds of ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades and components for roadside bombs, as well as other small arms.

The Washington Times reported June 5 that Chinese-made HN-5 anti-aircraft missiles were being used by the Taliban.

According to the officials, the Iranians, in buying the arms, asked Chinese state-run suppliers to expedite the transfers and to remove serial numbers to prevent tracing their origin. China, for its part, offered to transport the weapons in order to prevent the weapons from being interdicted.

The weapons were described as "late-model" arms that have not been seen in the field before and were not left over from Saddam Hussein's rule in Iraq.

U.S. Army specialists suspect the weapons were transferred within the past three months…

Is anyone surprised?  After all, the Chinese are still Communists. 

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Global American

Iran opposition group PMOI that supported the kidnappings of US diplomats in 1979 is suing the EU for €1 million in damages and to clear its name of being stuck on Brussels' terrorist register.

Lawyers for the PMOI on Wednesday filed the law suit at the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, saying the EU is breaking its own laws by not following a verdict by the Court of First Instance last December, which annulled the EU's earlier decision to list the group. Any officially-designated "terrorist" organisations have their financial assets frozen and are forbidden from fundraising in Europe, writes EUObserver.

The PMOI started out in 1965 as a Marxist-Islamist anti-corruption movement in Iran but fled after suffering purges that saw over 150,000 members slaughtered by the post-cultural revolution Islamic regime. The Mujahidin organised cross-border raids against Iran from bases in Iraq in the 1990s but says it renounced the use of arms in 2001, with a 2003 US army report saying the Iraq PMOI wing no longer has any guns. In the past few years PMOI and its sister group, the NRCI, has positioned itself as the democratic opposition in Iran and attracted backers including retired US generals, members of the UK House of Lords, former EU judges and MEPs. The movement accuses the UK and France of putting it on the EU terrorist register in order to have cards to play in the Iran nuclear diplomacy game. 

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The New European

Next »

Close
E-mail It