You ain't kidding.
OBAMA’S ‘HISTORIC’ IRAN DEAL FALLS APART, AS MULLAHS REV UP HIGH-SPEED CENTRIFUGES
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...art-as-mullahs-rev-up-high-speed-centrifuges/
Zuckerman: Iran ‘can do almost everything they want’ under framework
US News and World Report Chairman and Editor-in-Chief and publisher of the New York Daily News, Mort Zuckerman said that Iran “can do almost everything they want” under the P5 +1 framework on Friday’s “McLaughlin Group.”
“I think there’s a real concern about what really is being inhibited — for the Iranians? It’s not very much, frankly. They can do almost everything they want. They’ll do it a little bit more slowly, but I don’t think — I don’t think the constraints are really anywhere close enough for Iran” he stated.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/04/11/zuckerman-iran-can-do-almost-everything-they-want-under-framework/
US News and World Report Chairman and Editor-in-Chief and publisher of the New York Daily News, Mort Zuckerman said that Iran “can do almost everything they want” under the P5 +1 framework on Friday’s “McLaughlin Group.”
“I think there’s a real concern about what really is being inhibited — for the Iranians? It’s not very much, frankly. They can do almost everything they want. They’ll do it a little bit more slowly, but I don’t think — I don’t think the constraints are really anywhere close enough for Iran” he stated.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/04/11/zuckerman-iran-can-do-almost-everything-they-want-under-framework/
McCain responded late Saturday, saying, “It is undeniable that the version of the nuclear agreement outlined by the Obama administration is far different from the one described by Iran's supreme leader -- on inspections, sanctions relief and other critically important issues.
“These widely divergent explanations of the nuclear deal must be fully explained and reconciled if we are to give serious consideration to this agreement.
“These widely divergent explanations of the nuclear deal must be fully explained and reconciled if we are to give serious consideration to this agreement.
Israel: Iran boosts weapon shipments to Hamas, Hezbollah in expectation of lifted sanctions
http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...hezbollah-in-expectation-of-lifted-sanctions/
Chamberlain meant well.
Hussein...not so much.
http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...hezbollah-in-expectation-of-lifted-sanctions/
Chamberlain meant well.
Hussein...not so much.
Tom Cotton: Obama's Iran Deal May Lead to Nuclear War
http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...ama-iran-deal-may-lead-to-nuclear-war/390327/
http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...ama-iran-deal-may-lead-to-nuclear-war/390327/
WASHINGTON — The Senate Foreign Relations Committee unanimously approved legislation granting Congress a voice in negotiations on the Iran nuclear accord, sending the once-controversial legislation to the full Senate after President Obama withdrew his opposition rather than face a bipartisan rebuke.
...
The bill would mandate that the administration send the text of a final accord, along with classified material, to Congress as soon as it it completed. It also halts any lifting of sanctions during a congressional review and culminates in a possible vote to allow or forbid the lifting of congressionally imposed sanctions in exchange for the dismantling of much of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. It passed 19 to 0.
...
The bill would mandate that the administration send the text of a final accord, along with classified material, to Congress as soon as it it completed. It also halts any lifting of sanctions during a congressional review and culminates in a possible vote to allow or forbid the lifting of congressionally imposed sanctions in exchange for the dismantling of much of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. It passed 19 to 0.
Obama and Congress reach deal over Iran nuclear talks
The bill was authored by Republican Senator Bob Corker
The US Congress will have a say on a nuclear deal with Iran, under a new agreement reached with the White House.
President Barack Obama withdrew his opposition to a bipartisan bill that was unanimously passed through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
He has agreed to sign the bill, which gives Congress the right to reject any forthcoming agreement with Iran.
An outline agreement on the future shape of Iran's nuclear programme was reached after marathon talks in April.
The US, Iran, and four other nations have set a deadline of 30 June to finalise a deal which would ease western sanctions in exchange for restrictions on Iran's nuclear programme.
Some Republicans have argued against the deal, saying that Iran has received too many concessions.
They have always insisted they must have a say if any agreement means economic sanctions levied by Congress against Iran will be lifted.
The bill is now likely to clear both houses in the Republican-controlled Congress.
An earlier version of the bill had placed a 60-day halt to any plan by Mr Obama to lift sanctions on Iran.
But that review period has been reduced to 30 days.
Mr Obama will still be able to lift sanctions he himself imposed through executive action but he would be unable to ease those imposed by Congress.
- 5 hours ago
- From the sectionUS & Canada
The US Congress will have a say on a nuclear deal with Iran, under a new agreement reached with the White House.
President Barack Obama withdrew his opposition to a bipartisan bill that was unanimously passed through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
He has agreed to sign the bill, which gives Congress the right to reject any forthcoming agreement with Iran.
An outline agreement on the future shape of Iran's nuclear programme was reached after marathon talks in April.
The US, Iran, and four other nations have set a deadline of 30 June to finalise a deal which would ease western sanctions in exchange for restrictions on Iran's nuclear programme.
Some Republicans have argued against the deal, saying that Iran has received too many concessions.
They have always insisted they must have a say if any agreement means economic sanctions levied by Congress against Iran will be lifted.
The bill is now likely to clear both houses in the Republican-controlled Congress.
An earlier version of the bill had placed a 60-day halt to any plan by Mr Obama to lift sanctions on Iran.
But that review period has been reduced to 30 days.
Mr Obama will still be able to lift sanctions he himself imposed through executive action but he would be unable to ease those imposed by Congress.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Iran now says: 5-year-deal, 10k centrifuges, and total sanctions relief
the annulment of all sanctions together immediately after the first day of implementation of the final agreement.
The factsheet urges operation of 10,000 centrifuge machines at Natanz and Fordo, a maximum 5-year-long duration for the deal and Iran's nuclear limitations, replacement of the current centrifuges with the latest generation of home-made centrifuge machines at the end of the five-year period.
Maybe this lying dipshit guesser can post the 'thanks Obama' graphic again.
LMFAO
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Iran now says: 5-year-deal, 10k centrifuges, and total sanctions relief
the annulment of all sanctions together immediately after the first day of implementation of the final agreement.
The factsheet urges operation of 10,000 centrifuge machines at Natanz and Fordo, a maximum 5-year-long duration for the deal and Iran's nuclear limitations, replacement of the current centrifuges with the latest generation of home-made centrifuge machines at the end of the five-year period.
Maybe this lying dipshit guesser can post the 'thanks Obama' graphic again.
LMFAO
Rare Bipartisanship in Congress over Iran - Max Boot
Rare bipartisanship prevailed in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to force President Obama to submit any Iranian nuclear deal for congressional approval. Ironically, this legislation could actually strengthen Obama's hand with the Iranians: Secretary of State John Kerry can now plausibly tell his Iranian interlocutors that, however much he would like to concede their points, Congress won't stand for it.
The basic message, from Democrats and Republicans alike, is that there is deep unease in Congress, as well as in the country at large, about the terms of the accord, and for good cause. As former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger have noted, "negotiations that began 12 years ago as an international effort to prevent an Iranian capability to develop a nuclear arsenal are ending with an agreement that concedes this very capability." The writer is a Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. (Commentary)
Rare bipartisanship prevailed in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to force President Obama to submit any Iranian nuclear deal for congressional approval. Ironically, this legislation could actually strengthen Obama's hand with the Iranians: Secretary of State John Kerry can now plausibly tell his Iranian interlocutors that, however much he would like to concede their points, Congress won't stand for it.
The basic message, from Democrats and Republicans alike, is that there is deep unease in Congress, as well as in the country at large, about the terms of the accord, and for good cause. As former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger have noted, "negotiations that began 12 years ago as an international effort to prevent an Iranian capability to develop a nuclear arsenal are ending with an agreement that concedes this very capability." The writer is a Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. (Commentary)
[h=2]North Korea Transfers Missile Goods to Iran During Nuclear Talks[/h]Intelligence suppressed by Obama administration
EMAIL
BY: Bill Gertz
April 15, 2015 5:00 am
North Korea supplied several shipments of missile components to Iran during recent nuclear talks and the transfers appear to violate United Nations sanctions on both countries, according to U.S. intelligence officials.
Since September more than two shipments of missile parts have been monitored by U.S. intelligence agencies as they transited from North Korea to Iran, said officials familiar with intelligence reports who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Details of the arms shipments were included in President Obama’s daily intelligence briefings and officials suggested information about the transfers was kept secret from the United Nations, which is in charge of monitoring sanctions violations.
Critics of the U.S.-led nuclear framework agreement reached in Switzerland earlier this month have said one major deficiency of the accord is its failure to address Iran’s missile program, considered a key nuclear delivery system for the Islamist regime.
CIA spokesman Ryan Trapani declined to comment on the missile component shipments, citing a policy of not discussing classified information.
But other officials said the transfers included goods covered by the Missile Technology Control Regime, a voluntary agreement among 34 nations that limits transfers of missiles and components of systems with ranges of greater than 186 miles.
One official said the transfers between North Korea and Iran included large diameter engines, which could be used for a future Iranian long-range missile system.
The United Nations Security Council in June 2010 imposed sanctions on Iran for its illegal uranium enrichment program. The sanctions prohibit Iran from purchasing ballistic missile goods and are aimed at blocking Iran from acquiring “technology related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.”
U.S. officials said the transfers carried out since September appear to be covered by the sanctions.
Other details of the transfers could not be learned. However, U.S. intelligence agencies in the past have identified Iran’s Islamic Republic of Iran
Shipping Lines (IRISL) as the main shipper involved in transferring ballistic missile-related materials.
A U.S. report to the United Nations sanctions committee in 2010 stated that Washington closely cooperates with partner states in monitoring IRISL and other Iranian merchant shipping companies that pass through airports, seaports, and other international borders. The report said the United States takes “steps to prevent transfers of items prohibited by this and by previous Iran-related resolutions.”
The American efforts to block arms transfers are carried out under the George W. Bush administration’s international Proliferation Security Initiative.
A classified State Department cable from October 2009 reveals that Iran is one of North Korea’s key missile customers.
The cable, made public by Wikileaks, states that since the 1980s North Korea has provided Iran with complete Scud missiles and production technology used in developing 620-mile-range Nodong missiles.
Additionally, North Korea also supplied Iran with a medium-range missile called the BM-25 that is a variant of the North Korean Musudan missile.
“This technology would provide Iran with more advanced missile technology than currently used in its Shahab-series of ballistic missiles and could form the basis for future Iranian missile and [space launch vehicle] designs.”
“Pyongyang’s assistance to Iran’s [space launch vehicle] program suggests that North Korea and Iran may also be cooperating on the development of long-range ballistic missiles.”
A second cable from September 2009 states that Iran’s Safir rocket uses missile steering engines likely provided by North Korea that are based on Soviet-era SS-N-6 submarine launched ballistic missiles.
That technology transfer was significant because it has allowed Iran to develop a self-igniting missile propellant that the cable said “could significantly enhance Tehran’s ability to develop a new generation of more-advanced ballistic missiles.”
“All of these technologies, demonstrated in the Safir [space launch vehicle] are critical to the development of long-range ballistic missiles and highlight the possibility of Iran using the Safir as a platform to further its ballistic missile development.”
A spokesman for Spain’s mission to the United Nations, currently in charge of the world body’s sanctions committee, said the committee has not received any communications from the United States since Spain took charge of the panel in January.
Security and arms control analysts said the North Korean missile components shipped to Iran highlight the deficiencies of the Iran framework agreement announced earlier this month.
The framework is under fire from Congress. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday held a meeting to discuss legislation that would require the administration to submit a final Iran nuclear agreement to the Senate.
The committee voted to approve a bipartisan bill that would require Senate approval for any final Iran nuclear agreement. The legislation would block the administration from lifting any sanctions on Iran until after Congress approves the formal accord that is to be worked out before June 30. The White House has threatened to veto the legislation if it passes both the House and Senate.
Joseph DeTrani, former director of the National Counterproliferation Center, a U.S. intelligence agency, said North Korea has maintained “close and long term” relations with Iran on the transfer of missiles and missile-related technology.
“U.N. Security Council resolutions prohibit this type of activity, and continued missile-related transfers from North Korea to Iran would be in violation of these Security Council resolutions,” said DeTrani, a former CIA officer and special envoy to North Korea nuclear talks.
“The Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), comprised of over 100 countries, was established to monitor such activities and assist with the interdiction of such proscribed transfers. To date, PSI has been relatively successful,” he added.
Former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton also said the missile transfers would violate U.N. sanctions on both Iran and North Korea.
U.N. sanctions imposed on Pyongyang in 2009 for North Korea’s nuclear and missile tests prohibit the export of missiles and related technology.
“And if the violation was suppressed within the U.S. government, it would be only too typical of decades of practice,” Bolton said. “Sadly, it would also foreshadow how hard it would be to get honest reports made public once Iran starts violating any deal.”
Bolton, who also served as undersecretary of state for arms control in the George W. Bush administration, said he remembers the difficulty of getting the bureaucracy to use the word “violation” instead of diplomatic euphemisms such as “non-compliance.”
Former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz also criticized the administration for not publicizing the sanctions violations.
“While it may seem outrageous that the Obama administration would look the other way on missile shipments from North Korea to Iran during the Iran nuclear talks, it doesn’t surprise me at all,” Fleitz said.
“The Obama administration has excluded all non-nuclear Iranian belligerent and illegal activities from its nuclear diplomacy with Iran,” he said. “Iran’s ballistic missile program has been deliberately left out of the talks even though these missiles are being developed as nuclear weapon delivery systems.”
Fleitz said Iran’s role as a state sponsor of terrorism also has been excluded from the nuclear talks, along with Iranian aggression and subversion in the Middle East.
“Since the administration has overlooked this long list of belligerent and illegal Iranian behavior during the Iran talks, it’s no surprise it ignored missile shipments to Iran from North Korea,” he added.
Thomas Moore, a former Senate Foreign Relations Committee arms control specialist, said if the recent missile component transfers are confirmed, “it certainly points out the glaring omission present in the Iran deal: the total lack of anything on its missile threat.”
“If true, allowing proliferation with no response other than to lead from behind or reward it, let alone bury information about it, is to defeat the object and purpose of the global nonproliferation regime—the only regime Obama may end up changing in favor of those in Tehran, Havana and Pyongyang,” Moore said.
Henry Sokolski, head of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, also said the latest report of North Korean missile technology exports to Iran “more than suggests why the administration had to back away from securing any ballistic missile limits in its negotiations” with Tehran.
White House National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan declined to comment. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf did not return emails seeking comment.
This entry was posted in National Security and tagged Iran, North Korea, Nuclear Weapons, Sanctions. Bookmark the permalink.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, right, welcomes North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Su Yong, for a meeting in Tehran, Iran, Tuesday, Sept. 16, 2014 / AP
BY: Bill Gertz
April 15, 2015 5:00 am
North Korea supplied several shipments of missile components to Iran during recent nuclear talks and the transfers appear to violate United Nations sanctions on both countries, according to U.S. intelligence officials.
Since September more than two shipments of missile parts have been monitored by U.S. intelligence agencies as they transited from North Korea to Iran, said officials familiar with intelligence reports who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Details of the arms shipments were included in President Obama’s daily intelligence briefings and officials suggested information about the transfers was kept secret from the United Nations, which is in charge of monitoring sanctions violations.
Critics of the U.S.-led nuclear framework agreement reached in Switzerland earlier this month have said one major deficiency of the accord is its failure to address Iran’s missile program, considered a key nuclear delivery system for the Islamist regime.
CIA spokesman Ryan Trapani declined to comment on the missile component shipments, citing a policy of not discussing classified information.
But other officials said the transfers included goods covered by the Missile Technology Control Regime, a voluntary agreement among 34 nations that limits transfers of missiles and components of systems with ranges of greater than 186 miles.
One official said the transfers between North Korea and Iran included large diameter engines, which could be used for a future Iranian long-range missile system.
The United Nations Security Council in June 2010 imposed sanctions on Iran for its illegal uranium enrichment program. The sanctions prohibit Iran from purchasing ballistic missile goods and are aimed at blocking Iran from acquiring “technology related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.”
U.S. officials said the transfers carried out since September appear to be covered by the sanctions.
Other details of the transfers could not be learned. However, U.S. intelligence agencies in the past have identified Iran’s Islamic Republic of Iran
Shipping Lines (IRISL) as the main shipper involved in transferring ballistic missile-related materials.
A U.S. report to the United Nations sanctions committee in 2010 stated that Washington closely cooperates with partner states in monitoring IRISL and other Iranian merchant shipping companies that pass through airports, seaports, and other international borders. The report said the United States takes “steps to prevent transfers of items prohibited by this and by previous Iran-related resolutions.”
The American efforts to block arms transfers are carried out under the George W. Bush administration’s international Proliferation Security Initiative.
A classified State Department cable from October 2009 reveals that Iran is one of North Korea’s key missile customers.
The cable, made public by Wikileaks, states that since the 1980s North Korea has provided Iran with complete Scud missiles and production technology used in developing 620-mile-range Nodong missiles.
Additionally, North Korea also supplied Iran with a medium-range missile called the BM-25 that is a variant of the North Korean Musudan missile.
“This technology would provide Iran with more advanced missile technology than currently used in its Shahab-series of ballistic missiles and could form the basis for future Iranian missile and [space launch vehicle] designs.”
“Pyongyang’s assistance to Iran’s [space launch vehicle] program suggests that North Korea and Iran may also be cooperating on the development of long-range ballistic missiles.”
A second cable from September 2009 states that Iran’s Safir rocket uses missile steering engines likely provided by North Korea that are based on Soviet-era SS-N-6 submarine launched ballistic missiles.
That technology transfer was significant because it has allowed Iran to develop a self-igniting missile propellant that the cable said “could significantly enhance Tehran’s ability to develop a new generation of more-advanced ballistic missiles.”
“All of these technologies, demonstrated in the Safir [space launch vehicle] are critical to the development of long-range ballistic missiles and highlight the possibility of Iran using the Safir as a platform to further its ballistic missile development.”
A spokesman for Spain’s mission to the United Nations, currently in charge of the world body’s sanctions committee, said the committee has not received any communications from the United States since Spain took charge of the panel in January.
Security and arms control analysts said the North Korean missile components shipped to Iran highlight the deficiencies of the Iran framework agreement announced earlier this month.
The framework is under fire from Congress. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday held a meeting to discuss legislation that would require the administration to submit a final Iran nuclear agreement to the Senate.
The committee voted to approve a bipartisan bill that would require Senate approval for any final Iran nuclear agreement. The legislation would block the administration from lifting any sanctions on Iran until after Congress approves the formal accord that is to be worked out before June 30. The White House has threatened to veto the legislation if it passes both the House and Senate.
Joseph DeTrani, former director of the National Counterproliferation Center, a U.S. intelligence agency, said North Korea has maintained “close and long term” relations with Iran on the transfer of missiles and missile-related technology.
“U.N. Security Council resolutions prohibit this type of activity, and continued missile-related transfers from North Korea to Iran would be in violation of these Security Council resolutions,” said DeTrani, a former CIA officer and special envoy to North Korea nuclear talks.
“The Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), comprised of over 100 countries, was established to monitor such activities and assist with the interdiction of such proscribed transfers. To date, PSI has been relatively successful,” he added.
Former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton also said the missile transfers would violate U.N. sanctions on both Iran and North Korea.
U.N. sanctions imposed on Pyongyang in 2009 for North Korea’s nuclear and missile tests prohibit the export of missiles and related technology.
“And if the violation was suppressed within the U.S. government, it would be only too typical of decades of practice,” Bolton said. “Sadly, it would also foreshadow how hard it would be to get honest reports made public once Iran starts violating any deal.”
Bolton, who also served as undersecretary of state for arms control in the George W. Bush administration, said he remembers the difficulty of getting the bureaucracy to use the word “violation” instead of diplomatic euphemisms such as “non-compliance.”
Former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz also criticized the administration for not publicizing the sanctions violations.
“While it may seem outrageous that the Obama administration would look the other way on missile shipments from North Korea to Iran during the Iran nuclear talks, it doesn’t surprise me at all,” Fleitz said.
“The Obama administration has excluded all non-nuclear Iranian belligerent and illegal activities from its nuclear diplomacy with Iran,” he said. “Iran’s ballistic missile program has been deliberately left out of the talks even though these missiles are being developed as nuclear weapon delivery systems.”
Fleitz said Iran’s role as a state sponsor of terrorism also has been excluded from the nuclear talks, along with Iranian aggression and subversion in the Middle East.
“Since the administration has overlooked this long list of belligerent and illegal Iranian behavior during the Iran talks, it’s no surprise it ignored missile shipments to Iran from North Korea,” he added.
Thomas Moore, a former Senate Foreign Relations Committee arms control specialist, said if the recent missile component transfers are confirmed, “it certainly points out the glaring omission present in the Iran deal: the total lack of anything on its missile threat.”
“If true, allowing proliferation with no response other than to lead from behind or reward it, let alone bury information about it, is to defeat the object and purpose of the global nonproliferation regime—the only regime Obama may end up changing in favor of those in Tehran, Havana and Pyongyang,” Moore said.
Henry Sokolski, head of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, also said the latest report of North Korean missile technology exports to Iran “more than suggests why the administration had to back away from securing any ballistic missile limits in its negotiations” with Tehran.
White House National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan declined to comment. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf did not return emails seeking comment.
This entry was posted in National Security and tagged Iran, North Korea, Nuclear Weapons, Sanctions. Bookmark the permalink.
WASHINGTON — A remarkable clash between two key American allies in the Middle East burst into the open here on Wednesday as the Iraqi prime minister publicly criticized the Saudi air campaign in Yemen and a top Saudi official retorted that there was “no logic to those remarks.”
The exchange, driven by sharply opposing views of Iran in the region, reflected the challenges facing the Obama administration as it tries to hold together a diverse coalition, including Sunni Arab states and Shiite-dominated Iraq, in the fight against the Islamic State, also known asISIS. Iran is a sometimes patron to Iraq but an ideological archrival to Saudi Arabia.
The United States remains caught in a difficult balancing act as it tries to keep the Saudi air campaign in Yemen on track against Iranian-backed Houthis. But in its fight against the Islamic State in Iraq, the Obama administration finds itself supporting an Iraqi military offensive that is also backed by Iran.
The dueling Iraqi and Saudi narratives began when Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq, who this week is making his first official visit to Washington, spoke early in the day to a small group of reporters at Blair House, the White House guest residence for visiting dignitaries. He said the Saudi campaign and the fighting in Yemen had created huge humanitarian problems.
“There is no logic to the operation at all in the first place,” Mr. Abadi said. “Mainly, the problem of Yemen is within Yemen.”
Mr. Abadi, who is in Washington seeking American military help in the fight against the Islamic State as well as billions of dollars to shore up his sagging economy, then suggested that the Obama administration agreed with him in his concerns about the Saudi campaign.
“They want to stop this conflict as soon as possible,” Mr. Abadi said. “What I understand from the administration, the Saudis are not helpful on this. They don’t want a cease-fire now.”
The administration swiftly denied that President Obama had expressed concern about the Saudi air campaign during a meeting with Mr. Abadi on Tuesday at the White House.
“The president did not criticize Saudi or G.C.C. actions in Yemen,” said Alistair Baskey, a spokesman for the National Security Council, referring to the Gulf Cooperation Council. At the same time, Mr. Baskey said, Mr. Obama had conveyed his view to the Iraqi prime minister “that this not escalate into a broader conflict and that ultimately Yemen’s conflict can only be settled through a political negotiation.”
In his remarks to reporters, Mr. Abadi also said he was worried that Saudi airstrikes might be a precursor for a more assertive Saudi military role in neighboring states.
“The dangerous thing is we don’t know what the Saudis want to do after this,” Mr. Abadi said. “Is Iraq within their radar? That’s very, very dangerous. The idea that you intervene in another state unprovoked just for regional ambition is wrong. Saddam has done it before. See what it has done to the country.”
A few hours later Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi ambassador to Washington, held a news conference at the Saudi Embassy and made his remarks about Mr. Abadi in response to questions from reporters, some of whom had met with Mr. Abadi at Blair House.
In addition to saying that there was “no logic” to Mr. Abadi’s remarks, Mr. Jubeir set forth a highly positive picture of the Saudi campaign in Yemen. He said that the bombing had destroyed attack planes, helicopters, ballistic missiles, air defenses and command elements. But he gave no precise figures.
Saudi officials have insisted that their airstrikes, which they named Operation Decisive Storm, have been effective in weakening the Houthi forces.
Mr. Jubeir rejected as “false” reports that Saudi bombers had accidentally killed numerous civilians in some of their airstrikes, and said Saudi Arabiahad taken measures to minimize risks to Yemeni civilians.
The air campaign has also created fissures among the Houthis and loyalists to the former Yemeni president, Ali Abdullah Saleh. Mr. Jubeir said the bombing had prompted some senior Yemeni officers — he did not say how many — to abandon Mr. Saleh.
“We’re beginning to see cracks in their leadership,” Mr. Jubeir said
The ambassador dismissed Mr. Abadi’s claim that United States officials were worried about the goals and conduct of the air campaign, saying that no American official had complained to him about it.
The United States is flying Predator and Reaper reconnaissance drones over Yemen, and transmitting the information to a 20-person American military coordination team divided among Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain, overseen by Maj. Gen. Carl E. Mundy III, the deputy commander of Marines in the Middle East, said a senior American military official who wanted to remain anonymous because he was discussing targeting procedures.
Under the arrangement, Saudi Arabia gives lists of potential targets to the American analysts for vetting. “We are not choosing their targets, but upon request, we’re providing intelligence to help Saudi Arabia with their precision, effectiveness and avoidance of collateral damage,” the official said.
n other comments to reporters, Mr. Abadi played down Iran’s role in military operations in his own country — he said that Iran had only 110 military advisers in Iraq, far fewer than American military estimates. And he said that Iran’s role was understandable because some of the Islamic State attacks in Iraq were near Iran.
James F. Jeffrey, a former United States ambassador to Baghdad, said that Mr. Abadi’s remarks reflected deep-seated Iraqi concerns that sectarian tensions in the region might escalate further with devastating consequences for Iraq.
“The underlying fear in the whole Middle East given the weak state system in most countries is this three-way tug of war between Iran, Sunni Arab state and the Sunni Islamist militant movements,” Mr. Jeffrey said. “The Iraqis are openly angry with the Saudis and they are almost certainly quietly unhappy with the Iranians,” he added. “They would be the first victims of a Sunni-Shia cataclysm and don’t want to be a bigger version of Lebanon.”
Later on Wednesday, Iraq’s oil minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi, told reporters that the Islamic State had seized control of some of the towers surrounding the Baiji oil refinery in northern Iraq last Friday and had infiltrated part of the complex. The Islamic State militants, he said, are trying to mount a counterattack after their recent loss of the city of Tikrit. Mr. Mahdi said he was confident that the militants would eventually be defeated.
Also on Wednesday, Iraq’s finance minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said that Iraq is planning to issue $5 billion in bonds to try to cover a large budget deficit, which he said was about $25 billion for 2015. Iraqi officials have been in negotiation with Citibank and Deutsche Bank, which would underwrite the bonds.
Iraq is also hoping to receive about $400 million to $700 million from the International Monetary Fund, though the fund has been insisting that the country do more to cut public spending as a condition of receiving the funds, Mr. Zebari said. Iraq is also hoping to work out an arrangement with the Export-Import Bank of the United States to finance the purchase of Boeing commercial aircraft, which would provide Iraq with $500 million in short-term funds.
It has taken other steps to try to ease its budget squeeze, including deferring $4.2 billion in reparations to Kuwait for Saddam Hussein’s 1990 invasion of the country.
Mr. Abadi said that the next step in military operations against Islamic State fighters was to try to roll them back in Iraq’s western Anbar Province and north of Baghdad, toward the oil refinery at Baiji. A military push to retake the northern city of Mosul, he said, would not occur until after Ramadan, which ends in mid-July.
On Wednesday, the Islamic State launched a major offensive in Anbar, and by the end of the day had captured three villages on the outskirts of Ramadi, the provincial capital, officials said.
During the fighting, hundreds of people from the besieged villages fled their homes, many ending up in Ramadi. State television reported Wednesday that the Islamic State was burning homes and massacring civilians in the areas it had seized, although those reports could not be independently verified.
Anbar officials said that the army had fled the villages that were under attack, leaving tribal fighters and the local police, who they said were badly outgunned by the militants, to defend the areas. In recent days the American-led coalition struck several Islamic State targets near Ramadi, according to a Pentagon statement.
The exchange, driven by sharply opposing views of Iran in the region, reflected the challenges facing the Obama administration as it tries to hold together a diverse coalition, including Sunni Arab states and Shiite-dominated Iraq, in the fight against the Islamic State, also known asISIS. Iran is a sometimes patron to Iraq but an ideological archrival to Saudi Arabia.
The United States remains caught in a difficult balancing act as it tries to keep the Saudi air campaign in Yemen on track against Iranian-backed Houthis. But in its fight against the Islamic State in Iraq, the Obama administration finds itself supporting an Iraqi military offensive that is also backed by Iran.
The dueling Iraqi and Saudi narratives began when Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq, who this week is making his first official visit to Washington, spoke early in the day to a small group of reporters at Blair House, the White House guest residence for visiting dignitaries. He said the Saudi campaign and the fighting in Yemen had created huge humanitarian problems.
“There is no logic to the operation at all in the first place,” Mr. Abadi said. “Mainly, the problem of Yemen is within Yemen.”
Mr. Abadi, who is in Washington seeking American military help in the fight against the Islamic State as well as billions of dollars to shore up his sagging economy, then suggested that the Obama administration agreed with him in his concerns about the Saudi campaign.
“They want to stop this conflict as soon as possible,” Mr. Abadi said. “What I understand from the administration, the Saudis are not helpful on this. They don’t want a cease-fire now.”
The administration swiftly denied that President Obama had expressed concern about the Saudi air campaign during a meeting with Mr. Abadi on Tuesday at the White House.
“The president did not criticize Saudi or G.C.C. actions in Yemen,” said Alistair Baskey, a spokesman for the National Security Council, referring to the Gulf Cooperation Council. At the same time, Mr. Baskey said, Mr. Obama had conveyed his view to the Iraqi prime minister “that this not escalate into a broader conflict and that ultimately Yemen’s conflict can only be settled through a political negotiation.”
In his remarks to reporters, Mr. Abadi also said he was worried that Saudi airstrikes might be a precursor for a more assertive Saudi military role in neighboring states.
“The dangerous thing is we don’t know what the Saudis want to do after this,” Mr. Abadi said. “Is Iraq within their radar? That’s very, very dangerous. The idea that you intervene in another state unprovoked just for regional ambition is wrong. Saddam has done it before. See what it has done to the country.”
A few hours later Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi ambassador to Washington, held a news conference at the Saudi Embassy and made his remarks about Mr. Abadi in response to questions from reporters, some of whom had met with Mr. Abadi at Blair House.
In addition to saying that there was “no logic” to Mr. Abadi’s remarks, Mr. Jubeir set forth a highly positive picture of the Saudi campaign in Yemen. He said that the bombing had destroyed attack planes, helicopters, ballistic missiles, air defenses and command elements. But he gave no precise figures.
Saudi officials have insisted that their airstrikes, which they named Operation Decisive Storm, have been effective in weakening the Houthi forces.
Mr. Jubeir rejected as “false” reports that Saudi bombers had accidentally killed numerous civilians in some of their airstrikes, and said Saudi Arabiahad taken measures to minimize risks to Yemeni civilians.
The air campaign has also created fissures among the Houthis and loyalists to the former Yemeni president, Ali Abdullah Saleh. Mr. Jubeir said the bombing had prompted some senior Yemeni officers — he did not say how many — to abandon Mr. Saleh.
“We’re beginning to see cracks in their leadership,” Mr. Jubeir said
The ambassador dismissed Mr. Abadi’s claim that United States officials were worried about the goals and conduct of the air campaign, saying that no American official had complained to him about it.
The United States is flying Predator and Reaper reconnaissance drones over Yemen, and transmitting the information to a 20-person American military coordination team divided among Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain, overseen by Maj. Gen. Carl E. Mundy III, the deputy commander of Marines in the Middle East, said a senior American military official who wanted to remain anonymous because he was discussing targeting procedures.
Under the arrangement, Saudi Arabia gives lists of potential targets to the American analysts for vetting. “We are not choosing their targets, but upon request, we’re providing intelligence to help Saudi Arabia with their precision, effectiveness and avoidance of collateral damage,” the official said.
n other comments to reporters, Mr. Abadi played down Iran’s role in military operations in his own country — he said that Iran had only 110 military advisers in Iraq, far fewer than American military estimates. And he said that Iran’s role was understandable because some of the Islamic State attacks in Iraq were near Iran.
James F. Jeffrey, a former United States ambassador to Baghdad, said that Mr. Abadi’s remarks reflected deep-seated Iraqi concerns that sectarian tensions in the region might escalate further with devastating consequences for Iraq.
“The underlying fear in the whole Middle East given the weak state system in most countries is this three-way tug of war between Iran, Sunni Arab state and the Sunni Islamist militant movements,” Mr. Jeffrey said. “The Iraqis are openly angry with the Saudis and they are almost certainly quietly unhappy with the Iranians,” he added. “They would be the first victims of a Sunni-Shia cataclysm and don’t want to be a bigger version of Lebanon.”
Later on Wednesday, Iraq’s oil minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi, told reporters that the Islamic State had seized control of some of the towers surrounding the Baiji oil refinery in northern Iraq last Friday and had infiltrated part of the complex. The Islamic State militants, he said, are trying to mount a counterattack after their recent loss of the city of Tikrit. Mr. Mahdi said he was confident that the militants would eventually be defeated.
Also on Wednesday, Iraq’s finance minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said that Iraq is planning to issue $5 billion in bonds to try to cover a large budget deficit, which he said was about $25 billion for 2015. Iraqi officials have been in negotiation with Citibank and Deutsche Bank, which would underwrite the bonds.
Iraq is also hoping to receive about $400 million to $700 million from the International Monetary Fund, though the fund has been insisting that the country do more to cut public spending as a condition of receiving the funds, Mr. Zebari said. Iraq is also hoping to work out an arrangement with the Export-Import Bank of the United States to finance the purchase of Boeing commercial aircraft, which would provide Iraq with $500 million in short-term funds.
It has taken other steps to try to ease its budget squeeze, including deferring $4.2 billion in reparations to Kuwait for Saddam Hussein’s 1990 invasion of the country.
Mr. Abadi said that the next step in military operations against Islamic State fighters was to try to roll them back in Iraq’s western Anbar Province and north of Baghdad, toward the oil refinery at Baiji. A military push to retake the northern city of Mosul, he said, would not occur until after Ramadan, which ends in mid-July.
On Wednesday, the Islamic State launched a major offensive in Anbar, and by the end of the day had captured three villages on the outskirts of Ramadi, the provincial capital, officials said.
During the fighting, hundreds of people from the besieged villages fled their homes, many ending up in Ramadi. State television reported Wednesday that the Islamic State was burning homes and massacring civilians in the areas it had seized, although those reports could not be independently verified.
Anbar officials said that the army had fled the villages that were under attack, leaving tribal fighters and the local police, who they said were badly outgunned by the militants, to defend the areas. In recent days the American-led coalition struck several Islamic State targets near Ramadi, according to a Pentagon statement.
http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...sident-rouhani-us-needs-deal-more-than-we-do/
Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani said Thursday he wants to press forward for a final nuclear deal with the P5+1 nations but added that the West needs the deal more than Iran does.
“We do not want to speak about not reaching an agreement; agreement is what everyone needs; of course the 5+1 group needs this agreement more than us,” Rouhani told reporters in Iran on Thursday.
Rouhani went on to offer a possible explanation for his assessment of the deal saying, “if we do not reach an agreement, the sanctions regime will not continue like before.” He added, “They know that the sanctions regime has been disrupted and they know that this regime will not last.”
There have been signs that, even before a final deal is reached, sanctions against Iran are weakening. China is planning to build a new “Peace Pipeline” to transport natural gas from Iran to Pakistan. The Iranian portion of the pipeline is already complete but the Pakistanis had held off on completing their end of the project out of deference to U.S. sanctions. Meanwhile, Russia announced this week that it would resume shipment of advanced anti-aircraft missiles to Iran which it had previously claimed were stopped because of sanctions.
It appears that Rouhani has Obama’s balls in the palm of his hand. All he needs to do is squeeze.
Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani said Thursday he wants to press forward for a final nuclear deal with the P5+1 nations but added that the West needs the deal more than Iran does.
“We do not want to speak about not reaching an agreement; agreement is what everyone needs; of course the 5+1 group needs this agreement more than us,” Rouhani told reporters in Iran on Thursday.
Rouhani went on to offer a possible explanation for his assessment of the deal saying, “if we do not reach an agreement, the sanctions regime will not continue like before.” He added, “They know that the sanctions regime has been disrupted and they know that this regime will not last.”
There have been signs that, even before a final deal is reached, sanctions against Iran are weakening. China is planning to build a new “Peace Pipeline” to transport natural gas from Iran to Pakistan. The Iranian portion of the pipeline is already complete but the Pakistanis had held off on completing their end of the project out of deference to U.S. sanctions. Meanwhile, Russia announced this week that it would resume shipment of advanced anti-aircraft missiles to Iran which it had previously claimed were stopped because of sanctions.
It appears that Rouhani has Obama’s balls in the palm of his hand. All he needs to do is squeeze.
