Updates from July, 2018 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Masoud Dalvand 9:36 am on 12 Jul 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , The U.S. Department of State   

    US State Dept: “Iran uses embassies as cover to plot terrorist attacks” 

    The U.S State Department

    The U.S. Department of State

    July 11, 2018 – Less than two weeks after the Iranian opposition convention in Paris where a massive crowd and a large number of international dignitaries joined to express their support for the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) coalition as the alternative for the mullahs’ regime ruling Iran, and the following foiling of a terror plot blueprinted by Tehran involving the arrest of an Iranian diplomat and five other individuals in Belgium, Germany and France, the U.S. State Department held a briefing on Tuesday specifically saying the Iranian regime is using its embassies “as cover to plot terrorist attacks.”

    This briefing also covered meetings between State Department officials and their counterparts abroad.

    “We discussed new ways to deprive the regime of revenues to terrorize people and to terrorize other nations. We discussed how Iran uses embassies as cover to plot terrorist attacks,” the senior State Department official explained.

    “The most recent example is the plot that the Belgians foiled, and we had an Iranian diplomat out of the Austrian embassy as part of the plot to bomb a meeting of Iranian OPPOSITION leaders in Paris. And the United States is urging all nations to carefully examine diplomats in Iranian embassies to ensure their countries’ own security. If Iran can plot bomb attacks in Paris, they can plot attacks anywhere in the world, and we urge all nations to be vigilant about Iran using embassies as diplomatic cover to plot terrorist attacks,” the official added.

    The Iranian regime has a history of plotting and staging terror attacks in the Green Continent.

    “The most recent plot in Europe by Iranians is another chapter in a long history that dates back to 1984, when Iran was starting these hijackings on commercial airliners, bombings, assassinations,” the official continued.
    “So, when you look at what Iran has done just in Europe since 1984 and continuing up to the present, all nations need to exercise vigilance to protect themselves against the Iranian threat. And this is only the most recent example of Iran using diplomatic cover to plot terrorism. And we certainly want all countries to make good decisions about their own security, and we think Iran presents an enduring threat to nations, and they need to be vigilant.”

    When asked if the State Dept. takes the arrest of an Iranian regime diplomat seriously, the official confirmed and added, “We are working very closely with the Belgians and the Austrians and the Germans to get to the bottom of this plot to conduct a bomb attack in Paris that had two Americans speaking, attending.”

    In reference to a question on the party responsible the State Dept. officially explicitly said Washington believes the Iranian regime was behind this plot and described as “ludicrous” Tehran’s claims of this being a “false flag” plot carried out by the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK).

    Advertisements
     
  • Masoud Dalvand 6:44 pm on 21 Jun 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , Mike Pompeo,   

    A new factor emerges and takes center stage in Iran 

    IRGCTerrorists

    By Nikoo Amini

    For more than four decades the Iranian regime has been investing heavily in increasing its influence in the region, interfering in the affairs of Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and even Yemen and North Africa. The US Secretary of State Mike Pumpou tweeted this, on, June 31: Iran’s corrupt regime has enriched IRGCHezbollah, and Hamas, and plundered the country’s wealth on proxy wars abroad while Iranian families struggle.

    In order hands, Pumpeo posted to other tweets yesterday as below:

    The wave of sanctions and the bankrupt economy has dropped the regime into the abyss and now Trump has told firms worldwide that they have three to six months to cut ties with Iran or face sanctions, too. Oil exports, which rose as a result of the deal, are already falling. While all these pressures are undoubtedly causing damage to the regime, it is the people of Iran and the Iranian resistance who will make the final statement about their country’s future. The change will be made in Iran by the Iranian people, and Western countries and the international community should be asking themselves whose side they will be standing on in this important development of history.

    via  A new factor emerges and takes center stage in Iran — Iran News Wire

     

     

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 3:57 pm on 22 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Pompeo's Speach,   

    Understanding the US policy on Iran in light of Pompeo speech 

    Understanding the #US policy on #Iran in light of Pompeo speech. #IranRegimeChange

    Iran Commentary

    Dedicating his first foreign policy speech to the grave subject of Iran, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo outlined the Trump administration’s new strategy vis-à-vis Iran on Monday, coming shortly after President Trump announced the US would withdraw from the Obama-era nuclear deal.

    Speaking at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., Secretary Pompeo vividly explained how the US administrations is standing alongside the Iranian people and their aspirations for freedom and democracy, especially the ongoing protests across the country.

    The new strategy encompasses “a new security architecture” extending beyond Tehran’s nuclear program to also include its missile technology, support for terrorism and actions in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon, amongst other countries.

    A long slate of conditions were set forth…

    View original post 727 more words

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 9:24 am on 8 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , ,   

    Editorial: A Way Out Of The JCPOA Crisis 

    The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action

    One of the most important international issues in recent weeks is the pending decision by the US President on whether to remain or withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal known as the JCPOA. During their visits to the White House, France’s President and Germany’s Chancellor pressed President Trump not to withdraw as he has hinted he would do.

    In the run up to the May 12 deadline for President Trump to make his decision, the fate of the Iran deal continues to dominate the agenda. However, there is a way out of this crisis. But it depends on whether Western leaders are prepared to consider it or if they would rather continue to ignore the facts like in the past and disregard potential solutions?

    There are two opposing views. Both sides say they seek security and the most effective way to prevent the Iranian regime from obtaining nuclear weapons.

    The Europeans claim that, despite its flaws, the JCPOA has to date halted the regime’s nuclear program and a degree of international monitoring is in place. They believe that there is no other viable option. If this is indeed Europe’s position, one could say that there is general consensus that there are many flaws in the JCPOA and if there are any other viable alternatives to prevent the regime from acquiring nuclear weapons they must certainly be pursued. To this end, President Macron went as far as suggesting a new proposal to remove the expiration dates of key provisions of the JCPOA and add to it plans to counter the regime’s missile program and destructive meddling in other countries. The prevailing truth is the fact that so far the regime has shown no sign of intent to abandon its destructive policies on these issues.

    On the other hand, critics of the JCPOA underline two points: Firstly, their emphasis is on the deal’s flaws which even the Europeans acknowledge. Secondly, they point to the regime’s worrisome behaviour in the period after the JCPOA took effect in areas such as its missile program and increased meddling in the region, which, interestingly, is also acknowledged by the Europeans. But, to overcome these common concerns they end up with a different conclusion; one that rejects the JCPOA. They reason that, given that the regime cannot be trusted, the JCPOA with these flaws would not prevent the regime from obtaining a nuclear bomb. In view of the North Korean experience in 1990s this is not too farfetched an argument. This is especially true in light of the fact that the Iranian regime’s initial goal for starting a nuclear program was to build a bomb and that all indications were that contrary to Hassan Rouhani’s claim at the time when he headed Tehran’s nuclear negotiating team, they were not stopped in 2003. Rouhani admitted later in his memoires that he had deceived the West when he was the chief negotiator.

    Following the adoption of the JCPOA, the Iranian Resistance announced that as far as the Iranian regime was concerned, its decision to accept the terms of the deal were tantamount to a retreat, imposed on it. The regime wanted the bomb as soon as possible without any hitch but the growing pressures of sanctions and fear of a possible uprising forced the regime to give in.

    At the time, Mrs Maryam Rajavi, President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, said, “Circumventing the six UN Security Council resolutions and coming up with an unsigned agreement that is not internationally bounding as a treaty would neither block the mullahs’ path to deception nor their access to the nuclear bomb.”

    “Had the P5+1 been more decisive, the Iranian regime would have had no way but to fully retreat and permanently give up its efforts to acquire the nuclear bomb. Specifically, it would have halted all uranium enrichment and shut down its bomb-making projects.”

    “The P5+1 should now insist on evicting the regime from the Middle East and prevent its interferences in the region. This is a fundamental principle that needs to be included in any agreement, otherwise any country in this tumultuous region would have the right to demand all the concessions given to the clerical regime. This would only result in further catastrophic escalation of the nuclear arms race in this part of the world.”

    “Another important point is the United Nations’ strict monitoring of the cash poured into the regime’s pockets so that they would be spent on the Iranian people’s urgent needs, especially to pay for the unpaid meager salaries of workers, teachers and nurses and provision of food and medicine for the population. Otherwise, Khamenei, within the framework of the policy of export of terrorism and fundamentalism, would continue sending the money to Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon and before all, fill the pockets of the IRGC (the Iranian Regime’s Revolutionary Guards Corps) forces.”

    Mrs. Rajavi further stressed, “Indeed, any agreement that does not observe and consider the Iranian people’s human rights would only embolden the regime in its relentless suppression and executions and trample the nation’s rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Charter.”

    The righteousness of the Iranian Resistance’s position has now been proven after almost three years. The mullahs’ nuclear program must be abolished in its entirety. This should have been done many years ago.

    After three years, the regime’s behavior has gotten worse in all areas. This is reflected before anything in the suppression of the Iranian people. The Western governments’ silence regarding the widespread protests in Iran is shameful. At least 15 of those detained during the protests which began at the turn of the year have been tortured to death but the West continues to remain silent. This can only be explained within the context of greed for some trade contracts.

    All advocates of the policy of appeasing the regime are responsible for the current crisis and its consequences, whatever the outcome may be. Those who were competing against one another for more share of contracts with the regime, indeed with the IRGC, while closing their eyes to the suppression of the Iranian people and the regime’s destructive policies in the region, must be held to account for their role in the present crisis.

    It is now time to pay heed to the Iranian people’s demands. The people have shown in their protests that they want the regime to go. The international community must stand by the Iranian people and their Resistance. It is now time to put talk aside and take action. The benchmarks are clear.

    Mrs. Rajavi in a message to the convention of Iranian-Americans in Washington on May 5 said, “The experience of the past three years has confirmed that the mullahs took advantage of the concessions in the JCPOA to suppress the people of Iran and massacre the people of Syria. As such, we emphatically demand that Western countries adopt a policy that would eliminate the entire infrastructure of the regime’s nuclear program and, through unconditional inspections, prevent, once and for all, the regime from engaging in any nuclear-related activity, testing or research, including enrichment. Dismantling the regime’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, expelling the Revolutionary Guards from other countries in the region, and compelling the regime to stop torture and execution should be addressed in a holistic approach. Western countries must not ignore any of these aspects.”

    In order to secure the achievement of all these demands, the most stringent financial sanctions must be adopted immediately and the regime’s ties with international systems must be cut off. The regime is far too weak to stand against the will of the international community. Regrettably though, so far, it has not seen the necessary resolve on the part of the international community.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 8:27 pm on 7 May 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ,   

    Iran exiles demand regime change as nuclear deadline looms 

    Iran Commentary

    The international community is literally hanging in the balance over the upcoming May 12th Iran nuclear deal deadline. Advocates of the accord, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), continue to claim anything but the deal will lead to a new war in the Middle East.

    The Iranian people, however, represented by thousands of exiles taking part in Saturday’s “Iran Freedom Convention” in Washington, DC, voiced their demand for regime change in their home country. Their call is coupled with significant support provided by a long slate of American dignitaries and elite Members of Congress.

    This is the beginning of even more turbulent weeks and months for the Iranian regime.

    Strong voices

    The event was hosted by the Organization of Iranian-American Communities, a group supportive of the 2017-2018 protests and advocating regime change to realize freedom and democracy in Iran.

    “The people of Iran are calling on…

    View original post 761 more words

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 7:41 pm on 29 Mar 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , ,   

    The Challenges and Crises of the Iran Regime in the Iranian New Year’s Perspective. 

    Poisonous cup of missile and regional wars for Iran regime

    In the first year’s speech in Mashhad, Khamenei tried to give a good picture of the condition of the regime in the most critical areas such as justice, corruption, inflation and poverty, unemployment, and economic uncertainty and the issue of liberties, while the image of the Khamenei and his media at the end of the Iranian year (1396), they presented a condition of the regime, indicating crises and super-challenges.

    The question is, what is the reality at the end? Khamenei tried to give a good and so-called “natural” picture of the condition of the regime in the speech for beginning of year, but the result was a reversal. For everyone who has a little awareness of the issues of society, it was very clear that his words were deep crisis of the Mullahs regime.

    For example, in the case of corruption, this time, the issue of corruption has grown.

    As he himself, one month ago, in February 2018, he described the regime’s tragedy as a seven-heads dragon!

    Or in another example, while on February 18, 2018 he said:  “We having been helped to the rich classes of society  instead of paying attention to the poor people,” this time, it was the Mullahs and other officials who blamed the people for their troubles, accusing them of “wanting a lot, a lot eating and spending a lot!!. ”

    The most famous was the naming of the year, which was called “the protection of Iranian goods!”. While this expression and naming, shows a critical situation and a lack of “solution.” because it is very clear that this naming is not based on the material basis.

    Some of the two gangs of the regime in the news media, show along with examples and figures, confess and express concern to the critical situation of the country in various fields. But, apart from all the statements and unspoken ones, the reality of the scene should be assessed from the observation of the crises the regime is struggling with.

    We must first list the most pressing challenges and crises the regime faces , then how can the regime confrontation and resolution of each of these crises are possible?

    Currently, the regime faces several challenges and major crises:

    • The explosion of society and the uprising across the country and turbulent economy of the country
    • The internal challenges of the regime
    • endangering global
    • Regional isolation

    In relation to the explosive atmosphere of the society, we have seen that after the rebellion on January, many Mullahs, Khamenei and other leaders of the regime came to the scene and generally said that the roots of the uprising are both economic and political.

    In economic terms, they are characterized by severe budget deficits, millions of unemployed, poverty, high costs, and so on, but they don’t offer even a solution. For example, the day (Sunday, March 25th) Rouhani came to the scene and said, “We have to think for 3 million unemployed!” But he did not provide any solution.

    But Khamenei said the people’s problem is “a lot of spending, eating and consuming a lot”! Does he not know that this inspire anger and hatred for people who touch the poverty in entire of their lives? He knows, but it does not have a solution!

    In the other hand, regarding the fact that the president of the United States have to decide to put an end to Iran Deal until May 12, the regime must decide for the 2nd and 3rd deal… and either drinking the next poison cups or return  all the sanctions, the seventh chapter of the UN Charter (military action, etc.)

    Now, with the changes at the top of the American political pyramid, the horrors of the regime have become much higher. “I do not think that this agreement can be reformed through negotiations with the Europeans,” Tramp’s new National Security Adviser said yesterday in his first interview. So, we see that there is no solution to the crisis.

    In the context of the economic crisis, a few days ago, the “World of Economics” newspaper wrote: “The Iranian economy remains like a drowning person that only tries to keep itself on the water.”

     

    Although the above has been described, but in the final look, has the regime a solution?

    If it was to be a solution, it would have to appear within two years of its(Iran Deal) implementation, while now, according to the United States announcement, the regime is on a two-way path; its way is to accept the hand Take off missile activities and end its regional interference in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. Which means the spread of missile poison and a region that, according to Qassim Suleimani, “takes Islam and Shiea and Iran (the regime).”

    Or insisting on missiles and interference in the region that continues along this path leading to death, all bank and oil sanctions, and the threats of the seventh section of the UN Charter are on top of the regime.

    Finally, there is a very important point to point out; it is true that the regime is under the siege of crises from several sides and it has no solution, but the existence of an organized resistance and nationwide protests by leading this organized resistance is the biggest crisis and danger for the collapse and overthrow of the mullahs regime.

    That is why these days, high and low, the regime is fearing of the PMOI/MEK. Especially after a world-class change.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 8:51 am on 26 Mar 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , John Bolton, , , US National Security Advisor   

    Iran reacting to John Bolton’s appointment as US National Security Advisor 

    Bolton’s selection is tantamount to increasing pressure on Iran

    Naghavi Hosseini, spokesman of the Iranian parliament’s Security & Foreign Policy Commission said:

    “The selection of John Bolton as the U.S. National Security Advisor is aimed at increasing pressures & aggressive policies against Iran in the coming days.

    “Bolton is one of the planners of toppling the Islamic Republic Of Iran.

    “Down this path Bolton is supporting the [Iranian opposition People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK)].

    “We are also witnessing the coming of a new U.S. Secretary of State and a new sanctions bill against Iran in the U.S. Congress.

    “This trend signals the fact that the Americans… intend to continue their aggressive and enmity policy against Iran.”

    JamNews website:

    “Firebrand PMOI/MEK supporter becomes the new U.S. National Security Advisor.”

    “Bolton has time and again… sought regime change in Iran and is known for his strong positions against the Islamic republic.

    “The National Security Advisor is an important post in the White House and plays a significant role in policy-making & administration decisions in regards to U.S. foreign policy and military strategy.

    “Donald Trump and H.R. McMaster were talking about his resignation for some time. They pushed this development forward to have the new team in place sooner.

    “[Bolton], now in the main decision-making entity defining U.S. strategy, publicly supports regime change in Iran.

    “Supporters of aggressive action against Iran’s regime admire Bolton for his frankness.

    “Bolton also has good relations with the [PMOI/MEK], meeting with Maryam Rajavi and delivering a number of speeches in their events.”

    Guardian Council spokesman Abbasali Kadkhodaie says:

    “The news is short yet very meaningful. John Bolton, an [Iranian opposition People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK)] supporter, obtains the highest political post in Trump’s administration.”

    Rouydad 24 website:

    “Supporter of war against [Iranian regime] becomes US National Security Advisor!”

    “Bolton is among the most explicit opponents of the nuclear agreement (JCPOA).”

    “Bolton is among the main [PMOI/MEK] supporters and has supported regime change in Iran in his speeches at their rallies.”

    Tabnak website (affiliated to former Revolutionary Guards chief Mohsen Rezaie):

    “With new changes in the White House, one must say the neocons have gained the main role in Trump’s foreign policies against Iran.”

    “The nuclear deal and political regime change in Iran is the epicenter of this defiance.”

    “Considering the new circumstances, we must say political regime change is once again in the Trump administration’s agenda.”

    “[The new White House apparatus] considers Iran the main issue in the Middle East and Tehran the main threat against US interests.”

    “They are attempting to portray [the Iranian regime] as tantamount to ISIS.”

    Youth Journalists Club:

    “As the new White House National Security Advisor, John Bolton will be playing an important role in Trump’s security decisions.”

    “Bolton has repeatedly adopted aggressive positions against [the Iranian regime].”

    “He is a staunch supporter of exiting the JCPOA.”

    Bazar Ariya website:

    “Leaving the Iran nuclear deal was the pivotal point of John Bolton’s first TV interview.”

    “Trump’s new National Security Advisor reiterated he is participating in this program to talk about US’ possible JCPOA exit.”

    “John Bolton is known for his strong stance against the [Iranian regime].”

    “(US Secretary of State-nominee Mike) Pompeo also holds strong opinions against the nuclear pact.”

     

    via Iran reacting to John Bolton’s appointment as US National Security Advisor — Iran Commentary

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 11:14 am on 16 Mar 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Tillerson,   

    Tillerson’s Exit Could Doom the Iran Nuclear Deal 

    Outgoing U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson making a statement on his departure at the State Department in Washington, D.C. on March 13.

    Outgoing U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson making a statement on his departure at the State Department in Washington, D.C. on March 13.

    Foreign Policy, MARCH 15, 2018 – President Donald Trump’s sacking of his top diplomat, Rex Tillerson, signals America’s likely withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement, and raises the risk of a possible military confrontation with the regime in Tehran.
    The future of the Iran deal was already in serious doubt after Trump issued an ultimatum in January, warning he would pull the United States out of the accord unless European allies or Congress managed to “fix the deal’s disastrous
    But by picking CIA Director Mike Pompeo, an avowed Iran hawk, to succeed Tillerson as secretary of state, Trump sent a clear message that Washington was hardening its stance as a May 12 deadline approaches for the possible reimposition of U.S. sanctions.
    Talking to reporters Tuesday about his decision, Trump cited his disagreement with Tillerson over the Iran nuclear agreement as an example of how the outgoing secretary of state had “a different mindset” than his own.
    “When you look at the Iran deal, I think it’s terrible. I guess he thought it was okay…. So we were not really thinking the same,” Trump said before departing for California.
    In recent weeks, Tillerson’s deputies have worked to hammer out an arrangement with European allies that could preserve the deal while addressing Trump’s concerns about its shortcomings, including Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal and provisions that expire in the next decade and beyond.
    “I think it spells trouble for the nuclear deal,” said Colin Kahl, who served as the national security advisor to former Vice President Joe Biden.
    While Tillerson often found himself on the losing side of many issues at the White House, he was a voice of caution and “he did appear to have some impact in delaying Trump dumping the Iran deal,” Kahl said.
    The next round of talks among the United States and diplomats from the United Kingdom, France, and Germany aimed at salvaging the agreement is due to go ahead as planned in Berlin this week, officials say. And a meeting of all the signatories to the Iran deal, which includes the U.K., France, Germany, Russia, China, Iran, and the United States, is scheduled for Friday in Vienna.
    Despite Trump’s abrupt firing of Tillerson, the outgoing secretary of state’s top aide, Brian Hook, will attend the meetings in Europe, a State Department spokesperson said. Hook was an influential figure on Tillerson’s staff and it’s unlikely he will stay on under Pompeo.
    The 2015 agreement between Iran and world powers, which former President Barack Obama touted as a diplomatic breakthrough, imposed elaborate restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program while lifting an array of U.S. and international sanctions that had damaged the country’s economy. In his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump railed against the agreement as the “worst deal ever,” saying Iran had won relief from sanctions without having to give up enough in return.
    As president, Trump bristled when faced with a U.S. law that required him to regularly certify to Congress whether Iran was complying with the deal and whether the agreement was in America’s interest. In October, Trump told Congress he could not certify that the agreement was in the national interest but stopped short of pulling the United States out.
    Over the past 14 months, Tillerson, along with Defense Secretary James Mattis, repeatedly argued in White House meetings against abandoning the agreement on grounds that it had imposed important limits on Tehran’s nuclear work. Instead, Tillerson proposed trying to address the president’s concerns by negotiating a supplemental agreement or other arrangement with the Europeans, while retaining the benefits of the current deal.
    Trump’s January ultimatum set May 12 as the next key deadline, when he will have to decide whether to re-impose a slew of U.S. sanctions that were lifted as part of the nuclear deal.

    Critics of the nuclear agreement welcomed Tillerson’s departure.

    “The selection of Mike Pompeo at State should remove any doubt about the president’s intentions,” said Mark Dubowitz, chief executive of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “Two months to go and President Trump will snap back the most powerful economic sanctions against Iran unless there’s a real not a fictional fix to the Iran nuclear deal.”
    Omri Ceren, managing director of the Israel Project, a Washington organization that works on Middle East issues, said that with or without Tillerson’s exit, the president had made clear he would not keep sanctions relief in place without concrete improvements to the agreement.
    “In recent days the Trump administration has, if anything, been toughening its stance on what it would take to make the Iran deal worth staying in,” Ceren said.
    If Trump opts to reimpose U.S. sanctions on Iran after May 12, European Union officials have warned that Brussels might try to block the American measures and protect European companies investing in the Iranian market. But analysts said European banks and other firms are already reluctant to do business in Iran due to the threat of a possible “snap-back” of U.S. sanctions and don’t want to lose their access to the vast American market. A U.S. withdrawal could wreck the agreement, scaring off European investment that Iran saw as a key reward for agreeing to limit its uranium enrichment and other nuclear work.
    If the deal unravels and Iran concludes it has no economic incentive to hold back on its nuclear work, then Tehran could expel U.N. inspectors and head down a fast track to building nuclear weapons — possibly in a matter of months. Under that scenario, the United States — and Israel — may decide to take military action to prevent Iran from obtaining the bomb or at least slow down a bid for nuclear-tipped missiles.

    Source: Tillerson’s Exit Could Doom the Iran Nuclear Deal

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 8:26 pm on 24 Feb 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , Prospects for Change in 2018, , , U.S. Lawmakers,   

    Prospects for Change in 2018-US and EU policy on Iran- Senior U.S. Lawmakers meet Maryam Rajavi 

    Presentation1

    Senior Members of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the United States House of Representatives, Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Chair of the Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and Emerging Threats, and Judge Ted Poe (R-TX), Chair of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-Proliferation and Trade, met withMaryam Rajavi, on Saturday, February 24, 2018.

    In the meeting which took place at Maryam Rajavi’s residence in Auvers-sur-Oise, the two sides discussed the uprising by the Iranian people that began on December 28, 2017, its consequences and the options before the international community.

    The senior U.S. lawmakers condemned the Iranian regime for its brutal crackdown on the protests and underscored that the international community must break its silence and inaction vis-à-vis the atrocities perpetrated by the regime against its own citizens. They also urged the U.S. Government to impose comprehensive sanctions, including financial and banking sanctions on Iranian regime’s officials and entities, especially those involved in suppressing the protesters. They also called for measures that would enable the Iranian people to overcome the blocking of the internet and allow them access to communication systems. The lawmakers urged the U.S. Government to force the expulsion of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and its proxy militias from the countries in the region.

    “The uprising marked a turning point in the struggle of the Iranian people to attain freedom and democracy,” Maryam Rajavi said, adding that the “chants of ‘death to Khamenei’ and ‘death to Rouhani,’ and ‘reformer, hardliner, the game is now over’ made it palpably clear that the Iranian people demand the overthrow of this regime.”

    She emphasized that this uprising will continue until the overthrow of the clerical regime because the underlying factors that propelled the uprising, namely economic mismanagement, rampant government corruption, increasing poverty and inflation, escalating suppression, and a whole host of other social and political problems cannot and will not be resolved.

    Maryam Rajavi added, “With the Iranian people’s uprising, the clerical regime has entered its final phase and as such any investment in this regime is doomed to fail. It is time for the international community to stand with the Iranian people and not with the clerical regime.” Maryam Rajavi also called on the international community to exert greater pressure on the clerical regime to secure the speedy release of all protesters.

    “The U.S. Government needs to officially recognize that the Iranian people reject the corrupt and repressive mullah regime in Iran. We, in Congress and the U.S. Government must make it clear that we are on the side of the Iranian people and not their Islamic, fanatic and corrupt allies who oppress them,” Rep. Rohrabacher said.

    Rep. Poe emphasized that the world community must hold the Iranian regime’s officials accountable for their atrocities and assist the people of Iran in their noble quest for freedom and democracy.

    Then two members of the US Congress and a number of European political figures attended a conference called: ” Prospects for Change in 2018-US and EU policy on Iran”

    Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), Chair of the Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and Emerging Threats, at the conference  said: “We’re at this meeting,bcz this is not just about freedom. There’s strong relationship BTW peace,freedom&prosperity.W/out Freedom its Iran‘s military adventurism that endangers the region.”

    Judge Ted Poe (R-TX), Chair of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-Proliferation and Trade at Conference said: ” There’re growing signs that the efforts of Iranian people are cracking the regime. The mullahs are nervous. The Iranian people are giving them nightmares.”

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 11:16 am on 8 Feb 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , ,   

    How the Iranian Regime Is Using Its Proxy Groups and How the US Can Tackle Them 

    The Iranian Regime has a network of foreign proxy groups all across the Middle East, from large formal organizations like Hezbollah to small splinter groups like Asaib Ahl al-Haq. This means that Iranian influence is spreading further than ever before and is doing so in increasingly diverse ways. How can we stop them?

    At a Policy Forum at The Washington Institute on February 2, Hanin Ghaddar, the Institute’s Friedman Visiting Fellow and a veteran Lebanese journalist and researcher, spoke about the Iranian Regime’s control of Lebanon via Hezbollah and explained the political balance is a mere illusion in Lebanon because of Iran.

    He explained that because of Iran’s power over Hezbollah, the Regime has been able to build a land bridge across the Middle East through Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, which the mullahs will use to transport weapons, troops, and money to its terrorist proxies (including splinter groups) across the region, and expand its power even more.

    At that same forum, Phillip Smyth, a Soref Fellow at the Institute and a researcher at the University of Maryland, explained that if the US wished to tackle these Iranian-backed groups, they must recognise that they are all connected.
    Even though it may seem as if the groups are divided along religious or ethnic or political grounds, they are all reading from the Regime’s script. They are paid from the same coffers, following the same idealogy, and fightinging the same battles.

    Smyth said: “Understanding Iranian ideology will allow Washington to counter it more effectively. Iranian operatives know how to work with individuals and splinter groups, while U.S. policy tends to be more binary in determining allies and adversaries. Going forward, U.S. officials should learn how to better utilize religious networks in the region. They should also take advantage of the fact that Iran overestimates its influence in certain quarters, particularly within the Iraqi army.”

    Both speakers agreed that because of the speed that the Iranian Regime was recruiting fighters via their proxy groups, the fighters were no longer as loyal to the cause or as well trained, which was also a way to attack the Iranian Regime.

    Ghaddar said: “The United States can take several steps in response… In the short term, supporting anti-Iran and anti-Hezbollah candidates in the May elections could harden the line between the state and Hezbollah. In the longer term, Washington would be wise to draw red lines in Syria and stick to them.”

     

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: