Iran Election Guide

Donate to EAWV





Or, click to learn more

Search

Entries in Iran (26)

Tuesday
May052009

UPDATED Video: Benjamin Netanyahu to AIPAC Policy Conference --- The Threat is Iran

Related Post: An Israeli-Syrian Peace? Biden, US Give Conflicting Signals

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke by video yesterday to the annual Policy Conference of The American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The six-minute presentation was a far-from-subtle pitch to identify Tehran as Public Enemy Number One, linking it to both Fascism and Soviet Communism:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1A7SWQ5BAR4[/youtube]

For the first time in my lifetime --- I believe, for the first time in a century --- see Arabs and Jews see a common danger.

This wasn't always the case. In the '30s and '40s many Arabs supported another country, believing that there was their hope. In the '60s, '70s, '80s, they supported another country that was at odds with the Jewish state. But this is no longer the case.

So a common fight against Iran and its supposed attempt to develop nuclear weapons "presents great opportunities". At the same time, Netanyahu did not extend the greatest opportunity of "co-operation" with the Arab  world to a specific commitment to discussions for a two-state solution with Palestinian, limiting himself to the objective of "peace with the Palestinians". Instead, he restated his long-time line of a "political track, an economic track, a security track" with the precondition that "Palestinians must recognize a Jewish state".
Tuesday
May052009

Video: Vice President Biden at AIPAC Policy Conference

Related Post: An Israeli-Syrian Peace? Biden, US Give Conflicting Signals

biden2Vice President Joe Biden addressed the Policy Conference of The American Israel Political Action Committee this morning. His most challenging statement was a call on Israel to freeze settlement expansion and grant greater freedom of movement to Palestinians as a means of demonstrating Israel's commitment to Palestinian statehood: "Show me." Biden received polite, if far from rapturous, applause.

Biden also stood firm on the Obama Administration's pursuit of engagement with Iran but, as Josh Mull notes below, appeared to waver on an Israeli-Syrian settlement over the Golan Heights. We'll be watching closely whether that is a misstatement or an unexpected shift in US policy.

Here is the video.
Tuesday
May052009

Iran: Roxana Saberi Appeal to Be Heard Next Week?

saberi23The case of Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi, jailed in Iran for eight years on charges of espionage, may be moving to a legal and diplomatic conclusion. Iranian judiciary spokesman Alireza Jamshidi said today, "The case has gone to ... the appeal court and it is being studied there. There has been a date set for next week (for the court session)."

The announcement comes days after widespread international attention to and criticism of Iran's execution of Delara Darabi on Saturday. Darabi was 17 when she killed her father's cousin more than five years ago.
Monday
May042009

Meanwhile in Iraq: Iran Looks for a Border Settlement

iran-iraq-mapIran Review has posted an intriguing article, translated from the Iranian newspaper Tabnak, by Mirmehrdad Mirsanjanri on "Undecided Fate of Iran’s Longest Border". As Iran pursues its own political reconciliation with a Baghdad asserting its independence from US oversight, the thorough review has a clear objective:
Implementation of the 1975 Algiers Accord and precise demarcation of joint borders 20 years after the Iraqi war against Iran (1980-88) will help forge a formal and lasting peace between the two neighboring countries and lead to the Iranian people’s trust in the Iraqi government’s goodwill.

Undecided Fate of Iran’s Longest Border


Iran’s 1485-km border with Iraq is the longest land border in the country. At the same time it has been one of the most disputed borders between Iranian and Ottoman governments over the past 100 years from the Safavid era onwards.

Following disintegration of the Ottoman Empire in 1920 and creation of a state called Iraq, the dispute continued under all the Iraqi governments from the monarchy to the republican rule of Abdul Ghasem and after him under the Baathist rule. The 1975 Algiers Accord which was inked between Iran and Iraq after lengthy talks between leaders of the countries put an end to the border dispute forever. The agreement specified the land borders with slight changes in favor of Iraq and the Arvand River (Shatt al-Arab) was divided between the two countries through the Thalweg line.

It is to be noted that Iran’s western borders are the only borders shaped without intervention of British colonialism and Russia. The Russians took Aran and Shervan (present day Azerbaijan Republic) through the Golestan Agreement in 1813. They also separated Armenia and Nakhichevan from Iran through the Turkmanchai Accord 15 years later, namely in 1828. Britain too took Herat and Afghanistan away from Iran by imposing the 1850 Agreement. They also separated a major part of Baluchestan from Iran in 1905 and annexed it to their East India Empire.

Contemplation on the situation of Iran’s borders with Iraq located in the Kurdish regions in the north and Arab populated regions in the south makes implementation of the 1975 border agreement inevitable. The successor Iraqi government’s refusal to fulfill its commitment to the accord has received little attention due to the brotherly aids of Iran to the Iraqi people. Failure in border demarcation has caused the Iraqi troops and coalition forces stationed in Iraq to penetrate 500m to 1 km into the Iranian borders on some occasions in open violation of IRI’s territorial integrity.

In the meantime, Iraqi troops maintain a presence in the Iranian section of Arvand River (Shatt al-Arab) every now and then claiming to be in the Iraqi waters. To this we must add repeated violations by Iraqi thugs of Iranian waterway in Arvand River. Under the critical conditions in the region where foreigners intend to harm ethnic solidarity of Iranian tribes it is imperative for the Iranian government to make the Iraqi side respect the 1975 Algiers Accord.

Implementation of the 1975 Algiers Accord and precise demarcation of joint borders 20 years after the Iraqi war against Iran (1980-88) will help forge a formal and lasting peace between the two neighboring countries and lead to the Iranian people’s trust in the Iraqi government’s goodwill.

Meantime, establishment of security in the western borders of the country in addition to thwarting global threats against Iran’s territorial integrity will result in an economic boost for the people of these regions. Let’s not forget that to safeguard every inch of Iran’s land and water borders, the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iranian youth has been shed. Therefore, the Iranian nation will accept no negligence towards practical execution of the 1975 Algiers Accord.

Before waging his war against Iran in 1980, former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein appeared before TV and news media and impudently tore up the 1975 Algiers Accord on the pretext that Iraq’s rights had been overlooked in the international agreement.

And now six years into the fall of Saddam Hussein, the successor Iraqi government has not only failed to show its practical commitment to the agreement and pay war reparations to Iran but we hear Iraqi officials speaking about the need to revise the agreement and urging Tehran to forego the war reparations Baghdad must pay after it was identified by the UN as the aggressor party in the war.

A prominent Iraqi official said in an interview with Al-Arabiya TV network that he had explicitly asked Tehran to skip the war reparations. He also said those who are seeking war reparations are agents of Israel!

However, I would like to drawn the attention of the Iraqi officials to the following points:

1. The 1975 Algiers Accord is a formal and international agreement prepared on the basis of international law; it can neither be abrogated unilaterally nor can it be altered or revised with the change of governments.

2. The war reparations Iraq must pay to Iran do not belong to certain individuals or groups so they would have the right to forgo them. The money rather belongs to each and every Iranian who has tolerated the sufferings of the war with their flesh and blood. In the Iraqi imposed war which is known as the longest classic war in the 20th century, about one million Iranians were martyred, injured, maimed or suffered chemical wounds. The number of those suffering from the mental and psychological impacts of the war is much higher. Moreover, many Iranian families are still looking for their beloved ones who are missing in action. Therefore, it is the Iranian nation who has a right to make a decision on how to deal with the war reparation issue.

3. The refusal by the Iraqi establishment to pay war reparations to Iran is not called courage. Courage means for the Iraqi government to formally apologize to Iranians and announce its readiness to pay the war reparations. On the other hand, real courage by the Iraqi government would be in its firm decision to oust the American and British troops from its land.

4. Undoubtedly for the countries present in Iraq which have drawn up long term plans to plunder Iraq’s abundant wealth the payment of war reparations would be a bitter pill to swallow. By resorting to various schemes, including pressuring the Iraqi officials who have close ties with Iran, these countries are trying to make the Iranian government give up the rights of the present and future generations.

5. The Iraqi war against Iran, according to estimates of experts, caused a delay of 50 years in Iran’s economic and social development. Therefore, the war reparation of 1000 billion dollars would make up only for part of the damage the Iranian people have suffered and will suffer in the future.

6. Leveling “Israeli agents” charges against advocates of the Iranian people’s rights is just a ploy to deceive the people and would have no result for the Iraqi government but to provoke the pan-Arab sentiments of Arabs.

7. While reparations of the short war (Persian Gulf War) amounting to billions is being regularly paid by Iraq to other parties and considering that Iraq is in possession of the largest oil reserves (approx. 200 billion barrels), the Iraqi officials’ refusal to pay war reparations to Iran is not acceptable nor can it be justified in any way.

8. There is no doubt that there are numerous cultural and historical commonalties between Iranians and Iraqi Shias, but what can really establish peace between the two countries after 20 years is for the Iraqi government to respect the UN Security Council Resolution 598, pay war reparations as the aggressor party, and show practical respect for the 1975 Algiers Accord.

9. According to the international law, the change of governments would not clear their successors of respecting the commitments of their predecessors. The Japanese government had to apologize to the Korean people 40 years after committing crimes against them. After the lapse of 60 years since the World War II and despite the coming to power of many governments, the German government is still paying compensation to the war victims.

10. After the goodwill of the Iraqi side in execution of the 1975 Algiers Accord is proved and after Baghdad officially apologizes to the Iranian nation and declares its readiness to pay war reparations, the Iranians could also prove their goodwill through some proposals on mechanisms of payment of war reparations. This could include payment on long term installments; exclusive and long term development by Iran of Iraq’s rich oilfields; or contributions by the countries which aided Iraq in its war against Iran to pay the reparations.
Saturday
May022009

Video: Clinton Warns Iran, China, Latin America at State Department Town Hall Meeting

Full Video of Hillary Clinton Speech to State Department Town Hall Meeting

clinton-cnn2Earlier this week, it was "engaging" Hillary, setting out the American desire to work with partners and negotiate with former foes. On Thursday, it was "power politics" Hillary, making sure leaders such as Afghanistan's Hamid Karzai knew where they stood with Washington. And on Friday, it was "get tough" Hillary, strapping on her shoulder pads for a contest with Beijing and Tehran in Latin America.

Secretary of State Clinton told a meeting of State Department officers:
What we are doing hasn't worked very well and in fact, if you look at the gains, particularly in Latin American, that Iran is making and China is making, it is quite disturbing.

Of course, there will be political and economic competition, even between the closest of allies, but Clinton whipped out some Cold War memories to warn of a new Axis of Challenge:
We are looking at how to deal with [Nicaraguan President Daniel] Ortega. The Iranians are building a huge embassy in Managua. You can only imagine what it's for.

This seems to be a bit of posturing, balancing President Obama's recent appearance at the Summit of the Americas, but it does raise the question: if Washington wants to frame relations with Latin America as a battle with outside powers, how exactly does it propose to wage the political contest?