Archives

...now browsing by author

 

Iran dispatches warship to shadow Gulf exercises

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Iran has dispatched one of its newest warships to shadow the world’s biggest mine-hunting exercise that has been taking place over the last few days in the Gulf.

Telegraph.Co.UK

By Ben Farmer in the Gulf

2:20PM BST 18 May 2013

A 50cal gunner aboard a US Navy Riverine Patrol Boat during joint naval exercises in the Persian Gulf north of Bahrain: Iran dispatches warship to shadow Gulf exercises

A 50cal gunner aboard a US Navy Riverine Patrol Boat during joint naval exercises in the Persian Gulf north of Bahrain Photo: HEALTHCLIFF O’MALLEY

The frigate Jamaran cruised to within a mile of the western vessels, placing her “almost on top of” the fleet conducting exercises to secure shipping, naval sources said.

Commanders stressed they did not view the frigate as a threat and said day to day relations with the Iranian navy were cordial, but its presence underlined the sensitivity of the exercise in one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.

The Jamaran, armed with missiles and torpedoes, was built in Iran and launched in 2010, though it is based on a far older design.

Capt Jon Rodgers, commander of the USS Ponce which is one of 35 ships taking part in the exercise, said the Iranian and American navies regularly photographed each other as the two navies – widely seen as potential foes – run up against one another in the congested waters which many believe could be a future flashpoint.

He said: “As long as we are only taking pictures, then we are good.”

The fortnight-long exercise in the Gulf has seen 41 nations take part in drills aimed at protecting shipping from mines, attack by small ships and guarding oil platforms. Most of the vessels belong to Nato members but Australia and some Arab states have also contributed ships.

The organisers say the exercise is purely defensive and deny it is aimed at Iran, but Tehran has repeatedly threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, a key strategic chokepoint that is just 25 miles wide at its narrowest point, in a move which would send oil process soaring, deal a heavy blow to the world economy – and would provoke a military clash.

Capt Rodgers said: “The mission of mine counter measures is defensive in nature and we are not belligerent here. We are just practising to open up a waterway that may have been mined, so that oil and gas can get out to countries.”

Six British ships are among the vessels taking part in the exercise in which participants are practising securing passage through a stretch of water 250 miles long and 50 miles wide.

The Navy has four mine hunters in the Gulf at any one time, equipped with divers, sonar and Seafox remote controlled underwater drones to find and destroy mines.

Lt-Cdr Ben Vickery, commander of the mine hunter HMS Atherstone, plastic-hulled to prevent it triggering an explosion, said: “It’s something at which the Navy is world leading. It’s an area where we have got great pieces of equipment and we are well supported.”

The congested Strait carries nearly a third of all waterborne oil supplies, amounting to between 15 and 17 million barrels daily. A single mine costing a few thousand dollars could cripple a billion dollar vessel. Mines were used heavily during the Iran-Iraq war and the first Gulf war, and nine nations in the region still keep stocks.

Crews also held drills to protect shipping against the threat of terrorist suicide attack by small bomb-laden boats such as the one which struck the USS Cole in Aden in 2000. The ships bristled with mini-guns and heavy machine guns that would be used to unleash a barrage of fire against waves of attacking small craft, a tactic that has been rehearsed by Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

Cdre Simon Ancona, the Navy officer leading the exercise, said: “It’s not one single threat, it’s anything that could have a catastrophic effect on big value shipping. That’s the thing that has such a huge impact on economies.”

Such an attack would send energy markets into an instant panic he predicted, potentially costing billions.

Right now, though, he said relations with the Iranian navy were “polite, professional and reasonably cordial”.

“In no sense do we feel that either side has an inclination, or indeed is it in their interest, to sabre rattle or be provocative.

“Neither side would wish an incident of miscalculation.”

France: West should sanction Iran ‘decisively’

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

By JPOST.COM STAFF

05/18/2013 01:48

French defense minister says increased pressure is justified; calls to defeat Iran’s stalling tactics in IAEA talks.

Iran president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Iran president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Photo: Reuters

Iran’s inflexible stance on curbing its nuclear program should lead the US and European nations to implement “decisive sanctions” against the Islamic Republic in the coming months, AFP cited French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian as saying on Friday.

According to Le Drian, the Western nations should pressure the advancement “in quantity and quality” of Iran’s uranium enrichment program through sanctions and dialogue.

In regards to accusations of Tehran’s use of stalling tactics at the IAEA talks, aimed to resume an investigation into suspected atomic bomb research, and parallel negotiations with world powers, Le Drian said that “[more] than ever we have a responsibility to defeat this strategy of procrastination and concealment to ensure nuclear non-proliferation.”

“This responsibility justifies the strong commitment of ours, alongside our American allies and European partners, for the implementation of decisive sanctions,” he added during a talk at a Washington think tank.

Diplomatic efforts to resolve a dispute over Iran’s nuclear program, which Tehran says is peaceful but the West suspects is intended to give Iran the capability to build a nuclear bomb, have been all but deadlocked for years, while Iran has continued to announce advances in the program.

The United Nations‘ nuclear agency failed to persuade Iran on Wednesday to let it resume an investigation into suspected atomic bomb research, leaving the high-stakes diplomacy stymied.

On Thursday, Saeed Jalili, Iran’s chief negotiator said Tehran is prepared to pursue nuclear diplomacy with world powers before or after next month’s presidential election.

Negotiations between Iran and the six powers – Russia, China, the United States, Britain, France and Germany – have been deadlocked since a meeting last June.

Any movement in the decade-old standoff will now probably have to wait until after Iranians vote on June 14 for a successor to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Jalili reiterated that Iran would never abandon its right to enrich uranium. Major powers want Tehran to suspend its enrichment activities to reassure the world that it is not seeking nuclear weapons. Iran denies having any such goal.

France spelled out on Friday that it would oppose a peace conference for Syria if Bashar Assad’s regional ally Iran is invited, clouding the prospect for a US-Russian initiative to end the two-year-old war.

No date has yet been agreed for the international meeting, which appears to face growing obstacles

France has hoped the Syrian conflict could be resolved through political means, though without inclusion of the Assad family, AFP cited Le Drian as saying.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Iran’s ban on female presidential candidates contradicts Constitution

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

amnesty.org

17 May 2013

Women are not allowed to be presidential candidates in Iran

Women are not allowed to be presidential candidates in Iran

© ATTA KENARE/AFP/GettyImages

Iran’s ban on female presidential candidates contradicts several articles of the country’s Constitution as well as international law and should be removed, Amnesty International said.

Mohammad Yazdi, a clerical member of Iran’s Council of Guardians, a constitutional body responsible for ensuring that legislation adheres to Iran’s Constitution, as interpreted by Iran’s religious scholars and Islamic law, and for vetting presidential candidates has announced that Iranian laws “do not allow women to become presidents”.

Thirty women have registered to stand as candidates for the forthcoming presidential election on 14 June 2013. Women were previously prevented from standing in presidential elections, but there was a chance that the Council could have overturned that situation this time.

The ban on women to run for presidency contradicts a number of articles of Iran’s Constitution, which say there should be equality for all citizens before the law and require respect for the rights of women. It is also in clear breach of Iran’s international human rights obligations.

The recent statement by a member of the Council also contradicts a previous statement made by Dr Abbas Ali Kadkhodaei, the Spokesman of the Council of Guardians, in 2009 when he said that there was “no legal restraint” on women standing for presidential elections.

“It is beyond belief that women are still being banned from trying to become presidents anywhere in the world,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director at Amnesty International.

“Iran should take a closer look at its own Constitution and the international treaties it has committed itself to uphold and ensure no one is prevented from taking part in the upcoming presidential election because of their gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or politically held beliefs.”

Article 115 of the Iranian Constitution, which is also reflected in the Law for the Presidential Elections, stipulates that candidates must be from amongst “religious and political personalities” [Persian: rejal].

It also states that a potential candidate should be of “Iranian origin; Iranian nationality; administrative capacity and resourcefulness” and have “a good past record; trustworthiness and piety; convinced belief in the fundamental principles of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the official religion of the country”.

The exclusion of women appears to have been made on an interpretation of the word rejal, used in the wording of Article 115, as meaning “men”.

In previous presidential elections, the majority of candidates registered were disqualified under the article’s criteria, including all women.

Despite discrimination against women in law and in practice, Iranian women have reached high level of education and play prominent roles in the society yet they remain almost completely absent from decision-making positions.

No woman has ever held a position in the Council of Guardians and the Expediency Council, a non-legislative body that resolves disputes between Iran’s parliament and the Council of Guardians.

The election is scheduled for 14 June 2013, with the approved list of candidates announced on Tuesday.

Turkish PM says no decision yet on further Iran oil import cuts

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Turkey's Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan addresses his supporters during a Mother's Day event organized by his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Istanbul May 12, 2013. REUTERS/Murad Sezer

Turkey’s Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan addresses his supporters during a Mother’s Day event organized by his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Istanbul May 12, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Murad Sezer

WASHINGTON | Fri May 17, 2013 1:50pm EDT

(Reuters) – Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said on Friday Turkey had already significantly reduced its oil imports from Iran, which is under the choke of Western sanctions, and further cutbacks would depend on his country’s energy needs.

“On crude oil, there has been a significant decrease in the amount of oil we import from Iran … As to whether we would cut back any further, it will depend on our need. Time will tell,” Erdogan said at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

Last year, Ankara effectively halved imports of Iranian oil after a European Union oil embargo against Iran came into full force on July 1, which also targeted the marine insurance sector, cutting off the usual avenues for tanker insurance.

Turkey was twice granted a waiver on Iranian oil by the United States for 180 days after it made initial cuts.

Turkish imports of Iranian crude were steady in April at around 100,000 barrels per day, data from a well-informed shipping agent in the region showed two weeks ago.

Before the introduction of stricter U.S. and EU sanctions against Iran last year, imposed over Tehran’s disputed nuclear program, Ankara’s purchases were averaging 180,000 bpd.

Turkey nonetheless remains one of the largest customers for Iranian oil together with Asian buyers such as China, India, South Korea and Japan.

(Reporting by Nick Tattersall; Editing by Doina Chiacu)

Iran’s Farhadi And China’s Jia Make Cannes Splash

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

NPR

by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CANNES, France (AP) — Two directors from countries with tough film censorship brought bold and probing movies to the Cannes Film Festival on Friday — one exploring China’s social problems, the other delving into the mysteries of the human heart.

Jia Zhangke’s “A Touch of Sin” depicts facets of fast-changing China the government prefers to avoid: corruption, greed, violent crime and the growing gap between economic winners and losers.

“The Past,” by Academy Award-winning Iranian director Asghar Farhadi, is an unsparing tale of domestic upheaval, set in and around Paris and made with a largely French cast.

Both films are competing for Cannes’ top prize, the Palme d’Or — and both have been cleared for release in their homelands, where filmmakers often fall foul of restrictions.

Iran’s Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance has approved “The Past” for screening, and “A Touch of Sin” is due to open in China in the fall.

The two directors are pleased their films will be seen at home, but they gave very different descriptions of working in settings where official censorship is an everyday reality.

“I’m someone who is deeply attached to my creative freedom, and I always do my utmost to ensure I don’t indulge in any form of self-censorship,” said Jia, who has explored China’s rapid transformation throughout his career — from early underground films such as “Unknown Pleasures” to documentaries to the Venice Film Festival prize-winning 2006 feature “Still Life.”

Farhadi, though, said the effect of censorship was more insidious.

“One can try to free oneself of the past, but the past doesn’t let you do that,” he said — both a theme of “The Past” and an observation of his own situation.

“There are two kinds of censorship,” he told reporters. “You have official censorship which works in a certain way. But there is also self-censorship. You impose it on your innermost self.”

Iran’s authorities have long had an uneasy relationship with the country’s filmmakers, and influential clerics have often denounced the domestic cinema as dominated by Western-tainted liberals and political dissenters. Some directors and actors have faced arrest or fled the country.

While Farhadi shot previous films including “A Separation” — the 2012 foreign-language Oscar winner — in Iran, “The Past” was made entirely outside the country. It follows an Iranian man (actor-director Ali Mosaffa), who returns to France to finalize a divorce from his ex (Berenice Bejo, from “The Artist”), but soon becomes entangled again with her, her children and her new love (“A Prophet” star Tahar Rahim).

The film premiered at Cannes on Friday and was hailed as the first Palme d’Or contender of the festival. Critics praised its meticulous and non-judgmental look at the messy effects of relationships and their breakdown, on adults and on children.

Farhadi admitted that he felt “more secure” shooting outside Iran, free of external restrictions — but not of his own inner guidelines. He said he tried to see these “not as an obstacle but as an asset” — part of his creative makeup as a director.

Like his previous work, “The Past” is emotionally revealing but not overtly political. The director said he was happy to keep working on an intimate canvas, exploring the dynamics of personal relationships.

“There is so much suffering and pain attached to a couple, but the suffering and pain is always unique,” he said. “I could spend my whole career exploring this theme without ever exhausting it.”

Farhadi said he doesn’t know what he will make next — or whether it will be in Iran.

“I won’t decide where it will take place,” he said. “It’s history that will decide for me.”

In contrast, “A Touch of Sin” feels strongly political. Made up of four linked episodes focusing on uprooted citizens of the new China, its story lines have been ripped from the headlines. There’s a villager driven to violence by official corruption; an amoral killer roaming the land; a factory worker driven to suicide.

Jia — whose film “24 City” played at Cannes in 2008 — said he became preoccupied by the increasingly frequent stories of violence he saw in the media, and wanted to dramatize the stories for Chinese moviegoers.

“In society people often hear about these violent events, but they quickly forget,” he said. “It’s not by turning your back on violence or hiding violence that you make progress.”

Jia said he didn’t think the topics he depicted “are particularly touchy or secretive in any way, because they were already covered in the Chinese press and on the Internet.”

But the director also was careful to stress — and the censors no doubt happy to hear — that the stories were timeless, not the product of modern politics, economics or technology.

“If these people were alive 100, 200, 300 years ago, at the time of the emperors, their motivation for acting like that would be exactly the same,” he said. “We live in the era of the Internet and high-speed trains, but have people changed?”

___

Jill Lawless can be reached at http://Twitter.com/JillLawless

Iran Wants More Money From You

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

fool.com

By Rich Smith
May 18, 2013

Americans spent more money on gasoline in 2012 than in any other year… ever. Meanwhile, here in 2013, retail gasoline prices spiked to $3.60 a gallon on average — $3.94 on the West Coast — the sharpest rise in prices seen in the past three months. And Iran is happy to hear it.

In fact, if the Islamic Republic has anything to say about it, Americans could wind up paying even more for gas than we already do. Right now, a barrel of benchmark crude costs about $95. But over the weekend, Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Ghasemi was quoted arguing that “the price of crude oil [should] remain at about $100.” Ghasemi thinks that price “is fair, and Iran supports it.”

Fair is in the eye of the beholder
Of course, that’s fine for him to say. After all, Iran gets about 80% of its revenue from selling oil abroad. Inside the country, however, motorists enjoy subsidized pricing on gasoline, which limits the cost for many motorists to as little as $1.25 per gallon.

So this is kind of an inside joke, what Ghasemi is telling — $100 is a fair price to pay… because most Iranians aren’t paying it. They’re paying the gasoline equivalent of closer to $33 oil.

Ha, ha
American consumers, on the other hand, aren’t laughing. Not with the cost of gasoline now consuming $4, on average, out of every $100 we spend on daily living — the highest percentage of our living expenses seen since 1983.

And yet, at the same time, Iran’s targeting a $100 price of oil does pose the country with a bit of a dilemma. Over in China, the engine that’s kept the oil price machine humming, demand for oil hit an eight-month low in April. And according to Economics 101, lower demand generally portends lower prices rather than higher.

Meanwhile, strong-ish retail sales numbers are lending strength to the U.S. dollar. And with most oil contracts still being denominated in dollars, a strong dollar tends to result in lower prices for crude.

OPEC — the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries — plans to meet in Vienna on May 31 to discuss how the cartel will respond to these dynamics. At present, most analysts expect OPEC to maintain a target production rate of 30 million barrels per day. However, if the idea is to raise prices in a scenario of sagging Chinese demand, and robust U.S. dollars, OPEC might well have to reduce its output in order to maintain pricing power.

Decisions, decisions
At least, that’s how these things have worked historically. You see, OPEC’s job, in a nutshell, is to keep prices high enough to maximize the profits of oil exporting countries — while at the same time not letting prices rise so high as to discourage demand for oil — and the development of alternatives.

Raise prices too much — or, what’s really the same thing, cut supply too much — and you just encourage companies like First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR  ) to develop cheaper and more efficient solar panels, and General Electric (NYSE: GE  ) to invest more in wind turbine production. In the long term, that’s a bad business idea for oil producers.

On the other hand, if you allow too much oil to be produced, prices fall, and OPEC members start leaving money on the table. So getting the oil price to $100 — and getting it to stick — isn’t as easy as it sounds.

He who fracks first, laughs last
Complicating matters for Iran, and for OPEC, is the revolution in “fracking” — drilling for oil and gas with the assistance of hydraulic fracturing technology — in the U.S. As companies fromChesapeake Energy (NYSE: CHK  ) to Sandridge (NYSE: SD  ) pioneer the practice, and move it into the mainstream, they’re doing their part to make the U.S. truly independent of oil price hikes by countries like Iran.

Indeed, in a recent report on energy trends over the next couple decades, British oil giant BP(NYSE: BP  ) basically came out and predicted that thanks to the efforts of the frackers, the U.S. will become “energy independent” by 2030.

Granted, so far this hasn’t been terrific news for the companies doing the heavy lifting. The high cost of getting this effort off the ground, coupled with a glut of natural gas that is being produced, has left both Chesapeake and Sandridge struggling to earn a profit.

But the situation’s at least as troublesome for Iran and its cohorts in OPEC. Sure, they can curtail oil production to try to put a floor under oil prices. But the only sure result of cutting oil production at OPEC is that OPEC will sell less oil, and probably collect less oil revenue. On the other hand, there’s no guarantee that a price hike will hurt us. And there’s no guarantee that new U.S. production won’t take up much of the slack for the rest of the world, either.

It almost begs the question: What if OPEC held a price hike party, and nobody (in the U.S.) came?

Muddled Israeli-US policies on Assad set stage for Golan offensive against Israel

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis May 18, 2013, 2:30 PM (IDT)

Fox News: Israeli commandos returning from Syria.

Fox News: Israeli commandos returning from Syria.

Four days after a “senior Israeli official” warned Assad through The New York Times of Wednesday, May 15 that he risks forfeiting power if he retaliates for Israeli attacks on weapons supplies to terrorists, “Israeli officials” were telling the London Times of Saturday, May 18 something quite different: “An intact, but weakened, Assad regime would be preferable,” they said. “Better the devil we know than the demons we can only imagine if… extremists from across the Arab world gain a foothold there.”

The night before this report, Fox News aired footage appearing to show Israeli commandos inside Syria racing back on foot to Israeli territory.
Without going into whether the two sets of “Israeli officials” were one and the same, their utterances are clearly making Israel’s policy-makers and defense leaders look muddled and uncertain – or, worse, unable to think clearly – about how to cope with the menace building up on the Syrian Golan. This could take the form of a Syrian war of attrition and/or a Hizballah offensive against Upper and Western Galilee.
At all events, the Syrian civil conflict appears poised ready to spill over to one or more of its neighbors, starting with Israel as a result of six factors:

1. President Barack Obama’s inability to make up his mind on whether the US should intervene militarily in Syria – even in a limited way, such as the imposition of no-fly zones or finding a way to supply non-Islamist Syrian rebel groups with sorely needed weapons.

2.  The US president’s refusal to recognize that chemical weapons have already been used in Syria. His reaction to the file put before him in the White House Friday, May 17, by Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan - with evidence from physicians treating wounded Syrians - remained dismissive. “The US has seen evidence of chemical weapons being used in Syria,” he said, adding however, “it is important to get more specific details about alleged chemical attacks.”
This comment was interpreted as the US president’s acceptance of the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian war so long as it was on a limited scale. Obama, like Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, has therefore waved away another red line for military intervention in the Syria conflict, by closing his eyes to the evidence.
Former Israeli defense minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer was more realistic last week when he brusquely brushed aside a radio interviewer’s query by saying: Of course, Assad has used chemical weapons and isn’t it obvious that he has already transferred to Hizballah both chemical substances and other advanced weapons?

3.  Following again in American footsteps, Israel failed to prevent Russia sending advanced S-300 anti-air and Yakhont anti-ship missiles to the Assad regime – both improved versions which were outfitted with sophisticated radar to improve their range and precision.
When Netanyahu was challenged with failing in this mission in his May 14 trip to buttonhole Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi, he said only that he would “travel wherever is needed and talk to whoever is needed to keep Israel safe and secure.”
This was the closest he came to admitting that he had fallen down on his efforts for keeping advanced Russian weaponry out of Syrian hands.

4. Strategic errors, which may turn out to be irreversible, because they emanated from faulty assessments shared by Israel and the Obama administration of the strengths on the Syrian battlefield. To this day, the US, Israel and Turkey cling to the belief that Assad’s days are numbered and refuse to recognize the steady advances made by the Syrian army in its counter-offensive for dislodging the rebels from land they captured in more than two years of combat.

5. This misreading of the Syrian ruler’s survivability is part and parcel of the omission by Obama, Netanyahu and Erdogan to appreciate and counter two major strategic changes overtaking the region:

a)  They stood aside as Moscow, Tehran and Hizballah deepened their military commitments to Assad’s fight for survival – starting with the arrival of Russian military personnel in Syria to man the sophisticated missiles supplied by Moscow until Syrian crews were instructed in their use.
They didn’t raise a finger to interfere with the almost daily Russian and Iranian air lifts to Syrian air bases of complete brigades of elite Hizballah fighters and thousands of Iranian Bassij militiamen who now control key war sectors.

Washington Jerusalem and even Jordan sat on their hands when 3,000 Iraqi members of the Asai’b al-Haq (League of the Righteous) and Kataib Hizballah poured across the border into Syria to support Assad’s war on the Syrian rebellion.

b)  Because they kept their distance from all these strategic game-changers in and around Syria, the US and Israel lost their chance to break up the Tehran-Damascus-Hizballah alliance. This objective the Obama administration once offered as his priority and the pretext for avoiding military action against a nuclear Iran.

What Washington achieved by its hands-off stance on Syria was the very opposite: Instead of weakening the triple alliance, Obama has allowed it to be bolstered by Russian and Iraqi increments.

It is no wonder, therefore, that Moscow, Tehran, Damascus and Hizballah are behaving like winners and gearing up for the next stage of the Syrian war, which, if Tehran and Hizballah have their way, will evolve into a war of attrition against Israel waged from the Syrian Golan.
The opening shot was fired Wednesday, May 15 by a Palestinian terrorist front under Syrian, Iranian and Hizballah tutelage, which shelled an Israeli military observation post on Mt. Hermon. This attack drew no direct Israeli response – par for the course.

6. A war of attrition against Israel from the Golan would not be a new experience either for Damascus or Moscow. In 1974, from March to May, Syrian forces, refusing to accept the defeat of their 1973 offensive against Israel, launched a harsh war of attrition from the same enclave, on the advice of their Soviet patron. In what became know as “the little war,” Syrian forces kept Israeli Golan under heavy shelling barrages and tried repeatedly to capture Mt Hermon.

The big secret of that short-lived conflict was the deployment by the Soviet Union of two Cuban armored brigades on the Golan front against Israel, airlifted in from Angola. All the same, Damascus was forced to accept a ceasefire on Golan which was observed from that day on until the present.
This time, the big difference is that Moscow can leave the heavy-lifting for a limited war on Israel to Tehran and Hizballah.

Hizballah’s Hassan Nasrallah in one of his fiery speeches expressed eagerness to make the Golan his new front for war on Israel. And Friday, May 17, it was reported in Tehran that Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had entrusted Al Qods Brigades commander Gen. Qassem Soleimani with the task of sending troops to the Golan to embark on hostilities against Israel.

Once they begin, it will be hard to stop the violence from spreading to Israel’s borders with Lebanon, from Syria into Turkey and from Jordan into Syria and Iraq.

The John Batchelor Show

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

The John Batchelor Show

 Reza Kahlili, author, A Time to Betray, in re:  Iran elections and American influence as Ahmadinejad reaches term limits.

May 17, 2013

Listen Here

U.S. Quiet On Iran Women President Bar

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Cleric Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, a member of the Guardian Council, said Iranian law prohibits women from being president.

Cleric Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, a member of the Guardian Council, said Iranian law prohibits women from being president.

May 18, 2013

RFE/RL

The United States has declined to take a firm stand after a member of Iran’s electoral overseer said women will be barred from standing in Iran’s June presidential election.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Washington would not comment on specific candidates. She also noted that Iranian authorities must approve all candidates.

The spokeswoman said that, broadly, the United States supports women participating in elections for public office.
Earlier, Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, a member of the Guardian Council, said Iranian law prohibits women from being president.

The Guardian Council approves all candidates for Iran’s presidency and parliament.

A total of 686 people, including some women, have registered to run to replace President Mahmud Ahmadinejad in the June 14 election.

The final list of approved candidates is expected to be announced early next week.

Based on reports from AP and AFP

Afghan parliament fails to pass divisive women’s law

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Saturday, 18 May 2013

Miriam Arghandiwal and Ibrahimi Aziz – Reuters

Religious members of Afghanistan’s parliament objected to at least eight articles in the legislation. (Photo Courtesy: AP)

Alarabiya

Afghanistan’s parliament failed to pass a law on Saturday banning violence against women, a severe blow to progress made in women’s rights in the conservative Muslim country since the Islamist Taliban was toppled over a decade ago.

President Hamid Karzai approved the law by decree in 2009 and parliament’s endorsement was required. But a rift between conservative and more secular members of the assembly resulted in debate being deferred to a later date.

Religious members objected to at least eight articles in the legislation, including keeping the legal age for women to marry at 16, the existence of shelters for domestic abuse victims and the halving of the number of wives permitted to two.

“Today, the parliamentarians who oppose women’s development, women’s rights and the success of women…made their voices loud and clear,” Fawzia Koofi, head of parliament’s women’s commission, told Reuters.

Women have won back the hard-fought right to education and work since the Taliban was toppled 12 years ago, but there are fears these freedoms could shrink once NATO-led forces leave Afghanistan by the end of next year.

Increasing insecurity is deterring some women from seeking work outside the home, and rights workers accuse the government of doing too little to protect women – allegations rejected by Karzai’s administration.

“2014 is coming, change is coming, and the future of women in this country is uncertain. A new president will come and if he doesn’t take women’s rights seriously he can change the decree,” Koofi said of the Elimination of Violence Against Women Law, which goes by the acronym EVAL.

The election for a new president is expected to be held in April 2014. The constitution bars Karzai from running again.

After almost two hours of clashes between Koofi and the more religious members of the 244-member parliament, speaker Abdul Rauf Ibrahimi said the assembly would consider the law again ata later date, but declined to say when.

Some members sought amendments, such as longer prison terms for crimes committed against women, such as beating and rape.

Many lawmakers, most of them male, cited violations of Islamic, or Sharia law.

“It is wrong that a woman and man cannot marry off their child until she is 16,” said Obaidullah Barekzai, a member from southeast Uruzgan province, where female literacy rates are among the lowest in the country.

An Afghan man must be at least 18 years old to marry.

Barekzai argued against all age limits for women, citing historical figure Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq, a close companion of the Prophet Mohammad, who married off his daughter at age seven.

At least eight other lawmakers, mostly from the Ulema Council, a government-appointed body of clerics, joined him in decrying the EVAL as un-Islamic.

Abdul Sattar Khawasi, member for Kapisa province, called women’s shelters “morally corrupt”. Justice Minister Habibullah Ghaleb last year dismissed them as houses of “prostitution and immorality”, provoking fierce condemnation from women’s groups.

‘Got an umbrella?’ Obama in media storm after rain incident

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Saturday, 18 May 2013

Al Arabiya -

Asking for Marines to shield him with an umbrella, Obama didn’t realize he would be cooking up a media storm. (Photo courtesy: AP)

When the rain began to pour on President Barack Obama during a joint conference with the Turkish premier earlier this week, the U.S. official made a pretty mundane request.

Asking for Marines to shield him and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan from the rain with a couple of umbrellas, Obama didn’t realize he would be cooking up a media storm.

“Apparently, Marines are prohibited from holding umbrellas while in dress uniform as it obstructs saluting,” Israel-based Ynet News reported on Friday.

The sudden downpour had prompted Obama during the conference, which was held in the White House’s Rose Garden, to ask for a little assistance.

“I am going to go ahead and ask folks, why don’t we get a couple of marines – they’re going to look good next to us,” Obama said. “I’ve got a change of suits, but I don’t know about our prime minister,” he added, referring to Erdogan.

The president, who is also the U.S. Armed Forces’ commander-in-chief, “was apparently unaware that his request was a breach of protocol,” Ynet reported as two Marines in full dress uniform hurried to his side holding umbrellas.

CNN contacted Marine Corps spokesman Captain Greg Wolf, who explained that it’s “extremely rare” to see marines in uniform holding umbrellas, as they’re usually not permitted to do so.

“Of course, Obama is the commander-in-chief. If he orders Marines to hold umbrellas, they hold them, even if they can’t properly salute,” the CNN’s Political Unit posted in a web blog on Friday.

But it was described as an “awkward moment” by some.

“Obama stood next to Erdogan in the Rose Garden, shielded from falling rain by a pair of umbrella-wielding Marines. It was an awkward moment for an awkward task: Announcing aunited front on Syria despite underlying differences over policy,” wrote U.S. columnist Keith Wagstaff.

Hezbollah exploits religion to intervene in Syria, says Shiite cleric

Saturday, May 18th, 2013

Saturday, 18 May 2013

Al Arabiya -

Ali Al-Amin, who was the former mufti of the city of Tyre and Mount Amil in southern Lebanon, criticized Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. (Al Arabiya)

Lebanese Shiite party Hezbollah is exploiting religion to pursue its political agendas in Syria, a high-ranking Lebanese Shiite cleric told Al Arabiya in an interview on Saturday.

Ali Al-Amin, who was the former mufti of the city of Tyre and Mount Amil in southern Lebanon, criticized Hezbollah’s Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah for urging Shiites to head to Syria to defend the holy shrine of Sayyida Zainab.

Sayyida Zainab was the Prophet Muhammad’s granddaughter and her golden-domed tomb is considered to be one of Shiite Islam’s holiest sites.

Defending the shrine is not a “legitimate justification” to intervene in Syria, Amin said, adding that Shiite jihad should be in the homeland and not in the conflict-ravaged neighboring country.

“Our jihad is in Lebanon and that is to build our country amid national unity.”

At least 80,000 people having been killed since the start of the two-year Syrian conflict that started as a protest against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime but morphed into a civil war.

The conflict has polarized Lebanon between supporters and proponents of Assad’s regime, especially between Sunni and Shiite Lebanese.

Reports have indicated that Hezbollah fighters were fighting alongside Syrian forces against rebels in Shiite villages near the Lebanese border.

Earlier this month, Nasrallah made a strong indication that his group was ready to get more substantially involved in the neighboring country when he said that Syria’s friends would not let the Syrian regime fall.

“Syria has true friends in the region who will not allow Syria to fall into the hands of the United States, Israel and ‘takfiri’ groups,” he said, referring to Sunni Muslims fighting to overthrow Assad.

Meanwhile, Salafists in Lebanon expressed anger over the international community’s inaction to support the Syrian people’s struggle against Assad regime.

The Lebanese Salafits’ tone sharpened when they called for jihad in Syria against Damascus.

Al-Amin slammed the Salafists’ call for jihad as “sectarian.”

Bad Behavior has blocked 2277 access attempts in the last 7 days.