Can US afford an assault on Iran?

The US-Iran standoff continues to evolve quickly, yet commentaries covering tanker attacks, a downed drone, and reversed orders for airstrikes from the White House fail to explain the logic behind an intervention, if the Trump administration decides to intervene. Therefore, it is worth exploring what a war between the two would actually look like.

Ideally, the US should have learnt some lessons from Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Distant foreign conflicts are difficult to win, which most of the Americans are usually unwilling to think unless faced with a massive and immediate threat. Small-scale engagements accomplish little and are instead more likely to evolve into larger conflicts. Installing foreign governments are more difficult, costly, time-consuming and even deadly than leaders are likely to claim.

Backing a local proxy is often unpalatable for the country’s sense of ethics, but US adversaries often have no such misgivings. Those proxies are often an ineffective substitute for a US military presence when it comes to pursuing the US agenda. Without a substantial, long-term commitment of US forces, such wars are more likely to leave a power vacuum when the US withdraws. The outcomes are collapsed government, invasion by a neighbor, revolution that creates new and uncertain structures – or some combination of all these. In fact, the US has had a few true victories in the wars it has fought since World War II.

Airstrikes

Exploring US government’s options in a war with Iran, the most probable option is limited strikes, similar in scale to or perhaps somewhat greater than the strikes on Syria that the Trump administration ordered on Syria in 2017 and 2018. But Iran is not Syria, as it has a sophisticated air defense infrastructure and plenty of air denial capability, increasing the chance of US casualties. Further, a limited air strike probably wouldn’t accomplish anything meaningful. It might take out a handful of radar and air defense installations, sending a political signal but affecting in no real way the strategic reality on the ground. The only time US air power alone has significantly shifted the reality on the ground was in Kosovo, but Iran today is far more powerful than Serbia in 1999.

On the contrary, limited strikes may have opposite outcome. Iran’s economy is hurting and its society appears more divided as citizens continue to grow frustrated with the government. The US has imposed sanctions as a strategy to hobble the economy enough to create social pressure on Tehran, forcing the government to spend less on its defenses and funding of militias in Syria and Iraq, so far, they’ve been effective. If the US continues this tactic, over time Iran’s domestic situation would worsen, and its citizens would be more likely to blame its leadership for their problems. And that would likely intensify the divisions within the government that are already emerging, resulting in either a more Western-friendly government or one dominated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Even limited US airstrikes would increase the probability of the IRGC consolidating power. If the sanctions can help create division, an attack would unite Iran’s hard-liners and reformers against the US. That unity would likely occur under the aegis of the hard-liners who have been warning all along that this day would come if Iran were foolish enough to trust the US. As the most powerful entity in the county, the IRGC would probably take over, and do so with popular support.

Use of Ground Force

Ground force is a less likely choice for the US, even with limited objectives (like eliminating specific military equipment or securing passage through the Strait of Hormuz). But it would be more likely to achieve what the US really wants, Iran to recall its foreign militias to defend the home. But when a military force is rapidly removed without a replacement ready to take its place, it creates a power vacuum and, therefore, an opportunity for others to fill the void. The pace at which Iran withdraws its militias from Syria and Iraq can alter the regional balance of power.

If any militant group occupies the space vacated by Iran, US would have to again deal with this problem, which would require reoccupying parts of Iraq while fighting Iran. This would likely entail support from Syrian and Iraqi Kurdish forces, which would again put pressure on US-Turkey relations. But the Syrian Kurds may not see a long-term alliance with the US as in its best interest after the US threatened to leave them high and dry in December 2018. They could instead seek out a political resolution with Damascus, backed by Russia that would protect them from Turkey. It is also likely that Russia may step in to back Kurdish groups such as the Syrian Democratic Forces to fight back. But that would mean the US would be depending on Russian assistance to cover its western flank, and in exchange for such cooperation Russia would likely demand US concessions in places like Ukraine. In short, going all-in with Iran would require either a large-scale US occupation or dependence on Russia in Syria and Iraq. Neither of those are appealing options for Washington.

Regime Change

If it is regime change that the US may attempt in Iran, the risks are even greater. The fallout would look much like that of the second Iraq war, but on a far greater scale. Installing a pro-American regime isn’t easy, but it can easily fail. The US would have to commit to an indefinite occupation of Iran or again risk the emergence of a power vacuum. The US would have to deal with the rest of the Middle East. In the best-case scenario, the US would install a new head of government while facing a lengthy insurgency, which would likely include the vestiges of the IRGC and its heavy weaponry. After a long, costly occupation, the US would have to withdraw, leaving Iran’s leaders to face opposition on their own. The half-life of US-installed leaders in the Middle East would not be long. Limited airstrikes or a full-scale invasion (military confrontation with Iran) would create more problems for the US rather than offering any sustainable solution.

Cyber attacks against Iran a failed US strategy

Lately, the United States launched cyber attacks against Iranian missile control systems and a spy network after Tehran downed an American surveillance drone. It is believed US president Donald Trump authorized the US Cyber Command to carry out a retaliatory attack on Iran, shortly after the US president pledged to hit the Islamic republic with major new sanctions. The US claimed crippling of computers used to control rocket and missile launches. However, it was not clear whether the attacks were effective or not. It was suggested the US media reports were a bluff meant to affect public opinion and regain the lost reputation for the White House following the downing of its drone. The US had undertaken similar attacks in the past.

It was first in July 2010 when the United States launched a serious cyber-attack against Iran. At the time, it was said that a virus named Stuxnet was used for damaging the computer systems that controlled Iranian nuclear industry. 

On 16^th January 2011, New York Times and many other media published news about how Stuxnet malicious computer worm was jointly built by US, the Zionist regime, United Kingdom and Germany. It revealed that President George W. Bush had initially granted permission for production of Stuxnet and then they started building the virus in cooperation with the Zionist regime. 

According to the official documents, Stuxnet was built jointly by US, Germany, UK and the Zionist regime, but Germany and UK may not have been aware what function the virus will have in future. George W. Bush issued the permission for building Stuxnet and Barack Obama gave permission for using it in 2009. 

According to western and Zionist news agencies, in 2009, Stuxnet mostly infiltrated the computers via software such as USB flash drives and internet and then the virus was transferred to every other computer that became connected to an infected computer. 

At the time, the emergence of this computer worm was all over the news. On 2^nd October 2010, India Times and Daily Telegraph published some news and revealed that the Zionist regime was involved in building this virus.
What is interesting in both their reports, is that they mentioned that Stuxnet used a file named “Myrtus” to infiltrate the computers. 

Myrtus is a word with Hebrew roots that refer to the story of Esther,  the second wife of Persian king Ahasuerus (commonly identified as Xerxes) in ancient Persia. She was a Jewish woman who was under the guardianship of her cousin, Mordecai who was an advisor to king Ahasuerus and convicned the king to marry her. According to these reports, Esther was somehow considered as the queen of world Jews and the Zionist regime was inspired by this historical character to name the malware to infiltrate Iran’s systems. 

After George W. Bush and Barak Obama, the plans for launching cyber-attacks against Iran were still at work in White House. Recently, western media, specially the American ones, announced that Donald Trump has issued the permit for attacking Iranian computer systems. 

It is claimed that the permission for beginning cyber-attacks was given on Thursday right after Trump, allegedly, called off his attack against Iran in retaliation for downing US invading drone just 10 minutes before it was to be launched. Two informed sources have told Associated Press that the cyber-attacks are been approved by Trump. 

It appears that President Trump has chosen a strategy against Iran that was also tried by Bush and Obama.  According to the reports published in New York Times, contrary to the intentions of US and the Zionist regime, Stuxnet was never able to carry out its mission completely, that was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear program, it only slowed down the process of Iran’s nuclear developments. 

It seems that Trump is running a test on Iran; and, now, instead of direct military war, he has chosen to launch cyber-attacks and offered negotiations without any precondition. Currently, Trump has three big projects at hand: the Deal of the Century, Iran and North Korea. 

In dealing with North Korea, Trump also first started with direct threats, to the point that many predicted an imminent war would start, but he suddenly offered to negotiate with North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un; though these negations have not yet come to any conclusion. 

White House has also devised the Deal of the Century project for the Middle East, but the Palestinians have not agreed to abide by it. Finally, Trump has also been unsuccessful in dealing with Iran. 

By abandoning the nuclear deal with Iran and imposing sanctions on Iran, Trump burned all the bridges between the two countries and now he is wondering if he can push Tehran into submission by trying out other strategies such as cyber-attacks and economic pressure.

Israel, United States and Russia meeting at Jerusalem to combat Iran

“Tehran should not view the US decision to hold back from launching a retaliatory military strike against Iran as a sign of weakness”, said US National Security Advisor John Bolton told reporters in Jerusalem lately. 

Bolton spoke after a historic trilateral meeting with his Russian and Israeli counterparts, Nikolai Patrushev and Meir Ben-Shabbat, about regional security. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu headed the Israeli delegations at the talks.

Bolton repeated twice to reporters that Iran "should not mistake restraint as a sign of weakness." Iran must halt its pursuit of nuclear weapons and “all options are on the table” until it does, Bolton told reporters.

“They should give up their pursuit of deliverable nuclear weapons. They should make that strategic step, they have not done it yet,” Bolton said.

Prior to the meeting, Bolton said, “US President Donald Trump has held the door open for real negotiations, to completely and verifiably eliminate Iran’s nuclear weapons program, it's pursuit of ballistic missile delivery systems, its support of international terrorism and its other maligning behavior worldwide.”
Bolton noted that other top US officials - Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and US envoy on Iran Brian Hook - were also in the region to discuss Iran with Arab leaders.
“As we speak, US diplomats are surging across the Middle East seeking a path to peace,” Bolton said. “In response Iran’s silence is deafening,” he added.
"Iran’s provocations, which also include threats to and acts upon American personnel and assets in the Middle East, are the external manifestations of the essential threat Iran poses, namely its continued pursuit of deliverable nuclear weapons,” Bolton said.
“There is simply no evidence that Iran has made the strategic decision to renounce nuclear weapons and open realistic discussion to demonstrate that decision,” he added.
“In just a few days - perhaps by the weekend - Iran has threatened to exceed the key limits possessed by the inadequate 2015 nuclear deal, exposing once again the fatal deficiencies of that failed agreement,” Bolton said.
“All around the Middle East, we see Iran as the source of belligerence and aggression,” he said, giving as examples its support of Hezbollah in Lebanon, its assistance to the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad, the arming of militia groups in Iraq, the weaponizing of the Houthis in Yemen, its support of terrorist activities against US forces in Afghanistan and its threat to oil supplies.
Bolton said that the trilateral meeting was taking place at a “particularly critical moment.” The US envoy also spoke glowingly of Netanyahu’s leadership and the role he plays in maintaining Israeli security.
The trilateral meeting, Bolton said to Netanyahu, “is a tribute to your leadership and a recognition of the central role that Israel does and must play in securing international peace and security.”
He added that, “through your strong relationships with both [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin and President Trump, there is a substantially greater prospect for coordination of our perspective policies in order to achieve a secure and lasting peace in the region.”
The trilateral talks will include discussions in particular on Iran’s military presence in Syria. Israel and Russia are at odds over that presence, with Israel pushing for Iran to be ousted from Syria. Moscow holds that Israeli security is important but believes that the Assad regime has a right to open its doors to Iran.

Patrushev pledged his support to the joint battle against terrorism, which his country is waging alongside Israel and the US, particularly against ISIS.
“It is extremely important to guarantee Israel’s security,” he said, recalling that there are two million Russians living in Israel.
But he said that it is also important to respect other regional powers, hinting at Iran and noting that, “if we ignore them, we won’t achieve results.”
Russia is opposed to Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and Patrushev hinted at that opposition in his remarks. “There should be a peaceful, prosperous and sovereign Syria,” he said.
Netanyahu said the trilateral meeting showed that there was “a wider basis for cooperation between the three of us than many believe. This summit represents a real opportunity to help advance that stability in our region, particularly in Syria.”
“Israel has acted hundreds of times to prevent Iran from entrenching itself militarily in Syria,” Netanyahu said, adding that, “Israel will continue to prevent Iran from using neighboring territory as platforms to attack us and Israel will respond forcibly to any such attacks,” he said.
Netanyahu thanked Russia for working out a deconfliction mechanism with Israel, which allows it to operate in Syria without the risk of harming Russian forces in Syria.
“All three of us [Israel, Russia and the US] would like to see a peaceful, stable and secure Syria,” Netanyahu said.
“We also have a common objective to achieve that goal... that no foreign forces that arrived in Syria after 2011 remain in Syria,” Netanyahu said. He counts Iran as one of those foreign forces. Russia believes that Iran is not included in that list, because it is there at the request of the Assad regime.
“We think there are ways to achieve that common goal. I believe the outcome that I have just described - the departure of all foreign forces from Syria, who entered after 2011 - will be good for Russia, good for the US, good for Israel and good for Syria,” Netanyahu said.
Ben-Shabbat stood behind Netanyahu, saying that regional stability could not be obtained without stopping Iran.

Trump acts touching insanity

People may say, “you are nobody to comment on the acts of Donald Trump, President of United States, the sole surviving super power”. However, I am forced to say that most of his acts seem to be touching ‘insanity’, be it imposition of tariffs on goods of Chinese origin or the latest, sanctions on Iranian supreme leader and other top officials.

The mainstream media has written a lot on ongoing Sino-US trade war, purely from economic perspective. However, when it comes to Iran-US animosity, western media becomes ‘dishonest’ and tows US lines blindly.

According to a Reuters report, “US President Donald Trump has targeted Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other top Iranian officials with sanctions, taking a dramatic and unprecedented step to increase pressure on Iran after Tehran’s downing of an unmanned American drone. This, according to US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin would lock billions of dollars more in Iranian assets.

John Smith, who was director of the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) before joining a law firm last year, said the United States had never targeted an Iranian head of state before and that was a sign Trump was getting personal. “Generally, when you target a head of state you’re not turning back. That is when you believe all options are at an end,” Smith said.

On Monday, UN Security Council met behind closed doors at the request of the United States and its acting ambassador Jonathan Cohen said evidence showed Iran was to blame for attacks on commercial tankers in the Gulf in May and June and urged the world to tell Tehran its actions were unacceptable.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also travelled on Monday to meet with Saudi leaders to build what he called a “global coalition” against the Islamic republic. Pompeo met Saudi King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Jeddah.

Although, Trump backed away from a bombing strike in retaliation for last week’s drone downing, US media reports said a US cyber attack took place against Iranian missile control systems and a spy network. However, Iranian Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi said no cyber attack against his country had ever succeeded.

Trump has repeatedly said he does not favour war with Iran unless it is to stop the country getting a nuclear weapon — something Iranian leaders insist they are not pursuing.

But Trump critics say his policy of "maximum pressure" — including crippling economic sanctions, abandonment of an international deal to regulate Iran's nuclear activities, and deployment of extra troops to the region — make war ever more likely.

A key Republican ally of Trump, Senator Lindsey Graham, said the president's "options are running out".

Asked if he believed the countries were nearing conflict, he replied: "I think anybody would believe that we're one step closer."

One of Trump's biggest opponents, the Democratic speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, warned that "there's no appetite for wanting to go to war in our country".

Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has close relations with Iran's leadership, said US military retaliation "would be a disaster for the region".

In a televised address, President Hassan Rouhani said sanctions against Khamenei would have no practical impact because the cleric had no assets abroad.

Rouhani, a pragmatist who won two elections on promises to open Iran up to the world, described the U.S. moves as desperate and called the White House “mentally retarded” - an insult Iranian officials have used in the past about Trump but a departure from Rouhani’s own comparatively measured tone.

Rouhani and his cabinet run Iran’s day-to-day affairs, while Khamenei, in power since 1989, is Iran’s ultimate authority.

“The White House actions mean it is mentally retarded,” Rouhani said. “Tehran’s strategic patience does not mean we have fear.”

As world faces Armageddon, west seems leaderless

According to some news reports, the moronic warmongers in high office—Bolton, Pompeo, and Pence, and their Israel Lobby masters are determined, and they have not abandoned their campaign for war with Iran.  They believe Iran will just accept punishment for defending its territory and there will be no war, but this is not what Iran says.

A tiny percentage of people in the Western World, still believe that the consequences would have been the destruction of the Saudi and Israeli government and the cut-off of oil to the US and Europe, with the resulting depression causing the overthrow of the western warmonger governments.  They believe that catastrophic American defeat is the only way peace can be restored to the world.  

It is not clear whether Trump calling off the attack saved us or doomed us.  The Israel Lobby and their neoconservative agents have not been taught a lesson.  Trump has not fired Bolton and Pompeo for almost igniting a conflagration, and he has not dressed down his moronic vice president, it can all happen again.  

The lesson that Bolton and Israel have learned is that the fake news about an Iranian attack on a Japanese freighter, denied by the Japanese, was not sufficient to lock Trump into “saving face” by attacking Iran.  Be prepared for a larger orchestrated provocation. Bolton and Israel know that  ‘Dishonest Western Media, will lie for them.

Washington’s use of fake news and false flag attacks to launch military attacks goes back a long way.  In the 21st century we have had a concentrated dose—Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Assad’s use of chemical weapons, Iranian nukes, Russian invasions, Maduro starving his own people, the endless lies about Gaddafi, and the list can continue

Washington has grown accustomed to attacking countries on false pretenses and getting away with it.  Therefore, there is nothing to discourage the Israel Lobby and its Washington puppets from continuing to set-up Iran for an attack.  Success breeds incaution.  The attack on Iraq was managed by a credible US Secretary of State before the UN.  The attack on Libya was paved by a UN resolution that Russia and China failed to block. This time, Washington has failed in seeking a green light for the attack on Iran. Moreover, Iran is a more powerful military force than Iraq and Libya, and the extent of the depth of Russian and Chinese support for Iran is fully known to Washington.

If Israel succeeds in having its Washington puppet attack Iran, Israel and its neoconservative agents will not welcome failure of their objective.  They will fight against failure with more dangerous moves.  One can easily imagine the fanatics having Trump “save face” by destroying the world and issuing some kind of ultimatums to Russia and China or resorting to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.  

The people are kept unaware of the plan control the explanations given to the people. The US Congress is bought and paid for by the Israel Lobby, as are most important politicians in the UK and Europe. It is very easy for fanatics to produce Armageddon.

Those surviving the 20th century Cold War have reported on numerous occasions that the threat of nuclear war today is far higher than during the Cold War Era. During the Cold War US and Soviet leaders worked to defuse tensions and to build trust.  In contrast, since the Clinton regime the US has worked consistently to build tensions. One can compile a list of occasions when the tension-building activities were pursued by the then governments

The Russians no longer trust Washington, and neither do the Chinese.  Washington has lied to, and about, Russia so often in the 21st century that Russian trust of Washington is exhausted.  No matter how earnestly the Russian government wants to trust Washington, it dare not do so.

Therefore, it takes very little miscalculation for the morons in Washington to cause a threat-ending response from Russia as Washington has convinced the Russian government that the US intends to destroy them.  

President Trump has been forced to adopt the neoconservative attitude toward Russia and other “non-compliant” governments. It is extremely dangerous after trust has been destroyed by years of lies and false accusations. People must accept the fact, “As the world faces Armageddon the Western World is leaderless”.

Threats to maritime trade beginning to come true

A few weeks ago I wrote an article ‘Brewing turmoil in Pakistan’s backyard’ and the concluding remarks were, “The fact remains that none of the country (United States or Iran) wants to get the blame for initiating a conflict, but it doesn’t mean that the threat of eminent war is not there. There is a fear that miscalculation or misunderstanding can trigger confrontation and an outbreak of war. As the US expands its military presence in the region, the risk of beginning an accidental war rises further.”

The apprehension came true last Thursday when two oil tankers were attacked and left adrift in the Gulf of Oman. Washington was prompt in accusing Tehran of being behind a similar incident on May 12 when four tankers were attacked in the same area, a vital oil shipping route. Russia was quick to urge caution, saying no one should rush to conclusions about Thursday’s incident or use it to put pressure on Tehran, which has denied the US accusations. There were no immediate statements apportioning blame after Thursday’s incidents, nor any claims of responsibility.

The blasts detonated far from the bustling megacities of Asia, but the attacks on two tankers in the strategic Strait of Hormuz hits at the heart of the region's oil import-dependent economies. While the violence only directly jolted two countries in the region one of the targeted ships was operated by a Tokyo-based company, a nearby South Korean-operated vessel helped rescue sailors it will unnerve major economies throughout Asia.

Subsequently, officials, analysts and media commentators highlighted the importance of the Strait of Hormuz for Asia, calling it a crucial lifeline. There was deep interest in more details about the still-sketchy attack and what the United States and Iran would do in the aftermath. Whether Asia shrugs it off, as some analysts predict, or its economies shudder as a result, the attack highlights the widespread worries over an extreme reliance on a single strip of water for the oil that fuels much of the region's shared progress.

Japan, South Korea and China don't have enough oil, but the Middle East does, and much of it flows through the narrow Strait of Hormuz. This makes Asia vulnerable to supply disruptions from US-Iran tensions or violence in the strait. The attack came months after Iran threatened to shut down the strait to retaliate against US economic sanctions, which tightened in April when the Trump administration decided to end sanctions exemptions for the five biggest importers of Iranian oil, which included China and US allies South Korea and Japan.

Japan is the world's fourth-largest consumer of oil after the United States, China and India and relies on the Middle East for 80 per cent of its crude oil supply. The 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led to a dramatic reduction in Japanese nuclear power generation and increased imports of natural gas, crude oil, fuel oil and coal. In an effort to comply with Washington, Japan says it no longer imports oil from Iran. Officials also say Japanese oil companies are abiding by the embargo because they don't want to be sanctioned. But Japan still gets oil from other Middle East nations using the Strait of Hormuz for transport.

South Korea, the world's fifth largest importer of crude oil, also depends on the Middle East for the vast majority of its supplies. Last month, South Korea halted its Iranian oil imports as its waivers from US sanctions on Teheran expired, and it has reportedly tried to increase oil imports from other countries such as Qatar and the United States.

China, the world's largest importer of Iranian oil, understands its growth model is vulnerable to a lack of energy sovereignty and has been working over the last several years to diversify its suppliers. That includes looking to Southeast Asia and, increasingly, some oil-producing nations in Africa.

Asia and the Middle East are linked by a flow of oil, much of it coming by sea and dependent on the Strait of Hormuz, which is the passage between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. Iran threatened to close the strait in April. For both Japan and South Korea, there is extreme political unease to go along with the economic worries stirred by the violence in the strait. Both nations want to nurture their relationship with Washington, a major trading partner and military protector. But they also need to keep their economies humming, which requires an easing of tension between Washington and Tehran.

Japan's conservative Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, was in Tehran, looking to do just that, when the attack happened. His limitations in settling the simmering animosity were highlighted by both the timing of the attack and a comment by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who told Abe that he had nothing to say to Trump.

In Japan, the world's third largest economy, the tanker attack was front-page news. The Nikkei newspaper, Japan's major business daily, said that if mines are planted in the Strait of Hormuz, “oil trade will be paralyzed.” The Tokyo Shimbun newspaper called the Strait of Hormuz Japan's “lifeline.”

Analysts believe it's highly unlikely that Iran would follow through on its threat to close the strait. That's because a closure could also disrupt Iran's exports to China, which has been working with Russia to build pipelines and other infrastructure that would transport oil and gas into China.

Is turmoil in Persian Gulf aimed at containing Beijing’s access to energy resources of the region?

Though, I often reject conspiracy theories, but at time I also tend to pay attention to these, which provide me an opportunity to get a better perspective. One such theory demands little probe, is United States creating turmoil in Persian Gulf region to contain China’s access to energy resources of the region?

Since commencement of economic growth in 1993, China has become heavily dependent on imported oil from other countries. At present, it is the second largest energy consuming and the third largest oil importing country in the world. Despite Beijing’s efforts to ensure its energy security by diversifying its energy sources during the past years, the country is still heavily dependent on energy import from the Arabian Peninsula.

China has left its rivals far behind and became the second biggest economy of the world after the US. It seems that due Beijing is likely to leave behind the US in near future and become the world’s biggest economy. The White House has kept an eye on China’s development, its plans and initiatives and never been negligent in monitoring its ambitions and achievements.

Ever since Donald Trump, became President, conflicts between China and the sole surviving super power have widened from economic and trade to political and security conflicts. Now, the increase in Chinese power and global influence has become a major challenge for the White House. As a first step, Trump initiated trade and economic war against Beijing and in the next stage Trump wants to restrict China’s influence globally, particularly among the US allies.

To contain China, the US has resorted to many strategies and tactics such as destabilizing west borders of China with Afghanistan and Pakistan and trying to spread to central Asia aiming at thwarting Chinese ‘One road-One belt’ initiative that many experts believe will enable China to determine the word trade orders in the future.   

China imports crude oil from the following countries:

• Russia: US$37.9 billion (15.8%)
• Saudi Arabia: $29.7 billion (12.4%)
• Angola: $24.9 billion (10.4%)
• Iraq: $22.4 billion (9.4%)
• Oman: $17.3 billion (7.2%)
• Brazil: $16.2 billion (6.8%)
• Iran: $15 billion (6.3%)
• Kuwait: $11.9 billion (5%)
• Venezuela: $7 billion (2.9%)
• United States: $6.8 billion (2.8%)
• United Arab Emirates: $6.7 billion (2.8%)
• Congo: $6.4 billion (2.7%)
• Colombia: $5 billion (2.1%)
• Malaysia: $4.8 billion (2%)
• Libya: $4.7 billion (2%)

Crude oil is the driving engine of Chinese economy and any threats to energy security will inflict a heavy blow to the country’s economic growth. The statistics show that some 43% of the crude oil imported by China passes through the Persian Gulf. Another 4.6% goes from Libya and Venezuela, the US destructive polices have already created a chaotic situation in these two countries.

Many experts believe that the US withdrawal from Iran’s nuclear deal not only aims at pressurizing Iran, but also to pressurize China to compromise in the trade war that Washington has waged against it. Any conflict or tension in the Persian Gulf region means a great blow to China’s economy. Therefore, many suspicious incidents and tensions created by Washington and its proxies in Persian Gulf can be termed as the White House measures to contain China in order to guarantee the US hegemony.

With its provocative actions and sanctions, Washington not only aims to buttress its support for Israel and its Arab allies by punishing Iran, but also intends to deny Chinese access to Iranian oil.  The fear of and rivalry with China is today one of the primary drivers of American foreign policy.  Interruption of the oil flow in the Gulf is one way to directly hurt Chinese interests.  The Trump administration is, therefore, playing with fire in Iran and a potential conflagration with China.

The rising tensions between the US and Iran are mainly caused by Tehran’s policy and Washington’s intolerance. Iran's resistance to the US pressure is in fact shaping an equation in which the Islamic Republic indirectly contributes to the interests of China and even Europe. In a long-term strategic perspective, the dangers of insecurity in the Persian Gulf region, and the proximity of Europe and China to the region, heighten the need for greater coordination between Iran, China and Europe in countering the US hegemony.

There also seems a close relation between US created tensions in the Persian Gulf and containment of China, as Washington wants to exclude China from the region. Therefore, containing Iran is of crucial importance as China buys its oil. Therefore, China is likely to revisit its policy of balancing Iran and the US. Beijing may respect the latest sanctions on Iran, but resist any possibility of the US military attack on Iran. In my opinion the issue is not about Iran, but about China. I am convinced that the efforts are aimed at exploiting serendipitous opportunity.

Iran shoots down intruding US spy drone

In a statement issued early Thursday, the IRGC said the US-made Global Hawk surveillance drone was brought down by its Air Force near Kouh-e Mobarak region, after the aircraft violated Iranian airspace. The downing came after repeated violations of Iran’s airspace by US reconnaissance drones in the Persian Gulf region.

Reacting to the news, the US military claimed it did not fly over Iranian airspace on Wednesday. “No US aircraft were operating in Iranian airspace today,” said Navy Captain Bill Urban, a spokesman for the American military’s Central Command.

However, according to Associated Press an American military drone had been shot down in “international airspace” over the Strait of Hormuz by an Iranian surface-to-air missile. The drone was a US Navy MQ-4C Triton, which builds on elements of the RQ-4 Global Hawk with minor changes.

The RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aircraft system (UAS) can fly at high altitudes for more than 30 hours, gathering near-real-time, high-resolution imagery of large areas of land in all types of weather. The Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton is a maritime derivative of the RQ-4B Global Hawk and the airborne element of the US Navy’s Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Unmanned Aircraft System.

 Interestingly no MQ-4C is supposed to be in the Middle East. The deployment must have been secret. Update: This specific drone seems to have arrived in Qatar only a few days ago.

The incident is another piece of evidence that Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran now works against him.

In December last year, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta had told Fox News that the US will "absolutely" continue the drone campaign over Iran, looking for evidence of any nuclear weapons work. But the stakes are higher for such surveillance, now that Iran can apparently disrupt the work of US drones.

During an appearance with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Trump said, “Probably Iran made a mistake – I would imagine it was a general or somebody that made a mistake in shooting that drone down.”
According to officials in Jerusalem, Israel is closely monitoring the situation, although the IDF has not moved to a heightened alert status. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the issue briefly in a statement, saying, “In the last 24 hours Iran has intensified its aggression against the US and against all of us. And I repeat my call for all peace-loving countries to stand by the US in its effort to stop Iranian aggression. Israel stands by the US on this.”

Netanyahu’s comments were similar to what he said lately, following last week’s attacks on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman. He had urged all peace-seeking nations to support the US and Trump in their efforts to ensure freedom of navigation in international waterways.

US State Department announcement of ending war in Afghanistan is yet another big lie

Lately, the US Department announced, “The top US priority in South Asia is to end the war in Afghanistan through a sustainable political settlement.” It informed the Congress that any political settlement must also ensure Afghanistan’ never again serves as a haven for terrorist attacks against the United States or its interests.”

Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, a US diplomat of Afghan origin who is negotiating a political settlement with the Taliban, said that the US-backed peace plan could be “A springboard for regional connectivity, development, and economic integration.”

Earlier, the State Department and the Afghan government agreed to focus US assistance on America’s highest priority, “Furthering the peace process, ensuring Afghanistan does not serve as a terrorist safe haven, promoting Afghan self-reliance, and maintaining Afghan stability.”

I have no option but to term the statement of US Department a lie on the following grounds:

1) Afghans Taliban had neither played any role, whatsoever in 9/11, nor do they have the capacity to hit US interests or its allies. Taliban were used by the US to repel USSR attack on Afghanistan, which they did successfully.

2)  The US had announced to pull its troops from Afghanistan in 2014, which were not. It seems US is adamant at keeping its troops in Afghanistan because of ‘other reasons’. Over the years the US had failed in bringing peace and ushering development in the country, as it was never an objective.

3) One of the conspiracy theories is that the division of Taliban into good and bad is based on the support for or resistance against cultivation of poppy in Afghanistan. It seems that those resisting cultivation of poppy in Afghanistan and demanding withdrawal of US troops have been termed ‘Bad Taliban’.

4) The persistent stay of US troops in not for the development of Afghanistan but for the protection of drug trade, which allows CIA to make billions of dollars every year and use it on proxy wars in South Asia, Middle East and North Africa.

5)  After the recent hype in US-Iran confrontation, it seems more probable that US will increase its troops in Afghanistan and use them in the assault against Iran.

Therefore, all the favors the US intent to offers to Afghans are nothing but cover up, these include: 

1)       US working with the Afghan government to define the parameters of a sustainable, long-term partnership, a shift from military to civilian assistance.

2)       State Department’s 2020 budget seeking resources to help Afghanistan to maintain and expand the gains it has made over the last 18 years.

3)       Earlier, the World Bank held a donors meeting in Kabul on to arrive at and cement a peace agreement that allowed increasing economic well being and prosperity.

4)       Promoting self-reliance by developing internal resources, attracting investments, and reducing security costs.

Seven Reasons one should not trust US narrative on Gulf of Oman Incident

One should have not been surprised the way US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed Iran for the damage done to two vessels in the Gulf of Oman recently, without offering any credible evidence.

Pompeo told the press in a statement, “This assessment is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the resources and proficiency to act with such a high-degree of sophistication,”.

Pompeo concluded, “The US will defend its forces, interests, and stand with our partners and allies to safeguard global commerce and regional stability. And we call upon all nations threatened by Iran’s provocative acts to join us in that endeavor.” Following are the seven reasons to reject whatever Secretary has said:

1) Pompeo is a known liar, especially when it comes to Iran.

The entire world knows that Pompeo has a well-established history of circulating blatant lies about Iran. He recently told an audience at Texas A&M University that when he was leading the CIA, “We lied, we cheated and we stole. We had entire training courses.”

2) The US administration is known to use lies and false flags to start wars.

The US centralized power alliance has an extensive and well-documented history of advancing preexisting military agendas using lies, false flags and psyops to make targeted governments appear to be the aggressors. This is such a well-established pattern that “Gulf of Tonkin” briefly trended on Twitter after the Gulf of Oman incident. Any number of government agencies could have been involved from any number of the nations in this alliance, including the US, the UK, Saudi Arabia, UAE or Israel.

3) John Bolton has openly endorsed lying to advance military agendas.

The Trump administration had already begun rapidly escalating against Iran in ways that happen to align perfectly with the longtime agendas of Trump’s psychopathic Iran hawk National security adviser. At that time people were so aware of the possibility that Bolton might involve himself in staging yet another Middle Eastern war based on lies.

4) Using false flags to start a war with Iran is already an established idea in the DC swamp.

Back in 2012 at a forum for the Washington Institute of Near East Policy think tank, the group’s Director of Research Patrick Clawson openly talked about the possibility of using a false flag to provoke a war with Iran, citing the various ways the US has done exactly that with its previous wars.

5) The US State Department has already been running psyops to manipulate the public Iran narrative.

Lately, State Department officials admitted to congressional staff at a closed-door meeting that a US$1.5 million troll farm had gone “beyond the scope of its mandate” by aggressively smearing American critics of the Trump administration’s Iran policy as propagandists for the Iranian government, according to a new report from The Independent. That “mandate” had reportedly consisted of “countering propaganda from Iran,” also known as conducting anti-Iran propaganda.

6) The Gulf of Oman narrative makes no sense.

One of the ships damaged in the attacks was Japanese-owned, and the other was bound for Japan. This happened just as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was in Tehran attempting to negotiate de-escalation between the US and Iran with Trump’s blessing, and just after Iran had released a prisoner accused of conducting espionage for the US in what many took to be a gesture of good faith.

Iran has been conducting itself with remarkable restraint in the face of relentless sanctions and provocations from the US and its allies. It wouldn’t make much sense for it to suddenly abandon that restraint with attacks on sea vessels, then rescue their crew, then deny perpetrating the attacks, during a time of diplomatic exchanges and while trying to preserve the nuclear deal with Europe. If Tehran did perpetrate the attacks in order to send a strong message to the Americans, it would have been a very mixed message sent in a very weird way with very odd timing.

7) Even if Iran did perpetrate the attack, Pompeo would still be lying.

Pompeo’s statement uses the words “unprovoked” twice and “Iran’s provocative acts” once, explicitly claiming that the US empire was just minding its own business leaving Iran alone when it was attacked out of the blue by a violent aggressor. Sometimes the things put out by the US. State Department feel like they’re conducting experiments on us, just to test the limits of our stupidity

The US has been provoking Iran with extremely aggressive and steadily tightening sanctions, which means that even if Tehran is behind the attacks, it would not be the aggressor and the attacks would most certainly not have been “unprovoked.” Economic sanctions are an act of war; if China were to do to America’s economy what America is doing to Iran’s, the US would be in a hot war with China immediately. It could technically be possible that Iran is pushing back on US aggressions and provocations, albeit in a strange and neo-conservatively convenient fashion.

Either way, we have seen no evidence supporting Pompeo’s claims, so anyone hastening to blame Iran for the Gulf of Oman incident is either a war whore or a slobbering moron, or both. Knowing what we know about the US-centralized empire and its pre-existing regime change agenda against Iran, there is no reason to believe Pompeo and many reasons not to.

Strait of Hormuz: Most important oil artery of the world

Three weeks ago I wrote an article ‘Brewing turmoil in Pakistan’s backyard’ and the concluding remarks were, “The fact remains that none of the country (United States or Iran) wants to get the blame for initiating a conflict, but it doesn’t mean that the threat of eminent war is not there. There is a fear that miscalculation or misunderstanding can trigger confrontation and an outbreak of war. As the US expands its military presence in the region, the risk of beginning an accidental war rises further.”

The apprehension came true last Thursday when two oil tankers were attacked and left adrift in the Gulf of Oman. Washington was prompt in accusing Tehran of being behind a similar incident on 12^th May when four tankers were attacked in the same area, a vital oil shipping route. Russia was quick to urge caution, saying no one should rush to conclusions about Thursday’s incident or use it to put pressure on Tehran, which has denied the US accusations. There were no immediate statements apportioning blame after Thursday’s incidents, nor any claims of responsibility.

WHERE IS STRAIT OF HORMUZ LOCATED?

The strait lies between Oman and Iran, It links the Gulf north of it with the Gulf of Oman to the south and the Arabian Sea beyond. It is 21 miles (33 km) wide at its narrowest point, with the shipping lane just two miles (three km) wide in either direction. The UAE and Saudi Arabia have sought to find other routes to bypass the Strait, including building more oil pipelines.

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

Almost a fifth of the world’s oil passes through the Strait - some 17.4 million barrels per day (bpd) versus consumption of about 100 million bpd in 2018. OPEC members Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UAE, Kuwait and Iraq export most of their crude via the Strait. Qatar, the world’s biggest liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporter, sends almost all of its LNG through the Strait.

CURRENT POLITICAL TENSION

The US has imposed sanctions on Iran aimed at halting its oil exports. Iran has threatened to disrupt oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz if the US tries to strangle its economy. The US Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, is tasked with protecting commercial shipping in the area.

MAJOR PAST INCIDENTS

During the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war, the two sides sought to disrupt each other’s oil exports in what was known as the Tanker War.

In July 1988, the US warship Vincennes shot down an Iranian airliner, killing all 290 aboard, in what Washington said was an accident and Tehran said was a deliberate attack.

In early 2008, the US said Iranian vessels threatened three of its Navy ships in the Strait.

In July 2010, Japanese oil tanker M Star was attacked in the Strait by a militant group called Abdullah Azzam Brigades linked to al Qaeda claiming responsibility.

In January 2012, Iran threatened to block the Strait in retaliation for US and European sanctions that targeted its oil revenue in an attempt to stop Tehran’s nuclear program.

In May 2015, Iranian ships seized a container ship in the Strait and fired shots at a Singapore-flagged tanker which it said damaged an Iranian oil platform.

In July 2018, President Hassan Rouhani hinted Iran could disrupt oil trade through the Strait in response to US calls to reduce Iran’s oil exports to zero.

In May 2019, four vessels - including two Saudi oil tankers - were attacked off the UAE coast near Fujairah, one of the world’s largest bunkering hubs, just outside the Strait of Hormuz.

Europe might give up on saving JCPOA

Iran’s former ambassador to Norway has warned that Europe might give up on saving the 2015 nuclear pact and the financial mechanism of Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX), which was established to do business with Iran.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas was in Tehran for talks on ways to keep the nuclear deal, officially called the JCPOA in English or Barjam in Persian, alive. 

“It is possible that Europe would no more attach any significance to [saving] Barjam,” Mehr on Monday quoted Abdolreza Faraji-Rad as saying.

Faraji-Rad expressed doubt about the future of Iran-Europe relations, especially due to the growth of far-right groups in European countries manifested in the latest European Parliament elections.

He further said the person who will succeed European Union Foreign Policy Chief Federica Mogherini might not share her insistence on cooperating with Iran and salvaging the JCPOA.

Also the person who will succeed British Prime Minister Theresa May can be more of a hardliner compared to May, which could create a gap within Europe, Faraji-Rad remarked.

“This could mean that Europe might no longer place any importance to Barjam,” he said, underlining that such facts must be taken into careful consideration.

The JCPOA was signed between Iran and six international mediators (the United Kingdom, Germany, China, Russia, the United States, and France) in July 2015. Under the deal, Iran undertook to curb its nuclear activities in exchange for termination of the sanctions imposed previously by the United Nations Security Council, the European Union and the United States over its nuclear program.

On May 8, 2018, the United States unilaterally withdrew from the deal despite worldwide objections and followed the move with a “maximum pressure” policy against the Islamic Republic.

Likely facets of forthcoming Bangladesh Budget

Finance Minister of Bangladesh, Mustafa Kamal is scheduled to announce the budget for financial year 2019-20 in parliament on 13^th June 2019, a few days after the announcement of Pakistan's Budget for the next financial. I have just picked up news from a leading Bangladesh newspaper, which may give Pakistanis a chance to see what is being done there. 

Aiming to invigorate the promising export sector, an ailing stock market and cooling property markets, the upcoming budget is likely to announce a number of incentives to rekindle the business and investment environment, said sources involved in preparing this year’s national budget for parliamentary approval.

The incentives include enhanced subsidies, tax cuts and fiscal stimulus to take the economy to an 8.5% growth rate in financial year 2019-20.

Realtors and land developers have long been demanding a reduction of registration fees, including the Value Added Tax (VAT) and other taxes on the sale and transfer of property, like apartments or land, so as to stimulate the slowing real estate market. According to sources, the upcoming budget is likely to almost halve the current aforementioned costs.

Currently, total fees for flat registration are 14% to 16%, and 17% for land registration. The fee is imposed on the deed value of property.

A budgetary measure is also likely to be announced for the first time for the resale of existing (not new) flats.

National Board of Revenue (NBR) officials think a secondary property market boom would stimulate the economy further if registration fees for used flats were rationalized.

Presently, registration costs remain the same for both new and used flats.

The proposed budget is set to raise the tax-free income ceiling for cash dividend income from stocks to Tk50,000, up from the current ceiling of Tk25,000.

“The Finance Minister is serious about reviving the morale of stock investors in the upcoming budget. A number of budget incentives are in the offing to streamline capital markets,” said a top NBR official. “The market (capital market) will act positively after the announcement in the proposed budget,” he hoped.

Officials concerned at the finance division under the Ministry of Finance said the subsidy outlay in the budget would be around Tk45,000 crore for the next fiscal year, up from Tk38,500 crore earmarked for the current fiscal year.

The highest subsidy amount of Tk9,000 crore is likely to be allocated for the agricultural sector, with some allocation expected to be earmarked for farm mechanization.

The budget is also likely to announce a one percent export subsidy for the apparel sector, in addition to the 4% now applicable for receipts coming from non-traditional markets. The amount to be earmarked is likely to be Tk9,000 crore, which is now around Tk3,500 crore. Presently, 26 export-bound items, including apparel goods, get export subsidies of anywhere between 2% and 20%.

In the current budget, export sector subsidies amount to Tk5,000 crore. Of the total, Tk500 crore is allocated for jute and jute goods.

The power sector subsidy is likely to be earmarked at Tk10,000 crore, and the energy (including LNG) sector is likely to get Tk9,000 crore.

The proposed budget is reportedly set to announce an incentive for foreign exchange remitters, as the government is desperate for more remittances to handle the foreign exchange demand to manage rising import payments.

A subsidy of 2-3% is likely to be offered in the budget for remitters. Under the planned scheme, recipients of remittance will get 2-3% extra local currency on the remitted amount. For this purpose, an amount of Tk3,000 crore will be allocated in the budget.

Why Trump wants talks with Iran without any preconditions?

Decades ago I had heard, “Thugs have a common interest ‘make money’. They cooperate, facilitate and protect each other, though they may appear to the world, the deadliest enemies”. This was confirmed after the US President; Donald Trump announced, “We are ready to talk to Iran without any preconditions”.

I was curious about this change of heart and probed a little deeper. I instantly found a reason, “trillions of US dollars invested in financial derivatives”. The Bank for International Settlements said last year that the “notional amount outstanding for derivatives contracts” was US$542 trillion, although the gross market value was put at just US$12.7 trillion. Others suggested it was US$1.2 quadrillion or more. A person with ordinary wit may ask, what derivatives have got to do with US-Iran animosity?

The reply is simple, bulk of the derivatives are based on energy products, mainly crude oil. Therefore, it all has to do with the Strait of Hormuz. Blocking the Strait could cut off oil and gas from Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Iran – 20% of the world’s oil. There has been some debate on whether this could occur – whether the US Fifth Fleet, which is stationed nearby, could stop Tehran doing this and if Iran, which has anti-ship missiles on its territory along the northern border of the Persian Gulf, would go that far.

According to those privy to information, a series of studies hit President Trump’s desk and caused panic in Washington. These showed that in the case of the Strait of Hormuz being shut down, whatever the reason, Iran has the power to hammer the world financial system, by causing global trade in derivatives to be blown apart. The information was duly circulated to France, Britain and Germany, the EU-3 members of the Iran nuclear deal (or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), also caused a panic.

Oil derivative specialists know well that if the flow of energy in the Gulf is blocked it could lead to the price of oil reaching US$200 a barrel, or much higher over an extended period. Crashing the derivatives market would create an unprecedented global depression. Trump’s former Goldman Sachs Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin knows it better than any other person.

And Trump himself seems to have given the game away. He’s now on the record essentially saying that Iran has no strategic value to the US. He really wants a face-saving way to get out of the problem his advisers Bolton and Pompeo got him into. Washington now needs a face-saving, Iran is not asking for meetings, but it is the sole surviving super power, United States.

They also link it to non-scheduled stop of US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Switzerland, just because he’s a “big cheese and chocolate fan”, in his own words. Yet any well-informed also say, “He badly needed to ease the fears of the trans-Atlantic elites, apart from his behind-closed-doors meetings with the Swiss, who are representing Iran in communications with Washington. After weeks of ominous threats to Iran, the US said “no preconditions” would be set on talks with Tehran, and this was issued from Swiss soil.

Buying oil from other sources can cause a big dent to Indian economy

In India, top ministers of Narendra Modi government held talks on the issue of investment in petroleum and gas sector a month after the US waiver for India to import oil from Iran came to an end. The meeting chaired by Home Minister Amit Shah was attended by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister Dharmendra Pradhan and Railways and Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal.

The meeting gained significance as US President, Trump’s administration told India, China, Turkey and a few other oil customers of Iran that no waiver on sanctions would be granted to them after 1^st May 2019, ending six months of exception to the sanctions.

The US had granted exemptions to India, China, Japan, South Korea and Turkey “to ensure a well-supplied oil market” in November last year for six months after it re-imposed sanctions on the Persian nation in view of its controversial nuclear program.

India is said to be in touch with the US to seek further extension of the waiver on oil imports from Iran, pointed out that it has been gradually reducing its energy purchases from the Islamic country.

Two weeks after the US decision came into force, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif travelled to India and met the then External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj. After her meeting with Zarif, she had said a decision on India’s oil imports will be taken after the elections keeping in mind India’s commercial considerations, energy security and economic interests.

Following the withdrawal of the US waiver, India has stopped contracting oil shipments from Iran. With 80 per cent of India’s requirements being met through imports, higher-priced oil from non-Iranian sources can make a big dent in the country’s current account deficit and foreign exchange reserves.

Oil imports from Iran in the past fiscal year ended March 2019 amounted to about US$9 billion. Official sources have said that getting oil from alternative sources would have financial implications and lead to further pressure when crude prices touch US$75-80 per barrel in the near-term, putting pressure on India’s import bill.

Iran used to offer India a longer credit period of 60 days compared to other crude suppliers, while the cargo insurance was free.

Imports from Iraq, UAE and Saudi Arabia will now be on the higher side, without some of the benefits that Iran was giving, India has been Iran’s second largest customer of oil, after China.

Chinese President says US pressure on Iran worrying

A rise in tensions in the Middle East owing to the US pressure on Iran is worrying and all parties need to exercise restraint, Chinese President Xi Jinping told Russian media ahead of a visit to the country.

Tension between Iran and the US has escalated over the past months, after the United States pulled out of a deal between Iran and global powers to curb Tehran’s nuclear program in return for lifting sanctions.

Washington re-imposed sanctions last year and tightened them sharply at the start of last month, ordering all countries to halt imports of Iranian oil. It has also hinted at military confrontation, sending extra forces to the region to counter what it describes as Iranian threats.

Chinese President told TASS news agency and Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper that because of the “extreme pressure” Washington has put on Tehran and the unilateral sanctions, tensions have continued to rise in the Middle East.

He reiterated, “The development of the situation is worrying.”

The Iran nuclear deal should be fully implemented and respected, as it is of crucial importance for peace and stability in the Middle East and non-proliferation, Xi added.

 “China and Russia’s views and positions on the Iran nuclear issue are highly aligned, and both hope that all relevant parties remain rational and exercise restraint, step up dialogue and consultations and lower the temperature on the present tense situation,” he said.

China has been angered by U.S. threats against countries and companies that violate U.S. sanctions by importing Iranian oil. China and Iran have close energy ties.

Xi did not directly address the oil sanctions issue, but appeared to allude to them by saying: “China will continue to firmly safeguard its own legitimate and lawful rights and interests”.

Iranians told not to take Trump’s bait and stay calm

A number of former Obama administration officials have quietly urged Iranian government officials to keep their heads cool in the face of the Trump administration’s maximum pressure policy against Tehran.

US officials have reached out to their contacts in the Iranian government, including Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif to tell them, “Don’t take Trump’s bait and stay calm”.

Conversations between former Obama officials and Iranian government officials have been ongoing since November 2016. But the recent round of conversations, which took place over the phone and in person over the last two months, came as lines of communication between the US and Iran, through intermediaries in Europe and elsewhere.

Tensions between Iran and the U.S. have grown in recent weeks, especially after the latter deployed an aircraft carrier strike group, B-52 bombers, and 1,500 more American troops in the region, citing unidentified Iranian “threats”. Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said, “We are aware that evident elements are trying to put America into a war with Iran for their own goals.” He said US National Security Adviser John Bolton and “other warmongers” are plotting against Iran.

“War would be a disaster for everybody in the region. We hope that wisdom will prevail in Washington, that they do not make this biggest mistake in the region ever. But we are fully prepared for that scenario,” Araqchi said.