OPEC is dead, long live OPEC plus

OPEC has been the most important factor in global oil markets with the ability to influence prices for decades. The shale revolution in the United States has brought much uncertainty for traditional producers due to the vast amounts of oil and gas that are flowing from the American energy heartland in a short period. 

The looming threat is so big, that the traditional competitor Russia agreed to align its policies with that of cartel. Moscow seems eager to squeeze all it can from the agreement, leaving little for Saudi Arabia in particular who risks losing much more due to the particular phase of the country’s economic development.

Over the years, geopolitical and economic developments have transformed the power balance between the organization’s members. One factor that determines influence more than any other is production capacity. In this context, Saudi Arabia has been the undisputed king for decades.

The level of professionalization of national oil company Saudi Aramco has made it into a formidable energy king that controls the world’s second-largest conventional oil reserves. While Venezuela's reserves are bigger, Aramco's low production costs continued Western, in particular the US political support, and relative political stability have gradually increased and maintained OPEC’s largest production capacity.

Influence is not only derived from how much one can produce but more specifically from how much one chooses not to produce. Spare capacity is the defining factor behind leverage over price development. In this area, none is bigger than Saudi Arabia. The geography and type of wells make it possible for Aramco to ramp up and bring down production relatively quickly. On average, the Arab country has usually kept 1.5 - 2 million barrels per day (mbpd) of spare capacity on hand, which is 1.5 – 2 percent of global oil demand before the Covid-19 pandemic.

The unprecedented threat of the US shale industry drove Moscow and Riyadh into each other’s arms in 2016. The first time an agreement was struck, the participants agreed to cut production by 1.8 mbpd (1.2 from OPEC and 600,000 from non-OPEC). Despite some friction and disagreements, the OPEC+ format has survived for years.

However, the disparity in interests and share of dependence on oil revenues is a continuous source of instability. According to Ronald Smith, a Moscow-based analyst at BCS GM, “as long as oil is US$45/barrel or below, it is pretty easy to get everyone in OPEC+ on the same page and cut production. And when it is US$65-70, everyone agrees it is time to put oil back on the market. But between US$50 and US$60, that is where the interests diverge.”

The price of oil currently is hovering around US$55, which means that Riyadh finds the alliance with Russia more important than the other way around. The IMF estimated that Saudi Arabia's fiscal breakeven oil price for 2021 is at US$68. Russia, in contrast is US$46. Furthermore, a larger share of the Saudi production is exported while Russians consume more of their produce domestically. Also, the economy of the latter is more diversified which gives it another trump in its negotiations with Riyadh.

Another advantage in the hands of Russian producers and the Kremlin is the weak ruble. While the riyal in Saudi Arabia is fixed against the US$, oil is traded internationally in US$ meaning the export from Russia earns producers a handsome fee when exchanged into rubles. Saudi Arabia does not enjoy the same benefit and won’t any time soon either.

The low production costs in the Arab country give it an advantage over competitors such as shale producers in the US. Riyadh expects demand for oil to return later this year when vaccination against Covid-19 kicks-in. Therefore, policymakers in the Kingdom think they'll claw back customers when oil becomes scarcer.

Recently, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman announced that Aramco may offer additional shares to the market in the next dew few years. This shows the necessity for Riyadh to voluntarily lower production by one mbpd while Russia will increase by 130,000 bpd. Saudi Arabia is in a rush to modernize and diversify the economy by earning much-needed petrodollars while it still can.

Macron seeks to add Israel and Saudi Arabia to negotiation with Iran

According to a Reuters report, French President Emmanuel Macron has praised decision of the United States to engage with Iran. He also suggested Saudi Arabia and Israel must ultimately be involved in the negotiation with Iran. 

Macron claimed it was time for a new negotiation because Iran was closer to a nuclear weapon.  He also said the international community has to deal with Iran’s missile program.

Speaking with the Washington-based Atlantic Council think tank in a video conference from Paris, Macron noted, “We do need to finalize, indeed, a new negotiation with Iran.”

“I will do whatever I can to support any initiative from the US side to reengage a ... dialogue and I will be here ... I was here, and available two years ago and one and a half (years) ago, to try to be an honest broker and a committed broker in this dialogue,” he added.

Iran has already objected to the inclusion of Saudi Arabia to the JCPOA let alone Israel which Iran does not recognize and that it opposes a nuclear weapons free zone in West Asia.

In remarks on Wednesday, President Hassan Rouhani said there will be no changes to the content of the JCPOA and that no other country will be added to it.

Rouhani was in fact responding to Saudi Arabia which has said if the new Biden administration plans to rejoin the JCPOA its country should also be included. French President Emmanuel Macron has also called for inclusion of Saudi Arabia in the agreement. 

Rouhani emphasized, “The undue words should not be said. We did a job resulted from hard work. It took more than ten years to gain the achievements (JCPOA). In the beginning of the eleventh government, we made efforts during the first two years” to reach the multilateral agreement. 

In 2018, former US President Donald Trump quitted the JCPOA, which was designed to restrict Iran’s peaceful program in return for the lifting of the US and other sanctions. His successor, President Joe Biden, has said that if Iran returns to “strict” compliance with the deal, the US will too.

The Trump administration restored the US sanctions that Obama removed in 2015. Trump and his Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo perused a “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran with the aim of strangulating the Iranian economy. 

Abolfazl Amouei, the spokesman for the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, has responded to a French call to include Saudi Arabia in any future talks with Iran about the nuclear issue by saying that there are no links between Riyadh and the issue.

“Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with the nuclear agreement,” Amouei told the Qatari-owned Al Arabi Al Jadid newspaper, declaring his country’s refusal to include Riyadh in any possible talks with the parties to the nuclear agreement reached with Iran in 2015.

He stressed, “The Islamic Republic will not negotiate again about this agreement.”

According to Amouei, Riyadh did not have a place in the nuclear negotiations and that it has nothing to do with the issues related to the nuclear agreement between Iran and major world powers, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Saeed Khatibzadeh, the spokesman for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, put out a statement dismissing the French president's recent remarks about the need for a new nuclear deal with Tehran. He called on Macron to “exercise self-restraint and refrain from hasty and ill-advised stances.”

“The JCPOA is a multilateral international agreement that has been endorsed and stabilized by the (UN) Security Council Resolution 2231. It is by no means re-negotiable, and its parties are also definite and unchangeable,” Khatibzadeh noted.

Pointing to the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal and Europe’s failure to maintain it, the spokesman said, “If there is any willingness to revive and save the JCPOA, the solution is easy. The US should return to the JCPOA and lift the whole JCPOA and non-JCPOA sanctions that have been imposed (on Iran) during the tenure of the previous president of that country.”

Aviv Kochav, chief of staff of Israeli armed forces, has recently issued stark threats against Iran while railing against the nuclear deal.

He said that Israel is not welcoming the expected efforts by the US and its European allies to revive the 2015 nuclear deal. The top Israeli general claimed that he had ordered several plans to launch offensive operations against Iran while voicing Israel’s opposition to any efforts to revive the JCPOA or even to improve it.

“I have instructed the IDF to prepare several operational plans in addition to existing ones, which we will develop throughout the coming year. The power to initiate them lies with the political echelon. However, the offensive options need to be prepared, ready and on the table,” Kochavi said in remarks delivered at the Israeli Institute for National Security Studies 14th Annual International Conference.

Apprehensions of Bangladesh Media

Reportedly, leading newspapers in Bangladesh have expressed frustration over a media environment in which a major investigative report leveling allegations against senior leaders and key institutions in the country had been met with “silence” in the domestic press. 

Editorials in The Daily Star and The Dhaka Tribune noted that media outlets had widely reported on the government response to an Al Jazeera report published on Monday, without describing allegations it contained.

“We are facing the absurd situation of publishing the government response without publishing what the government is responding to. So far, we have neither carried what the Al Jazeera reported nor any synopsis of it,” The Daily Star wrote in its Wednesday editorial.

The Tribune’s editorial, meanwhile, said the nation’s Digital Security Act “has had a chilling effect on Bangladeshi media.”

“The silence of the Bangladeshi media in this instance has been all-encompassing and deafening,” the Tribune wrote.

“The reason for our silence is simple: The current state of media and defamation law in Bangladesh, and how it is interpreted by the judiciary, makes it unwise for any Bangladeshi media house to venture into any kind of meaningful comment on the controversy.”

The nation’s Digital Security Act “contains language proscribing reporting that is so broad in its scope and threatens such draconian consequences that no responsible editor can take the chance of publishing reports that might even conceivably fall into its purview.”

A BenarNews review of at least 10 prominent Bengali- and English-language news portals on Wednesday found that they all based their reports on news releases from the Foreign Ministry and the army, while none of them included Al Jazeera allegations.

The 1st February report by Qatari-based television network Al Jazeera alleged that Bangladesh Army Chief Gen. Aziz Ahmed kept close links with his two foreign-based brothers who are on the run from justice after being convicted of the 1996 murder of a rival political leader.

The Al Jazeera documentary linked Aziz to corrupt deals with at least one of his brothers, who the report said had been able to travel to Bangladesh to meet with the army chief despite being a fugitive.

The report said that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina had previously hired Aziz’s brothers Haris and Anis Ahmed as bodyguards when she was opposition leader. It alleged that the Ahmed clan’s fortunes “have been long intertwined with that” of Hasina.

It claimed that the military had secretly purchased surveillance equipment manufactured by an Israeli company, even though Bangladesh does not recognize Israel and forbids nationals from traveling there or engaging in commerce with Israelis.

The Bangladesh foreign ministry and army dismissed the allegations contained in the documentary and accompanying stories.

The Bangladesh foreign ministry in a statement on Tuesday described the report as “false and defamatory” and “anti-Bangladesh propaganda.”

It however, did not specifically address any of the charges leveled against Aziz Ahmed in the report.

“The report is nothing more than a misleading series of innuendos and insinuations in what is apparently a politically motivated ‘smear campaign’ by notorious individuals,” it said, linking them to the “extremist group” Jamaat-e-Islami, one of the largest Islamic parties in Bangladesh.

The Bangladesh Army said the surveillance equipment had been procured from Hungary for an army contingent deployed in a U.N peacekeeping mission, and that the Al Jazeera allegation was based on “false information.”

The Daily Star editorial praised the government for its “mature decision” not to block Al Jazeera’s report or “its spread on social media.”

It also expressed frustration over the lack of reporting in the domestic media on allegations that it said raised questions about the security of the country and the integrity of its institutions.

“There are people who served the PM at various times, especially during her days of struggle, who are now taking full advantage of her sense of gratitude and indulging in influence-peddling for payment in some of our highly sensitive areas,” The Daily Star said.

“There is reference to our purchase of sensitive listening devices from Israel, a country that we do not recognize. There are also the issues of false passports, NID cards and bank documents that should be looked into, especially as they involve institutions on whose integrity and honesty our security depends.”

Considered by many the leading English-language newspaper in Bangladesh, The Daily Star has a circulation of 44,000 and an editor who faces dozens of criminal charges over its journalism.

Mahfuz Anam faces 81 criminal charges filed since 2016, one of his lawyers told BenarNews.

“All of the cases were criminal in nature such as defamation and others. Currently, the courts have issued stay orders on the cases,” Chaitanya Chandra Halder said.

Mahfuz Anam turned down a request to be interviewed for this article.

Passed in 2018, the Digital Security Act empowers police to make arrests on suspicion and without a warrant. Fourteen of its 20 provisions do not allow for bail, so that whenever an accused is brought before a magistrate, he or she is almost automatically sent to jail.

A media advocacy group, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), said that the Bangladesh media’s decision to self censor was not surprising, while the draconian law requiring it reflected the government’s fear of a free press.

“By and large we are seeing how much of a chilling effect the Digital Security Act has had in Bangladesh,” Aliya Iftikhar, senior CPJ Asia researcher, told BenarNews.

“In the past year, we have seen dozens of frivolous DSA cases filed against journalists, and many of them have been detained for months at a time under the draconian law, for no reason other than they dared to publish critical reports. So it is not surprising that after seeing numerous colleagues in jail, the media in Bangladesh is choosing to self-censor,” Iftikhar said.

“The Bangladesh government is showing its weakness with its constant fear of a free press.”

Turkish exports to Saudi Arabia coming to grind halt

An unofficial Saudi boycott of Turkish goods reduced Turkey’s exports to the Kingdom to a record low in January 2021, despite diplomatic efforts to mend ties between the two countries. Turkish exports to Saudi Arabia dropped by a remarkable 92% in January, from US$221 million to just US$16 million YoY, according to data released by the Turkish Exporters Union (TIM).

Last year, Riyadh ramped up its efforts targeting the Turkish economy after a Turkish court’s decision to accept two separate indictments against Saudi officials said to be involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul in October 2018.

Relations between the two regional powerhouses have been at a low since the murder of the Saudi journalist, whose killing is believed by the CIA to have been ordered by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Since October, the Saudi government has been systematically pressuring local businesses not to trade with Turkish companies and to drop their goods from their shelves.

The statistics indicate a steady slowdown in Turkish exports since then. As a result, Turkey’s annual exports to Saudi Arabia decreased by 24% in 2020, to US$2.3 billion from US$3.1 billion.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan last year tried to remedy the situation by talking to Saudi King Salman, and both agreed to hold consultations on the issue.

However, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu’s first meeting with his Saudi counterpart Faisal bin Farhan in November 2020 ultimately failed to change the situation.

 “We have agreed to have a second meeting to discuss the problems,” one senior Turkish official said, speaking anonymously, at the time. Since then, no second meeting has taken place.

Burak Onder, a Turkish houseware and kitchenware manufacturer and exporter, told Turkish media that exports to Saudi Arabia had come to almost a complete halt because goods that had been sent to the country had been held in customs for months without any official explanation.

One senior Turkish trade ministry official, speaking anonymously, told Middle East Eye that from time to time the Saudis would release exports held in the customs after official interventions, but the general problem was still ongoing.

Turkish officials have been considerably muted over the Khashoggi murder and other issues of friction with Riyadh, such as Ankara's relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, since last year.

"We don't have any issue other than the Khashoggi affair, which we have done as much as we could to resolve," a Turkish official said last November. "It is time to move on."

China and Russia demand unconditional US return to JCPOA

President Joe Biden is under pressure from three sides to return the United States immediately to compliance with the Iran nuclear deal, as Washington and Tehran both remain unwilling to make the first move.

China and Russia, two of the other Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action signatories, are pushing the Biden administration for a full return to the 2015 accord under its original terms, as Iranian leaders continue to do the same.

Biden said during his election campaign that he wanted to reverse Donald Trump's 2018 decision to withdraw from the JCPOA. Trump embarked on a "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran, trying and failing to force Tehran to negotiate a new, more restrictive nuclear deal.

For Iran, Trump's withdrawal and sanctions mean it is Biden who must take the first step towards a thaw. Iran has expanded its nuclear activity since Trump's JCPOA withdrawal and its leaders are refusing to scale back the program until Biden lifts his predecessor's sanctions.

Russian officials have repeatedly urged the Trump and Biden administrations to return to the deal without any conditions. Lately, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said China backed "the unconditional return of the United States to the JCPOA as early as possible, its resumption of compliance and elimination of all relevant sanctions."

"On this basis Iran should resume full compliance," Wang added. "China is following the situation closely and maintaining close communication with all relevant sides. We support a step-by-step and reciprocal approach and will continue to work with relevant parties and the international community to bring the JCPOA back on track and promote the political settlement of the Iranian nuclear issue."

Russia's representative to the international organizations in Vienna said US demands for Iran to make the first move would prove "fruitless." Mikhail Ulyanov wrote on Twitter "This is high time for US and Iran to make coordinated steps to restore full implementation of JCPOA."

Biden administration officials have warned that a return to the deal is not imminent, demanding that Iran curtail its nuclear expansion before talks can resume. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif had told CNN that Tehran would be open to a step-for-step return to compliance, with the European Union (EU) acting as a referee.

Zarif said EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell could "choreograph the actions that are needed to be taken by the United States and the actions that are needed to be taken by Iran...The United States needs to come back into compliance and Iran will be ready immediately to respond. The timing is not the issue."

State Department spokesperson Ned Price, however, was lukewarm on the idea during a press conference on Wednesday, saying the administration was currently focused on consulting Congress and foreign allies on the JCPOA.

"We haven't ... had any discussions with the Iranians and I wouldn't expect we would until those initial steps go forward," Price said. "There are (many) steps in that process ... before we're reaching the point where we are going to engage directly with the Iranians and willing to entertain any sort of proposal."

 

Is OPEC ready to face tough time?

OPEC and its allies may celebrate their success in buoying world oil markets, but the coalition will soon be faced with some tough choices. Russia has already expressed fears that high prices will facilitate US shale comeback and Iran could revive exports, if it succeeds in improving relations with the United States.

Oil prices extended gains on Thursday after the OPEC alliance decided to stick to a reduced output policy. There was another blessing as crude stockpiles in the United States fell to their lowest levels, since March last year. Brent were traded at US$58.97/barrel, by 0741 GMT and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) futures were traded at US$56.22, after reaching its highest settlement level in a year on Wednesday.

Last month’s pledge by Saudi Arabian Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman to slash production by a further one million barrels a day has supported global markets against the latest onslaught from the pandemic.

While that relieves OPEC+ of any need to adjust its policy, it’ll need to start considering how long to restrain output -- a calculation clouded by the potential return of supply from Iran.

At the heart of the dilemma is a fundamental tension between the Saudis and their most critical partner in the alliance, Russia. While Riyadh has sought higher prices to cover government spending, Moscow will certainly try to maintain its market share.

“Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman’s doctrine that you err on the side of caution has been vindicated,” said Helima Croft, chief commodities strategist at RBC Capital Markets LLC. “We might get the contours of the arguments that will be made next month.”

OPEC and its partners have resolved this year to restore some of the 7.2 million barrels of daily output, roughly 7% of global supplies, they continue to idle after making vast production cuts when the pandemic erupted last spring.

The restrictions have proved effective, turning around an oil market that in April 2020 briefly saw prices plunge below zero in New York, and throwing a financial lifeline to producers around the world, from tiny African states to corporate giants.

Restoring the halted production, however, is turning out to be a delicate process.

OPEC+ is scheduled to revive a total of 2 million barrels a day this year; it agreed a two-month pause after the first 500,000 barrel installment in January as new virus infections menaced fuel demand. Riyadh doubled down on the curbs by announcing an extra one million-barrel cutback of its own.

The panel that oversees the alliance’s strategy, the Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee, will convene online to assess the outlook. The JMMC is unlikely to recommend new policies, which will instead be tackled at the next full OPEC+ meeting in early March, according to delegates who asked not to be identified.

“The Saudi cut has bought OPEC+ some time,” said Bill Farren-Price, a director at research firm Enverus and veteran observer of the cartel. The question of what to do next will loom over their discussions on Wednesday.

Russia on the other hand fears that supporting prices too long will backfire, provoking investment in US shale oil and a flood of new supply that will negate OPEC+’s hard work. At last month’s meeting, Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak proposed a production increase, and tried to dissuade the Saudi Prince from his unilateral cut.

 “It is going to be a hell of fight at the OPEC+ March meeting,” said Helge Andre Martinsen, senior oil market analyst at DNB Bank ASA. “Russia will consider it a massive failure if OPEC+ cuts starts to stimulate growth in US shale again, while at the same time they’re sitting on plenty of spare capacity.”

Russia isn’t the only member that might push for relaxing the curbs. Iraq is in the grip of an economic crisis and desperately needs the revenues that would come from higher oil sales. The United Arab Emirates is seeking to promote a benchmark oil contract that depends on plentiful output, and last year briefly broke ranks with Riyadh to open the taps.

Then there’s the complication of Iran. President Joe Biden is seeking to reactivate a nuclear agreement that would lift US sanctions on the Islamic Republic, allowing the return of almost 2 million barrels of daily output. With the end of the “maximum pressure” campaign waged by former President Donald Trump, Iranian exports have already crept higher.

Still, Secretary of State Antony Blinken says an agreement remains a “long way” off. As the two sides jockey for leverage -- and Tehran presses on with uranium enrichment -- they could be headed for a new rupture rather than reconciliation, according to RBC’s Croft. Instead of extra barrels, markets may need to brace for “a geopolitical tremor,” she cautions.

But if a deal is struck, OPEC+ will need to choose between cutting output further, or seeing their efforts to drain surplus oil stockpiles founder. It is unclear how readily Saudi Arabia would make way for the comeback of its political nemesis.

Yang Jiechi warns United States to stop meddling in Chinese internal affairs

Yang Jiechi, Director, Central Foreign Affairs Commission of the Chinese Communist Party has called Beijing and Washington to put relations back on a predictable and constructive path, saying the United States should stop meddling in China's internal affairs, Hong Kong and Tibet.

Yang Jiechi is the highest ranking Chinese leader to speak on Sino-US relations since President Joe Biden took office.

Under the Trump administration, the US relations with China plunged to their lowest point since the establishment of diplomatic ties in 1979, as both sides clashed over issues ranging from trade and technology to Hong Kong, Taiwan and Xinjiang, and the South China Sea.

While reassuring the United States that China has no intention to challenge or replace the US position in the world, Yang stressed that no force can hold back China's development.

"The United States should stop interfering in Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang and other issues regarding China's territorial integrity and sovereignty," Yang said, defining these as issues concerning China's core interests and national dignity.

Speaking at an online forum organized by the National Committee on US-China Relations in Beijing, Yang said China never meddles with US internal affairs, including its elections.

Yang, whose position in the ruling Communist Party gives him more influence than even the Foreign Minister, also urged the Biden administration not to abuse the concept of national security in trade.

"We in China hope that the United States will rise above the outdated mentality of zero-sum, major-power rivalry and work with China to keep the relationship on the right track," he said.

Yang reasserted that China is prepared to work with the United States to move the relationship forward along a track of "no conflict, no confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation."

The word "cooperation" appeared 24 times in his speech. He suggested that US firms could gain from an estimated US$22 trillion worth of exports to China in the coming decade.

Bangladesh rejects Al Jazeera report

Reportedly, Bangladesh has dismissed Al Jazeera news channel’s Monday’s report titled “All the Prime Minister’s Men” calling it as “false and defamatory” and a desperate “smear campaign” instigated by extremists and their allies, working in London and elsewhere.

“The report is nothing more than a misleading series of innuendos and insinuations in what is apparently a politically motivated “smear campaign” by notorious individuals associated with the Jamaat-e-Islami extremist group,” a foreign ministry statement said here today.

The Jamaat-i-Islami extremist group has been opposing the progressive and secular principles of Bangladesh since its very birth as an independent nation in 1971, it added.

The foreign ministry said Dhaka regrets that Al Jazeera had allowed itself to become an instrument for their malicious political designs aimed at destabilizing the secular democratic government of Bangladesh with a proven track record of extraordinary socio-economic development and progress.

The statement noted that the main “source” of Al Jazeera’s allegations is an alleged international criminal claimed to be a “psychopath” by Al-Jazeera itself.

“There is not a shred of evidence linking the prime minister and other state institutions of Bangladesh to this particular individual, and it is highly irresponsible for an international news channel to draw conclusions on the basis of the words of a mentally unstable person,” said the statement.

Pointing that the report’s historical account failed to even mention the horrific genocide in 1971, in which Jamaat perpetrators killed millions of Bengali civilians and raped more than two hundred thousand Bengali women, the statement said, this is the reflection of the political bias in Al Jazeera’s coverage.

It also noticed that the principal commentator of the report David Bergman was convicted by International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh for challenging the official death toll of 1971 Liberation War.

“It is also not surprising that the report aligns with the string of anti-Bangladesh propaganda habitually orchestrated by a few convicted absconding criminals and discredited individuals patronized by Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, which on certain occasions have conspired with international extremist groups and news media specially the Al Jazeera,” said the statement.

 

 

Nuclear weapons are in contradiction to our ideological views, says Zarif

If Iran wanted a nuclear weapon it would have built one already, Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said in an interview with CNN published on Tuesday. 

"If we wanted to build a nuclear weapon we could have done it some time ago," Zarif told Christiane Amanpour. "But we decided that nuclear weapons are not, would not augment our security and are in contradiction to our, eh, ideological views. And that is why we never pursued nuclear weapons."

On Monday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told NBC that if Iran violated additional restrictions included in the 2015 nuclear deal it could obtain enough fissionable material for a bomb within "a matter of weeks". 

Zarif said that the uranium enriched by the Islamic Republic could immediately be scaled back to comply with the nuclear deal if the US lifts sanctions. "Eight thousand pounds of enriched uranium can go back to the previous amount in less than a day,” he claimed. 

The Biden administration, the Iranian foreign minister said, had a "limited window of opportunity" to re-enter the 2015 nuclear agreement.

"The time for the United States to come back to the nuclear agreement is not unlimited," he said. "The United States has a limited window of opportunity, because President Biden does not want to portray himself as trying to take advantage of the failed policies of the former Trump administration."

Zarif sketched out the path to overcome the impasse saying the EU foreign policy chief could "choreograph" the moves.

"There can be a mechanism to basically either synchronize it or coordinate what can be done," Zarif told CNN when asked in an interview how to bridge the gap between Washington and Tehran. Each government wants the other to resume compliance first.

Zarif noted the agreement created a Joint Commission coordinated by the European Union foreign policy chief, now Josep Borrell. Borrell "can ... sort of choreograph the actions that are needed to be taken by the United States and the actions that are needed to be taken by Iran," Zarif told CNN.

The Commission includes Iran and the six other parties to the deal that were Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.

 

Robert Malley appointment as Iran envoy attracts mixed response

Joe Biden has named Robert Malley as special envoy for Iran. He was a key member of former President Barack Obama's team that negotiated the nuclear accord with Iran and world powers, an agreement that Donald Trump abandoned in 2018, despite strong opposition from Washington's European allies.

Malley’s appointment puts him at the forefront of Biden's efforts to find a way to deal with Iran after years of worsening relations under former President Donald Trump, who not only pulled out of a 2015 international nuclear deal with Tehran, but also re-imposed crippling economic sanctions.

When Malley's name first surfaced in news reports as a leading candidate for the post, he drew criticism from some Republican lawmakers and pro-Israel groups who expressed concern that he would be soft on Iran and tough on Israel, but a number of foreign policy veterans rushed to his defense.

It's a positive sign from Biden that he's really willing to revitalize American diplomacy. For too long, US foreign policy has been militarily very muscular, but diplomatically very weak," Sina Toossi, a senior research analyst at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) told Middle East Eye.

Toossi said the humiliations that Iran had faced in recent years - including the US departure from the JCPOA, the killing of top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani and the assassination of nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh - make it difficult for the Iranian government to take the first step towards reviving the JCPOA.

Matt Duss, a foreign-policy adviser to Senator Bernie Sanders, lauded Biden for refusing to back down in the face of attacks against Malley's candidacy.

"Great news, there's no one better than Rob to make this policy succeed, which is why the hardliners didn't like the pick," Duss wrote on Twitter. "Also very good that Biden stood strong with this choice and disregarded their smear campaign. It won't be their last."

Khaled Elgindy, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, also praised the announcement, calling the nomination "great news". "Malley is a highly skilled and thoughtful negotiator with extensive knowledge and an empathic disposition - literally the polar opposite of every member of the previous administration’s Middle East team of clowns," Elgindy said in a Twitter post.

Senator Tom Cotton, a staunch conservative, had led criticism against Malley, accusing him of being sympathetic to the Iranian government and having "animus towards Israel".

Malley is an American lawyer, political scientist and specialist in conflict resolution, who was the lead negotiator on the 2015 Iran nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). He being once again tasked to bring the United States and Iran into compliance with the Iran deal abandoned by President Trump.

Previously, Malley was President and CEO of the International Crisis Group, a Washington, DC, committed to preventing wars. Prior to holding that title, he served at the National Security Council under Barack Obama from February 2014 until January 2017.

In 2015, the Obama administration appointed Rob Malley as its "point man" on the Middle East, leading the Middle East desk of the National Security Council. In November 2015, Malley was named as President Obama's new special ISIS advisor.

Malley is considered, by some, to be an expert on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and has written extensively on this subject advocating rapprochement with Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood. As Special Assistant to President Clinton, he was a member of the US peace team and helped organize the 2000 Camp David Summit.

Malley was criticized by supporters of Israel after co-authoring an article in the July 8, 2001 edition of The New York Review of Books arguing that the blame for the failure of the 2000 Camp David Summit should be divided among all three leaders who were present at the summit, Arafat, Barak, and Bill Clinton, not just Arafat, as was suggested by some mainstream policy analysts. Later, other scholars and former officials voiced views similar to those of Malley.

Malley and his views have come under attack from other critics, such as Martin Peretz of the magazine The New Republic, who has opined that Malley is "anti-Israel", a "rabid hater of Israel. No question about it” and that several of his articles in the New York Review of Books were "deceitful."

On the conservative webzine The American Thinker, Ed Lasky asserted that Malley "represents the next generation of anti-Israel activism."

 

 

 

 

  

Are Israel-US relations turning bitter after Joe Biden becomes President?

Reportedly, Joe Biden, President of United States has not called Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel as of Sunday; 11 days into his presidency.  Biden has called the leaders of Canada, Mexico, the UK, France, Germany, NATO, Russia and Japan, in that order, but not Netanyahu.

This not only surprises the analysts, but must be bothering Netanyahu, who had enjoyed exceptionally cordial as well as personal relationships with outgoing President, Donald Trump. 

Some quarters attribute the lack of a call between Biden and Netanyahu to Joe Biden’s priorities, which are mostly domestic in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as an America that has increasingly disentangled itself from the Middle East in recent years.

However, it also comes at a time when Israeli officials feel a sense of urgency to communicate with Biden on his stated plan to rejoin the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

Netanyahu, IDF Chief of Staff and others have said returning to the plan, with its sunset clauses would eventually allow Iran to attain nuclear weapons that would endanger Israel.

Blinken and others in the Biden administration have said they would speak with US allies in the region, including Israel, before Iran, but it was still too early for negotiations.

The history haunt Israelis because former US President, Barack Obama called Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas before calling the then Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert on his first day in office, indicating his emphasis on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Netanyahu was the third leader former president Donald Trump called, which reflected their close relationship.

“Biden is screening Netanyahu’s calls... Netanyahu is now reaping the rotten fruit of the rift he created with the Democrats,” Meretz leader MK Nitzan Horowitz wrote on Facebook.

“Israel must rehabilitate its relationship with the Democrats and the new administration and return to values of democracy, equality and peace,” he said, adding that Meretz was the only party that speaks the Democrats’ language.

According to former Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren, “They’ll speak eventually, and [Netanyahu] will eventually go to Washington.” But regarding Biden’s phone calls, he said: “There’s a message in that order.”

Netanyahu congratulated Biden for winning the presidency about 12 hours after most of the other leaders with whom the president spoke. He also did not actually say in his message that Biden was president-elect and he followed it with praise for Trump, Oren said. “There’s a price to pay for that,” he said.

Oren was ambassador to the US (2009-13) during the Obama administration, when Biden was Vice President. Netanyahu and Biden are unlikely to have the mutual personal acrimony that poisoned the relationship with Obama, he said.

“They may not be as chummy as they used to be... but it won’t be like [Netanyahu] and Obama: That was very bad blood,” Oren said.

Biden administration sees Quad as fundamental foundation to build US policy on Indo-Pacific

The new Biden administration sees the Quad grouping comprising of the United States, India, Japan and Australia as a fundamental foundation upon which to build a substantial American policy in the strategically-vital Indo-Pacific region. National security advisor Jake Sullivan said at an event organized by the US Institute of Peace, a Congress-funded think-tank that the US will build on and carry forward the four-nation Quad grouping.

Quad and the Indo-Pacific policy of the Trump administration are one of the few policies that the Biden administration has said it will continue to build on, besides the Abraham Accords, Sullivan said.

“Those are in two different theaters in the world and two initiatives that you will see continuity and an effort to reinforce and carry forward steps that have been taken by the previous administration,” he said.

"When the first Accords with the UAE, Bahrain were announced, it was in the heat of a political campaign, a presidential campaign, and then candidate Biden made no bones about coming out saying: ‘I think this is a good thing. I think this is a positive thing',” he said.

Biden said consistently over the course of the last several months that he would like to carry forward this initiative, deepen the cooperation between the countries that have signed the accords, make real normalization that has taken root and add more countries, he said.

“He (Biden) sees that as being positive for security in the region, positive for economic development, in the region, and positive for America's national interest for many of the reasons that Robert laid out,” Sullivan said.

“So, one of the things that we will be doing in the coming weeks and months is thinking about how we make sure that the seeds that have now been planted actually grow into the full kind of cooperation across multiple dimensions and these relationships can move forward and how that can really help the United States advance our interests,” he said.

In November 2017, India, Japan, the United States and Australia gave shape to the long-pending proposal of setting up the "Quad" to develop a new strategy to counter China's aggressive behaviour in the strategically-vital Indo-Pacific region.

The evolving situation in the Indo-Pacific region in the wake of China's increasing military muscle flexing has become a major talking point among leading global powers. The US has been favouring making Quad a security architecture to check China's growing assertiveness.

China is engaged in hotly contested territorial disputes in the South and East China Seas. Beijing has also made substantial progress in militarizing its man-made islands in the past few years.

Beijing claims sovereignty over all of the South China Sea. But Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei and Taiwan have counterclaims. In the East China Sea, China has territorial disputes with Japan.

The South China Sea and the East China Sea are stated to be rich in minerals, oil and other natural resources. These are also vital to global trade. Although, the US lays no claims to the disputed waters, it has challenged China's growing territorial claims in the South China Sea by deploying warships and fighter jets to assert freedom of navigation and over flight patrols in the strategically-vital region.

Iranian Foreign Minister meets Taliban delegation in Tehran

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif met on Sunday with a Taliban delegation led by deputy head of the group’s political bureau Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. In the meeting, Zarif welcomed the idea of formation of an all-inclusive government with the participation of all ethnic and political groups in Afghanistan, the Iranian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

“Political decisions could not be made in a vacuum, and the formation of an all-inclusive government must take place in a participatory process and by taking into account the fundamental structures, institutions and laws, such as the Constitution,” the statement quoted Zarif as saying in the meeting.

The chief Iranian diplomat expressed Iran’s readiness to facilitate dialogue among the Taliban, the Afghan government and other Afghan groups, noting, “The noble people of Afghanistan have been wronged. The war and occupation of Afghanistan have dealt heavy blows to the Afghan people.”

He expressed hope that the Taliban would focus efforts on an immediate end to the pains and problems of Afghan people so that the establishment of peace in Afghanistan would strip the outsiders of a pretext for occupation.

According to a Tasnim report, Zarif also voiced support for an all-inclusive Islamic government in Afghanistan.

“We support the formation of an all-inclusive Islamic government with the participation of all ethnicities and sects and consider it necessary for Afghanistan,” Zarif was quoted by Tasnim as telling the Taliban delegation. He underlined the need for the Taliban to avoid targeting the people of Afghanistan.

Zarif also told the Taliban delegation that the United States is not a good mediator.

The Taliban delegation, for its part, gave a report of the Afghan peace process and the intra-Afghan negotiations.

“Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar also noted that the relations between Afghanistan and Iran are based upon friendship and good neighborliness, expressing hope for the expansion of relations between the two countries with the establishment of peace and calm in Afghanistan,” the statement noted.