Is the world ready to condemn murder of Iranian Nuclear Scientist?

Israel used all the four years of Trump’s presidency to entrench its systems of occupation and apartheid. Now that Joe Biden has won the US election, the assassination of Iran’s top nuclear scientist, likely by Israel with the go-ahead from the US administration, is a desperate attempt to use Trump’s last days in office to sabotage Biden’s chances of successful diplomacy with Iran. Biden, Congress and the world community shouldn’t let that happen.

On Friday, November 27, Iran’s top nuclear scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, was assassinated in the Iranian city of Absard outside of Tehran. The immediate speculation was that Israel had carried out the attack, perhaps with the support of the Iranian groups.

In 2018, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu identified Fakhrizadeh as a target of his administration during a presentation in which he claimed that Israel had obtained secret Iranian files that alleged the country was not actually abiding by the Iran Nuclear Deal.

During 2010 and 2012, four Iranian nuclear scientists were assassinated that included: Masoud Alimohammadi, Majid Shahriari, Darioush Rezaeinejad and Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan. Though Israel never accepted responsibility of these murders, reports suggested that Israel, working with Iranian rebel groups, was behind the killings. The Israeli government also never denied the allegations. 

The assassination of Fakhrizadeh also follows reports that the Israeli government recently instructed its senior military officials to prepare for a possible US strike on Iran, likely referring to a narrowly averted plan by President Trump to bomb Iran’s Natanz nuclear site. Furthermore, there was a clandestine meeting between Netanyahu and Saudi ruler Mohammed bin Salman.

Israel’s attacks on Iran’s nuclear activities are particularly annoying given that Israel, not Iran, is the only country in the Middle East in possession of nuclear weapons, and Israel refuses to sign the International Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons and it has opened itself up to the most intrusive international inspections ever implemented. Adding to this absurd double standard is the intense pressure on Iran from the United States, a nation that has more nuclear weapons than any country on earth.

Given the close relationship between Netanyahu and Trump, and the seriousness of this attack, it is very likely that this assassination was carried out with the green light from Trump himself. Trump has spent his time in the White House destroying the progress the Obama administration made in easing the conflict with Iran. He withdrew from the nuclear deal and imposed an unending stream of crippling sanctions that have affected everything from the price of food and housing, to Iran’s ability to obtain life-saving medicines during the pandemic. He also blocked Iran from getting an IMF US$5 billion emergency loan to deal with the pandemic. In January, Trump brought the US to the brink of war by assassinating Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, and in an early November meeting with his top security advisors, and right before the assassination of Fakhrizadeh, Trump himself reportedly raised the possibility of a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. 

After the news broke of the assassination, Trump expressed implicit approval of the attack by re-tweeting Israeli journalist and expert on the Israeli Mossad intelligence service, Yossi Melman, who described the killing of Fahkrizadeh as a “major psychological and professional blow for Iran.”

Iran has responded to these intense provocations with extreme patience and reserve. The government was hoping for a change in the White House and Biden’s victory signaled the possibility of both the US and Iran going back into compliance with the nuclear deal. This recent assassination has further strengthens the hands of Iranian hardliners who say it was a mistake to negotiate with the United States and that Iran should just leave the nuclear deal and build a nuclear weapon for its own defense. 

Iranian-American analyst Negar Mortazavi lamented the chilling effect the assassination will have on Iran’s political space. “The atmosphere will be even more securitized, civil society and political opposition will be pressured even more, and the anti-West discourse will be strengthened in Iran’s upcoming presidential election,” she tweeted.

The hardliners already won the majority of seats in the February parliamentary elections and are predicted to win the presidential elections scheduled for June. So the window for negotiations is a narrow one of four months immediately after Biden’s inauguration. What happens between now and January 20 could derail negotiations before they even start. 

Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council said that US and Israeli efforts to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program have now morphed into Trump and Netanyahu sabotaging the next US President. They are trying to provoke Iran to accelerate nuclear work—exactly what they claim to oppose.

That is the reason US members of Congress, and President-elect Joe Biden himself, must vigorously condemn this act and affirm their commitment to the US rejoining the nuclear deal. When Israel assassinated other nuclear scientists during the Obama administration, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denounced the murders, understanding that such illegal actions made negotiations infinitely more difficult.

The European Union, as well as some important US figures have already condemned the attack. Senator Chris Murphy pointed out the risks involved in normalizing assassinations, how the killing will make it harder to restart the Iran Nuclear agreement, and how the assassination of General Soleimani backfired from a security standpoint. Former Obama advisor Ben Rhodes tweeted that it was an “outrageous action aimed at undermining diplomacy,” and former CIA head John Brennan called the assassination “criminal” and “highly reckless,” risking “lethal retaliation and a new round of regional conflict,” but rather than putting the responsibility on the US and Israel to stop the provocations, he called on Iran to “be wise” and “resist the urge to respond.”

Many on Twitter have raised the question of what the world response would be if the roles were reversed and Iran assassinated an Israeli nuclear scientist. Without a doubt, the US administration, whether Democrat or Republican, would be outraged and supportive of a swift military response. But if we want to avoid escalation, then we must hope that Iran will not retaliate, at least not during Trump’s last days in office.

The only way to stop this crisis from spiraling out of control is for the world community to condemn the act, and demand a UN investigation and accountability for the perpetrators. The countries that joined Iran and the United States in signing the 2015 nuclear agreement —Russia, China, Germany, the UK and France—must not only oppose the assassination but publicly recommit to upholding the nuclear deal. President-elect Joe Biden must send a clear message to Israel that under his administration, these illegal acts will have consequences. He must also send a clear message to Iran that he intends to quickly re-enter the nuclear deal, stop blocking Iran’s US$5 billion IMF loan request, and begin a new era of diplomacy to dial back the intense conflict he inherited from Trump’s recklessness.

Human rights groups condemn sale of US arms to UAE

Human rights groups and arms control organizations have condemned sale of arms by United States to the United Arab Emirates, asking the Congress to block the mega deal. The groups signed a letter opposing the sale of US$23 billion worth of missiles, fighter jets, and drones, raising concern about the UAE’s role in the Saudi-led devastating war on Yemen and Libya conflict.

"The hope is to stop these sales altogether," said Seth Binder, advocacy officer at the Project on Middle East Democracy, who spearheaded the effort.

"But if that is not possible in the short term, this sends an important signal to the incoming Biden administration that there is a diverse group of organizations that oppose delivery of these weapons."

The letter, sent to US lawmakers and the State Department, said the planned arms sale would fuel continued harm to civilians and exacerbate humanitarian crises due to conflicts in war-wracked Yemen and Libya.

Signatories include human rights organizations from the region, including the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies and Mwatana for Human Rights.

The US-UAE arms deal includes F-35 fighter jets, Reaper drones, air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles, and more than 14,000 bombs.

The sale was approved following a US-brokered agreement in September in which the UAE agreed to normalize relations with Israel.

Several US senators, including Murphy, earlier this month proposed legislation to halt the weapons sale to the UAE, setting up a showdown with President Donald Trump weeks before he is due to leave office.

Trump administration officials briefed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about the deal on Monday evening.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, a sponsor of the resolutions of disapproval, responded later on Twitter: "Just a mind blowing number of unsettled issues and questions the Administration couldn't answer. Hard to overstate the danger of rushing this."

Murphy had said, "I support the normalization of relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, but nothing in that agreement requires us to flood the region with more weapons and facilitate a dangerous arms race."

Iran’s Zamaninia elected as chairman of OPEC Executive Board for 2021

Iranian Deputy Oil Minister for International Affairs and Trading Amir-Hossein Zamaninia, who is the country’s governor at the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) has been elected new Chairman of the OPEC Executive Board for 2021. The decision was made during the 180th meeting of the OPEC Conference which was held on Monday, the meeting lasted for more than four hours.

The mentioned Board is the executive body of OPEC which directs the Organization's affairs, implements the decisions made at meetings, reviews and decides on the reports submitted by the Secretary General, submits reports and recommendations to the ministerial meetings, prepares the budget for each calendar year and submits it to the ministerial meetings for approval and etc.

In the meeting, extending the oil output cut of 7.7 million barrels per day was discussed. Although, some OPEC members complained that some members had not complied with the previous decisions, there was a consensus that the organization’s complaint was not in a way that could prevent an extension of the existing deal.

OPEC members’ main concern was how non-OPEC members would cooperate? Iranian Oil Minister Bijan Namdar Zanganeh said in a press conference following the 180th OPEC meeting which was held through video conference.

The 12th meeting of the oil and energy ministers of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and its allies, a grouping known as OPEC plus, was due to be held on Thursday in Vienna but it was postponed to Thursday December 03, 2020

“What is important is that we negotiate and have the patience to reach a conclusion,” Zanganeh said announcing the adjournment of the ministerial meeting.

Jebel Ali Port receives first shipment from Israel

According to media reports, Jebel Ali Port, a major Dubai port has received the first export shipments from Israel. The shipment has been sent by Emirati firm Kimoha from Ashdod of adhesive tape manufactured by Israeli company Davik. The shipment is the first to arrive in the United Arab Emirates and even more notably at one of the busiest ports in the world, since the Abraham Accords normalized ties between the two countries.

“We would like to congratulate Kimoha Entrepreneurs FZCO for adding value to the UAE and Israel diplomatic relations by initiating trade association with Israel-based establishments,” Dubai Ports World (DP), which operates the port, CEO and chairman Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem said in a statement.

“And we are glad that Jebel Ali Port could be an intrinsic part of the transfer from Israel to the UAE. We take great pride in being involved in this momentous achievement that is integral for both countries. This operation is just the beginning of trade and commerce activities. We are confident that this move will be the starting point for trade activities that will have a significant impact on both economies, and the business in the region. We are in complete support of the leadership of the UAE and will do everything in our capacity to foster trade ties with Israel and accelerate economic growth.”

“It is an honor to be able to partake and initiate a significant move that will greatly influence the trade exchange in the UAE and Israel,” said Kimoha chairman Kiran Asher.

“This move will go down in the history of the two countries. We cannot thank DP World enough for helping us to make this transfer a seamless process. We have been running operations from Jafza since 1988, and I must say that it is an ideal location to set industries and connect with the world. Emirates NBD, the largest banking group in the UAE supported this transaction seamlessly.”

DP World is playing an active role since ties between Israel and the UAE were normalized. In early November, it teamed up with Israel Shipyards to try to win the tender to run Haifa Port, and the company is an expert at maximizing efficiency of harbors, even one as relatively small as Haifa's.

What after Fakhrizadeh assassination?

If the reports are true that Israel was involved in Mohsen Fakhrizadeh’s killing, the manner in which it was carried out – in broad daylight and without anyone being caught – shows again Israel’s tremendous capabilities, that is something Iran would be wise to take into consideration while weighing its next moves.

Friday’s assassination of Iran’s top nuclear scientist Fakhrizadeh led to predictable concern from those who prepared the Iranian nuclear deal in 2015. Former CIA head John Brenner was furious, “This was a criminal act and highly reckless,” he tweeted. “Such an act of state-sponsored terrorism would be a flagrant violation of international law and encourage more governments to carry out lethal attacks against foreign officials.”

Ben Rhodes, President Barack Obama Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications was indignant, “This is an outrageous action aimed at undermining diplomacy between an incoming US administration and Iran,” he tweeted. “It’s time for this ceaseless escalation to stop.”

Jeremy Ben-Ami of the left-wing J Street lobbying group was furious. “The assassination of a senior Iranian nuclear scientist appears to be an attempt to sabotage the ability of the incoming Biden administration to re-enter the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as well as the chances of further diplomacy, either by limiting the political leeway of Iranian officials who want to restore the deal, or by triggering an escalation leading to military confrontation,” he said.

Each of these reactions pushed the same theme: whoever carried this out – and all fingers are pointed at Israel – intended to limit President-elect Joe Biden’s space for maneuvering and sabotage any possible diplomacy with Iran.

The unstated subtext of this type of criticism is the same, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu still leading the way, trying to sabotage diplomatic efforts to solve the Iranian nuclear dilemma and undermine the Biden presidency from the get-go.

But that is wrong, the assassination of Fakhrizadeh is not about Biden, it is about Israel’s nearly three-decade effort to prevent Iran from getting a bomb. It is Israel trying to demolish a threat for its existence.

The assassination is just the latest in a series of steps over the last three decades taken to prevent Iran from getting the ability to do it. The killing of Fakhrizadeh will set back Iran’s efforts to attain the bomb because he was a key player in the nuclear program.

Iran has been unable to realize its nuclear ambitions up until now, though it has been trying since the end of the Iran-Iraq War in 1988, is not because of a lack of trying, or because they are any less capable than any of the other countries that have nuclear weapons. Rather, it’s because of actions that Israel and others in the West have taken over the years to bar their path.

These actions included setting up straw companies selling damaged goods to the Iranians so that when they would spin their centrifuges, they would blow up; computer worms and cyber sabotage; mysterious explosions; and assassinations.

Most people, when imagining how Israel might stop Iran from getting a bomb, imagine it will be via bombs or missiles falling from the skies, as was the case when Israel destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, or the Syrian one in 2007. It has to be a new strategy and a new game plan in 2020.

Iran has been kept from reaching its nuclear goals through numerous actions, of which the killing of Fakhrizadeh is just the most recent one, through one big dramatic explosion. To present the killing of Fakhrizadeh as a move intended simply to make things more complicated for Biden is to fail to fully appreciate the degree to which the Israeli government genuinely believes a nuclear Iran is an existential threat that must be stopped at all costs.

The killing need not undermine the diplomacy that Biden might want to pursue. The hit was carried out under the outgoing Trump administration. If Iran does indeed want to turn over a new leaf with the new administration – which it is very much in its interests to do – then it would only be counterproductive to let this killing stand in the way.

Israeli perspective that the JCPOA is a non-starter because under its terms, Iran will be able to produce as much nuclear fuel as it wants in 2030 is worth noting. And as steps such as Friday’s assassination show, Israel – if it was involved – is not going to sit idly by and allow what it deems to be an existential threat to develop, regardless of who is the US president.

OPEC plus leaning towards oil cut extension

According to media reports, OPEC and allies (OPEC plus) are leaning towards delaying next year’s planned increase in oil output to support the market during the second wave of COVID-19 and rising Libyan output, despite a rise in prices.

OPEC plus was due to raise output by 2 million barrels per day (bpd) in January 2021, about 2% of global consumption as it moves to ease this year’s record supply cuts. With demand weakening, OPEC plus has been considering delaying the increase.

Russia is likely to agree on a rollover of current output for the first quarter if needed, a source familiar with the issue said, and would prefer to decide later on extending for the second quarter.

“It looks like the extension is needed,” the source said, citing “possible price drops and demand uncertainties” amid the second wave of the virus.

Oil has rallied in the past weeks, rising to its highest since March this year, near US$49 a barrel, on hopes that coronavirus vaccines will lead to higher demand. This hasn’t changed OPEC plus thinking around the extension.

 “This increase in prices is about sentiment, but we need to extend to have solid market fundamentals to support the prices,” said one. “So far, the best choice is the three-month extension.”

Still, enthusiasm for extended cuts is not universal, delegates and analysts say.

A potential complication is the United Arab Emirates’ wish for a higher OPEC plus quota, Goldman Sachs said this week.

Nigeria also wants a higher quota, and Iraq has talked about being exempt from 2021 reductions.

Goldman said it did not expect such a push from the UAE to derail the extension, and Iraq has said it will support any unanimous OPEC plus decision.

There are several technical meetings this week to prepare the ground for ministerial gatherings on Monday and Tuesday. All meetings are virtual due to the pandemic.

Christyan Malek, Managing Director and Head of oil & gas research at J.P. Morgan, said he expected OPEC+ plus to delay the increase by up to six months despite the price rally, with Saudi Arabia possibly offering deeper voluntary cuts until March next year.

“Inventories are not coming down as quickly as expected. Lockdowns are moving east to west, with more lockdowns expected in the US,” he said.

Malek said the departure of Donald Trump as US President, who was seen by some in OPEC as a friend after he helped bring Russian President Vladimir Putin into the OPEC plus output cut in April, would actually boost the producer alliance.

“Without Trump, OPEC plus is getting stronger rather than weaker,” he said. “Putin is using OPEC plus to get closer to Saudi Arabia, as the departure of Trump creates a bit of a vacuum in the US-Saudi relations.”

According to another report, Saudi Arabia and Russia summoned OPEC plus ministers who oversee their oil production cuts for last-minute talks on Saturday, as the cartel prepares for a decision on whether to delay January’s output increase.

A clear majority of OPEC plus watchers expect the group to maintain their supply curbs at current levels for a few months longer due to lingering uncertainty about demand. However, the decision is by no means certain amid public complaints from Iraq and Nigeria, and private discord with the United Arab Emirates.

The two leading members of OPEC and its allies, Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak and Saudi Energy Minister Abdulaziz bin Salman, requested an informal video conference with their counterparts from the Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee, which includes Algeria, Kazakhstan, Iraq, Nigeria and the UAE, according to a letter seen by Bloomberg.

The unscheduled gathering comes just two days before a full OPEC ministerial meeting on November 30, which will be followed by OPEC plus talks on December 01. The JMMC met online as recently as November 17, but that ended without any kind of recommendation about delaying the January supply increase.

On Thursday, Algerian Energy Minister Abdelmadjid Attar, who this year holds OPEC’s rotating presidency, told Bloomberg that the group must remain cautious because the recent surge in oil to US$45 a barrel in New York could prove fragile.

A separate meeting of a committee of OPEC technical experts considered data that pointed to the risk of a new oil surplus early next year if the cartel and its allies decide to go ahead with the production increase. The 23-nation OPEC plus is scheduled to ease its 7.7 million barrels a day of production cuts by 1.9 million barrels a day from January 01, 2021

Can Iran become a dependable source of copper for Pakistan?

Pakistan imports substantial quantity of refined/purified copper to meet its industrial demand. At present the metal is being imported from far-flung countries, costing huge freight cost. Pakistan can’t import copper from Iran due to the sanctions imposed on the country by the United States.

Production of copper cathode in Iran increased six percent during the first half of the current Iranian calendar this year as compared to the same period last year. Copper cathode output was recorded at about 139,900 tons during the period under reviews, while the budgeted figure was 130,015 tons. Monthly copper cathode production was 24,198 tons or 10 percent higher than the figure of the same month in the previous year.

Production of copper cathode this year is budgeted at 280,000 tons as against reported production of 250,000 tons last year.

In early May, four development projects worth slightly more than US$952 million were inaugurated in the copper sector of Kerman Province in the southeast of Iran.

The projects inaugurated in Khatoon Abad Copper Complex included increasing the capacity of copper smelting in the complex, building a copper concentrate storage, construction of a sulfuric acid production plant, and an oxygen supplying unit. 

By putting the first project into operation, the complex’s capacity for producing copper anode rose by 50 percent to 120,000 tons, and the country’s copper smelting capacity rose to 400,000 tons. This project created jobs for 120 persons.

The second project, which was the construction of a 60,000-ton storage facility, was implemented at the cost of about US$3.7 million plus three million euros, creating jobs for 250 people. The third project was valued at about US$17.8 million plus 100 million euros and the fourth one was put into operation at the cost of about US$4.5 million plus 31 million euros.

Iran has seen its copper exports doubled in the past Iranian calendar year despite a series of bitter sanctions imposed by the United States aimed at hampering the Islamic Republic’s trade of metals.

RCEP a wakeup call for the West

The Pan Asian trade pact between 15 countries including Japan, China, and South Korea, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or RCEP is a wakeup call for the West, writes Lionel Barber, former Editor of The Financial Times.

With the US conspicuous by its absence, RCEP is the latest sign of a shift in economic power eastward. China's stunning third-quarter rebound from COVID-19 contrasts starkly with the relatively feeble recovery in Europe, where governments are still struggling with a second wave of the pandemic.

China has become the European Union's most important trading partner, a remarkable achievement given Beijing only joined the World Trade Organization 19 years ago. "China is catching up even faster," says Herman Van Rompuy, former Belgium Prime Minister, President of the EU council, and leading member of the European Policy Centre in Brussels.

Van Rompuy, a devotee and publisher of haiku poetry knows Asia well. He observes that China's rise and Donald Trump's "America First" protectionism has created a new term in the EU's political lexicon: strategic autonomy. Europe is eager to escape being sandwiched between the two superpowers, but "strategic autonomy" is more easily said than achieved.

First, the EU must judge where best to carve out freedom of maneuver. Should it focus on nurturing specific industrial sectors to create "European champions?" Or is it better to set standards like the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, which are later adopted by the US and the rest of the world?

The EU has a far more developed internal trading bloc, the single market, than the RCEP model. But the single market, in turn, requires a "level playing field" that limits individual countries' discretion to subsidize sectors. Strategies aimed at protecting sectors against U.S. or Asian competition can therefore fall foul of EU rules on competition and the application of state aid.

Between 2014 and 2019, the European Commission antitrust authorities, led by the formidable Margrethe Vestager, blocked six mergers in six different sectors: telecoms, financial services, cement, copper, steel and, most notably, railways. In the last case, the Danish commissioner scuppered a combination between Siemens and Alstom to create a European champion to combat the rapid emergence of China's state-backed train maker CRRC.

The Chinese colossus, itself a fusion of two big rail equipment groups, had revenues of US$30 billion in 2017 and 12% of the worldwide market in trains, services, and signaling. Siemens and Alstom together would have sales of US$15 billion and about 9% of the market. Verstager's decision provoked outrage in Berlin and Paris, where mercantilist instincts go back to the late 17th century.

Diesel multiple units for Sri Lanka manufactured by a CRRC subsidiary at the dockyard in Qingdao: the Chinese colossus had 12% of the worldwide market in trains, services and signaling in 2017.

The political tides have, however, shifted since the outbreak of the COVID pandemic. Governments have been forced to provide billions of euros of financial aid to keep companies afloat. The state is suddenly in the front and center in the economy.

Second, the coronavirus pandemic has turbocharged the internet, highlighting Europe's digital gap with Asian countries. Most European governments have a long way to go to catch up with Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea in terms of data management for reliable tracking and tracing. The lag on the development and application of artificial intelligence compared to mainland China is even more serious.

Third, the brutal lobbying campaign by both China and the U.S. over the adoption of Huawei Technologies' fifth-generation, or 5G, superfast broadband technology was a sober reminder that Europeans had no technological alternatives. Huawei wiped out competition from the likes of Alcatel more than a decade ago.

Finally, there is the "British question." Having exited the EU (Brexit), the UK government has proclaimed the need for a new industrial policy. Prime Minister, Boris Johnson is insisting on maximum flexibility, without being bound by EU rules. Last week, he unveiled a 10-point plan to wean the economy off carbon, with state support for the wind industry and new nuclear plants. "We will make the UK the Saudi Arabia of wind," Johnson promised.

Continental Europe fears that an unfettered UK could use state aid to become a formidable competitor -- which is why the EU is playing hardball in the final phase of the Brexit negotiations on a future trade deal. Member states also want to draw on the 1.8 trillion euro summer rescue package for their pandemic-ravaged economies, including provisions for common borrowing on the bond market. This will include tens of billions of support for "strategic" industries, notably in digital technology.

Europe is also signaling the willingness for a closer relationship with the incoming Biden administration. In a speech this month, Ursula von der Leyen, EU commission president, said the US and Europe enjoyed power and influence "indispensable" to global cooperation. A common agenda would cover climate change, trade and digital issues -- including the taxation of big data giants like Amazon, Facebook, and Google.

Twenty years ago, European politicians employed similar heady rhetoric with the launch of "Agenda 2000" to make Europe "the most competitive, dynamic and knowledge-based economy in the world." Most of the goals were not achieved. The difference today is that China has become an economic force scarcely imaginable at the turn of the century. Europe cannot afford another lost decade.

Iran says won’t negotiate terms of JCPOA

Mahmoud Vaezi, Chief of Staff of Iranian President said, the nuclear agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) which was signed in July 2015, is not open to new rounds of negotiations. The negotiations were held in the past that led to the deal, Vaezi told reporters after a cabinet meeting.

Vaezi also said while Iran has welcomed US President Donald Trump’s defeat, but it is not optimistic about the US administration unless it acts differently.

“President Rouhani announced that if the other JCPOA parties return to January 20, 2017, the day Trump came to power, Iran is ready to step back to the same date as well,” the presidential chief of staff said.

Vaezi, who was a high-ranking diplomat in the Rafsanjani administration, said Trump has disturbed the international order and ruined international relations, including those in the Middle East. “He has put intense pressure on the Iranian people over the past three years,” he added.

Tensions soared between Tehran and Washington when Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from the JCPOA on May 8, 2018. The US president not only exited the deal but has since targeted Iran with a series of harsh economic sanctions Trump has called the sanctions his “maximum pressure” campaign aimed at forcing Iran to renegotiate the nuclear deal. However, Tehran has rejected renegotiating the terms of the deal.

Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif has insisted that “under no circumstances” would Tehran consider renegotiating the terms of the deal which was adopted as a UN Security Council Resolution.

“If we wanted to do that [renegotiate], we would have done it with President Trump four years ago,” Zarif told CBS News earlier this month.

Former European Union foreign policy Chief Catherine Ashton has said there will be resistance to further “asks” of Iran, especially if the US is not offering more in return.

“Yet the Iranians will be relieved to have survived the Trump administration’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign and undoubtedly many will hope Biden’s election represents the opening of a new chapter,” Ashton wrote in an article published by Time magazine on Monday. “But there will be little appetite in Tehran to do more, if asked.”

She confirmed that until President Trump withdrew the US from the nuclear deal, Iran kept to its side of the bargain.

Ashton added, “Finding a way to get support in Congress will be challenging when, as things stand, the Democrats may not have control of the Senate. To put a revived JCPOA on firm foundations, he needs to be able to guarantee that if Iran sticks to its part of the bargain, the US will too.”

She also called on the incoming Biden administration to work with Congress, saying, “Returning to the JCPOA with only Presidential authority to keep it in place might work for the short term, but it is not a sustainable approach.”

Israeli mantra against Iran aimed at convincing Saudi Arabia to buy more arms

Saudi Arabia is vehemently denying normalization of relationship with Israel, but Iran is being projected a threat by Jerusalem, Riyadh and Washington. Analysts term Israeli mantra against Iran aimed at convincing Saudi Arabia to buy more arms. Over the years Israel has brainwashed the monarchy by constantly hammering, “Iran is a bigger treat as compared to Israel.

Following the weapons deal signed between the UAE and the US, many analysts have raised concerns that it would bring about a new cycle of arms proliferation in a region already flooded with weapons and where major powers have no reservations about using proxy groups to fight their wars.

With Iran being portrayed as a global threat by Jerusalem and Riyadh, the United States may once again succeed in making another large scale arms sale to the kingdom to tilt the power balance even further against Tehran.

Over the years, Saudi Arabia's appetite for weapons has grown and with normalization with Israel no longer being a pipe dream, the Kingdom will likely ask for something from Washington in return.

Though Washington has been selling billions of dollars military hardware to Saudi Arabia, the US has been bound to preserve Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge (QME) in the Middle East before selling any advanced weaponry to regional states.

But this summer, following normalization of relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, the administration of US President Donald Trump announced an arms package to UAE valued at almost US$23.4 billion, which includes F-35 stealth fighter jets, drones with anti-submarine warfare kits, stealth cruise missiles and more.

A March report published by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute found that arms imports by states in the Middle East increased by 61% between 2015–19 over 2010–14. Saudi Arabia received 35% of all arms transfers to the region followed by Egypt (16%) and the UAE (9.7%).

American arms exports to the Middle East increased by 79% over the last decade and accounted for 51% of total US arms exports during 2015-19.

Last year the Institute found Middle East arms imports almost doubled in the previous five years, with Saudi Arabia becoming the world’s largest arms importer during 2014-18.

Arms sales to Saudi Arabia are nevertheless controversial, as the Kingdom has an atrocious human rights record and is leading an alliance of Arab states (including the UAE) in a war in Yemen. That war has sparked one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world and has led to dozens of countries imposing bans on arms sales to the Saudis.

But Riyadh imports most of its arms, such as fighter jets, tanks, missiles, advanced intelligence-gathering equipment and more, from the United States, and Washington has not imposed any restriction yet.

Not only are the Saudis’ arms purchases taking place against the background of war in Yemen, but Iran’s increasing hostility has led the Kingdom to procure more and more weapons.

With Israel giving Washington the green signal to sell the F-35 to the UAE, Saudi Arabia will likely demand the same. In addition to advanced precision missiles, Riyadh has also expressed interest in active protection systems for its armored vehicles, missile defense batteries, electronic interference systems and advanced radar and other detection systems. It might also want advanced armed drones like the MQ-9 Reaper drones and maritime weaponry.

Chabahar port of Iran an emerging hub of transit trade and foreign investment

Transit of goods through Southeastern Chabahar port of Iran has increased significantly in recent years due to offered incentives and the development of the port’s infrastructure. Loading and unloading figure have reached two million tons, while it was merely 200,000 tons just a few years ago. The port aimed at attracting regional markets that include India and Afghanistan as well as the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

Iran's Ports and Maritime Organization (PMO) Deputy Head for Ports and Economic affairs said, transit of goods through Southeastern Chabahar port has increased significantly in recent years due to offered incentives and the development of the port’s infrastructure.

“A 70% discount on tariffs and lowering transit costs through Chabahar port have been so effective that Chabahar loading and unloading figure has reached two million tons, while it was merely 200,000 tons just a few years ago,” Farhad Montaser Kouhsari told IRNA. According to Kouhsari, many of the country’s neighbors are currently choosing Chabahar port as the main route to ship their imported and exported goods, as well as raw material.

He emphasized that the goal of the port is now to attract regional markets including India and Afghanistan, Iran's big trade partners, and also the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) which can use Chabahar port to transit their goods with an average of 70% discount.

Montaser Kouhsari went on to say that the costs of commodity transit through Chabahar have been lowered and at the same time the infrastructure of the port has been improved so that it could load and unload all varieties of goods in a reasonable time.

Although, Chabahar is not directly on the US list of sanctions, it has been affected by them, he said adding that the PMO has identified potential customers and various incentives are offered so that they choose Chabahar as their main base.

Chabahar is Iran’s only ocean port, which is located in the southeastern Sistan-Balouchestan Province near the Indian Ocean. The port provides unique opportunities for investment of the private sectors of Iran and other regional countries.

In line with the development of the port, five big projects were recently started. The projects include petrochemical storage reservoirs, a goods warehouse, two oil products tanks, and a decontamination terminal of trucks. Implementation of eight other big projects in the port is in progress as well.

Managing Director of Chabahar Free Zone Organization said that through implementation of development programs, this organization is preparing the ground for the attraction of investors. Abdul-Rahim Kordi said these programs are creating trust for the investors in the zone.

Located on the coast of the Gulf of Oman in Iran’s southeastern Sistan-Baluchestan Province, Chabahar is the country’s only oceanic port and given its strategic location in the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) development of the port is of high significance for Iran. The government has some major projects to create multi-dimensional transportation facilities in this port.

In addition, Chabahar Free Zone has been suggested as a transit and logistic gateway for Iran's domestic market which, while reducing the cost and time of transportation it has also provided profitable economic opportunities in the development of logistics facilities. It is a multi-purpose zone with educational, industrial, tourism and transportation sectors.

Chabahar Free Zone Organization has a plan for the development of specialized industrial parks with the participation of the private sector in the fields of industry, logistics, education, healthcare, tourism, etc., which the establishment of logistics industrial park is followed in the framework of upstream programs and documents.

At present Chabahar Free Zone is considered as a transit gateway in eastern Iran and based on national plans and also the interest shown by international parties, it is noteworthy as a center for providing logistics support, transportation and transit services.

Chabahar Free Zone with the aim of facilitating trade and minimizing transportation costs and focusing on services has allocated 150 hectares of land to create a logistics industrial park. This industrial park will be assigned to the international investors and or Iran-foreign joint venture.

Considering the geographical location, this industrial park can be connected to the Chabahar railway and will be established to have full support services. Centers such as public warehouses, cold storages, special warehouses for storing liquid and bulk goods, container warehouses, required laboratories, as well as personnel service facilities have been predicted.

Chabahar-Zahedan railway is expected to become operational in the next Iranian calendar year (begins in March 2021). Keeping in view the important role that the free zones play in promoting the country’s export and employment, Iran is seriously pursuing development of its existing free zones and establishment of new zones as well.

More development measures in this field have been taking since the US re-imposition of sanctions on the Iranian economy in November 2018, as Iran is reducing its dependence on the oil income, while elevating its domestic production and non-oil exports.

Although, the sanctions have disrupted Iran’s economic activities, they could not impede the development of Iranian free zones; in fact, the development of these zones has been even accelerated. Many strides made for increasing activities in the free zones have played a significant part in boosting the country’s non-oil exports and brought prosperity in the other economic sectors.

Is sending heavy bombers to Middle East part of pressurizing Iran?

Reportedly, the United States has sent heavy bombers to the Middle East in an apparent threat to Iran, amid swirling speculation that US President Donald Trump plans to take military action against its foe before President-elect Joe Biden enters office. US Central Command said the planes were sent into the region “to deter aggression and reassure US partners and allies.”

In a highly irregular move, the B-52H planes were seen flying toward Israeli airspace on Saturday en route to the base where they will be stationed, likely in Qatar. The aircraft were spotted on civilian tracking software approaching Israel before they apparently turned off their transponders, rendering them invisible on those applications.

It was the third time in the past year and a half that B-52 bombers, which are capable of carrying nuclear weapons and other powerful munitions, have been deployed to the region in tacit threats to Iran.

In previous cases, the bombers were not seen flying through Israeli airspace. It was not immediately clear what accounted for the change in route.

The planes were ordered on short notice to fly to the Middle East nonstop from their home base in North Dakota, refueling along the way in mid-air. The bombers were accompanied on the mission by F-15 and F-16 fighter jets, as well as KC-10 and KC-135 refueling planes, said US Central Command (CENTCOM).

“The ability to quickly move forces into, out of and around the theater to seize, retain and exploit the initiative is the key to deterring potential aggression,” Lt. Gen. Greg Guillot, commander of the US military’s 9th Air Force, said in a statement.

The general said deploying bombers to the region allows their crews to better acquaint themselves with the area and work better with local units.

“These missions help bomber aircrews gain familiarity with the region’s airspace and command and control functions and allow them to integrate with the theater’s US and partner air assets, increasing the combined force’s overall readiness,” Guillot said.

The US has previously deployed B-52 bombers to the region during periods of heightened tensions. This occurred in early 2020 after the US killed top Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani in an airstrike in Iraq. The strategic aircraft were also sent to the region in May 2019, when Iran allegedly attacked a number of US allies in the Persian Gulf and shot down an American spy drone that flew near its airspace.

The deployment of the long-range heavy bombers came amid reports that the Trump administration — and Israel — planned to carry out military operations against Iran before Biden enters office. The US president-elect is expected to take a somewhat softer, more diplomatic approach than Trump, who pulled out of the 2015 nuclear deal world powers signed with Iran and employed a so-called “maximum pressure” campaign of heavy economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic.

Though, analysts say this effort has created leverage for future negotiations, the tactic has not yet borne fruit in terms of halting Iran’s nuclear efforts — indeed the Islamic Republic has amassed far more nuclear material and at higher levels of enrichment under the campaign — nor has it curbed Tehran’s regional hegemony ambitions.

Biden, who was Vice President to Barrack Obama when the 2015 accord was signed, has said that he plans to return to the agreement as a basis for further negotiations with Iran.

The Trump administration is reportedly planning a bevy of wide-ranging sanctions on Iran to make it more difficult for the incoming administration to rejoin the nuclear deal.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited the region over the past week, including a stop in Israel, in which he told the Jerusalem Post that the US would consider a military strike against Iran.

“The administration has been clear on that for its entire four years. There is no reason that would change today or tomorrow,” Pompeo said.

Last Friday, Channel 13 reported that Israel and the US were planning to increase pressure on Iran with “covert operations” and economic sanctions during Trump’s final weeks in office. Jerusalem and Washington assess that Tehran will not respond militarily before the end of Trump’s term. The report did not elaborate on the nature of actions that may be taken.

Among other covert operations against Iran’s rogue nuclear program, Israel and the US were reportedly responsible for introducing the Stuxnet computer virus to sabotage parts of Iran’s nuclear enrichment process a decade ago, and for more recent sabotage attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities. Israel’s Mossad spy agency spirited out a vast trove of Iranian documentation regarding the regime’s nuclear program, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu revealed in 2018. Israel has also been linked in reports to the killings of several Iranian nuclear scientists, and last week The New York Times reported that Israeli agents killed Al-Qaeda’s No. 2 Abu Muhammad al-Masri in Tehran in August at the behest of the US.

Last Monday, it was reported that Trump asked top advisers if he had options to strike Iranian nuclear sites during his last weeks in office, but was dissuaded with warnings it could lead to a wider conflict. Trump convened the officials a day after the UN nuclear watchdog said Iran had stockpiled over 12 times more enriched uranium than the 2015 nuclear deal allows, the report said, citing four current and former US officials.

 

Joe Biden names his foreign policy team

US President-elect Joe Biden has named his top foreign policy staff on Monday. He announced, as expected, Antony Blinken would serve as secretary of state.

“We have no time to lose when it comes to our national security and foreign policy,” the president-elect said in a press release. “I need a team ready on Day One to help me reclaim America’s seat at the head of the table, rally the world to meet the biggest challenges we face, and advance our security, prosperity, and values.”

Biden also tapped former secretary of state and former senator, John Kerry, as Special Presidential Envoy for Climate. He will sit on the National Security Council as well. “This marks the first time that the NSC will include an official dedicated to climate change, reflecting the president-elect’s commitment to addressing climate change as an urgent national security issue,” the transition team said in a press release.

Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, a veteran member of the Foreign Service, would serve as ambassador to the UN. Thomas-Greenfield served in many positions during her 35-year service, including as ambassador to Liberia. She was posted in Pakistan, Nigeria, Kenya, and at the US mission to the UN in Geneva. In 2013, she was appointed as assistant secretary for the Bureau of African Affairs, where she led the policy on sub-Saharan Africa. Thomas-Greenfield also served as Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of human resources and as Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Population, Refugees and Migration Bureau.

Ambassador Barbara Bodine is the Director of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown, where Thomas-Greenfield was the inaugural Distinguished Resident Fellow in African Studies from 2017 to 2019. “She has a background and experience directly with multilateral institutions,” Bodine said. “After serving in Africa, as she has as assistant secretary and ambassador, she also has seen how multilateralism or multilateral collaboration is how we operate in the field, on the ground every day,” she added.

According to Bodine, the fact that her name came out at the same time as Antony Blinken and Jake Sullivan and before all the other members of the administration, “signals that diplomacy is going to be a fundamental tool, not a secondary tool, and that we want to reengage credibly, collaboratively, with our partners, our friends and the rest of the world.”

She noted that Thomas-Greenfield is experienced in “conflict areas and worked on how you craft sustainable agreements to bring about peace.”

One important element for her work, Bodine noted, is that the US is going to chair the Security Council starting in March, which would require a knowledgeable person to hold the position. She added that Thomas-Greenfield doesn’t have experience with Israel or the Near East, “but she is going to represent the policy of the administration” when it comes to the region.

Biden also named Jake Sullivan as a national security adviser, according to media reports. Sullivan has gone a long way with Biden and Hillary Clinton. He advised Clinton during her 2008 primary bid and later Obama in his general-election bid. When Clinton was appointed secretary of state, Sullivan served as her deputy chief of staff and director of policy planning. When Clinton left the administration during Obama’s second term, he served as Biden’s top security aide. In 2016, he again advised Clinton during her presidential campaign. He was instrumental in shaping the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. He had defended the agreement.

“Under the deal, Iran’s nuclear program was in a box, it was frozen,” Sullivan wrote. “Under the deal, there were no rocket attacks killing Americans in Iraq... Today, Iran is attacking shipping in the Gulf and threatening the rest of the region.”

In August, he spoke at a webinar hosted by Democratic Majority of Israel, and said that Biden believes that “it is not a concession of leverage to sit down with Iran at the bargaining table.”

Sullivan said that at the end of the day, “what has been proven out over the past few years is that the United States has immense capacity, through the financial sanctions tool, to very swiftly ratchet up pressure. We did that in the Obama administration; the Trump administration did it; Iran knows that.

“He fundamentally believes that there’s a way to interplay the diplomacy side of this equation and the pressure side of this equation in a way that will help us secure the objectives that we’re trying to achieve,” Sullivan added.

According to Sullivan, diplomacy backed by pressure that creates leverage “is the kind of formula that could work again to make progress, not just on the core nuclear issues, but on some of these other challenges as well.

“One of the vice president’s commitments and all of this is to get to the table to be able to negotiate a follow-on agreement that does materially advance the security of the United States, of Israel, and our other regional partners as well, and does hold Iran to account.

“And he believes that that is the best way to actually produce a durable outcome,” he added.

Sullivan – together with two other former Obama officials, ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro and under-secretary of state Wendy Sherman – played a role in shaping the Democratic Party’s foreign-policy platform.

Following the signing of the Abraham Accords to normalize relations between Israel and the UAE and Bahrain, Sullivan praised the move, saying the deal was a “positive accomplishment” for the president’s foreign policy.

“It’s good for the region, it’s good for Israel, it’s good for peace,” said Sullivan during an interview on the Yahoo News podcast Skullduggery.

Netanyahu trip to Saudi Arabia signifies importance of ties between two countries

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Mossad chief Yossi Cohen met with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) in Neom, Saudi Arabia on Sunday, Israeli sources confirmed. Netanyahu used a private plane belonging to businessman Udi Angel, which he has used for past diplomatic trips. The plane left Israel at 5.00 pm on Sunday and returned after midnight.

The trip was kept tightly under wraps, with Netanyahu not informing Defense Minister Benny Gantz or Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi before it took place. "Gantz is doing politics while the prime minister is making peace," Netanyahu's social media adviser tweeted as reports of the visit came out.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also met with Netanyahu and MBS in Neom, a new city in northern Saudi Arabia on the Red Sea meant to show of the Kingdoms’ technological advancement.

A trip by Netanyahu to Saudi Arabia showcased the importance of Israel-Saudi Arabia ties in the last months of the Trump administration. This is important for numerous reasons, including regional alliances and security and economic ties that are flowering between Israel the Gulf States after the Abraham Accords.

Topaz Luk, Adviser to Israeli Prime Minister tweeted about Netanyahu “doing peace.” KAN correspondent Amichai Stein tweeted that the Prime Minister traveled to Saudi Arabia for a meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Pompeo tweeted about his “Constructive visit with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Neom. The United States and Saudi Arabia have come a long way since President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and King Abdul Aziz Al Saud first laid the foundation for our ties 75 years ago.”

The meeting came as Iranian-backed Houthi rebels fired ballistic missiles at an Aramco installation in Jeddah, which is far south of Neom, where the apparent meeting took place. Boris Johnson had noted during the recent G20, hosted by Saudi Arabia, that he wished he could have visited.

In this sense the center of the story is also about Saudi Arabia’s future. Riyadh has been talking more about climate change and trying to showcase the city of the future, the planned city of Neom which will cost hundreds of billions to build but will show what Saudi Arabia’s future can be.

While Riyadh has suffered diplomatic setbacks on the world stage in recent years, it has been trying to shore up support. Working with the current US administration and supporting peaceful outreach from Bahrain and the UAE to Israel have been part of that.

Saudi Arabia was the main engine behind the Arab peace initiative of 2002 and supported the concept of peace and normalization with Israel, with a Palestinian state being created. It doesn’t want to go back on that promise.

The UAE has posited that peace has helped stop Israeli annexation. Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE ambassador to the US and Hend al-Otaiba, the spokesperson at the Foreign Ministry who recently penned an op-ed in Tablet, have stressed this point.

The Emirates and Bahrain are deeply investing in coexistence and interfaith initiatives, and Israelis are running to embrace them. Saudi Arabia, the larger of the countries and a global power in the Muslim world, has been more cautious, but has the same overall agenda as it speaks about reform and change.

However, Saudi Arabia has challenges abroad. It has been critiqued for human rights abuses in recent years, especially in the wake of breaking relations with Qatar in 2017.

Qatar and Turkey have mobilized state media and allies in Western governments, academia and media to portray Saudi Arabia as a human rights violator. The truth is more complex. Riyadh has been a monarchy for the last century and has had the same human rights issues in the 1990s as it has today.

The sudden daylight in relations that Riyadh feels from Western powers is about more than just an objective view of the situation in the kingdom, it is about some agendas being pushed by those in the West who seek a redress to decades of the West being close to Middle East Gulf countries. There are also claims that those who are more close to Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood have driven this narrative, trying to portray Riyadh more negatively than Qatar and Turkey.  

The result  has been much closer visible work between Saudi Arabia and Egypt, as well as between the UAE, Bahrain, India, Jordan, Greece and Egypt and Israel. This system of countries is juxtaposed with the Iranian alliance that includes its proxies in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen, and the Turkey-Qatar alliance that includes Hamas.

These countries work on opposite sides in Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon. Riyadh is a supporter of Sunnis in Lebanon and Iraq, for instance, but must seek to fight for their hearts and minds against Turkey. This is a global struggle that also involves Pakistan and Malaysia. And it also involves Israel.

That is why the Pompeo visit, fresh from meeting the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Saudi hosting of the G20, the Houthi missile fire and reports of Netanyahu’s trip are all part of the same story. Saudi Arabia appeared to be moving toward peace with Israel. That would open many doors. But there are questions in Riyadh about what will change next year under President-elect Joe Biden.

Biden has been critical of Saudi Arabia and also of Turkey. US commentators critique the Riyadh-led war against the Houthis in Yemen. Major think tanks, some of which are warmer toward Iran or Qatar, seek to tarnish Saudi Arabia’s image. But at the G20 meeting Riyadh and Ankara appeared to be getting along better.

Many wonder what comes next. Closer Saudi-Israeli ties could be on the list. Riyadh has been flexible about flights and more openly supportive of the Abraham Accords. There is a role that Israel could play in the Saudi economy and cities like Neom if there were normalization. It could also mean a re-alignment of other issues from Iraq to Lebanon.

Clearly the willingness to be more open about these types of meetings is part and parcel of a movement in a direction that has been paved by Abu Dhabi and its innovative approach to rapidly expanding ties. Flights begin on 26th November to Dubai, for instance. That is symbolic, as symbolic as the business jet that left Israel at five in the afternoon yesterday and appeared headed to Neom.

Likely members of Joe Biden foreign policy team

In these blogs I often talk about the US foreign policy and the damage it causes, a look at Biden's foreign policy team seems inevitable. Susan Rice of Benghazi fame, National Security Advisor under Barak Obama, is likely to become Secretary of State.

Others likely selections is Michele Flournoy, co-founder of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) as Secretary of Defense. Flournoy is a hawk and CNAS is financed by donations from who-is-who of the military industrial complex. She also co-founded WestExec Advisors, a consultancy that pulls strings to help companies to win Pentagon contracts. 

Also at WestExec Advisors was Tony Blinken who is set to become the National Security Advisor. He was National Security Advisor for then Vice President Biden, Deputy National Security Advisor for Obama and Deputy Secretary of State. 

All three, together with Joe Biden, promoted the 2003 war on Iraq and supported the wars the Obama administration launched or continued against some seven countries. They will continue to wage those wars and will probably add a few new ones.

Biden has said that he will re-instate the nuclear agreement with Iran but with 'amendments'. A realistic analysis shows that Iran is likely to reject any modification of the original deal.

The Biden administration will face the harsh reality that the amendments to the JCPOA that it needs to make its return to the agreement politically viable are unacceptable to Iran. The new US administration will more than likely find itself in a situation in which sanctions, including those on oil exports, must be maintained in an effort to pressure Iran to yield to US demands to modify the JCPOA.

There will be much pressure from the liberal hawks to finish the war they had launched against Syria by again intensifying it. Trump had ended the CIA's Jihadi supply program. The Biden team may well reintroduce such a scheme.

Susan Rice has criticized Trump's Doha deal with the Taliban. Under a Biden administration US troop levels in Afghanistan are therefore likely to increase again.

One possible change may come in the US support for the Saudi war on Yemen. The Democrats dislike Mohammad bin Salman and may try to use the Yemen issue to push him out of his Crown Prince position.

Biden and his team have supported the coup attempt in Venezuela. They only criticized it for not being done right and will probably come up with their own bloody 'solution'.

After four years of Russiagate nonsense, which Susan Rice had helped to launch, it is impossible to again 'reset' the relations with Russia. Biden could immediately agree to renew the New START treaty which limits strategic nuclear weapons but it is more likely that he will want to add, like with Iran's nuclear deal, certain 'amendments' which will be hard to negotiate. Under Biden the Ukraine may be pushed into another war against its eastern citizens. Belarus will remain on the 'regime change' target list.

Asia is the place where Biden's policies may be less confrontational than Trump's.

China would have a big sigh of relief if Biden picks Rice as his secretary of state. Beijing knows her well, as she had a hands-on role in re-molding the relationship from engagement to selective competition, which could well be the post-Trump China policies.

For the Indian audience, which is obsessive about Biden’s China policy, I would recommend Rice’s oral history where she narrates her experience as NSA on how the US and China could effectively coordinate despite their strategic rivalry and how China actually helped America battle Ebola.

Interestingly, the recording was made in April this year amidst the “Wuhan virus” pandemic in the US and Trump’s trade and tech war with China. Simply put, Rice highlighted a productive relationship with Beijing while probably sharing the more Sino-skeptic sentiment of many of America’s foreign policy experts and lawmakers.

All together the Biden/Harris regime will be a continuation of the Obama regime. Its foreign policies will have awful consequences for a lot of people on this planet.

Domestically Biden/Harris will revive all the bad feelings that led to the election of Donald Trump. The demographics of the election show no sign of a permanent majority for Democrats.

It is therefore highly probable that Trump, or a more competent and thereby more dangerous populist republican, will again win in 2024.

Iran unveils a new warship packed with drones and missiles

Iran unveiled a new ship over the weekend called the Shahid Roudaki. It is part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and was given a spotlight at Bandar Abbas port near the strategic Straits of Hormuz on Thursday. The ship is so interesting to Iran watchers that the United States Naval Institute ran a story about it.

On its surface this is just a transport ship, but Iran has crowded its deck with all sorts of weapons to show off what it can do. According to aerial photos and description the ship has been packed with multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) that are mounted on fast boats. There is also an advanced 3rd Khordad air defense system and helicopters, as well as drones and anti-ship missiles. It is being termed a floating armory, or a floating “bazarr”.  

The Bell 412 helicopter appears to be one of those old American helicopters that Iran has because it once had a bell helicopter Textron factory under the Shah. The 3rd Khordad system is more recent. It was used to down a US$200 million American Global Hawk drone in June 2019. The six Ababil drones, noted in the photo, are part of Iran’s expanding drone arsenal. It is often alleged that Iran used drones and cruise missiles to attack Saudi Arabia in September 2019. Iran has also sent drones to Syria and used them to threaten Israel and provided them to Hezbollah.

According to H.I Sutton, who wrote the USNI news piece, the ship has four Qader anti-ship missiles, the Iranian version of the Chinese C-802. The ship is 492 feet long and 72 feet wide. It also has 23 mm anti aircraft guns. “It seems unlikely that these systems would be arrayed like this in normal operations. The small boats may be a common feature, but the other systems appear only representative of her potential capability and role,” Sutton writes. The assessment is that this ship is capable of long range missions and support.

Iran has a relatively weak navy. It relies on the IRGC fast boats to ward off US ships. The US warned the fast boats to stop harassing American ships in the spring and US President Donald Trump threatened to sink the Iranian ships. Iran has been training recently against a mock US aircraft carrier, a giant model it keeps sinking and strafing to show off. But Iran’s navy is no match for the American Fifth Fleet.  

The US Navy’s Nimitz Carrier Strike Group recently left the Persian Gulf to train with Japan, India and Australia for a drill called Malabar. The US is increasingly working with India on regional security. India is also a close partner of Israel and the UAE. US carriers can be at sea for a very long time. The Abraham Lincoln was at sea for 295 days, during which it also went to the US 5th Fleet base in Bahrain. US ships such as the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea and USNS Wally Schirra and USS Winston Churchill are in the area as well.  

Even though the US Navy has immense firepower, the new Iranian ship is still an asymmetric threat. Sutton writes in a separate post at Covert Shores “in fact while the IRGC-N has been limited to local operations in the Persian Gulf, the IRGC as a whole is active further afield. They have interests in Syria for example. So she may turn up in the Mediterranean to support IRGC efforts ashore. Or provide intelligence to proxy forces in conflicts which Iran is technically not involved in.” This might involve supporting the Houthis in Yemen, for instance.

Other experts, such as Jeremy Binnie of Janes Defense Weekly, noted that the new Iranian ship is likely a ship built in Italy in 1992 once called Galaxy F. He pointed out online that it carries a 2031 Radar unit that is used to “support long-range anti-ship missiles.” 

Could this be a forward base for the IRGC, or part of an expeditionary unit? It was provided to the IRGC likely to harass Iran’s foes. That could be Gulf states or Israel or the US. Iran has provided the Houthis with drones and ballistic missiles to attack Riyadh in recent years. The US Navy helped intercept three of these shipments over the years. The US also maintains what is called by those in the know; the “petting zoo” in Washington where captured Iranian missiles and drones provided to the Houthis are shown to experts.

Furthermore, Iran has been building new drones. It has showcased drones armed with missiles in September and it has shown off a new train capable of carrying ballistic missiles on November 5. An arms embargo on Iran ended last month and Iran says it may soon be exporting weapons.

Also Iran recently began working with North Korea again on missile development, US reports indicated in October. Iran has also shown off a new Pars satellite it wants to launch. Tal Inbar, an expert on aerospace technology, has tweeted images noting Iran’s Sejil missile put on a launcher and also reports about the deputy head of Iran’s Space Research Center Jafar Salehi announcing plans for a new launch of a 100kg satellite. The satellite may be for telecommunications. Iran launched its first military satellite in April.

Video of the ship was put online on November 19. Clearly Iran is sending yet another message to the region that it has the indigenous technology to build numerous weapons. Reports that this was an “aircraft carrier” style of ship were a bit exaggerated, but this new Iranian ship certainly gives the country more options at sea.

Iran has done joint training with Russia and Iran at sea, a message to the West and Gulf that it has allies in faraway places. Israel struck Iranian IRGC Quds Force sites in Syria on November 18. Israel said it was sending a message to Iran and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Iran against entrenching in Syria. 

Saudi Arabia may not find Biden as bad as being perceived

Pakistan had enjoyed extremely cordial relations with Saudi Arabia and Iran in the past. Now, one is termed friend and other is declared foe of United States. One of the remote possibilities of easing tension between the arch-rivals is change of hearts after the change in White House. Many Muslim countries wish Joe Biden succeeds in restoring working relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran. The first step in this direction is Saudi Arabia accepting Joe Biden as friend getting ready for the reconciliation with Iran.

Under Donald Trump, Saudi Arabia got all the attention it wanted from the United States. While Joe Biden presidency may end the love-fest, the Kingdom’s leaders may not mind as much as one might think. King Salman bin Abdulaziz and his son, Crown Prince Mohammed, are set to lose much of what they gained during Trump’s four years in office.

A Joe Biden administration might seem all bad for the kingdom and for the crown prince who largely runs the country and assumed his role less than a year after Trump took office. While there will be greater scrutiny, especially over human rights, the country has an opportunity in a US president who isn’t all that different from Trump in regarding Saudi Arabia as a crucial ally in a volatile region.

“What Saudi Arabia has wanted is to be seen as a state like any other, to be a leader in the G-20, to have legitimacy,” said Karen Young, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “What the Biden administration can offer is to say, ‘OK fine, you want to be treated like any other partner in the Middle East, no more special relationship, let’s lay it all out.’”

Saudi Arabia will get a fresh chance to burnish its bona fides this weekend when it hosts a virtual summit of the Group of 20 nations. It’s still unclear whether Trump will make a video appearance. In yet one more sign of the Trump administration’s long support for the regime, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo will visit the country’s leaders briefly on Sunday in the futuristic planned city of Neom.

Saudi Arabia already seems to be adjusting to the new political reality. After initially holding off, its leaders sent cables congratulating Biden and seeking warmer ties with the US. King Salman praised the historical deep-rooted relations between the two friendly countries, adding that both countries are keen to develop and enhance these relations in all fields.

During his election campaign, Biden referred to the country as a “pariah” and said he would end support for the war in Yemen, where a Saudi-led coalition has been fighting the Iran-aligned Houthis for more than five years in an effort to restore the internationally recognized government, contributing to one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises. At the same time, Biden has made clear Saudi Arabia is a “critical” partner in preserving stability in energy markets and the Middle East.

 “We should recognize the value of cooperation on counter-terrorism and deterring Iran,” Biden told the Council on Foreign Relations in July 2019. “But America needs to insist on responsible Saudi actions and impose consequences for reckless ones.” Such pledges to cooperate have helped keep calm in Saudi Arabia. Officials recognize that it is a less harsh tone than President Barack Obama took, he had once vented about the “so-called ally” and said Saudi Arabia must “share” the region with Iran.

Saudi Arabia’s leadership is also assuaged by Biden’s past comments. While he wants to rejoin the Iran nuclear deal that Trump abandoned, he also wants follow-on negotiations to strengthen the deal. Saudi Arabia regards Iran as its chief regional foe, and opposed the 2015 nuclear accord between Iran and world powers.

“Given the fact that we’re weaning ourselves off Arab hydrocarbon, Biden can pursue a different approach,” said Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and former Mideast official at the State Department. At the same time, he said, the Biden administration will want to make sure Saudi Arabia sees a smooth transition of its own should King Salman, who is 84 now, formally transfer power to the crown prince.

 

 

Can Trump initiate a war against Iran now?

Recently there were some reports about US President Donald Trump considering taking military action against Iran during his remaining few days at the White House.

According to a report by New York Times, “President Trump asked senior advisers in an Oval Office meeting whether he had options to take action against Iran’s main nuclear site in the coming weeks.

A range of senior advisers discouraged the president from moving ahead with a military strike. The advisers — including Vice President Mike Pence; Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Christopher C. Miller, the acting defense secretary; and Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — warned that a strike against Iran’s facilities could easily escalate into a broader conflict in the last weeks of Trump’s presidency.”

While New York Times says Trump was the initiator of this plan, some other sources say the plan was initiated by other officials of the White House but Trump was not interested in it. 

Regarding the psychological warfare orchestrated against Iran, some points and possibilities should not be neglected. These include:

On the eve of the martyrdom of Lt. General Qasim Soleimani, assassinated in Iraq, the US administration was worried about possible Iran’s revenge and actions against the US interests in the region. Therefore, the recent US psychological war can be interpreted as a part of the White House’s efforts to create a balance of horror to prevent Iran’s possible measures against the US interests.

A question also arise, why has Trump revealed its plan if he really intended to pave the way for military action against Iran or its regional allies? Why didn’t he attack Iran or its allies before or after the assassination of Lt. Gen. Soleimani?

Trump’s possible move can also be considered as part of his efforts to increase the costs of his removal from power for his opponents and rival Biden and also to satisfy his rightist supporters.

Final point to ponder, it should not be forgotten that making such a dangerous decision that can lead to an all-out regional war cannot be made by Trump himself. Such a decision needs confirmation of both US Republicans and Democrats.

Any media report to introduce Trump as the only responsible for a possible attack on Iran aims to reduce the consequences of such a dangerous possible measure and limit Iran’s response.

US recent moves to reduce the number of its troops in Iraq and the region can be interpreted as the White House's tactic to decrease its possible fatalities and losses.

 

Can US$23 billion sale of arms to United Arab Emirates be stopped?

According to a Reuters report, three US senators said Wednesday that they would introduce legislation seeking to halt the Trump administration’s effort to sell more than US$23 billion of drones and other weapons systems to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), setting up a showdown with the president just weeks before he is due to leave office.

Democratic Senators Bob Menendez and Chris Murphy and Republican Senator Rand Paul will introduce four separate resolutions of disapproval of President Donald Trump’s plan to sell more than US$23 billion worth of Reaper drones, F-35 fighter aircraft and air-to-air missiles and other munitions to the UAE.

The huge sale could alter the balance of power in the Middle East, and members of Congress have scrape the administration’s attempt to rush it through, having sent a formal notice to Congress only last week.

Many lawmakers are concerned that the UAE would use the weapons in attacks that would harm civilians in Yemen, whose civil war is considered one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters.

When the deal was announced, Amnesty International warned that the weapons would be used for “attacks that violate international humanitarian law and kill, as well as injure thousands of Yemeni civilians.”

While the resolutions bring attention to lawmakers’ questions about the massive sales, and could delay them, they are unlikely to stop them.

US law covering major arms deals lets senators force votes on resolutions of disapproval. However, to go into effect the resolutions must pass the Republican-led Senate, which rarely breaks from Trump. They also must pass the Democratic-led House of Representatives and survive Trump vetoes.

Incoming President, Joe Biden could ultimately stop them for reasons of national security, making a prediction on the final outcome difficult.

The senators said the Trump administration, seeking to rush the sale as it brokered a peace deal between the UAE and Israel, circumvented the normal review process. They said State and the Pentagon failed to respond to their inquiries.

Weaponry involved includes the world’s most advanced fighter jet, more than 14,000 bombs and munitions and the second-largest sale of U.S. drones to a single country.

The Senate Foreign Relations and House of Representatives Foreign Affairs committees have the right to review and attempt to block weapons sales.

Past measures to block arms sales over concerns about Yemeni casualties passed the House and Senate with bipartisan support, but failed to get enough Republican backing to override Trump’s vetoes.

Lawmakers have also expressed concern about whether the UAE sales would violate a longstanding agreement with Israel that any US weapons sold in the Middle East would not impair its “quantitative military edge” over neighboring states.

Menendez is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and in line to become chairman next year if Democrats take control of the Senate in Georgia runoff elections in January.