Posts Tagged ‘sanctions’

China has opened a railway link with Iran as a response to the sanctions set on the Middle Eastern country by President Donald Trump’s administration after Trump recently ended the Iran deal.

Meanwhile, the U.S. and Israel are working to spin the narrative about the protest in Gaza after Israel massacred 58 Palestinians and injured scores of others by blaming Hamas. This sets the stage to blame Iran, which is known to fund Hamas, according to the group’s new leader Yehiyeh Sinwar, who stated last year they repaired relations with Iran after a five-year rift. Other countries are choosing to work with the Middle Eastern country.



Read Full Post »

As the world changes for Iran post-sanctions, it’s paying calls to those who benefitted from the country’s sanction shackles in one way or another, and India—whose refiners are said to owe Iran $6.5 billion worth of euros—is its first port of call. But it’s much more than that as Iran re-stakes its claim to oil-based power.

Under sanctions, Iran was limited in how it could sell its oil and accept payment, but now that payment channels have been reopened, Tehran is seeking past dues in euros, particularly from Indian-based refiners such as Essar Oil, Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd (MPRL).

And India, for its part, has every reason to pay these past dues if it hopes to take its new energy relations with Iran to the next level.

Iran has made clear that it will continue to increase output until it has regained much of the market share it lost under sanctions. It wants to pump 4 million barrels a day—up from 3.3 million at present.


Read Full Post »

Linh Dinh, has written this article, posted in Sott.Net.

Seems to make sense.

Wake up, citizens of the USA!  You are being brainwashed!

All governments lie, kill and misuse public funds, but these calculated habits are amplified manifold during wars. We’re in two now, aiming for a third. Japan, whose land we’re still occupying 65 years after Hiroshima, has just announced sanctions against Iran beyond what the U.N. mandated.

Here is the full article:


Read Full Post »

Sanctions No Obstacle to Either, Insists Lavrov

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov announced today that they are in new talks with Iran on construction of additional nuclear power plants in the nation, and that they may still deliver the S-300 Missile Defense System to Iran, though no date was given for this delivery.


Read Full Post »

Today, the United Nations Security Council will adopt a new resolution imposing sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran over its nuclear activities. Predictably, the Obama Administration is working to spin its “victory” in New York as both a great diplomatic achievement and a serious intensification of international pressure on Iran over the nuclear issue. It is neither….


Read Full Post »

Exactly why Hillary is doing what she is doing. Crystal

After Iran issued a declaration seeking to end the country’s nuclear dispute, Brazil says slapping a new round of UN Security Council sanctions against Tehran would jeopardize a peaceful solution to case.

Read Full Post »

An Israeli strike of Iran’s nuclear facilities could spark a nuclear conflict, which could spiral into a global catastrophe, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev told ABC on Monday, adding that he supported what he called “smart” sanctions on Tehran as part of attempt to make it abandon its nuclear program.

The Russian president is in the United States for a 47-nation nuclear summit convened by U.S. President Barack Obama aimed at thwarting nuclear terrorism, and which may also center on a U.S.-back attempt to hit Iran with new nuclear sanctions.

Russia and China remain two important missing links in Obama’s drive to sanction Iran over its nuclear program.


Read Full Post »

What is the difference between Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran? The answer, future historians may relate, is none. At the dawn of the 21st century, all three states were ruled by nasty undemocratic regimes to which America and its allies took exception. Antagonism began with hectoring ostracism. This led to economic sanctions, diplomatic isolation and bloodcurdling threats of “other measures”. Finally a pretext was drummed up for military intervention, for bombing, invasion, occupation and appalling destruction.

Will Iran really be on this list? At present the west, covered in blood and expense, is trying to leave Iraq and Afghanistan, yet at the same time it stumbles into an identical trap in Iran.

The casus belli is the same. There is a declared ongoing threat and this is inextricably linked to a “humanitarian” need for regime change. In Afghanistan the trigger was the harbouring of Osama bin Laden. In Iraq it was a tenuous claim that Saddam possessed a nuclear capability and was preparing to use missiles against western targets.

In Iran similar claims are being made about nuclear enrichment. There is the same stumbling UN involvement, the same histrionic spin and the same regime abuse. There are the same threats to increase economic sanctions and the same sabre-rattling about “no option being off the table”. Childish tit-for-tat diplomacy sees yachtsmen arrested and cultural exchanges impeded. The rhetorical slither to confrontation is seen on every side.

But Iran is wholly different from Iraq or Afghanistan. It is a big, semi-modern state of 80 million people, compared with 20 million each for Iraq and Afghanistan. Bombers can lay waste to Kabul and Baghdad. Doing likewise to Tehran, a city the size of London, should be unthinkable. Iran’s politics may be unstable but its national pride is fierce. To challenge it would be disastrous, a final sign that western democrats can no longer contain the globalised moral arrogance shown by their leaders.

Iran’s government clearly intends a nuclear capability beyond what is considered acceptable by the International Atomic Energy Agency. A clique within the ruling coalition would like to go further and join the nuclear weapons club. Since the non-proliferation treaty failed to disarm India, Pakistan or Israel, many Iranians cannot see why they are different. If Britain requires a nuclear deterrent, why not Iran?

It is still moot how far Tehran has gone down this road. Interventionists cry that “the ayatollahs” are on the brink of “nuclear breakout”, like North Korea. Last week’s announcement that Iran would build 10 enrichment plants was clearly meant as a snub to the IAEA. Those averse to intervention retort that such ambitions are meaningless, but show how absurd it is to think that foreign lectures can moderate Iran’s stance.

Intelligence from Iran indicates a fragmented leadership. The government has not stabilised after the summer’s fraudulent elections. The president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is under siege from assembly democrats on one hand and the crypto-warlords of the Revolutionary Guard on the other. In this life-or-death struggle, the country’s nuclear strength is a distraction, a bauble, like the Olympic games to the Labour government. Ahmadinejad will not bow to western pressure and meekly surrender nuclear enrichment.

At this point the interventionists reach wearily for their favourite whip – tighter economic sanctions. Two decades of sanctions did not bring Saddam to his knees. They enriched him, ruined Iraq’s middle class, drove opposition into exile and entrenched a siege economy. The same happened with the Taliban in Afghanistan. The idea that sanctions will dismantle Natanz, crush the Revolutionary Guards and drive Ahmadinejad to respect the outcome of the summer election is barmy.

Sanctions are idiot diplomacy. They are the last gasp of the “something must be done” brigade, before surrendering to the military/industrial complex and going to war. Bred in the ideological bone to intervene in the affairs of other states, these people cannot admit that sometimes nothing can be done, or that anything done might make matters worse. Yet more sanctions are the proclaimed policy of David Miliband. Only Moscow and Beijing protest that sanctions do more harm than good.

CONTINUED HERE…………………………..

Read Full Post »

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu called on all sides to “redouble diplomatic efforts” to persuade Iran to end its nuclear programme.

Her remarks came after Russia indicated it could soften its longstanding opposition to further sanctions.

Iran’s nuclear ambitions are set to lead Thursday’s nuclear proliferation debate at the UN General Assembly.

Tehran says its nuclear programme is for civilian use only but many Western states believe it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.


Read Full Post »

Lets speculate on how many nuclear weapons Israel has, anyone????

Iran’s latest proposals on its nuclear ambitions have brought diverging views from the US and Russia.

Earlier, a US official told the BBC that Washington was unhappy with the proposals, submitted on Wednesday.

Correspondents say parties involved are making their positions clear ahead of the UN General Assembly this month.

President Barack Obama has given Tehran until the end of September to respond to his friendlier overtures or face new sanctions.

But the US and Israel have never ruled out the option of air strikes on Iran to stop it acquiring an atomic weapon.

In contrast to Washington’s negative response on Iran’s new proposal, Russia’s foreign minister described them as a positive step forward and ruled out sanctions on Iran’s oil sector.


Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: