T Minus Bushehr
Tad | Aug 18, 2010 |
1 
Russia hopes to start the reactor in just days
Following news that Russia is to start powering up Iran’s Bushehr nuclear facility on August 21, John Bolton suggested that Israel subsequently has just days left to attack it. This is because once Bushehr goes online, any attack would “almost certainly release radiation into the atmosphere,” implying that Israel will “most unlikely … act militarily after fuel rods are loaded.” Both Bolton and the people at Heritage are worried that Russia’s assistance in bringing the plant online will “represent a major step forward for Iran's nuclear weapons aspirations”, giving the country a “second route to nuclear weapons.”
Bolton concedes that an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities remains unlikely, but pointed out that if Israel was “going to do anything, they certainly wouldn't be talking about it” – just like before the bombing of Iraqi and Syrian reactors in 1981 and 2007 respectively. However, given the resurgence in speculation on the probability of an Israeli attack, the hawkish nature of Netanyahu’s coalition government, and now even Saudi Arabian media outlets advocating military action, might there be a chance that officials in Jerusalem believe attacking Bushehr is essential?
S-300 Bluffing from Iran?
Tad | Aug 06, 2010 | 0 
Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency allegedly reported Wednesday that Tehran has acquired “four S-300 surface-to-air missile systems”. Iran apparently acquired two “S-300 from Belarus and two others from another unspecified source”, with Fars adding, "Iran possesses four S-300 PT missiles.” The news comes following June reports that suggested the seemingly never-ending saga between Russia and Iran over the sale of the S-300 PMU1 air defense system had finally come to a close - as a result of a recent tightening of UN sanctions.
As explained before, if Iran really did acquire the much touted S-300 PMU-1, it would make an air attack of its controversial nuclear program a lot harder. However, from looking at the Fars report in more detail and the context in which it was released, it seems that there are a number of issues which cast doubt on the credibility of the notion Iran has acquired a robust S-300 air defense system from Belarus.
In terms of the detail of the report, there is firstly no elaboration on what is meant with regards to the "four S-300 surface-to-air missile systems". Indeed, does the wording refer to launchers or batteries? One battery of S-300 PMU1’s, the system that Iran was trying to buy from Russia, consists of up to 12 semi-trailer erector-launchers (TEL) which mount four tubular missile container-launchers and a launcher complex of several other components, detailed photographically here. Should this report merely infer that Iran has acquired four launchers, then there is little for any would-be aerial attacker to worry about. Indeed, even with a launcher complex, four TELs would only ever be able to provide a highly limited air defense....
Iran, S-300, missiles, Security Matters, Iran Watch (all tags)
New Working Group on Iran Sanctions
Laicie | Aug 04, 2010 | 1 
Yesterday, Howard Berman and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of the House Foreign Affairs Committee released the following statement announcing the initiation of a bipartisan Working Group on Iran Sanction Implementation:
Today we are initiating a working group that will help ensure that U.S. and international sanctions on Iran are fully implemented, effectively enforced and, ultimately, have the intended effect of bringing about Iran’s termination of all activities contributing to its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability.
The Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act of 2010, which was signed into law by President Obama on July 1, has already had a significant impact on Iran's access to international markets and its ability to acquire refined petroleum.
We will continue to pressure and isolate Iran until it terminates its illicit nuclear weapons activities. A nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable.
“The group will meet on a regular basis with Administration officials, foreign ambassadors, and outside experts to oversee and verify enforcement of Iran sanctions implementation” ---- which is pretty ambiguous, but there’s nothing like leaving for recess on a strong note, right?
So it goes...
Laicie | Jul 01, 2010 | 0 
At 6:15 this evening, in the East Room of the White House, President Obama will sign into law “the toughest ever unilateral US sanctions against the Islamic republic” that nobody believes will work.
The Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act was passed last week by overwhelming margins in both the House and Senate: 408-8 and 99-0, respectively.
Despite Congress’ denial of exemptions for cooperating countries sought by the administration, reactions from the White House have been mostly positive. In a statement released Friday, Secretary Clinton welcomed the passage of the legislation, saying that both she and President Obama support the “broad aims” of the Congressional action.
While the final measure does contain significant human rights and development initiatives that should not be discounted, they do little to offset the fact that the people of Iran, not the regime, are most sensitive to broad sanctions such as those passed by Congress.
Update 7/2/10: Remarks by the President at the signing can be found here.Iran Policy in the Aftermath of UN Sanctions
Sarah | Jun 24, 2010 | 0 On Tuesday, Undersecretaries William Burns and Stuart Levey testified at a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee titled “Iran Policy in the Aftermath of UN Sanctions.” The hearing focused on the recently passed Resolution 1929, which is intended to address “the international community’s concerns regarding Iran’s nuclear program” and “send an unambiguous signal to Iran that the international community holds it accountable for its actions.”
Overall, Iran sanctions appear to be a nonpartisan issue, where both sides have taken on the view that the harsher the sanctions are, the better, given the nature and seriousness of the Iranian threat.
Chairman Kerry opened the hearing by noting that “a nuclear armed Iran would pose an intolerable threat to our ally Israel, risk igniting an arms race in what is already the world’s most dangerous region, and undermine our global effort to halt the spread of nuclear weapons.”
The two witnesses strongly supported the utility of the sanctions. However, while Burns asserted that they will leave Iran increasingly isolated, weak, and defenseless, he cautioned that “sanctions and pressure are not an end in themselves. They are a complement, not a substitute, for the diplomatic solution to which we and our partners are still committed.”
Senate Unanimous on Gasoline Sanctions
Laicie | Jun 24, 2010 | 0 Update 6/25/10: The House vote took place later in the day on Thursday. The bill was approved 408-8 and now moves to the President for signing.
The Senate has unanimously passed H.R. 2194, the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, by a vote of 99-0. The House is expected to follow later today.
The final bill expands existing U.S. sanctions to include entities that trade with Iran's energy sector, since U.S. sanctions passed in 1996 targeted investment only. It also imposes sanctions on financial institutions doing business with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or with certain Iranian banks blacklisted by the Department of the Treasury.
While the bill does allow the president to waive penalties on countries cooperating with UN sanctions, it denies the exemptions the administration had requested and places extensive restrictions on the president’s waiver authority. This exemption has been the most serious disagreement in a process that has had bipartisan support from both the House and Senate since its inception.
Under this bill the president may waive sanctions on companies for 12 months on a case-by-case basis as long as he certifies to Congress that the country where the company is based is cooperating with U.S.-led multilateral efforts to isolate Iran.
S-300 Cancelled
Tad | Jun 24, 2010 | 0 
End of this badge manufacturers line?
As anticipated by many, it was reported this weekend that Russia has decided to cancel its controversial sale of the S-300 PMU1 air defense system to Iran. According to Russian Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrei Denisov, the cancelation was a result of the restrictive measures contained in UN Security Council Resolution 1929 –though its not clear if the Resolution would actually prohibit the sale. The news marks the apparent end of a years long saga in which Russia ostensibly delayed delivery on a number of occasions due to ‘technical reasons’ – but perhaps more realistically as a result of pressure from Israel and the U.S. As a result, this news represents an Israeli and U.S diplomatic success and illustrates a possibly increasing distance between the once close Iran and Russia…
The S-300 PMU-1 is one of the most advanced surface-to-air missile systems in the world, capable of engaging up to six targets simultaneously up to 90 km away. Given the capabilities of the system, it was always easy to see why countries like Israel and the U.S were opposed to the sale. Indeed, by installing S-300 missile batteries close to its nuclear facilities, Iran could have made it a lot harder for an enemy to successfully destroy its nuclear program from the air. Naturally, this would not be in the interests of either Israel or the U.S in the event that they felt they had to use military force...
Iran, S-300, Security Matters, Russia, sanctions, Iran Watch (all tags)
More Sanctions (Updates)
Laicie | Jun 17, 2010 | 0 
Oh, and Ahmadinejad is really mad.
After setting the stage at the UN last week, the US and EU have followed through on their pledge to implement strong unilateral sanctions on Iran. While decades of US sanctions have eliminated Iran’s reliance on the US market and rendered US sanctions essentially worthless, the implementation of stronger European sanctions is a significant step.
According to an official statement, the European measures include sanctions on “key sectors of the gas and oil industry with prohibition of new investment, technical assistance and transfers of technologies” and related equipment and services. In addition, Iran's shipping and air cargo companies will be blacklisted and banned from operating in EU territory, and new visa bans and asset freezes will be imposed on Iran's Revolutionary Guard. Officials say the new sanctions could come into force within weeks.
Prior to this move, the EU has not placed significant trade restrictions on Iran beyond existing UN sanctions. As a result, the EU is one of Iran’s largest trading partners, along with China, and provides for more than 20 percent of Iran’s trade. H/T to Max Bergmann here, who makes some great points on the Obama Administration’s containment strategy over at the Wonk Room. Bergmann points out that...
Iran Sanctions Update: UNSC Down – Next up, Congress
Laicie | Jun 09, 2010 | 0 
I tried to work a good baseball reference into the title (but failed miserably) since at the water cooler this morning, most of DC was focused on new Washington National Stephen Strasburg’s impressive major league debut, rather than the impending UN Security Council sanctions vote.
In fact, maybe that’s the real reason why the vote was delayed?
After over an hour delay, said to be due to indecision on the part of Lebanon, twelve nations of the 15-member body voted for the resolution. Turkey and Brazil voted against, as was expected, while Lebanon chose to abstain.
Ambassador Susan Rice spoke out strongly against Iran’s actions and addressed ongoing negotiations on the TRR Deal in her remarks following the vote:
Turkey and Brazil have worked hard to make progress on the Tehran Research Reactor proposal—efforts that reflect their leaders’ good intentions to address the Iranian people’s humanitarian needs while building more international confidence about the nature of Iran’s nuclear program. My government will continue to discuss the Iranian-revised proposal and our concerns about it, as appropriate. But the Tehran Research Reactor proposal—then and now—does not respond to the fundamental, well-founded, and unanswered concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. This resolution does.
Later in the day, President Obama said that the new Iran sanctions resolution “demonstrates the growing costs that will come with Iranian intransigence,” but also repeatedly emphasized that the UN sanctions vote does “not close the door on diplomacy.”
Unfortunately, necessary posturing on the part of Iran is likely to make diplomacy difficult in the near future, and Congress is already gearing up to ensure that another round of sanctions is passed by the end of the June.
Rep. Howard Berman praised the passage of this morning’s resolution and confirmed that Congress would be moving forward on gasoline sanctions legislation:
We now look to the European Union and other key nations that share our deep concern about Iran's nuclear intentions to build on the Security Council resolution by imposing tougher national measures that will deepen Iran's isolation and, hopefully, bring the Iranian leadership to its senses. The US Congress will do its part by passing sanctions legislation later this month.
Iran Watch, UN, Congress, Berman, Rice, Strasburg (all tags)
Futile Sanctions and Missed Opportunities
Sarah | Jun 08, 2010 | 0 At an event held today at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, “Taking Tehran’s Temperature: One Year On,” some of the world’s top scholars on Iran, including Abbas Milani, Gary Sick, and Karim Sadjadpour, spoke about Iran’s domestic political situation and American policy towards the Islamic Republic.
While Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not a focus of the panel, Professor Sick included substantive commentary on the recent round of UN sanctions. He stated clearly that sanctions do not work—noting most specifically that “when sanctions began, Iran had zero centrifuges. Today, after four UN Security Council sanctions resolutions, Iran has 9000 centrifuges.” He went on to explain that “Iran doesn’t like sanctions,” however if they are imposed, Iran will live with them; but, if they are threatened, Iran is likely to compromise in order to avoid them. This, he says, is what happened with the Brazil-Turkey deal. The West’s failure to take advantage of this opening was a “terrible decision,” missing the opportunity to use sanctions for what they do best—leverage. Missed opportunities (which he expands on in his blog), he says, are the most disappointing aspect of recent events.
Professor Sick added that threatening smart sanctions- which target the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and not the citizens of Iran- could be effective. Details of the newest round of UN sanctions are included in the Annex of the most recent version of the resolution, which is expected to see a vote tomorrow. The text of the Annex is, unfortunately, not available to the public, so we cannot yet conclude if these sanctions are “smart”, or will be as futile as those in the past.
