[Mb-civic] FW: Iraq wants the smuggled Aircrafts back ((many news))

[villasudjuan]

FYI
------ Forwarded Message
From: "Farhad Sepahbody" <sepa at sedona.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 09:03:46 -0700
To: <villasudjuan at free.fr>
Subject: Fw: Iraq wants the smuggled Aircrafts back ((many news))

 
----- Original Message -----
From: Javidiran <mailto:Javidiran at payandehiran.org>
To: 'Un-Disclosed' <mailto:javidiran at payandehiran.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 5:57 AM
Subject: Iraq wants the smuggled Aircrafts back ((many news))

 
Powell Says U.S. Uneasy About Iranian Role in Iraq

July 30, 2004 
Reuters 
The United States is uneasy about attempts by Iran to gain influence in
Shi'ite dominated southern Iraq, Secretary of State Colin Powell said
Friday, and he urged the neighbors to forge stable relations.

"Iran has the potential of playing a helpful role (in Iraq), but we are
uneasy about some of the actions that Iran has been taking in the south, the
influence that they are trying to gain in the south," Powell told a news
conference in Baghdad.

"We hope that the Iranian authorities will realize that it is in their
interest to have a stable Iraq as a neighbor."

Powell said it was in the interests of both countries to cooperate and avoid
confrontation. 

"Too much blood has been shed between these two people over the years," he
said. 

Powell was speaking during a surprise visit to Iraq on Friday as part of a
swing through the Middle East.

Iraq's Defense Minister Hazim al-Shalaan told the Washington Post in an
interview this week that Iran was Iraq's "first enemy," and has accused
Tehran of "blatant interference" in Iraq's internal affairs.

Iraq and Iran fought an 8-year war during the 1980s and relations between
the two have been delicate ever since.

Iran, a majority Shi'ite Muslim country governed by clerics, has been
accused of seeking to gain influence among Iraq's Shi'ite community, which
is focused in the south of the country.

Iraq is also majority Shi'ite, but the community was suppressed under the
rule of Saddam Hussein, a Sunni.

During Saddam's reign, many Shi'ites from southern Iraq went into exile in
Iran and formed militia which carried out occasional attacks against the
Iraqi armed forces.

Since Saddam's overthrow, and during the past 15 months of insurgency, U.S.
authorities and Iraq's interim government have repeatedly accused Iran of
not doing enough to patrol its borders and prevent foreign fighters entering
Iraq to wage war. 

Iran has denied foreigners are entering across the long and mountainous
border with Iraq. 

Israel May Be Compelled to Pre-empt

July 31, 2004 
Chron Watch 
Rachel Neuwirth 

Iran is moving rapidly to become a nuclear power. The Iranian mullahs have
publicly promised to use nuclear weapons to exterminate Israel even if
Israel were to achieve peace with the Palestinians. They also claim that
Iran, with 70 million people, could absorb and survive any response from
Israel while Israel, with only 5.5 million Jews, is vulnerable to
devastating losses if only a few of Iran’s missiles got through.

Each time these Iranian threats were announced, the U.S. administration
failed to issue any statement in opposition. (When Saddam Hussein earlier
vowed to “burn half of Israel” the US administration also remained silent.)
The Iranian mullahs could not fail to notice the significant American
silence and to draw conclusions. They can also note that Israel is outside
NATO and has no mutual defense treaty with the United States. If Iran
attacks Israel they need not fear any U.S. response.

All of Israel’s past experiences with America and the United Nations
underscore the reality of Israel’s isolation and vulnerability. Some
examples: 

At its birth Israel totally accepted the United Nations partition
resolution. The Arabs rejected that resolution and attacked the new state,
attempting to destroy it at birth. The U.N. failed to help Israel and
America imposed a regional arms embargo, which only affected Israel because
the Arabs were already well-armed. Israel survived only due to its own
sacrifice and would have perished if it depended upon the United Nations and
the United States. There was no subsequent punishment or even criticism for
Arab aggression. 

In 1967 Egypt and Syria were openly poised to launch an unprovoked attack to
''drive the Jews into the sea'' as Gamal Abdul Nasser vowed. There was no
strong U.S. warning to Egypt and Syria not to attack. Instead the U.S. urged
Israel not to pre-empt and to wait on U.S. diplomacy. When it became clear
that U.S. diplomacy was failing and Israel could face catastrophic losses if
the Arabs were allowed to strike first, Israel was forced to pre-empt. Again
there was no subsequent punishment or even criticism for Arab aggression.

In 1973 Egypt and Syria again were openly poised to launch an unprovoked
attack on Israel. And again there was no U.S. warning to Egypt and Syria not
to attack. But this time Secretary of State Henry Kissinger did not just
urge Israel ''not to fire the first shot,'' he warned Israel not to pre-empt
and to not even mobilize, lest it face the loss of American support, and
then have to face Egypt and Syria backed by Russia and be left all on her
own. Israel obeyed, was attacked, and almost lost that war while sustaining
horrendous loss of life and suffering a brutal blow to its economy. Again
there was no subsequent punishment or even criticism for Arab aggression.

These examples illustrate an ongoing pattern of U.S. behavior from Israel’s
birth until this day. The Arabs are always free to commit aggression and
launch repeated attempts to destroy Israel without facing punishment or even
criticism. It appears that the U.S. will always act to restrain Israel from
exercising its full right of self-defense but will never act decisively to
blunt Arab aggression. If Israel obeys U.S. pressure it could gravely
endanger its security but if it acts in legitimate self-defense it could
face U.S. punishment because of a consistent U.S. double standard.

Today the Iranian threat poses the greatest danger ever, because even a
single nuclear missile reaching an Israeli population center could cause
catastrophic damage and casualties. The U.S., the U.N., and the Europeans
are also concerned, but only because Iranian nukes could also endanger them.
However, they have so far failed to generate a sufficient collective
response to guarantee that the ongoing Iranian quest for nuclear weapons
will be halted and dismantled in time.

The U.S. is the lead player in all this and recent reports suggest that
President Bush is unlikely to act until after the November election,
assuming that he is re-elected, and that there is still enough time left to
act. Note that President Bush, after Iraq, is now gun shy about pre-emption
and he has announced no deadline for Iran to terminate its nuclear program.

Perhaps the West believes that Israel is their free insurance policy. The
Western nations may prefer to have Israel take out Iran’s nuclear facilities
for them, as in 1981 when Israel bombed the Iraqi reactor. This means that
Israel takes all the risk, Israel takes all the blame and the other nations
benefit for free. The U.S. and the other nations still want to avoid
alienating more Muslims and want to appear ''even handed'' concerning
Israel. Bluntly put, the survival of Israel may be desirable for the
nations, but not at any cost in jeopardizing their essential oil supplies
and facing increased enmity among the world’s Muslims.

It is not unreasonable to speculate that the U.S. and Europe may have
decided to wait and let Israel be forced to pre-empt and do their dirty
work, and hopefully be successful. But if something goes wrong they can
always claim plausible deniability and join in the denunciation and possible
punishment against Israel to appease the Arabs. It has happened before after
the 1981 Israeli attack on the Iraqi reactor.

Another possibility is for the U.S. and Europe reluctantly to allow Iran to
go nuclear in the same way that we allowed North Korea to go nuclear while
downplaying the real threat. And once they do go nuclear to then say that
they have become too dangerous to attack and now we must negotiate--just as
with North Korea which signed agreements, accepted U.S. aid and then
secretly violated their agreement and brazenly announced their nuclear
capability. We have established the pattern and Iran can simply follow suit.

Iran will then have additional options besides overt missile attack. They
could build mini nukes and secretly distribute them to various terrorists
for smuggling into target countries to be used against Israel and the West
while adamantly denying all culpability. Heavy Western pressure might be put
on Israel, including possible threats, to not pre-empt and to rely on their
missile defense. This approach may appeal to the West because it simply
plays for time and avoids having to take unpleasant decisions today that
could upset their voters in the next election.

What is the military option? Retired Air Force and Army Generals, Thomas
McInerney and Paul E. Vallely wrote the book, ''Endgame: The Blueprint for
Victory in the War on Terror.'' At a recent lecture, they claimed that the
United States has the military capability to effectively take out the
nuclear facilities of both North Korea and of Iran and can reach facilities
buried deep underground. They stated that American capabilities are much
greater than Israel’s. If that is true then it is primarily a U.S. political
decision rather than one of military capability.

There are further complications if Israel feels compelled to pre-empt.
Unlike Iraq in 1981 Iran’s facilities are buried underground, dispersed and
well protected with air defenses. Israel may not be able to readily
neutralize these facilities. Iran also had ample time to develop a counter
strategy to deter Israel that may include Syria’s launching chemical and
biological attacks on Israel combined with Iranian-backed Hezbolla attacks
on northern Israel. If Israel is forced to pre-empt, other Arab countries
may join in a general attack on Israel. This would rapidly create an
entirely new situation that could escalate out of control. In such a
situation Israel may be forced to use some of its nuclear weapons. (Note
that prior to the invasion of Iraq, the U.S. publicly reserved the right to
use tactical nuclear weapons if required.) A worst-case scenario could also
include an oil embargo and even destruction of some oil fields resulting in
major damage to Western economies. Thus a Western policy that results in
Israel feeling gravely threatened and forced to pre-empt could backfire
severely against Western interests.

There is also the question of knowing just how close Iran is to having the
bomb. Keep in mind how often Western and U.S. intelligence have been wrong
in the past. There has also been a tendency to underestimate the
capabilities of rogue nations and their ability to deceive. We were fooled
by North Korea and then surprised at their progress. After the 1991 Iraq war
we were surprised at how close Saddam was to having a nuclear bomb. He
fooled us again by moving his nuclear weapons program to Libya while we were
still searching in Iraq. We only found out when Momar Khadaffi decided to
come clean. And Iran insists its program is only for non-military purposes
that legally allow it to progress just short of weapons level. If all their
nuclear components are fabricated but unassembled, they may be able to
assemble them suddenly and then announce they are now a nuclear power. We
know they are also acquiring more and better missiles as delivery systems.
We may tell Israel that there is still plenty of time to act but we have
little credibility, and Israel can also suspect that we may be lying just to
restrain her for our own convenience.

There are still other complicating factors, including the paranoia of the
Iranian mullahs who may also act irrationally in response to their own
fears, both real and imagined. Nevertheless the Iranian bomb must be
stopped. The best way is to mobilize a solid Western front plus any other
international support, with an ultimatum to Iran combined with support for
Iran’s large internal opposition. This will require America to lead with
more firmness and more wisdom than we have seen in the past. Any perceived
weakness by our side will only serve to increase the defiance of the Iranian
mullahs. 

In summary, it is definitely not in American or Western interests to leave
Israel with no other security option except to pre-empt and thus open
Pandora’s Box of horrors. The longer we wait to act the higher the stakes
and the greater the danger. And to again push this problem into the future
may be the worst option of all.

Iran, Turkey Cancel Deal Signing Ceremony

July 30, 2004 
Radio Farda 
Radio Farda Newsroom



The dispute over the price of Iran’s gas export to Turkey, and the domestic
dispute within the Islamic government over the airport management contract
with the Turkish-Austrian concern TAV, prevented the two governments from
holding an official deal signing ceremony on Thursday, on the last day of
Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s visit to Tehran. But that did
not prevent the neighbors from agreeing on a security pact which includes
cooperation against Turkey’s Kurdish militants and the Iraq-based
anti-regime group MKO.

The Kurdish armed group changed its name last June from PKK to Kongra-Gul,
and ended the self-proclaimed ceasefire it was observing in its battle
against the Turkish government.

“I think the security cooperation between the two countries is bearing
fruit,” Erdogan said.

“Iran has agreed to put rebels from the former Kurdistan Workers' Party
(PKK) on its list of terror groups,” the Islamic government’s deputy
interior minister for security affairs Ali Asghar Ahmadi said.

Turkey in return agreed to place the Iraq-based anti-regime group the
Mojahedin-e Khalaq Organization (MKO), on its terror list.

“Both Iran and Turkey have decided to brand the PKK and MKO as terrorist
groups, and what was signed today stated that even if they continue to
operate under different names, they will continue to be dealt with as
terrorist groups,” Ahmadi said.

In an crackdown earlier this month, the Islamic government’s security forces
killed 35 PKK members hiding inside Iran’s borders. The group’s hideouts in
Iran had been the target of Turkish air raids in the past.

On the dispute between the two neighbors over Iran’s gas exports, Erdogan
said the energy officials of the two nations need to negotiate more,
indicating that no agreement had been reached during his visit. Turkey
halted gas imports from Iran last year, complaining about the price and
quality of the gas Iran was piping to Turkey, through a pipeline built for
that purpose by the two countries.

The visit did not produce any accord on TAV's airport management deal. The
Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps forcibly shut down Tehran’s new
international airport on May 8, the day it began operations after 35 years
in development. IRGC officers said the Khatami government’s deal with
Turkish-Austrian consortium TAV for managing the airport endangered Iran's
national security. 

During his visit, Erdogan met with President Khatami, ministers of oil,
defense and foreign affairs, as well as Majles speaker Gholamali
Haddad-Adel. 

Iran Said Insisting on Enriching Uranium

July 30, 2004 
Reuters 
Carol Giacomo 

WASHINGTON -- Iran, intensifying a standoff over its nuclear programs, has
told European officials it will not back down on its right to proceed with
uranium enrichment, a senior U.S. official said on Friday.

"The British and the French tell us Iran insists it will not back down on
its right to proceed with enrichment," the official, speaking on condition
of anonymity, told Reuters.

During a meeting in Paris on Thursday that included Germany, the three
European delegations responded that halting uranium enrichment was
fundamental to a deal negotiated with Tehran last October, the U.S. official
said. 

The Europeans added that "nothing else was coming if Iran didn't get back on
the road to suspension, leading to cessation of enrichment and
reprocessing," the American said.

The European Union trio have given no details of their high-level talks with
Iran. 

But a French spokesman said in Paris on Friday that they would push ahead
with talks on Iran's nuclear program, even though Washington says a U.N.
Security Council showdown is becoming increasingly likely.

The European Union three secured promises from Iran last October to suspend
all uranium enrichment-related activities in exchange for sharing peaceful
nuclear technology.

But Iran, which says it has only peaceful nuclear ambitions, was infuriated
last month by a tough rebuke from the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency -- the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) -- over cooperation with its
inspectors. 

Even before the meeting in Paris, Iran said it would resume the manufacture,
assembly and testing of enrichment centrifuges, which can be used to enrich
uranium for weapons.

WEAPONS DEBATED 

The United States says Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons, a charge
Tehran denies. 

U.S. officials with access to intelligence estimates say Iran can achieve a
bomb in three to five years, although some experts say it might even be
sooner. 

The IAEA has uncovered many potentially weapons-related activities in Iran,
but no clear proof that Washington is right about Iran -- no "smoking gun."

Another U.S. official, speaking anonymously, said the Europeans were "not
too happy" with the Iranian meeting.

"The EU three underscored their concerns and said (to the Iranians), 'Look,
you're making a big mistake. You need to get back on the program," the U.S.
official said. 

The Iranians "pushed back. ... The fact that Iran just decided to back off
of its commitment took them by surprise and they weren't happy about it," he
added. 

Secretary of State Colin Powell repeated on Thursday that Iran had not met
its IAEA obligations or kept its commitments to the EU three.

A U.N. Security Council referral was now "more and more likely," he said
during a visit to Kuwait.

The administration has been agitating to bring Iran before the security
council, which can impose sanctions on violators of the Nuclear
Non-proliferation Treaty.

Iran has fiercely resisted the move.

So have the EU three and other security council members, who instead have
kept the matter before the IAEA as they tried to persuade Tehran to adhere
to NPT and IAEA commitments.

In interviews with Reuters this week, U.S. officials for the first time said
that as they move to increase pressure on Tehran, they do not see imposing
sanctions as the first goal.

The comments suggested an attempt by Washington to dampen international
resistance to bringing the controversial nuclear issue before the security
council. 

Before imposing sanctions, the council could give the IAEA more powers to
probe Iran's program or have its chairman issue a rebuking statement,
officials said. 

Iraq Wants Smuggled Aircrafts Back

July 30, 2004 
The Middle East Media Research Institute
MEMRI News Ticker 

Iraqi Defense Minister Hazem al-Sha'lan announced that his country has
decided to begin negotiating with the Iranian government about returning the
aircraft smuggled into Iran by the previous regime.
(Al-sharq al-Awsat, London, 7/30/04)

In response to his statements that Iran is Iraq’s enemy no. 1, the
conservative Iranian dailies Jomhour-ye eslami and Kayhan accused Iraqi
defense minister Hazem Sha'lan of murdering Iraqis after the fall of Saddam
Hussein, of spying for Saudi intelligence and the CIA, and of being a member
of Saddam Hussein's ba'th party.
(Jomhour-ye eslami & Kayhan, Iran, 7/29/04)

Iran’s expediency council head Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said during a
meeting with the visiting Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan that
terrorism is rooted in the wrong views of the U.S. and in its exploitative
ambitions. 
(Jomhouri-ye eslami, Iran, 7/29/04)

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said during his visit to Iran
that the expansion of the two countries' political, economic, and security
cooperation is a priority in Turkish foreign policy.
(Jomhouri-ye eslami, Iran, 7/29/04)

An IAEA spokeswoman said a new IAEA report on Iran’s nuclear program will be
prepared in early September and the next meeting of IAEA board of governors
is set for September 13.
(Kayhan, Iran, 7/29/04)

With the renewal of Iran’s nuclear talks with the three European countries
in London, Iranian MPs said that until the Iranian dossier at the IAEA is
closed, it would not ratify the additional protocol.
(Kayhan, Iran, 7/29/04)

Iranian president Muhammad Khatami warned Israel that it would be making a
mistake in attacking Iran’s nuclear installations, and Iranian defense
minister Ali Shamkhani said that in the event of an Israeli threat on Iran,
nowhere in Israel would be safe for the heads of its regime.
(Kayhan, Iran, 7/29/04)

The reformists in Iran presented as a candidate for the presidential
elections in May 2005 Mir Hussein Mousavi, an engineer, who together with
the reformist clerics is supported by the reformist parties.
(Aftab-e yazd, Iran, 7/29/04)

The Iranian daily Jomhour-ye eslami reported that the Hamas news agency Quds
press had said that Israel, under the aegis of the u.s. forces, has for the
past year maintained an embassy in Iraq, and that over 900 Israelis are in
Iraq. 
(Jomhour-ye eslami, Iran, 7/29/04)

The 'Fedayoon [martyrs] of Qaddafi' threatened to kill anyone who raises
questions about the disappearance in Libya in the 70s of senior Lebanese
Shi'ite cleric Ayatollah Mussa al-Sadr.
(Al-Sharq al-Awsat, London, 7/30/04)

No Progress in Nuclear Talks With Iran

July 30, 2004 
The Washington Post
Dafna Linzer 

A meeting yesterday between European and Iranian officials over Tehran's
suspect nuclear program ended with the sides agreeing to continue
discussions, but Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said it is increasingly
likely the matter will have to be brought to the U.N. Security Council.

The Paris meeting, attended by French, German and British diplomats, was the
first since Iran resumed nuclear work in June that it had promised to
suspend 18 months earlier in exchange for European trade incentives.

The three European powers, trying to defuse a standoff over Iran's nuclear
efforts, want Tehran to work with U.N. nuclear inspectors and halt
activities that could lead to weapons development.

"The discussions are continuing with Iranian authorities toward obtaining
all the guarantees relative to the peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear
program," said Herve Ladsous, spokesman for the French Foreign Ministry. He
said the meeting was aimed at reestablishing trust between the sides.

But Powell, traveling in Kuwait yesterday, made it clear that the United
States believes Iran is concealing its true intentions and suggested the
European efforts were unlikely to succeed. "It is getting more and more
likely that this matter is going to have to be referred to the Security
Council," Powell said.

"It is our judgment that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon," Powell said.
"The world has to take note of this."

The secretary talked by phone with his German, French and British
counterparts ahead of the meeting, which had been scheduled for London and
then moved to Paris.

European diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said both
Washington and Moscow would be briefed on the outcome of the discussion.

The Bush administration wants Iran rebuked by the Security Council for
violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty and has been pressuring allies to
take a harder line with the Islamic republic.

In June, the Europeans crafted a condemnation of Iran for failing to fully
cooperate with international inspectors. But Iran responded by breaking its
commitments to halt certain nuclear efforts.

A European diplomat, who spoke ahead of yesterday's meeting, did not
discount the possibility of going to the Security Council but said that
currently appears remote. "All different scenarios are in play, but the goal
is to try to convince Iran to come back to the process."

Since June, Iran has resumed building centrifuge parts and is conducting
tests at an enrichment facility. But the activities, which Iran is allowed
to carry out for peaceful purposes, are being done under the eye of nuclear
inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency who have been trying
to determine whether the country has a clandestine weapons program.

Iran has denied it is intending to build a nuclear bomb, but in recent
months inspectors have turned up inconsistencies in Iran's claims and have
found evidence suggesting research in the area of nuclear weapons
development. 

Iran's foreign minister, Kamal Kharrazi, told reporters in Tehran yesterday
that "Iran's right to peaceful nuclear technology should be respected."

"We have started a process of cooperating with the E.U. and the IAEA and are
determined to continue that," he said.

In Washington, State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said the United States
would decide whether to bring up Iran in the Security Council after the
IAEA's 35-member board of governors meets in September.

"This is a subject that not only concerns us but is bothersome and troubling
to the other members of the board of governors," Ereli said.

Noting pressure from Washington and a U.N. report on Iran's activities due
in September, one European diplomat said: "This is a critical moment, and we
think it's a kind of turning point. The ball is in Iran's camp right now,
and they should take careful steps to cooperate with inspectors."

 
   
 
 
Due to the duplication by some internet services,
   the logo, flag and Parsi gif has been removed.
-----------------------
 Join me in this silent voice of unity
Iran deserves better.
   When Truth is not free, Freedom is not true, Freedom of Speech,
   Freedom of pen, most important of all Freedom of thought
 ----------------------
 The sole purpose of this distribution is share of information.
Not necessarily the content of this e-mail is supported by
the distributor or represents my personal opinion. This
dispatch should not have impact on those whom I dearly
help or associate with.
Should you not wish to be contacted at this e-mail
address again, please reply using your original mail
address with "Remove" in the subject line.
We have provided "opt out" e-mail contact so you
can be deleted from our mailing list.
 
 
 


------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20040731/997a82ac/attachment.htm