Category: Iran

  • Did Moscow Prevent a US Attack On Iran By Its Moves In Georgia?

    Did Moscow Prevent a US Attack On Iran By Its Moves In Georgia?

    soursce –

    Gulnara Inandzh

    Director International Online Information Analytic Center Ethnoglobus

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

    While it is still too early to speak in detail about the results of the behind the scenes talks between Moscow and Washington about the resolution of the Georgian-Russian conflict, it is clear that these discussions, like the calculations of all those involved in this conflict, reflected not just the immediate situation in Georgia and its two breakaway republics, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.  Some of these larger or more distant goals have been mentioned by various officials and analysts, but some of the most interesting, even if they remain in the realm of speculation, say a great deal about just how consequential this conflict is.

    Many, especially in the Russian capital, saw Georgia’s moves as part of a larger U.S.-sponsored effort to push Russia out of the Caucasus and to place American bases there in order to protect American energy interests.  Others, especially in Washington, viewed what happened as a Russian effort to bring a former Soviet republic to heel and thus to demonstrate not only that it is a world power that can take actions independently of what others think but also that other former Soviet republics must consider Moscow’s views first and foremost.

    There is more than a little truth in each of these perceptions.  Obviously, the Georgian conflict has had a serious impact on the energy situation throughout the Caspian region and thus on the dynamics of prices in the world market, and equally obviously, both the United States and Russia want to be able to protect their interests in the region, interests that are sufficiently at odds that it is difficult to imagine just what a negotiated settlement in this area will look like.

    Indeed, by provoking a war with Georgia, the Kremlin was able to create obstacles to the transportation of energy resources via routes bypassing Russia.  As a result, it created the conditions for the realization of Iran’s Neka-Jask project, which envisages the transportation of the Caspian oil and thus allows for Moscow to preserve its control over the transportation of energy resources from the region.  The statement made by the deputy executive director of the Iranian National Oil Company for investment issues Hojatollah Ghanimifard that the Iranian Neja-Jask pipeline will be a serious competitor to and eventual replacement of the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline [4] attests to this line of thinking.  In the meantime, the problems arising with pipelines in Georgia have forced Azerbaijan for the first time to send its oil into Iran. [5]

    But as large an issue as the control of the flow of hydrocarbons out of the Caspian basin is, there are clearly still greater equities involved.  When Russia launched its drive against Georgia, the international community did not devote much attention to the ways in which this may have been a move by a great power in the complicated politics in the Middle East.  It is important to note that almost at the same time as the events in Tskhvinvali began, there were major American, British and French naval exercises in the Persian Gulf, an action that dramatically increased the number of ships and hence firepower in that region.  The exercises were explicitly intended to prevent Iran from taking any action in the Straits of Hormus which might impede the flow of oil, but at least some analysts, pointing to statements in Washington and Jerusalem, have suggested that these forces might have been assembled to launch an attack on Iran. [1] And hence it could well be that in the complex play of forces which always affect international relations, the Russian move into Georgia may have prevented an American-led move against Iran.  Some evidence points in that direction.

    Most notably, as the events in Tskhinvali and the international reaction to it were unfolding, Turkish prime-minister Erdogan visited Russia with his new “Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform” – an initiative Moscow wholeheartedly embraced.  Shortly afterwards Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad paid a “working visit” to Turkey – his first visit to a NATO country which Israel harshly objected. [2] These developments attest to the fact that Ankara and Russia combined their efforts to prevent the United States and Israel from an attack against Iran.

    One additional report that lends credence to this reading was the statement of Haled Mashal, the head of Hamas which won the Palestinian elections.  He too was received both in Moscow and in Ankara.  And by this maneuver, Turkish and Russian officials demonstrated their willingness to use the Palestinian lever of influence in the event of the use of force against Iran, something that neither saw as being in its economic or geopolitical interests.

    Of course, the place Azerbaijan with its rapidly developing economy has in the calculations about the Georgian-Russian military conflict should not and cannot be ignored.  Some in Azerbaijan were extremely critical of the government for failing to react sharply against Russian aggression, given Azerbaijan’s membership in GUAM and its strategic partnership with Tbilisi.  But President Ilham Aliyev continued to pursue his step by step balanced diplomacy and spoke only about the importance of maintaining the territorial integrity of states, something Azerbaijan itself is very much interested in.

    That was striking given the role Baku had always played in maintaining friendly ties with Georgia, in supplying its neighbor with oil and gas and thereby mitigating its energy, and hence political as well, dependence on Russia.

    But of course there is yet another implicit negotiation going on here.  That concerns the competition between Moscow and Washington for influence in the former Soviet republics.  Moscow’s actions in Georgia sent a clear message to Ukraine, Moldova and Azerbaijan, who also have frozen conflicts on their territories that Russia can intervene if it chooses to, a new element in the foreign policy calculations of all these states.  Indeed, it may be that Moscow was especially interested in sending this message to Azerbaijan given the upcoming electoral campaign in which some candidates will push for greater integration with the West.

    In that connection, it is worth noting that at the time of the crisis, David Harris, the executive director of the Jewish Committee of America, was in Baku.  Considering the role of the Jewish lobby in the US and the well-known sympathy of that lobby for Azerbaijan, it is entirely possible that Harris made clear that Baku would be defended from aggression from its northern neighbor. [3] Whether that message was received, however, is unclear, given that the United States has not yet taken any dramatic actions as opposed to tougher rhetoric in response to Russian moves in Georgia.

    In short, Baku appears likely to become a place des armes not for military action but rather political discussions not only about its own status but about the status of Iran in the world and the influence of Moscow and Washington in the post-Soviet states.

    Notes

    [1] See http://www.ethnoglobus.com/?page=full&id=344 (last accessed August 21, 2008).

    [2] “Iranian President Makes First Visit to Turkey”, VOA News, August 14, 2008, available at (last accessed August 21, 2008).

    [3] (last accessed August 21, 2008).

    [4] “Иран планирует составить конкуренцию экспортному нефтепроводу Баку-Джейхан”, Iran News, August 12, 2008, available at https://iran.ru/news/politics/52773/Iran_planiruet_sostavit_konkurenciyu_eksportnomu_nefteprovodu_Baku_Dzheyhan (last accessed August 30, 2008).

    [5] “Азербайджан впервые отправил через Иран партию нефти на Запад”, Iran News, August 27, 2008, available at https://iran.ru/news/economics/53024/Azerbaydzhan_vpervye_otpravil_cherez_Iran_partiyu_nefti_na_Zapad (last accessed August 30, 2008).

  • Armenia Showcases Iran Ties, as Talks With Azerbaijan and Turkey Falter

    Armenia Showcases Iran Ties, as Talks With Azerbaijan and Turkey Falter

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 7 Issue: 29

    February 11, 2010

    By: Emil Danielyan

    Armenia is showcasing its close relationship with Iran at a delicate time in its negotiations with two other, less friendly neighbors: Azerbaijan and Turkey. With the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations and the resolution of the Karabakh conflict looking increasingly problematic, authorities in Yerevan seem to be hedging their bets by pursuing more multi-million dollar commercial projects with Tehran.

    Armenian leaders have also made a point of underlining Iran’s broader geopolitical significance for their landlocked country and what they have long described as Tehran’s “balanced” position on the Karabakh dispute. Their Iranian counterparts have readily reciprocated that praise in the latest flurry of diplomatic activity between the two governments. “The foundation of the two countries’ relations is being fundamentally strengthened and cooperation in such major fields as energy, transportation, and communications would project a new image of our bilateral ties,” Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said at the end of a two-day visit to Yerevan on January 27 (IRNA, January 28).

    “You know well what importance we attach to relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran, and that we perceive you as a reliable partner and a country with a pivotal significance in the region,” Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan told Mottaki during their talks adding, “Therefore, the development and deepening of bilateral relations stems from our interests” (Statement by the Armenian presidential press service, January 27).

    The main official purpose of Mottaki’s trip was to co-chair with the Armenian Energy Minister Armen Movsisian a regular session of an Armenian-Iranian inter-governmental commission on economic cooperation. The meeting focused on plans for building a railway connecting the two countries, a pipeline to deliver Iranian oil products to Armenia, and a major hydro-electric station on the Arax River marking the Armenian-Iranian border. Mottaki and Movsisian said they have made further progress on these projects, requiring billions of dollars in funding, but announced no dates for their implementation. The Iranian minister said only that the commission is “aiming to achieve quick results” (Kapital, January 27).

    With an estimated cost of $2 billion, the railway project is particularly ambitious. Just how the two sides, and Armenia in particular, plan to finance it remains unclear. The Iranian government reportedly expressed its readiness during Sargsyan’s April 2009 visit to Tehran to provide a $400 million loan to Yerevan for that purpose. The Armenian side, which would foot the bulk of the bill due to the virtual absence of any rail infrastructure in its southeastern Syunik region bordering Iran, is expected to seek the remainder of the funding from multilateral lending institutions. One of them, the Manila-based Asian Development Bank, has already agreed to finance a $1 million feasibility study on the project to be conducted soon.

    Armenian-Iranian economic cooperation has, until now, centered on energy, resulting in the construction of a natural gas pipeline inaugurated by the two governments in December 2008. In May 2009, Armenia began importing modest amounts of Iranian gas (approximately 1 million cubic meters per day) and paying for it with electricity supplies to the Islamic Republic. The volume of those deliveries is due to rise sharply after the planned construction of a third high-voltage transmission line linking the Armenian and Iranian power grids. Movsisian said in November 2009 that the work on that line will start in 2010 and take about 18 months (www.armenialiberty.org, November 12). The ongoing reconstruction of Armenia’s two largest thermal-power plants, the main recipients of Iranian gas, should be completed by that time.

    Mottaki arrived in Yerevan less than a week after the former Armenian President Robert Kocharian’s surprise visit to Tehran, which sparked intense media speculation in Armenia. Kocharian held talks there with the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mottaki. The official Iranian IRNA news agency cited Ahmadinejad on January 21 as calling the Armenian-Iranian relationship “very friendly” and saying that the two neighboring nations are “determined to implement joint projects and play an active role in regional developments.” Both the Armenian government and Kocharian’s office insisted afterwards that the former president, who has kept a low profile since handing over power to Sargsyan in April 2008, visited Iran in a private capacity, even though he was invited by the Iranian government. Speaking at a news conference in Yerevan, Mottaki described Kocharian’s talks in Tehran as a conversation between old “friends” who share “good memories of the past” and have plans for the future (www.armenialiberty.org, January 27).

    Some Armenian media commentators construed Kocharian’s first major political engagement since his resignation as a sign of his impending bid to return to power. Others said, however, that Sargsyan himself sent his predecessor and longtime ally to the Iranian capital to warn the West against pressuring Armenia to make additional concessions to Azerbaijan and Turkey. The main opposition Armenian National Congress (HAK), Kocharian’s most bitter detractor, subscribed to the latter theory. In a January 26 interview with Radio Free Europe’s Armenian service, one of the HAK leaders, Levon Zurabian, speculated that a high-profile visit to Tehran by Sargsyan or another serving Armenian leader would have made Yerevan’s diplomatic gambit too galling for the United States and other foreign powers involved in the Karabakh peace process.

    According to the pro-government newspaper Hayots Ashkhar, Kocharian’s trip was meant to send a different message to the West. The paper said on January 26 that it reflected Yerevan’s frustration with the Western powers’ failure to convince Ankara to stop linking the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations with a Karabakh settlement acceptable to Azerbaijan. The Armenian leadership, it said, “cannot sit and wait for the West to exert serious pressure on Turkey.”

    In what might be a related development, Iran’s Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi has invited his Armenian counterpart, Seyran Ohanian, to visit the Islamic Republic in the coming months. Ohanian received the invitation at a February 3 meeting with the Iranian Ambassador to Armenia, Seyed Ali Saghaeyan. A statement by the Armenian defense ministry said they had discussed “regional problems of mutual interest and issues related to the resolution of conflicts.”

    https://jamestown.org/program/armenia-showcases-iran-ties-as-talks-with-azerbaijan-and-turkey-falter/

  • US insistent on missile system in Turkey, not more Afghan troops

    US insistent on missile system in Turkey, not more Afghan troops

    Nato Meeting
    Nato Meeting
    Gates said, we have discussed the possibility of erecting two radars in Turkey.
    United States (U.S.) Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said Saturday his meeting with the Chief of Turkish General Staff, General Ilker Basbug, was almost completely devoted to the issues of Afghanistan and PKK.

    Speaking to a group of Turkish and U.S. journalists in Ankara, Secretary Gates said that they had “not requested any new troops from Turkey.”

    We are pleased with the partnership between Turkey and the U.S. in Afghanistan, Gates said.

    We “discussed, with General Basbug, Turkey’s role in the missile defense system and relations between our armies”, Gates noted.

    “PKK issue”

    We carry a will to further develop cooperation with Turkey against the terrorist organization PKK as was set forth by former U.S. President George W. Bush back in 2007, Gates stressed.

    We are searching for new opportunities that Turkey could utilize against the threat emanating from terrorist organization PKK, Gates said.

    The commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, General Ray Odierno, had arrived in Ankara to hold talks on this (PKK) issue, Gates emphasized.

    Cooperation between Turkey and the U.S., against PKK, is getting more intense, Gates said.

    In regard to his talks at the Turkish General Staff, Secretary Gates said that “as the General noted, the final solution does not involve killing all”.

    While speaking with the leader of the regional administration in north of Iraq, Massoud Barzani, I have stressed the importance of placing pressure on PKK to end violence, Gates said.

    “Missile defense system”

    The dialogue on what Turkey could do within NATO to counter the proliferation of ballistic missiles via a missile defense system continues. We have discussed the possibility of erecting two radars in Turkey, Gates said.

    Reminded by a journalist about comments made by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan that there were actually countries in the region that possessed nuclear weapons, aside from Iran, like Israel, Secretary Gates argued, that Iran was “a country that openly announced a will to destroy another country” and violated the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

    We are “not against” Iran’s peaceful nuclear works. However, Iran continues efforts for uranium enrichment, Gates noted.

    I have not seen a progress with Iran on this matter. In order to be a progress, the Iranians must give up their enriched uranium to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Secretary Gates said.

    Asked if Turkey is making sufficient efforts in regard to the issue of Iran, Gates said that Turkey was valuable as they could talk to the Iranians, a mission highly difficult for the U.S.

    There could be opportunities (from Turkey’s dialogue with Iran). We need to have a common understanding on concerns expressed, under the roof of the United Nations, pertaining to programs inititated by Iran, Gates stressed.

    I have observed such an understanding in Turkey. We will continue on this path, Gates underlined.

    Asked about what he thinks on comments made that Turkey has shifted its axis, Secretary Gates said that Turkey was in a unique position geographically and that their efforts in all fields must be received positively.

    We are extremely pleased with Turkey’s contributions in Afghanistan. We have received a promise from “allies and partners” for the deployment of 10,000 additional personnel. We pay high importance to personnel that can train individuals (Afghans) in the areas of military and security, Gates said.

    Iran says it enriches uranium for civilian applications and that as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it has a right to the technology already in the hands of many others.

    Israel, most experts estimate that it has at least between 100 and 200 nuclear warheads, often threatens Iran with an attack.

    World Bulletin
  • ‘Iranian Cyber Army’ hacks Twitter

    ‘Iranian Cyber Army’ hacks Twitter

    18 December 2009

    A hacker group called ‘Iranian Cyber Army’ hacked Twitter for an hour early on 18 December, redirecting users to a website containing a green flag and Arabic writing.

    Graham Cluley at Sophos, said in his blog: “Fortunately there isno indication at this point that the page was carrying malicious code, and this attack appears to have had political motivations rather than designed to steal confidential information from users.”

    INfo security

    Cluley pointed out that although the hacker group calls itself the Iranian Cyber Army, this does not necessarily mean they are from Iran. However, he pointed out that Twitter was widely used by anti-government protesters in Iran earlier this year, and that Twitter delayed planned maintenance to allow Iranians to continue to share information over the service.

    Part of the hacker message from the Iranian Cyber Army read: “The USA thinks they control and manage internet access, but they don’t. We control and manage the internet with our power, so do not try to the [sic] incite Iranian people.”

    Cluley expressed relief, however, that ‘all’ that happened was that Twitter users were taken to a site displaying a political message: “Just imagine what could have occurred if they had pointed people to a phishing site posing as Twitter (designed to steal login names and passwords) rather than a political message?”

    In a brief blog entry, Twitter’s Biz Stone said that the Twitter DNS records were compromised by an unauthorised party.

    Cluley explained that this does not necessarily mean that the Twitter servers were breached by the ‘Iranian Cyber Army’, but that someone managed to somehow change the DNS look-up for twitter.com.

    Although this of course raises the question of how the hackers managed to change the Twitter DNS records…

    Infosecurity (UK)

  • Azerbaijan and Iran to sign gas agreement next week

    Azerbaijan and Iran to sign gas agreement next week

    Date: Sunday, December 13, 2009
    The State Oil Company of Azerbaijan (SOCAR) is due to sign an agreement with the National Iranian Gas Company to sell natural gas to Iran, said SOCAR President Rovnag Abdullayev.

    According to him, the agreement will be signed in Tehran next week during the visit of Azerbaijani delegation led by foreign minister to Tehran.

    According to the memorandum signed between the two countries on November 14, SOCAR will deliver at least 500 million cubic meters of gas to Iran a year from 2010 at the initial stage, and the volume will be gradually increased later.

    Azerbaijan will charge Iran a price “close to the world market prices” calculated on the basis of an agreed formula, said officials.

    Azerbaijan has natural gas agreements with Georgia, Turkey and Russia at present.


    Yusif Babanly
    Board of Directors
    Azerbaijani American Council (AAC)

  • Ahmadinejad says US planning to prevent coming of Mahdi

    Ahmadinejad says US planning to prevent coming of Mahdi

    US wants to stop mankind’s savior: Iran leader

    DUBAI (Al Arabiya)

    Ahmedinejad

    Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he has documented evidence that the United States is doing what it can to prevent the coming of the Mahdi, the Imam that Muslims believe will be ultimate savior of mankind, press reports said Monday.

    “We have documented proof that they [U.S.] believe that a descendant of the prophet of Islam will raise in these parts [Middle East] and he will dry the roots of all injustice in the world,” the hard-line president said, addressing an audience of families of those killed during the 1980’s war against Iraq.

    “They have devised all these plans to prevent the coming of the Hidden Imam because they know that the Iranian nation is the one that will prepare the grounds for his coming and will be the supporters of his rule.”

    Iranian news website Tabnak said Ahmadinejad further revealed plots by both the East and the West to wipe out the Islamic Republic.

    “They have planned to annihilate Iran. This is why all policymakers and analysts believe Iran is the true winner in the Middle East,” he went on to proclaim, adding that they were after Iranian oil and other natural resources.

    “In Afghanistan, they are caught like an animal in a quagmire. But instead of pulling their troops out to save themselves, they are deploying more soldiers. Even if they stay in Afghanistan for another 50 years they will be forced to leave with disgrace — because this is a historical experience.”

    The president said on his last visit to New York he asked officials “Is there not one sane person in your country to tell you these things?”

    “They know themselves that they need Iran in the Middle East, but because of their arrogance they do not want to accept this reality. They are nothing without the Iranian nation and all their rhetoric is because they don’t want to appear weak,” he added.

    Enemy hype

    Referring to his disputed June reelection, Ahmadinejad said, “The enemy… was hyping the issue as if the Iranian nation has been weakened and as if this was the best opportunity to get concessions from them. But your humble son stood in front of the oppressive powers and shouted: You are dead wrong! The Iranian nation will put you in your place.”

    “In the recent [post-election] incident, they claimed that they had devised a plan that could bring hundreds of governments to their knees,” he continued. “But he who is on the righteous path will always be victorious and will never see defeat.”

    The June 12 presidential election sparked Iran’s worst unrest since the Islamic revolution three decades ago and exposed deep divisions in the establishment. Authorities have denied all allegations of vote-rigging.

    On Monday Iran commemorates the killing of three students in 1953 under the former Shah. The opposition is expected to try to use the state-organized rallies to revive opposition protests.

    ALARABIYA