:-0 Nothing can be expected from Congress. And American liberals and
leftists are still in torpor, though there are stirrings of discontent
here and there (e.g.
<http://iraqmoratorium.org/>).
Iran, however, is by no means an economic basket case to which Iraq was reduced before the US invasion of the country, and it has much better diplomatic cards besides (especially since Washington continues to sow doubts about its intentions in the minds of the Russian power elite), which Iran's leadership have used better than some might expect (for instance, taking Moscow's offer of Azerbaijan in stride -- a mature response, which I wish they had been capable of making back in the Soviet days). Sanctions have yet to work, and they won't unless the US power elite decide to blockade Iran's oil exports, which they won't any time soon; and at least one faction of Iran's power elite cherish independence more than financial gains. So far the populace of Iran have accepted the measures taken by their government to protect the country, such as the 25% rise in gasoline price to reduce gasoline subsidies and diminish the risk of (unlikely but not impossible) gasoline embargo -- a good sign. Iran's diaspora, like any diaspora, are a mixed bag, and some have already signed a pact with the devil, but others have risen to the defense of their country, doing what they can. New developments in Lebanon ("Seymour Hersh: Fatah Al-Islam Crisis in Lebanon," Your World Today, CNN International, 21 May 2007, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ga22XxUjSU>) and Palestine are dangerous, but their outcomes are not yet clearly against Iran and its Arab friends. Now, if only Washington could lose Egypt soon! -- Yoshie
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6726290,00.html> Russia: Iran No Missile Threat Thursday June 21, 2007 7:46 PM By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV Associated Press Writer
MOSCOW (AP) - Iran poses no threat to Russia, top diplomats and military officials said Thursday as Moscow pressed its argument for the United States to abandon plans for a missile defense system in Europe.
The senior Russian officials warned Washington against snubbing Moscow's proposal for cooperating on missile defense, saying the deployment of U.S. missile defense sites in Europe would strengthen Russia's belief that it is the real target of the American system.
Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky, the chief of general staff of the Russian armed forces, said with Iran posing no immediate missile threat, the aim of the planned U.S. sites in Poland and the Czech Republic must clearly be against Russia's nuclear arsenal.
If the United States rejects President Vladimir Putin's proposal for a shared use of a Russia-rented early warning radar in Azerbaijan, that would clearly show Washington's real intentions, he said.
``That is a litmus test,'' Baluyevsky told reporters. ``The entire world will see the true aim of this system.''
Baluyevsky described the U.S. plans as part of efforts to weaken Russia's nuclear deterrent and referred to what he said were U.S. Cold War-era plans for a disarming nuclear first strike, using missile defenses, that would deprive Russia of the ability to retaliate.
``I don't want to see that even in my worst nightmare,'' he said at a news conference.
The Russian military, he said, would take ``asymmetrical steps'' to ensure its nuclear deterrent capability, possibly involving new Iskander missiles, but he refused to elaborate.
Putin has threatened to target U.S. allies in Europe with nuclear missiles, as the Soviet Union did during the Cold War, if Washington proceeds with the deployment of missile defense elements in Europe.
Baluyevsky accused U.S. officials of deliberately misinterpreting Putin's proposal, adding that their statements appeared to signal that Washington plans to reject the Russian initiative.
Putin made the proposal to President Bush after months of bitter criticism of the U.S. plans. Bush agreed to consider the initiative, but Washington made it clear it was not abandoning plans for the project in Poland and the Czech Republic - former Soviet satellites that are now NATO members.
The two leaders agreed to discuss the issue further July 1-2 at talks in Kennebunkport, Maine, at the estate of Bush's father, former President George H.W. Bush.
While U.S. officials cast the Russian proposal as a reflection of the Kremlin's apprehension of an Iranian threat, Baluyevsky denied it, saying Putin made the move to ease tensions and avoid a new arms race, not because of concern over Iran.
``The Iranian missile threat is hypothetical,'' he said. ``It's not of a catastrophic character and it doesn't require a quick deployment of missile defense sites.''
Baluyevsky said that a joint use of the Soviet-built radar in Azerbaijan would help keep track of the Iranian missile program and leave enough time for a response if it evolves into a real threat. He dismissed U.S. claims that the huge Soviet-built radar in Gabala was outdated and unfit for missile defense purposes.
Sergei Kislyak, a deputy foreign minister in charge of arms control, dismissed Iran's claim that it had received indications from Putin that he would not follow through with an offer to allow the U.S. to use the Azerbaijani radar station.
``That is not true and the Iranian colleagues couldn't hear that from any officials here,'' he told reporters.
Azerbaijan shares borders with both Russia to the north and Iran to the south.
Kislyak warned Washington that by rejecting Putin's initiative, it would push the world toward a new arms race. He said that while in reality the U.S. missile defense capability could be far below its declared potential, the Russian military would have to factor it in as a fully viable program in their planning.
``Our military would have to assess it by its maximum capability and will recommend to deploy systems that would ensure a reliable security of Russia,'' he said. ``That would return us to the era we though was left behind - an arms buildup if not a new arms race.''
Russian-U.S. relations have worsened rapidly amid Moscow's criticism of the U.S. missile defense plans and U.S. concerns about Kremlin democratic backsliding and strong-arming of ex-Soviet neighbors.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the current state of the U.S.-Russian relations was ``alarming,'' and warned that Moscow would not accept lecturing from Washington.
``Any format of relations with the United States other than equal partnership will be unacceptable to us,'' he said.
On a conciliatory note, he added that Moscow was ready to improve relations with the United States if Washington shows more respect for its interests.
``We have no anti-American sentiments unlike some other countries,'' he said. ``Nobody objects to the leadership of any country, provided it is prepared for this status and can cope with it. However, everybody should listen to each other, and such a leader must be involved in collective work.''
<http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-236/0706207289195333.htm> Today: Friday June 22, 2007 Ahmadinejad: Iran's ties with Russia of strategic nature Tehran, June 20, IRNA
Iran-Russia-Ahmadinejad
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday that the current relations between Iran and Russia is of strategic nature and there is no rivalry between the two nations.
According to the press bureau of the Presidential Office, Ahmadinejad made the remarks in his meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
The two sides' relations are not superficial but very strategic, he underlined.
"Our alliance roots in history and the two sides should try to stay away from any kind if rivalry which bears no fruits," he underlined.
Iran's nuclear standoff will finally be solved after many ups and downs, he said, adding that "We carry out our work under supervision of IAEA and call for a good and unlimited ties with Russia, believing that a powerful Iran would benefit Russia."
The Russian foreign minister, for his part, said the relations between Tehran and Moscow are strategic although some foreign powers seek to mar their relations. But as President Putin has time and again declared Iran poses no threat to Russia and the region.
The Russian foreign minister called the new proposal made by the group 5+1 on resolving Iran's nuclear issue as very close to Iran's stance and hoped that the issue would be resolved soon.
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6727041,00.html> U.N. States Lag on Iran Sanction Reports Thursday June 21, 2007 11:46 PM By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Less than 40 percent of U.N. member states have filed required reports on how they are complying with sanctions against Iran for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, the chairman of a monitoring committee said Thursday.
Belgian Ambassador Johan Verbeke said the committee has written to countries that haven't reported reminding them of their obligation to implement the two sanctions resolutions adopted by the U.N. Security Council since December.
``It is an obligation for all the members of the United Nations to report on the implementation of their obligations pursuant to both these resolutions,'' he told reporters after briefing the Security Council.
On Dec. 23, the Security Council ordered all countries to stop supplying Iran with materials and technology that could contribute to its nuclear and missile programs. It also ordered a freeze on assets of 10 key Iranian companies and 12 individuals related to those programs.
Iran responded by expanding enrichment.
On March 24, the council imposed further sanctions that include banning Iranian arms exports and freezing the assets of 28 people and organizations involved in Iran's nuclear and missile programs.
Iran again responded by expanding enrichment.
Verbeke said the March 24 resolution required all 192 U.N. members to report within 60 days on steps taken to implement the measures. As of Thursday, the committee had received reports from 50 nations and the European Union - only 15 of them by the May 23 deadline, he said.
Of the 50 responses, he said, 38 countries reported they had legislation in place to implement the sanctions and 12 states reported on steps they had taken or would be taking.
Seven countries submitted combined reports covering both resolutions, bringing the total number of reports received on implementation of the Dec. 23 resolution to 73, Verbeke said.
Deputy U.S. Ambassador Jackie Sanders called on Iran to change its ``confrontational course, suspend its proliferation-sensitive nuclear activities, and engage in constructive negotiations on the future of its nuclear program.''
Iran insists it has the right to develop uranium enrichment to produce fuel for nuclear reactors that would generate electricity, while the Security Council demands enrichment halt until Tehran allays fears it is trying to develop atomic weapons. Iran denies it is working on nuclear arms.
<http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1182409609714&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull> Analysis: Congress vs Ahmadinejad DORE GOLD, THE JERUSALEM POST Jun. 21, 2007
The 411-2 vote by the US House of Representatives to implore the UN Security Council to charge Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating the 1948 Genocide Convention represents a significant milestone in the campaign to use the instruments of international law against Teheran.
The legislation is nonbinding, but it clearly makes a legal determination that Ahmadinejad has engaged in "incitement to commit genocide" through his call that Israel be "wiped off the map."
The initiative to see the Iranian president indicted under the Genocide Convention began in New York on December 14, when former Canadian justice minister Irwin Cotler and Harvard Law Prof. Alan Dershowitz joined outgoing US ambassador to the UN John Bolton and an Israeli legal team at an event sponsored by the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs at the New York Bar Association's offices.
Cotler's involvement was critical because, as Canada's attorney-general, he actually prosecuted Rwandan Hutus in Canada under the Genocide Convention for their involvement in broadcasting repeated calls over the radio for the massacres that led to the deaths of over 800,000 Rwandans, chiefly from the Tutsi tribe.
For Cotler, who still serves in the Canadian Parliament, Ahmadinejad's rhetoric was "as direct and public, clear and compelling" case of incitement to genocide as he had ever seen. And what made the Iranian declarations chilling, he explained, was Tehran's ongoing determination to acquire nuclear weapons, at all costs.
The case against Ahmadinejad picked up steam internationally. On January 25, two British MPs, Michael Gove (Conservative) and Gisela Stuart (Labor), invited former prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Cotler, and an Israeli legal team from the Jerusalem Center to appear in the House of Commons along with Lord David Trimble, who had won the Nobel Peace Prize for his involvement in Northern Ireland. The event and the lobbying it created had a definite impact.
As of Thursday, 69 members of Parliament had signed onto a motion that "urges the British Government to put forward a resolution at the United National Security Council demanding President Ahmadinejad be brought to trial on the charge of incitement to commit genocide."
On March 5, the Australian shadow foreign minister, Robert McClelland, also called on the UN Security Council to initiate legal proceedings at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, against Ahmadinejad for incitement to genocide.
A month later, the Canadian Parliament's Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Human Rights adopted a motion by Cotler to refer Ahmadinejad's genocidal incitement to the Security Council, in order that the International Court of Justice investigate and actually prosecute the Iranian president. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who has characterized Ahmadinejad's rhetoric's as genocidal, will be critical for moving this initiative further in Ottawa.
The international community is not about to see Ahmadinejad in the seat of former Yugoslav and Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic in The Hague next week or next month. But the growing consensus that the Iranian president's statements constitute an actual breach of the Genocide Convention is still significant.
And beginning with Florida, more than a half dozen states across the US have considered adopting legislation requiring state pension funds to divest from companies doing business with Iran. Much of the original momentum behind this idea comes from efforts by individual states to divest from companies doing business in Sudan, because of its campaign of genocide over the last three years against the residents of Darfur.
The effort to divest from companies operating in Sudan due to the Darfur genocide is extremely important, but it should be broadened to divest from genocide, as a principle, wherever it has occurred. The legal determination that Ahmadinejad is indeed violating the Genocide Convention, through his repeated acts of incitement, should now be used to create a global alliance for punishing those who engaged in genocide in the past as well as those declaring their intent to carry it out in the future.
For years, Iran and its allies have tried to systematically delegitimize the State of Israel through fictitious charges about "Israeli war crimes." The time has come for Israel to counter with a campaign of its own, which unlike the accusations of its adversaries, is firmly grounded in international law and a growing consensus of increasingly significant international opinion.
The author, Israel's former ambassador to the UN, is president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. -- Yoshie