Mediaboss Marketing

Iran is in terrible shape. It is among the countries worst hit by the coronavirus more than 27,000 documented cases to date. Sanctions have choked its economy. Tensions with Washington remain high and the government is incompetent.

Does that mean the United States should tighten sanctions further in the hope that the maximum pressure strategy will compel Tehran to toe Washingtons line? Or should it loosen sanctions to help Iranians and show them that Americas argument is not with the people?

The choice seems obvious. Demonstrating compassion in times of crisis is good foreign policy, and in this case it may actually help achieve the goals the Trump administration is pursuing.

Yet last week the Trump administration tightened its sanctions, blacklisting several companies around the world for significant transactions in petrochemical products with Iran. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin issued a statement stressing that the United States would continue to target those who support the Iranian regime, even as it remains committed to facilitating humanitarian trade and assistance in support of the Iranian people. He has insisted all along that sanctions do not prohibit humanitarian contributions.

Such arguments are specious in these terrible times. Iran has been overwhelmed by confirmed cases and fatalities, and theyre climbing by the day and thats according to the Iranian governments dubious numbers. The reality may be far worse. Iran has appealed to the International Monetary Fund for $5 billion in emergency funding and a long list of essential equipment ranging from gloves and masks to portable respirators. It should get all this immediately.

No, the United States and its sanctions are not responsible for the rapid spread of the coronavirus in Iran, as Iranian hard-liners have claimed, though the economic hardships from the sanctions could not have helped. Last year, before the current crisis, Human Rights Watch wrote in a report that sanctions had drastically constrained the ability of the country to finance humanitarian imports, including medicines. But the Iranian government carries primary responsibility for the plague by initially denying the outbreak and then reacting far too slowly.

The Trump administration says it has offered to help the Iranian people and to facilitate the delivery of medical supplies to Iran. But the offer is said to carry many conditions, and importers say they still have a major problem finding banks willing to maneuver through the daunting compliance processes to finance the trade.

In any case, piling on more sanctions while Iran bleeds is morally wrong and looks terrible.

Setting aside arguments over whether scuttling the Obama administrations nuclear deal with Iran and resuming sanctions made sense to begin with this editorial board argued that it did not the crisis should be treated by President Trump as a diplomatic opportunity.

On the most elemental level of humanitarian compassion, the United States should be at the forefront of offering what help it can. That may not mean sending medical supplies like respirators, which are in short supply everywhere, but at the least it should mean clearing the way for the I.M.F. loan.

The United States could also offer to send experts to help with technical assistance, a measure that would have the added benefit of providing American medical officials with experience on the coronavirus epidemic at its most devastating. The Trump administration should also loosen or lift sanctions for a limited time and offer technical assistance to Tehran.

There should not be a quid pro quo, which Mr. Trump is so fond of demanding humanitarian aid should be without strings but American generosity might be the best way of persuading Iran to release American and other foreign detainees.

Ideally, that could lead to a lowering of tensions, a reduction of attacks on American targets in Iraq by Iranian allies, and even, down the line, serious discussions on freezing Irans nuclear escalation.

Thats a lot of maybes, given a regime that has shown no inclination to back down before the United States. But if Iran refused American help or continued in its ways despite it, the sanctions would go back into place and the Islamist leaders would be hard put to convince their people that the United States was blocking humanitarian aid.

More important, theres no evidence that the maximum pressure strategy the administration has followed will achieve any of these goals. On the contrary, for the past year the Iranian government has retaliated with repeated nuclear and regional provocations in the evident conviction that this is more likely than restraint to get results.

Writing in Foreign Policy magazine, Robert Malley and Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group argued that in the current crisis, desperate hard-liners in Tehran might take even more dangerous risks.

That was the warning from Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, head of the militarys Central Command, who told Congress earlier this month that the outbreak of the virus probably makes them, in terms of decision-making, more dangerous rather than less dangerous.

Suspending sanctions, clearing the I.M.F. loan and offering help, real help, may not make the Iranian government less dangerous. But its what America should be doing as a great nation, and unlike the alternative, it does hold out the possibility of making Iran less dangerous.

Read the original:
This Coronavirus Crisis Is the Time to Ease Sanctions on Iran - The New York Times

The minister of defence and support of the Iranian Armed Forces, Brigadier Amir Hatami, announced in a statement that major defence gear will be unveiled this year, noting that the Iranian naval force will receive a DANA destroyer and a minesweeper ship, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

Hatami affirmed: We have reached full accuracy in the field of surface-to-surface missiles and will work to increase the destructive capacity of missile warheads.

He referred to Irans defensive system by stating: As far as the defensive field is concerned, we are focusing on the deterrent aspect, which depends on a certain degree of defensive force and resources, in order to be in a position where the enemy would not dare to attack our country.

Hatami added: In the past year, we tried to maintain and stabilise the situation. It was a special year for us, because we faced many fluctuations. In fact, these fluctuations started occurring since the previous year when our enemies publicly planned to destabilise the Islamic Republic of Iran. Of course, we have responded aggressively to all of their actions and the enemy has realised that it cannot challenge the proxy force of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

READ: Its time for Iran to work with world leaders to halt the coronavirus body count

Hatami asserted that the Iranian defence industry will work on optimising the impact of warheads by increasing the destructive capacity to make the missiles more effective, noting that Iran has been developing very competitive research programs to increase the missiles speed, manoeuvrability and agility.

The defence minister also touched on the cruise missiles: If Allah wills, we will have air cruise missiles, and we are seeking to reach a technology to launch cruise missiles while on the move, which we consider a major step. We will achieve our goal this year.

Hatami referred to the new accomplishments in the field of ground warfare by explaining: We have a well-trained group specialised in arming helicopters, increasing its ranges in terms of targeting armoured vehicles and optimising its ability to fly and carry out night operations.

The Iranian defence minister discussed the missile strike carried out against US forces at Ain Al-Assad airbase, which proved Irans deterrent capabilities in the face of aggression.

Iran launched an attack on 8 January on Ain al-Assad airbase in Iraq, where US soldiers are deployed, in response to a US raid that led to the death of the Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani on the third of the same month.

Read more here:
Iran's Minister of Defence: 'We will work to increase the destructive capacity of missile warheads' - Middle East Monitor

Key point:Tehran is always making new weapons or claiming that it has inventing something that really is old. Here's what we know about this latest addition.

Iran has revealed a new attack drone. The Kian jet-powered unmanned aerial vehicle appears to be around 10 feet in length.

With its simple shape and apparent fiberglass fuselage, the new UAV probably is unsophisticated. But even an unsophisticated drone can pose a danger to enemy forces if its user employs it the right way and in sufficient numbers.

This first appeared in 2019 and is being reposted due to reader interest.

Brig. Gen. Alireza Sabahifard, the head of Irans air-defense force, revealed the Kian at a ceremony in Tehran on Sept. 1, 2019. Sabahifard told state media the UAV can fly more than 600 miles and climb to an altitude of 15,000 feet.

The Kian will carry out precision strikes against distant targets far from Irans borders, Sabahifard added.

The Jerusalem Post characterized Sabahifards comments as an apparent threat to Israel or other countries.

Oddly, the drone announcement was made in English but Farsi media downplayed its importance, The Jerusalem Post pointed out. This likely means that [state media] ISNA and PressTV were given orders to push this information to make Western audiences aware of it.

From the Post:

Iran also showed off another drone called Mobin in Russia on Aug. 27, [2019]. It can supposedly fly up to 45,000 feet high for 45 minutes, and has a warhead of 120 kilograms. Thats a lot, but its not clear how far it can go.

Tehran also showed off new smart bombs on Aug. 6, [2019]. According to reports, these were dubbed the Yasin and Balaban and a new series of Qaem optic bombs. They can be used on drones and have advanced, precision-guided equipment. In January, Iran also showed off another UAV called Saegheh-2, which looks like a medium-range reconnaissance drone modeled on the U.S. RQ-170.

As if that wasnt enough drones, Iran also showed off another drone, the Mohajer 6, in June [2019]. It is capable of conducting surveillance missions. Tehran seems to have a surfeit of all this new military technology. It also seems to have a huge spectrum of drones, but it isnt clear if all of them work well.

The unveiling of the drone comes at a time of mounting tensions with the United States, which have escalated since last year when U.S. president Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from a 2015 nuclear deal signed between Iran and world powers, Al Jazeera pointed out.

Washington has since reimposed sanctions to strangle the Iranian economy as part of a pressure campaign to force Tehran to negotiate a new agreement. Iranian leaders say they are open for dialogue if the sanctions are lifted and the U.S. returns to the nuclear deal.

On July 18, 2019, U.S. troops aboard an amphibious assault ship forced down an Iranian drone over the Strait of Hormuz.

The downing comes just a few weeks after Iranian forces downed an American drone in the same area. U.S. President Donald Trump said the unmanned aerial vehicle threatened USS Boxer.

Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman told The New York Times that Boxer was in international waters at the time of the incident. The drone closed within a threatening range before Boxer took action.

U.S. Marines embarked on Boxer used radio-jamming gear to bring down the drone, CNN reporter Ryan Browne tweeted. The drone was immediately destroyed, Trump said.

Iran around a decade ago began arming some of its drone types with missiles and bombs. Iran Aviation Industries Organization in 2014 revealed a Mohajer variant that Iranian media claimed could shoot down other aircraft.

Just one day before Boxer downed the drone over the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian officials revealed a new model of the Mohajer. The Mohajer-6 has the capability to carry out surveillance and reconnaissance missions, and enjoys a wide operational range and wingspan with a high precision, state media reported.

With the deployment of these unmanned aerial vehicles, any threat to the Iranian borders and even beyond the borders, will be identified, tracked down and removed before it could even take form, said Brig. Gen. Hasannejad, commander of Iranian army drones.

The Mohajer-6 can carry guided munitions, state media claimed.

David Axe serves as Defense Editor of the National Interest. He is theauthor of the graphic novelsWar Fix,War Is BoringandMachete Squad.This first appeared in 2019 and is being reposted due to reader interest.

Image: Reuters

Read the original post:
Meet the Mohajer-6: How Scary Is Iran's Newest Drone? - The National Interest

President Trump claimed Iran and China are rooting for Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.

Trump jabbed Biden during a press conference with members of the White House coronavirus task force on Thursday, claiming it would be China's or Iran's "best dream" to negotiate with Biden instead of Trump.

"We made a [trade] deal with China, and we're going to do another one, it looks like. They want to do it very badly. Maybe they'll want to wait, like Iran, to see whether or not Trump gets beaten in the election because would they love to negotiate with Biden or somebody else other than me. They would love it. Thats their best dream in the world," Trump said.

He added, "There are some that may be waiting until after Nov. 3, the election day. But I think we are doing very well. It would be sad if we blew all of the advantages that we have right now because we made unbelievable trade deals. Whether its Mexico, Canada, Japan, South Korea, China, and others, we have changed the whole thing around."

Trump is slated to speak with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday night to discuss the second phase of trade negotiations.

The rest is here:
'Best dream in the world': Trump says Iran and China would love if Biden defeated him - Washington Examiner

After nearly two years of stunning success imposing maximum pressure on Iran, U.S. President Donald Trump has been holding back on delivering a final blow and abolishing the ill-fated Iran nuclear deal.If he waits too long, he may inadvertently breathe new life into a deal hepledgedto dismantle four years ago.

Ever since last summer, when Iran first exceeded the nuclear limits established by the 2015 agreement, Trump supporters in Congresshave urgedthe president to exercise the United States right to respond to Irans transgression by restoring all United Nations restrictions on its nuclear, missile, and conventional arms programs.This right to fully restore sanctions, known as snapback, wasmarketedby former President Barack Obama at the time as an accountability fail-safe to ensure that the United States could always deny Iran the strategic benefits of the nuclear deal should the regime breach its own commitments.

By late fall, with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)reportingthat Iran was not cooperating with an investigation into possible undeclared nuclear material and activities inside the country, the furor on Capitol Hill grew more intense. Republican Sen. Ted Cruz held up Stephen Bieguns nomination for deputy secretary of state until the State Departmentconfirmedin writing what legal experts had alreadyopined: The United States can use its right to snapback at any time.

Despite this acknowledgement, the Trump administration opted for a surprising strategy: not making use of the snapback prerogative.Instead, the focus shifted to fixing another piece of the Iran deal: the scheduled end of the United Nations arms embargo.

The IAEAsreportthis month that Iran has tripled its stockpile of enriched uranium since November demonstrated that the Trump administrations hesitation to unilaterally snap back sanctions allowed Iran to have its cake and eat it, toothat is, to fully breach the agreement while remaining on track to reap strategic benefits far beyond the end of the arms embargo.

If Trump was waiting for more justification to snap back sanctions and permanently end Obamas nuclear deal, he received it when the IAEAreportedthat Iran had also denied inspectors access to multiple sites connected to undeclared nuclear material and activities. That put Iran not only in breach of the agreement but in breach of its most basic safeguard obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, to which it is a signatory.

But instead of leveraging the IAEA reports to press for snapback, Secretary of StateMike Pompeoand his special envoy for Iran,Brian Hook,remained focused on trans-Atlantic coalition politicsbuilding support for a new United Nations Security Council resolution to extend the arms embargo on Iran this summer.

Though well-intentioned, the strategy wont work. Russia has alreadydeclaredits intent to veto any new Security Council resolution to extend the embargo. Pompeo recentlytestifiedbefore Congress that Russia is preparing to sell advanced arms to Iran the minute the embargo expires.

Even if Pompeo could persuade Russia to support a temporary extension of the arms embargo, that alone would not be worth allowing the rest of the Obama nuclear deal to survivebecause the deal gives Iran potential pathways to nuclear weapons as key restrictions expire.

On the other hand, if America snaps back sanctions at the Security Council, all restrictions on Iran return indefinitely: the arms embargo, missiles, nuclear restrictions, and the demand that Iran halt all enrichment activities on its own soil.Another bonus: Russia would have no veto power over snapback since the mechanism was designed to protect the rights of the United States and its European allies from attempts by Iran, Russia, or China to block the reimposition of sanctions.

Pompeo, for his part, may be concerned by reports that Russia would challenge Americas right to snapback, reinterpreting the plain language of the existing Security Council resolution to claim the United States forfeited its rights when it withdrew from the agreement.This concern echoeswarnings issuedby the Iran deals opponents in 2015 that any future fight over snapback would be a political struggle, not a legal one.What, after all, is the practical effect of a snapback that is not recognized as legitimate by the rest of the Security Council?

The Trump administrations strategy then might be to avoid a showdown inside a divided Security Council and, instead, do all it can to pressure European allies to take the final step. In that context, the administrations focus on the arms embargo might make sense.The logic: get Europe to agree that extending the arms embargo is a trans-Atlantic security priority and, following an inevitable Russian veto, make the case that snapback is the only remaining option.

If one of the European countries that are party to the deal with Iran triggers the snapback,most of the Security Council and, more importantly, the U.N. Secretariat may be more likely to recognize its legitimacy in the face of Russian and Chinese objections.If the Secretariat affirms that snapback occurred, it will have to resuscitate prior resolutions and sanctions committees governing Iranchanges that will be posted on the U.N. website for all nations to observe.Russia and China might still reject snapback, but Washingtons response to Moscows and Beijings actions would be anchored in binding Security Council resolutions.

European leaders, however, have done all they can to wait out the Trump administration in the hopes a new president will arrive in 2021 and return to the original deal.On the heels of a surprise coronavirustravel ban aimed at Europe, these leaders arent looking to do Trump any favors.Waiting until mid-summer to call a vote on an arms embargo resolution only to see the Europeans balk on snapback leaves little time for the administration to respond before the November election.

The snapback process takes 30 days to completea period that will be filled with loud threats from an Iranian regime desperate to undermine Trumps chances of reelection.Does anyone believe the presidents political advisers will favor a snapback that close to Election Day?

The outcome, then, may be not only the expiration of the arms embargo, but the survival of the nuclear deal with all its flawsa result that would greatly undermine the past two years of maximum pressure and decrease the incentive for Iran to negotiate a new deal.

If Pompeo believes that Europe, for its own internal politics, must see a vote to extend the arms embargo fail before agreeing to snapback, then he should schedule that vote and proceed to snapback without delay.The United Kingdom, having just losta British soldier to an Iranian proxy attack in Iraq, may be willing to act sooner than later.We must notwaste another moment to save the United Statesand the worldfrom what Trump rightly calls the worst deal ever made.

Read the rest here:
If Trump Hates Obama's Nuclear Deal, Why Is He Letting Up on Iran? - Foreign Policy