Mediaboss Marketing

A much-hyped Tehran space launch turned out to be a dud, as the Iranian Simorgh rocket suffered a "catastrophic failure" shortly after liftoff on Thursday and likely blew up before it reached space, two U.S. officials told Fox News.

On Thursday, U.S. Strategic Command, which monitors launches around the world, could only confirm a satellite was not deployed from the rocket. But fresh intelligence assessments on Friday confirmed yet another failure by the Islamic Republic in its mission to place an operational satellite into orbit --something Tehran has never done before, despite repeated attempts over the past few years.

Officials have long been concerned the technology used to put a satellite into space could also be repurposed to make a long-range ballistic missile capable of one day potentially hitting the U.S. The Simorgh rocket is based on a North Korean design.

Iran's state media on Thursday claimed the launch was successful, but U.S. spy agencies quickly determined that assessment was more propaganda than fact.

But even though it failed, Iran's attempted rocket launch succeeded in violating United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said.

Critics of the UN resolution -- which went into effect days after the landmark Iran nuclear agreement two years ago -- say the language is purposefully weak, however, and does not forbid Iran from carrying out such tests. The resolution states Iran is merely "called upon" not to conduct such rocket and missile tests.

"We would consider that a violation of UNSCR 2231," Nauert said flatly. "We consider that to be continued ballistic missile development."

Lucas Tomlinson is the Pentagon and State Department producer for Fox News Channel. You can follow him on Twitter: @LucasFoxNews

Read the rest here:
Iran rocket suffered 'catastrophic failure,' likely blew up ...

ISTANBUL New U.S. sanctions targeting Iran are a breach of its nuclear deal with world powers and an attempt to abolish the accord, Iranian officials said Thursday, adding that the government will respond to what it sees as an escalation of U.S. aggression.

We believe that the nuclear deal has been violated, and we will react appropriately, Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on state television Thursday.

The deal curbed Irans nuclear activities in exchange for the removal of some sanctions, while the new measures target anyone involved in Irans ballistic missile program and its powerful Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The belief in Washington is that . . . Iran must be put under pressure, Araghchi said. And the goal of the new sanctions, signed by President Trump on Wednesday, is to destroy the 2015 agreement so that Iran will withdraw.

The administration has criticized the deal for its narrow focus on the nuclear program, without addressing issues such as Irans support for proxy militias and its growing ballistic missile arsenal. Trump has questioned the utility of the agreement, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in remarks at the State Department on Tuesday.

The agreement dealt with a very small slice of Irans threats, Tillerson said. It was kind of like we put blinders on and just ignored all those other things.

But even as the United States ramps up pressure on Iran including threats to leave the pact officials in Tehran have moved cautiously in response, weighing the cost of potential conflict with the benefits of remaining part of the deal.

Before the agreement, which ended the countrys isolation, Iran probably would have balked at calls for diplomacy. As a regional power, it has defied the international community, building up missile defense and backing proxy forces across the region.

[Power struggle escalates between Irans president and hard-liners]

But under the nuclear deal, Iran has rejoined the global economy and is now keen to avoid blame for the collapse of the agreement. Trump recently certified Irans compliance with the deal, an authorization he is required to make to Congress every 90 days, but has suggested he may not do so again in the fall, without saying why.

President Trump made clear that, in terms of the fate of the nuclear deal, the administrations latest certification of Iranian compliance was only a temporary reprieve a stay of execution, said Robert Malley, who served as the White House coordinator for the Middle East under President Barack Obama.

So far, Iran has appeared content to sit back and allow the [Trump] administration to further isolate itself on the nuclear deal, said Malley, who is now vice president of policy for the Brussels-based International Crisis Group. But that calculus could change.

Iran, experts say, could continue to adhere to the agreement and seek assurances from Europe and Russia that they would refuse any U.S. attempt to renegotiate. The European Union has countered Trumps calls to ditch the accord, reminding the administration that it belongs to the international community.

If the White House decided to declare Iran noncompliant, it would probably be based on little to no valid evidence, said Richard Nephew, former coordinator for sanctions policy at the State Department.

But Iran could still push the technical limits of the deal with small incremental steps that restart its nuclear program, he said.

It could also restart all of its nuclear activity, which it says is for peaceful purposes, or use its military assets or proxy forces to strike U.S. interests in the region.

Iran and the United States have skirmished in the waters of the Persian Gulf, where the U.S. Navy stations its 5th Fleet. American forces and militias loyal to Iran also fight in proximity in Iraq and Syria, where they are both battling the Islamic State.

Having Iranian proxies take aim at the U.S. presence in Iraq or Syria could trigger powerful U.S. retaliation, which quickly could snowball, Malley said.

[The United States and Europe are on a collision course over Iran]

According to Ali Vaez, senior Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group, rising tensions could push Iran to double down on means of deterrence it considers essential to its national security, including missile defense and support for regional proxies.

Last week, Iran successfully fired its satellite-carrying Simorgh launch vehicle into space, prompting the U.S. Treasury Department to come back with more sanctions.

Irans parliament, reacting to the sanctions bill as it made its way through Congress, recently fast-tracked funding for the countrys ballistic missile program and Revolutionary Guard Corps.

According to Abbas Aslani, world news editor at Irans privately run Tasnim news agency, Iran will not violate the nuclear agreement but neither will it abandon or compromise on its defense capabilities, including the missile program.

Irans hard-liners, many of whom opposed the deal as one that granted too many concessions, may use the tensions to press for some sort of retaliation. The deal was negotiated under Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, a moderate recently elected to a second term.

He fired back at domestic critics Thursday at a ceremony marking his formal endorsement by Irans supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final word on all matters of the state.

Iran survived some of the toughest sanctions through a combination of the power of diplomacy and deterrent defensive power, the Associated Press quoted Rouhani as saying. During his second term, Iran will insist on constructive engagement more than before.

But it is unclear how long Rouhani will maintain his pro-diplomacy rhetoric, which has already become increasingly more critical of the Trump administration, said Farzan Sabet, a fellow at Stanford Universitys Center for International Security and Cooperation.

Still, conflict between the United States and Iran is not preordained, Malley said, and both sides could back down.

But that means that the survival of the nuclear deal and avoidance of military conflict depend on the Trump administration showing restraint and the Iranian regime displaying wisdom, he said. Given what we know of the two, what are the odds of that?

Read more

Todays coverage from Post correspondents around the world

Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news

Excerpt from:
Iran calls new US sanctions a violation of nuclear deal - Washington Post

Of course, most Iranians themselves also did not expect the revolution to succeed. They did not know that the shah had terminal cancer, or that he would handle the response to protests as poorly as he did. Iran had periodic bouts of mass protests, after all.

Many of Khomeinis followers took him at his word that he sought reform, not personal power. For example, in 1978, the exiled ayatollah told the Associated Press, Personal desire, age, and my health do not allow me to personally have a role in running the country after the fall of the current system. He told the Parisian newspaper Le Journal, I cant accept any special role or responsibility. Once he grasped the reins of power, though, he held on tight. The revolution was already spinning itself out when Iraqi President Saddam Hussein launched a surprise attack on Iran. For Khomeini, it was a gift because it allowed him to distract from his own failings and rally people around the flag. By the time the war ended, he had consolidated power.

The Islamic Republic of Iran remains, however, an anomalous historical phenomenon and an unstable one at that. Throughout its history, there have been sparks that have rocked the regime. In 1999, the defenestration of students at a Tehran University dorm by plainclothes security men sparked unrest that shook the regime to its core. In 2001, Irans 3-1 loss to Bahrain in a World Cup qualifier also sparked nationwide protests when diaspora television broadcast that the Iranian team threw the match on government orders to prevent mixed gender celebrations. Most recently, in 2009, there was the fraudulent re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which once again sparked nationwide protests. In short, Iran is far from stable.

Only about ten percent of Iranians believe that the Islamic Republic is working well; these are the so-called hardliners. And additional 15 percent think Khomeini had good ideas, but that the revolution went off its rails and can still be righted; these are the so-called reformers. The remaining three-quarters believe that Khomeinis system failed and cannot be fixed. Most of these Iranians are not revolutionary but apathetic. Outrages such as those in 1999, 2001, and 2009 can bring them to the streets. In short, Iran is a tinderbox.

Every so often, a spark ignites. The question then becomes whether the regime is better at smothering the embers than the opposition is at fanning the flames. What is certain, however, is that in such an unpopular system, there will always be new sparks. What might be the next one?

A good bet is that it might revolve around the death of imprisoned Iranian politicians. The two most prominent Iranian politicians now under house arrest are Mehdi Karroubi and Mir-Hossein Mousavi. Karroubi has been a stalwart of post-revolutionary Iranian politics. He twice served as speaker of parliament, and he twice sought the presidency. In 2005, he went to sleep the winner as ballots were counted only to wake up in third place. After he publicly alleged raised questions about irregularities, Supreme Ali Khamenei chided him for questioning the integrity of the system. In 2009, after coming in last, he conceded gracefully and became a symbol of relative integrity when he condemned detainee sexual abuse in the wake of post-election unrest. Against the backdrop of Arab Spring unrest and regime concern that the similar demands for government accountability could find fertile ground inside Iran, the regime placed Karroubi under house-arrest in order to ensure his silence.

Around the same time, they also rounded up both Mousavi, a former prime minister and unsuccessful 2009 presidential candidate, and his wife Zahra Rahnavard. Charged initially with Mofsed-e-filarz, being corrupt on earth, a capital crime in Iran, Karroubi, Mousavi, and Rahnavard were eventually sentenced on lesser charges.

While Rouhani promised to free his former colleagues from house arrest, he did not do so; the three remain detained. On July 25, Karroubis daughters visited him and subsequently reported that their 79-year-old father was in ill-health, suffering both from kidney disease and high blood pressure. He was subsequently hospitalized, but the Islamic Students News Agency reported on July 28 that he had been released in perfect health. On July 30, however, his son reported to the reformist website Kalameh that his father had been re-hospitalized with a dangerously low heart rate.

Iran should be very, very worried. While reformists and democrats are not synonymouseven the most liberal reformist is a hardline theocrat when placed on the broad spectrum of Iranian political thoughtimprisoning Karroubi and Mousavi may have painted the regime into the corner. If they release one or both, not only does the regime look weak but, after six years of house arrest, both men may be slightly antagonistic to those who ordered their harassment and detention. If they die while in detention, popular outrage could amount to a spark that spreads.

Either way, the Islamic Republic is in for a challenge. The faade of acceptance and acquiescence is only thata superficial image that cannot mask the frustration and outrage festering just the beneath the surface.

See the original post here:
The Spark to Unleash Iranian Unrest - Commentary Magazine

Prime Minister Narendra Modis widely publicised trip to Israel last month was labelled as de-hyphenating the traditional vector of Israel-Palestine in Indian strategic thinking in West Asia, without damaging relations with Arab states. The final say on this balancing, however, will be determined by Iran.

Historically, India has projected Israel as an apartheid regime. Despite the latters drawn-out courtship, it was a weakening of old structures that ushered new ideas into Delhis decision-making and, in 1992, mutual securities became salient. Since then, cooperation and trade have improved steeply. Not unusually, and simultaneously, India has maintained support for the Palestinian cause. Despite not making the customary stopover in Ramallah during his trip, the ground was privately prepared when Mr. Modi welcomed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to Delhi in May. The relative quiet across Arab states during Mr. Modis visit and conversations with diplomats in the region reveal that Indias West Asia relations are no longer viewed through the prism of Israel-Palestine, but the changing security landscape in the region pertaining to Iran.

A new political order in West Asia is in full force, led assertively by Saudi Arabia, and one that regards Iran as the existential threat. The assumption in some sections of the international community, that Indias ties with Israel naturally negate the South Asian powers relationship with the Arab nations, specifically of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), is misguided. Indeed, Mr. Modi would not have made the visit to Israel had he calculated that such a trip would antagonise the Sunni Arab leaders who have shown concrete interest in Indias growing market and improving regulatory environment. India, in turn, looks to the region for its constantly expanding natural gas and crude oil thirst. Essentially, Arab leaders can today live with their allies operating with the Israelis, but not with the Iranians. Since the Iran nuclear deal, insecurities among Tehrans rivals, supported increasingly by the Trump White House, have gone into overdrive. That the Iranian leadership is fully aware of these shifting dynamics was on show in the days leading up to Mr. Modis Israel visit.

Twice in the space of 10 days, Irans Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei linked the plight of Muslims in Gaza, Yemen, and Bahrain, with, unexpectedly, those in Kashmir. The timing and frequency of his comments, which were so close to the Israel visit, cannot be underplayed. The Iranians will have been aggrieved by the visit coupled with Indias unambiguous pro-Riyadh tilt. Despite this, ties between India and Iran will not cease any time soon, but run on an independent track. Indeed, they are currently developing the geopolitically valuable Chabahar port on the Gulf of Oman. But rising economic stakes in Delhi and a new regional order will mean that India cannot maintain its traditionally equidistant, neutral position in West Asia for long. These pathways will be stress-tested soon if India desires a concrete regional strategy beyond tactical visits.

Bilal Baloch is a Visiting Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Delhi, India. Twitter: @bilalabaloch

Read the original post:
The Iran question - The Hindu

BBC News

Spain police bust huge Iran-UK immigration ring BBC News Police in Spain say they have broken up a large immigration ring that smuggled Iranians as young as five into the UK. The gang allegedly supplied fake Spanish passports to Iranian nationals so they could fly into the UK. More than 100 people were ... and more »

Here is the original post:
Spain police bust huge Iran-UK immigration ring - BBC News