Mediaboss Marketing

President Donald Trump's repeated promises to rip up the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal may accomplish what Tehran has been trying to do for decades drive a damaging wedge between the U.S. and key European allies.

Trump has made no secret of his dislike for the 2015 agreement, which saw painful sanctions lifted in exchange for Iran curbing its nuclear program. On the campaign trail, he called it "the worst deal ever."

On Thursday, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said "Iran is clearly in default" of U.S. expectations for the pact. He cited Iranian support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, its development of ballistic missiles and "cyber activities."

Tillerson added: "We have to consider the totality of Iran's activities and not let our view be defined solely by the nuclear agreement."

While the Trump administration also extended sanctions relief to Tehran under that deal, NBC News reported that Trump plans to sign off on a new Iran policy ahead of his first appearance at the United Nations General Assembly next week. The president is seeking to take a more aggressive approach, according to administration officials.

While there is broad consensus that Iran is abiding by the agreement with the U.S., Russia, China and three European powers, some American officials have hinted that Trump would decertify the deal when it comes up for renewal in October.

Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley Aaron P. Bernstein / Reuters

Earlier this month, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said that the agreement falls short of what was promised. We were promised an end to the Iranian nuclear program. What emerged was not an end but a pause.

So do we allow ourselves to have blinders on to a flawed deal or do we say what else can we do is there something else we should be doing now to prevent whats going to happen 10 years from now? she added during comments at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based think tank. We cant continue to kick this down the road.

European governments stand firmly behind the plan, and European companies have pursued a series of partnerships inside Iran now that major sanctions have been lifted.

So if it pulled out of the deal, the U.S. would not be able to count on the EU to reimpose the tough multilateral sanctions that were so effective in bringing Iran to the negotiating table in the first place, according to Thomas Wright, an expert in American foreign policy at the Brookings Institution.

"The Europeans would be furious at Trump for wrecking the agreement and they would also worry about the prospect and consequence of U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear program," he said.

Wright added that the "result could be a diplomatic crisis worse than the Iraq crisis of 2003," referring to the U.S.-EU rift that followed the American invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

And achieving the sort of international consensus that produced the 2015 agreement would be practically impossible, he suggested.

Foreign Minister of Iran Mohammad Javad Zarif shakes hands with then-Secretary of State John Kerry at nuclear deal talks in Vienna, Austria, on July 14, 2015. Thomas Imo / Getty Images file

What the Trump Administration will expect to do is unilaterally pull out of the deal and then go to Europe and say 'follow us,' said Wright. But you dont go back to this containment policy ... you go back to very limited sanctions, and what was really effective in Iran were the multilateral sanctions.

And a divided international response would play into Tehrans hands because negotiating with individual countries or even blocs increases Tehrans power, said Sanam Vakil, a professor at Johns Hopkins' School of Advanced International Studies in Bologna, Italy.

She said splitting international reaction has been an age-old process that Iran has been using even before there was unity on Irans nuclear program."

It took a lot of maneuvering" to get the widespread support for the agreement, added the associate fellow at Chatham House, a think tank based in London. Fragmentation will make getting another international agreement done very hard.

The EU stands behind the deal.

The Iran deal is a good and robust agreement that serves the interests of all parties," the EU's foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said in a statement to NBC News. "It is not an agreement between two countries it is a commitment undertaken by the entire international community on one side and Iran on the other, supported by a resolution of the U.N. Security Council."

While Trump has twice certified very reluctantly to Congress that Tehran was is in compliance with the nuclear agreement, as a candidate he promised to ax.

The U.S. has already punished Tehran for actions that violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the agreement.

On July 28, the U.S. slapped sanctions on six Iranian entities after the country launched a satellite-carrying rocket into space.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin cast the sanctions as part of an ongoing effort to oppose Iran's ballistic missile activity, including what he called a "provocative space launch."

In early August, Trump signed into law new sanctions on Iran, as well as Russia and North Korea. The sanctions in that bill target Iran's missile programs as well as human-rights abuses.

The U.S. imposed unilateral sanctions after saying Iran's ballistic missile tests violated the U.N. resolution, which endorsed the nuclear deal and called upon Tehran not to undertake activities related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such technology. It stopped short of explicitly barring such activity.

More sanctions were imposed Thursday on several Iranian firms and individuals with links to the country's Revolutionary Guard, a body Trump is considering labeling a terrorist organization.

On Monday, sources told NBC News' Andrea Mitchell that the Trump is weighing new measures against Irans proxy forces in Iraq and Syria and its support for militant groups elsewhere. The plan is aimed at getting Iran to curb its ballistic missile program, which was not restrained as part of the nuclear deal.

Iran denies its missile development breaches the resolution, saying its missiles are not designed to carry nuclear weapons.

According to Jim Phillips, senior research fellow for Middle Eastern affairs at Washington think tank The Heritage Foundation, ties with Europe would indeed suffer if the U.S. stepped away from the deal.

Relations with EU would be strained, unless the administration successfully tied its decertification decision to Iranian violations of the agreement, he said. "But the administration could mitigate some of this strain by not formally withdrawing from the agreement, but delegating that decision to the U.S. Congress, which would formally make the decision to abrogate the treaty."

This would make clear that the decision was bipartisan, he said.

But no matter how the U.S. nullifies the agreement, the decision would be a result of Irans disruptive behavior throughout the region, according to some experts, including Phillips.

While President Obama was in office, Iran undoubtedly felt free to escalate its interventions in Syria, Yemen and elsewhere because it knew that the administration valued the deal as its foreign policy legacy and would seek to preserve it at all costs, he said.

Hezbollah fighter walks near a military tank in Western Qalamoun, Syria, on Aug. 23. mar Sanadiki / Reuters

Iran policies throughout the Middle East run counter to U.S. interests and those of its allies. Tehran threatens Israel, backs Hezbollah a powerful Lebanese militia and political group and meddles in conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Bahrain.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week described his country's view on the deal as "straightforward," adding: "This is a bad deal. Either fix it or cancel it."

Brookings Wright pointed to what he said was a flaw in the administration's drive against the deal, regardless of what he called Iran's "nefarious" behavior.

They need a plan for when it falls apart whats the plan then? How are they going to deal with the sanctions issue, with the military issues? he said. The real question mark is what happens at the end.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif on Thursday tweeted that the nuclear pact, which is formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was not up for discussion.

While the U.S. is wavering in its support of the deal, Europe has been steadfast. Mogherini led a delegation to the inauguration of President Hassan Rouhani on Aug. 5 a visit seen as a sign of warming relations between the EU and Tehran.

France's Ambassador to the U.S. Grard Araud drove this point home on Sept. 5 the same day that Haley outlined why the U.S. should withdraw from the pact.

A day later, France's foreign minister said he was worried about Trump's take on the agreement.

"The agreement which was passed two years ago enables Iran to give up on a nuclear weapon and so avoid proliferation. We have to guarantee this stance," Jean-Yves Le Drian said during a visit to Science-Po university in Paris.

"I am worried at this moment in time by the position of President Trump, who could put into question this accord. And if this accord is put into question then voices in Iran will speak up to say: 'Let's also have a nuclear weapon.' We are in an extremely dangerous spiral for the world."

Europe's stance isnt only about weapons of mass destruction, it is also about dollars and cents. The European Union used to be the countrys main trading partner but now rates as its fifth-largest, according to EU statistics.

Iran's President Hassan Rouhani Handout / Reuters file

On July 3, French energy major Total signed a $5 billion deal with Iran Tehrans first such deal since sanctions were lifted. Chinas National Petroleum Corporation is also part of the deal.

Economic development is also a way of building peace, Totals chief executive Patrick Pouyann told AFP news agency at the time.

That opinion that appears widespread across the EU, with the trading block having much more at stake in Iran commercially than the U.S.

While take-up has been relatively slow Iran is notoriously difficult to do business in, sanctions or no sanctions other European companies have also dipped a toe in the potentially lucrative market, including hotel chains Melia and Accor.

Regardless of what is motivating the U.S. and Europe, a departure from Washington's historical allies on the nuclear deal could prove devastating to America's ability to craft international deals in the future, according to Vakil, who is also an associate fellow at London's Chatham House think tank.

She added: Europe and many countries in Asia will just be looking beyond the U.S. to determine the fate of conflict situations.

F. Brinley Bruton reported from London. Ali Arouzi reported from Tehran. Paul Goldman reported from Tel Aviv.

Read more here:
Iran Nuclear Deal: Trump Drive to Ax Pact May Alienate Allies

Sheikh Abdullah, who lives in London and comes from a wing of the ruling family that was ousted in a 1972 coup, posed for pictures with King Salman at his lavish coastal palace outside Tangiers. (Estimates of the cost of the kings holiday run as high as $100 million expensive even for a monarch who typically travels with an entourage of 1,000 or more.)

Although there was no official explanation for the visit, the Saudi news media played up Sheikh Abdullahs visit as the beginning of a potential challenge to the emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani.

Few analysts believe the emir faces a serious threat, but some Qataris took the move as a provocation, and as further evidence that the true intention of the Saudi- and Emirati-led boycott is to engineer leadership change in Doha.

The diplomatic skirmishes are the latest moves in a crisis that, until now, has largely played out in the news media, amid accusations of hacked emails and fake news stories, and in fruitless efforts at conciliation led by worried Western allies like Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson.

President Trumps role in the crisis has been hotly debated since he openly sided with the Saudi-led bloc in June, although he has been silent in recent weeks.

The charge that Qatar is too close to Iran resonated with Mr. Trump, who during a summit meeting in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, in May called on Muslim leaders to isolate Iran, a nation that he said fueled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror.

Qatar insists that it maintains cordial relations with Iran out of commercial necessity, in that the two countries share the worlds largest gas field, the source of Qatars vast wealth, and notes that the United Arab Emirates has a far greater trading relationship with Iran.

Doha also says it has shown solidarity with its Sunni neighbors during disputes with Shiite-led Iran, particularly in the January 2016 attack on the Saudi mission in Iran, after which Qatar recalled its ambassador.

Still, Qatars payment last April of a huge ransom to Shiite militants in Iraq, in exchange for a group of hostages that included members of the Qatari royal family, was seen by critics as fresh proof of Qatars reckless approach to foreign policy. The incident further inflamed the already tender relations between Qatar and its neighbors.

Since the dispute flared in June, Iran has provided Qatar with sea shipments of fresh food and allowed a stream of Qatari airplanes to cross its airspace. On Thursday, Irans Foreign Ministry spokesman, Bahram Ghasemi, welcomed the return of Qatars ambassador to Tehran in a short statement. There was no immediate reaction from the four boycotting countries.

Qatar has taken a defiant stance, introducing a raft of measures to ensure the country, whose population is 90 percent foreign, remains attractive to outside investors and workers.

On Thursday, it enacted regulations that give greater protections to foreign domestic workers, many of whom work as nannies, cooks and cleaners. Their limited rights and often poor treatment in gulf countries like Qatar has frequently been a focus of Western human rights groups.

But the strain of the crisis is starting to show on Qatars economy and financial system. Depositors from boycotting countries withdrew billions of dollars from Qatari banks in June, forcing the treasury to step in. Qatars rating with international credit agencies has also taken a hit.

Qatars imports fell 38 percent in June and recovered only slightly last month, according to official figures released on Thursday.

Still, the sanctions have not affected Qatars gas exports, the primary source of its wealth, which grew by 7.8 percent in July compared with a year earlier. Analysts say the effect of the sanctions may lessen as Qatar develops alternate sea and air routes.

Follow Declan Walsh on Twitter @declanwalsh

A version of this article appears in print on August 25, 2017, on Page A8 of the New York edition with the headline: Qatar Restores Full Ties With Iran, Deepening Gulf Feud.

See original here:
Qatar Restores Full Relations With Iran, Deepening Gulf Feud - New York Times

Iran's education department has sparked outrage online after banning 'ugly' teachers.

A list by the Ministry of Education details hundreds of illnesses and conditions that prevent people from entering the teaching field.

Most controversial are those relating to teachers' appearances.

The ban includes those with severe acne or eczema, burn marks, unsightly facial moles, or less than 20 teeth. Women with facial hair are also banned.

Other rules regard conditions that would usually be unnoticeable such as female infertility, cancer, bladder stones, or colour blindness.

The list went viral after it was published by the semi-official FARS news agency which pointed out that prospective teachers spend more time undergoing medical tests than they do on training.

Social media users have attacked the rules, calling them ableist, discriminatory, and a clear violation of human rights.

An advisor to the President has since promised that the list would be investigated.

As a result of the backlash, an education spokesperson told the Tehran-based Etemad newspaper that rules specifically targeting women would be removed and the rest of the list reviewed, according to Euro News.

Newshub.

Read the rest here:
Iran bans 'ugly' teachers - Newshub

The State

Haley is after nuclear info Iran doesn't want her to have The State U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley traveled overseas Wednesday on the hunt for information about Iran's nuclear program, a hunt that Iran is trying to make difficult. Haley flew to Vienna, Austria, to meet with officials of the ... Trump's suspicious scheme to discredit the Iran nuclear dealThe Hill (blog) Smart Power Update: Iran Allegedly Violates Nuclear Deal, Cubans Secretly Attack US DiplomatsTownhall Iran warns of 'illegal' US pressure on IAEA after Haley's visit to ViennaPress TV Washington Times -Forbes -The Jerusalem Post all 45 news articles »

Read the original post:
Haley is after nuclear info Iran doesn't want her to have - The State

When it comes to the Middle East the only surprise is when there arent surprises. At the moment, the defeat of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) strongholds in Mosul and Raqqa in a force led by Hezbollah and Iraqi troops with U.S. Special Forces has led directly to the elevation of Hezbollah as a military entity since it bore the brunt of the combat burden in Syria and paid the highest price in casualties.

Since Hezbollah is a proxy for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, its enhanced status has given both forces the opportunity for a military buildup on Israels northern border. For Israel this emerging reality constitutes a strategic game changer. Ironically the victories over ISIS, have yielded a strategic failure vis--vis the Shiites.

In fact, the success of Hezbollah has had the added benefit of attracting Shiites across the globe to its revolutionary cause. Moreover, Hezbollah has been able to warehouse up to approximately 150,000 missiles, more than exist in European NATO sites. These missiles are targeted at Israeli cities. To make matters even more complicated for Israels military leaders, the United Nations has confirmed that the Hezbollah missiles have been placed in schools and the Israeli military reports that missiles are also placed in hospitals and community centers. These places will ensure carnage if destroyed and likely yield an anti-Israel backlash across European and Northern American media outlets.

This human shields issue has been discussed in the United Nations as well as in talks among Israel, Russia and the U.S., but it tends to be ignored when anti-Israel sentiment has an instrument to clobber the Jewish state. However, this factor cannot be ignored by military planners anticipating a preemptive strike against Hezbollah missile sites.

As far as Russia is concerned, Iran has assisted in establishing and reinforcing its presence in Syria. While there is probably no love lost between the two states, there are mutually reinforcing interests.

Russian presence in the region gives Iran an ally with advanced weaponry and a clear, unequivocal reason for the maintenance of its position in the eastern Mediterranean. It appears as if Russia believes Iran is a stabilizing force in the Middle East, notwithstanding Iranian promotion of extremist organizations. This stance is not dissimilar from President Obamas suggestion that an assertive Iran can counter the aspirations of the Sunni nations, thereby creating a balance of regional power. The fact that this belief has been rendered nugatory by Iranian actions, seems to be ignored or forgotten by U.S. analysts.

From Israels point of view, there is a desperate need to convince the Trump administration it is being outflanked and outmaneuvered by a combination of Russian and Iranian diplomacy. First the Iran deal on nuclear weapons and now the acceptance of Iran on the border of Israel. With missiles that can reach every major Israeli city, the Iranians are effectively saying checkmate.

Needless to say, Israel will fight to its last citizen in order to challenge the Iranian scenario. But it is still worrisome when one observes the movement of armed forces across the Levant, as well as the capitulation of the U.S. in negotiation.

When Iran and Iraq were preoccupied with the defeat of ISIS, Israel was generally safe from mobilization against it. That condition has changed as quickly as the weather. And whether one agrees or not, Israel will probably be obliged to act against Hezbollah, increasing the chances of all-out war and increasing the odds blood will flow.

Herbert London is the president of the London Center for Policy Research, which conducts research on national security, energy, and risk analysis. He formerly served on the Board of Governors at St. Johns College, the Board of Overseers at the Center for Naval Analyses and the board of the Hudson Institute.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

View original post here:
Iran and Israel are poised for war in Syria - The Hill (blog)