Mediaboss Marketing

With war in Ukraine grinding well past the four month mark, on July 19th, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a trip to Iran, where he received a hearty endorsement for his violent incursion into Eastern Europe. In Iran, Mr. Putin met with supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei offered not just verbal support of the war, but also agreed to provide as many as 300 drones to Russia, according to U.S. intelligence. This partnership, which had existed in a more tentative form before the war, has quickly solidified, with Russia finding itself increasingly isolated from the global economy, as Iran has been for years. Iran offers Mr. Putin a chance to form an economic partnership and learn from a state that has experience functioning under severe sanctions.

Khamenei, taking a much more decisive stance than Russias fair-weather Chinese partners, told Mr. Putin that War is a violent and difficult endeavor, and the Islamic Republic is not at all happy that people are caught up in war. But in the case of Ukraine, if you had not taken the helm, the other side would have done so and initiated a war. Behind these sentiments is a strengthening bond between the two nations, commercially and diplomatically. Ali Vaez, the International Crisis Groups Iran director, described the necessity both sides feel to pursue linkages, saying Russia and Iran still dont trust one another, but now they need each other more than ever. This is no longer a partnership of choice, but an alliance out of necessity. Yuri Ushakov, the Russian foreign policy advisor, told reporters in Moscow that the contact with Khamenei is very important. A trusting dialogue has developed between them on the most important issues on the bilateral and international agenda.

Oil remains an important part of the Russia-Iran relationship. The increase in oil prices due to the war in Ukraine could give Iran more leverage to push for concessions from Washington in negotiations regarding the renewal of a 2015 nuclear deal, where Iran agreed to slow nuclear development in return for eased sanctions. Russias massive energy corporation, Gazprom, looking to keep a foothold in the energy markets, has signed a nonbinding $40 billion agreement to help develop Iranian gas and oil fields. However, oil could become a source of contention, as Western sanctions have forced Russian producers to shift towards Eastern markets, who have traditionally bought from Iran. In particular, Russias highly discounted gas sales to Beijing have significantly reduced Iranian crude exports to China. This is a hard blow to the Iranians, leaving nearly 40 million barrels of their oil on tankers in Asiatic seas, looking for a buyer. This will be an important development to watch, because as Russia lowers prices and finds new customers in order to sell around sanctions, they are increasingly edging allies Iran and Venezuela out of the market. A Canada-based political analyst has pointed out that Iran is at a major economic and political disadvantage in the post-Ukraine war environment.

The military relationship between the two countries seems to be going strong. A White House disclosure reported that during Putins visit to Iran, he implored Iran to help the Russians replenish their stocks of armed and unarmed surveillance drones. Top U.S. officials have said that Iran is willing to provide as many as 300 remotely piloted aircraft and will start training Russian troops on how to use them shortly. This collaboration has been in the making for months, with a Russian delegation visiting Iranian airfields twice in the early summer of 2022. According to U.S. satellite imagery, Russians reviewed Shahed-191 and Shahed-129 drones. Iran has extensive experience developing and flying drones. In the past, theyve supplied drone technology to Houthi rebels in Yemen, Shiite militias in Iraq, and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

On the war front in Ukraine, particularly in the Donbas, drones are essential to success, as they have taken on a large role in modern warfare, in insurgency, counterterrorism, and even conventional-style operations. Samuel Bendett, a specialist on Russian drones, reports that while the Russians still have drones, they dont have all the types they need. Throughout the fighting, Russia has gone through most of its precision-guided weapons and the drones it uses to help guide long-range artillery strike targets. It has also lost dozens of reconnaissance drones and has struggled to build large quantities of armed drones and remotely piloted aircraft that can fly for long periods of time. In what has become essentially an artillery war, small unmanned aircraft play a critical role in Russias ability to target Ukrainian forces and report coordinates to longer-range weapons. The drone sales have not yet been publicly confirmed, but will represent a major shift once they are completed, according to P.W. Singer, a New America strategist: Russia is used to selling military gear to nations like Iran, not the other way around.

As the war in Ukraine grinds on, Russias relationship with Iran will most certainly continue evolving. Seeing as President Biden visited Israel and various Arab countries around the same time that Mr. Putin visited Tehran, it is clear that two opposing blocs have been forming in the Middle East. However, most see the Iran-Russia axis as a partnership formed out of necessity by two entities that are ultimately commercial competitors. Abdolrasool Divsallar, a visiting professor of Middle Eastern studies at the University Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, told DW that a major part of Irans motive to work with Russia is driven by its urgent economic needs and lack of alternatives. Iran cannot dismiss its relations with Eastern powers like Russia, as long as there are no options in the West. Experts are divided over whether opening up Western markets to Iran will weaken its devotion to Russia, perhaps depriving Mr. Putins regime of a supporter in their crusade to burn Ukrainian democracy to the ground. It will be up to the U.S. and NATO allies to decide based upon their read of Irans broader intentions: will they concede on nuclear restrictions and human rights demands and allow Iran into Western oil markets desperate for relief from sky-high prices, or will they adhere to a policy of isolation?

Read the original post:
Sanctioned States Unite: Iran And Russia Forge New Partnerships In Oil and Drones - The Organization for World Peace

A key reason for Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the US House of Representatives, to visit Taiwan last week (and before that Ukraine) is her determination to expand the contours of her legacy to include dealing with America's major foreign policy rivals, Russia and China. Her primary motivation, however, is linked to her loyalty to the governing Democratic Party and her determination to prop up Joe Biden's presidency.

We may, thus, soon see Ms Pelosi land in Tehran to pave the way for a grand deal between her country and Iran. But in that case, she will need to avoid boasting about "democracy standing up to autocracy". After all, an agreement with Tehran would be a deal with the ultimate autocratic regime.

Ms Pelosis incentive isn't just challenging what the US deems to be autocracies running Russia and China. Sure, landing in Taiwan angered Beijing and raised concerns of military escalation. And sure, American strategic interests were key considerations for the Speaker. But was her trip really to pre-empt China's feared invasion of the island, or to draw Beijing into a trap?

Neither reason seems compelling. Rather, the visit had the flavour of political manoeuvring.

The obsessive media and public attention given to the trip had caused a stir in the financial markets, but the fundamental misreading of the situation may have been the main reason for this. From the outset, there have been no indications of a strategic US decision to begin a standoff with China. Logic also suggests the visit would not have taken place had there not been a minimum level of understanding about it between Mr Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping, with the two leaders having spoken on the phone for nearly two hours on July 28 less than a week before Ms Pelosi's trip.

A screen displays images of Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President JoeBiden, while broadcasting news about their recent call at a shopping mall in Hong Kong last month. Reuters

The ideological battle is hugely influential, but it is not the basis of the US-China rivalry

So far, the visit appears to have served both leaders' agendas, for it has allowed them to reassert their traditional positions in an expedient political dress rehearsal. It can be seen as a step to shore up Mr Biden's credibility as well as that of the Democratic Party on foreign policy issues, without paying a high cost in the short term. It certainly enabled Mr Xi to reassert Beijings "red lines" on Taiwan, including its categorical rejection of the island's independence as part of its One China principle, yet without being dragged into a military confrontation that Beijing wants to avoid. Certain sections of China's elite are pushing for a confrontation with the US, and they see Ms Pelosis visit as a provocation requiring a response beyond military exercises. But Mr Xi is resisting these voices, opting for a restrained approach.

That doesnt mean accidents or missteps can be ruled out. The cross-Strait issue is now bigger than both countries' leaderships. In the Chinese political system, moreover, the Communist Party collectively makes decisions.

So far, the co-existence between democracies and autocracies as subjective as both terms are has trumped the ideological struggle between them.

The Wests battle with Russia, for instance, is not a confrontation between two political systems, despite Ms Pelosi and others framing it as such. It is essentially a battle between the Nato military alliance and Moscow. Likewise, in its supposed ideological battle with China, the US is actually more worried about the Asian powers rise, which Washington sees as a threat to its global primacy. Successive US administrations have, thus, resolved to contain this rise. No doubt, the ideological battle is hugely influential, but it is not the basis of their rivalry.

Iran is another example of the duplicity in America's "democracy versus autocracy" articulation.

Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Ali Bagheri Kani, right, is leaving the Coburg Palais, the venue of the JCPOA in Vienna last week. AFP

More from Raghida Dergham

Even though it is run by an autocratic regime (and an ideologically expansionist one), neither Mr Biden nor Ms Pelosi would have any problem securing a nuclear agreement with Iran without challenging the regime on its regional record or ideology. Indeed, there is little room for Ms Pelosi to raise the "defence of democracy against autocracy" banner in this context, for the Democratic administration would be doing the opposite: empowering an autocratic regime.

The party will insist that a deal with Tehran serves US interests, defuses a potential nuclear standoff, and avoids military confrontation that the American people do not want. However, it is just as duty-bound to acknowledge that lifting economic sanctions a condition set by the Iranian regime in the nuclear negotiations would provide Tehran with the resources it needs to spread its autocratic ideology across the Middle East.

The Iranian regime recently indicated that it is willing to give up its demand that the US remove the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from its terror list. This suggests it is seeking a formula to conclude a nuclear deal. It has determined that there are creative ways to untie the knot around the IRGC, which is indispensable to the regimes domestic and foreign policies, for it has no qualms about outsmarting western democracies while benefiting from their capitalist features.

Immaterial of how the talks pan out, the time has probably come for US administrations to stop claiming that the wars they have waged in their recent history have been primarily to serve their ideological purposes. Such duplicity has and will continue to cost America, no matter the benefits to its military-industrial complex.

Published: August 07, 2022, 2:00 PM

Link:
After Taiwan, will Pelosi visit Iran? - The National

Tehran: In an attempt to uphold the Hijab and chastity laws in the country, Irans Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance has barred women from appearing in ads.

According to Radio Free Europe, the government of Iran has sent a letter to all advertising companies that states women are no longer permitted to star in any type of advertisement or commercial. Local legislation also established prohibiting the instrumental use of women, men, and children.

This move from the Government of Iran comes a few days after an advertisement had sparked controversy across the country. In the ad, a woman could be seen sporting an improper Hijab and biting into a Magnum ice cream.

The advertisement had left Iranian clerics outraged who demanded that the ice cream manufacturer Domino, be sued. Officials had retaliated by declaring that the advertisement was against public decency and an insult to womens morals.

According to the letter addressed to advertising firms by Irans Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, the ban is per Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution rulings.

For the uninitiated, since the Islamic revolution of 1979, the Hijab has been mandatory in Iran. However, recently, new social media campaigns against Hijab enforcement have been on the rise in the country. Women in Iran have risked arrest and punishment by removing their headscarves in public to protest imposed clothing regulations, in recent years.

Continued here:
Iran bans women from appearing in ads, heres why - The Siasat Daily

Bou Habib says Lebanon has not been under pressure to demarcate its maritime borders, adding that Beirut is holding the negotiations through a US mediary.

Iranian officials have visited Lebanon twice but did not talk about this issue with me or any other official. The Officials did not even mention anything about doing or not doing this, never. Even the Iranian ambassador has not talked about this [the negotiations]. Hezbollah, which has strong ties with Iran, also says negotiations are your job. You go and see what you agree upon. We do neither support you, nor oppose you, he says.

Beirut and Tel Aviv are discussing the fate of the disputed Karish natural gas field in the Mediterranean to end tensions after Israeli moved a drillship to begin extraction of gas from the field.

Hezbollah had earlier warned that it is ready to take any necessary step to protect the natural riches of Lebanon.

The negotiations on Karish field have so far produced no result. Bou Habib, however, expressed optimism that they could lead to an agreement by September.

View original post here:
Lebanon FM Says Iran Not Interfering In Negotiations With Israel Over Gas Field - Iran Front Page - Iran Front Page - IFP News

Press play to listen to this article

Belgiums parliament on Tuesday will debate whether to ratify a proposed treaty with Iran that could allow an Iranian convicted of terrorism in Belgium to be sent back to Tehran.

Iran has loudly demanded that Belgium release Assadollah Assadi, an Iranian diplomat who was convicted on terrorism charges and sentenced to 20 years in prison for his role in a bomb plot targeting a rally by opponents of the Iranian regime in France.

The Belgian government has refused to explain the immediate need for the treaty, although Belgian media reported Monday night that Iran has been holding a Belgian national in jail since February, potentially as leverage.

The treaty could also pave the way for a future political deal on Ahmadreza Djalali, who was sentenced to death by an Iranian court in 2017 on charges of spying for Israel. Djalali, a former researcher at the medical university Karolinska Institute in Stockholm and a guest lecturer at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), denies the charges. Belgium and Sweden have lobbied for his release for years. However, he would not immediately be covered by the treaty, as he doesnt have Belgian nationality.

Several Western citizens are detained in Iran on spurious charges. These cases have long represented one of the most difficult challenges in the problematic relationship between European nations and Iran. Earlier this year, for example, the U.K. settled a debt to Iran dating back to the 1970s effectively paying a400 million ransom to free two British-Iranian nationals.

The move by Belgium, however, which envisions the release of a terrorist convicted in the Belgian courts of attempting mass murder on European soil, is proving far more controversial drawing outrage from European critics of Iran, as well as members of the Iranian opposition living in exile.

While the treaty has been in development for many months, the action in the Belgium parliament comes as European leaders are panicking over energy prices and are increasingly eager to repair relations with Iran in the hope that the Islamic Republic can resume its role as a major supplier of oil and gas.

Doing so would require resolving continuing disagreements with the United States over the Iran nuclear deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which will not be easy. But with EU countries intent on cutting off Russian energy supplies, Iran is seen as one of the few alternative sources.

The new treaty between Belgium and Iran was signed in March and is now being pushed through parliament at speed, with legislative leaders aiming to have it ratified before the parliamentary summer break. The treaty would permit Iranians convicted in Belgium to serve their sentences in Iran, with the same happening for Belgians convicted in Iran. But the treaty also allows each party to grant amnesty and there is little doubt that Assadi, who worked as an Iranian diplomat, would quickly be set free.

Critics of the new treaty say that it will undermine the Belgian law enforcement and justice systems, literally creating a get-out-of-jail-free card for terrorists.

This is an erosion of the legal system, said Michael Freilich, a Belgian MP for the Flemish nationalists N-VA, who are in opposition in the Belgian parliament. Iran has made clear publicly that they dont see Assadi as a terrorist, but as a diplomat. He will be freed as soon as he steps foot on Iranian soil.

Our country is signing a treaty with a terrorist state purely for the purpose of extraditing terrorists to Iran, said Rik Vanreusel, a lawyer representing the Iranian opposition. Iran has a clear policy of taking foreigners hostage as leverage. This new law institutionalizes this kind of behavior via a legal framework.

Amnesty International has also previously warned Iran was holding Djalali hostage to compel Belgium and Sweden to hand over former Iranian officials, including Assadi.

When asked for comment, the Belgian foreign affairs ministry referred questions to the office of Prime Minister Alexander De Croo, who is also serving temporarily as foreign affairs minister. De Croos office referred questions to Belgian Justice Minister Vincent Van Quickenborne.

A spokesperson for Van Quickenborne insisted that the treaty was not tied to any specific case. There is no link with any individual file, the spokesperson said, adding that the vote in parliament was not just about the treaty with Iran, but also about treaties with India and the United Arab Emirates, which would help extradite criminals in the drug trade.

When asked about the treaty in the Belgian parliament last Thursday, Van Quickenborne also pointed out a need to protect Belgians who might be detained by foreign regimes. This is how we ensure that criminals cannot hide in other countries, because impunity is not an option. At the same time, however, we also want to protect our compatriots worldwide, hence the international agreement, Van Quickenborne said.

In recent days, there has been mounting global condemnation of the planned new treaty.

Nine former senior members of the U.S. law enforcement and national security community sent a letter to the Belgian parliament urging against ratification.

This pending treaty is totally disrespectful to the law enforcement officers who risked their lives to prevent the 2018 attack, the letter, seen by POLITICO, stated. It also frustrates the judicial systems ability to fulfill its mission to protect the citizens of Europe by denying it the ability to make perpetrators accountable.

The authors, who include former FBI Director Louis Freeh and an array of former U.S. military commanders, warned that the treaty would effectively establish Belgium as a sanctuary country for terrorist operations, and a safe haven for Iranian intelligence services to maintain a European central command center.

Three Republican U.S. congressmen Randy K. Weber and Louie Gohmert of Texas, and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania have also written a letter to De Croo urging him to oppose the treaty. In the letter, the three U.S. lawmakers praised Belgian authorities for preventing a heinous tragedy by foiling Assadis dastardly plot, which they noted was carried out under the ploy of diplomatic immunity.

Shahin Gobadi, a spokesman for the Peoples Mojahedin Organization of Iran, an Iranian opposition group based in Paris, said there was no doubt about the purpose of the treaty.

This legislation sets the stage for the transfer of a convicted terrorist, Assadollah Assadi, the Iranian regimes diplomat to Iran, Gobadi said in a statement to POLITICO. This disgraceful deal compromises the safety and security of Europeans including the Belgian people and rolls the red carpet for the Iranian regime and its terror apparatus. The message to the Iranian regime would be very clear: you can perpetrate mass terrorism in Europe by using your diplomats and embassies and commit the worst crimes in Europe and get away with it. It is imperative for the Belgium Parliament to reject this agreement and prevent the sacred principles of Europe from being subjected to such dirty deals.

Some Belgian critics of the treaty said there had been a marked change of tone from the Belgian government in the last couple of months, as Van Quickenborne in February had said he wanted to avoid horse-trading on a prisoner swap. That raised the possibility that Belgium was coming under pressure from other European capitals, including Paris, which are eager to ease tensions with Tehran.

Several Belgian diplomats contacted by POLITICO said they were not authorized to speak about the case or that it was above their pay grade. However, diplomats stressed that freeing Djalali, or at least setting aside the death penalty for a more lenient sentence, has long been a priority for the Belgian government.

Freilich also pointed to Benjamin Brire, a French national who has been sentenced in Iran for espionage and propaganda, and suggested that he might be part of a prisoner exchange, with Djalali alone not being sufficient to get Belgium to release Assadi. But honestly, we dont know, Freilich said. Its very sneaky. If the Belgian government really feels that such a deal should be done, it should be transparent about it.

One Belgian politician said there has been large diplomatic pressure, in particular from France.

But some senior leaders strongly defended the efforts to re-engage with Iran and further isolate Russia in the context of its war with Ukraine. Speaking at a news conference at the G7 summit in Germany, European Council President Charles Michel, a former Belgian prime minister, said the EU had consistently supported the Iran nuclear deal, and should do everything possible to revive it.

Even if it is extremely difficult even we know whats the role played by Iran in the regional context, Michel said, we think that the EU has responsibility to engage with all the actors with all the partners there to see if agreements with Iran are possible.

The treaty will first be discussed on Tuesday by the foreign affairs committee. Once it gets the green light there, which could be within hours, it will go to the full parliament, possibly later this week.But given the increasing pressure and the growing media attention the treaty is getting in Belgium, some Belgian politicians said it isnt a done deal yet.

Continued here:
Belgium paves way to send convicted terrorist to Iran - POLITICO Europe