Mediaboss Marketing

"That (the) US arms a terrorist group is what causes instability," Khameini wrote on Twitter Monday. "Who created ISIS? The US!" He added that while US President Donald Trump accuses Iran of supporting terrorists, "terrorism in this region has American roots."

Those attacks, which left at least 12 people dead, were claimed by ISIS.

Qatar's Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani said Monday that the country's government still has "no clue what are the main reasons behind all these measures."

"There is no more trust," he said, adding, "it is time for cooler heads to restructure Qatar's approach on foreign policy."

Gulf leaders have also been critical of Qatar's relatively neutral stance on Iran, which they view as a prime destabilizing force in the region.

The diplomatic rift came two weeks after Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt blocked several Qatari media outlets, including Al Jazeera, over comments allegedly made by Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani.

Al Thani reportedly hailed Iran as an "Islamic power" and criticized US President Donald Trump's policy towards Tehran. Qatar said the official news agency which reported the comments was hacked -- and on June 6, US officials told CNN that US investigators believe Russian hackers were behind it.

But al Thani disputed that Monday, saying that "if the problem is Iran, why have those measures been taken against Qatar, why not taken against Iran?"

Al Thani praised French President Emmanuel Macron Monday for being "very active" in attempting to find a "solution to the problem."

British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who is currently in the Gulf for a series of meetings, on Monday "urged all sides (to) refrain from any further escalation and to engage in mediation efforts."

Johnson encouraged Qatar to "take seriously their neighbors' concerns" but also expressed alarm at the blockading of the country and called for it to be eased.

"Qatar is a partner of the UK in the fight against terrorism but they urgently need to do more to address support for extremist groups, building on the steps they have already taken," Johnson said.

CNN's Katie Polglase and Katie Hunt contributed reporting.

Continue reading here:
Iran blames US for creating ISIS amid worsening Middle East tensions - CNN

Sign Up for

Our free email newsletters

The way the United States government is treating Iran is an absolute disgrace. At a time when Iran has been, on balance, behaving with relative moderation and decency, America has responded with vile callousness and additional sanctions.

The worst, of course, comes from President Trump, who responded to a terrorist attack in Iran by blaming it on them for their support of terrorism. But Senate Democrats, who voted overwhelmingly to impose additional sanctions on Iran, mainly to hit Russia, are nearly as bad.

For the last several years, Iran has been involved in a tense standoff with Western powers, most of all the United States, driven by ethno-nationalist hatred and religious fanaticism on both sides. In Iran, conservative religious hardliners and belligerent warmongers argue for maximal aggressiveness and confrontation; in the United States, a virtually identical group of people argue for the exact same thing (up to and including a nuclear first strike, in the case of one notable plutocrat). The mutual dependence of both groups is so obvious that sometimes they don't even bother to disguise their advocacy of the other's political success.

But up through the Obama presidency, open war was avoided through strenuous effort by peace-favoring factions in both countries. After some initial problems most notably when conservative elites (probably) stole the 2009 Iranian presidential election and installed the hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the 2010 Stuxnet cyber-assault on Iran's nuclear program tensions were slowly ratcheted down. The 2013 Iranian election was not stolen, and returned the moderate reformer Hassan Rouhani. The 2012 American election replaced the hawkish Hillary Clinton as secretary of state with moderate John Kerry, who pursued a diplomatic bargain to restrict Iran's nuclear deal with a fervent intensity.

Iranian elites have long been suspicious of American intentions, for completely justifiable reasons, but the government grudgingly engaged with the multi-party diplomatic talks, which eventually produced the nuclear deal supported by a huge super-majority of the Iranian public. It was the best news to come out of the Middle East in decades a possible route for an influential partly-democratic Muslim nation to rejoin the community of nations on an equal footing, with the rights and responsibilities that entails.

American hardliners were infuriated by the deal, because it seemed to rule out their next planned war of aggression. Since it passed, they have yowled like cats in heat about Iran's support for Hamas, Hezbollah, and other such factions. And while one might criticize Iran for such behavior, the Middle East is a rough place, and it's easy to imagine nations thinking that supporting terrible groups simply can't be avoided. For another example, look no further than the United States, which supports the brutally repressive Saudi dictatorship (and their quasi-genocidal war in Yemen) and has armed extreme Islamist factions all over the globe (most notoriously the Afghan mujahideen in the 1980s).

Whatever Iran has done, when it comes to arming and supporting morally odious nations and factions in the Middle East, the United States simply doesn't have a leg to stand on. And now we have elected President Donald Trump our very own Ahmadinejad, except more inept. Worse still, many of the economic benefits for Iran predicted by the nuclear deal have failed to materialize, in part due to business worries that American hardliners will clamp down again.

Remarkably, the Iranian public did not respond to these developments by electing their own conservative hardliner in the May elections this year. On the contrary, they returned Rouhani to office again and by a larger margin than his first term. It's a triumph of willful optimism.

Only a couple weeks later, the Iranian parliament and its most sacred national shrine were attacked by terrorists, apparently ones linked to ISIS. In response, the Trump administration sent a two-sentence memo containing a pro forma expression of sympathy and a piece of absolutely vile victim-blaming: "We underscore that states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote." On the very same day, the Senate voted 92-7 to impose new sanctions on Iran, ignoring warnings from Kerry that they risked undermining the nuclear deal. Because Iran has upheld its side of the deal, the supposed justification that the state continued to violate human rights and supports terrorism only thinly disguised a desire to land a blow on a Russian proxy.

Iran is fighting ISIS on the same side as American forces in several countries. Anti-American hardliners could ask for no better gift than American politicians acting with such grotesque callousness after an ISIS attack.

The balance of evidence strongly suggests that the vast majority of ordinary Iranians, and a significant fraction of Iranian elites, favor reduced tension with America. After the 9/11 attacks, ordinary Iranians responded with a massive outpouring of sympathy, and the Iranian government tried a back channel outreach to help American forces root out al Qaeda and concede on various points. For their trouble they were labeled part of the "axis of evil" by George W. Bush and his speechwriter David Frum.

It's not surprising that belligerent, dimwitted warmongers like Bush or Trump mistake Iran for Germany circa 1942. But Senate Democrats are if anything more intellectually and morally debauched. I believe that with a bit of effort and good faith, Iran might be peeled off the Russian orbit, at least into relative neutrality and at a minimum, it's worth trying.

Instead, Democrats are risking President Obama's finest diplomatic accomplishment to strike a tiny blow against a completely different country. I don't know what it will take for the party to gain a bit of good sense on foreign policy, but nearly two decades of constant failure of just this sort of omnidirectional belligerence apparently isn't enough.

See original here:
America is treating Iran disgracefully - The Week Magazine

An increasing number of women in Iran are getting on their bicyclesto protestagainst afatwabanning them fromcycling in public.

HardlineIranian leaders believe women on bikes are a threat to morality and arestrictly forbidden as a means of public transport.

Women must also be completely veiled, even in the height of summer, when playing sport or driving.

But a counter-movement, propelled by social media, has emerged over the last year. In a country of record-high air pollution and traffic congestion, more and more women are cycling.

Following a popular measure called car-free Tuesdays that started in the city of Arak two years ago, women spotted an opportunity to cyclein the name of the environment.

But the movement was cut short when a group of women cyclists were arrested in Marivan in Western Iran. They were released the same day after they signed documents, pledging not to cycle again despite no law against it.

There were then a flurry of press declaring women could cycle as long as they pertained to religious customs and the dress code.

But in September, Irans supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a fatwa that women were not allowed to cycle in public.

Women subsequentlyposted pictures of themselves on bikes on social media with the hashtag #IranianWomenLoveCycling.

A mother and daughter filmed themselves cycling on the island of Kish, alongside postsexplaininghow they immediately rented two bicycles after the fatwa.

Cycling is part of our lives. We were here when we heard Khameneis fatwa banning women from cycling, they said.

Another woman posted a video and said she was proud to resist the oppression.

As I believe those who oppress us are wrong, she wrote. Biking for women is not a taboo. And no one can tell me it is.

Despite the fatwa, an increasing number of women cycle through the hilly and traffic-clogged city of Tehran.

Agroup of cyclists, including women, alsogather outside the TehranAzadistadium on Friday mornings to race onthe cycling track,The Guardianreported.

Nanaz, a 30-year-old lawyer, told the paper that she cycles up to 80 km per day.

"As long as [the moderate Hassan] Rouhani is our president, we will be able to do it. My great ambition is to take part in the Olympics," she said.

The Iranian Cycling Federation does not have even 100 members, yet male Iranian cyclists have won competitions across Asia.

Cycling used to be more common.

During the first half of the 20th century, when cars were an expensive import, many residents used their bikes. In 2017, Tehran'snew bike-sharing system has reportedly had little uptake and the 2016 plan for 120 bike stations around the cityhas yet to beimplemented.

Even in the bike-friendly city of Isfahan, with cycle paths, a rental bike scheme and encouragement fromauthorities, women are still not allowed to use them.

It is unclear how longthe fatwa will continue, butFariba, a 36-year-old accountant, told The Guardian she was excited to cycle.

"And yes, I cycle through Tehran, no problem. I am not afraid of the police."

Continued here:
Iranian women get on their bikes to defy cycling fatwa - The Independent

A soldier aims an automatic rifle through a peephole in a wall at Raqqa, Syria, on June 11, 2017.(Photo: Youssef Rabie Youssef, European Pressphoto Agency)

WASHINGTON New efforts by Iranian-backed militias to control supply lines in southern Syria highlight an alarming trend in the war-torn region: Militias and their foreign backers are accelerating their rivalry for power as the U.S.-led coalition shrinks the Islamic States territory.

You can see everyone maneuvering frenetically, said Michael Knights, an analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

The problem surfaced in recent weeks when Iranian-backed militias maneuvered close to a U.S. outpost in southern Syria. The outpost at al-Tanf is a base for several hundred coalition advisers and the local forces they are supporting.

Last week, U.S.-led coalition aircraft struck the militias for a third time to warn them away from U.S. forces. An American warplane also shot down an Iranian-built armed drone operating in the same area after it fired at U.S. advisers and their partner forces.

Analysts say the primary objective of the Iranian forces is not to threatenU.S. forces. Instead, the militias are defending Irans supply routes to Lebanon that go through Iraq and southern Syria.

The Islamic State, or ISIS, "was always destined to be defeated, and now the U.S. and its allies have to contend with an emboldened, belligerent, and more powerful Iran, which has cultivated more proxies than ever, saidAli Khedery, a former special assistant to five U.S. ambassadors in Iraq.

The Pentagon sees the Iranian-backed militias as a potentialdistraction from the fight against ISIS.

The coalition calls on all parties in southern Syria to focus their efforts on the defeat of ISIS, which is our common enemy and the greatest threat to the region and the rest of the world, said Col. Ryan Dillon, a Pentagon spokesman.

Analysts say the array of militias and foreign powers in the region have differing objectives, which are coming to the forefront as ISIS is pushed out of its strongholds in Iraq and Syria, leaving a power vacuum.

For countriessuch as Iran and Russia, defeating ISISwas never themain objective. Both countries are the principle backers of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Turkey, a NATO member, has supported opponents of Assadbut mistrusts the Syrian Kurds, who are backed by the United States and are among the most effective fighters against ISIS.

ISIS is almost an afterthought, Knights said. Theyre a speed bump.

Other developments suggest that rival powers are positioning themselves for the defeat of ISIS. In Iraq, powerful Shiite militias, some supported by Iran, have moved close to the Syrian border, raising concerns about their objectives.

The militias, called popular mobilization forces, have helped Iraqs military cut ISIS supplylines during an offensive in Mosul. With ISIS nearly defeated in that key city, some analysts fear the Shiite militias now want to spread their influence by trying to control Iraq's border with Syria.

I dont want the popular mobilization forces to be part of any regional political game. But it looks like they are, said Ismael Alsodani, a retired Iraqi brigadier general who served as a military attach in Washington.

The maneuvering has intensified as ISIS' grip on territory has diminished since the militant groupswept into Syria and Iraq three years ago.

U.S.-backed Iraqi security forces are close to clearing militants from Mosul, the countrys second-largest city. In Syria, the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces have launched an offensive in Raqqa, the Islamic States de facto capital.

Nearly three years of bombing has devastated ISIS'leadership and destroyed much of the militant group's weapons and equipment.

Everyone knew ISIS would be defeated, said Lukman Faily, a former Iraqi ambassador to the United States. We see now that many of the powers in the region, and locally, are trying to strengthen their position for when ISIS is gone.

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2tgvyEJ

See more here:
Iran attempts to expand control through Syria as ISIS nears defeat - USA TODAY

"This is one of those areas, in a very tumultuous political climate here in the Senate, where we are able to find strong, united agreement that we need to move forward," Banking Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) said. | Getty

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday teed up a final vote as soon as this week on a bipartisan Iran sanctions bill that is also set to include a bipartisan agreement to boost penalties against the Russian government and make it more difficult for President Donald Trump to lift them.

McConnell moved to wind down debate on the Iran sanctions bill, which counts 58 cosponsors in both parties, with a key procedural vote expected Thursday. The first step in the legislation's path to passage will come Wednesday, when senators are expected to clear a bipartisan agreement that boosts sanctions against Moscow and requires Trump to seek congressional approval of any future decision to ease or eliminate punitive measures against Russia.

Story Continued Below

"This is one of those areas, in a very tumultuous political climate here in the Senate, where we are able to find strong, united agreement that we need to move forward," Banking Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), a lead negotiator on the Russia sanctions deal, told reporters Tuesday.

Even as Democrats push back hard at the GOP's closed-door work on an Obamacare repeal bill, they are preparing to support a Russia sanctions agreement that Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) pushed to make as stringent as possible.

The Russia deal shows that "Democrats and Republicans are joining together to warn the president he cannot lift sanctions without our approval," Schumer told reporters Tuesday. "I hope it will pass with a strong bipartisan vote. Thats what I expect will happen."

Missing out on the latest scoops? Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning in your inbox.

See more here:
Russia-Iran sanctions bill heads toward vote with bipartisan backing - Politico