Mediaboss Marketing

ISTANBUL When the French energy giant Total signed a landmark gas deal with Iran this month, the companys chief executive lauded the nearly $5 billion investment as a trailblazing initiative for peace.

Were here to build bridges, not walls, Patrick Pouyann said in an interview with Agence France-Presse at the signing ceremony in Tehran.

The venture, which includes Chinas National Petroleum Corp. and the Iranian company Petropars, will develop the South Pars gas field under a 20-year contract. It is Irans the first major energy contract with a European firm since a nuclear deal with world powers lifted sanctions on Iran last year.

Economic development is also a way of building peace, Pouyann said.

Pouyanns remarks reflect a broader vision among European leaders for improving ties with Iran, in part by encouraging firms such as Total to invest now that major sanctions are gone. But his comments also highlight the growing rift between the United States and Europe over how to engage with Iran, which the Trump administration has identified as a global menace and singled out for sanctions and isolation.

Since Donald Trump took office, Europe and the United States have pursued increasingly different courses on Iran, casting doubt over the future of the nuclear accord, which limits Iranian nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief and other trade.

For Europe, the nuclear deal negotiated in 2015 has facilitated relations with a key if problematic player in the Middle East, while opening a vast consumer and energy market to European companies.

[Trump administration plans to certify Iranian compliance with nuclear agreement]

Many European banks and firms have been reluctant to jump in, but French, German and Italian companies have also invested in everything from renewable energy to luxury hotels and auto manufacturing. On Thursday, the French company that makes Peugeot and Citroen cars said its sales nearly tripled in the Middle East and Africa in the first half of the year because of new production in Iran.

The Europeans are returning, the Chinese are returning, the Russians, Ukrainians its all over the place, said Fabien Dany, a Tehran-based consultant who advises companies on the Iranian market. There are very big companies with appetites for investment in Iran, he said. And theyre going through with it.

But in Washington, the agreement, which was negotiated by the Obama administration, has been portrayed as a boon for a repressive regime that threatens the region. Some in the White House are pushing for harsher measures against Iran, which they say should not go unpunished for activities such as ballistic-missile development.

In April, the administration informed Congress that Iran was in compliance with the deal, a certification it must make every 90 days. But it also put the accord under review with the option to abandon it entirely. On Monday, the administration plans to certify again. Officials have said the policy review should be completed before the next certification is due in October.

In the meantime, the Treasury Department has not even said whether it will allow companies such as Boeing to do business with Iran, despite potential sales the firm says would create tens of thousands of American jobs.

There is a clear division between where the Europeans are going and where the Americans are going on Iran, said Ellie Geranmayeh, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. The Europeans have embarked on a path of rapprochement. The U.S. is looking at a policy of isolationism and containment.

The optics of Totals $4.8billion investment, which analysts say has the backing of the French government, were seen as, Were going ahead despite all the uncertainties of the U.S. administration, Geranmayeh said. The Europeans are messaging: Our foreign policy on Iran now is different to yours in Washington. Were not just going to automatically follow suit.

Critics of the European approach, and of the deal more generally, say the pro-business attitude has blinded the international community to incremental violations of the accord by Iran, as well as more nefarious activities in the region.

Iran, critics point out, has twice breached the limit the accord places on heavy water, a chemical used in nuclear reactors capable of yielding plutonium. Still, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the body tasked with monitoring Irans nuclear program, certified in June that it was in compliance with the agreement.

Europe sees Irans violations as individual and accidental, said Behnam Ben Taleblu, Iran analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based think tank. FDD has taken a critical stance on the deal, and its chief executive, Mark Dubowitz, has publicly urged Persian Gulf states to refuse to work with companies that do business with Iran.

Because European businesses want to return to Iran, they are inclined to downplay those violations, Taleblu said, adding that U.S. officials believe that the violations add up to something much more nefarious.

But should the White House decide to pull out of the accord or push for a renegotiation of the deal, analysts say, the United States would struggle to bring Europe and other signatories such as Russia or China on board. The administration would also face obstacles enforcing a stricter sanctions regime without support from other world powers.

European nations have been pretty open about their commitment to the deal and readiness to counter any U.S. opposition, said Richard Nephew, former principal deputy coordinator for sanctions policy at the State Department.

The Total deal in particular says that the company itself and likely the French government are prepared to battle a U.S. decision to snap back the sanctions for anything less than a very good reason, he said.

Geranmayeh said European leaders are already discussing contingency planning for if the U.S. were to overtly or covertly start to interfere with European foreign policy on Iran.

The Europeans are playing the middle ground and are trying their best to keep the Americans on board with them, she said. But they are also saying, If there is unreasonable obstruction to that, we are going to be looking at what our options are.

Karen DeYoung in Washington contributed to this report.

Read more:

Todays coverage from Post correspondents around the world

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

The rest is here:
The United States and Europe are on a collision course over Iran - Washington Post

Iran has piqued financial interest throughout the world for its massive energy reserves, but the country actually has a host of other opportunities in less obvious areas, according to one global investor.

For Clemente Cappello, CIO of London-based Sturgeon Capital, Iran holds promise in part for its cheap labor, abundance of natural resources, and well-educated youth. Specific sectors that could benefit from this mix include glass, manufacturing and petrochemicals, he explained, but Iran could also grow its technology sector.

In fact, the country already has local versions of Uber, Amazon and eBay.

In addition, Cappello mentioned that he thinks "equity opportunity is the easiest and most profitable" option in the country. Stocks, he said, are trading on average of six times price-to-earnings ratio, dividend yields are "well into the double digits" and interest rates could soon be cut in half.

Iran's recent election in May could provide a strong mandate for President Hassan Rouhani to continue with a foreign policy of re-integrating Iran's economy with the rest of the world, and also with his domestic economic reforms, especially in the troubled banking sector.

Cappello, who launched Sturgeon Capital's Iranian fund, told CNBC's "Street Signs" that service providers such as banks are the "real obstacle" for foreign investors. Those banks, he said, "are not keen to do business with Iran."

The investor also highlighted the risk foreign investors run when they lack understanding about the changing Iranian business dynamics. Other risks associated with doing business in Iran include not understanding the stakeholder structure of entities, he said.

Here is the original post:
This London-based investor says Iran holds huge promise and it's not just in energy - CNBC

Iranian fans of the HBO show Game of Thrones are in a frenzy as the buildup to the July 16 premiere of the seventh and final season continues.

Persian-language social media pages adoring all of the wonders of Westeros have emerged in the Islamic Republic, some with more than 100,000 followers. Fans use the sites toshare images of the actors in the show as well as video clips of its music and trailers.

Websites such as winterfell.ir are dedicating their content to Game of Thrones for Iranian fans, where you can download Persian translations of the original Game of Thrones books. Meanwhile, the wider fantasy genre is represented by sites such as fantasy.ir and arda.ir, according to Middle Eastern news site Al-Monitor.

Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

The shows theme song has also become a popular ringtone in the Islamic Republic.

The theories behind the Iranian love for Games of Thrones vary: At the center of the George R. R. Martin universe is an ancient Persian God known as Azor Ahai, a warrior who overcame darkness in a battle in which he carried a weapon blessed by Rhllor, a demigod known as the Lord of Light.

"Game of Thrones" Season 7, Episode 1: "Dragonstone," airing Sunday 16 July on HBO. Helen Sloan/HBO

Fans see comparisons between such fantasy worlds and seminal Iranianworks of literature such as the Shahnameh poem by the Persian poet Ferdowsi, written between977 and 1010 CE, and pre-Islamic folklore.

But another reason for its popularity is Iranian-German dual national Ramin Djawadi, the composer behind the shows dramatic instrumentals. Last monthwhen weapons experts at an Iranian university unveiled a new assault rifle, it was presented to the theme music of Game of Thrones.

The instrumentals have proven so popular that Djawadi even took a live concert experience based on the shows music on a tour of the U.S. and Canada earlier this year.

The show has good music and is unpredictable, Iranian fan Mohammad Reza told Al-Monitor. The fact that some parts are inspired from real history makes it much more addictive.

The shows Iranian fans love it so much that they will go to greater lengths to watch the latest episodes than their American counterparts. Fans in Iran say they mostly watch the show through illegal downloading on torrent websites, or exchanging clips on USB sticks with friends.

https://twitter.com/hdagres/status/884856479504896000

American and Western television shows are viewed as un-Islamic in the country and Game of Thrones frequent sex scenes and violent battles fall foul of censors in the country.

Game of Thrones Season 7 will premiere on HBO on July 16.

See the original post:
Game of Thrones Season 7: Iran Goes Crazy For Show Ahead of Premiere - Newsweek

House Republican leaders want to attach a bill increasing sanctions on North Korea to legislation to restrain the president and stiffen punitive measures against Russia and Iran, a last-minute wrinkle that could further delay the bills progress through Congress.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said on the House floor Friday that he believes the North Korea sanctions bill, which the House passed in May on a 419 to 1 vote, should be added to the legislation increasing sanctions against Russia and Iran.

It would be a very strong statement for all of America to get that sanction bill completed and done, and to the presidents desk, McCarthy said.

But Democrats are furious at the change, which they see as a last-minute effort by one of the presidents closest allies in Congress to derail the Russia-Iran sanctions bill just as congressional leaders had agreed on a way to resolve their differences.

Democrats are absolutely not in agreement with adding North Korea sanctions, said one House Democratic aide. This is another delay tactic. This is moving the goal posts again.

The Russia and Iran sanctions bill, which the Senate passed last month on a vote of 98 to 2, stalled as lawmakers argued over technical changes House Republicans leaders insisted were necessary to get the measure through their chamber. At issue was an alleged blue slip violation arising from the fact that bills affecting revenue must originate in the House and a disagreement over how lawmakers would be able to bring up measures to block the president should he ever try to scale back sanctions against Russia.

The bill codified existing sanctions against Russia, while stepping up punitive measures over its interference in Syria, Ukraine and the 2016 U.S. election; it also increases sanctions against Iran for recent ballistic missile tests. But critically, the bill would give Congress a 30-day window to check the president before he could make any changes to existing sanctions policy against Russia, including scaling back the punitive measure the United States has against Moscow.

The Trump administration has vocally objected to this provision, though they say they are otherwise comfortable with the increased sanctions under the bill. But lawmakers have been wary of the presidents warm approach to Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Trumps reticence to endorse the intelligence communitys conclusion that Russia was behind a series of hacks and disinformation campaigns to swing the outcome of the 2016 election in Trumps favor. Many lawmakers are concerned that absent a congressional check on his authority, the president might try to scale back sanctions against Russia particularly by returningcontrol to Moscow of two compounds that the Obama administration wrested from Russia in late 2016 as punishment for alleged meddling in the 2016 campaign.

Earlier this week, Democrats objected that House Republicans were trying to prevent the minority from ever bringing up a resolution under the bill to block President Trump from making changes to sanctions policy, absent Republican approval. But as of Friday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Democrats were ready to let their complaint go.

I dont like that, I want to protect the prerogatives of the minorities in the House, but weighing the equities, what was more important was passing the Russia-Iran sanctions bill, she said. So we are on board to just proceed.

House Democrats, who also voted overwhelmingly for the North Korea sanctions package this spring, could decide to attach the measure to the Russia-Iran bill. But doing so likely creates a serious hurdle for the bill in the Senate, where lawmakers have not examined the Houses North Korea sanctions bill and will probably want to consider a bipartisan sanctions measure of their own, unveiled by Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) this week.

The senators measure would give Congress review power over any changes the president might try to make to North Korea sanctions policy that is almost identical to the review power over Russia sanctions written into the Russia-Iran bill. Congressional review is not a part of the Houses North Korea bill.

On Thursday, the chairs of the Senate Banking and Foreign Relations committees said they were still reviewing the senators North Korea bill, but were generally supportive of including congressional review power in such measures.

Foreign Relations Committee chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) also said Thursday that as he understood it, it was a possibility that House leaders might try to attach North Korea sanctions to the Russia-Iran package, but that the chances were slim probably a four-percenter, as he put it.

On Friday, Corker said that he would be more than glad to take a close look at tying North Korea sanctions to the Russia-Iran bill if this is the path they choose in the House.

There is no question that we need to apply more pressure to North Korea, he said.

Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), reacting to McCarthys proposal Friday, said: We want to get this done as soon as possible, and Im urging the majority to move quickly. Id be pleased if we could move next week.

House leaders have been frustrated that the Senate has not taken steps in the past two months to take up the Houses North Korea sanctions package.

Senators are not likely, however, to agree to approve comprehensive North Korea sanctions legislation without conducting some vetting first. And that could leave Congress at least at an impasse that, if it extends to the August recess, would mean that it could be months before any sanctions measures against Russia or North Korea proceed.

Here is the original post:
House wants to link North Korea sanctions to measure on Russia and Iran sanctions - Washington Post

The Trump administration, delaying an anticipated confrontation with Iran until the completion of a long-awaited policy review, plans to recertify Tehrans compliance with the Obama-era nuclear deal, according to U.S. and foreign officials.

The recertification, due Monday to Congress, follows a heated internal debate between those who want to crack down on Iran now including some White House officials and lawmakers and Cabinet officials who are managing other constituencies such as European allies, and Russia and China, which signed and support the agreement, one senior U.S. official said.

As a candidate and president, Trump has said he would reexamine and possibly kill what he called the disastrous nuclear deal that was negotiated under President Barack Obama and went into effect in January last year. The historic agreement shut down most of Irans nuclear program, in some cases for decades, in exchange for an easing of international sanctions.

Under an arrangement Obama worked out with Congress, the administration must certify Iranian compliance with the terms of the accord every 90 days. If the administration denies certification, it can then decide to reinstitute sanctions that were suspended under the deal.

The Trump administration issued its first certification in April, when it also said it was awaiting completion of its review of the agreement, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA. The senior official, one of several who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal administration deliberations, said the review should be completed before the next certification deadline in October.

(Gillian Brockell and Julio C. Negron/The Washington Post)

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations and other signatories have said repeatedly that Iran is complying with the agreement, under which the country dismantled most of its centrifuges and nuclear stockpile, shut down a plutonium production program and agreed to extensive international monitoring of all stages of the nuclear process.

[Frances Total bets big on Irans gas fields. American rivals watch from afar.]

Beyond disagreements over what supporters of the deal consider minor and quickly rectified infractions, and detractors assert are dealbreaking violations, there is broad consensus within the administration and Congress that Iran continues to participate in other prohibited activities not covered in the nuclear accord.

The question is how the United States should respond.

White House officials, including those charged with managing Iran policy within the National Security Council, believe Iran should be punished not only for nuclear violations, but also for its support of international terrorism and its development of ballistic-missile technology.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who has statutory responsibility for certification, and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis have successfully argued that the nuclear deal should not be tied to punishments for those activities and that any nuclear-related action should await the review.

Officials cautioned that Trump, who has made clear his disdain for the accord, could decide not to sign off on the recertification between now and the Monday deadline but said that was unlikely. The decision to recertify was first reported Thursday by the Weekly Standard.

Next Tuesday, the administration must also comply with a separate deadline, reporting to Congress on Irans overall nuclear behavior and deciding whether to waive reinstituting sanctions lifted under the accord. That report, due 180 days after Trumps inauguration, was part of restrictions lawmakers put on the agreement, as was the 90-day certification requirement.

As White House officials have asserted their role in the process, the administration has downgraded internal State Department mechanisms for monitoring Iranian compliance. In recent weeks, a separate State Department office of Iran Nuclear Implementation established by Obama was subsumed by the bureau in charge of overall Middle East policy. Both Stephen D. Mull, the lead coordinator for implementation, and Stuart Jones, the acting head of the Middle East bureau, have told Tillerson they are resigning from the Foreign Service.

It is unclear who will replace Jones or whether Mull will be replaced at all.

Among those weighing in from the outside during the debate, which included a meeting of Trumps national security principals last week, were four Republican lawmakers Sens. Tom Cotton (Ark.), Ted Cruz (Tex.), David Perdue (Ga.) and Marco Rubio (Fla.).

They urged noncertification in a letter Tuesday to Tillerson, saying that in addition to violations of the deal, Iran continues to wage a campaign of regional aggression, sponsor international terrorism, develop ballistic missile technology and oppress the Iranian people.

Mark Dubowitz, head of the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, which has long criticized the accord and urged its reformulation, said that recertification was the wrong decision.

I think the administration this time around should have made the decision not to recertify, explain why, and actually gone ahead with the waiver and slapped on some new nonnuclear sanctions.

Noncertification would not automatically trigger the end of the deal. That would require the United States to allege a material breach on Irans part and a referral to the joint commission of signatories to the agreement for assessment. But proponents of the accord said that a failure to certify would nonetheless trigger unwanted reactions.

Even if new sanctions were not related to Irans nuclear program, said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, the real question is whether under those conditions the political support inside Iran for compliance with the deal will continue.

Allegations of Iranian violations, he said, are trumped up and not supported by any evidence. ... They have exceeded heavy-water limits by a tiny percentage, and gone back into compliance within days.

Tillerson aide R.C. Hammond made clear that his boss believes that Iran is behaving badly in a number of areas, regardless of the assessment of the nuclear deal, and that a new policy is being formulated. All the Obama Iran deal did was pay for a pause in Irans nuclear program, he said. It didnt fix any problems. What were going to try to do is fix the problems.

The senior official added that unlike the previous administration, this administration sees the JCPOA as a symptom, not the disease.

The disease is broader Iranian aggression. Thats what the strategy review is focused on, and until its complete, its difficult to know what is the best resolution, the official said. The president has been very frank about his opinion.

Friday is the second anniversary of the signing of the deal, negotiated with Iran over a number of years by the United States, Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia and the European Union. Other signatories have been open in their rejection of Trumps assessment, and they have warned that they would continue to honor the agreement, and increase their trade and relations with Iran, no matter what the United States does.

I know that in the U.S. there is a review ongoing, E.U. foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said at a news conference Tuesday with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. We respect that. But we also have the duty to make it clear that the nuclear deal doesnt belong to one country. It belongs to the international community, to the U.N. system. ... We share responsibility to make sure that this continues to be implemented fully by all.

Carol Morello in Kuwait contributed to this report.

Read more:
Trump administration plans to certify Iranian compliance with nuclear agreement - Washington Post