American techniques used to combat addiction in Iran
Millions of Iranians are addicted to the narcotics that flow cheaply and easily from nearby Afghanistan. In an attempt to control the problem, the Iranian go...
By: CBS Evening News
See more here:
American techniques used to combat addiction in Iran - Video
Iran Navy equipped with upgraded vessels December 1, 2014
By: TVofPars
View post:
Iran Navy equipped with upgraded vessels December 1, 2014 - Video
Story highlights Benjamin Netanyahu's open conflict with President Obama over Iran has served as blow to U.S.-Israeli relationship, says Trita Parsi Parsi: Conflict has also damaged Israel's otherwise arguably successful Iran policy by painting country into corner Over course of past 18 months, Netanyahu government has made Iran all about Israel, Parsi argues
Trita Parsi
Contrary to Israel's rhetoric, the fear of Iran getting a nuclear weapon has not been the driving factor of Israel policy on Iran since the early 1990s. Obviously, Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon would be highly undesirable for Israel. But that has not been Israel's primary concern. Rather, the fear has been that Washington would end up finding a compromise with Iran that on the one hand would close off any Iranian path to a bomb, but on the other hand would lock in a shift in the regional balance of power in Israel's disfavor.
Regardless of the details of a nuclear deal with Iran, a deal per se would reduce Washington's tensions with Tehran, while not necessarily tempering the Israeli-Iranian rivalry proportionally. Israel will be "abandoned" to face Iran alone, Israelis fear. Moreover, a deal would signal, the argument goes, that Washington has accepted and will not contest Iran's geopolitical advances in the region. Iran has hegemonic aspirations, Israel contends, and must be stopped, not accommodated. After a deal with Iran, Washington would be even more likely to shift its geopolitical focus elsewhere and be less intertwined with Israel's needs.
The U.S.-Iran enmity has ensured Washington's commitment to isolating and containing Iran, much to Israel's satisfaction. If your interest dictates that the U.S. and Iran must remain firmly at odds with each other, a nuclear deal -- any deal -- would eliminate the most explosive point of contention between Washington and Tehran and lessen America's inclination to confront Iran on other matters, Israel believes. As Israel's Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon said earlier this week: "[E]very deal that will be signed between the West and this messianic and apocalyptic regime will strike a severe blow to Western and Israeli interests." This also explains why Netanyahu has been contradicting his own intelligence services and exaggerated and misconstrued Iran's nuclear activities.
Israel's policy towards Iran and the nuclear issue in the past two decades has rested on a few principles.
First, consecutive Israeli governments have been on the forefront of sounding the alarm about Iran, while carefully avoiding making Iran an "Israeli issue." At times, Israel has tried to tone down its rhetoric, both to avoid making the nuclear file an Israeli issue, but also to avoid making Israel shine too bright on the Iranian threat radar.
When Netanyahu was first elected prime minister, he requested an intelligence assessment of Israel's security environment. The debate was largely on whether Iran or Iraq constituted Israel's greatest external threat. Netanyahu decided to go with the assessment of the Mossad, presented by Uzi Arad, who argued that Israel could either make itself Iran's prime enemy by continuing belligerent rhetoric against Tehran, or it could tone things down and let Iran focus on other threats.
"Until the Netanyahu government, there was a proliferation of Israeli statements trying to deter Iran, warning Iran, the long arm of the Israeli air force etc. That was stopped, to his credit, by Netanyahu," Israeli journalist Ehud Yaari told me in an interview for my book Treacherous Alliance - the Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the US.
Ultimately, Israel was successful at turning the world's focus towards Iran's nuclear activities. The international community, led by Washington, began regarding Iran's nuclear issue as a primary threat to international security, imposed U.N. Security Council sanctions on Iran and the U.S. even openly debated bombing the country.
Read the original post:
Netanyahu has crossed point of no return on Iran
An Iranian exile group on Tuesday accused Irans government of conducting secret research with the aim of developing nuclear weapons, even as it is negotiating potential constraints on its ability to do so.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran said underground labs in suburban Tehran have been used since 2008 to enrich uranium. It said the plant, named Lavizan-3 after the neighborhood where many officers and their families live, is reached through tunnels leading from under a building ostensibly used to process passports and identity cards.
The claims could not be independently verified and U.S. officials initially declined to comment. On Wednesday, a State Department spokeswoman said officials have no information at this time to support such a conclusion.
We have seen these claims and we take all such reports seriously, said spokeswoman Jen Psaki.
Representatives of the opposition group, appearing at the National Press Club before a flag dating from pre-revolutionary Iran, detailed their claims as Secretary of State John F. Kerry testified before Congress, defending the administrations ongoing nuclear talks with Iran.
Negotiators want to reach the broad outlines of an agreement by late March, though many highly complex technical details would still have to be hashed out before an interim agreement expires in late June.
The Iranian opposition group said Iran has lied about its nuclear program before, and no deal should be signed until Tehran agrees to inspections of the Lavizan-3 facility.
Its absolutely senseless to continue negotiations and decide the number of centrifuges youre going to have if we have these serious issues lingering out there, said Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the groups Washington office.
Over more than a decade, the NCRI has made several assertions about Irans nuclear program, not all of which have proved accurate. In 2002, however, the group exposed the existence of two nuclear-related plants, one in Natanz for uranium enrichment and a heavy water reactor near Arak.
Tehran hadnt acknowledged either previously, and the discovery has fueled a level of distrust that persists to this day.
See more here:
Exile group accuses Iran of secret nuclear weapons research
Washington New revelations from an Iranian opposition group about what it claims is a secret nuclear facility could raise fresh questions about Irans credibility at a make-or-break moment in the international nuclear negotiations.
The exiled National Council of Resistance of Iran, which has uncovered a number of clandestine sites in Iran over a dozen years of nuclear sleuthing, on Tuesday claimed to expose a secret facility in a Tehran suburb where it says nuclear research and uranium enrichment are taking place in violation of international agreements.
The revelation comes as both the United States and Iran signal that they are making progress in talks aimed at reaching an international accord on Irans nuclear program by a March 31 deadline. And the exposure of another purported secret Iranian nuclear site joins other external factors for example, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahus speech to Congress next week on the dangers of the deal that are jostling the impending diplomatic dash in pursuit of an accord.
While some nuclear proliferation experts say they are not surprised by the rising outside challenges at a decisive moment in the talks, they also say those should not be viewed as enough to derail the diplomatic effort. If anything, they say, new factors like the claims of secret facilities only underscore the need to reach a deal that will limit Iran and allow for inspections of all the countrys facilities.
Many people are looking for ways to blow up these negotiations; some are legitimate concerns and some are less valid, says Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association in Washington. This report should be explored, but it should not be a reason to stop short of a deal that would address this problem [of undeclared sites] for a long time to come.
The report also comes a week after the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Iran continued to stonewall on providing information on past nuclear weaponization activity.
What we know is that [uranium] enrichment has been going on here, as has research and development, and its continuing as we speak, says Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the National Council (NCRI) Washington office. Its the task of the United States and the [international community] to force an inspection of the site.
Mr. Jafarzadeh, who was behind the bombshell revelation of Irans Natanz uranium enrichment site and the Arak plutonium facility in 2002, says the group shared its information with US officials in the White House and at the State Department before holding a press conference Tuesday.
The dossier of information contains satellite photos of a 62-acre site in a northern Tehran suburb with extensive military facilities and residential buildings. Photos of heavily reinforced doorways in a series of underground work sites and other information about the site were provided by informants inside the regime and, in particular, in key ministries responsible for Irans nuclear program, the group says.
However, the information does not offer proof of nuclear activities at the site. The informants were unable to provide information about the level of the uranium enrichment they assert is taking place at the site, Jafarzadeh says, nor could they affirm the extent of the enrichment or the number of on-site centrifuges, the fast-spinning machines that can be used to deliver weapons-grade uranium.
See the original post:
Iran group's 'secret nuclear site': Legitimate or effort to derail talks?