West Asia News and Discussions

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 21 May 2011 00:18

the brainchildren of British imperialism are stepping into their own shoes. the status quo of what British left behind in ME is finally changing. the world has been dealing with the consequences of Anglo-French meddling in ME, and now ME is moving past the post-colonial conflicts into something different. it is creating lot of destabilization right now, but might eventually lead to a setup which is less prone to conflict, assuming of course that non-traditional powers (Europe/US) keep their hands out of ME, which is unlikely.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 21 May 2011 00:23

Forgot to add: obama being close to elections is another thing. He needs AIPAC support, but will still be constrained due to elections.
Most of the peace proposals come straight after elections, so there is a bit of flexibility to bully israel if needed. .

Bibi will tell him to shove the idea down the toilet.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 21 May 2011 15:47

Israel and Iran have been allied discretely for a long time. US wants Iran to rule the Middle East. Problem is Iran doesn't want to drop the anti-israel terror. Once this regime goes in Iran, Iran and Israel will be thickest of friends.

Removal of Saddam was one of the processes to shia'ize the peninsula. Iran contra etc etc. You will slowly realise that US has been trying to get Iran and ISrael to become allies. But the problem was that Iran wasn't willing to drop its sponsor of terror groups. Read Rob Sobhani's book on Iran - Israel relations and how thier interests converged, how they worked to gether and so on.

This is part of the reason why KSa has dropped its oil for security deal with the US. KSA/GCC will go its own way from now on. We are just seeing the 2001 situation play out once again, when in Aug 2001 King Abdullah cut relations with US. Then US agreed to re-launch peace process. THen Sept 11th happened the day they were due to meet up to discuss how they were going to do it.

-----------------------------------------------------
A must read article on KSA viewpoint. KSA/US - Oil for security is over.

Amid the Arab Spring, a U.S.-Saudi split

By Nawaf Obaid, Published: May 16

RIYADH, SAUDI ARABIA

A tectonic shift has occurred in the U.S.-Saudi relationship. Despite significant pressure from the Obama administration to remain on the sidelines, Saudi leaders sent troops into Manama in March to defend Bahrain’s monarchy and quell the unrest that has shaken that country since February. For more than 60 years, Saudi Arabia has been bound by an unwritten bargain: oil for security. Riyadh has often protested but ultimately acquiesced to what it saw as misguided U.S. policies. But American missteps in the region since Sept. 11, an ill-conceived response to the Arab protest movements and an unconscionable refusal to hold Israel accountable for its illegal settlement building have brought this arrangement to an end. As the Saudis recalibrate the partnership, Riyadh intends to pursue a much more assertive foreign policy, at times conflicting with American interests.

The backdrop for this change are the rise of Iranian meddling in the region and the counterproductive policies that the United States has pursued here since Sept. 11. The most significant blunder may have been the invasion of Iraq, which resulted in enormous loss of life and provided Iran an opening to expand its sphere of influence. For years, Iran’s leadership has aimed to foment discord while furthering its geopolitical ambitions. Tehran has long funded Hamas and Hezbollah; recently, its scope of attempted interference has broadened to include the affairs of Arab states from Yemen to Morocco. This month the chief of staff of Iran’s armed forces, Gen. Hasan Firouzabadi, harshly criticized Riyadh over its intervention in Bahrain, claiming this act would spark massive domestic uprisings.

Such remarks are based more on wishful thinking than fact, but Iran’s efforts to destabilize its neighbors are tireless. As Riyadh fights a cold war with Tehran, Washington has shown itself in recent months to be an unwilling and unreliable partner against this threat. The emerging political reality is a Saudi-led Arab world facing off against the aggression of Iran and its non-state proxies.

Saudi Arabia will not allow the political unrest in the region to destabilize the Arab monarchies — the Gulf states, Jordan and Morocco. In Yemen, the Saudis are insisting on an orderly transition of power and a dignified exit for President Ali Abdullah Saleh (a courtesy that was not extended to Hosni Mubarak, despite the former Egyptian president’s many years as a strong U.S. ally). To facilitate this handover, Riyadh is leading a diplomatic effort under the auspices of the six-country Gulf Cooperation Council. In Iraq, the Saudi government will continue to pursue a hard-line stance against the Maliki government, which it regards as little more than an Iranian puppet. In Lebanon, Saudi Arabia will act to check the growth of Hezbollah and to ensure that this Iranian proxy does not dominate the country’s political life. Regarding the widespread upheaval in Syria, the Saudis will work to ensure that any potential transition to a post-Assad era is as peaceful and as free of Iranian meddling as possible.

Regarding Israel, Riyadh is adamant that a just settlement, based on King Abdullah’s proposed peace plan, be implemented. This includes a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem. The United States has lost all credibility on this issue; after casting the sole vote in the U.N. Security Council against censuring Israel for its illegal settlement building, it can no longer act as an objective mediator. This act was a watershed in U.S.-Saudi relations, guaranteeing that Saudi leaders will not push for further compromise from the Palestinians, despite American pressure.

Saudi Arabia remains strong and stable, lending muscle to its invigorated foreign policy. Spiritually, the kingdom plays a unique role for the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims — more than 1 billion of whom are Sunni — as the birthplace of Islam and home of the two holiest cities. Politically, its leaders enjoy broad domestic support, and a growing nationalism has knitted the historically tribal country more closely together. This is largely why widespread protests, much anticipated by Western media in March, never materialized. As the world’s sole energy superpower and the de facto central banker of the global energy markets, Riyadh is the economic powerhouse of the Middle East, representing 25 percent of the combined gross domestic product of the Arab world. The kingdom has amassed more than $550 billion in foreign reserves and is spending more than $150 billion to improve infrastructure, public education, social services and health care.

To counter the threats posed by Iran and transnational terrorist networks, the Saudi leadership is authorizing more than $100 billion of additional military spending to modernize ground forces, upgrade naval capabilities and more. The kingdom is doubling its number of high-quality combat aircraft and adding 60,000 security personnel to the Interior Ministry forces. Plans are underway to create a “Special Forces Command,” based on the U.S. model, to unify the kingdom’s various special forces if needed for rapid deployment abroad.

Saudi Arabia has the will and the means to meet its expanded global responsibilities. In some issues, such as counterterrorism and efforts to fight money laundering, the Saudis will continue to be a strong U.S. partner. In areas in which Saudi national security or strategic interests are at stake, the kingdom will pursue its own agenda. With Iran working tirelessly to dominate the region, the Muslim Brotherhood rising in Egypt and unrest on nearly every border, there is simply too much at stake for the kingdom to rely on a security policy written in Washington, which has backfired more often than not and spread instability. The special relationship may never be the same, but from this transformation a more stable and secure Middle East can be born.

The writer is a senior fellow at the King Faisal Center for Research & Islamic Studies.

KSA means business this time, it can't F around with Washington this time. Its getting surrounded with problems and Iranian meddling. Its a real great opportunity for India to pick up. But the KSA has looked at PRC for its maal this time. Medvedev is shouting at his generals for not seizing this opportunity. For India, we did the right thing to offer our strategic mijjile cooperation during MMS visit. Our interests and KSAs don't necessarily converge on some things (KSA can't afford to trust Desh on N issue imo). But our defence relations will be strong. India has a chance now to really prove itself. It needs to expand its ship building facilities and start pumping out those P17s - integrate AAD's, PADs etc. Need to work double hard.

-----------------------------------------
KSA is busy delivering a strategic slap to Iran. Iran may lose Asad and mil logistics support for hezb. Iranians are now desperate.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 May 2011 17:15

So preserving the Saudi regime is in India's interest now? Which means more sops given to the Saudi theological establishment [more shaking the hand of the likes of As Sudias at dinners hosted by rashtryia functionaries!] and more power to the growing Indian Sunni voice in the internal politics of India? Actually it is a wonderful opportunity for the Centre-Left of India to justify more appeasement and more paralysis of the rashtra before Islamist demands. It is merely formally recognizing the perception perhaps in the ruling icrcles of India - that India is already a hostage to its Islamic population, and whatever is claimed in their name or by various spokespersons has to be given importance to simply because of the potential mobilization of IM on essentially foreign issues and of Arab interest. Of course the "large" expat population in KSA acts as a further excuse to all concerned to justify this perception of unavoidability to the "hostage" scenario.

The basic tactical understanding in dealing with a two party conflict from the viewpoint of a third party, is to try to avoid strengthening the stronger party more - if neither of the fighting parties differ in their long term ambitions to try and replace the third party completely.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 22 May 2011 00:51

A Look at the Root Causes of the Arab Revolution

In a SPIEGEL interview, French social scientist Emmanuel Todd discusses the demographic roots of the Arab revolution, which he argues was spurred by rising literacy and rapidly shrinking birth rates. He also muses on the ghost of Osama bin Laden, arguing "al-Qaida was already dead," and on why he believes Germany is not a part of the "core West."

The condition for any modernization is demographic modernization. It goes hand-in-hand with a decline in experienced and practiced religiosity. We are already experiencing a de-Islamization of Arab societies, a demystification of the world, as Max Weber called it, and it will inevitably continue, just as a de-Christianization occurred in Europe.

The Islamist convulsions are classic companion elements of the disorientation that characterizes every upheaval. But according to the law of history that states that educational progress and a decline in the birth rate are indicators of growing rationalization and secularization, Islamism is a temporary defensive reaction to the shock of modernization and by no means the vanishing point of history. For the Muslim world, that vanishing point is far more universal than people are willing to admit. The notion of unchanging Islam and the Muslim essence are purely intellectual constructs of the West. The tracks along which the world's various cultures and religions move are converging toward an encounter rather than the battle that Samuel Huntington believed would take shape.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 22 May 2011 03:18

My latest blog post on the region.
Regional Update

Next Stop: GCC Integration with Jordan and Morocco.

Readers have been emailing in asking why this has taken place? One word: Iran.

With a possible clash with Iran over meddling in the GCC, KSA has decided to strengthen its alliances by adding Jordan and Morocco.

The obvious meaning of this deal is that these countries will be automatically integrated with the GCC. GCC money will flow into both countries, thereby strengthening them economically. The lower cost labour will flow in and perhaps replace Asian labourers. This of course makes sense, as nations would rather have individuals who can easily integrate and have language and religious affinity (E.g. Poland integration into EU).

The real reason in our opinion is, in the event of a faceoff with Iran, shia Iraq will be allied with Iran and MAY attack or work with Iran to fight Sunni GCC.

During the Bahrain crisis, Muqtada Al Sadr had threatened to send shia tribesmen to the border with Kuwait and KSA to open a armed front in solidarity with so called peaceful protesters in Bahrain. Therefore, to secure themselves Jordan and Morocco will be able to tie down Iraq and prevent Iraq from attacking Kuwait.

Yes this does sound like the nuclear scenario, where borders may be redrawn on religious lines. But GCC can't afford to take chances if Iran continues its behaviour of meddling in internal affairs of other countries.

This story further continues when we discuss Syria and Iran.

---------------------------------------------------
Syria

Syria is facing a lot of protests. The Muslim Brotherhood (MB) appears to be playing a small clandestine role against Bashar Al Assad. The KSA GID (General Intelligence Directorate) has established contacts with the MB via tribal networks. Saudi's are prepared to deal with sunni islamist MB to prevent any expansion to Iranian influence in the region and therefore corner Hezbollah in Lebanon.

There are rumours afloat that KSA is funding and arming various groups via Jordan to defeat the Assad regime . This rumour also suggests that Prince Bandar bin Sultan (Former KSA Ambasador to the US) is running this operation from Jordan. The rumour was given further credence as Syria had closed of the Jordanian border and lately Syia has accussed Saudi of supporting Syrian terror cells.

Jordan is a major front for most US intelligence operations and have worked together with the Saudi's in Lebanon. So the accusation coming from Assad's government does make sense to this editor.

80% of the population in Syria is sunni. So a sunni Syria may also be a potent deterent against any potential moves of Iran and Iraq against Sunni GCC.

-----------------------------------------
Iran: Ahmadinejad - Khamanei spat

To justify Ahmadinejad's decision to sack the minister for intelligence Haidar Moslehi, in a meeting with Iranian supreme leader, Ahmadinejad complained of recent failures to take advantage of protests in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.

In Kuwait, various iranian spy networks have been dismantled and diplomats expelled. The Ministry of Intelligence and Security was reduced to organising protests outside the KSA embassy in Tehran and consulate in Mashaad.

These were the main reasons why Ahmadinejad and Khamanei had a fall out. Khamanei wanted to keep Moslehi due to upcoming elections and various other reasons.

This further confirms that Iran did attempt to capitalise on protests in Bahrain and KSA.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 22 May 2011 03:36

asprinzl wrote:Not only Islamism but Islam the religion is on death bed in Iran. Iran is well on her way to become the first nation to leave Islam. Zoroastrian faith is slowly increasing in numbers. According to my sources (both Indian and Iranian Zoroastrian sources) based in the US, from a mere 50 000 to 100 000 returnees between 1979 to 1990, in the last couple of years more than two million Muslim Iranians have returned to their ancient religion. Many millions of others have turned atheists and Christians.
Avram

Reminds me of a video I saw a long time back

The iconography of Persia is still alive in places. Even Shia Islam is Persian revenge at being made the handmaiden of the boorish uncivilized Arabs.

There is however stiff competition from Islam's Abrahamic brother.

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 22 May 2011 05:32

Iran accused of role in 9/11 attacks.

manju · Post by **manju** » 22 May 2011 06:07

Today I heard a colleague at work say- he is a second generation persian. "i am from Persia, not Iran" His point was I did not vote for Persia to be called Islamic Republic of Iran... therefore i dont agree with IRI.. Am not sure if he was a muslim, christian or a Farsi!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 May 2011 09:56

shyamd wrote:-----------------------------------------------------
A must read article on KSA viewpoint. KSA/US - Oil for security is over.

Amid the Arab Spring, a U.S.-Saudi split

KSA means business this time, it can't F around with Washington this time. Its getting surrounded with problems and Iranian meddling. Its a real great opportunity for India to pick up. But the KSA has looked at PRC for its maal this time. Medvedev is shouting at his generals for not seizing this opportunity. For India, we did the right thing to offer our strategic mijjile cooperation during MMS visit. Our interests and KSAs don't necessarily converge on some things (KSA can't afford to trust Desh on N issue imo). But our defence relations will be strong. India has a chance now to really prove itself. It needs to expand its ship building facilities and start pumping out those P17s - integrate AAD's, PADs etc. Need to work double hard.

-----------------------------------------
KSA is busy delivering a strategic slap to Iran. Iran may lose Asad and mil logistics support for hezb. Iranians are now desperate.

This in fact could be a huge strategic catastrophe for India.

What we are looking at is the Indian Ocean being given on a platter to the Chinese! Can we even imagine, what happens if China becomes the mainstay of Saudi and thus GCC security?! Can we imagine how much of the Gulf Oil would go into financing and justifying Chinese Navy buildup in the Indian Ocean Region?!

Pakistan may be a basket case of country, but it would then have managed its next biggest coup in its history

Partition of India (1947)
US-Chinese Rapprochement (1971)
Procuring Nuclear Weapons Technology (1980s/90s)
Soviet Retreat from Afghanistan (1989)
US boosting Pakistani Military (Post 9/11)
Saudi-Chinese Alliance ??? (2011)

Each accomplishment has taken place at a huge cost to India. Do we really want a Saudi-Chinese Axis to come up in the Indian Ocean, because that gives China a sanction to build a huge Navy presence supporting all the Muslim countries from Indonesia to Malaysia to Bangladesh to Maldives to Pakistan to UAE to Saudi Arabia to Yemen to Somalia!

India would lose that what we consider our most valuable domain of dominance - the Indian Ocean Region! Plus on top we would be helpless to counter that alliance because of internal political factors - the Indian Muslim vote. But the question is why should we even try to counter such an alliance. Why should we not stop it from coming up in the first place?

If Americans are worried about these developments, no wonder they are asking Bibi to accept 1967 borders!

If India wants to even dream of killing the demon next door some day, we better offer Saudi Arabia a complete strategic alliance! Yes it would have been good if an Arab Shia State would have taken over Al Ahsa Province of Saudi Arabia and Khuzestan of Iran and established a new Arab Shia Oil Power monopoly! However we don't have the luxury of that dream, and we have to leave that to other forces of politics. As long as Pakistan exists as a country under the Pakistani Establishment, India needs to be very close to Saudi Arabia.

We have other priorities at the moment and that is to save the Indian Ocean from Chinese domination!

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 22 May 2011 10:44

US-Iran Escalation: Iran Arrests 30 US Spies As It Builds Venezuelan Missile Base; America Sends A Third Aircraft Carrier To Persian Gulf

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 22 May 2011 15:08

asprinzl wrote:Not only Islamism but Islam the religion is on death bed in Iran. Iran is well on her way to become the first nation to leave Islam. Zoroastrian faith is slowly increasing in numbers. According to my sources (both Indian and Iranian Zoroastrian sources) based in the US, from a mere 50 000 to 100 000 returnees between 1979 to 1990, in the last couple of years more than two million Muslim Iranians have returned to their ancient religion. Many millions of others have turned atheists and Christians.
Avram

Is this really true? Or you are saying this to please us?! I do pray and hope it is true though

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 22 May 2011 15:12

VikasRaina wrote:Has any country in the past converted or reconverted into a specific religion in a very very short span of time without the use of Sword ?

Read about how Russia became Orthodox Christian..

The czar wanted a new religion for his masses and went literally shopping around. ROP was discarded because of ban on alcohol. Then they saw the splendor and glory of Constantinople (now ruled by Hamas loving fanatic Erdogan/Gul as Istanbul) and chose that religion.

Soon entire country was made Orthodox Christian - not sword but of course, not voluntary either...

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 22 May 2011 15:21

Kuwait bans issuing visas for Pakistani nationals for trade and employment.

UAE has begun issuing stapled visas for PoK nationals including the PM.

Interesting.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 22 May 2011 15:30

A lot of the money going to the jihadis from the Gulf states is from these Paks who live there, most likely the middle- to upper-income ones (can't be sure though). As there are a lot of them there, a little from each monthly goes a long way. Of course, the locals do their bit for Sunni brotherhood (pun in Tamil intended) as well... the exact split is anybody's guess.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 May 2011 00:19

Gunmen (loyal to president Saleh) have surrounded US, British, French and all GCC embassies in Sanaa. The Sec Gen of GCC is stuck in the UAE embassy. GCC FMs just called an emergency meeting. latest reports that the US ambassador and GCC sec Gen were evacuated via helicopter.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 23 May 2011 01:33

Suppiah wrote:
asprinzl wrote:Not only Islamism but Islam the religion is on death bed in Iran. Iran is well on her way to become the first nation to leave Islam. Zoroastrian faith is slowly increasing in numbers. According to my sources (both Indian and Iranian Zoroastrian sources) based in the US, from a mere 50 000 to 100 000 returnees between 1979 to 1990, in the last couple of years more than two million Muslim Iranians have returned to their ancient religion. Many millions of others have turned atheists and Christians.
Avram
Is this really true? Or you are saying this to please us?! I do pray and hope it is true though

This has been happening at least since early 1990s. I knew of a fellow graduate student from the westwood suburbs filled with Iranian expats, who claimed himself an atheist. He married someone from Iran and brought her to massa and their kid was named Aryan. He was very found of Indian history and common roots. Other Iranian students I knew were mostly atheist/rationalists and not Christian unlike ones from TSP who were still grounded in religion.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 23 May 2011 19:55

Bade wrote:
asprinzl wrote:Not only Islamism but Islam the religion is on death bed in Iran. Iran is well on her way to become the first nation to leave Islam. Zoroastrian faith is slowly increasing in numbers. [...] Many millions of others have turned atheists and Christians.
Avram
This has been happening at least since early 1990s. I knew of a fellow graduate student from the westwood suburbs filled with Iranian expats, who claimed himself an atheist. He married someone from Iran and brought her to massa and their kid was named Aryan. He was very found of Indian history and common roots. Other Iranian students I knew were mostly atheist/rationalists and not Christian unlike ones from TSP who were still grounded in religion.

I wouldn't read too much into this, though. Iran right now is like America in the 1960's. There is a burgeoning middle class, old class boundaries are being breached. The younger generation is disaffected with the hypocrisy of the older generation and the imposition of religious society. They are experimenting with all kinds of things. Certainly, they are exploring their Zoroastrian heritage. Many wear a Fravahar around their necks more as a symbol of protest than a new-found piety. Interest in Christianity -- and Judaism -- is always there. Many want to study Hebrew. India is the top tourist destination for Iranians, and also for education. So, many of them learn about Indic religions too. Its common for some students at universities to form "religious research" clubs to learn about the religious traditions of other countries and civilizations. In terms of real spiritual seeking and practice (rather than a political statement of disaffection, or a mere fad), I would say that Buddhism is the top contender. There are a few serious Hare Krishnas also in Iran. Upanishadic Hinduism is respected, but the common man's Hindu Pauranic traditions are considered too culture-specific or simply silly and contrived. On the fringe side, some of them even form cults and indulge in occult rituals in the Alborz, pentagrams and all!

Its important to distinguish which of these trends are fringe fads, which of them are rebellion against the regime and against "Islam", and which of these are actual spiritual commitments to a different, non-Moslem tradition. I know of no Iranian, whether Moslem, atheist, Buddhist, Zoroastrian or Krishna devotee, who does not cherish the spiritual contributions of great masters like Molana Balkhi ("Rumi"), Hafez, Sa'adi, Hallaj, Attar, etc. These were all Moslem. The revolt that is there is against the hypocrisy of the Shi'ite clerical establishment (the akhoond) and the imposition of Islamic jurisprudence. Notice that even the controversial politician Esfandiar Mashaie was snubbed by Ayatollahs as deriving his philosophy from "mystics and monks" rather than "scholars". Its an old debate found in all traditions.

Moreover, Iran being an old civilization, has several layers of religious tradition, including heavy Zoroastrian and Buddhist influences. The norm is that this is recognized and celebrated by government and society, though there is an extremist political faction that wants to obliterate that racial memory. Take one example - If you have a baby in Iran, the name you give him/her has to be government approved LOL. Now, the government approves Moslem names, Zoroastrian names (or any Persian-rooted names), Hebrew names, and also Sanskrit names. But not, for instance, Western or Chinese names. The guideline is that the name should be either "Aryan" or from the abrahamic spiritual tradition. Western names are not considered Aryan. Only Indo-Iranian names are considered Aryan. So an Iranian can name his son "Krishna" if he wants to, but not "Carl". Similarly, most of the akhoond do study at least one non-Islamic doctrine, usually Buddhism, as part of their curriculum. Note that Shi'ite ulema are a bit different from the typical Sunni in that respect.

Disaffection with legal Islam is widespread amongst the youth. Expats in the West are a drastic over-representation of this trend. However, IMHO this should not be misinterpreted or over-interpreted at this point of time.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 23 May 2011 20:01

Decoding Obama's Bahrain puzzle
by MKB

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ME24Ak02.html

Put the puzzle of Barack Obama's selective contemplation of the Arab Spring together and Iran comes into sharp relief. The mild rebuke for the crown prince of Bahrain is part of a bigger picture that, with other pieces, suggests the United States president believes democratic Shi'ite empowerment in Bahrain and Iraq could create a "fusion" to overthrow an Islamic regime in Tehran that even now is circling its wagons.

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 23 May 2011 20:31

Carl wrote:Decoding Obama's Bahrain puzzle
by MKB

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ME24Ak02.html

Put the puzzle of Barack Obama's selective contemplation of the Arab Spring together and Iran comes into sharp relief. The mild rebuke for the crown prince of Bahrain is part of a bigger picture that, with other pieces, suggests the United States president believes democratic Shi'ite empowerment in Bahrain and Iraq could create a "fusion" to overthrow an Islamic regime in Tehran that even now is circling its wagons.

So this democratic wave of Shi'ite empowerment will only overthrow regime in Iran ?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 May 2011 21:15

^^ MKB has come to the wrong conclusions using the data about US intentions.

He's a pretty good analyst with good info but he's got the wrong answer.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 May 2011 21:17

Yeah he always connects the dots to paint a scary picture of US(lion) and a benign picture of the jihadis(goats).

ShyamD, Whats the scoop on PNS Mehran raid?

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 23 May 2011 21:57

Something about the supposed appearance of the non-state actors at the air-strip tell me that this is Saif al-Adel's opening salvo. This is what an attack directed by him would look like, IMO. Mulla Omar's fate wouldnt be left hanging by a thread in this manner if Zawahiri was directing matters.

It would make sense for Saif al-Adel to get rid of the TSPA's India obsession to some extent by doing this. TTP is providing disinformation here!

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 23 May 2011 23:57

Please read my latest blog post on Syria - I was spot on. KSA is taking on Syria to save lebanon and "fight" hezbollah. The gloves are off with Hezbollah, pro Iran. Nawaf Obaid was right. Prince B is running the ops from Syria.

Pattom · Post by **Pattom** » 24 May 2011 07:58

I remember reading this one guy's far-fetched ramblings on his blog the other day. This is his his proposed solution for weakening Islamism. See how convoluted the thinking is:

1. The underwriter for much of today's Islamist mischief around the world is KSA.
2. Like other Muslim countries, a large part of KSA's population is youth.
3. Unemployment is high, as is education and drive, especially among youth.
4. Under such conditions, anything that disturbs the social order, even slightly, can lead to much larger disruptions.

Now here is the radical part:
5. We know now that homosexuality results from both genetic causes and environmental causes in the womb, specifically certain hormonal imbalances.
6. If someone with a perverse agenda were to spike products meant for pregnant women (such as halal Ensure) that are shipped to KSA, this would lead to a significant shift in the ratio of sexual preferences in that country.
7. Cognitive dissonance among a lot of youth who want something that could bring a wall down on them may lead to social unrest.
8. Subsequent political turmoil could undermine the root of Islamist terrorism.

Just like Al Capone ultimately was jailed on tax charges or Picard infected the Borg with a low-level command function (sleep), sometimes a less direct solution may be the most viable.

I'm not saying I subscribe to this, just that I read this somewhere. Crazy, isn't it?

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 24 May 2011 10:24

^ You mean KSA should be encouraged to produce/reproduce "Halal Gays"

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 24 May 2011 13:39

What is happening in Syria is very positive from the perspective of Israel. Saudis have been trying to get rid of the Alawite President Bashar Al-Assad, and allow Sunnis to take over the government. That would be a body blow to the Hezbollah, as it would stop Hezbollah's supply lines from Iran.

shyamd ji also writes that Saudi Arabia is intent on taking on Hezbollah now. It means the war has already started. So even as Syria's jump into the Sunni column helps Israel viz-a-viz Hezbollah and Iran, it also means that there would now be less qualms on Israel's side against cooperation between Israel and the Iranians, as Iranians now cannot threaten Israel to the same extent. In fact, by overthrowing Assad's regime in Syria, Saudis are enabling an Israel-Iran rapprochement.

In essence, it means 2 things:

Any support given to the Shia militias does not automatically constitute hurting Israel
The Shia much closer to home in Saudi Arabia would be more open to start a front against Saudi Arabia

This allows Shi'ite militantism to shift from Lebanon to Gulf. This allows Shi'ite militantism to turn from anti-Israel to anti-Saud.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 24 May 2011 18:37

'Blast' at new Iran oil refinery as Ahmadinejad visits

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13516440

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 24 May 2011 18:39

At least 4 killed in blast before Ahmadinejad dedicates refinery

Authorities ruled out any form of sabotage and instead spoke of an industrial incident caused by a gas leak at the Abadan oil refinery, in one of the largest and oldest industrial complexes in Iran.

According to Mehr, a “testing machine” exploded almost directly after it was placed in the area where Ahmadinejad was preparing to give a speech.

Some independent media outlets said the death toll from the blast was much higher than what was reported by the state-controlled news services. The Khabar Online Web site, for example, which tends to be critical of Ahmadinejad, quoted an engineer at the refinery who said at least 30 people had been killed.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 24 May 2011 19:46

asprinzl wrote:Not only Islamism but Islam the religion is on death bed in Iran.

Not exactly, but here's some more on this:

Iranians find Rumi's voice is their own

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ME25Ak01.html

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 24 May 2011 23:27

RajeshA wrote: In essence, it means 2 things:

Any support given to the Shia militias does not automatically constitute hurting Israel

The Shia much closer to home in Saudi Arabia would be more open to start a front against Saudi Arabia
This allows Shi'ite militantism to shift from Lebanon to Gulf. This allows Shi'ite militantism to turn from anti-Israel to anti-Saud.

Right up to this bit. The reason why they are removing Assad is because Lebanon is where the Iranian shia ideology meets the arab world - in their view. Hesbollah is training the shia in the GCC and is allied with Iran through and through. In the long run, Iraq will become the next bastion if KSA indeed succeeds in isolating and reducing Hezbollah's power and influence. KSA will go in with $$ to finance Salafi (ideally not the violent takfiri's) groups to take on the Hezbollah and back the democratic sunni Saad Harriri (He's like a KSA son). But I am still not convinced of the long term aims of the KSA to remove Asad - its mainly due to Iraq I feel.

The shia in the gulf are scared to start a military confrontation without external support. We saw the reactions in Eastern KSA - they weren't that bad, in fact the KSA system over reacted and they are perfectly aware of the threats. This is one of the biggest threats that they face and they have drilled for this. Bahrain had stopped talking to the opposition and are openly taking them on. The Iranians pretty much asked the Bah Shia leaders to back down and the leaders were reluctant to go it on their own. These guys can't do anything.

Bahrain is re-inforcing its defence cooperation with KSA - which seems to be irking the opposition even more.

------------
What will be interesting to watch is if Maliki has a sunni Defence minister as per the agreements with the GCC. So far the portfolio is empty, the Iraqi sunni's are putting maliki under pressure to give them the post. THe US wants all Anti terror forces - currently with Interior ministry to be transferred to the MoD by the end of the year. US has control of the MoD and its a vote of confidence to the KSA etc. But with Iraq signing a mutual defence pact with Iran, it remains to be seen what Maliki will do now. He'll probably delay and stall. What a great success democracy is in Iraq eh...

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 25 May 2011 00:46

shyamd wrote:
RajeshA wrote: In essence, it means 2 things:

Any support given to the Shia militias does not automatically constitute hurting Israel

The Shia much closer to home in Saudi Arabia would be more open to start a front against Saudi Arabia
This allows Shi'ite militantism to shift from Lebanon to Gulf. This allows Shi'ite militantism to turn from anti-Israel to anti-Saud.
Right up to this bit. The reason why they are removing Assad is because Lebanon is where the Iranian shia ideology meets the arab world - in their view. Hesbollah is training the shia in the GCC and is allied with Iran through and through. In the long run, Iraq will become the next bastion if KSA indeed succeeds in isolating and reducing Hezbollah's power and influence. KSA will go in with $$ to finance Salafi (ideally not the violent takfiri's) groups to take on the Hezbollah and back the democratic sunni Saad Harriri (He's like a KSA son). But I am still not convinced of the long term aims of the KSA to remove Asad - its mainly due to Iraq I feel.

The shia in the gulf are scared to start a military confrontation without external support. We saw the reactions in Eastern KSA - they weren't that bad, in fact the KSA system over reacted and they are perfectly aware of the threats. This is one of the biggest threats that they face and they have drilled for this. Bahrain had stopped talking to the opposition and are openly taking them on. The Iranians pretty much asked the Bah Shia leaders to back down and the leaders were reluctant to go it on their own. These guys can't do anything.

Bahrain is re-inforcing its defence cooperation with KSA - which seems to be irking the opposition even more.

The Shia and Sunni militants, they work quite differently. The Shi'ites are more defensive. They build closely-knit ghettos where any new face would stand out. In South Lebanon, that is how the Hezbollah hold their sway. In Iraq it has been much more difficult to hold on to this security model, because of the mixed sectarian nature of cities like Baghdad, etc.

The Sunnis, and I mean the Saudi Wahhabis they are a lot more aggressive, and have been the major reason for the bomb explosions in Shia areas. They are willing to use terror on a huge scale. The Shi'ites may be willing to undertake some assassinations here and there, but those are a lot more surgical and precise.

The main tool the Saudis and other Gulf Sunni Arabs will use against the Shia is terror, and they would be willing to let "non-state actors" take the lead on this. As a second line of defense they have the mercenary police and army from Pakistan and elsewhere to put down the Shia with a heavy hand if necessary. Thirdly they have the big powers - USA, PRC, etc. to provide them with heavy weaponry and military support if necessary. So yes, the Sunnis are prepared.

The question is how to wake up the Shia of Al Ahsa Province into an insurgency! In that way, any training the Hezbollah are giving the Saudi Hezbollah, or to the Mehdi Army is welcome!

As far as Lebanon is concerned, I think the Lebanese Sunnis are of a different bent than the Saudis, and it would be difficult for Saudis to Talibanize them. What the Saudis can do is to push for similar bombing attacks on Hezbollah strongholds using cars and trucks, and then blame it on the Mossad.

If Hezbollah and Iran are clever they will not fall for the ploy and respond to the Saudis in kind - by sowing terror in the big Saudi cities. The Saudis have had a free run with their bombings in Iraq, and the Iraqi Shia have not responded in kind. Someday the dam will burst!

shyamd wrote:------------
What will be interesting to watch is if Maliki has a sunni Defence minister as per the agreements with the GCC. So far the portfolio is empty, the Iraqi sunni's are putting maliki under pressure to give them the post. THe US wants all Anti terror forces - currently with Interior ministry to be transferred to the MoD by the end of the year. US has control of the MoD and its a vote of confidence to the KSA etc. But with Iraq signing a mutual defence pact with Iran, it remains to be seen what Maliki will do now. He'll probably delay and stall. What a great success democracy is in Iraq eh...

The Americans should themselves be giving training to the Shia forces as much as they can!

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 25 May 2011 23:08

Lebanese extremists do exist - see fatah al islam. These type of groups will increase. Fatah Al Islam was meant to "resist" shia islam, now these types will take on hezb openly.

RE: Iraq - Sunni shia clashes have happened. Many times - especially with the armed groups. KSA leadership - on one hand want to protect the sunni's there, but on the other hand it wants stability in Iraq because the US is forcing the KSA to introduce reforms. SO the greater the attention on IRaq in terms of security problems the more attention is on KSA to reform. So KSA didn't want to over play its hand in Iraq. Current status of IRaq - Sold to IRan in their view.

The Sahwa movement wasn't purely US, it was also KSA involvement with the tribes that got them to take on the AQ movement. The AQ movement grew so strong that they wanted to set up an emirate between northern KSA and half of Anbar. So KSA was forced to get stuck in and remove AQ. They do want sunni control in Iraq ideally, after 91 the west and all were hoping for a coup (this is what these arabs are good at and had plenty of practice). But that never happened. They didn't trust saddam since he lied to everyone. But they could work with him because he was sunni. Now Iraq is a lost cause, IRan has pretty much taken over. So KSA will do what it needs to do to defend the sunni's there. I don't think it is accurate to suggest sunni's started everything off - It was the baathists who were using Saddam's leftover paisa from Syria/yemen/Jordan and a few other places who were doing all the bomb attacks, not much to do with KSA. Iraq was one big mess, Zarqawi was getting help from Iran and training their boys at one point, then things turned and Zarqawi was fighting Shia after the shia started assassinating sunni generals/personalities.

Heard of the Gulen network? Turkish muslim group - CIA backed. Check em out.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 26 May 2011 18:46

shyamd wrote:Heard of the Gulen network? Turkish muslim group - CIA backed. Check em out.

CIA backed? How do you figure that?

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 26 May 2011 20:55

^^ Well known in the intel circles. They used their seminaries as bases for ops and so on. The CIA is promoting them too.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 27 May 2011 02:29

OBama strategy in WANA - Tunisia - promoting softer islam - mainy islamist or semi islamist parties. US providing training in how to campaign in elections. A lot of these guys are US linked - US Tunisia commerce council etc. US is now thinking of curbing US politician links with the MB. But this ennahada party (islamist)) in Tunis may be the first US appoval for elections. State dept funded some progrm linked with dialogue between secular and islamists.

Soros is trying to build up his image with arab spring countries. Funding some bloggers and a new digital platform.

Klaus · Post by **Klaus** » 27 May 2011 04:03

Archaeologists have discovered 17 hidden pyramids along 3000 odd settlements in Egypt.

It would be interesting to know if any of these Egyptologists have active political roles and the ways in which they are able to influence happenings in Egypt, there is a good chance that there is heavy influence by UK through them.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 27 May 2011 19:24

Israel as Middle Eastern hegemon

With a total fertility rate of three children per woman, Israel's total population will rise to 24 million by the end of the present century. Iran's fertility is around 1.7 and falling, while the fertility for ethnic Turks is only 1.5 (the Kurdish minority has a fertility rate of around 4.5).
Not that the size of land armies matters much in an era of high-tech warfare, but if present trends continue, Israel will be able to field the largest land army in the Middle East. That startling data point, though, should alert analysts to a more relevant problem: among the military powers in the Middle East, Israel will be the only one with a viable population structure by the middle of this century.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ME24Ak01.html

Erdogan's most apocalyptic utterances refer to Turkey's own future, and to problems that are neither imaginary nor exaggerated. "They want to eradicate the Turkish nation," he alleged in 2008. "That's exactly what they want to do!"

The "they" to whom Erdogan referred in his speech, to a women's audience in the provincial town of Usak, refers to whoever is persuading Turkish women to stop bearing children. Turkey is in a demographic trap. Its birth rate has fallen, and its population is aging almost as fast as Iran's. Erdogan sees nothing less than a conspiracy to destroy the Turkish nation behind the fertility data. "If we continue the existing trend, 2038 will mark disaster for us," Erdogan repeated in May 2010.

In the long run, we are all dead, but the Turks are all old, and the Kurds may inherit Anatolia. In some ways Erdogan's impassioned Islamism responds to the danger that Turkey will turn gray and decline like the nations of Western Europe. But every attempt to advance the Islamist agenda runs into land mines. That is why Erdogan's tone suppurates with desperation.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 May 2011 19:43

Westphalian NAtion-States are ~350 years old idea which gained prominence in late 19th century. They are one phase in the world history. Due to time compression due to communications, knowledge etc, they are being eased out. For those who hang (post Ottoman Turkey for example) on to such temporary constructs they appear bad karma.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 27 May 2011 21:30

Saudi Bid to Curb Iran Worries U.S.

By MATTHEW ROSENBERG, JAY SOLOMON and MARGARET COKER

Saudi Arabia is rallying Muslim nations across the Middle East and Asia to join an informal Arab alliance against Iran, in a move some U.S. officials worry could draw other troubled nations into the sectarian tensions gripping the Arab world.

Saudi officials have approached Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and Central Asian states to lend diplomatic support—and potentially military assistance in some cases—to help stifle a majority Shiite revolt in Sunni-led Bahrain, a conflict that has become a symbol of Arab defiance against Iran.

Saudi Arabia's efforts, though against a common enemy, signal increasing friction with the Obama administration. Its invitation to Pakistan in particular could complicate U.S. security goals in South Asia. The push also complicates U.S. efforts to guide popular uprisings in the Middle East toward a peaceful and democratic conclusion.

The chief of the Saudi National Security Council, Prince Bandar bin Sultan al Saud, asked Pakistan's powerful generals in March to lend support for the operation in Bahrain, according to Pakistani, U.S. and Saudi officials briefed on the meetings.

Prince Bandar—who was the Saudi ambassador to Washington for more than two decades—told the Pakistani generals that the U.S. shouldn't be counted on to restore stability across the Middle East or protect Pakistan's interests in South Asia, these officials say.

U.S. officials working with Saudi Arabia acknowledged in recent days Riyadh's frustration with Washington's policies but believe the relationship can be stabilized. "They are not happy with us, and are really nervous about Iran," said an American official. "But I don't think they are going to go too far."

Saudi officials said their campaign was broad. "There are many elements of this initiative," said a Saudi official. "All the major Muslim states are willing to commit to this issue if need be and asked by Saudi leadership."

The official said any potential Pakistani troops could be integrated into the 4,000-man force of mostly Saudi soldiers that deployed to Bahrain in March to defend the ruling Khalifa family against the popular domestic uprising against its rule. But Saudi officials said the current force is adequate, and no formal request for troops has yet been made. (contrary to whta I am hearing)

The military intervention was invited by Bahrain's Sunni monarchy, which accused Iran of driving the protest movement. Tehran denied the charge, while volubly defending the rights of the protesters and demanding a withdrawal of the foreign troops.

Security forces from other Gulf Cooperation Council members joined Saudi troops in stifling the revolt, in what Saudi Arabia said was a message to Iran not to meddle in other nations' affairs. The GCC includes Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Saudi Arabia has sought to expand the GCC to include Jordan and Morocco.

The U.S. opposed the violent crackdown. American officials have objected to the use of force by Arab regimes against protesters, and say they fear violence could drive Bahrain's Shiite protesters into the arms of Iran, a Shiite theocracy that has long vied with the Saudis for influence in the Persian Gulf and the broader Middle East.

Saudi diplomats said that after the GCC force entered Bahrain in March, Riyadh dispatched senior officials to Europe and Asia to explain the operation and try to galvanize support. Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal traveled to Europe while Prince Bandar traveled to Asia.

Prince Bandar's stops included India, China, Pakistan and Malaysia. Prince Bandar, who has no spokesman, couldn't be reached for comment.

Malaysia, which is also Sunni-dominated, said this month it was willing to send troops to Bahrain, during a visit to Riyadh by Prime Minister Najib Razak. "Malaysia fully backs all sovereign decisions taken by Saudi Arabia and GCC states to safeguard the stability and security of the region in these trying times," Mr. Najib said in a statement.

Bahraini officials said Thursday that they desire diplomatic support but don't need military assistance at this stage, and haven't made requests to either Pakistan or Malaysia.

A civilian Pakistani official said its military was weighing what it could do to help the Saudis. A senior Pakistani military officer said Pakistan has no immediate plans to send soldiers for "operational purposes."

The officer said a Pakistani battalion has been in Bahrain since before the unrest began to help train Bahraini forces (confirms what I am hearing), but hasn't taken part in the crackdown. Bahrain's police force includes a substantial contingent of Pakistani recruits.

Military ties between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia go back decades. Pakistan receives hundreds of millions of dollars a year in Saudi aid, much of it in the form of subsidized oil.

The Saudi overture in Pakistan is a sign of how diplomatic friction in two distinct regions—the Middle East on one hand and Afghanistan and Pakistan on the other—could make it harder for the U.S. to pursue its goals of ending the conflict in Afghanistan, stabilizing nuclear-armed Pakistan, limiting Iran's power and keeping a lid on violent turmoil in the Mideast.

Pakistani and U.S. relations were already souring in March before the U.S. raid in Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden, which Pakistan viewed as a violation of national sovereignty.

But Pakistan, like Saudi Arabia, relies heavily on the U.S. The U.S. is Saudi Arabia's closest strategic partner. Last year Riyadh and Washington announced a planned $60 billion arms sale, the largest in U.S. history.

The U.S. provides Saudi Arabia and other allies in the region with an air and naval shield against possible attacks by Iran, with military bases in Qatar, Bahrain and the U.A.E.

Still, U.S.-Saudi relations have soured over the past decade. Saudi Arabia was opposed to the toppling of Iraq's Saddam Hussein because of his role as a bulwark against Iranian power. And Riyadh has been skeptical of the Obama administration's efforts to engage Iran diplomatically, among other disagreements.

Riyadh upset officials in Washington in another nominal proxy fight with Iran, in late 2009, when Saudi forces entered Yemen to clear rebels from their shared border. Yemen accused Iran of aiding the insurgents; Tehran denied the charge. The U.S. says it has seen no evidence of Iranian involvement in the uprising.

Saudis blame the U.S. in large part for abetting the push to topple Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. The Saudis saw him as the last strong Sunni hedge against Iranian influence and fear Egypt's new government will be too friendly with Tehran.

A senior Saudi official said relations with Washington are strong, and denied that Prince Bandar had spoken ill of the U.S.

The Saudis and Iranians have cobbled together loosely allied camps across the Mideast. Iran holds sway in Syria, and with the militant Arab groups Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian territories, parties opposed to the West and deeply hostile to Israel.

The Saudi sphere, which is more pro-Western, includes the Sunni Muslim-led Gulf monarchies, Egypt, Morocco and the other main Palestinian faction, Fatah.

Write to Matthew Rosenberg at [email protected], Jay Solomon at [email protected] and Margaret Coker at [email protected]

Basically the alliance is Jordan, Turkey, Egypt and KSA with Israel. They meet up now and then in Jordanian palaces (Aqaaba). This aliance has been create in 2006/7. Prince Bandar and Muqrin handle things from KSA side. King Abdullah II and Raqqad (Jord GID), Dagan and chief of staffs of Olmert, Omar Suleiman (Egypt), Turkish intel chiefs.

Egypt has dropped out of this alliance and now some are spying on Egypt. Cooperation is on Syria, Iran, Iraq , Lebanon.

----------------------
LOL! They preach to us. They haven't even come up with a coordinated plan to stop trade with Iran until a few months ago where they started thinking about it. Why should we stop trading with Iran, when the Israeli's aren't sanctioning Iran, US can't touch israel but will enforce sanctions and threaten Indian companies trading with Iran.

Israel apparently doing nothing to enforce international sanctions on Iran

Benjamin Netanyahu, who endlessly preaches the need for firm action against Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear arms, is not lifting a finger to stop Israeli companies and individuals indirectly trading with Iran.
By Yossi Melman Tags: Benjamin Netanyahu Iran

The Ofer Brothers Group may be scurrying into damage control in Israel, Singapore, London and Washington, after the United States blacklisted it for trading with Iran, but Israel seems to be doing nothing to enforce international sanctions on Iran.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who endlessly preaches the need for firm action against Iran to prevent it from acquiring nuclear arms, is not lifting a finger to stop Israeli companies and individuals indirectly trading with Iran.
Ofer Brothers

Sammy and Yuli Ofer from the Ofer Brothers Group.
Photo by: Archive

Nor is he acting against international companies and corporations that operate in Iran, while maintaining huge contracts with Israeli companies - including state bodies like the Electric Corporation and Airport Authority.

This incompetence, bordering on grave deficiency, is causing severe damage to the image of both Israel and its prime minister.

The situation raises questions about Israel's intelligence community, headed by the Mossad, which seems oblivious to what is going on in Israel. This community is in charge of thwarting Iran's nuclear plan by any means, including locating companies worldwide that trade with Iran and help its nuclear program.

At least 200 international companies operating in Israel maintain extensive trade ties with Iran. These ties include investments in the Iranian energy industry, which is Iran's main income source and serves to funnel funds to develop missiles, the nuclear program and other unconventional weapons.

In 2008 Israel enacted legislation prohibiting Israeli companies from investing in such corporations. But so far the government has done nothing to enforce it. Even after the Israel Electric Corp. and the Israeli Airports Authority purchased hundreds of millions of dollars worth of equipment from Danish and German companies operating in Iran, and after Haaretz reported it, Israel still did nothing.

Dr. Uzi Arad, until recently head of the National Security Council, said in response to a query from Haaretz that the issue is not within his jurisdiction and referred us to the Finance Ministry. But the Finance Ministry has also done nothing.

Yesterday it transpired that the company at the center of the storm involving the Ofer Brothers' alleged trade with Iran is the Singapore-based Tanker Pacific, one of the world's largest shipping companies. It operates a fleet of 45 huge tankers that transport crude oil worldwide, with branches in India, Britain and China. Its chairman and CEO is the British Alastair McGregor.

Company spokesman Edward Ion refused to give Haaretz details about the company's full ownership and legal structure but confirmed, in a telephone conversation from Singapre, that the company is "owned by the Ofer Brothers Group."

Tanker Pacific purchased the tanker Raffles Park in 2000. Until it was sold in September 2010, the tanker carried crude oil under a Liberian flag. Liberia gives ships the right to use its flag to hide their real ownership, as is customary in the shipping business, in exchange for foreign currency.

The tanker was sold for $8.65 million, a relatively low price, in a deal brokered by the Monegasque company Shipping Brokerage Associated. This company located the Coral Light Corporation of Panama company, registered in Panama, which ended up under ownership of the company Crystal Shipping of Sharjah. Sharjah is a small emirate in the Persian Gulf.

Crystal Shipping was the company that bought the Ofer Brothers' tanker. Another company registered in Dubai, called Noah Ship Management, provides managing services for the purchased tanker.

The U.S. State Department said on Tuesday that several companies involved in the deal served as a "front," to hide the fact that Iran's national shipping company - the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines - was behind it.

This shipping company appears on the UN Security Council's blacklisted corporations. It is forbidden to trade with these corporations because of their involvement in transporting equipment and materials for Iran's missile and nuclear programs.

Dubai is also seen as a major operation base for Iran's Revolutionary Guards, which built branches and offices there under fictitious names to hide their identity.

In the past, Dubai acted against companies that were discovered to be associated with Iran and its missile and nuclear programs.

Spokespeople for the Ofer Brothers Group and Tanker Pacific said yesterday they did not know the sale was carried out for Iran's shipping company, stressing they had acted in good faith.

They said it was the broker's - the Monegasque company - responsibility to check the buyer's identity.

The Ofer Brothers are making efforts through their lawyers in Singapore and Washington to meet American officials in a bid to persuade them the administration had made a mistake and to remove them from the black list.