West Asia News and Discussions

habal · Post by **habal** » 15 Nov 2013 21:38

he was actually found by ISIS but looking at their rebel uniforms he thought that he was captured by hezbollah and started chanting Shia hymns. He was resultantly beheaded due to the misunderstanding. Poor innocent thing.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 16 Nov 2013 03:35

http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/15/al-qa ... r-forgiven

Al Qaeda-Linked Group Asks For Forgiveness After Mistakenly Beheading Fellow Rebel in Syria

Al Qaeda-linked fighters in Syria are asking for forgiveness after mistakenly beheading a fellow rebel, thinking that the man was a Shiite fighter from Iraq.
After video footage of members of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant holding the severed head was released rebels in another Islamist group, Harakat Ahrar al-Sham, said they recognized the head as that of Mohammed Fares Maroush, one of their commanders.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 16 Nov 2013 05:08

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 783934.cms
Saudi anti-migrant operation creates a mess

RIYADH: Garbage is piling up on streets around the mosque housing the burial site of the Prophet Muhammad. Grocery stores have shut their doors and almost half of Saudi Arabia's small construction firms have stopped working on projects. The mess is because foreign workers on which many businesses rely are fleeing, have gone into hiding or are under arrest amid a crackdown launched November 4 targeting the kingdom's 9 million migrant labourers.Now, authorities say booting out migrant workers will open more jobs for citizens, at a time when unemployment among Saudis is running at 12.1% as of the end of last year, according to the International Monetary Fund. But the nationalist fervour driving the crackdown risks making migrant workers vulnerable to vigilante attacks by Saudis fed up with the seemingly endless stream of foreigners in their country.

With fewer people to do the job, the state-backed Saudi Gazette reported that 20,000 schools are without janitors. Others are without school bus drivers. Garbage became so noticeable around the mosque housing the Prophet Muhammad's tomb that a top city official in Medina helped sweep the streets, the state-backed Arab News website reported.About 40% of small construction firms in the kingdom also have stopped work because their foreign workers couldn't get proper visas in time, Khalaf al-Otaibi, president of the World Federation of Trade, Industry and Economics in the Middle East, told Arab News. Saudis say dozens of businesses like bakeries, supermarkets, gas stations and cafes are now closed. They say prices have also soared for services from mechanics, plumbers and electricians. The owner of a multi-million dollar construction company in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, said he had to halt all of his projects. He told the AP he was not the legal sponsor of most of his laborers but that they made more money working as freelance hires.Since the weekend clashes, Saudi officials say 23,000 Ethiopians, including women and children, have turned themselves in to the police. Authorities say most had no documentation of ever entering the kingdom and are being held in temporary housing ahead of deportation.Ethiopia's Foreign Ministry said in a statement that officials in Addis Ababa sought an explanation from Saudi Arabia's envoy over the ``mistreatment'' of Ethiopians in the kingdom.Workers from neighboring Yemen also face harassment. Yemeni Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Tawakkol Karman posted a picture last week on her Facebook page of what appeared to be a Saudi man in his car grabbing hold of a Yemeni man for a police officer.Saudi columnist Abdul-Rahman al-Rashed cautioned Saudis to remember that without ``a strong state and oil revenues'' they too may have emigrated in search of work.``Those deprived of the chance of a proper life can understand the feeling of those wanting to seek a better life,'' he wrote in the Asharq al-Awsat newspaper

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Nov 2013 13:45

Crude Oil and the Syrian Conflict

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 17 Nov 2013 13:59

X-post from TSP

Anujan wrote:The Sunni-Shia kerfuffle is partially Saudis and Iranians jockeying for influence. Saudis are terrified that Iranians will patch up with US and get to keep their nukes. They have warned US to not support Muslim brotherhood (Sunni but anti-monarchy), act on Syria (Shias) which US is waffling about.

Remember that Nawaz was the guest of the Saudis and Pakis have nukes.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... r-spy.html

Bandar’s goal is to undermine Iranian power: strip away Tehran’s allies like Assad and Hezbollah; stop the Shiite mullahs from acquiring nuclear weapons; roll back their regional designs; and push them out of office if there’s any way to do that.

The recently elected prime minister there, Nawaz Sharif, lived under royal protection in Saudi Arabia for much of the last decade. Journalist and scholar David Ottaway, author of the up-close Bandar biography The King's Messenger, predicted in 2009 that “if Iran did become a nuclear power and threatened the Kingdom, Pakistan could well become its principal defender rather than the United States.” In October, Yezid Sayigh of the Carnegie Middle East Center reported that the Saudis have been trying to coax the Pakistanis into a major training program for Syrian rebels.
Note that Pakis training "Syrian rebels" means that more Shias get killed in Syria. Wouldnt sit well with the local Shia population and they are likely to get enraged.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Nov 2013 18:38

Who said that the Pakis do not have a flourishing IT industry (International Terrorism)? The Saudis are their best customers for the same.Reports floating around today say that the Saudis and Israelis have shaken embraced upon a plan to allow the Israelis to use Saudi airspace and other facilities to take out Iran's nuke facilities. Typical of the Saudis raging to go to war as long as someone else does the dirty work,this time against their Shiite counterpart.That the reports come out just as other reports say that a deal with Iran is round the corner is significant.The region is in a state of acute flux.The balloon may go up any time on some pre-engineered event as a pretext.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Nov 2013 20:52

In March 2011, the Malaysian government declared the Shia a "deviant" sect and banned them from promoting their faith to other Muslims, but left them free to practise it themselves

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 17 Nov 2013 21:15

the malaysian ulema need to introspect deeply as to why instead of using fine arabic words they refer to ramadan and eid as "hari raya puasa"?
hari sounds suspiciously yindic to me onlee...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Nov 2013 06:22

Qataris.Definition in the "New OED".Former camel drivers,now "cattle" slavers.

Qatar 2022 World Cup workers 'treated like cattle', Amnesty report finds
Fresh fears raised about exploitation after Fifa president declares country 'on right track' over migrant labourers' rights

A damning Amnesty report has raised fresh fears about the exploitation of the migrant workers building the infrastructure for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, amid a rising toll of death, disease and misery.

The report – published a week after Fifa's president, Sepp Blatter, met the country's emir and declared Qatar was "on the right track" in dealing with workers' rights – claims that some migrant workers are victims of forced labour, a modern form of slavery, and treated appallingly by subcontractors employed by leading construction companies in a sector rife with abuse.

The report, based on two recent investigations in Qatar and scores of interviews, found workers living in squalid, overcrowded accommodation exposed to sewage and sometimes without running water. It found that many workers, faced with mounting debts and unable to return home, have suffered "severe psychological distress", with some driven to the brink of suicide. Discrimination is common, according to the report, which says that one manager referred to workers as "the animals".

It describes one case in which the employees of a company delivering supplies to a construction project associated with the planned Fifa headquarters during the 2022 World Cup were subjected to serious labour abuses. Nepalese workers employed by the supplier said they were treated like cattle. Employees were working up to 12 hours a day, seven days a week, during the summer months when temperatures regularly reach 45C.

Qatar's labour laws stipulate a maximum working day of 10 hours and say no one should work between 11.30am and 3pm during the summer months.

Last month Fifa was forced to address the issue of workers' rights after a Guardian investigation showed that dozens of Nepalese workers had died in recent months, prompting warnings from trade union organisations that 4,000 could be killed before the start of the football tournament.
Link to video: Qatar: the migrant workers forced to work for no pay in World Cup host country

Blatter promised to travel to Doha to meet the emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, and said he would raise the issue of workers' rights. But after the meeting and a presentation from the 2022 World Cup supreme committee, which includes many senior government representatives, Blatter said he was reassured by the progress that had been made on the issue.

That will not pacify human rights organisations, which have called for improvements to living and working conditions and for urgent action to reform the kafala sponsorship system that ties migrant workers to their employers. Amnesty said the sponsorship system "permits abuse and traps workers".

In November 2011, the Fifa general secretary, Jérôme Valcke, met Qatari officials to address the issue of workers' rights and the Qatari authorities promised to take the issue seriously.

But Amnesty's report, The Dark Side of Migration: Spotlight on Qatar's Construction Sector Ahead of the World Cup, is based on inspection visits in October 2012 and March 2013 and suggests change is nowhere near fast enough, despite a new charter introduced by the supreme committee, which applies only to the World Cup stadiums and not to infrastructure.

Amnesty said many workers had reported poor health and safety standards at work, including some who said they had not been issued with helmets on sites.

It quoted a representative of Doha's main hospital saying that more than 1,000 people were admitted to the trauma unit in 2012 after falling from height at work. Some 10% were disabled as a result and the mortality rate was significant.

Researchers also found migrant workers living in squalid, overcrowded accommodation with no air conditioning, exposed to overflowing sewage or uncovered septic tanks. One large group was found to be living without running water.

The organisation has also documented cases where workers were effectively blackmailed by their employers to get out of the country and others where they were not allowed to leave.

Researchers witnessed 11 men signing papers to get their passports back to leave Qatar in front of government officials, falsely confirming that they had been paid.

The company for which the men worked, ITC, had cashflow problems and 85 workers from India, Nepal and Sri Lanka were left in accommodation with no electricity or running water, with sewage leaking from the ground and piles of rubbish accumulating. Their salaries went unpaid for up to a year and they were forced to sign away any claim to the money before being allowed to leave.

"It is simply inexcusable in one of the richest countries in the world that so many migrant workers are being ruthlessly exploited, deprived of their pay and left struggling to survive," said Amnesty's general secretary, Salil Shetty.

"Our findings indicate an alarming level of exploitation in the construction sector in Qatar. Fifa has a duty to send a strong public message that it will not tolerate human rights abuses on construction projects related to the World Cup."

Amnesty, which carried out interviews with 210 workers and held 14 meetings with Qatari authorities, said that multinational construction firms profiting from the $220bn (£137bn) construction boom in the tiny gas-rich state could not ignore the actions of the web of subcontractors employed to do the work.

"Construction companies and the Qatari authorities alike are failing migrant workers. Employers in Qatar have displayed an appalling disregard for the basic human rights of migrant workers. Many are taking advantage of a permissive environment and lax enforcement of labour protections to exploit construction workers," said Shetty.

Amnesty found that some of the workers who had suffered abuses were working for subcontractors employed by global companies, including Qatar Petroleum, Hyundai E&C and OHL Construction.

"Companies should be proactive and not just take action when abuses are drawn to their attention. Turning a blind eye to any form of exploitation is unforgivable, particularly when it is destroying people's lives and livelihoods," added Shetty.

Following his meeting, Blatter said Fifa could look forward to "an amazing World Cup" in Qatar. "What was presented to us shows that they are going forward not only today but have already started months ago with the problems with labour and workers. The labour laws will be amended and are already in the process of being amended."

The Qatari authorities insist they are being proactive and say the World Cup can be a catalyst for change.

More on this story

Doha, Qatar

Qatar failing on forced labour, says UN agency

International Labour Organisation says Qatar does not properly inspect migrant workers' conditions despite signing convention

Qatar under pressure over migrant labour abuse

Qatar World Cup construction 'will leave 4,000 migrant workers dead'

Qatar World Cup 'slaves': Fifa's UK representative 'appalled and disturbed'

Revealed: Qatar's World Cup 'slaves'

At 16, Ganesh got a job in Qatar. Two months later he was dead

Qatar 2022 puts Fifa's reputation on the line

Video Qatar: the migrant workers forced to work for no pay in World Cup host country - video

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Nov 2013 07:25

here is the photo posted in fbook
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 9672_n.jpg

syele · Post by **syele** » 18 Nov 2013 07:39

What did Nigerian president say about Saudi Arabia clampdown?
http://allafrica.com/stories/201311071427.html

Many Nigerians are among thousands of foreign nationals in detention centres across Saudi Arabia, following the crackdown on illegal immigrants which began on November 4 in that country after the expiration of their residence permits on November 3 at the end of the amnesty granted by the Saudi authorities for the renewal of permits.

A source in the Nigerian embassy in Saudi Arabia told Daily Trust on telephone that although they don't have the exact number of Nigerians arrested during the crackdown, they are among those in the many detention centres across the Kingdom where people are being arrested and kept before deportation.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Nov 2013 16:16

ISIS,representing Al Q now run Raqqa,a city of 1M+ in Syria. The contours of this conflict are rapidly changing with Al Q and the Islamist uingodlies now well entrenched in Syria,from where they can further consolidate their sectarian agenda,funded by the monarchies of the region.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-24926584

13 November 2013
Syrian activists flee abuse in al-Qaeda-run Raqqa
Tim Whewell By Tim Whewell BBC Newsnight

Political activists in northern Syria have been forced to flee after attempting to defy the growing power of al-Qaeda in the region.

A citizens' protest movement has been challenging the jihadist group, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), an affiliate of al-Qaeda, after its fighters attacked churches in the city of Raqqa.

But activists who have fled to Turkey told BBC Newsnight that many had been arrested, beaten or kidnapped by ISIS in retaliation.

Raqqa, a city currently sheltering nearly a million people, is now under the full control of the group.

One of the activists, photographer Mezar Matar, said: "I saw many people who had signs of lashes on their bodies after being released from an ISIS prison."
They are the new dictators, just like Bashar al-Assad but dressed in black”

He said his brother, Muhammed Nour, had disappeared after filming a battle in Raqqa between ISIS and a brigade loyal to the Western-backed Supreme Military Council of the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

He believed Muhammed had been kidnapped by the jihadists.

Another activist, who asked not to be named for her own safety, said she and her sister, also involved in the protest movement, had fled after being fired at by ISIS gunmen.

"Seven or eight men with explosive belts surrounded my sister. Some said: 'Knife her.' Some said: 'Shoot her.' They tore down her banner that said 'Christians and Muslims are one', and told her she was an infidel," the activist said.

The protests started in September after jihadists raised their black flag over a church in Raqqa and turned it into their headquarters.
Black flag of al-Qaeda on the Armenian Catholic Church of the Martyrs in Raqqa (30 September 2013) The black flag was flown from Raqqa's Armenian Catholic Church of the Martyrs

"Two carloads of armed fighters went onto the roof of the church. They broke the bell with hammers, and threw one of the crosses down into the street. They tried to break it, but it was iron," the activist said.

Activists filmed protesters carrying the cross through the streets shouting "Shame! Shame!" and calling for Muslim-Christian unity.
'New dictators'

Earlier this year, Raqqa became the first provincial capital in Syria to fall fully under rebel control.
A man sits on a statue of President Hafez al-Assad in Raqqa A statue of the late President Hafez al-Assad was toppled after Raqqa's capture

But after only two months when control was shared by SMC-aligned and jihadist fighters, it was taken over in May by ISIS.

They marked the moment by publically executing three men they said were Alawites, members of the same heterodox Shia sect as President Bashar al-Assad.

Now Raqqa, its population swollen by displaced families, may be the largest city in the world ever to be controlled by al-Qaeda.

Mr Matar said: "They banned the sale of alcohol, they tried to close cafes where boys and girls sit together, they banned street theatre, cinema, bright colours, and forced women to wear Islamic dress.

"They are the new dictators, just like Bashar al-Assad, but dressed in black. Only the colour has changed."
BBC map Raqqa in northern Syria may be the largest city in the world to be controlled by al-Qaeda

Smaller but better funded than other rebel groups, ISIS has historically been made up of foreign jihadists from Arab countries - particularly Iraq, but also Libya, Tunisia, and Saudi Arabia - Russia's north Caucasus, and Europe.

But activists from Raqqa said it was now attracting more and more Syrian recruits.

In the last few months, ISIS has made significant advances, largely at the expense of the FSA, and controls a wide swathe of northern Syria close to the Turkish border.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 18 Nov 2013 16:51

Interesting how raqqa citizens are dealing and will deal with alKeada. What is the legitimacy of ISIS, and how come Iraq is mentioned along with Levant in ISIS? Is it just because an oil field can lay across these region that such arbitrary jihadi orgs with arbitrary nomenclature is formed since this won't improve chances for Iraqi oil, may be Syrian oil too, to reach international market.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Nov 2013 21:52

The massive suicide attack on the Iranian embassy in Beirut marks another defining moment in this latest ME spat,the Syrian War and the proxy war going on between the Sunni despot monarchies and the Shiite revolutionaries led by Iran.Most informed observers feel that the real masterminds of this attack against the Iranians have their HQ in Riyadh,with Qatar a way station.What is definie is that that there will be a suitable response from Iran and it will not be pleasant.More and more the Syrian conflict is turning out to be a proxy war between the M-East Sunnis and Shiites.As my Lebanese friend told me earlier this year,it has been the west/US's long term goal to set the Sunnis and Shiites at each other's throats in the region,sadly with its epicentre in Lebanon.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/n ... rut-blasts

Lebanon: Iran's embassy in Beirut hit by two explosions
More than 20 people including diplomat die after twin blasts near Iranian mission in Lebanese capital

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/n ... asts[quote]
Martin Chulov in Beirut
theguardian.com, Tuesday 19 November 2013

Link to video: Iranian embassy in Beirut left devastated by two explosions

Two explosions near the Iranian embassy in Beirut have killed at least 23 people, wounded more than 150, including an Iranian diplomat, and caused extensive damage to one of Lebanon's most heavily guarded buildings.

The attack shattered more than two months of relative calm in Lebanon and was cast by some officials as another spillover from the devastating war in neighbouring Syria, in which Iran, along with other regional powers, has taken a prominent stake.

One of the explosions is thought to have targeted a convoy arriving at the embassy, which contained cultural attaché Sheikh Ibrahim al-Ansari. Ghazanfar Rokanabadi, Iran's ambassador to Lebanon, confirmed Ansari's death, Iranian semi-official news agency Fars said. Lebanese officials also said he had been killed.

Among those killed were embassy guards, who eyewitnesses said had tried to stop a suicide bomber riding a motorbike near the building's gates, which were destroyed in the attack. The first bombing is thought to have been a prelude to a more substantial explosion about a minute later. A large crater near the embassy gate revealed the destructive force of the bomb, which is thought to have been hidden in a car.

Gunfire was heard in the minutes after the blasts as security forces tried to hold back bystanders and allow a cavalcade of rescue vehicles to enter the Bir Hassan area on the western edge of Hezbollah's Beirut stronghold.

The Lebanese militia has been on high alert in its heartland since August when the second of two explosions within weeks ravaged a nearby civilian area, killing scores.

The Shia Islamic leadership of Iran and its Hezbollah ally are strongly supportive of Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria, while those fighting against it are almost all Sunni Muslims – many of them homegrown Syrians, but also including jihadists who have travelled to Syria to fight the regime and its backers.

As state power has crumbled in Syria, sectarian faultlines have been stretched in Lebanon, where, despite their 1,500-year-old schism, the two main sects of Islam have more or less co-existed since both countries were formed from the ruins of the Ottoman empire.

But such an accommodation is increasingly being tested here, and elsewhere in the region, where the two sects live in proximity. Iraq has witnessed almost daily bombings for the past six months, nearly all of them carried out by extremist Sunni groups who openly state they are trying to reignite the sectarian war that raged there from 2006-07.

Both Iran and Hezbollah have played lead roles in recent advances by Syrian forces around Aleppo in the north and in rebel-held land south of Damascus. Hezbollah is also believed to be at the vanguard of a regime offensive in the Qalamoun mountains just to the east of the Syrian border, which looms as a significant battleground in the overall fight for control of the country.

With the war raging and regional tensions continuing to reverberate, Syrian opposition political leaders have yet to commit to a summit that aims to bring the crisis to a negotiated end. Opposition leaders say they remain opposed to Iran taking part and to Assad playing any future role in Syria.

Iran's ambassador blamed Israel for the attack. The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, remains vehemently opposed to negotiations between Iran, the US and Europe over the fate of Tehran's nuclear programme, which Iran insists is for civilian purposes but Tel Aviv counters is a cover to make nuclear weapons that will be used to threaten it.
[/quote]

habal · Post by **habal** » 20 Nov 2013 09:16

vishvak wrote:Interesting how raqqa citizens are dealing and will deal with alKeada. What is the legitimacy of ISIS, and how come Iraq is mentioned along with Levant in ISIS? Is it just because an oil field can lay across these region that such arbitrary jihadi orgs with arbitrary nomenclature is formed since this won't improve chances for Iraqi oil, may be Syrian oil too, to reach international market.

I think most refugees in Raqqa are mostly Sunni who have escaped fighting from homs and Aleppo, the Syrian Govt has allowed the rebels to control this area is to show the disaffected Sunnis on how the future will look. Because wherever these ISIS/Jabhat types tend to 'administer' and apply Sharia, they usually do the govt's job all by themselves. You just need to give them a free reign and they will effectively alienate the population and eventually destroy themselves.

Kati · Post by **Kati** » 21 Nov 2013 10:30

More on Abdullah Azzam brigade

http://world.time.com/2013/11/20/the-ab ... t-embassy/

Kati · Post by **Kati** » 22 Nov 2013 18:47

Iraqi Shiite group claims shelling Saudi border
The Associated Press
The Associated Press
CAIRO -- An Iraqi Shiite group has claimed responsibility for firing six mortar shells at a region of Saudi Arabia bordering Iraq and Kuwait.
Wathiq al-Batat, the leader of the so-called Mukhtar Army, said the shelling was in retaliation for religious decrees in Saudi Arabia that insult Shiites and encourage killing them.
Al-Batat told Beirut-based Iraqi satellite news channel al-Sumaria on Thursday that the mortars should be considered "a warning." He also said: "If they continue their provocations, we will carry out armed operations inside Saudi territories."
Saudi border guard spokesman Brig. Gen. Mohammed al-Ghamidi told the Saudi Press Agency on Wednesday that six mortar rounds hit an uninhibited area in Hafar al-Batin in the east, causing no damage.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/11/22/3 ... rylink=cpy

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 23 Nov 2013 01:18

habal wrote:
vishvak wrote:Interesting how raqqa citizens are dealing and will deal with alKeada. What is the legitimacy of ISIS, and how come Iraq is mentioned along with Levant in ISIS? Is it just because an oil field can lay across these region that such arbitrary jihadi orgs with arbitrary nomenclature is formed since this won't improve chances for Iraqi oil, may be Syrian oil too, to reach international market.
I think most refugees in Raqqa are mostly Sunni who have escaped fighting from homs and Aleppo, the Syrian Govt has allowed the rebels to control this area is to show the disaffected Sunnis on how the future will look. Because wherever these ISIS/Jabhat types tend to 'administer' and apply Sharia, they usually do the govt's job all by themselves. You just need to give them a free reign and they will effectively alienate the population and eventually destroy themselves.

Not on their own. The population under the love of AQ and Sharia - by historical experience - will not have the jihadists destroy themselves on their own. Yes it creates an initial window in time of grievance and resentment - but to turn that into real liberation, you need violent overthrow of the jihadists - usually by external superior armed forces. Left to itself, the jihadism usually wins absolute control over every society where it does not face equal or greater terror back against them.

The tactic of letting free reign over an area given to any islamist - from anywhere in the claimed spectrum of moderate to extremist, and expect them to destroy themselves by becoming unpopular - is a false premise. The religion acts as a geography less state formation, complete with a totalitarian power structure that has its handle on all aspects of life of a society. Once it gains entry - and areas like Syria - they have had a very long time entrenching themselves through the theologians, so that the basic memes lie within the society, and will weaken them when faced by the theologians representing jihadi demands as kosher. At best the population will split into three groups, one small overt apparent minority openly supporting the jihadis - the other openly overtly protesting, the majority not risking a direct confrontation and slightly confused against denying the theologians, who have been allowed to grow in their demonic stranglehold.

The group protesting the islamist side will be the weaker one, and will be the first group to be crushed. It is in the interest of both the external pseudo-secular groups represented by the "west" - and their allies the Saudis - to let this minority protest groups to be eradicated. It is true everywhere of the global convergence of pseudo-secular forces to the islamist agenda.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 23 Nov 2013 17:10

The group protesting the islamist side will be the weaker one, and will be the first group to be crushed. It is in the interest of both the external pseudo-secular groups represented by the "west" - and their allies the Saudis - to let this minority protest groups to be eradicated. It is true everywhere of the global convergence of pseudo-secular forces to the islamist agenda.

Very interesting. While same group facing destruction would expect 'justice' etc from seculars and only hear radio silence from pseudo secular pretenders who don't mind jihadists and freedom fighter pretenders(imported) running wild.

Some uniform front of jihadis in that city is formed now, after 100,000 are already dead in Syria and more displaced. Jihadis have many ways to organize and melt away as per the need-many lessons to be learnt here.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Nov 2013 08:28

So is Damascus burning as was promised?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Nov 2013 18:05

The interim deal between Iran and the EU/West/IAEA is a considerable achievement that hopefully halts Iranian uranium enrichment beyond 5% and freezes its plutonium production plants too.Unfortunately,the Israelis do not think so and warn that the world is a more dangerous place now.Unilateral Israeli strikes against Iran with the covert help of the Saudis cannot be ruled out despite the hard fought agreement at Geneva.lady Ashton of the EU has played a major part in the negotiations on behalf of the EU.The Iranians insist that an N-bomb is not their ambition,but reserve the right to enrichment for "peaceful purposes".This agreement must be hailed a victory for commonsense and diplomacy ,but the Israelis have considerable clout,"an historic mistake" says Netanyahu.The final contours are to be worked out within 6 months and these will indeed be crucial.

Iran nuclear deal: Historic agreement reached with US and other world powers in Geneva
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 60434.html

Iran has reached a historic agreement with the US, Britain and other world powers that will see its nuclear programme restrained in exchange for billions of pounds of trade sanctions relief.

In a deal which the US Secretary of State John Kerry said “makes the world safer”, Iran will freeze any development of its nuclear facilities for six months, give better access to international inspectors and halt some of its work on uranium enrichment.

In return, the West, Russia and China will relax the strict, longstanding trade embargoes which have been crippling Iran’s economic development.

The sum total of the sanctions relief is estimated to be worth around $7 billion (£4.3 billion), around $4 billion of which will be made up of oil sales.

The agreement comes after days of intense negotiations between foreign ministers for Iran, the US, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. It was finally signed at 4.30am this morning in the Geneva Palace of Nations, and buys diplomats another six months in which to negotiate a more sweeping deal.

The progress was hailed by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, whose policy initiative to open up Iran to greater collaboration with the West has been instrumental in securing today’s agreement.

The package includes freezing Iran's ability to enrich uranium at a maximum 5 per cent level, which is well below the threshold for weapons-grade material and is aimed at easing Western concerns that Tehran could one day seek nuclear arms.

Speaking to reporters in Washington, US President Barack Obama said: “Simply put, they cut off Iran's most likely paths to a bomb.”

In a nationally broadcast speech, Mr Rouhani said the accord recognizes Iran's “nuclear rights” even if that precise language was kept from the final document because of Western resistance.

“No matter what interpretations are given, Iran's right to enrichment has been recognized,” said Mr Rouhani, who later posed with family members of nuclear scientists killed in slayings in recent years that Iran has blamed on Israel and allies.

Saying “trust is a two-way street,” Mr Rouhani insisted that talks on a comprehensive agreement should start immediately.

The UK Foreign Secretary William Hague also hailed the deal, describing it as “good news for the whole world”.

“Important and encouraging first stage agreement with Iran,” he said. “Nuclear programme won't move forward for six months and parts rolled back.”

Mr Kerry, who joined the final stages of the negotiations, said the pact will reduce the threat of war to US allies in the Middle East, including Israel.

“Agreement in Geneva,” he tweeted. “First step makes world safer. More work now.”

Yet the deal was heavily criticised in Israel itself, with the country’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calling it a “historic mistake”.

Speaking to his Cabinet, Mr Netanyahu said: “Today the world became a much more dangerous place because the most dangerous regime in the world made a significant step in obtaining the most dangerous weapons in the world.”

The deal marks a milestone between the two countries, which broke diplomatic ties 34 years ago when Iran's Islamic revolution climaxed in the storming of the US Embassy in Tehran. Since then, relations between the two countries had been frigid to hostile.

Although the deal lowered tensions between the two countries, friction points remain — notably Iran's support of the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad. The US also has said Iran supports terrorism throughout the region and commits widespread human rights violations.

The Geneva negotiations followed secret face-to-face talks between the US and Iran over the past year. The discussions, held in the Persian Gulf nation of Oman and elsewhere, were kept hidden even from America's closest allies, including its negotiating partners and Israel, until two months ago.

A White House statement said the deal limits Iran's existing stockpiles of enriched uranium, which can be turned into the fissile core of nuclear arms.

The statement also said the accord curbs the number and capabilities of the centrifuges used to enrich and limits Iran ability to “produce weapons-grade plutonium” from a reactor in the advanced stages of construction.

The statement also said Iran's nuclear programme will be subject to “increased transparency and intrusive monitoring.”

“Taken together, these first step measures will help prevent Iran from using the cover of negotiations to continue advancing its nuclear programme as we seek to negotiate a long-term, comprehensive solution that addresses all of the international community's concerns,” said the statement.

Since it was revealed in 2003, Iran's enrichment programme has grown from a few dozen enriching centrifuges to more than 18,000 installed and more than 10,000 operating. The machines have produced tons of low-enriched uranium, which can be turned into weapons grade material.

Iran also has stockpiled almost 200 kilograms (440 pounds) of higher-enriched uranium in a form that can be converted more quickly to fissile warhead material than the low-enriched uranium. Its supply is nearly enough for one bomb.

In return for Iran's nuclear curbs, the White House statement promised “limited, temporary, targeted, and reversible (sanctions) relief” to Iran, noting that “the key oil, banking, and financial sanctions architecture, remains in place.” And it said any limited sanctions relief will be revoked and new penalties enacted if Iran fails to meet its commitments.

Additional reporting by the Associated Press

pushkar.bhat · Post by **pushkar.bhat** » 25 Nov 2013 21:00

The Iranian nuclear deal is a shot across the bow for the house of saud and a message to Israel that the time for the two nation solution to the Israel Palestinian conflict has come. I won't be surprised if Netanyahu tries to pull off a stunt to add a spin to situation.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 25 Nov 2013 21:57

The silence in BR on Iran deal is deafening! It is a curve ball it looks like...

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 Nov 2013 22:46

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 7#p1546957

ramana wrote:The US accommodation of Iran will put the Pakis in a squeeze. So expect them to rush into PRC arms. Same time KSA , Israel and the GCC will be piqued.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 26 Nov 2013 00:09

The six month agreement is tenuous at best. Obama may not get any legislative backing in the US for the agreement. So he's taking a big risk. Israel has powerful allies in the US congress. And if Iran cheats on the agreement, it will even be worse for Obama with the US public after the Obamacare rollout. So he's got a lot to lose. But he could win big too with an easier oil market and a greater diplomatic reputation for his presidency. So nothing is cast in concrete so far. It's either into the out house or win big in the clubhouse. There's still a lotta mileage to go. Hopefully the US congress realizes there are other countries involved and not just Obama.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 26 Nov 2013 00:37

V_Raman wrote:The silence in BR on Iran deal is deafening! It is a curve ball it looks like...

Actually, it has not been a total silence - comments have been distributed across various threads. However, you have a point. Probably no one has said much because, pretty much any way you look at it, this is good for India - and, for the US. I'll put my take on it down a little later...

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 26 Nov 2013 01:56

OK here you go... sorry for the longish one...
_______________________________

This apparent rapprochement between the US and Iran, and it clearly involves more than the optics associated with the nuclear negotiations, opens up a whole new vista for not just Washington, but for a lot of other countries. We can look at it from several angles and it’s hard to see a downside from any, the clenched-teeth statements of Israel and Saudi Arabia notwithstanding.

From the nuclear side, it is definitely better to get Iran into some sort of control regime than not to have any real engagement in this regard. To expect Iran to simply abandon its “rights” to nuclear development under sanctions pressure is foolhardy and displays a lack of understanding of the Iranian people and their mindset. It would simply have precipitated conflict. The deal also puts a dampener on the risk of rapid proliferation in the Middle East, or at least the excuse for it. It’s going to happen anyway, but perhaps now the potential acquirers of nuclear weapons will be given pause for thought.

However, the nuclear deal can be viewed as a sideshow. The real story here is the promise of an improvement in US-Iranian relations, and what that means from the sectarian angle in the Middle East. It automatically improves the Iranian position in the region, and therefore the Shiite position. This is a necessary rebalancing which will inevitably put them on a much more even footing with the Sunni side. The Americans have been doing this not so subtly since 9/11. Iraq, where the Shiites rule, was the first. Syria was an aberration, probably a result of policy inertia and Pavlovian reflex after decades of repeating the same old shibboleths, as well as relentless pressure from the GCC allies as well as Turkey; but that foolishness was quickly exposed and to Washington’s credit they readily walked back, once the flimsiest of openings was provided by the Russians. You will note that none of the big powers have any real interest in putting an end to the sectarian strife in the Middle East; indeed, a quiet encouragement of the opposite is more likely.

From the American side, this is a masterstroke. The move reduces the ability of its allies in the region to influence its policies, while creating new friends, new options; strangely enough, it gives the US more strategic autonomy by reducing the need for the display of the hammer, because now every problem with Iran does not have to be a nail.

Despite the Israeli posture at the moment, it is not really a loser in this emerging situation. It simply has held on to a view for so long that it finds it hard to adjust. I’m surprised it didn’t know what the US was up to with Iran (and it is not something that just happened over the last month). The position of the Netanyahu government seems to be that Iran can only be redeemed through a military assault. The Americans have decided otherwise. If Israel is able to see the advantages for itself in this, it will gradually re-examine and re-articulate it’s position, saying –after a thorough study of the agreement – that it does see a potential for a globally acceptable solution in what the EU+3 have negotiated. That will, gradually, open the way for a changed relationship with Iran – which will not be obvious on the surface, but will certainly bring a subsurface calm. There will not be an outbreak of declared peace between Israel and pretty much any noteworthy Muslim country in the foreseeable future. That’s an unfortunate reality that Israel will have to live with. But it’s ability to live with that will be enhanced by the outcomes expected : a softening of Iran, and a hardening of the Sunni-Shiite rift.

Why did Russia and China pursue this course and enable this opening? Very simple, neither want another Islamic nuclear power so close to their borders. An Islamic bomb can reach their heartlands far more easily than it can the US, whether overland or by air. And, neither are particularly opposed to the idea of a reasonably calibratable amount of sectarian strife in the area from Pakistan to Morocco. This opens up possibilities for the classic balance of power game that the P5 have played now for a long time and are quite comfortable with, and have the internal mechanisms for. Can it get out of hand? Possibly, but with a defanged Iran, it is less likely to be in a nuclear fashion.

That leaves us with one tiny little problem. Whether anyone articulates it or not, the eyes of world powers will now swivel towards Pakistan. Nothing immediate, nothing obvious, but the steady moving of pieces to reduce options, constrain manoeuvring room, hesitance to discourage “fissiparous tendencies”, etc – until the bigoted half-wits in Rawalpindi see the light, or tear their own country apart. Pakistan has not yet realised that it has no friends. Ironically, the only country which may have some sympathy for it is India – or rather those peace-at-any-cost Indians who would sell a bit of their country for a free breakfast.

Of course it can all be rolled back by either US politicians, or Iranian ones. Right now, the bigger challenge on that front stems from the US politicians. My feeling is that the administration will be able to overcome it. The logic behind the move is sound, pretty much any way you look at it.

Excuse the typos, grammatical errors, etc... It's late at night where I am and I can't be bothered now to edit

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 26 Nov 2013 02:08

I for one was hoping for a Nuclear Iran - hope its just a gamble for some more time and keeps up the research in Nuclear and attains them if not now , 5 years later.
Always remember fate of Gaddafi who gave up his Nuclear weapons program at Western behest.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 26 Nov 2013 02:12

>>I for one was hoping for a Nuclear Iran

How does it benefit India?

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 26 Nov 2013 02:17

^^ Enemy's Enemy will remain strong.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 26 Nov 2013 02:22

The question to ask here is in the case of conflict between Hindu and Muslim, will the Shiite support the Sunni or the Hindu, especially if the Sunni country has a lot of Shiites? The answer is probably not so clear, which suggests that allowing our enemy's enemy to arm itself with weapons that can threaten us is not advisable. We should want agents not peers.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Nov 2013 02:27

JEM very good take on the issue and the outcome.
Offcourse the Shia will support the Sunni agaisnt the Hindu. The partiton was good example.

Also this outcome will lead to leadership changes in the contra postion countries:Israel, Turkey, KSA and sectarin strife in TSP.....

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 26 Nov 2013 02:33

Yes I agree, Shia will support Sunni or remain neutral in best case, or at least we have to operate under that assumption.

Change of leadership possible, even probable, in Israel, Turkey but in KSA that will only happen with rulers death and nature of succession is uncertain. Sectarian strife will gradually be nurtured in Islamic Zone. There appears to be a conspiracy of common sense on that issue...

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 26 Nov 2013 02:41

Thanks JEM!

I think it is all economy at this point. World needs cheap oil and the only way it is possible is if Iran/Iraq oil comes out in full flow.

I agree with JEM that this is good for India as it will get us to focus on the economy and rise with the recovery of the west.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 26 Nov 2013 02:47

JEM ji,
Since the House of Al Saud was installed post ottoman, the final basis behind Sunni entities was is and will be the West .
West is always the enemy. It may give some whiffs of benevolence now and then to entice Turd world for a tighter embrace , but the fact is that its not an embrace but its a strangle. I don't want Iran to get into this nor would I want India to go down this path.

I certainly don't want to live the wretched life of a South Korean or Philipino or Thai or Taiwanese who have given up their independence and are getting slowly digested into the belly of the Beast.
I want India to emerge as an independent pole like Russia or China.

Its not even about Sunni Shia play off dynamics (and the benefits to the Hindu as such)
So lets forget India for time being and let's look it from China's and Russia's viewpoint ...
Is Iran giving up its Nuclear option good for them ?
Both of them would strongly disagree in private but would outwardly express "satisfaction" for politically correct reasons .

So India too aiming to take its place among future poles should be concerned about the development for the same reasons as China and Russia.

Actually I wished this deal to have occurred after a mini bum pataka (ala NoKo) and with Iran negotiating with an upper hand through fait accompli .

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 26 Nov 2013 02:56

Lilo wrote:^^ Enemy's Enemy will remain strong.

One day we have to bring the Peacock throne back as well march to Mitani land to control and change the dirty oil clogging Hindu Mahasagar arteries .

Lets keep long term objective in mind like Elephant who never forget.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Nov 2013 03:07

Two back to back articles in TOI by Chidananda Rajghatta

US Iran clinch interim deal-Blow to israel, KSA and releif for India
Mostly on BRF lines:

WASHINGTON: The United States plus five world powers reached a landmark deal with Iran on Sunday to curtail the Persian country's purported march towards nuclear weapons.

The agreement, when fully realized, has the potential to dramatically alter the geo-political landscape of the Middle-East, Gulf, and South Asia, affecting the strategic outlook and orientation of major countries from Israel to India and in between.

Under the first phase of the agreement, clinched in a 3am signing ceremony in Geneva, Iran will stop enriching uranium beyond five per cent, effectively giving up the higher levels of enrichment needed to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons. It will also divert or convert its stockpile of 20 per cent enriched uranium into an oxide form so it cannot be used for military purposes.

Iran will also not install any new centrifuges nor start up any that are not already in operation or build new enrichment facility, while submitting to daily international inspections that will make it almost impossible for it to work towards making nuclear weapons.

In return, Iran will get to keep its existing centrifuges, be able to enrich uranium below five per cent for civilian nuclear uses, and receive relief from crippling US-led sanctions (including getting some revenues seized by past sanctions) for the next six months, during which a more detailed, longer term agreement will be negotiated.

At a broader level, it will begin the process of recasting strategic alignments in the region. Untrusting Israel, haunted by an existential crisis that comes from a (mutual) pathological fear of a nuclear-armed rival, straightaway rejected the deal, suggesting US and its allies had been suckered by Teheran. Sunni-dominated Saudi Arabia, which fears its cozy equation with Washington being eclipsed by a Shia-dominated Iran returning to the US sphere of influence, also lashed out at the agreement.

Nearer home, the US-Iranian detente provides an exit route for the United States from landlocked Afghanistan while reducing its dependence on extremist Pakistan, which is extracting a ransom for the 2014 drawdown from Afghanistan.

It will also come as a big relief for India, which has had to do juggle and balance four aspects — its growing strategic partnership with the US, its strong military relationship with Israel, its economic and social investments in Afghanistan, and its civilizational ties with the Persian power. An Indian-built road from the Afghan border town of Zaranj to the Iranian port of Charbahar suddenly comes into play.

Eventually, India may also be able to resume normal trade relations with Iran, which the US-led sanctions had put a crimp on.

The US-led deal is interim in nature and there is much that can go wrong in the six months during which the concerned parties will negotiate a more comprehensive deal. For now though, both sides exulted on having broken new ground, and both claimed to have gained from the accord, effectively pointing to a win-win situation.

"It is important that we all of us see the opportunity to end an unnecessary crisis and open new horizons based on respect, based on the rights of the Iranian people and removing any doubts about the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program," Iranian foreign minister Mohammed Javad Zarif, who played a key role in the talks, told reporters. "This is a process of attempting to restore confidence."

President Obama, speaking from the State Dining Room in the White House, said diplomacy "opened up a new path toward a world that is more secure — a future in which we can verify that Iran's nuclear program is peaceful and that it cannot build a nuclear weapon."

But disquiet and unease were evident in the reactions from Israel and Saudi Arabia, although Obama pledged that as negotiations go forward, US will retain steadfast in its commitments to "friends and allies — particularly Israel and our Gulf partners, who have good reason to be skeptical about Iran's intentions."

That skepticism was aired openly. "What was concluded in Geneva last night is not a historic agreement, it's a historic mistake," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told reporters. "It's not made the world a safer place. Like the agreement with North Korea in 2005, this agreement has made the world a much more dangerous place."

Netanyahu maintained that Iran would be "taking only cosmetic steps which it could reverse easily within a few weeks, and in return, sanctions that took years to put in place are going to be eased."

But US interlocutors appeared confident that they had the lock on Iran's route to a nuclear weapon. "It will make our partners in the region safer. It will make our ally Israel safer," secretary of state John Kerry, who led the US-allied talks, said.

Sad that he sees only a mercantile ascpect of the deal for India while it has many other benefits. But then he writes for mainstream Indian paper and has to mind the sensibilities of the owners.

Nov 26th:

India connect of the US-Iran deal

He means connection not connect.

WASHINGTON: When the US led by President Richard Nixon and his foreign policy major domo Henry Kissinger cut a deal with communist China using Pakistan as a conduit in 1970, India was left out of the loop in a detente that changed the geopolitical dynamics of the region. Some four decades later, India is front and center in the American reconciliation with Iran, an event that when fully realized is likely to bring about an even greater seismic shift in Asia.

New Delhi may not have directly played errand boy or secret channel in the latest diplomatic upheaval that Pakistan's Yahya Khan played in 1970. But almost every interlocutor who worked on the US-Iran agreement has an India connection — from William Burns, the deputy secretary of state who initiated and led the secret talks (he also wrapped up the US-India nuclear deal) to Puneet Talwar, the White House national security council staffer who did the grunt work for the agreement, to Thomas Pickering and Frank Wisner, both former US ambassadors to New Delhi, who opened the back channel with Teheran going back to the Bush administration.

{Sorry but this appears like the rat gloating when the she elephant was announced to be expecting!}

More important than the personnel involved, however, the reconciliation carries multiple benefits for India, which has the second largest Shia Muslim population in the world after Iran. In fact, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Indian officials has often pointed this out during discussions with US officials whenever the subject of Washington's difficult relationship with Teheran came up, suggesting that a reconciliation would redound to the benefit of all sides — from making US draw down from Afghanistan smoother to relieving India, which has close civilizational ties with the Persian power, from suffocating pressure on the energy front.

The US-Iran deal, which is currently of an interim nature with much more groundwork to be done before it is set in stone, has other profound consequences for India and the region. For one, its extricates Washington from the Sunni stranglehold that had cast the US as an unremitting ally of Sunni-dominated countries such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt against mostly Shia-dominated Iran, Iraq, and Syria. India, which has about a 70:30 Sunni-Shia mix, has an exemplary record of intracommunal harmony, and there were lurking fears that this might be disrupted if the Sunni-Shia conflict in the Muslim world expanded eastward.

Nuclear weaponization

On the nuclear front too, US exceptionalism is being applied to two countries with civilizational underpinnings (India and Iran) vis-a-vis their artificially created rivals (Saudi Arabia and Pakistan). Although the US-Iran deal precludes Teheran having nuclear weapons, and is in fact designed to avert its nuclear weaponization (unlike in the case of India where Washington implicitly recognized India's right to retain its nuclear weapons), the agreement is seen as being as bold a move by the Obama administration as the Bush administration's nuclear deal with India.

The nuts and bolts of this agreement, which still has many missing parts and is clearly a work in progress, was put together by Puneet Talwar, an Indian-American White House staffer whose formal designation is special assistant to the president and national security council senior director for Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf states. A long-time Washington DC political wonk, Talwar was a senior staffer on the Senate foreign relations committee, chaired by then-senator Joe Biden, with whom he came to the NSC when Biden became vice-president.

Even as a Senate staffer, Talwar was among the few Washington pols (former US envoys to India Frank Wisner and Thomas Pickering were two others) who kept open back channel contacts with Iranian officials during the Bush era, when the US capital was a war-mongering haven for neo-cons in a town where the Israeli lobby and the House of Saud had combined to successfully put Teheran in the doghouse. When President Obama came to office in 2009 determined to chart a different course with Iran and initiated the first secret outreach, Talwar was a natural choice to continue the back channel grunt work — this time with official White House imprimatur.

Again taking credit for the hardwork of an Indian American who is working for US govt.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Nov 2013 07:10

imo the US will do a lot of good for itself by withdrawing totally from the Syria situation and letting the quadra of israel, france, KSA and qatar fight it out if they want.
first to desert will be france moment they realize would have to foot the bill
second will be israel since the syrian govt has no real territorial ambitions on israel..its lebanon where the hizbollah are based mainly...
KSA and qatar can continue the fight but without american resources and intel, frustrated jihadis will get hit from all sides and return home to vent their anger and demand more purity and piety. TSP contractors used to shore up the ramparts will eventually change sides and the day of judgement will dawn when mobs of faithful gather outside the opulent palaces of the ruling families and demand adherence to spartan desert code of living....

I figure the royal families will fly away to rome and london a few days ahead of the army turning sides.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 26 Nov 2013 07:35

JE Menon wrote:That leaves us with one tiny little problem. Whether anyone articulates it or not, the eyes of world powers will now swivel towards Pakistan. Nothing immediate, nothing obvious, but the steady moving of pieces to reduce options, constrain manoeuvring room, hesitance to discourage “fissiparous tendencies”, etc – until the bigoted half-wits in Rawalpindi see the light, or tear their own country apart. Pakistan has not yet realised that it has no friends. Ironically, the only country which may have some sympathy for it is India – or rather those peace-at-any-cost Indians who would sell a bit of their country for a free breakfast.

Of course it can all be rolled back by either US politicians, or Iranian ones. Right now, the bigger challenge on that front stems from the US politicians. My feeling is that the administration will be able to overcome it. The logic behind the move is sound, pretty much any way you look at it.

I think it's the US experience with Pakistan in the past few years has something to do with this. Iran had to be solved or at least put on the back burner for the Pak and Saudis to be dealt with. I know folks on the forum harp constantly about Sunni/US nexus, how there's a plan to use that to constrain us and what not. Shia Iran has mostly ranted against the US a lot vs the Sunni camp that has a lot of american blood on it's hands. The americans aren't stupid.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Nov 2013 08:28

AS JEM has written,it was the Russians who pulled off with their Syrian gambit and saw Assad's chem warfare stocks neutralised and the reduction of tension and threat of a full scale ME war in the region.The same concept is being used in the Iranian N-WMD situ.The common thread in the two cases is that when the US and Russia sit down together,they can and do sort out conflict resolution through diplomacy and we have a more peaceful world.It is unfortunate that in the US CW veterans have still not smelt the tea brewing in the samovar and the kebabs on the coal ,and like Don Quixote are still tilting at windmills.O'Bomber and Putin need to be congratulated in both instances for "detoxifying" the region and ushering in hopefully a period of peace and tranquility.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/n ... eneva-deal

Iran sanctions to be eased as US and west work out full Geneva deal
Oil revenues to be paid to Tehran in first phase of nuclear agreement, with warmer relations expected across region

PS:O'Bomber NOW deserves his Nobel peace prize!