West Asia News and Discussions (YEMEN, gulf)

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 02 Apr 2015 19:21

Article in yesterday's Toronto Sun, by Tarek Fatah, about how Saudi Arabia has fooled the West once again, and that it is Saudi Arabia, not Iran, that is the real threat to freedom and liberty in the region, if not the world. Saudi by its actions in Yemen, is attacking a bunch of poor people, who are not really fanatic, and whose Iranian support is limited, if anything. Well said! Can always count on Mr. Fatah, for an intelligent, astute, fair assessment of the goings on in that region!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Apr 2015 19:30

How about a link to the Tarek Fatah article? And contents with parts highlighted.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Apr 2015 19:52

We need to pay more attention to the Yemen crisis.
We need regular reports with numbers and maps.

Please help.
Once we get data we can speculate.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 02 Apr 2015 19:56

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/03/31/sa ... west-again

Fatah
Saudi Arabia fools the West, again
63

Tarek Fatah
By Tarek Fatah, Toronto Sun

Diplomats and U.N. staff flee Yemen as Houthis target Aden
Warplanes hit Yemen's Sanaa overnight, after dawn: Residents

Yet another war has broken out within Islam.

The richest nations of the Arab world are pummeling one of the poorest people on earth – the Yemenis.

As the deaths of helpless civilians mount, a lie of Goebellian scale is being perpetuated on the rest of us, who seem to have learned little from the propaganda that gave us Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction”.

This time the bogeyman is Iran’s tentacles choking the sea lanes of Bab-el-Mandeb that separate Yemen from the African coast.

While the vast majority of Islamic terror attacks on the West, Middle East and South Asia have been conducted by Sunni Muslim jihadis, Saudi Arabia has somehow convinced us it is Shiite Islam and Iran that are to blame.

Now the Saudis have taken on the task of restoring democracy in Yemen by backing President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, who was ousted in a popular insurgency by the Ansar Allah Party, better known as the Houthis.

The only problem is that none of the countries in the Saudi-led coalition of oil-rich Gulf Arab sheikhdoms that purportedly seek to restore democracy in Yemen have ever faced their own electorates.

In addition, they are the very countries that have been the source of funding for the world’s worst jihadi terrorist organizations, nations that have funded tens of thousands of Islamic madrassahs that churn out jihadis willing to die for Islam’s victory over the kufaar, the hated non-Muslim infidel.

The lie that has been floated and gobbled up by western analysts and politicians is that the Yemeni Houthis are a product of Iranian intervention in Yemen and thus pose a threat to western interests as well as the security of Israel.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Finnish anthropologist Susanne Dahlgren, who has lived in Yemen, points out in the Middle East Research and Information Project this week that the Shiite and Iranian links being slapped on to the Houthis have little substance.

She writes: “The Western media shorthand designating the Houthis as ‘Iran-backed’ and ‘Shiite’ is misleading at best, since Houthi grievances are home grown and the Zaydi sect to which the Houthis belong is a distant cousin of the Twelver Shi’ism championed by the Islamic Republic in Tehran.”

Dahlgren goes on to say, “Much huffing and puffing by Gulf (Arab) media notwithstanding, there was little evidence that Iran aided the Houthis in the intermittent fighting of 2004-2010, certainly not to the extent of Saudi Arabia’s military intervention against the Houthis in 2009.”

For the United States and, unfortunately, Canada to throw their weight behind this coalition of medieval dictators is not only unprincipled, but also suggests Middle East petro dollars and possible defence contacts are shaping Western foreign policy.

The Saudis have been very successful in convincing the West that it is not they who pose a threat to our liberties, but Iran.

This notwithstanding the fact that as early as November, 2013, the BBC’s diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, broke the news that Saudi Arabia had invested in Pakistan’s nuclear weapons projects for its own needs.

Urban reported, “several nuclear weapons made in Pakistan for Saudi Arabia are sitting, waiting for delivery.”

Canada should resist the temptations offered by Saudi Arabia, a regime accused of buying nukes off the shelf from a potentially hostile nuclear power – Pakistan, not Iran.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 02 Apr 2015 22:05

70 killed so far in al shabaab attack on kenya university.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 02 Apr 2015 22:13

Most of aden incl palace is now under houthi control after fighting in the morning.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 02 Apr 2015 22:13

Both plan and in naval ships onsite for evac.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 02 Apr 2015 22:33

India needs to keep out of middle eastern wars but if pakis are stupid enough to go head long into it then we can of course play games in Af-PAk region. Iran will be happy to oblige.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 02 Apr 2015 22:34

More on Yemen:
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semp ... abyss.html

The North had been a Shia Zaydi Kingdom, until a coup fomented with the help of Nasser's Egypt turned it into the "Yemen Arab Republic", in 1962. For several years, a civil war tore the country apart, with the monarchist rebels inflicting very painful losses to the Egyptian expeditionary force, up to the point where some in Egypt considered Yemen to be their "Vietnam", just as Afghanistan should be to the Soviets some 20 years later.

Oddly enough, it didn't seem awkward at the time that the Zaydi (Shia) rebels were being funded, supported and armed by the Saudi Wahhabi monarchy, which is now launching airstrikes against the sons and grand-sons of their former allies. This is also the same Saudis who had been at war with the Zaydi Emirate in the 1930s, annexing three provinces (Assir, Najran and Jizan), a loss the Yemenis have never completely forgotten nor forgiven. But Yemeni politics and history are no strangers to reversals of alliances, as recent events also have shown.

Overall however, the fault lines in Yemeni politics have been blurred by years of nepotism and outside meddling, and the latest cycle of violence should be seen more as the confrontation between various confederations of interests rather than two sides entrenched in clear-cut and opposing views. The ancient and long established tribal structures are being reshaped not only by the new alliances that have been formed, but also by the social and political demands of ordinary Yemenis, in the urban areas in particular.

To put it simply, and based on events on the ground, the Houthis and the supporters of the Saleh clan, many of them in the military and among Sunni tribes opposed to Saleh's successor, are facing a coalition of three forces: the Salafi inspired tribes in the South and East, the local Al Qaeda franchise in Yemen (AQAP), and the Islamic party "Al-Islah", sponsored by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The situation is not all too different for Pakistan, which has insisted that its participation is about protecting the integrity of Saudi Arabia, meaning implicitly they might agree to some cross-border operations, in case the Yemenis should have the stupid idea of trying to take back the provinces they lost in 1934, but Pakistan certainly isn't keen on any confrontation with a locally backed insurgency. They have already one back home and that is plenty enough for them to take care off.

The military ties between Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan are probably the strongest and closest and it reaches quite far back actually: Pakistani military and volunteers have always figured prominently among the Saudi National Guard. The latest example of this is the crack-down on the Bahraini Shia revolt in 2014, which was done mostly with Pakistani "mercenaries" under Saudi command.

But however well equipped, the "Saudi Arabian National Guard" is a force intended first and foremost for domestic purposes, like quelling unrest or violence that might erupt among the Shias in the oil-rich Eastern province. There is a big question mark about the ability of this force to conduct a ground campaign against a much more potent enemy.

bhalluka · Post by **bhalluka** » 02 Apr 2015 22:36

John Dolan/Gary Brecher/War Nerd has a great background writeup on Yemen

http://pando.com/2015/03/28/the-war-ner ... lusterfck/

Some excerpts

Najran was once part of that kingdom. It’s only been Saudi territory since 1934, when the Saud family leased the province from Yemen on a 20-year term. They kept it when the term expired, because by that time Saudi Arabia was rich and closely allied with the US and Britain, while Yemen was weak and poor.

In 2000, the Shia of Najran got sick of being told by their Saudi Provincial Governor (a Saudi princeling, naturally) that they were rafidii (“nay-sayers”) and takfiri (“apostates”). The Najrani grabbed their guns, scared off the Saudi national police and drove Prince Mishaal into hiding in the Najran Holiday Inn.

There was a time when Yemen was the world’s only coffee exporter (Mocha is a town in Yemen, on the Red Sea) and though coffee was banned as a dangerous drug by Murad IV, he couldn’t make that Prohibition work, because the Turks were addicts from their first sip.

Arabs were getting very “modern” at that time. It’s important to remember that. You know why they stopped getting modern, and started getting interested in reactionary, Islamist repression?

Because the modernizing Arabs were all killed by the US, Britain, Israel, and the Saudis.

So all the factions we call “The West” jumped in to destroy these Yemeni officers: British commandos and pilots, Israeli military advisors, CIA bagmen, NSA geeks, and mercenaries from all over the world.

That was the all-star lineup fighting “for Allah and the Emir,” as the idiots at Time Magazine enthused in a 1963 article.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 02 Apr 2015 22:38

A_Gupta wrote:
Oddly enough, it didn't seem awkward at the time that the Zaydi (Shia) rebels were being funded, supported and armed by the Saudi Wahhabi monarchy, which is now launching airstrikes against the sons and grand-sons of their former allies. This is also the same Saudis who had been at war with the Zaydi Emirate in the 1930s, annexing three provinces (Assir, Najran and Jizan),

This is what I found strange. Why did the Saudis support the Shia Imam at the time....to the extent of opposing the Egyptians who had sent in 60,000 troops into battle?

bhalluka · Post by **bhalluka** » 02 Apr 2015 22:38

And this one is also very interesting.

http://pando.com/2015/03/30/the-war-ner ... of-dammaj/

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 02 Apr 2015 22:44

nachiket wrote:
A_Gupta wrote: This is what I found strange. Why did the Saudis support the Shia Imam at the time....to the extent of opposing the Egyptians who had sent in 60,000 troops into battle?

Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Yemen_Civil_War

1962:

Saudi Arabia, fearing Nasserist encroachment, moved troops along its border with Yemen, as the Jordanian monarch dispatched his Army chief of staff for discussions with al-Badr's uncle, Prince Hassan. Between October 2–8 four Saudi cargo planes left Saudi Arabia loaded with arms and military material for Yemeni royalist tribesmen; however, the pilots defected to Aswan..... The Saudis argued that Nasser wanted their oil fields and was hoping to use Yemen as a springboard for revolt in the rest of the Arabian peninsula. King Hussein of Jordan was also convinced that Nasser's target was Saudi Arabia's oil, and that if the Saudis went, he would be next....

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 02 Apr 2015 22:45

^^Thanks A_Gupta. So the SHia-Sunni divide vanishes even for the Wahhabi's when their oil is threatened.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 02 Apr 2015 23:19

For the record, The Plight of the Yazidis

The main reason the Yazidis have slipped below the media radar is because they apparently believe President Obama sufficiently addressed the problem last August, when he announced airstrikes aimed at a twofold purpose: protecting U.S. personnel stationed in Erbil, and saving those Yazidis trapped in around Sinjar without food or water.
..
..by October, with U.S. attention diverted elsewhere and airstrikes dwindling, ISIS surrounded Mount Sinjar again. More than 10,000 Yazidis were once again trapped, and ISIS reprised its bloody rampage, capturing one mountain village after another, killing the men and selling the women and children into slavery.
..
Furthermore, the humanitarian airdrops were also halted. Iraqi helicopters were employed to pick up the slack, but they are old and fly only once or twice a week..
..
Elias also illuminated another facet of the problem. “Most of the ISIS members are from the towns around ISIS,” he said. “They were our neighbors. We lived with them for hundreds of years. Now all of a sudden they are ISIS. They joined ISIS.”

The animus directed towards the Yazidis spans centuries. “To this day, many Muslims consider them to be devil worshipers,”
..
Nonetheless, beginning around the late 16th and early 17th centuries, accusations of devil-worship arose because Muslims believe the story of Tawwus Melek resembles the Qur’an’s Shaytan, a rebellious “djinn” (Muslim spirit) who leads men away from goodness.
..
The plight of those in the aforementioned refugee camps has been largely ignored as well.
..
After capture, the Yazidi women and children were then divided according to Sharia [Islamic law] amongst the fighters of Islamic State who participated in the Sinjar operations…Before Satan sows doubt among the weak-minded and weak-hearted, remember that enslaving the kuffa [infidels] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly-established aspect of Sharia
..
The Yazidis blame several entities for their current predicamen,t including an Iraqi government that has never sufficiently protected them, Kurdish forces who abandoned the fight for Sinjar last August—and an Obama administration whose lack of continuity has given ISIS the impression they can exterminate Yazidis with impunity.
..
No doubt. In the meantime, hundreds of Yazidi women abducted by ISIS remain unaccounted for, children in refugee camps freeze to death, and the Peshmerga remain without the necessary firepower to limit ISIS’s gain, much less defeat them.

Notice how Satan is projected either on non-believers or to supress 'doubts' when attacking non-believers.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Apr 2015 07:06

the toll in the kenyan university attack has crossed 150+

a proper bloodbath.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 03 Apr 2015 07:14

It is almost (or is it greater than) double the number of deaths in the Nairobi mall attack. Heart goes out to the Kenyans. By the way muslims were separated from xtians and were let go. Kenya has a sizable PIO hindu population. I am hoping against hope that they were spared.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Apr 2015 10:06

there is actually a shia leader in iraq named Abu-Mahdi Al-Mohandess ..... could be some ancient emigrant from Gujarat! if mohandess is a form of mohandas

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 03 Apr 2015 11:12

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security ... take-video

As I have mentioned earlier, its about resource (mis)allocation and crisis. This is a brilliant read.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 03 Apr 2015 11:33

I am very sure that many of the war planes would be flown by paki pilots. saudi backsides are too precious to risk

US to refuel Saudi-led aircraft in Yemen war

US to refuel Saudi-led aircraft in Yemen war

5 hours ago

Washington (AFP) - The United States will provide aerial refueling for a Saudi-led campaign in Yemen but is not passing on precise information for air raids, a senior military official said Thursday.

The US military's Central Command (CENTCOM) has been given the green light to deploy refueling tankers for the Saudis and their Gulf partners in the operation, though the refueling will take place outside of Yemen's airspace, the official told reporters.

"We have given CENTCOM the authority to do tanking," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Officials had said previously Washington was considering offering refueling assistance as well as airborne early warning and control aircraft (AWACs).

The Saudis were expected to reimburse Washington for the refueling flights, which have not yet started, officials said.

President Barack Obama's administration had earlier promised intelligence and logistical support for the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen, where Iran-backed Huthi rebels have advanced deep into the southern city of Aden.

The United States was delivering intelligence from surveillance satellites and aircraft to help the Saudis monitor their border and to track the location of Huthi rebel forces as they push south, the official said.

The intelligence was helping create "a battlefield picture" of where the Huthis were deployed and to enable the Saudi-led aircraft to avoid causing civilian casualties, the official said.

"We're helping the Saudis understand what's happening on their border," the official said. "They're looking for evidence of any Huthi ground incursions."

The Huthis are "poised above Aden and we're trying to help the Saudis build a picture of that," the official said.

"But we're not providing them with targeting information."

Rights groups have voiced dismay at accounts of civilian casualties from the air raids. Dozens were killed in an air strike on a camp for displaced people and in a raid that struck a dairy.

Officials in Washington insist the United States is not relaying coordinates for particular strikes but only broader intelligence.

- No imminent invasion -

Although the Saudis had reinforced their border, they did not appear on the verge of a ground invasion of Yemen, the official said.

"I don't think they're going to do that. They're arraying their forces along their border to prevent a Huthi incursion," he said.

"They're postured defensively."

The official's comments came as Saudi Arabia announced its first casualties since starting the air offensive, with one soldier killed and 10 more wounded by gunfire from across the Yemeni border.

The Saudi-led coalition's campaign, dubbed Operation Decisive Storm, was launched a week ago against positions held by Shiite rebels and their allies across the country.

As violence mounted in Yemen, it was possible Iran would "seek to establish an air bridge and a maritime bridge to support the Huthis," the official said, citing Tehran's links to the rebels.

The Saudis recognize the need to stop the flow of weapons into Yemen, the official said, "but they haven't figured out what to do about that yet."

Before the latest chaos erupted, Yemen had been a crucial US ally in the fight against Al-Qaeda, enabling the Americans to conduct drone strikes on its territory against militants.

The collapse of the government in Yemen in the face of the Huthi rebels' advance forced the United States to close its embassy and withdraw US special operations forces that were helping Yemeni government forces battle Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).

As a result of the US pull out from Yemen, "our capability is diminished" against AQAP, the official said.

US intelligence agencies view AQAP as the most dangerous branch of Al-Qaeda, as the group has attempted to blow up airliners bound for the United States.

However, the threat posed by AQAP has not increased due to the crisis in Yemen because the group now is focused on countering its Huthi adversaries, the official said.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 03 Apr 2015 11:38

Approved by Nobel Peace prize winner, pissing on the scam run by Northern Europeans which had the rest of the world in awe through slavish media.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Apr 2015 12:03

around 350 AQ have been freed from a prison and have moved on.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Apr 2015 12:37

MEast expert,Robert Fisk has this nightmarish scenario evolving if the Saudis lose the battle in Yemen...enter the Pakis ,"adding fire to the oil"!

Robert Fisk
Thursday 2 April 2015
Yemen crisis: What will Saudi Arabia do when – not if – things go wrong in their war with the Shia Houthi rebels?
They might ask the Pakistanis to send part of their vast army into the cauldron - but that would not be adding oil to the fire. It would be adding fire to the oil

The depth of the sectarian war unleashed in Yemen shows itself in almost every Gulf Arab official statement and in the official press.

The Saudis take it as read that Iranian forces are actually present in Yemen to assist the Shia Houthis. There are Hezbollah fighters from Lebanon with the Houthis. Iran is itself behind the Houthi uprising. One Kuwaiti journalist calls the Houthi rebels “rats”. As usual in Arab wars, real evidence has gone out of the window.

Another journalist, the editor-in-chief of the Kuwaiti Arab Times, Ahmed al-Jarallah, concluded a political tribute to King Salman of Saudi Arabia with the observation that “leaders of the (Saudi) coalition for virtue and stability in Yemen and the region made their point through their offensive against the tunnel and vice of conspiracy where the rats of extremism, enmity and division incubate”.

“Rats” and “incubation” – that’s the kind of language sectarian wars also produce. No-one in the wealthy Gulf states has asked if Saudi Arabia is entering the Yemen war simply because it does not want another Shia state on its border – after the Americans “liberated” Iraq and installed a Shia government in Baghdad. Saudi generals talk of massive casualties among the Houthis – they still say they have not killed civilians, even though they use the tired phrase “collateral damage” in their denials. No-one challenges the boasts of its victory – or dares to mention that this extraordinary coalition is a Sunni force fighting Shia.

Read more: • Aden's central districts fall despite Saudi air campaign

At a Syrian refugee conference in Kuwait this week, the Saudis were lauded for their generosity in pledging $60m for homeless and destitute Syrians out of a total of $3.8bn of promised aid world wide. No-one was ungenerous enough to mention that the Saudis bought $67bn worth of weapons from the US in 2011-12.

A Houthi fighter stands guard as he secures the site of a demonstration by fellow Houthis (Reuters/Khaled Abdullah) A Houthi fighter stands guard as he secures the site of a demonstration by fellow Houthis (Reuters/Khaled Abdullah)
With that kind of money you might be able to buy up most of the protagonists in the Syrian war and get them to agree on a ceasefire. But this is the figure that makes sense of the Yemen war.

That, and the fact that Pakistan is part of this extraordinary coalition. Pakistan is a nuclear power – “Saudi Arabia’s nuclear bomb outside Saudi Arabia”, as one conference delegate bleakly put it in Kuwait.

There are 8,000 Pakistani troops based in the Saudi kingdom. And Pakistan is one of the most corrupt and unstable nations in South-west Asia. Bringing Pakistan – widely believed to have shipped second-hand weapons to anti-government rebels in Syria via Saudi Arabia – into the Yemen conflict is not adding oil to the fire. It’s adding fire to the oil.

Iran has maintained a diplomatic silence. When Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal accused Iran of supporting the destabilisation of Yemen, the Iranian deputy foreign minister, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian warned that the Saudi attack was a “strategic mistake”, a comparatively mild reaction.

Perhaps that is what you expected to hear when the Iranian minister’s nation was still trying to persuade the Americans to lift sanctions against Tehran. Or perhaps he actually meant what he said, which means that the Saudis may find it to have been easier starting a war in Yemen than ending one.

But outside the Gulf, there are sectarian Sunni-Shia conflicts in Iraq, Syria, even marginally in Lebanon.

A Yemeni boy inspects his family's house, which was destroyed by an airstrike allegedly carried out by a Saudi-led coalition against a Houthi rebels in Sanaía, Yemen (Yahya Arhab/EPA) A Yemeni boy inspects his family's house, which was destroyed by an airstrike allegedly carried out by a Saudi-led coalition against a Houthi rebels in Sanaía, Yemen (Yahya Arhab/EPA)
The leader of the Lebanese Shia Hezbollah movement, Hassan Nasrallah, scored a point in his own country when he asked why the Saudis were prepared to fight the Houthis with their huge forces but had never raised the sword to fight for the Palestinians.

Saudis are being told to regard their country’s struggle as a decision even more important than Saudi Arabia’s appeal to the US to send troops to the land of the Two Holy Mosques in 1990 – a view Osama bin Laden might have disagreed with.

What is less clear, however, is where Washington stands amid all this rhetorical froth in the Gulf and real dead bodies in Yemen. There have been reports in the Arab states that US drone attacks have been made as part of the coalition’s battle in Yemen, that American intelligence has been pin-pointing targets for the Saudis (with the usual civilian casualties). There was a time when America’s war in Yemen seemed to be just part of the whole War on Terror fandango throughout the Middle East. Not any more.

And what of Israel? In Kuwait, Arabs privately agreed that Saudi fears of Iran’s nuclear potential suited Israel very well – although there has been no evidence in the Gulf that Israel heartily supported the Saudis to the point of sending them a message of approval over the Yemen assault.

But with the US an ally of both countries, this would be unnecessary. What we now have to learn is what the Saudis will do when – not if – things go wrong.

Ask the Pakistanis to send part of their vast army into the cauldron? Or ask their Egyptian allies to earn their pocket money from Riyadh by sending their soldiers to the land which the greatest of all Egyptian presidents once retreated from with deep regret: a man called Gamel Abdul Nasser.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 03 Apr 2015 12:39

Isnt there we should also be talking about the other side of the same coin: Iran deal got done. I expected it to be done eventually. Interesting.

http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/upload ... usanne.pdf

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 03 Apr 2015 13:02

http://world.einnews.com/article/258033 ... Wae6qjS_s9

FTA: With Yemen now sliding towards total chaos there is also the risk that al-Qaeda and Islamic State will profit from the confusion to seize more territory, set up more camps, attract more recruits from Europe and the Middle East, and plan more international attacks.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Apr 2015 13:07

Yes! Great achievement. It certainly reduces tensions,oil prices have flattened as a result,and one seriously wonders whether the attempt to destroy Yemen,sabotage the Iran N-deal is an attempt by the oily "Lootocracies" to fatten their pockets and infinite appetite for filthy lucre at global expense.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/a ... -agreement

Iran nuclear deal: negotiators announce 'framework' agreement
EU foreign policy chief and Iranian foreign minister hail ‘decisive step’ in Switzerland after 18 months of intensive bargaining

Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, and US secretary of state John Kerry address the media in Lausanne. Source: Reuters

Julian Borger in Lausanne and Paul Lewis in Washington
Friday 3 April 2015 00.46 BST Last modified on Friday 3 April 2015

Iran has promised to make drastic cuts to its nuclear programme in return for the gradual lifting of sanctions as part of a historic breakthrough in Lausanne that could end a 13-year nuclear standoff.

The “political understanding”, announced on Thursday night in the Swiss city’s technical university, followed 18 months of intensive bargaining, culminating in an eight-day period of near-continuous talks that went on long into the night, and on the last night continued all the way through until dawn.

In a joint statement, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, and the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, hailed what they called a “decisive step” after more than a decade of work.

Speaking afterwards, Zarif said the accord showed “our programme is exclusively peaceful, has always been and always will remain exclusively peaceful”, while not hindering the country’s pursuit of atomic energy for civilian purposes.

Speaking at the White House, Barack Obama said that if fully implemented, the agreement would “cut off every pathway that Iran could take to develop a nuclear weapon”.

As news of the deal reached Tehran, people took to the streets to celebrate, looking forward to the prospect of life without sanctions.

In Washington, meanwhile, there was a clear sign of the battle to come over the agreement which Republicans have vowed to overturn. Senator Mark Kirk, who is promoting fresh sanctions against Iran, declared that former British prime minister Neville Chamberlain “got a better deal from Adolf Hitler” at Munich.

In his remarks in Lausanne, Kerry issued a riposte to rightwing critics of the accord.

“Throughout history, diplomacy has been necessary to prevent wars and to define international boundaries, to design institutions, and to develop global norms,” Kerry said.

“Simply demanding that Iran capitulate makes a nice soundbite, but it’s not a policy. It is not a realistic plan ... The test is whether or not it will leave the world safer or more secure than it would be without this agreement. And there can be no question that the comprehensive plan that we are moving toward will more than pass that test.”

Iran nuclear talks: Obama hails 'historic' agreement as Iranians celebrate — live updates
‘Key parameters’ for nuclear deal with Iran reached as EU and US agree to terminate economic sanctions

Obama on Iran nuclear deal: it is our best option by far. Source: Reuters

The US president is expected to face intense opposition on Capitol Hill, particularly from Republicans, who are determined to use their control of both chambers of the legislature to undermine an agreement they believe is soft on Tehran.

Obama acknowledged there would be “a robust debate in the weeks and months to come” but insisted the agreement was both the most peaceful and effective method to ensure Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. “If we can get this done, and Iran follows through on the framework that our negotiators agreed to, we will be able to resolve one of the greatest threats to our security, and to do so peacefully.

The declaration of a framework deal is both preliminary and partial. It does not cover all the issues in dispute and is intended to be only a precursor to a full, comprehensive and detailed agreement due to be completed by the end of June. Before then, the understanding must survive attack from hardliners in Iran and the US.

But the joint statement and the details published in Lausanne represent a set of basic compromises that had eluded negotiators for many years. Iran will cut its nuclear infrastructure to the point that western governments are satisfied it would take a year to “breakout” and build a bomb, if Tehran chose to follow that path.

At the same time, Iran will open itself up to a level of monitoring and scrutiny of its nuclear programme that is likely to unparalleled anywhere in the world.

When all that has been achieved, which could be in as little as six months, the overwhelming bulk of international sanctions would be lifted and Iran would re-enter the global economy.

Iranians celebrate nuclear deal: 'This will bring hope to our life'

The accord also has the potential to be a turning point in normalising Iran’s adversarial relations with the west, which have been a constant in world affairs since the Islamic revolution of 1979.

“This could be one of the most important diplomatic achievements in a generation or more,” said Ali Vaez, an Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group.

The UK foreign secretary, Philip Hammond, said: “This is well beyond what many of us thought possible even 18 months ago.”

Hammond said that Iran would face stringent monitoring of its programme.

“There is a very rigorous transparency and inspection regime with access for international inspectors on a daily basis, high-tech surveillance of all the facilities, TV cameras, electronic seals on equipment, so we know remotely if any equipment has been moved,” he said.

But Israel dismissed the deal, and said it would continue to prevent a “bad” final agreement.

Strategic affairs minister Yuval Steinitz said in a statement after the announcements in Switzerland: “The smiles in Lausanne are detached from wretched reality in which Iran refuses to make any concessions on the nuclear issue and continues to threaten Israel and all other countries in the Middle East.”

Obama spoke to Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, who told him that a final deal based on the agreement “would threaten the survival of Israel”.

Among the main points of the understanding unveiled in Lausanne are:
Iran’s infrastructure for uranium enrichment will be reduced by more than two thirds, from 19,000 installed centrifuges, to 6,104, of which only 5,060 will be used for uranium enrichment, for a period of 10 years.

Iran’s stockpile of low-enriched uranium will be reduced by 98% to 300kg for a period of 15 years.
Iran’s heavy water reactor will be redesigned so it produces only tiny amounts of plutonium.
Iran’s underground enrichment plant at Fordow will be turned into a research centre for medical and scientific work.
Iran will be open to enhanced inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency for 20 years.

The first major test of the understanding will come in the next few days when Kerry is expected to present the details to a closed session of the Senate foreign relations committee,before a vote on a bill that would give Congress the power to accept or reject any nuclear agreement and another that would impose new sanctions.

Zarif, Kerry’s opposite number at the talks, is expected to return to Tehran to a hero’s welcome from a public desperate to escape the shackles of sanctions, but he has frequently warned his fellow negotiators that he will face a backlash from hardliners opposed to dismantling any of Iran’s prized nuclear infrastructure.

Kazem Sadjadpour, an Iranian university professor, said on state TV: “I feel very proud as an Iranian … This is a turning point in Iran’s history of diplomacy. “This is a night of mourning for Netanyahu and his warmongering allies in the US congress.”

The nuclear standoff with Iran has been a threat to global security and non-proliferation for well over a decade since a uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and a heavy water production plant at Arak were exposed in 2002 by an opposition group, most probably using Israeli intelligence.

Negotiations began in 2003 with European states in which Iran offered to limit its capacity to 3,000 centrifuges if its right to enrichment was recognised. The deal collapsed by 2005 and there was no sign of compromise for the next eight years as the international community ratcheted up sanctions and Iran responded defiantly by expanding its nuclear programme, moving from production of low-enriched uranium or 20%-enriched uranium, a major step towards the capacity to make weapons-grade fissile material.

The confrontation continued to escalate until 2013 and the election of a pragmatist president in Iran, Hassan Rouhani, who acted swiftly to establish lines of communication with the White House and between Kerry and Zarif. An interim deal was agreed in November 2013 that halted production of 20%-enriched uranium and eliminated Iran’s stockpile of the material in return for access to $700m a month of its assets frozen around the world.

The interim deal, known as the joint plan of action, bought time for a comprehensive agreement which was initially intended to be completed by July last year. The negotiators gave themselves another four months until November, and then after marathon talks in Vienna, it was postponed again, setting 30 June as the new deadline.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 03 Apr 2015 15:36

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer273/breakdo ... initiative

This is the other bit. Quite informative and detailed

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Apr 2015 18:40

IRAN just signed its death warrant today.

the bar to lifting sanctions will keep getting shifted.

population will get increasingly angry and frustrated as the promised benefits do not come.

a colour revolution will start, followed by armed rebellion

Libya all over again.

they need to explode a crude North korean style N-device and then demand a price for staying off bigger things.

look at noko, koi kuch ukhar nahi paya and Kim is busy scouting for his next set of concubines....well fed and happy.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 03 Apr 2015 18:49

Left to themselves, without external assistance, KSA would collapse quickly just based on an assessment of their armed forces in the face of a determined attack by the Houthis.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Apr 2015 18:51

GD, I think Ombaba will demand nook transparency from Israel as pro quid quo. Watch.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 03 Apr 2015 18:54

Singha wrote:there is actually a shia leader in iraq named Abu-Mahdi Al-Mohandess ..... could be some ancient emigrant from Gujarat! if mohandess is a form of mohandas

Mohandees in Arabic is 'Engineer'. This guy's eldest son is probably some sort of engineer.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 03 Apr 2015 21:07

ramana wrote:GD, I think Ombaba will demand nook transparency from Israel as pro quid quo. Watch.

Not necessarily Israel (that might be a bridge too far given current US political climate). But definitely Saudi Arabia.

The most amazing thing in the Robert Fisk article posted above is the clear admission that the Paki "pindigenous" bum is actually a Saudi bum, bought and paid for. We have known this on BRF forever, but can you seriously imagine Amriki Non-Proliferation Eggjpurts like Fisk, Krap-on, etc. openly saying such a thing even 2-3 years ago?

Another thing to note is how Obama has completely hung the Saudis out to dry with the Iran deal.

To explain: as we all know, the oil prices have been very low for the last several months. This was a product of US machinations and happy (for the US) circumstances. The main factors cited are:
(1) Increased US and Canadian oil production via fracking, etc.
(2) Increased US control over some crucial West Asian/North African supply centers like Libya despite the ongoing turmoil there
(3) Decreased demand from EU and especially from China as their economies slow down
(4) MOST importantly: KSA/GCC willingness to keep oil prices LOW.

Of course KSA/GCC agreed to keep oil prices low as a quid-pro-quo for US help to their own machinations: destabilizing Syria, with a view to disrupting the proposed Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline to EU. This served the US in many other ways. Oil-producing foes like Russia, Iran, and Venezuela could be made to suffer economically as oil prices dropped.

All worked out well for the US. Syria hasn't worked out so well for KSA/GCC because at some point, US interest in changing the Assad regime flagged and fell by the wayside. American atrocity-lit factories began to focus 100% on ISIS, a KSA/GCC proxy, and no longer on Assad's "barrel bombs" or "chemical weapons use".

But that's not all. What happens now that there is an Iran-US Nuclear Deal?

1) Sanctions on Iran will ease.
2) Oil prices still remain low, largely because the KSA/GCC was stupid enough to go along with the US strategy and not curtail supply.
3) Iranian oil now comes on the market.
4) KSA is screwed either way.
*If KSA/GCC now decides to cut supply and raise oil prices, Iran also benefits because it also stands to get more money for its now-freely-available oil.
*If KSA/GCC continues with the program of keeping oil prices low, they are now competing with a large influx of Iranian oil into a market where returns are low.

On top of this the voluble admissions by Fisk-type NonProl wallahs that KSA contributed to Paki proliferation are the usual warning sign that US establishment recognizes the instance of proliferation, and therefore has not ruled out non-proliferation sanctions against KSA!

To me the big picture here is that KSA has become a Paki-ishtyle used c0ndom. A very instructive lesson on how US foreign policy works to exploit multilateral conflict situations.

Interesting times ahead.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 03 Apr 2015 21:37

Kurds look well set to get aid on a shah of iran lavish scale.

But a Republican potus could reverse obama ksa policy. Houses of bush and saud are like kin.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 03 Apr 2015 21:45

>>Houses of bush and saud are like kin.

That they are, and yet it was GWB who wrested power from a Sunni minority in Iraq (Saddam) and handed it over to the Shias. That has resulted in a more equitable balance of power between the Sunnis and Shias in the region. This agreement IMO is about cementing that balance of power status quo so that the Sunnis and Shias will in perpetutity be fighting each other. KSA has the bomb by proxy via Pakistan. Iran will breakout if it has to, in the meantime the lifting of sanctions via this agreement will strengthen its economic position. The Russians and Chinese supported this agreement because that strengthens their proxy in the region, but the Iranians IMO have their own mind and will do exactly what promotes their own national interest. The process of exporting the Iranian revolution has not ended. Wonder how Israel will handle this? And KSA?

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 03 Apr 2015 21:54

SSridhar wrote:Left to themselves, without external assistance, KSA would collapse quickly just based on an assessment of their armed forces in the face of a determined attack by the Houthis.

An off-the-wall scenario of unintended consequences : al qaeda fighters who just escaped from Yemeni prison thanks to Saudi bombing become the nucleus of ISIS in Yemen; after disposing of or holding off the ill-supplied Houthis, ISIS targets the corrupt and hedonistic House of Saud next door.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 03 Apr 2015 21:57

Singha wrote:IRAN just signed its death warrant today.

the bar to lifting sanctions will keep getting shifted.

population will get increasingly angry and frustrated as the promised benefits do not come.

a colour revolution will start, followed by armed rebellion

Libya all over again.

they need to explode a crude North korean style N-device and then demand a price for staying off bigger things.

look at noko, koi kuch ukhar nahi paya and Kim is busy scouting for his next set of concubines....well fed and happy.

I think there are many differences between Iran and Libya that make your scenario unlikely.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 03 Apr 2015 22:07

KLNM,

Even though Singha saars scenario is a long shot, I do think Iran just became US/West's next *****. Islamist divisions in Iran will now be amplified by the usual "NGO style" front end leading to a weakening of the state apparatus.

Atrocity literature charlatan gang will infest Iran the moment they open up a little more.

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 03 Apr 2015 22:14

I think Singha's POV that Iran is basically screwed is sound, not least because this current rapprochment seems largely tactical, as the US plays both sides in the shia-sunni bloodletting. If this rapprochment is just tactical then it means that there will be no support for it in Iran internally (and certainly not from the clerics council) that can only mean the rise of another Ahmedinejad type leader in a future election and all of these new sanctions kicking in -- the question is whether Iran will have increased its ability to be unaffected by US sanctions when they come into effect down the line.

If the KSA Sunnis openly declare pakistan's nukes as their sunni bomb, and Israel's open secret is made more open, then Iran will be pressed to respond. This treaty seems to say that Iran cannot take any steps for its survival against the sunni bomb -- I fail to see why they would consider than an acceptable choice at that time, with the treaty with the US blocking all other choices. Again, if this is a tactical move, it measn that Iran needs some breathing space to get its affairs in order until the eventual inevitable withdrawal from this treaty.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 03 Apr 2015 22:42

I would not underestimate the Iranians, let alone write them off. They've never been amenable puppets, unlike the peninsular Arabs. Even the Pahlavi poodledom (between Mossadegh and Khomeini) was a mere 26 years... and even that was much more problematic for the US than any Arab proxy ruler, especially the KSA/GCC types had ever been. In fact Reza Pehlavi was finally ditched by DC and London because he had too many ambitions that diverged from the Western agenda.

Iran is a civilization-state; like EVERY civilization-state (Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq) in West Asia/North Africa it will prove hard for the US to contain or co-opt for very long at a time. As opposed to the nouveau-riche-goatherder states in the region.

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 03 Apr 2015 22:51

Rudradev, you are correct re: Iran, and I was saying as much in my email. Let me qualify how I agree with Singha's "screwed" prognosis here. Iranians are no pushovers and will have far more ambitious agendas and capabilities than the idiots in KSA.

Specifically, "Iran is screwed if they adhere to this new treaty with the US" since the possibility of the future throwing up events that make this treaty a hinderance to Iran's ambitions is pretty much a certainty, especially given how the Israel/KSA nuclear bomb capabilities are set in stone, and there is a lot of mutual hostility there requiring a deterrent for long-term stability. I would think that the Iranians are well aware of all this, which then begs the question as to why they signed up this treaty at this point, and all the indicators point to it being a tactical move -- the split between Russia and the US in recent years provides Iran a chance to diversify its risks so that they are not affected by any future sanctions.