Iran defiant at new US sanctions

[Black Wraith]

Iran has responded defiantly to new sanctions imposed by the US targeting Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps and three state-owned banks.

The Iranian foreign ministry said the sanctions were doomed to failure.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says the measures are to "confront the threatening behaviour of the Iranians".

But both China and Russia criticised the sanctions. Russian President Vladimir Putin likened the US move to "mad people wielding razor blades".

Earlier, US Assistant Secretary of State Nicholas Burns criticised Russia for selling weapons to Iran and China for investing in the country.

He told the BBC: "It's very difficult for countries to say we're striking out on our own when they've got their own policies on the military side, aiding and abetting the Iranian government in strengthening its own military."

'Doomed to failure'

Iran's foreign ministry condemned the sanctions.


REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS
Officially the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), or Pasdaran
Formed after 1979 revolution
Loyal to clerics and counter to regular military
Estimated 125,000 troops
Includes ground forces, navy, air force, intelligence and special forces
Also has political influence: dozens of ex-guard sit as MPs
Iran President Ahmadinejad is a former member
Source: Globalsecurity.org

US turns heat up on Iran
Timeline: US-Iran relations
Send us your comments

Spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said: "The hostile American policies towards the respectable people of Iran and the country's legal institutions are contrary to international law, without value and, as in the past, doomed to failure."

The head of the Revolutionary Guards, Mohammad Ali Jaafari, said the corps was ready to defend the ideals of the revolution more than ever before.

Correspondents in Tehran say the sanctions could be very damaging for Iran as the Revolutionary Guards are thought to control a third of the country's economy and foreign firms may now be deterred from dealing with them.

Mr Putin's comment came ahead of an EU-Russia summit in Mafra, near the Portuguese capital Lisbon.

BBC Europe editor, Mark Mardell, says that behind the president's colourful language, diplomatic sources say there is a real Russian irritation, a belief that new sanctions are the wrong approach and only make Iran less likely to give up its nuclear programme.

Russia is helping Iran construct a nuclear reactor.

On Friday, China's foreign ministry said Beijing was "opposed to imposing sanctions too rashly in international relations", saying it "can only make the situation more complicated".

Western nations suspect Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons, although Tehran says its programme is purely peaceful.

Military strike

Ms Rice tried to play down any rift with Russia, saying neither wanted a nuclear-armed Iran.

"After all, Moscow is a lot closer to Iran than the United States," she said.

US Vice-President Dick Cheney
Dick Cheney is thought to be pressing for a military strike

She strongly defended the sanctions, saying: "The international community cannot just sit idly by... A nuclear weapon in the hands of the Iranian regime would be deeply destabilising in the world's most volatile region."

Mr Burns said that despite differences with both Russia and China the US still hoped that the UN Security Council would approve a third resolution imposing new sanctions this November.

The US has repeatedly accused Iran of destabilising Iraq and Afghanistan, blaming the Revolutionary Guards for supplying and training insurgents.

The BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says Condoleezza Rice continues to be committed to finding a diplomatic resolution to the crisis.

However, he says Vice-President Dick Cheney is widely believed to be pressing for a military strike on Iran before the Bush administration's term is over, and if these sanctions have no effect, Ms Rice may well have to give way to his strategy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7063188.stm

Someone should put a sanction on America to stop them from attacking another Islamic country. Palastine, Afganistan, Iraq and now Iran next will be Saudi once America has drained all the oil out of it.

[Toby]

There is also a very interesting development in Iran's foreign affairs office which is of great importance to this issue. One of the very arguments the US motivates these sanctions upon is the lack of transparency, or clarity, of the Iranian nuclear dossier, their foreign policy on the matter.

So why is it not transparent? The answer is simply that the Islamic Revolution is facing its biggest hinder in the development of Iran as a theocracy: Political disarray.

For one thing, the resignation of Ali Larijani, secretary of the national security council and Iran's chief nuclear negotiator for over the past two years, has caused a split in the current policy. He is a clear competitor with president Ahmedinejahd, and the two have clashed before on some issues, although not one nearly as tremulous as the nuclear programme - which has, according to an official poll, caused fifty percent of Ahmedinejahd's electorate to say they won't for him again.

Mr Ali Larijani's role in the UN was also rendered irrelevant when Ahmedinejahd made the first public display in which he famously claimed that frankly, there was nothing to discuss about the nuclear programme. However, his role as a pragmatic politician makes him a threat to Ahmedinejahd, and he knows that he can compete with him in the next election for office (despite his last 6% of the vote) and that if he had stayed in office, one could speculate, he would have been 'boxed in' by the president's influence on the policy of the nation as a whole.

This was the same case with for example Hitler, who Hindenburg proudly claimed to have 'boxed in' by giving him a position in power where his limited authority by Hindenburg's default superior political power would cause those in favour of Hitler to become less disillusioned when they saw his lack of ability to carry out any reforms.

Not to draw any comparisons between the two men, but this sort of political situation is very rare, and interesting to study.

The other political groups of the Iranian parliament, the conservatives for example, are divided by the different ideas of the radicals. And if they were to withdraw their support for radical MPs, they would only remain in the poor electorate still which is not keen on having another Ahmedinejahd in office (because he has failed to raise the poor's living standards contrary to what he promised).

The reformers of Iran, who used to be lead by Muhammad Khatami, former president back in 97-05, are now, more than ever, demoralised in their attempts at reforming the country. They do not have a concise plan or the leadership for how they will promote reform.

What will happen now in Iran's foreign policy is anyone's guess.

http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/8860/d4307ww0mv4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

EDIT: For great justice

[The_Unforgiven]

^ lol, love the caricature.

On topic: Why is the US concerned with Iran. They are halfway across the world, and they don't pose a threat to US security.

[hcheng02]

^ lol, love the caricature.

On topic: Why is the US concerned with Iran. They are halfway across the world, and they don't pose a threat to US security.

They do sponsor terrorists that threaten the USA. They might also sell nuclear weapons to them if they finally develop one. Furthermore, if Iran gets a nuke it might spawn a Middle East arms race, since Iran is mostly Shiite and the rest are Sunni.

[The_Unforgiven]

^ isn't that what they said about Iraq before invading it?

[Toby]

... They might also sell nuclear weapons to them if they finally develop one. Furthermore, if Iran gets a nuke it might spawn a Middle East arms race, since Iran is mostly Shiite and the rest are Sunni.

There are a million ways that deal would go so wrong that Iran would be raped both politically speaking and in military terms as both a war against the nation would be declared, and its people would be held hostage for the stupidity of a government deal.

No, don't worry. There is no nation on this earth with the exception of the despotic rule of Kim Jong-Il which would ever sell a nuclear war-head to a terrorist group. If you mean smaller nuclear weapons then it is still a clear no, because such weapons are extremely easy to identify the origin of, and the world's few nuclear powers would have no problem in pointing the finger at Iran in that sort of situation.

The only threat a nuclear Iran has is to the balance of power in the Middle East. Nuclear weapons are highly unlikely weapons of choice in the area, despite the advantage of the terrain. The mere threat might actually be a good counter-balance between Iran and Israel, although it is plausible that a nation of such similarity to former Iraq's war-mentality could accrue over time the people's consent towards using such weapons.

But, like with all other nations, that is a development of societal thinking. The interesting balance of the theocracy of Iran is that El Khamenei, despite being the supreme spiritual leader of Iran, is still in power just because of the people's respect for him. If he abuses this mutual trigger of trust, he knows what will happen. Nationwide revolts occurred in Iran when the oil prices went up in a ration-response tactic imposed by the government in fear of sanctions' effect on trade. If a nuclear weapon was considered as a legit course of action, the people would be alerted, and at this point in history, seriously pissed at whoever increases the already unfair prospect of being bombed by a foreign nation for a programme which they are not interested in the importance of.

To spin on this topic: Why do people who want to turn to less dangerous sources of for instance alternative energy not encourage Iran for going over to nuclear power? Aren't they at least trying to shift their dependency on foreign power to their own responsibility?

[niyesuH]

^ lol, love the caricature.

On topic: Why is the US concerned with Iran. They are halfway across the world, and they don't pose a threat to US security.

Israel wants it.. they have the strongest lobby in US

[Gaawa-chan]

Funny, I thought the USA wast the country with 'threatening behavior.' Silly Condi. She's all confused.

[tinhamodic]

You just know the US is preparing tactical military strikes if Iran keeps up with their nuclear program.

[Kira]

This is looking very bad. I hope that this isn't the start of WWIII.

@Toby Christ, well done for becoming a mod. When did that happen?

[Toby]

;11457693']This is looking very bad. I hope that this isn't the start of WWIII.

Actually, the closest we were was when Iran disobeyed the unanimous Security Council order issued to cease spinning the centrifuges at their nuclear plant for the third time.

Now we are quite accustomed to this "disobeying/ignoring us SC-folk /wrist".
;11457693']
@Toby Christ, well done for becoming a mod. When did that happen?

Exactly one day ago, I think. Although the message was in my inbox for a while before I noticed it. :sag

[That NOS Guy]

Exactly one day ago, I think. Although the message was in my inbox for a while before I noticed it. :sag

Eh, congrats man.

[Sexta Espada]

@ Toby: congratulations, and nice comic ya got there.

But yeah, I guess wanting to talk is threatening to someone who can't. That, and anybody would be pissed in a situation like theirs.

[Kira]

Actually, the closest we were was when Iran disobeyed the unanimous Security Council order issued to cease spinning the centrifuges at their nuclear plant for the third time.

Now we are quite accustomed to this "disobeying/ignoring us SC-folk /wrist".
Yep, Iran never listens to the security council or the UN ever it seems. I think that's because they've had sanctions imposed on them before and have survived. So, they think that they can't be hurt anymore. Of course, if the US invades (looking more and more likely), then there will be trouble, especially with the Russians lurking around.

[Kira]

We need to start dumping our nuclear waste and garbage from plane over Iran.
We can play dirty too but we are better.
I hope you're not serious about this.

[Xion]

But both China and Russia criticised the sanctions. Russian President Vladimir Putin likened the US move to "mad people wielding razor blades".

The last two countries that should be criticizing anyone else are Russia and China.

At least we have freedom in this country, more so than can be said for the virtual dictatorship in Russia and the censor-hungry, nationalistic Chinese government.

Putin is really getting on my nerves. I would like to visit Russia sometime in my life, but between Putin and the rampant corruption in the Kremlin, I do not know if I will ever get to see Red Square. :cry