Iran

Monday

Peter Hoskin

Iran and oil are still on the agenda

For all the talk about Greece and France and the Eurozone, it’s telling just how much our politicians are focusing on Iran. Indeed, some of the most concrete political settlements of the past few days have concerned that turbulent state. On Friday, the US Congress approved a Bill which included the blunt reminder that, ‘It shall be the policy of the United States to take all necessary measures, including military action if required, to prevent Iran from threatening the United States, its allies or Iran’s neighbours with a nuclear weapon.’ And the G8 subsequently put out a statement about oil reserves that clearly had Iran in mind. ‘Looking ahead to

Monday

James Forsyth

Encouraging signs from talks with Iran

The weekend’s six power talks with the Iranians about their nuclear programme were more fruitful than many, including I, expected. It seems that the EU sanctions on Iranian oil and gas, which are due to come into force in July, have concentrated minds in Tehran. However, we won’t know whether the Iranians are just playing for time again until the next set of talks in Baghdad on the May 23. These six power talks are an imperfect vehicle in that the Russians and the Chinese take a far softer line than the French, British, Germans and Americans. But as James Blitz blogs over at the FT, one of the most

Friday

Douglas Murray

Behind Galloway’s grin

George Galloway has tragically demonstrated that sectarian politics are now alive and well in Britain.  The other week Ken Livingstone appeared at a London mosque and promised to make London a ‘beacon of Islam’ and last week went on to dismiss Jews as unlikely to vote Labour because they are ‘rich’. Now we see Galloway flying in to one of the country’s most divided areas to sweep the Labour party aside in what he has termed ‘a Bradford spring.’ Much can — and should — be said about this depressing, and predictable, turn of events.  But for now I’d just like to make two quick observations. The first regards the

Monday

Jonathan Jones

Obama reiterates his commitment to a nuke-free future

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajuq5u3IoSQ As leaders from 53 nations gather in Seoul for the second Nuclear Security Summit, President Obama spoke of his ‘vision of a world without nuclear weapons’. It’s a vision he described during his 2008 campaign, and which was later the focus of his 2009 speech in Prague. Today, as then, he talked about the ‘obligation’ he feels to act on this in strikingly personal terms: ‘I say it as a father, who wants my two young daughters to grow up in a world where everything they know and love can’t be instantly wiped out.’ Obama detailed his efforts to reduce America’s arsenal, to get other countries to reduce theirs, and

Thursday

Alex Massie

Today in Stupidity: Who Lost Syria?

Perhaps I should apologise to Leon Wieseltier? His recent column is not a patch on Jennifer Rubin’s latest screed which may be the most stupid and contemptible thing I’ve yet read today. Ms Rubin peers at Barack Obama’s Syrian policy and does not like what she sees: Not unlike the Green Revolution in 2009, the president nearly three years later is willing to allow an opportunity — to undermine Iran, support democracy, reassert U.S. leadership — slip away. Every now and then the president talks a good game on human rights, but his heart is never in it. In this case, even when coupled with an obvious and compelling national

Alex Massie Alex Massie

War Games: Syria & Iran Edition

The past is always a different, better place and never more so than when commentators dip into American history to salvage some justification for their favoured approach to any contemporary policy dilemma. Thus Leon Wieseltier has a point when he suggests Rachel Maddow’s view that “disincentives to war” were “deliberately built into” the “American system of government” is really only proof that “originalism is just the search for a convenient past, a political sport played with key words”. A shame, then, that he buttresses his argument with copious references to Thomas Jefferson! In truth, those disincentives withered with Andrew Jackson. But how many military interventions can one man countenance at

Thursday

Peter Hoskin

Will Israel strike?

While we’re on the subject of conflict in the Middle East, it’s worth pointing out the cover story to this week’s edition of the magazine. It’s by the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, and it deals with the dangerous war of words currently being waged over Iran. Will it tip over into real war? In the eye-catching conclusion to his article, Goldberg suggests so: ‘I thought, before the Netanyahu-Obama summit, that the meeting would delay premature action by Israel against Iran. I believe now that I was mistaken. My sense is that Netanyahu feels the press of history and may well strike at Iran in the coming months. The clues are increasingly

Freddy Gray Freddy Gray

McCain’s on the warpath (again)

Senator John McCain was on the radio again this morning, urging us to intervene on behalf of Syria’s rebels. ‘It’s not a fair fight,’ he said, as if that were a good reason to wade in. McCain, a former prisoner of war, is to humanitarian intervention what Mother Teresa was to helping the sick. He never misses a chance to promote a good scrap in the name of freedom and democracy. He cheered on western involvement in the wars in Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. In McCain’s worldview, there is no conflict or international problem which cannot be solved by the application of American military power. When running for president in 2008, he

Saturday

Charles Glass

Man with a mission | 3 March 2012

He was a Persian aristocrat who struggled to make his country a democracy. Given to mood swings and sulks worthy of Achilles, Mohammed Mossadegh was born in June 1882 just a month before Britain bombarded and occupied Egypt. His formidable mother, Najm al-Saltaneh, belonged to the family of Qajar Shahs who ruled Iran from 1794 to 1925 and instilled in him a strong noblesse oblige that matured into genuine dedication to democratic and constitutional government. During his childhood, the country barely governed itself, yielding important decisions to the Russian and British empires that held it in joint subjugation. Mossadegh’s father, Mira Hedayatullah Vazir-Daftar, had been a minister of finance and

Thursday

Alex Massie

Iran Hawks Circling

At National Review, Mario Loyola offers a pretty succinct summary of the conservative (that is, American conservative) case for attacking Iran: [I]n an editorial, the Wall Street Journal makes the same points that I made on the Corner over the weekend, here and here. The only way to convince Iran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons is to convince it that the risks of pressing on are prohibitive. Almost certainly the only way to do that is to convince them that military strikes are coming if they don’t pull back. If the goal is to deter from getting the bomb in the first place, then we should be giving Iran the

Saturday

Jonathan Jones

Hague’s ‘Cold War’ warning

William Hague has gazed into his Middle Eastern crystal ball and doesn’t like what he sees. In an interview in today’s Telegraph, he says of Iran: ‘It is a crisis coming down the tracks, because they are clearly continuing their nuclear weapons programme… If they obtain nuclear weapons capability, then I think other nations across the Middle East will want to develop nuclear weapons. And so, the most serious round of nuclear proliferation since nuclear weapons were invented would have begun with all the destabilising effects in the Middle East. And the threat of a new cold war in the Middle East without necessarily all the safety mechanisms… That would

Thursday

Fraser Nelson

Our enemy’s enemy

It’s unusual for The Guardian and The Spectator to agree on anything, but Seamus Milne and our own John R Bradley are sceptical about these Syrian rebels whom we’re being invited to support. Bradley was alone in predicting the Egyptian revolution, and argues in today’s magazine that the conventional wisdom is once again wrong. Who’s backing the rebels? The Qataris, keen to depose the last secular regime in the Arab world. And the Saudis and Israelis, whose hatred of Iran eclipses all other considerations: this isn’t about the Syrian people, but about depriving the ayatollahs of an ally. Some in the West also take the view that the enemy’s enemy

Wednesday

Alex Massie

Does Iran Actually Want the Bomb?

The obvious answer to this is, Yes of course it does. Were I advising the Iranian regime I’d probably be pretty keen on developing a nuclear capability too. At the very least I should certainly want Iran’s opponents to think Iran has serious nuclear ambitions. And yet, I’d also appreciate that if Iran’s opponents really believe Iran is close to acquiring a nuclear weapon then the game enters a new and complicated phase that is dangerous for Iran too. So I might actually want Iran’s opponents to be unsure or confused and prefer it if the question of Iran’s nuclear desires remained ambiguous. That way, I might argue, Iran could

Friday

Daniel Korski

An Israeli strike on Iran?

Will they or won’t they? Most political parlour games involve a question of this kind and the one about whether Israel will strike Iran – played out regularly in Washington, London and Paris – is no exception. The last couple of days have seen more sabre-rattling than before. Israeli Vice Premier Moshe Yaalon, who heads the Strategic Affairs Ministry, and is a former commander of the Israeli military, said all of Iran’s nuclear installations are vulnerable to military strikes while the US defence secretary was quoted as saying he thought Israel was likely to bomb Iran within months. They may or may not, but it is unlikely they will communicate

Sunday

Daniel Korski

Uncertainty reigns in Syria

The Syrian situation is worsening by the day. Now the Arab League has pulled back its monitors in recognition of their failure to ease the violence. Foreign Secretary William Hague has said he is ‘deeply concerned,’ while the Gulf states are pushing for the whole mater to be referred to the UN Security Council. But the chances of a ceasefire and the start of a transition are low. The Russian government is growing tired of Bashar al-Assad but does not want to condone any kind of intervention, which they think is likely if the matter is referred to the UN Security Council. Russia still regrets backing the Libya resolution, believing

Tuesday

Daniel Korski

Would Iran block the Strait of Hormuz?

With the EU agreeing a new round of sanctions on Iran – outlawing European oil and gas purchases from Iran in six months, freezing Iran’s Central Bank and banning trade in gold and other precious metals with any state-related bodies – tensions between Iran and the West are increasing. An Iranian MP has – again – warned that Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz and the US administration has – again – said that such an action will be countered. But what would happen if Iran carried out its threat? Iran has noteworthy littoral warfare capabilities, including mines, anti-ship cruise missiles, and land-based air defence. If Iran uses these

Friday

Douglas Murray

Push off now, Press TV, and take your conspiracy theories with you

A week that began with an insane decision from the European Court of Human Rights has come to an end with a sensible decision from Ofcom. The Iranian government’s propaganda channel in London, Press TV, has just had its license to broadcast revoked. Insomniac Islamists will no longer be able to enjoy their weekly dose of programmes presented by the likes of Lauren Booth, Tariq Ramadan or Derek Conway. And of course they will now forever miss The Real Deal with George Galloway. On that show you could see such treats as Galloway interviewing ‘President’ Ahmadinejad. It is a wonderful interview, not least thanks to Galloway’s thoughtful attempt to lay out the terrain

Thursday

Daniel Korski

Dire straits

The situation in the Strait of Hormuz continues to intensify, with Defence Secretary Philip Hammond showing that, like his predecessor, he is not shy of pushing back when he gets a shove. Today he warned Iran that any attempt to block the straits, a key shipping lane, would be ‘illegal and unsuccessful’, and would be countered militarily if necessary.     In truth, any conflict over the straits would be very costly for both sides. Iran is likely to have the capacity to strike, in a shock-and-awe attack, at US and British bases in Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman. But this would be a dramatic escalation of events which would —

Tuesday

Daniel Korski

Goading in the Gulf

The year has begun with Iran and the United States circling each other in the Straits of Hormuz; like two boxers before a bout, seeing who will strike first and working out where a blow could land. The immediate cause has been Iranian manoeuvres in the Arabian Gulf, and a visit to the area by the American aircraft carrier USS John C Stennis. Iran’s army chief has said that his country will take action if a US aircraft carrier returns to the Gulf. Oil prices have shot up as a result. This could be the worst time to goad a Democratic president facing pressure from those Republicans currently trying ‘out

Friday

Daniel Korski

Will Israel bomb a near-nuclear Iran in 2012?

An Israeli strike on Iran has to be the most over-predicted event of recent years. It was meant to happen last year. And the year before that. But now there are reasons why 2012 could, indeed, be the year when Israel will find it propitious to take overt military action against Iran’s nuclear programme. (Everyone assumes that a range of covert activities, from assassinations to cyber attacks, are already ongoing). The Iranian government is moving closer to having the requisite capabilities, and can reasonably be expected to take the final steps towards nuclearisation. What better way for Tehran to distract attention from their burgeoning problems — including sanctions, economic hardship,