SPOILER

quote:

Balad airbase in Iraq has come a long way since June 201[/sub]4, when Islamic State fighters conquered its surrounding villages. Today the base, 80 kilometers north of Baghdad, is home to a new air force academy with more than forty Iraqi pilots entering flight training. US Brigadier General Andrew A. Croft, deputy commander of air operations for the coalition in Iraq that has been fighting ISIS, is proud of that achievement, which is helping to enable Iraq to ensure its future security. In an interview with The Jerusalem Post, Croft said that air power has played a critical role in defeating ISIS, and that training the Iraqis to support their own ground forces will be essential in the country, transitioning as major combat operations against ISIS have ended.

The US-led coalition’s mission has been to work “by, with and through” the Iraqi army – meaning that the Iraqi commanders lead the way and choose their own targets and goals while the US and other coalition partners work on advising, assisting and training. All of this takes time. In June 2014 when ISIS took over a third of Iraq, it captured and massacred more than 1,500 Iraqi cadets at Camp Speicher. Many of these were air force personnel who will take time to replace. To make up for its losses, Iraq ordered 36 F-16s from the US. The first of those arrived in the summer of 2015 and Iraqi pilots took to the air again fighting ISIS. Croft arrived in May 2017 when the Iraqi army was still slogging through the battle of Mosul. Since then he has assisted the Iraqis in retaking Tal Afar City, the district of Hawija and Anbar province, defeating ISIS on the ground. “It’s a remarkable transition in such a short amount of time...over the last year [and particularly during] the last six months,” he says, of the Iraqi Air Force and the ability of Iraq’s various security forces to work together. Iraq now gathers its own intelligence from air reconnaissance, and uses unmanned drones and manned surveillance aircraft. “We are doing operations to increase effectiveness to find those ISIS remnants and move ground forces or rotary-wing assets [helicopters] to attack,” Croft says. Over the last few years Iraq has relied on contractors for a lot of its training and mechanics. But the long-term cost of contractors is difficult to sustain. Now that most of the battle against ISIS is over, the strategy is to move Iraq towards having its own training programs and decrease dependency on others. The years of war and stagnation in Iraq have resulted in a small air force. It has only two dozen recently acquired F-16s, and another two dozen Czech and Russian fighters that are decades old. It also has helicopters and transport aircraft, such as C-130s. THE COALITION is now focusing on transitioning from the anti-ISIS combat operations of last year to securing and stabilizing Iraq “as the ISF [Iraqi Security Forces] become more capable,” says Croft. One problem is that there are still pockets of ISIS control in Syria just across the border. This is all happening as Iraq prepares for nation-wide elections on May 12. “We keep an eye on eastern Syria to prevent ISIS [version] 2.0 or prevent another ISIS entity arising. [In Iraq we] protect critical infrastructure and we will assist them in doing that.” Croft describes the coalition’s strategy as fitting like a mold around core capabilities, such as training. “Then we will have a secure Iraq they can defend. They are good at this and they are survivors.” Through this security arrangement will come good governance, stability and a better economy, he says. The ability of air power to hunt down what remains of the ISIS threat in Iraq has changed greatly. Today ISIS is still capable of carrying out small terror attacks, but it has mostly melted back into rural areas, hiding in caves and stashing weapons in farm houses. The coalition and the Iraqis look for targets and do surveillance, but the mission has changed. Across the border in Syria it hasn’t changed – and the Iraqis have been paying close attention to threats at their border. In mid-April Iraqi Air Force pilots were briefed on a sensitive mission. A group of their F-16s, with coalition backup, would cross into Syria and strike at ISIS. “In this case there was an ISIS facility on the Syrian side of the border that the Iraqis struck,” says Croft. “That is important because it demonstrates the ability of Iraq to defend its borders and pursue ISIS in cross-border operations.” It was carried out with coalition assistance and coordination. “We shared intel and we had coalition fighters with the Iraqi fighters... [It] is significant that we did a coordinated effort on both sides.” The Iraqi F-16s used precision munitions; Croft says that the operation shows they are as capable as any other member of the international coalition. It bodes well for the future and the ability of the coalition to step back, as Iraq emerges from years of conflict.

quote:

On April 4, the presidents of Iran, Russia and Turkey met in Ankara to hold a trilateral summit within the framework of the Astana process to discuss the latest developments in Syria. It was the second round of high-level talks between the three heads of government after their first meeting in Russia’s Black Sea resort of Sochi on Nov. 22, in which they agreed to continue their contacts in order to facilitate the process of finding a peaceful solution to the Syrian conflict.

The second summit came as the situation on the ground in Syria has undergone significant developments over the past four months. On the one hand, Ankara’s military operation in northern Syria against Kurdish groups has resulted in the taking over of Afrin by Turkey and its local partners, with the possibility that Turkey may extend the scope of its operation further to the west still on the horizon. On the other hand, the Syrian army, with the direct help of Russia and Iran’s tacit support, has managed to gain almost full control of the strategic Damascus suburbs of eastern Ghouta.

Having been identified as standing at the two opposite ends of the Syrian conflict, Russia and Iran on the one hand and Turkey on the other showed an unprecedented level of restraint toward each other’s latest military moves in the war-torn country. While Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan made it clear that Ankara and Moscow “have no disagreements” over Turkey's Operation Olive Branch, some reports even suggested that Russia was actually helping Turkey to reach its goals in Afrin. For its part, while expressing concern over the situation in eastern Ghouta, Turkey stopped short of directly condemning the Russian-backed military moves in the area. Meanwhile, Iran apparently preferred to keep a low profile regarding both cases.

Taking into account the above-mentioned developments, one could reasonably argue that the three Astana partners have reached a meaningful level of mutual understanding of their main goals and interests in Syria. However, a deeper look at the recent trilateral summit in Ankara could provide us with a better understanding of the exact areas of agreement and disagreement between the three guarantors of the truces in Syria.

First, it seems that the three parties do not have a unified view of the exact role and status of the Astana process. While referring to the Astana format as “the only effective international initiative that has helped reduce violence across Syria,” the joint statement issued after the summit introduces the Geneva process as the ultimate format for finding “a lasting political solution to the Syrian conflict.” This is in line with the repeated insistence by Ankara and Moscow that Astana and Geneva are not competing but rather complementary formats for a Syrian settlement.

Like before, however, Iranian officials present in Ankara didn’t make any reference to Geneva, insisting solely on the role of the three Astana partners in bringing stability to Syria. “The Astana peace process and the efforts of the three countries have resulted in the best successes in the war on terrorists,” Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said during his bilateral meeting with Erdogan on April 4. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif also said upon his arrival in Ankara that the “Astana peace process has been the only successful initiative” for Syria, while criticizing “foreign governments” trying to make decisions for the Syrian people.

Mindful of the bottom line of the recent statements made by high-ranking Iranian officials, it seems that Iran is trying to introduce the Astana process as a successful example of regional cooperation without any Western presence or influence to solve regional problems and a template for regional political-security dialogue. In this vein, Iranian Defense Minister Brig. Gen. Amir Hatami, who was in Russia on April 3 to attend the Moscow International Security Conference, said “foreign plans” to enhance security in the region “would inevitably fail,” underlining that any plan made for this purpose must originate within the region. In this vein, reports suggesting that Iran had rejected the idea of French President Emanuel Macron’s presence at the recent Ankara meeting makes more sense if being considered in this context.

Second, the three leaders’ emphasis in their joint statement that they would continue cooperation to combat terrorist groups in Syria clearly shows that none of them intend to cease their military presence in the country. However, Rouhani for the first time clearly defended the idea of “drawing up and amending a new constitution” for Syria, as well as speeding up the political process. This could mean that Iran — after eyeing the current situation on the ground and in particular the recent achievements of the Syrian army — is gradually shifting its focus toward defining a role for itself in the postwar political scene of Syria, trying to have a say in shaping the new political structure in the country.

Third, while attempting not to alienate Turkey by directly condemning Ankara’s military plans in Syria, Tehran appears to become increasingly concerned about Turkey’s plans in the north of the country. In what could be considered Iran’s most explicit criticism of Operation Olive Branch, Rouhani expressed concern that the situation in Afrin might lead to the violation of Syria’s territorial integrity, asking Ankara to hand over the city to the Syrian army. In fact, this issue seems to have the potential to appear as a hurdle in the way of further development of the trilateral format.

Finally, the five principles of the “sovereignty, independence, unity, territorial integrity and nonsectarian character” of Syria, underlined by the three parties in their joint statement, might be a sign of a compromise between Iran, Russia and Turkey over the nature and structure of the future Syrian government. If the latter is truly the case, it could be argued that Moscow is no longer pursuing the idea of federalism in Syria, while Tehran and Ankara, respectively, have agreed not to seek the establishment of Alawi-dominated or Sunni-dominated governments in the country.

In the event of the above, the most probable result would be a unitary political system based on the principle of power-sharing between various ethnic and religious groups, like the models currently operating in Lebanon or Iraq. Nonetheless, whether or not this is welcomed by the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian opposition is a different issue that only time will tell.

twitter:

BuzzFeedNews twitterde op maandag 07-05-2018 om 00:33:00 Fifteen years after the US invasion, and the war against ISIS, the Iraqi capital is alive and buzzing, with bars and restaurants open til the early morning.https://t.co/o5XmxhaJV4 reageer retweet

quote:

Op maandag 7 mei 2018 01:00 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

BuzzFeedNews twitterde op maandag 07-05-2018 om 00:33:00 Fifteen years after the US invasion, and the war against ISIS, the Iraqi capital is alive and buzzing, with bars and restaurants open til the early morning.https://t.co/o5XmxhaJV4 reageer retweet

Het gaat inmiddels een stuk beter in vrij Irak.

quote:

The new US Embassy will be inaugurated in Jerusalem next week, but construction works by American, Israeli firms will continue over next 6 years; move will initially be largely symbolic, as at first only ambassador will move to capital building.

While the new American Embassy in Jerusalem is expected to be inaugurated next week, the road to the diplomatic mission actually beginning operations is still a ways off.



The current move, then, is mostly symbolic, including a changing of a sign and the move of the ambassador and his secretary, and possibly a visit from US President Donald Trump, who decided on the move to begin with.

The capital's American consulate stretches across 6,000 square meters of actual construction, with rights to up to 25,000 square meters—rights that will be realized in full over the next six years to create the new embassy complex.

In honor of the impending move, fitting works were carried out on the existing structure, including interior changes in how spaces are organized and improving security measures in entrances and fences. According to the plan, a perimeter wall more than three meters high will be built and an escape route will be paved. A basement—which has thus far remained locked—will be put to use and an opulent, high-end chamber and office will be built for the ambassador. The construction of the wall is not a declaratory move, as until work on it is completed the mission will be an embassy in name alone. Moreover, even following the festive inauguration ceremony, the US ambassador will only be able to make limited use of the complex—using it for meetings and daily activities, but not residing there permanently. In the second phase, set to be carried out over the next three years, floors will be added to the structure as well as a new building that will house embassy employees coming in from Tel Aviv. At the same time, the embassy reached out to a Jerusalem realtor to help it locate properties for rent, in order to move various other units to the capital as well.

An embassy building on the ground of the nearby Diplomat Hotel will only be built in the future, explained architect Amir Mann of the Amir Mann / Ami Shinar Architects & Planners firm. Mann served as the head of the planning team for the consulate complex.


Embassy to be planned by American firm
Some 20 planning companies and two New York firms were hired to map out the project. The American State Department usually employs selected American firms, but deviated from the norm by hiring a local Israeli team, including an Israeli contractor to carry out the work.



Unlike the consulate building, it appears the embassy structure will be planned by an American team, possibly accompanied to some extent by Israelis.


A five-storey structure was originally planned to be built on the site—which stretches over some 25 dunam in the capital's Arnona neighborhood. The building was to include a 5,000 square meter floor for the consulate, with a four-storey structure above it to serve the remainder of the US government's activities in Jerusalem.


The plan was created and approved at a record time of 14 months. However, due to budgetary limitations, the additional floors over the consular structure have yet to be completed.

A road and a kilometer-long access route were completed, however, using American funds, to allow access directly to the complex with minimal traffic in the adjacent residential neighborhood. A car park for employees and visitors was built as well.


The embassy will not replace the existing Tel Aviv consulate, which will provide passport issues and renewals and US visa services, alongside other consular services.


The aforementioned services are also provided in the existing Jerusalem structure, which is not planned to meet the entire demand of people contacting the Tel Aviv mission.


The Diplomat Hotel, which serves as a residence for elderly olim, will be demolished. The embassy will then be built in its stead, while integrating existing structures and constructing new ones both above and below ground.


Israelis residing around the ambitious project are less than pleased. The embassy is located on the Seam Zone, and locals fear for their safety and complain that the works will be carried out at an accelerated pace against the orders of local planning and construction bylaws.

Their impact on the project will nevertheless be minimal, as the government has marked the project as one of national importance. Arnona residents still appealed to the High Court of Justice against a building permit exemption given to the wall surrounding the embassy.


In its reply to the petition, the state said, "A difficulty was discovered in the Jerusalem municipality building the fence, and talks are therefore ongoing among government ministries to agree on the identity of the body that will carry out the work."


As for the project's cost, President Trump has said he received a document citing a cost of one billion dollars, but assured the American public by claiming actual costs will run in the neighborhood of a quarter of a million dollars.


MKs incensed at being shut out of embassy opening
A number of MKs protested the fact that tickets for the inauguration event had run out, leaving them out of the proceedings once again, after their exclusion from the torch lighting ceremony this past Independence Day.



Several coalition MKs contacted the US Embassy's staff and were disappointed to learn they would not be invited due to constraints of space.

Apart from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, embassy officials said, only heads of parties will be invited to the grand opening, in addition to a very limited number of ministers and other officials.


"We're the worker bees who did all of the legwork for the embassy move," lamented one MK. "It's very disappointing to be shut out of the ceremony at the moment of truth."

quote:

Israel allegedly prevented an Iranian missile attack on the north late Tuesday, but Iran has a broad strategic goal of expanding its empire and will not be easily deterred

It would be premature to celebrate what appears to have been Israel’s success in thwarting Iran’s threatened “revenge attack” on northern Israel from Syria. The Iranian missile strike intended for Tuesday night may have been prevented by means of the raid on the Kisweh base, but presumably the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is not done yet.

According to the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, at least 15 people were killed in the nighttime strike at Kisweh, of whom eight were Iranians. Which means the Iranian motivation for revenge has not dimmed; quite the reverse.

The head of the IRGC’s Al Quds Brigades, Qassam Soleimani, will try again via his various proxies in Syria to settle accounts with Israel, whether via missiles or an attack on IDF troops in the Golan like the one in January 2015.

Here’s how the Iranians may view the ongoing activities attributed to Israel in Syria: Israel will not agree to the transfer of “game-changing” weaponry to Syria for the use of Hezbollah or the IRGC — neither long-range Fateh-110 missiles nor attack drones entering Israel and impinging on its absolute air supremacy. Also on Israel’s red line list: an Iranian or Shiite/Hezbollah militia presence close to the Golan Heights border, and an Iranian air force presence.

In other words, the Iranians will have recognized that Israel’s concern is focused on an Iranian military presence. But Iran’s ambitions in Syria are not solely military in nature. Iran wants economic and political influence in an area where its main rival is Saudi Arabia. And it is making gains. While Riyadh sustains political defeats (cf the Lebanese parliamentary elections) and military defeats (cf Yemen), Iran is deepening its hold.

The Shiite crescent that Jordan’s King Abdullah began warning of a decade ago is now becoming a real monster. Iran wields growing influence in a corridor from Tehran to the sea, if not full control. Tehran will continue to win tenders to operate cellular companies, to mine phosphates, and maybe even to (indirectly) operate a naval port.

Iran attempted last year to lease land near Tartus for an Iranian port, but was turned down by Damascus, which was under intense Russian pressure. But the Iranian regime believes that anything that doesn’t work via formal channels can always be accomplished through the back door. It now plans to lease the land and operate a Mediterranean port via a private company unconnected — at least not visibly — to the Iranian government.

Tuesday night’s preventative action allegedly by Israel, and evidence of the immense capabilities of Israeli intelligence allegedly on display, may prompt Tehran’s leaders to think more carefully about their threatened retaliation — “revenge,” it is worth stressing, for an alleged Israeli raid on the T-4 air base from which Iran launched an attack drone into Israel three months ago.

Soleimani and his colleagues will have woken up on Wednesday morning with considerable unease and some pointed questions about the vulnerability of their forces in Syria to Israeli intelligence. That could lead to a change in tactics.

But make no mistake. Nothing that Iran has seen thus far, and that includes the impressive display of alleged Israeli military and intelligence capabilities inherent in the airstrikes against its forces, will alter its strategic goal of expanding its sphere of influence via an economic, political and military expansion into Syria. Iran intends to be there for the long term.

quote:

Het akkoord werd in 2015 gesloten om het nucleaire programma van Iran aan banden te leggen. Trump was vanaf het begin een tegenstander van de deal.

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 08-05-2018 om 20:52:00 Statement on the Iran Nuclear Deal: https://t.co/O3SpryCKkc reageer retweet

De Verenigde Staten trekken zich terug uit de nucleaire deal met Iran. Dat heeft president Donald Trump dinsdag bekendgemaakt tijdens een persconferentie. Eerder meldden The New York Times en persbureau AP op basis van bronnen dat het land uit het akkoord stapt.

Trump zei dat hij Teheran “economische sancties van het hoogste niveau” oplegt. De president dreigde ook landen die zaken doen met Iran met strafmaatregelen te treffen. “Iran is de grootste staatssponsor van terrorisme ter wereld”, zei de president. Trump stelde dat Iran terreurgroepen als Hezbollah, de Talibaan en Al-Qaida steunt en dat het land de afgelopen jaren “honderden Amerikaanse militairen heeft gedood”.

Trump noemde de deal “gebrekkig in de kern” en bekritiseerde dat de beperkingen die op nucleair gebied werden opgelegd aan Teheran te zwak waren. De president noemde het “een enorme fictie” dat “een moorddadig regime alleen een vreedzaam nucleair programma” zou hebben. Trump zei dat door Israël vrijgegeven documenten “sluitend bewijs” hadden gegeven dat Iran zijn beloften niet nakwam.

Volgens Trump werkt Teheran aan raketten met kernkoppen:

“Als ik deze deal intact laat, komt er snel een nucleaire wapenwedloop in het Midden-Oosten. Dan wil iedereen kernwapen zodra Iran er één heeft.”

Reactie Iran
De Iraanse staatstelevisie veroordeelde Trumps besluit na de persconferentie als “illegaal en onrechtvaardig”. Volgens de staatsmedia ondermijnt de beslissing internationale afspraken.

President Hassan Rouhani zei dat de Amerikanen nooit hun verplichtingen uit het akkoord zijn nagekomen. Hij zei dat Teheran onderdeel wil blijven van een nucleair akkoord.

Wel heeft Rouhani zijn minister van Buitenlandse Zaken de opdracht gegeven om opnieuw te gaan onderhandelen met de vijf overige landen over het voortzetten van de deal. Als die gesprekken niets opleveren zal Iran “de komende weken meer dan voorheen” uranium gaan verrijken, zo zei Rouhani. Met hoogverrijkt uranium kan Teheran een atoombom fabriceren.

De Franse president Emmanuel Macron zei dat Frankrijk, Duitsland en het Verenigd Koninkrijk de keuze van Trump betreuren. Volgens die landen komt het systeem dat moet voorkomen dat Iran kernwapens krijgt in het geding. De EU-topdiplomaat Federica Mogherini zei dat ze verwacht dat de overige vijf landen die in 2015 het akkoord sloten zich aan de afspraken zullen blijven houden.

Rusland liet weten “teleurgesteld, maar niet verrast” te zijn. Volgens Moskou zorgt het besluit ervoor dat pogingen om tot een akkoord te komen om het Noord-Koreaanse kernwapenprogramma te ontmantelen nu minder kansrijk zijn. Secretaris-generaal van de Verenigde Naties António Guterres zei “zeer bezorgd” te zijn door de beslissing en riep alle andere deelnemende landen op zich te blijven houden aan het akkoord.

Minister Stef Blok (Buitenlandse Zaken, VVD) liet dinsdagavond weten dat het besluit van Trump “slecht nieuws voor de Europese en Nederlandse veiligheid” is. Hij wil snel met de VS en binnen Europa praten “om een nieuw pad uit te stippelen en aan een oplossing te werken”. Ook SP, GroenLinks en D66 lieten zich afkeurend uit. De PVV reageerde dinsdag op Twitter als enige partij uit de Kamer positief op Trumps besluit.

Trump kwam aan het einde van de conferentie met een verrassing. De president liet weten dat minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Mike Pompeo momenteel op weg is naar Noord-Korea. Daar spreekt Pompeo met Noord-Koreaanse hoogwaardigheidsbekleders om de top tussen Trump en Kim Jong-un voor te bereiden. Ook daar zal gesproken worden over kernwapens. Nationaal Veiligheidsadviseur John Bolton zei dinsdag dat Trumps besluit een signaal afgeeft aan Noord-Korea dat “een onvolwaardig akkoord niet zal worden geaccepteerd”.

Akkoord
Het nucleaire akkoord werd in 2015 gesloten tussen Iran enerzijds en de VS, het Verenigd Koninkrijk, Frankrijk, Duitsland, Rusland en China anderzijds. Afgesproken werd dat het nucleaire programma van Iran louter civiele doelen zou dienen. Om te bewijzen dat er niet toch aan een atoombom werd gewerkt, moest Teheran 98 procent van haar voorraad verrijkt uranium opgeven en tweederde van haar centrifuges stilleggen.

Ook moest Iran inspecteurs van het Internationaal Atoomagentschap (IAEA) toelaten die moesten controleren of het land zich aan de afspraken hield. Dat is volgens IAEA steeds het geval geweest. De overige vijf ondertekenaars van de deal zijn voorstander van het in stand houden van het akkoord.

Sancties
In ruil hiervoor werden westerse sancties tegen Iran gefaseerd afgeschaft. Nu de VS zich terugtrekken uit het akkoord, zal Washington op termijn weer strafmaatregelen opleggen aan Iran. De Amerikanen zijn zelfs van plan aanvullende sancties op te leggen die voor het sluiten van de deal nog niet van kracht waren.

Dat kan ertoe leiden dat Teheran zich geheel of gedeeltelijk terugtrekt uit het akkoord. De overige vijf ondertekenaars zullen er alles aan doen om de deal te redden, desnoods zonder Amerikaanse steun. Eerder op de dag lieten Parijs, Londen en Berlijn weten nog vierkant achter het akkoord te staan.

Hoewel Trump al ruim een jaar president is, heeft hij telkens het akkoord met Iran intact gelaten. Nu was voor de Republikein de maat vol. Waarom? 17 vragen over de nucleaire deal met Iran
Kritiek
Evengoed heeft Trump van het begin af aan kritiek gehad op het akkoord, dat hij geregeld heeft beschimpt als “de slechtste deal aller tijden”. De Amerikaanse president denkt dat Iran zich niet aan de afspraken houdt, dat de looptijd van de deal te kort is en dat de belangrijkste dreigingen die van het shi’itische land uitgaan niet worden gesmoord met het huidige akkoord. Zo steunt Iran president Assad in Syrië, terreurbeweging Hezbollah in Libanon en de Houthi-rebellen in Jemen. Ook heeft Teheran de afgelopen jaren meerdere raketproeven uitgevoerd.

Trump krijgt bijval in zijn kritiek van de Israëlische premier Benjamin Netanyahu, tevens van meet af aan fel tegen de deal gekant. Volgens Netanyahu heeft Iran gelogen over zijn atoomprogramma en wordt stiekem wel degelijk gewerkt aan een kernwapen. Netanyahu zei dinsdag na de persconferentie dat hij “het besluit van Trump zeer waardeert”. Ook Saoedi-Arabië zei achter het besluit van Trump te staan.

De Europese Unie, Rusland en China stellen juist dat het akkoord voorkomt dat Iran een atoombom ontwikkelt. Volgens voorstanders van de deal zorgt het sneuvelen van het akkoord er alleen maar voor dat de Iraanse dreiging groter wordt.

De Turkse minister van Economische Zaken Nihat Zeybecki zei dinsdag dat Ankara gewoon doorgaat met het drijven van handel met Iran, ondanks Amerikaanse dreigementen om ook handelspartners met sancties te treffen. “Wij gaan hiervoor tegenover niemand verantwoording afleggen”, aldus Zeybecki. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan zei dat Trumps terugtrekking “grote instabiliteit en nieuwe conflicten” zal veroorzaken.

Kritiek
Voormalig buitenlandbeleidsadviseur Ben Rhodes, een van de architecten van het nucleaire akkoord namens de Amerikaanse president Barack Obama, reageerde kritisch op Trumps besluit. Volgens Rhodes blaast Trump een deal waar jaren aan gewerkt en over gesproken is in één keer op zonder de consequenties hiervan te overzien.

Oud-president Barack Obama, onder wiens leiding de deal tot stand kwam, liet dinsdag ook van zich horen. In een lijvige Facebookpost schrijft Obama dat de opzegging “een ernstige fout” is die de “mondiale geloofwaardigheid van Amerika zal doen eroderen”:

De Israëlische regering zei verdachte Iraanse militaire bewegingen te hebben opgemerkt in Syrië. Hierop beval Israël dat schuilkelders op de Golanhoogten in gereedheid worden gebracht. De Golanhoogten zijn een stuk Syrisch land langs de grens met Israël dat sinds de Zesdaagse Oorlog van 1967 door het Israëlische leger is bezet.

quote:

Op maandag 14 mei 2018 20:24 schreef Ryan3 het volgende:
Zijn ongeveer 50 mensen dood nu in Gaza, gekke is nergens een topic over? Niet in Nws iig.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 01:09 schreef Vallon het volgende:

[..]

Of dat aantal klopt is maar zeer de vraag en bespelen van media met een incomplete waarheidsvinding. Dat er doden zijn gevallen lijkt mij duidelijk waarbij je je onbevooroordeeld moet afvragen hoe en door welke oorzaak, elk slachtoffer is gevallen.

//

Wanneer ik anno 2018 in NL met een mes op een agent stap zal die mij - lerende wijs geworden - gaan neerschieten, ongeacht mijn drijfveren.

De gedachte dat Israëliërs zomaar iemand neer schieten omdat het kan is net zo ridicuul als te veronderstellen dat die rellende Palestijnen, alleen maar braaf wilden demonstreren met vredesterretjes in de hand. Probleem is verder ook dat die rellende mensen, geen ander doel/belang (meer) hebben en dienen dan ten faveure van hun koppige leiders, de escalatie op te zoeken.

In mijn beleving is dit gewoon een voortdurende burgeroorlog waarbij de strijdende groepen middels een hek van elkaar gescheiden zijn. Op het moment dat je te dicht op/bij/door/over het hek komt, loop je het risico om neergeschoten te worden. Daar moeilijk over doen is het verdraaien van de realiteit.

Er is ook geen waarheid meer te destilleren, hoe diep je ook graaft. De enige oplossing lijkt nog, slikken of stikken waarbij (nofi) de Palestijn maar beter kan gaan overwegen om zichzelf aan te passen aan de gegeven situatie.

Wanneer ieder aan zijn zijde van het hek blijft, zullen er geen doden (zijn ge)vallen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 09:10 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Waren de doodgeschoten Palestijnen de grens al overgestoken dan? Of mag Israël schieten op mensen die bij de grens in de buurt komen? Want dan zou dat andersom ook moeten mogen natuurlijk.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 09:00 schreef rockstah het volgende:
Het narratief is dat Israël door de "rechtse lente" in het westen zich minder geroepen voelt om terughoudend te opereren, gezien Trump Israël onvoorwaardelijk steunt en geen enkele interesse in een tweestatenoplossing heeft getoond. Ik vraag me af of we geweld van een dergelijke orde ook onder een Obama hadden gezien.

quote:

Op maandag 7 mei 2018 01:00 schreef Nintex het volgende:

twitter:

BuzzFeedNews twitterde op maandag 07-05-2018 om 00:33:00 Fifteen years after the US invasion, and the war against ISIS, the Iraqi capital is alive and buzzing, with bars and restaurants open til the early morning.https://t.co/o5XmxhaJV4 reageer retweet

Het gaat inmiddels een stuk beter in vrij Irak.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 10:29 schreef Vallon het volgende:

[..]

Je neemt de oorzaak en situatie totaal niet mee. Je stelt een vraag die redelijk lijkt en daarom negatief moet worden beantwoord.... natuurlijk mag je niet zomaar iemand neerschieten. Niets is daar echter zomaar.

quote:

Wanneer er iemand je aanwezigheid ontkent, met een mes op je afkomt en tegen je deur staat aan te trappen, ga je niet vragen of hij/zij een appeltje wil (schillen). Dat hek is niet voor niets de grens.

quote:

Het gegeven is ook dat het daar helemaal niet meer om rede gaat, die fase is al heel lang voorbij (als die er ooit al geweest is). Israël heeft daar en is aan haar zijde de "wetgevende" mogendheid wat door de Palestijnen en haar medestanders tot in het diepste van wordt verafschuwd.

De "doden" zijn heel eenvoudig te voorkomen door je te houden aan de (opgelegde?) regels. Je mag best demonstreren maar je gaat niet rellen. Probleem is natuurlijk dat je daar geen (media) aandacht (meer) bij en voor krijgt.
^{Ik snap best waarom die (veelal) jongeren gaan rellen, wanneer je geen werk, noch (irreële) uitzichten (meer) hebt en ontevreden bent, moet er een schuldige zijn en dat kan - daar - alleen maar Israël aka. het vermaledijde Westen zijn. De Palestijnen willen iets wat paradoxaal (gebleken) is.}

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 10:58 schreef rockstah het volgende:
[..]
Daar zijn gewoon regels voor, dit is officieel geen oorlogssituatie dus wanneer ongewapende protestanten en journalisten worden neergeschoten dan heb je echt wel wat uit te leggen. Vooralsnog is hun enige verklaring er een van "Oeps! we wouden ze eigenlijk alleen in de benen raken" x50.

quote:

[..]Wanneer jij echter ongevraagd een hek om het huis van je buurman heen bouwt en vervolgens gaat schieten wanneer hij protesteert spreek je toch van een andere situatie.

quote:

[..]Je kunt best stellen dat ze hun conclusie moeten trekken, maar je stelt het nu voor alsof ze daar slechts uit verveling een beetje lastig staan te doen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 09:10 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Waren de doodgeschoten Palestijnen de grens al overgestoken dan? Of mag Israël schieten op mensen die bij de grens in de buurt komen? Want dan zou dat andersom ook moeten mogen natuurlijk.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 18:08 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Ze kunnen de grens niet zomaar over, maar Gaza is afgesloten en verdedigt de grens, binmen een bepaalde afstand zullen eerst waarschuwingen volgen, andere afschrikwekkende middelen, en vervolgens schoten zullen er gelost worden, was ook een baby omgekomen door traangas gestikt, maar wie neemt zijn of haar 8 maanden oude baby mee op zo'n gevaarlijke plek vraag ik mij dan af.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 18:32 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:

[..]

Tja, zo vraag ik me af hoe je het in je hoofd kan halen om op zulke jonge kinderen te schieten.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 18:08 schreef DeParo het volgende:

[..]

Ze kunnen de grens niet zomaar over, maar Gaza is afgesloten en verdedigt de grens, binmen een bepaalde afstand zullen eerst waarschuwingen volgen, andere afschrikwekkende middelen, en vervolgens schoten zullen er gelost worden, was ook een baby omgekomen door traangas gestikt, maar wie neemt zijn of haar 8 maanden oude baby mee op zo'n gevaarlijke plek vraag ik mij dan af.

quote:

Op dinsdag 15 mei 2018 19:00 schreef trein2000 het volgende:

[..]

Schieten op burgers in een andere staat = oorlogshandeling. Ergo Israël = agressor.

quote:

In his April 21, 2018 column in the Lebanese daily Al-Nahar, titled "Hizbullah Resettling in Syria," Ahmad 'Ayyash referred to the policy of transfer and forced demographic change that the Bashar Al-Assad regime has been conducting in Syria over the past several years, with the assistance of Hizbullah and its other allies. [1] According to 'Ayyash, this is actually an Iranian "settlement project," which involves expelling residents from various parts of the country and resettling these areas with Shi'ite members of Hizbullah and of other Iran-backed militias, who prevent the original residents from returning to their homes. He warned that the presence of these new settlers in Syria may not be temporary.

"Hizbullah's involvement in the Syria war is not confined to military action aimed at propping up the Syrian regime. [Its goals] extend much further than that, and have to do with an Iranian settlement project whose implementation began several years ago. The aim [of this project] is changing the demography [of Syria] by settling [it with members of] Iran-backed [Shi'ite] militias from Afghanistan, Lebanon and other countries in the region.

"Naturally, the world is currently occupied with the implications of the chemical [weapons] issue, which came up again after the Assad regime used such weapons... in Douma, near Damascus. But while addressing the issue of the chemical weapons, [the world] is ignoring the ongoing plan of demographic cleansing, as part of which tens of thousands of Syrians were transferred from their homes in Ghouta to northern Syria several days ago, and thousands of others left eastern Al-Qalamun, near Damascus, [as part of a move] 'brokered by Russia'...

"[These] tens of thousands of Syrians left their ancestral homes, where their families had been living for generations, just as hundreds of thousands of [other] Syrians had previously left their homes in Aleppo, Hama, Homs and Al-Qusayr. The world is oblivious [to the fact] that Iran has been acting vigorously to fill the demographic vacuum [left by these Syrians], with Hizbullah acting as the chief executive arm of this [project]. Whoever doubts the existence of this Iranian plan can read statements made by Ali Akbar Velayati, an advisor to Supreme Leader [Khamenei], as quoted by the Iranian news agency Mehr. [He said]: 'The Islamic awakening on our resistance front begins in Tehran and extends to Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Palestine, and will soon include Yemen as well. Were it not for Iran's support, Baghdad and Damascus would have been occupied by ISIS today, and Beirut would have been occupied by Israel.'

"Several weeks ago, Al-Nahar received information that people from Al-Qusayr had appealed to the Syrian regime for permission to return to their properties in that town, and had received permission to do so. But when they reached the town, they found themselves facing Hizbullah militiamen, who are still militarily occupying the town, and who ordered them back, saying: 'Whoever gave you permission [to return is welcome] to give you back your property.' According to the information [we received], Hizbullah is investing in developing thousands of acres in this area, known for its fertile fields, and will directly reap the profits.

"One of the most disturbing aspects of the Iranian plan in Syria was reported by our colleague, [Lebanese journalist] Randa Taqi Al-Din, in the daily Al-Hayat. She cited French sources, who assessed that Hizbullah will transform from the 'Lebanese Hizbullah' into the 'Syrian Hizbullah,' because its members are currently settling in Syria along with the Iranians.[2]

"On May 6, thousands of these [Hizbullah] 'settlers' will be bussed to voting booths in Lebanon, and especially in the Baalbek-Hermel governorate, [to vote in Lebanon's parliamentary elections]. Then they will return to their 'properties,' to continue carrying out their 'duty of jihad.'"

quote:

Op zondag 20 mei 2018 13:32 schreef DeParo het volgende:
Lebanese Journalist: Hizbullah Settling In Syria As Part Of Iranian Plan To Change Its Demography
https://www.memri.org/rep(...)hange-its-demography

[..]

Gewoon etnische zuiveringen vinden plaats in Syrie, bovenop massamoorden, en iedereen staat erbij en doet alsof Iran het braafste jongetje van de klas is zonder noemenswaardige misdaden.

quote:

Op zondag 20 mei 2018 14:00 schreef arie_bc het volgende:

[..]

Je bedoelt dat ze goed hebben gekeken bij het vestigingsbeleid van Israël?

Die doen al decennia niets anders met de kolonisten.

quote:

Foreign Minister Lavrov indicates Moscow open to Israeli demands that Iranian forces be kept far from Israel's frontiers; urges withdrawal of all 'non-Syrian forces'

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Monday that only the Syrian regime should field military forces in the country’s southern border areas.

Lavrov’s comments, made at a press conference in Moscow, apparently referred to areas including the Syrian Golan Heights region abutting the Israeli Golan Heights and the border with Jordan, and indicated that Russia was open to Israeli demands that Iranian forces should be kept far from Israel’s borders.

The area is currently held by various rebel groups and Israel has accused Iran of trying to establish a presence in the area. Israel also accused Iran of firing a salvo of rockets at Israel from the area earlier in the month.

“Of course, the withdrawal of all non-Syrian forces must be carried out on a mutual basis, this should be a two-way street,” Lavrov said at a news conference in Moscow.

“The result of this work which should continue and is continuing should be a situation when representatives of the Syrian Arab Republic’s army stand at Syria’s border with Israel,” Lavrov said.

Earlier Monday, the Haaretz daily reported that Russia is considering trying to keep Iranian forces and their allies from Israel’s northern border, fearing that repeated Israeli strikes may undermine Syrian President Bashar Assad’s grip on the country.

Citing Israeli security and diplomatic sources in Jerusalem, the Haaretz report said Russia decided to work on a deal to remove the Iranian troops following a heavy Israeli attack on Iranian targets in Syria on May 10. The bombing raids came after Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’s al-Quds Force launched 32 rockets at Israel’s forward defensive line on the Golan Heights border.

Israel has acknowledged carrying out several aerial raids on Iranian targets in Syria, and is suspected of carrying out several more, the most recent last week, when a military air base in western Syria was hit in an airstrike.

Much of the Iranian infrastructure is set up on Syrian bases and Israel has also frequently hit Syrian air defenses during strikes on Iranian targets.

The preemptive effort by the Israel Defense Forces against Iran and its allies in Syria is known collectively as “Operation Chess.”

However, just last week, Iran appeared to reject remarks from Russia’s leader that the Islamic Republic should pull its forces out of Syria after a political settlement is reached in the war-torn country.

“No one can force Iran to do anything,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Bahram Qasemi said, according to the Tasnim news website.

Russia has reportedly also recently tried to involve the United States in an agreement to bring stability to Syria, which has been ravaged by civil war for the past seven years.

Jerusalem wants Iranian troops and Shiite militia groups aligned with Iran to be at least 60 kilometers (40 miles) from the Golan Heights, Israel’s northern border with Syria.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has spoken several times with Russian President Vladimir Putin and stressed that Israel will not allow Iran and Shiite militias backed by Tehran to maintain a foothold in Syria near the Israeli border.

Last November Russia reportedly made a deal with the Iranians that they would not come within five kilometers (three miles) of Israel’s border, but in practice Tehran has ignored this, and members of the Revolutionary Guard have occasionally been seen right on the border.

Israel suspects there are some 2,000 Iranian troops currently in Syria, Haaretz reported, along with almost 9,000 Shiite militia from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq and another 7,000 members of the Hezbollah terror group.

On Sunday, Netanyahu told his cabinet that Israel was taking action against arms manufacturing in Lebanon and threatened continued fighting with Iran Sunday.

“We are working to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. At the same time we are working against the establishment of an Iranian military presence against us; to this end we are also operating against the transfer of deadly weapons from Syria to Lebanon or their manufacture in Lebanon,” Netanyahu said.

“All of these weapons are for use against the State of Israel and it is our right – based on the right of self-defense – to prevent their manufacture or transfer,” he said. Netanyahu did not specify what action was being taken against the arms in Lebanon.

On Thursday night a military air base in western Syria was hit in an airstrike, sparking large explosions, which were heard throughout the area, state media reported.

The Daba’a air base, also known as al-Qusair air base, and the surrounding area are known to be a stronghold for Hezbollah and Iran-backed militias. It was also reportedly struck by Israel in skirmishes against Syrian and Iranian forces on May 10.

quote:

Russia and Saudi Arabia’s energy ministers will discuss a potential relaxation of the global oil output cap agreed between Opec and Moscow amid calls for them to boost output after their supply cuts helped drive prices to $80 a barrel.

The historic agreement that came into effect in January 2017 between the previous oil market rivals — curbing global output by 1.8m barrels a day — helped arrest the three year slump in crude prices.

But collapsing oil production in crisis-hit Venezuela and fears renewed US sanctions against Iran’s energy sector will curb exports further have seen prices jump to the highest level since 2014, sparking calls for an exit from the deal.

Russia’s Alexander Novak will meet his Saudi counterpart Khalid al-Falih in St Petersburg on Thursday evening to discuss the oil market and debate a possible easing of the caps that were agreed among 24 countries.

“We will discuss the current situation, the outlook and possible further actions to be taken within the framework of our deal. Speaking of relaxing the deal: it is possible but should be based on a thorough analysis of the situation,” Mr Novak told the Financial Times. “Generally speaking, we are quite flexible.”

Opec, Russia and other producing countries will next meet fomally in Vienna on June 22 to decide the future of the deal as pressure mounts from consumer nations to amend the strict curbs, even as most oil-exporting economies have benefited from rising prices.

Opec and its allies have cut production by more than their initial targets, removing far more barrels from the market than originally planned.

The price of benchmark Brent crude slipped 1 per cent on Thursday to a low of $78.57 on speculation that Opec and Russia’s deal could be amended.

Ahead of the US withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear deal, President Donald Trump’s administration held discussions with big producer countries— widely believed to have included Saudi Arabia — about alleviating any supply shortages.

Mr Trump last month also accused Opec of “artificially” boosting the price.

While Mr Al Falih said last week the market had “ample” supplies, he also said he was in communication with countries such as the US and Russia “to co-ordinate global action to ease oil market anxiety”.

Indian government officials have expressed concern about the impact of higher prices on the fast-growing Asian economy, which is a big oil consumer. The International Energy Agency, meanwhile, warned demand growth would take a hit.

“$80 per barrel is way higher than expected … it is surprising and unexpected for us,” Mr Novak said in an interview.

“We cannot argue that higher prices are always a good thing for producers. When prices are way too high, it leads to the market being overheated and it results in destabilisation and excess supply,” he added.

Some countries are afraid such a high price will encourage more investment in the US shale industry, which they fear has the potential to once again crash the price should more supplies come on too fast.

“We need to thoroughly analyse the reasons behind this price development. We need to understand whether it is a result of basic fundamental balance shift between supply and demand, or a one-time issue that will not last,” Mr Novak added. “Our ultimate goal was not to set a specific price.”

Gulf officials too have said they want to ensure the rally is not temporary, fearing a renewed price drop should they ease supply curbs too soon, two people familiar with the matter said.

Vagit Alekperov, head of Russia’s second-largest oil producer Lukoil, said on Thursday that Russian producers should be allowed to increase their output. Mr Alekperov said the deal should remain but be made more “flexible.”

Mr Novak said that any easing would take place across all members of the deal and would be “gradual”, to avoid a rush by producers to increase their market share.

“It will be a gradual process in order to prevent market destabilisation. Maybe it will involve reduction of quotas step by step, and at any time it could be adjusted according to the state of the market,” he said.

“We want to continue our co-operation beyond 2018. What we are talking about right now is the format.”

quote:

Op dinsdag 29 mei 2018 14:37 schreef kladderadatsch het volgende:
Dit topic gaat helemaal niet over 'politieke ontwikkelingen in het MO', het is gewoon verkapte Israël propaganda.

quote:

Egypte heeft in een beroepszaak videowebsite YouTube voor een maand in de ban gedaan omdat daarop een film te zien was die voor moslims beledigend zou zijn. De Egyptische telecomautoriteiten moeten ervoor zorgen dat YouTube wordt geblokkeerd. Het gaat om de film Innocence of Muslims die in de VS is gemaakt en veel ophef heeft veroorzaakt in moslimlanden. In de film wordt de profeet Mohammed afgeschilderd als een idioot met een seksuele afwijking. Dat is godslastering voor moslims. Een lagere rechtbank had in 2013 al tot de blokkade bevolen, maar de telecomautoriteiten waren tegen die uitspraak in beroep gegaan. Ze lieten weten dat als YouTube geblokkeerd zou worden dit zou leiden tot de ontwrichting van zoekmachine Google. Volgens de telecomautoriteiten zou dat slecht zijn voor de economie. (ANP)

quote:

Isfandyâr Âryânpour, lives in Iran
Answered Tue
The Iranian economy is practically dead, but money is still circulating.

The economy has basically collapsed to half of what it was last month, which was already in a terrible position.

Millions are suffering from poverty, and millions upon millions more are going hungry.

I can’t afford anywhere near as much groceries from the bazaar as I could just a few months ago.

But at least I can afford to eat three meals a day, unlike a huge number of Iranians who are going hungry and are suffering daily under the policies of this government.

As a result, huge protests have broken out across Iran. Larger than any before under this regime.

In my city, the bazaaris (shopkeepers) have been on strike for several days and it may continue for weeks to come.

Huge protests are taking place, most noticeably in Tehran, where thousands have been marching through the streets demanding change.

The response is brutal; government forces are deploying tear gas and viciously attacking civilians and destroying public property.

quote:

Parham Shirazi, I have been to Iran and her major cities many times
Answered Tue

The Iranian economy in numbers and the immediate effects of economic damage (Fast Facts):

-The International Monetary Fund reported that a record amount of capital, $27 billion, was taken out of the country last year.

-Iran is banning imports of over 1,300 products to counter U.S. sanctions. This suggests the U.S. sanctions threat is pushing Tehran back toward another "resistance economy" designed to conserve foreign exchange reserves and become as self-sufficient as much as possible.
Iranian Rial is 90,000 for every dollar as of Monday. A dramatic increase from 75,500 since last Thursday. And this compared to the end of last year, where it stood at 42,890.

-Drastic increase in prices of imported goods. Many people are buying real estate, gold and cars, which then drives up prices of those assets to counter inflation.
A Toyota RAV4, costs around $25,000 in the United States. In Iran, it was sold for $68,000 in August last year. Now its about $100,000.

-In the Grand Bazaar, hundreds staged protests. More protests could put pressure on President Hassan Rouhani, who has been criticized by hardliners for his economic performance.
No arrests in the Tehran protests so far. They were dispersed with tear gas when they were becoming overcrowded.
Many of those who protest are small shopkeeper owners and young people since majority of the youth are unemployed. While many did peacefully protest so far, some protestors have as gone far as too harassing other shopkeepers into shutting their shops and calling them cowards. Those shopkeepers complied for fear of vandalism and destruction.
"Police have dispersed the protectors. We are all angry with the economic situation. We cannot continue our businesses like this. But we are not against the regime," said a merchant in the bazaar, who asked not to be identified.

-A quote from Reuters article on the protests.

Sources for fast facts: My family, Reuters, New York Times

Some economic analysis:

I talked to my family and Mom the other day. She's visiting Iran now and I wish I was there but I have things to set straight here in the United States.

Just like it was expected for Trump to pull out of the nuclear, so are these protests. The Iranian people make the most noise when they suffer economically and the Iranian government is anticipating it right now. There are going to be drastic changes in Iran's economy that the will take some months or longer for adjustment. And no matter how much they anticipated it, the economic troubles will still hit hard. This is until they can go back to the self - sufficient economy they had before.

Speculation for Iran's political future:

There are whispers of a plot for a military coup at the blessing of the hardliners. Rumour has it that hardliners were to blame for the initial protests around New Years against the reformist president, Rouhani, in order to sway influence from him to themselves.

While the Iranian hardliners had issues with the nuclear deal when it was signed, the pullout and economic hardships is further strengthening the Hardliner’s legitimacy with these protests - that Reformists can't be trusted or effective in their government roles. They're now going to receive some heat for the economic troubles. Within the next few years, there might be a military led government instead of civilian one.

The nuclear deal that Europe is trying to salvage is failing. And since the deal is not working, Iran shouldn't have to uphold their end of the nuclear deal also.

Again, this is my speculation and understanding. But I could be wrong. Any corrections or suggestions are welcomed.