Iran

From the archives: A nuclear Iran

This week there were rumblings that war with Iran may be closer than most people thought. In a piece for the Spectator in 2004, Andrew Gilligan argued that even with a nuclear bomb, Iran would not be a threat to us: The case for not attacking Iran, Andrew Gilligan, 27 November 2004 Do the last few days remind you of anything, by any chance? Presidential heavy breathing about a ‘rogue’ Middle Eastern state; a supporting chorus of exiles with dramatic new claims; and a senior member of the US government bearing intelligence which turns out to be more spin than spine-chilling. Less than a month after the presidential election, the

A collision course with Iran?

Are we on the verge of war with Iran? The Guardian’s frontpage today suggests we might well be. Here’s a taster of the article: “Britain’s armed forces are stepping up their contingency planning for potential military action against Iran amid mounting concern about Tehran’s nuclear enrichment programme, the Guardian has learned. The Ministry of Defence believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government. In anticipation of a potential attack, British military planners are examining

The coming world oil order

Following on from Daniel’s post this morning about a more inward looking America, Daniel Yergin has a very interesting essay in the Washington Post about how the changing balance of the US’s energy supplies are going to change its geo-strategic priorities. Yergin makes the point that by 2020, Canada could be a bigger oil producer than Iran and Brazil could be producing more than half of what Saudi Arabia is currently pumping out. Put these developments together with increased domestic energy production in the States itself and the fact that China is on its way to overtaking the US as the world’s largest oil consumer, and the geo-politics of energy

Gaddafi's Warning to Other Dictators: Shoot First & Shoot Them All

Now that Colonel Gaddafi is dead, there’s a lot stuff flying about Twitter along the lines of Are you watching Mr Mugabe/Assad/Ahmadinejad? I’m sure they are. Few people are likely to mourn Gaddafi’s death but one should not, I fear, suppose that his eclipse weakens other distatorial regimes or vastly emboldens their respective opposition movements. It would be grand if this were so but foolish to presume it must be. Indeed, one can plausibly argue that a quite different message has been sent by this Libyan uprising and that this message warns other ghastly regimes to crack down harder and faster to ensure that dissent is suppressed before it has

Saudi and Iran at each others' throats

Yesterday — as Pete pointed out earlier — the Obama administration filed criminal charges against two individuals, Manssor Arbabsiar and Gholam Shakuri, claiming that they worked with Mexican criminals and for the Iranian government on orders to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States. The plot has met with denials from Tehran, which “categorically and in the strongest terms condemn this shameful allegation.”     But, if true, the plot would only be the latest in a long-standing feud between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The struggle between Riyadh and Tehran has become the Middle East’s central conflict, overshadowing even the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The countries are divided by a Shiite-Sunni

Iran crosses a line

A flurry of news yesterday evening, among it Slovakia’s rejection of the euro bailout and even more ado about our Defence Secretary. But nothing nearly as striking as the alleged Iranian plot to murder the Saudi ambassador to Washington. Drugs, money, geopolitics, potential mass slaughter — this is a web of the most tangled and terrifying kind. And, according to US officials, it all leads back to Tehran. Assuming that that’s the case, there can few more alarming reminders of the threat posed by Iran. Here is a regime that is bent on terror and destabilisation — and bent, also, on acquiring a nuclear weapon. Little wonder why politicians from

An Execution in Tehran

Cranmer is right about this: It really is quite incredible. Last week, a convicted murderer, Troy Davis, was finally executed in the United States, and it seemed as though the entire British (and EU) Establishment arose to denounce the barbarism. Even Pope Benedict XVI appealed for clemency. Yet today, Iran is scheduled to hang a Christian pastor for ‘apostasy’, and the collective silence from our scurvy politicians, trappist churchmen and hypocritical media is positively deafening. Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani was found guilty two years ago of ‘apostasy’, even though he was never a practising Muslim. His guilt was determined because he ‘has Muslim ancestry’ (which is a kind of convenient catch-all

Tensions rise in the Middle East

The escalating crisis in Gaza and Sinai is worrying. Egypt is to recall its ambassador to Israel after 3 security personnel were killed in confused scuffles after an Israeli bus was bombed near the Sinai border; the Israeli embassy in Cairo has also been the scene of ill-tempered demonstrations and vandalism. Israel denies responsibility for the three deaths. Meanwhile, the Egyptian army is also conducting operations against Islamist militants in the increasingly lawless Sinai desert. Finally, the Arab League has called an emergency meeting after Israel retaliated to 30 rocket attacks by launching stiff operations in Gaza. This latest smattering of violence will be of great concern to friends of

Tim Pawlenty: Generic Republican

Tim Pawlenty’s Presidential campaign may be stranger than any of his rivals’. For some candidates – Gingrich, Cain – running for the Republican nomination is an outlet for excess egomania. For others – Johnson, Paul – it’s an opportunity to raise issues and a style of conservatism that’s notably unfashionable. Others – Bachmann, Palin, Huntsman – fly a standard for sectional interests within the broader conservative movement. And Romney, of course, is interested in winning. But Pawlenty? What’s he about? Quite. There’s no interesting reason for Pawlenty to run at all. His starting ambition appears to be the “Oh God, I suppose he’ll have to do” candidate. His appeal –

The mystery of modern Turkey

What does Turkey actually think? That’s an issue that has been occupying many Europeans, as the vital NATO ally heads to the polls. On the one hand Turkey has in the last 10 years become more like the West: globalised, economically liberal and democratic. Turkey’s economy is now the world’s 16thlargest, the sixth largest in Europe. But, at the same time, questions arise about its recent policies: will it consolidate its democratic achievements, or is it threatened by a populist tyranny or even authoritarian rule? Certainly, many fear that Prime Minister Recyp Erdogan’s behaviour is moving Turkey away from the West, both in terms of internal policy and external alignmen.

A good day for Cameron

Today is one of those days when David Cameron gets full political benefit from being Prime Minister. He is basking in the president of the United States’ reflected glory. The papers this morning are full of him playing table tennis with Barack Obama and tonight’s news bulletins will lead on their joint press conference at lunchtime. As Cameron stands next to Obama, he’ll look both a statesman and a centrist. It’ll be hard for Labour to attack Cameron as an extremist on deficit reduction when he keeps stressing how he and Obama agree on a sensible level and pace to get their budgets heading back into balance. There are, obviously,

Obama Men & Bush Measures?

Ross Douthat and Andrew Sullivan have been debating the extent, if any, to which Barack Obama’s foreign policy has broken with his predecessor’s. Ross’s point in his column this week is that Obama’s approach is more consistent with Bush’s than is generally supposed. I think that’s true, though some of Andrew’s criticisms of that view are plausible too. Ross responds here and Andrew has another go here during which post he writes: As for the impact of Obama on the Iranian revolution and the Arab Spring, I agree it’s too facile to draw a direct linkage. History and perspective will again help. But the Cairo speech – defending democracy in

Obama's Love of Cake

Ryan Lizza’s New Yorker article on the development of Barack Obama’s approach to foreign policy is, as always, full of interestig stuff even if, perhaps unavoidably, I suspect it depends a little too heavily upon the Slaughter-Power approach. Nevertheless, Ryan gets to the heart of Obama’s presidency – or at least the style of it – here: Obama’s instinct was to try to have it both ways. He wanted to position the United States on the side of the protesters: it’s always a good idea, politically, to support brave young men and women risking their lives for freedom, especially when their opponent is an eighty-two-year-old dictator with Swiss bank accounts.

Eyes turn to Syria

The situation in Syria seems to be on a knife’s edge. Perhaps 80 protesters were killed by security forces during massive demonstrations yesterday. Checkpoints have gone up around all major cities, including Aleppo, Homs and Hama and of course Damascus. A friend who has been visiting the country this week says the situation is “pretty tense with police all around and no one, I mean almost no one on the streets. Taxis are not operating and there are no buses between cities.” The road south from Damascus to Deraa is heavily guarded to prevent the protesters moving from one city to the next. The key problem for Bashri al-Assad’s regime

A certain tragic allure

Towards Mohammed Reza Pahlavi (1919–1980), the last or most recent Shah of Iran, there are two principal attitudes. Towards Mohammed Reza Pahlavi (1919–1980), the last or most recent Shah of Iran, there are two principal attitudes. To the Islamic Republic and many in Europe and the US, Mohammed Reza was a tyrant, womaniser and poltroon, who was put on the throne by Britain and Russia in 1941 and maintained there by the US, till a popular uprising sent him scurrying abroad in 1979 where he died, unlamented, in Egypt 18 months later. The second attitude, which is gaining ground even in Iran, is that Mohammed Reza was a man of

Obama sketches out the limits to American involvement in Libya

There was one aspect of Barack Obama’s Big Speech on Libya last night that was particularly curious: for a President who is trying to downplay American involvement in this conflict, he sure went in for good bit of self-aggrandisement. The amount of references to his and his government’s “leadership” — as in, “At my direction, America led an effort with our allies at the United Nations Security Council to pass an historic Resolution” — was really quite striking, at least to these ears. I suppose it’s all about mollifying those voices who argue that the US Pres hasn’t done enough, quickly enough. But it’s hardly going to endear him to

How to deal with Bahrain

If you find yourself on the same side of an issue as Iran, it is wise to think carefully what path you have chosen to walk. Today, an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman condemned the foreign military intervention in Bahrain to confront the protests as “unacceptable.” To my dismay, I agree with what Tehran says; but, I suspect (and hope), for very different reasons. The grievances driving the Bahraini protests stem from years of discrimination by the Sunni elite of the Shia majority. Evidence of the problem is well-documented. Last year, Amnesty said that the Bahraini authorities had “failed to investigate alleged torture of detainees”. The State Department’s annual human rights

A reminder that the Iranian threat hasn’t gone away

Today’s news that Nato has intercepted an Iranian weapons shipment to the Taliban shows the threat Iran poses to international order and just how dangerous it would be for this regime to develop a nuclear capability. The shipment means that the regime, or at least part of it, wishes to assist those who want to kill Western troops and will back the forces of instability in the world. William Hague has released a statement calling Iran’s behaviour ‘completely unacceptable.’ But it is not clear what options Nato has beyond complaining about Iran’s actions. Any attempts to disrupt these supply routes on the other side of the border would be extremely

Iranian regime moves against opposition leaders

There are two significant developments in the Middle East to reflect on tonight. The New York Times is reporting that two Libyan air force jets conducted bombing raids on Monday. These raids appear to have been relatively ineffective. But they do suggest that there are still pilots prepared to carry out the regime’s orders, something that makes the issue of a no fly zone pertinent. But, perhaps, more important is that ground-level counter attacks by pro-Gaddafi forces have been repelled with relative ease by the rebels. Second, the Iranian government have, according to the BBC, removed Mir Hossein Mousavi, the ‘defeated’ 2009 presidential candidate, and Mehdi Karroub, the reformist politician,

Tehran's latest provocation

The people of Egypt and Libya may have swung the spotlight onto their respective countries – but it is a spotlight that Iran is keen to exploit. Two of their warships have just passed through the Suez canal en route to Syria, the first to do so since 1979. They were given clearance by Egypt’s new military stewards a few days ago. On one level, Tehran’s actions are unimpeachable: Egypt cannot forbid access to Suez unless it is at war with the country at sail. But they are also, of course, designed to provoke. Why choose to do this now, other than to suggest something about the new latticework of