Pompeo Lied About Iran’s Legitimate Ballistic Missile Program

By Stephen Lendman
Source

US strategy against sovereign independent governments it wants toppled involves inventing reasons to vilify them, Big Lies supported by major media acting as imperial press agents, imposing illegal sanctions, using destabilizing tactics, waging propaganda war, and if all else fails, launching naked aggression to smash them.

All of the above tactics were used against the Islamic Republic for nearly 40 years, orchestrating the 1980s Iran/Iraq war included, wanting both countries to destroy each other – US launched aggression against Tehran not so far implemented.

The Trump regime is so hellbent for replacing sovereign Iranian governance with pro-Western puppet rule that if war by other means fails like every time before, naked aggression may be the next option against a nation able to hit back hard.

On December 1, Pompeo turned truth on its head tweeting: Iran “test-fired a medium range ballistic missile that’s capable of carrying multiple warheads.”  

“This test violates UNSCR 2231. Iran’s missile testing & missile proliferation is growing. We condemn this act and call upon Iran to cease these activities.”

Iran’s ballistic missile program is entirely legitimate. It’s solely for defense, designed to carry conventional warheads alone, not nuclear ones as US and Israeli Iranophobes falsely claim.

Adopted on July 20, 2015, Security Council 2231 unanimously approved the JCPOA Iran nuclear deal.

On May 8, the Trump regime illegally pulled out of the international treaty, overwhelming endorsed by the world community.

Multiple rounds of sanctions his regime imposed on Iran are flagrantly illegal. Neither SC 2231 or any other SC resolutions prohibit Tehran’s legitimate ballistic missile development, testing and production.

Pompeo lied claiming otherwise. Responding to his Big Lie, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Ghasemi mocked him, saying:

“(T)he most interesting and, of course, ridiculous, part of your claim is that you refer to a resolution, from which your country unilaterally and illegally withdrew,” adding:

“You have not only violated it, but also encouraged others to violate it, and threatened those who committed to their obligations to punishment and sanctions.”

Iran is the region’s leading peace and stability advocate. Its legitimate nuclear program has no military component. The IAEA repeatedly said Tehran fully complies with its JCPOA obligations. 

The Islamic Republic supports regional and global denuclearization, wanting these WMDs eliminated before they eliminate us. 

Its military readiness and weapons development is solely for defense, not offense – polar opposite how US-dominated NATO, Israel, Turkey, the Saudis, and their imperial partners operate, waging endless wars of aggressions against nations threatening no one.

Virtually all US/Israeli/AIPAC/major media accusations against Iran are bald-faced lies, not a shred of evidence supporting them.

The Islamic Republic and other sovereign independent countries are falsely accused of crimes committed by the US, NATO and/or Israel against them – time and again, the world community, including the UN, failing to demand these countries be held responsible for high crimes too egregious to ignore.

Commenting on Pompeo’s anti-Iran tweet, the Wall Street Journal shamefully called its legitimate ballistic missile program “contentious” – a bald-faced lie, adding:

“The US has long seen Iran’s ballistic missile program as a threat to its ally Israel” – another bald-faced lie. The Journal failed to explain that the US and Israel are mortal threats to the Islamic Republic – not the other way around.

Claiming the Trump regime withdrew from the JCPOA “in part because the pact didn’t put major curbs on Iran’s ballistic missile program” is more deception.”

Trump regime hardliners and DLT himself want regime change in Iran by whatever it take to topple its sovereign independent government – no matter how destructive and illegal.

That’s what pulling out of the JCPOA, imposing illegal sanctions, employing destabilizing tactics, and waging propaganda war are all about.

That’s what the Journal and other major media don’t explain – blaming all sovereign independent countries targeted by the US, NATO, and Israel for crimes committed against them.

Advertisements

Why’d the US Issue a Sanctions Waiver for Chabahar?

Astute News

Many observers are wondering why the US issued a sanctions waiver for the Indian-built port of Chabahar in southeastern Iran and the railroad project that’s supposed to one day extend from it to Afghanistan, but the reason is that America sees this curious “Lead From Behind” arrangement as one of its last chances to retain its long-term influence in the landlocked country.

For as tough as the US promised that its reimposition of sanctions on Iran would be, it unsurprisingly went soft when it came to the issue of the Indian-built port of Chabahar in the southeastern part of the Islamic Republic. The State Department confirmed earlier this week that the US granted a sanctions waiver for this project, which simultaneously drew attention not only to the project’s significance, but also the special nature of the American-Indian Strategic Partnership if Washington thought it important enough to preserve at the expense…

View original post 1,141 more words

Pompeo Threatens to Starve Iranians

By Stephen Lendman
Source

Illegal unilaterally imposed sanctions by the US against Iran and other countries amounts to waging war by other means.

So far, high oil prices offset the effects of US sanctions, head of Iran’s Planning and Budget Organization Mohammad Baqer Nobakht explained.

Granting waivers to nearly all key purchasers of Iranian crude, along with EU opposition to US sanctions, assures stable, perhaps rising, oil exports at least through May 2019.

They’ll likely continued with most countries against Trump regime hostility toward the Islamic Republic – world oil exports also highly dependent on international economic conditions.

So far, at least 10 nations have waivers to continue buying Iranian oil and/or gas: Afghanistan, China, Greece, Iraq, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Turkey, perhaps others to be added.

The Trump regime’s “toughest” ever sanctions on Iran haven’t and likely won’t turn out as touted. The country has nearly 40 years of experience in dealing with ways to avoid much of their harshness.

Support from Russia, China, India, and the EU alone will likely mitigate their effects.

According to an unnamed EU diplomat, unilaterally imposed sanctions by the Trump regime leaves the US isolated in relations with Iran internationally.

With few exceptions, the world community supports normal political, economic, and financial relations with the country.

A second unnamed EU diplomat said “(i)t will be a difficult period but Iran’s economy will withstand (US sanctions) for various reasons, including” because of  unilateral “US sanctions on other countries, Saudi Arabia having its own financial and political issues, and (trade war) between China and the United States.”

Fitch analyst Andrine Skjelland said “Tehran is still likely to see a substantial share of its foreign exchange earnings maintained. This will (let its government) continue subsidizing imports of selected basic goods, keeping the costs of these down, and thus limiting inflation to some extent.”

On Wednesday, Pompeo threatened Iran, saying its “leadership has to make a decision that they want their people to eat.”

Does he have trying to forcibly block Iranian exports and imports, or perhaps intending US hot war on the country?

Attorney Tyler Cullis, specializing in US economic sanctions, said Pompeo “decided to wash his hands of (the potentially harsh) consequences (of Trump regime sanctions) by prematurely and conveniently pinning the blame on Iran’s government.”

Responding to Pompeo’s disgraceful remark and the Trump regime’s unlawful sanctions war, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif blasted him, accusing the US of crimes against humanity in Yemen and regarding Iran, tweeting:

“You know what @SecPompeo? It’s the Yemenis themselves who’re responsible for famine they’re facing.”

“They should’ve simply allowed your butcher clients — who spend billions on bombing school buses & ‘millions to mitigate this risk’ — to annihilate them w/o resisting. #HaveYouNoShame.”

“Just as with Yemen, @SecPompeo blames Iran for unlawful US sanctions preventing Iranians’ access to financial services for food and medicine.” 

“Naturally, we will provide them for our people in spite of US efforts. But US is accountable for crimes against humanity re Iran & Yemen.”

The same is true about all US wars of aggression, along with partnering with longstanding Israeli state terror against long-suffering Palestinians, as well as harming most Americans by serving domestic monied interests at their expense.

US sanctions on Iran exclude food, medicines, and other humanitarian goods. Without an alternative to the international SWIFT financial transactions system, banks will be reluctant to deal with Iran normally.

On Thursday, Iranian Parliamentary Security Committee head Valiollah Nanvakenari expressed mixed feelings about EU promises to circumvent US sanctions, saying:

“We hope that EU is committed to bringing their words into action and comply with their agreements with Iran regarding the implementation of a financial mechanism,” circumventing SWIFT, so far not in place because of heavy US/Israeli pressure against it and normal relations with Iran overall.

Nanvakenari and other Iranian officials are concerned about the failure of Brussels to fulfill key promises made so far, hopeful for their full implementation ahead.

On September 24, Iran together with Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany (the P5+1 countries minus America) issued a joint statement, announcing a “Special Purpose Vehicle” to facilitate normal trade economic, financial, and trade with the Islamic Republic – circumventing SWIFT and unilateral US sanctions.

Six months after the Trump regime’s unlawful JCPOA pullout on May 8, promises made by Brussels remain to be fully implemented.

Why’d The US Issue A Sanctions Waiver For Chabahar?

By Andrew Korybko
Source

Many observers are wondering why the US issued a sanctions waiver for the Indian-built port of Chabahar in southeastern Iran and the railroad project that’s supposed to one day extend from it to Afghanistan, but the reason is that America sees this curious “Lead From Behind” arrangement as one of its last chances to retain its long-term influence in the landlocked country.

For as tough as the US promised that its reimposition of sanctions on Iran would be, it unsurprisingly went soft when it came to the issue of the Indian-built port of Chabahar in the southeastern part of the Islamic Republic. The State Department confirmed earlier this week that the US granted a sanctions waiver for this project, which simultaneously drew attention not only to the project’s significance, but also the special nature of the American-Indian Strategic Partnership if Washington thought it important enough to preserve at the expense of undermining its sanctions regime against Iran. The reason for this is that the US understands the long-term strategic ramifications of redirecting Afghanistan’s international trade away from Pakistan (and increasingly China) and towards the rest of the world market via the access that it obtains through Chabahar, which is why the railroad that’s supposed to branch off from this port to the landlocked country is also excluded from the sanctions regime.

Between A Rock And A Hard Place

The US isn’t just losing influence in Afghanistan on the military front after the Taliban’s recent spree of gains across the country, but also on the economic one as well after China’s recent inroads there, which America worries could soon have political consequences if Beijing succeeds in establishing new patronage networks with the internationally recognized Kabul elite. This could in turn make it less likely that the US can keep Kabul and the Taliban from striking a deal, especially one at its expense, which is why there’s such an interest in ensuring that America can still retain its control over Afghanistan’s permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”). Suitcases full of cash aren’t sustainable, whereas the clinching of privileged business deals with China are, hence why the US had to urgently streamline a solution and realized that it was forced to rely on its newfound Indian ally.

No reasonable comparison can be made between China’s ability to exert influence in Afghanistan and India’s, but the two BRICS “frenemies” nevertheless did agree to cooperate in jointly training its diplomats. There’s also the possibility that they’ll pool their infrastructure resources together in turning the country into a shining example of the “China-India-Plus-One” framework that they unveiled before this summer’s BRICS Summit, thereby putting an end to the competition between the New Silk Road and the “Asia-Africa Growth Corridor”. On the surface, all of this should be appalling to America because of how much it risks undercutting its strategic ambitions in Afghanistan, but Washington is clearly wagering that mutual suspicions will persist between China and India which will in turn make the railroad a feasible opportunity for indirectly exerting influence through its South Asian “Lead From Behind” partner.

Keeping India In Line

Iran will obviously receive some residual knock-on benefits from being the transit country facilitating Indian-Afghan trade (which, to remember, is intended to function as a more sustainable means of ‘buying off’ Kabul’s “deep state” than suitcases full of cash in the face of China’s New Silk Road competition), but the US is willing to turn a blind eye to that because of how comparatively insignificant those profits will be. After all, the US could always sanction individual Indian or Afghan companies that trade with Iran across this route instead of keeping their economic activities on a strictly bilateral basis (apart from paying transit dues and other unavoidable expenses that go into the country’s coffers), so the plan is at least conceptually viable and doesn’t necessarily subvert the spirit of Trump’s sanctions policy against the Islamic Republic.

It needs to be emphasized that the US is engaging in long-term strategic planning that won’t yield immediate dividends, but that it’s undertaking this approach because of the high level of trust that it’s established with India since the election of PM Modi in 2014. The US now regards India as a strategic partner, one which is indispensable to “containing” China, even though India itself is playing a “double game”  by working closer with China over the past few months through a cunning strategy that it regards as “balancing” (officially described as “multialignment” in its official parlance). There’s always the chance that India could disappoint the US, but that’s unlikely since it needs access to the US marketplace to continue its growth and is deathly afraid (whether rightly or wrongly) of having its domestic industries swamped by Chinese imports if it pivots towards the New Silk Road.

A Reason To Rethink The Hybrid War On CPEC

This strategic backdrop suggests that the Indian-American Strategic Partnership is here to stay and that the US will continue indirectly backing New Delhi’s efforts to circumvent Pakistan and trade with Afghanistan via Iran in spite of the Trump Administration’s sanctions against the Islamic Republic. Adding another wrinkle to this already complicated arrangement is that Pakistan might counterintuitively benefit in some respects from Chabahar’s success so long as this gets the US and India to stop destabilizing Balochistan out of fear that the resultant blowback could endanger the Afghan corridor that New Delhi is building. Terrorism could easily spill across the border and threaten the project, thereby harming the US and India’s long-term joint strategic interests, and Iran might also take serious issue with India’s covert sponsorship of these terrorists to make its continued hosting of this corridor conditional on New Delhi discontinuing its support for them.

Pakistan and Iran are on the same page regarding the role that third-party actors have in provoking occasional border problems between them through these means, so considering the increasingly strategic importance that both countries attach to their relations with one another, it follows that Tehran’s interests would be best served by leveraging its influence over the Chabahar Corridor to ensure security in the transnational Baloch space. This is the only scenario in which Pakistan could partially benefit from the Chabahar Corridor, so it’s incumbent on those in Islamabad to do everything that they can to encourage their Tehran counterparts to take every step in that direction. The US and India have obvious reasons for wanting to continue their Hybrid War on CPEC, but the argument can be made that their support of Baloch terrorism to this end runs an unacceptably high risk of blowback that could scuttle their joint plans for Afghanistan and the rest of Central Asia.

Concluding Thoughts

The prima facie impression is that the US must have had some reason or another for waiving its sanctions against Chabahar, but cohesive explanations for why this is have been far and few between. It sounds absurd that the US’ interests in Afghanistan are furthered by Iran of all countries and especially at this specific point in time, but that’s the reality as it presently exists. To be clear, Iran isn’t intentionally assisting the US with anything, but its hosting of the Indian-built Chabahar Corridor to Afghanistan could be instrumentalized by Washington through its strategic partnership with New Delhi to advance the US’ grand strategic interests. On the other hand, however, Iran isn’t a completely passive bystander to this process either, and could at the very least work directly with its Indian partner to ensure that neither it nor the US continue their destabilization of Balochistan through the Hybrid War on CPEC because of the blowback that it could cause for the Chabahar Corridor.

Sanctioning The Sanctioners: De-Dollarization & De-Americanization is an Idea Whose Time Has Come – By John WIGHT – RT

Unlawful US Global Operations

Republican and undemocratic Dem regimes meddle aggressively worldwide, Trump the latest in a long line of warrior presidents – waging endless wars in the name of peace the US abhors.

America’s military footprint threatens nations on every continent. Wherever it shows up, mass slaughter, destruction and human misery eventually follow.

Will the Asia/Pacific become another US war theater? Was nothing learned from Washington’s humiliating Southeast Asia defeat?

Is China on America’s target list? Trade war with Beijing is economically destructive. Will hot war follow? 

Provocative US actions seem headed in this direction – madness confronting a nation militarily powerful enough to respond as punishingly as its struck, including against the US mainland if things go too far.

Washington is a serial international law scofflaw, operating by its own rules, no others, threatening all nations unwilling to bend to its will.

The US abuses what freedom of navigation operations (FONOP) are all about, threatening other nations by intruding close to or in their waters.

Early last year, Trump regime war secretary James Mattis falsely claimed the world order “is under the biggest attack since WW II…from Russia, from terrorist groups, and with what China is doing in the South China Sea.”

Truth is polar opposite of his belligerent remark. The US created and supports ISIS and other terrorist groups. 

It consistently meddles in parts of the world not its own – politically, economically and militarily, notably by unlawful militarized sanctions and hot war.

Last year, the US Indo-Pacific Command (PACOM) developed a schedule for South China Sea naval patrols, claiming its freedom of navigation operations (FONOP) right.

Beijing justifiably considers intrusion of US warships in or near its waters provocative. 

Reportedly PACOM plans a major early November show of naval and air force in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait – provocatively close to Chinese waters, certain to trigger a strong Beijing response.

An unnamed Chinese official called what’s reportedly coming an escalation of Sino/US tensions, adding Beijing will respond by increasing its military presence in both areas.

China earlier criticized the way Washington abuses is freedom of navigation rights. On Sunday, a Chinese destroyer nearly collided with the USS Decatur close to its Nansha (Spratly) Islands.

Both ships came within 135 feet of each other. Washington consistently holds other countries responsible for its own provocations and lawless actions.

An earlier Global Times editorial bluntly warned that “(i)f the United States’ bottom line is that China has to halt its activities, then a US-China war is inevitable in the South China Sea.”

“China will have no choice but to” respond to US provocations. Beijing’s waters are its own. It won’t tolerate US intervention where it doesn’t belong.

Last month, China’s envoy to Britain Liu Xiaoming accused “big countries outside the region (of) sen(ing) warships and aircraft all the way to the South China Sea to create trouble,” adding:

“(F)reedom of navigation” abuses by) the United States  (and its partners constitute) a serious infringement of China’s sovereignty.”

PACOM prepared “a classified proposal to carry out a global show of force as a warning to China,” CNN reported.

The Pentagon refused to confirm or deny the report. According to China’s Global Times, “(i)t’s  highly likely that the US will intensify its provocation(s) against China,” adding:

“Washington must exercise restraint, or China’s countermeasures will accelerate…the cost the US has to pay for escalating provocations.”

“Peace and stability could be on the edge of collapse at some point. If Washington wants to play this way, China will have to respond accordingly.”

US rage for global dominance increases the chance for confrontation with China, Russia, Iran, and other countries. Global war is possible by accident or design.

A Final Comment

In response to escalated Trump regime trade war, China halted all US oil imports. It’s been the second largest buying of US oil, averaging 334,880 barrels a day through August.

Beijing buys most of its crude from Russia, over 1.2 million barrels last year, Saudi Arabia and Iran its other two major suppliers. China also buys most of its soybeans from South America.

Russian crude oil production reached a record high in September at 11.36 million barrels per day, according to its energy ministry.

By Stephen Lendman
Source

Time the @UN did something to help the children of Gaza, with or without USA veto

Children of Gaza Call Upon International Community to Stop Israeli Crimes

A group of Gaza children organized a stand on Tuesday, in front of the mourning tent erected for the murdered child, Rahaf Hassan, age 2, who was killed along with her pregnant mother two days ago, after an Israeli airstrike directly bombed their home at Al-Zaitoon neighborhood in Gaza.

gazachildren3alray.jpg

The children delivered a speech in three languages: Arabic, English and French, calling on the international community to take a serious action against the Israeli crimes, especially targeting children in their homes.

The children have also called on the international community to instantly intervene to stop the Israeli aggression against Palestinian people in the West Bank, Gaza and pre-1948 occupied territories, assuring on their rights of live, play and education.

In this stand, which was organized by the Ministry of information in Gaza, according to Al Ray, the children called to open an urgent international investigation regarding the murder of Rahaf and her mother, and to bring the Israeli occupation to justice for the crimes committed against this family and others.

In the same context, the children pointed out the necessity of documenting crimes committed by the Israeli occupation in order to expose them to the world, especially the brutal acts against Palestinian children.

Search IMEMC: “DCI-Palestine” for related info.

The children noted that the murder of Rahaf Hassan was not the first or last crime; and it should put an end to the continued Israeli onslaughts against the children in Palestine, appealing the human rights organizations to bring cases in front of the International Criminal Court to judge the Israeli occupation.

%d bloggers like this: