In February, Washington introduced new economic sanctions against Iran. US Treasury заявило about reducing the list of countries that can buy oil from Iran. In addition, it is argued that the measures make it difficult for Tehran to access the proceeds from the sale of oil. At the same time, America imposed sanctions on the state television company IRIB. This company, according to the US Treasury, is guilty of censoring broadcasts, as well as broadcasting confessions of political prisoners received "under pressure."
To impose such sanctions on an ideal world democratizer like Washington does not in the least interfere with the existence of the infamous Guantanamo base and the enhanced torture activities of the CIA. Brennan, who replaced the disgraced Petraeus, being the third person in the CIA at the time, was well aware of the use of torture, including drowning (this one is favorite with Bush).
Of course, Brennan justified himself in front of the senators: they say, my field of activity was somewhat aloof from the gloomy butchery occupation, but this does not change the essence. The fact that great America is possible is impossible for others. Why? Because in America it turns out democratically, while for others - with deviations from the democratic canon. What are the deviations? With those that Iran, for example, is not America.
A representative of the Treasury Department therefore frankly stated that "as long as Iran does not respond to the concerns of the world community with its nuclear program, the United States will apply sanctions and increase economic pressure on the Iranian regime."
Washington will never accept such a state of affairs in which someone becomes, if not stronger than him, then rises to a new level of military-strategic, economic and further geopolitical power. After all, then America will lose the right to the strong.
And that's it. The boss is always right. The United States may have nuclear weapons, Iran - no. North Korea-either. It is advisable to disarm Russia to the very foundation (it’s a pity that the cause of the friendship of nations that Mikhail Sergeyevich so fervently preached, and then Boris Nikolayevich, is dying in Russia).
As for Iran, it seems that this country is nuclear weapon already received. Neither militant Israel nor the United States go there. Alone sanctions and aggressive rhetoric. To which Comrade Ahmadinejad responds quite adequately.
The other day, while visiting Cairo, he gave an interview to the Al-Ahram newspaper and saidthat Tehran has a nuclear potential, but it is exclusively defensive in nature.
After a five-second pause, the Iranian president advised the international community to treat Iran as a nuclear power, as such is the Islamic Republic. Claiming the peacefulness of the Iranian people, he noted that his country is not seeking a military confrontation with Israel and is not going to threaten the "Zionist enemy."
At the same time, the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran said that Israel would very much like to attack Iran and invade its territory, but the Zionists are afraid to do it: they fear consequences. "Those who helped create Israel have ceased to support it, and this indicates the imminent end of the occupation," he noted.
And the next day, February 7, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei refused to participate in negotiations with US representatives. With a clever reservation. Any negotiations on the normalization of relations between countries, in his opinion, can only go after the lifting of the US sanctions. According to Khamenei, the United States offers Iran to negotiate "at gunpoint," that is, through sanctions.
A day later, the new US Secretary of State, Mr. Kerry, spoke. At the first of his press conferences, he hurried to express readiness for a diplomatic solution to the problem. John Kerry She urged Iran makes the "right decision" on the nuclear program, on which the further development of relations between Western countries and Iran depends. Then he scared Ahmadinejad with “sanctions” and expressed hope that the Iranian authorities would provide a clear report on the nuclear program during the upcoming talks with the “six” mediating countries in Kazakhstan (25 or 26 in February). And then America will express its readiness for a diplomatic solution to the problem.
For now - sanctions. Sanctions, sanctions and more sanctions. In no way can Washington comprehend that sanctions, threats and aggressive rhetoric give the government of the “sanctioned” country and its spiritual leaders a ready-made image of the worst external enemy. And not an image, not an “image”, not a picture, - in fact, there is a real enemy here.
By the way, the US sanctions policy against Iran was condemned by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia. Comrade Lukashevich called it "counterproductive."
February 7 during the Moscow briefing Alexander Lukashevich, the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry сообщилthat Russia’s Iran’s negotiations with the “six” in Almaty will be represented by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. Answering the question of the Voice of Russia correspondent, the diplomat emphasized that the next US statement on sanctions came on the eve of important negotiations. Lukashevich called it "symptomatic" and reminded the Russian position on the imposition of sanctions: "Such a policy is counterproductive."
Against the background of the increasing Western sanctions policy, Iran began to economically come closer to Russia.
February 12 стало известноthat Iran offered Russian companies to take part in the development of their oil and gas fields. This was told to journalists by the Minister of Energy of the Russian Federation Alexander Novak. During his meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi, an agreement was reached on introducing amendments to Iranian legislation that would allow Russian companies to participate in Iranian hydrocarbon projects. Earlier, similar agreements Iran braked.
In November, 2009, Gazpromneft, and the National Iranian Oil Company signed a memorandum of understanding. The document assumed the joint work of Russian and Iranian experts in the development of Iranian oil fields Azar and Shangule. But in 2011, Iran refused to cooperate. The reason for termination of the agreement was called the draft Russian.
Analyst Utro.ru Yury Levykin explains the “return” of Iran by the desire of his government to overcome the difficult situation caused by the country's energy blockade: after all, the West decided to ban gas imports from Iran and, at the same time, export oil and gas equipment and tankers to the Islamic Republic. The EU has an oil embargo, which prohibits the import, purchase and transportation of Iranian oil and oil products to the EU. Prohibited and related financial and insurance operations.
Iranian oil and gas cooperation with the Russian Federation, the analyst believes, could contribute to a partial circumvention of sanctions - for example, in terms of the supply of oil and gas equipment. In addition, the oil produced in Iran can be supplied to the markets as Russian oil. This is also a way to circumvent Western sanctions.
According to Yu. Levykin, the anti-Western rhetoric that is growing in Russia could come to the Iranian leadership as a signal: Moscow is ready for certain actions "in peak with the West."
“How much such cooperation can be justified for Russia is an open question. All recent experience with the Iranian side shows that the Islamic Republic prefers to use its partners for their own political purposes and to part with them in case of such necessity. This is evidenced by both the experience of the construction of the nuclear power plant in Bushehr and the last история with Gazpromneft.
It is also quite obvious that the cooperation of the Russian Federation with Iran under international sanctions will cause irritation on the part of the EU and the USA. Subsequently, this may lead to a deterioration of Russia's relations with these countries ... "
It is also quite obvious that the cooperation of the Russian Federation with Iran under international sanctions will cause irritation on the part of the EU and the USA. Subsequently, this may lead to a deterioration of Russia's relations with these countries ... "
In the meantime, there is a discussion between Russia and Iran of possible oil cooperation, and the leadership of Pakistan has declared its support for Iran - and in full in the event of war.
Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari during a joint press conference with the presidents of Afghanistan and Iran on the results of the tripartite summit made a statement that Pakistan will fully support Iran in the event of aggression by other states. Zardari also promised the Iranian leader that he would not assist one of the main "enemies" of Iran - the United States. At a press conference, Zardari stressed the importance of a joint gas pipeline construction project with Iran.
The government of Pakistan has finally approved a gas pipeline project from Iran, the cost of which is about $ 1,5 billion to be laid. It is estimated that Iran will transport 7,8 billion cubic meters of gas to Pakistan in 2015 year.
For its part, Iran intends to provide Pakistan with a loan of $ 250 million, equipment and materials for the construction of a gas pipeline.
Alexander Serdyuk, Resource Analyst Pravda.ru, singled out two so-called myths generated by the Iranian atomic project.
The first myth is Iran’s desire to end Israel forever. In reality, the author believes, Iran, if it wants to acquire nuclear weapons, then in order to protect itself against invasion by the United States, as well as to create nuclear parity with Israel.
From here, a good time was chosen for the revitalization of activities in the nuclear field. After Iraq, the US economy is not in the best position. They will not have enough money for the second large-scale war in the region.
However, the analyst writes, Iranian scientists failed to achieve serious success. Therefore, the idea of enriching a large amount of uranium to weapons-grade, most likely, Iran had to reject.
The second myth: the development of the Iranian nuclear program may trigger a new round of the arms race (and nuclear) in the Middle East. Indeed, in the footsteps of Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia can move.
But who said that the US will allow its satellites to acquire bombs and nuclear warheads?
If there is a large amount of 20-percent uranium and modern centrifuges in underground factories practically inaccessible to the enemy's air force, the expert writes, Iran will have the opportunity to enrich uranium in minimal time. What's next? And the fact that the “nuclear baton” is capable of cooling the ardor of the United States and its allies. Iran has nuclear delivery vehicles covering a range of 2 thousands of kilometers (a medium-range ballistic missile Shahab-3).
According to the latest IAEA data, Iran has 7611 kilograms of uranium enriched to 5%, and 232,8 kg of uranium enriched to 20%.
With the next forecast of how quickly Iran can create an atomic bomb, the Israelis came out.
To get a bomb, Iran needs from 4 to 6 months, said the head of the Israeli Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), Amos Yadlin. Tehran already has all the necessary components to create a nuclear weapon. The expert reported this at a press conference in Tel Aviv, the topic of which was devoted to the evaluation of Israel’s strategic prospects from the point of view of INSS. Amos Yadlin previously served as chief of Israeli military intelligence.
Yadlin’s words are in line with what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said earlier (by summer Iran will reach an average level of enrichment of fissile materials, and then, in a few weeks or months, build a bomb).
However, American experts believe that Iran will possess nuclear weapons no earlier than in the middle of 2014.
Konstantin Sivkov, First Vice-President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Military Sciences, offered to the attention of readers "Military Industrial Courier" several options for military development of the situation around Iran. The analyst identified three options for the use of military force against Iran: limited missileaviation a strike to disable the most important facilities of the Iranian nuclear complex; large-scale air operation in order to completely destroy the nuclear complex and defeat the main objects of the Iranian economy, as a result of which Tehran will lose its leading position in the region; a full-scale war involving the air force, naval forces and ground forces until the complete defeat of the armed forces of Iran, the occupation of its territory and the establishment of a pro-American puppet regime.
Why is the United States and Israel still holding back?
First, Tehran has a very advantageous position - from a military-geographical point of view: the country borders on states that do not want to provide territory for the deployment of strike groups.
Turkey will not allow such a grouping to be placed on its territory: Ankara claims to revive influence in the Islamic world, and this world will not approve an alliance with Israel, which Ankara will have to conclude in case of aggression against Iran.
Highlights expert and Pakistan mentioned above. There are strong anti-American sentiment. Therefore, the presence of a contingent of NATO troops there, which will be based on the Americans, will be difficult.
Iraq is committed to maintaining good relations with its neighbor. He, too, is unlikely to provide territory to prepare for an invasion of Iran.
As for Afghanistan, there NATO forces are not even able to control the territory of the country. And there is no military infrastructure sufficient to ensure the intensive combat activities of significant groups of troops.
Here Saudi Arabia and nearby Arab monarchies can provide a relatively well-developed infrastructure for the war against Iran. But the distance from the Iranian border will allow to use their territory only to accommodate the Air Force grouping.
However, for the Arab rulers, the presence of the Israeli armed forces in their country would be an extremely undesirable step for ideological, political and social considerations, the expert writes.
The situation in the region is thus clearly not in favor of Israel and the United States. Moreover, Iran, the analyst notes, is building up its military potential.
Secondly, the Iranian armed forces, consisting of two independent components — the army and the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps — are the largest in the Middle East.
The large-scale air operation in order to completely destroy the nuclear complex and destroy the main objects of the Iranian economy, given the unwillingness of the American leadership to get involved in military conflicts on its own, may be, according to the scientist, conducted by a coalition of states led by the United States. Its participants are likely to become Turkey and Saudi Arabia, whose territory and military infrastructure will become a military strategic base. And without participation in the operation of Pakistan it will be impossible to ensure effective strikes on the territory of Iran by tactical aviation forces.
The operation will be very costly, and the economic crisis has not been canceled.
For a blitzkrieg on the Iranian front, the United States and its allies will have to ensure the overwhelming superiority of the air force. That is, it is necessary to create a grouping of aviation with a total number of at least 2000-2500 machines, writes Konstantin Sivkov, including up to 500 strategic bombers. It will probably be allocated from 1500 to 2500 cruise missiles, mainly for strategic aviation.
The total volume of cargo that needs to be delivered to the region, judging by the experience of military operations against Iraq, may exceed three million tons. The cost of such an operation will amount to more than a trillion dollars.
Such expenses are difficult even for the USA. Moreover, strikes on Iran will cause a spike in oil prices, which will aggravate the unfavorable economic situation in Europe.
This is not to say that neither Turkey nor Pakistan are going to fight with Iran.
Finally, there is a third - political - argument against the American attack on Iran. After the American lie about "Iraqi weapons of mass destruction," the analyst writes, few people can believe in the threat of "Iranian nuclear weapons" as an excuse for a military operation. In any case, the Americans will not be able to carry out the necessary resolution through the UN Security Council: Russia and China will not allow it.
The expert concludes: a large-scale air operation against Iran in the medium term is unlikely. There is even less chance of a full-scale war in order to completely defeat the Iranian Armed Forces, occupying the territory of this country and establishing a “puppet pro-American regime” in it. In this case, it will be necessary to additionally create a significant grouping of ground forces (at least 500 thousand people). The cost of the operation to defeat the armed forces of Iran and the occupation of its territory could exceed three trillion dollars. Then it will have to spend billions of dollars annually to fight the national liberation movement - without hopes of being able to use Iran’s resources. The moral and political losses of the United States and Israel will also be enormous.
Today, the United States is unlikely to plan a powerful military operation against Iran - both in the short and in the medium term.
Retired General James Cartwright, who recently held the post of Deputy Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a conference in Washington saidthat the conflict around the Iranian nuclear program can be resolved by providing Tehran with guarantees of “extended deterrence” - such as those that the US gives its allies in Europe and Asia. The guarantees will prompt Tehran to abandon the creation of a nuclear weapon.
Noting that the main reason for the Iranian desire to acquire nuclear weapons is the fear of external attack, Mr. Cartwright suggested:
“Why not find an opportunity to provide Iran with guarantees of sovereignty — so that he himself does not need to arm himself for these purposes?”
Of course, before the idea of a guarantee “umbrella” is implemented in practice, it will have to be worked out with regional partners.
Guarantees of “extended deterrence” are provided by Washington to allies and partners in Europe and Asia (members of NATO, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea, Australia). In exchange for protection by all available means, the United States makes the countries under the “umbrella” dependent on themselves.
The idea of an “umbrella” for Iran, we note, looks very strange. If Iran is afraid of aggression just from the United States (and its first ally Israel), then the “umbrella” from the United States, which will have to explain to Israel that it is now a sin to touch Iran, will puzzle Iranians and Israelis. Rather, someone here on the eve of negotiations in Kazakhstan is trying to confuse their heads, for which a neutral retiree was used - a person out of work.
On the other hand, like is treated like. Negotiations are coming, and the Iranians want to hear from the US, finally, sensible suggestions. Diplomacy is already tired from transfusions from empty to empty, and Israel continues to count weeks and months until the irretrievable moment when Iran will cross the "red line" indicated by Mr. Netanyahu.
Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
- especially for topwar.ru