Trump administration tightens Iran sanctions, Tehran hits back

[rooster59]

Trump administration tightens Iran sanctions, Tehran hits back

By Yeganeh Torbati

 

White House spokesman Sean Spicer holds a press briefing at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 3, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration on Friday imposed sanctions on Iran, which it said were just "initial steps" and said Washington would no longer turn a "blind eye" to Iran's hostile actions.

The sanctions on 25 individuals and entities were the opening salvo by President Donald Trump who has vowed a more aggressive policy against Tehran and came two days after the administration had put Iran 'on notice' following a ballistic missile test.

"The Trump Administration will no longer tolerate Iran’s provocations that threaten our interests," National Security Advisor Michael Flynn said.

"The days of turning a blind eye to Iran’s hostile and belligerent actions toward the United States and the world community are over," Flynn said in a White House statement.

Suggesting that more concrete action could follow if Iran does not curb its ballistic missile programme and continues support in regional proxy conflicts, a senior administration official said the latest sanctions were the initial steps in response to Iran's "provocative behaviour".

The administration was "undertaking a larger strategic review" of how it responds to Iran.

Iran denounced the sanctions as illegal and said it would impose legal restrictions on American individuals and entities helping "regional terrorist groups", state TV quoted a Foreign Ministry statement as saying.

Those affected under the sanctions cannot access the U.S. financial system or deal with U.S. companies and are subject to secondary sanctions, meaning foreign companies and individuals are prohibited from dealing with them or risk being blacklisted by the United States.

NUCLEAR DEAL

The White House said that while the sanctions were a reaction to recent events, they had been under consideration before. It added that a landmark 2015 deal to curb Iran's nuclear programme was not in the best interest of the United States.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said the missile test did not violate the nuclear agreement.

"It's not a direct violation ... I think there is no question that it violates the spirit of that," Spicer said in an interview with MSNBC. He said the nuclear agreement was a "sweetheart deal" for Iran.

Citing a foreign ministry statement, Iran's semi-official Fars news agency said the missile programme is "the undeniable and inalienable right of our nation under international law and the UN charter. Any foreign interference in this regard is a violation of international law."

The new designations stuck to areas that remain under sanctions even with the 2015 nuclear deal sealed between Iran and world powers in place, such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, an elite military body that is powerful in Iranian politics and the economy, and Iran's ballistic missile programme. Zarif led Iran's delegation at the nuclear negotiations in 2015.

Among those affected by the sanctions were what it said was a Lebanon-based network run by the Revolutionary Guards.

"The list is actually so targeted and comparatively mild, it leads one to surmise that it may have been a set of targets devised by the Obama administration, and was ready to go when Trump came into office," said Adam Smith, former senior advisor to the Director of the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control.

"As such, the real test for which way the Trump team will go on Iran may well be not this list release but the next one, whenever that occurs," Smith said.

The sanctions' impact will be more symbolic than practical, especially as they do not affect the lifting of broader U.S. and international sanctions that took place under the nuclear deal.

Also, few of the Iranian entities being targeted are likely to have U.S. assets that can be frozen, and U.S. companies, with few exceptions, are barred from doing business with Iran.

Meanwhile, the U.S. moved a Navy destroyer, the USS Cole, close to the Bab al-Mandab Strait off the coast of Yemen to protect waterways from Houthi militia aligned with Iran.

DESIGNATIONS

German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel on Friday expressed understanding over the sanctions, but warned against conflating Sunday's test with the nuclear deal.

Earlier on Friday, Trump tweeted: "Iran is playing with fire". U.S. Senator Mark Warner expressed support for the sanctions, adding:

"I urge the Administration to bring clarity to their overall strategy towards Iran, and to refrain from ambiguous rhetoric – or provocative tweets – that will exacerbate efforts to confront those challenges.”

Some of the entities sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury are based in the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and China.

Among those affected were companies, individuals and brokers the U.S. Treasury said support a trade network run by Iranian businessman Abdollah Asgharzadeh.

Treasury said he supported Shahid Hemmat Industrial Group, which the United States has said is a subsidiary of an Iranian entity that runs Iran's ballistic missile programme.

Hasan Dehghan Ebrahimi, a Beirut-based official with the Revolutionary Guard's Qods Force, which runs its operations abroad, was put under sanctions for acting on behalf of the Qods Force, Treasury said.

Three Lebanese companies involved in waste collection, pharmaceuticals, and construction were also listed under the sanctions for being owned or controlled by Muhammad Abd-al-Amir Farhat, one of Ebrahimi's employees.

Treasury said he has facilitated millions of dollars in cash transfers to Lebanese militant group Hezbollah. Two of his employees and a company he manages were also sanctioned. Treasury said Ebrahimi and his employees used a Lebanon-based network to transfer funds, launder money, and conduct business.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-02-04

[Ulysses G.]

"It's not a direct violation ... I think there is no question that it violates the spirit of that. "

 

Even Obama said the same thing, but he did not do anything about it. Anyway, the missile launches did violate UN resolutions.

[daveAustin]

Quote

Citing a foreign ministry statement, Iran's semi-official Fars news agency said the missile programme is "the undeniable and inalienable right of our nation under international law and the UN charter. Any foreign interference in this regard is a violation of international law."

Face-saving tripe for domestic consumption, but I wouldn't tug the big dog's tail now he's in the house. 

[Grouse]

I still believe that it would have been better to build bridges with Iran. Having an ally in such a strategic location would be of great benefit to us. Afghanistan to the East, Iraq to the West, Russian influenced "stans" to the North. 

 

Can you imagine Saudi Arabia having their own nuclear capability or ballistic missile program? Of course not; they couldn't. The Iranian people are not imbeciles, they're sophisticated.

 

Sometimes, threatening is not the best way forward. Iran could be guided down a path much more in line with stability IMHO.

[joecoolfrog]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

"It's not a direct violation ... I think there is no question that it violates the spirit of that. "

 

Even Obama said the same thing, but he did not do anything about it. Anyway, the missile launches did violate UN resolutions.

Israel has ignored or violated any number of UN resolutions in the past , I trust you condemed those actions also.

[Ulysses G.]

Iran violated UN resolutions concerning illegal nuclear weapons programs - not exactly the same thing. 

[craigt3365]

14 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

Iran violated UN resolutions concerning illegal nuclear weapons programs - not exactly the same thing. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel#Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty_and_United_Nations.27_Resolutions

Quote

In a statement to the May 2009 preparatory meeting for the 2010 NPT Review Conference, the US delegation reiterated the longstanding US support for "universal adherence to the NPT", but uncharacteristically named Israel among the four countries that have not done so. An unnamed Israeli official dismissed the suggestion that it would join the NPT and questioned the effectiveness of the treaty.^[237]The Washington Times reported that this statement threatened to derail the 40-year-old secret agreement between the US and Israel to shield Israel's nuclear weapons program from international scrutiny.^[238] According to Avner Cohen, by not stating that Israel has atomic weapons, the US avoids having to sanction the country for violating American non-proliferation law.^[239] Cohen, author of Israel and the Bomb, argued that acknowledging its nuclear program would allow Israel to take part constructively in efforts to control nuclear weapons.^[240]

Not so sure Israel has the moral high ground here....

[Andaman Al]

2 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

"It's not a direct violation ... I think there is no question that it violates the spirit of that. "

 

Even Obama said the same thing, but he did not do anything about it. Anyway, the missile launches did violate UN resolutions.

Which UN Resolution did the missile test violate?

[RuamRudy]

Russia launches fresh attacks on Ukraine and sanctions against Russia are relaxed;

Iran tests a missile and sanctions against them are tightened.

Who says that it isn't Putin yanking the Donald's chain?

Edited February 4, 2017 by RuamRudy

[SheungWan]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

I still believe that it would have been better to build bridges with Iran. Having an ally in such a strategic location would be of great benefit to us. Afghanistan to the East, Iraq to the West, Russian influenced "stans" to the North. 

 

Can you imagine Saudi Arabia having their own nuclear capability or ballistic missile program? Of course not; they couldn't. The Iranian people are not imbeciles, they're sophisticated.

 

Sometimes, threatening is not the best way forward. Iran could be guided down a path much more in line with stability IMHO.

We are dealing here with the Iranian regime not the Iranian people. Not quite the same thing.

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

We are dealing here with the Iranian regime not the Iranian people. Not quite the same thing.

Well put.  I've had 2 friends visit Iran recently.  Both had nothing but great things to say about the people.

[Krataiboy]

"The Trump Administration will no longer tolerate Iran’s provocations that threaten our interests," 

 

The remit the US gives itself to attack anyone at any time for any reason gets wider - and more worrying - by the day, and never more so than under the hamfisted new misadministration.

[JHolmesJr]

Something tells me that Mr Trump might just move a small number of nuclear missiles to Saudi Arabia. (provided he gets the all-clear that they will be secure there).

[Grouse]

27 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

We are dealing here with the Iranian regime not the Iranian people. Not quite the same thing.

True.

 

But better to get the Iranian people onside and keep them there. I firmly believe this is doable. Big mistake to deny their pointy heads access to the USA. Great opportunity for Russia and China (or the EU actually)

[DriveByTrucker]

33 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Something tells me that Mr Trump might just move a small number of nuclear missiles to Saudi Arabia. (provided he gets the all-clear that they will be secure there).

So they can use them for their terrorist activities, and drop a few on Yemen and maybe Israel?

[thaihome]

40 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Something tells me that Mr Trump might just move a small number of nuclear missiles to Saudi Arabia. (provided he gets the all-clear that they will be secure there).

You do realize that the US does not have a land based mobile nuclear missle system that could be moved to Saudia Arabia.  There are undoubtedly missle carrying subs in the area as there have been since likely 1975.

TH 

[JHolmesJr]

11 minutes ago, DriveByTrucker said:

So they can use them for their terrorist activities, and drop a few on Yemen and maybe Israel?

alright, scratch that.

[SheungWan]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

True.

 

But better to get the Iranian people onside and keep them there. I firmly believe this is doable. Big mistake to deny their pointy heads access to the USA. Great opportunity for Russia and China (or the EU actually)

That would presumably be the Iranian people banged up in Iranian jails if not already executed for opposition activities.

Edited February 4, 2017 by SheungWan

[Jingthing]

In the U.S. past the slogan was  --

Speak softly but carry a big stick

 

In the trumpist regime, it's now --

Bark loudly but wave your tiny hands all around

[SheungWan]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

In the U.S. past the slogan was  --

Speak softly but carry a big stick

 

In the trumpist regime, it's now --

Bark loudly but wave your tiny hands all around

For someone who campaigns loudly about sexual/social/physical discrimination issues you seem happy to sling the physical slur when it politically suits you.

[RigPig]

Just watch "The Secrets of the Seven Sisters"

 

nd ALL will be clear!

[Jingthing]

44 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

For someone who campaigns loudly about sexual/social/physical discrimination issues you seem happy to sling the physical slur when it politically suits you.

I'm not the topic here so back off, dude. 

 

Remembering another famous slogan --

The only thing we need to fear is fear itself.

 

trump's (tragically successful) game: FEAR! FEAR! FEAR! Feel it BIGLY so we can succeed in a complete  degradation of all democratic norms the USA has ever known.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-rallying-cry-fear-itself/2017/02/03/7d2a0432-ea4a-11e6-bf6f-301b6b443624_story.html

 

Trump’s strategy of stoking fear helped get him elected. Now it’s how he plans to govern.

 

Fear has been a theme for Trump at key moments, such as his speech at the GOP convention that conjured “terrorism and lawlessness,” and his inaugural address with its image of “American carnage.” It’s a stark contrast to the ways other presidents lifted the country.

Edited February 4, 2017 by Jingthing

[optad]

That old adage in these times; Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer.

 

Donald cannot do either.

[Chicog]

I'm guessing that Boeing deal may be getting another look.

[Grouse]

52 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

That would presumably be the Iranian people banged up in Iranian jails if not already executed for opposition activities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011–12_Iranian_protests

 

The main thing is not to hand a propaganda coup to the mad mullahs. 

 

We need a strategy which speaks to the Iranians and gets the message that life would be much better if the powers at be stopped antagonising the West.

 

The latest USA response is just not sensible in my opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, optad said:

That old adage in these times; Keep your friends close but keep your enemies closer.

 

Donald cannot do either.

He's clearly deeply insane and is trying (and succeeding) in sucking much of the planet into his diseased mental sphere. As people should know from history, when such a force of TOXIC madness takes great power, it ALWAYS ends badly and with much blood. Here we go ... 

Edited February 4, 2017 by Jingthing

[Chicog]

There is also the point that Trump could do with Iranian help if he truly wants to eradicate IS.

[Grouse]

2 minutes ago, Chicog said:

There is also the point that Trump could do with Iranian help if he truly wants to eradicate IS.

Unwise to turn eradicating IS into a Shia/Sunni war. 

[DriveByTrucker]

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

He's clearly deeply insane and is trying (and succeeding) in sucking much of the planet into his diseased mental sphere. As people should know from history, when such a force of TOXIC madness takes great power, it ALWAYS ends badly and with much blood. Here we go ... 

Much blood on his tiny little hands....