While more than 1,600 Palestinians have been killed and another 8,000 injured and more than 200,000 internally displaced persons are sheltered in UNRWA since Israel launched an full scale air attack against the tiny strip of Gaza on July 8, yet the international community failed to stop Israeli indiscriminately offensives .

UN’s human rights council passed a resolution condemning the Israel’s military actions; resolution was adopted by 29-1 vote. The sole “no” vote was the United States. Strong US support for Israel and Israel’s powerful lobby prevented any effective decision being made by the international organizations. Same was for more than last six decades of Israel – Palestine conflict.

In such circumstance when Palestinians see none of political efforts could protect them against the well-armed regime of Israel, in the Gaza strip, they prefer to resist rather than to continue living under an inhuman blockade.

Palestinians who lost of most of their land due to Israeli occupation since 1946, now only rule in the West Bank and Gaza strip. Two separate landlocked territories with two different ruling systems.

The Gaza under Hamas has chosen military resistance to liberate Palestine from Israeli occupation. On other hand, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) in the West Bank recognized Israel In 1993 and accepted to stop fighting against Israel and engage in a peace process which went nowhere so far.

It was only after PLO put down its weapon that the Palestinians lost their control over the West Bank and Israel occasionally conduct crackdown in the region, arrest or kill civilians.

Looking at the West Bank as a sample of setting back from military resistance, Palestinians don’t see a successful experience while on other hand Lebanon’s Hezbollah successfully defeated Israel and ended the Israeli occupation of Lebanese territories in 2000 make resistance in Gaza more meaningful.

Like Hezbollah, Hamas is fighting Israel with military and financial support from Iran. It was Iranian missiles and arms that led Hamas to stop Israel in the 2008 and 2012 conflicts.

Despite Iran and Hamas’ strained relations over the Syrian war, Iran’s political and military officials have stressed their unconditional and strong support for Palestinian resistance groups including Hamas.

The letter of the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force to the Palestinian freedom fighters on July 31 is the latest exemplar of the support for Palestinians resistance from Iran.

“Before the almighty God, we take an oath with the martyrs that we will remain bound to and not change, just like we are and have been in doing our religious duty in supporting the resistance. We emphasize that we continue to insist on the victory of the resistance … until the ground, the sky, the sea for the Zionists turns into hell,” Qasem Soleimani wrote.

While Israel and US are trying to disarm resistance movements, Iran called on the world to help arm Palestinians in the West Bank.

“Everyone, whoever has the means, especially in the Islamic world, they should do what they can to arm the Palestinians [in the West Bank] too,” Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Sayed Ali Khamenei said on July 29.

“Iran will also do its best to form military resistance in the West Bank. But obviously we won’t deal with Abbas and its people, we will work with real resistance groups,” Abdollahi who is familiar with the Iranian strategy in Palestine told Iran’s View.

Soleimani excluded Fatah and PA in his statement while naming Palestinian groups and leaders and praising their resistance.

But what an armed West Bank would mean for Israel?

West Bank has a population of more than 2,000,000 Palestinians who anxiously follow the events in Gaza and show their support from the resistance movement by protesting against Israel.

The photos and videos of Palestinians protesting and fighting back Israeli military by throwing stones may give one a better idea when those stones are to be replaced by weapons provided from Iran or other supporters of Palestinians freedom fighters.

In this case, Iran expects Palestinians to defend themselves against Israel in a more balanced battle.

The final solution to the Palestinian–Israeli conflict however is seen differently by Iran.
Iran suggests that all current and former inhabitants of the Palestinian territory should participate in a referendum and decide on their fate and future.

The post Arming West Bank only Way to Save Palestine first appeared on .

following is the full text of the plan:

Joint Plan of Action

Preamble

The goal for these negotiations is to reach a mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution that would ensure Iran’s nuclear programme will be exclusively peaceful. Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek or develop any nuclear weapons. This comprehensive solution would build on these initial measures and result in a final step for a period to be agreed upon and the resolution of concerns. This comprehensive solution would enable Iran to fully enjoy its right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes under the relevant articles of the NPT in conformity with its obligations therein. This comprehensive solution would involve a mutually defined enrichment programme with practical limits and transparency measures to ensure the peaceful nature of the programme. This comprehensive solution would constitute an integrated whole where nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. This comprehensive solution would involve a reciprocal, step-by-step process, and would produce the comprehensive lifting of all UN Security Council sanctions, as well as multilateral and national sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear programme.

There would be additional steps in between the initial measures and the final step, including,among other things, addressing the UN Security Council resolutions, with a view toward bringing to a satisfactory conclusion the UN Security Council’s consideration of this matter. The E3+3 and Iran will be responsible for conclusion and implementation of mutual near-term measures and the comprehensive solution in good faith. A Joint Commission of E3/EU+3 and Iran will be established to monitor the implementation of the near-term measures and address issues that may arise, with the IAEA responsible for verification of nuclear-related measures. The Joint Commission will work with the IAEA to facilitate resolution of past and present issues of concern.

Elements of a first step

The first step would be time-bound, with a duration of 6 months, and renewable by mutual consent, during which all parties will work to maintain a constructive atmosphere for negotiations in good faith.

Iran would undertake the following voluntary measures:

     •    From the existing uranium enriched to 20%, retain half as working stock of 20% oxide
          for fabrication of fuel for the TRR. Dilute the remaining 20% UF6 to no more than 5%.
          No reconversion line.

     •    Iran announces that it will not enrich uranium over 5% for the duration of the 6 months.

     •     Iran announces that it will not make any further advances of its activities at the Natanz Fuel
           Enrichment Plant1, Fordow2 , or the Arak reactor3 , designated by the IAEA as IR-40.

     •     Beginning when the line for conversion of UF6 enriched up to 5% to UO2 is ready, Iran
           has decided to convert to oxide UF6 newly enriched up to 5% during the 6 month period,
           as provided in the operational schedule of the conversion plant declared to the IAEA.

     •     No new locations for the enrichment.

     •     Iran will continue its safeguarded R&D practices, including its current enrichment R&D
           practices, which are not designed for accumulation of the enriched uranium.

     •     No reprocessing or construction of a facility capable of reprocessing.

     •     Enhanced monitoring:

                o  Provision of specified information to the IAEA, including information on Iran’s plans
                     for nuclear facilities, a description of each building on each nuclear site, a
                     description of the scale of operations for each location engaged in specified
                     nuclear activities, information on uranium mines and mills, and information on
                     source material. This information would be provided within three months of the
                     adoption of these measures.

                o  Submission of an updated DIQ for the reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as
                     the IR-40, to the IAEA.

                o  Steps to agree with the IAEA on conclusion of the Safeguards Approach for the
                     reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as the IR-40.

                o  Daily IAEA inspector access when inspectors are not present for the purpose of
                     Design Information Verification, Interim Inventory Verification, Physical
                     Inventory Verification, and unannounced inspections, for the purpose of access to
                     offline surveillance records, at Fordow and Natanz.

                o  IAEA inspector managed access to:
                                centrifuge assembly workshops4;

                                centrifuge rotor production workshops and storage facilities; and,

                                uranium mines and mills.

                                                           
1 Namely, during the 6 months, Iran will not feed UF6 into the centrifuges installed but not enriching uranium. Not install additional centrifuges. Iran announces that during the first 6 months, it will replace existing centrifuges with centrifuges of the same type.
2  At Fordow, no further enrichment over 5% at 4 cascades now enriching uranium, and not increase enrichment capacity. Not feed UF6 into the other 12 cascades, which would remain in a non-operative state. No interconnections between cascades.
Iran announces that during the first 6 months, it will replace existing centrifuges with centrifuges of the same type.
3 Iran announces on concerns related to the construction of the reactor at Arak that for 6 months it will not commission the reactor or transfer fuel or heavy water to the reactor site and will not test additional fuel or produce more fuel for the reactor or install remaining components. 
4 Consistent with its plans, Iran’s centrifuge production during the 6 months will be dedicated to replace damaged machines. 

                                                                                                                                    2 

  In return, the E3/EU+3 would undertake the following voluntary measures:

      •    Pause efforts to further reduce Iran’s crude oil sales, enabling Iran’s current customers to purchase their current average amounts of crude oil. Enable the repatriation of an agreed amount of revenue held abroad. For such oil sales, suspend the EU and U.S. sanctions on associated insurance and transportation services.

      •    Suspend U.S. and EU sanctions on:

                 o Iran’s petrochemical exports, as well as sanctions on associated services5.

                 o Gold and precious metals, as well as sanctions on associated services.

      •    Suspend U.S. sanctions on Iran’s auto industry, as well as sanctions on associated  services.

      •    License the supply and installation in Iran of spare parts for safety of flight for Iranian civil
           aviation and associated services. License safety related inspections and repairs in Iran as well
           as associated services6.

      •   No new nuclear-related UN Security Council sanctions.

      •   No new EU nuclear-related sanctions.

      •    The U.S. Administration, acting consistent with the respective roles of the President and the
           Congress, will refrain from imposing new nuclear-related sanctions.

      •    Establish a financial channel to facilitate humanitarian trade for Iran’s domestic needs using
           Iranian oil revenues held abroad. Humanitarian trade would be defined as transactions
           involving food and agricultural products, medicine, medical devices, and medical expenses
           incurred abroad. This channel would involve specified foreign banks and non-designated
           Iranian banks to be defined when establishing the channel.
                 o This channel could also enable:
                             transactions required to pay Iran’s UN obligations; and,
                             direct tuition payments to universities and colleges for Iranian students
                                studying abroad, up to an agreed amount for the six month period.

      •    Increase the EU authorisation thresholds for transactions for non-sanctioned trade to an agreed
           amount.

                                                           
5 “Sanctions on associated services” means any service, such as insurance, transportation, or financial, subject to   the underlying U.S. or EU sanctions applicable, insofar as each service is related to the underlying sanction and required to facilitate the desired transactions. These services could involve any non-designated Iranian entities.
6 Sanctions relief could involve any non-designated Iranian airlines as well as Iran Air.

                                                                                                                                  3 

  Elements of the final step of a comprehensive solution*

The final step of a comprehensive solution, which the parties aim to conclude negotiating and commence implementing no more than one year after the adoption of this document, would:

          •    Have a specified long-term duration to be agreed upon.

          •    Reflect the rights and obligations of parties to the NPT and IAEA Safeguards
               Agreements.

          •    Comprehensively lift UN Security Council, multilateral and national nuclear-related
               sanctions, including steps on access in areas of trade, technology, finance, and energy, on
               a schedule to be agreed upon.

          •    Involve a mutually defined enrichment programme with mutually agreed parameters
               consistent with practical needs, with agreed limits on scope and level of enrichment
               activities, capacity, where it is carried out, and stocks of enriched uranium, for a period to
               be agreed upon.

          •    Fully resolve concerns related to the reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as the IR-40.
               No reprocessing or construction of a facility capable of reprocessing.

          •    Fully implement the agreed transparency measures and enhanced monitoring. Ratify and
               implement the Additional Protocol, consistent with the respective roles of the President
               and the Majlis (Iranian parliament).

          •    Include international civil nuclear cooperation, including among others, on acquiring
               modern light water power and research reactors and associated equipment, and the supply
               of modern nuclear fuel as well as agreed R&D practices.

Following successful implementation of the final step of the comprehensive solution for its full duration, the Iranian nuclear programme will be treated in the same manner as that of any non-nuclear weapon state party to the NPT.

* With respect to the final step and any steps in between, the standard principle that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” applies.

The post Full Text of Iran and P5+1 Nuclear Deal first appeared on .

On June 16, 1945, America detonated the first atomic bomb, starting the atomic age and the biggest arms race in the world.

Although the first attempts to make atomic bomb initiated in Nazi Germany they weren’t successful until the US president Franklin D. Roosevelt in cooperation with the British government authorized the “Manhattan Project” in order to research about production of atomic bomb.

A group of top scientists of the time worked for the project with the distinguished physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer being the head of the group. They succeeded to make the first atomic bomb in the US which was detonated in what is now called Trinity in New Mexico.

Perhaps at first it was believed that the US would not use that lethal weapon against the mankind but soon people of two big cities in Japan fell victim to America’s atomic bombs.

On August 6, 1945, a bomber in US Air Force 509th Bomb Squadron called Enola Gay- which is now kept in a museum in Washington- left a US base in the south of Pacific Ocean and detonated an atomic bomb named “Little Boy” over the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The direct and the indirect death toll caused by this bombardment are estimated to exceed 140,000.

This however was not the end as three days after Hiroshima bombing, another atomic bomb, called the “Fat Man” killed 73,000 and injured 74,000 people in Nagasaki, Japan, not including those who later were found to be the victims of the bombing. Of course there was another bomb made in the Manhattan Project which was never used.

Oppenheimer regretted his participation in the Manhattan project after a while and began to speak against nuclear arms, and thus was removed from the project. His regret was of no use though.

The Soviet Union detonated its first atomic bomb on August 29, 1949, with the help of Oppenheimer’s friend, Klaus Fuchs. To keep its superiority in the arms race, the US began the research for making hydrogen bombs and could successfully detonate it in November, 1952.

No country has so far used nuclear arms for military purposes except for the US. There is however concerns over some countries possessing nuclear arms, especially as some of them have refused to sign the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty (NPT).

“[Until September 9, 2009] there are over 20,000 nuclear weapons around the world. Many of them are still on hair-trigger alert, threatening our own survival,” said Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, in the Annual DPI/NGO Conference. 18,500 of these bombs were made by the US and Russia.

All five permanent members of the UN Security Council –America, France, Russia, China, and Britain- have atomic bombs and have been recognized as nuclear powers in the NPT. The NPT recognizes the countries that owned or detonated nuclear bombs or arms before January 1, 1967 on the condition that they would gradually be disarmed and destroy all their atomic bombs.

But the nuclear powers not only did not move toward nuclear disarmament- that was demanded by Article VI of the NPT, but also in some cases defended some countries who illegally possessed nuclear arms and in some other cases rejected the right to have peaceful nuclear energy for some other countries.

This contradiction in world nuclear powers actions has put many obstacles in the ways of a group of other countries who want to have peaceful nuclear energy, depriving them even of the rights that they legally have under the NPT.

The Article IV of the NPT recognizes “the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with articles I and II of this Treaty,” and demands all the member “to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.”

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is responsible for supervising over the implementation and observation of the NPT and Additional Protocol but it is too influenced by the nuclear powers that so far have fallen short of this responsibility.

For example Iran says it is after producing and using peaceful nuclear energy and there has been no evidence that proves otherwise. The members of Security Council however neither have helped Iran in this regards nor have recognized the country’s right to Uranium enrichment although it is considered as a basic right under the NPT. But when it comes to Israel, some of the nuclear powers who object to Iran’s peaceful nuclear program consider possession of nuclear bombs as the regime’s right not caring about the fact that it is not a member of the NPT. What’s more important is that the IAEA can’t do anything about it; it either keeps silent or sides with the Western powers.

Israel that has not declared itself a nuclear state is the biggest nuclear power outside the NPT. It acquired its first primitive nuclear bomb in late 1960s and now it is estimated that the regime has over half a ton of Plutonium and unknown amounts of enriched Uranium needed for making nuclear bombs. The amount of Plutonium kept by Israel is more that the amount the five nuclear powers possess altogether. Experts believe Israel has nearly 200 atomic bombs.

India, Pakistan, and North Korea also own atomic bombs. So far 188 countries have signed the NPT but India, Pakistan, and Israel has refused to sign the treaty. North Korea also left the treaty after violating it.

It seems that this dual approach towards a significant and sensitive issue like the right of the nations in accessing nuclear energy would only result in discredit of the NPT and the IAEA which can make the future of the world insecure. 

The post On This Day 68 Years Ago The Nuclear Age Began When The US Detonated The First Atomic Bomb first appeared on .

In response to reports of Russia’s supply of the sophisticated s-300 anti aircraft missiles to Syria IransView asked an Iranian MP his opinions.

Mehdi Sanaei, a member of the Iranian Majlis’ National Security and Foreign Policy Commission and the Chairman of Iran-Russia Parliamentary Friendship Group said in an interview with Iran’sView: “Russia has employed a more clear and determined foreign policy in the Middle East due to several reasons including the reelection of president Putin, also the enduring American intervention in different countries especially in the Middle East and because of the Libyan scenario.”

According to Sanaei, the U.S. and its allies passed a resolution in the UN [on Libya] but they “operated as they wanted” and denied Russia’s concerns.

He recalled “having the authority to impose a No Fly Zone in Libya, and the violation of international laws by the U.S. in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, the misusing of the resolution of the U.N. Security Council and the loss of Russia’s interests in Iraq, Libya and now the most important and the most recent one; Syria” as the reasons for Russia’s full political and military support for Damascus.

Sanaei believes that evidence shows Russia is serious in defending against any military intervention in Syria and emphasizes the political solutions based on the Geneva agreement.

On the possibility of Iran’s direct intervention in Syria he said: “Iran, Hezbollah and the so-called “Axis of Resistance” in the Middle East consider Syria as a front for their resistance and they will never compromise on that.”

“Iran doesn’t think direct intervention in Syria is necessary but it supports this country and provides advice and suggestions to the Syrian government”, said the Iranian MP.

“Iran’s and Hezbollah’s support has definitely led to more Russian support and changed the game,” he said.

Recently, contradictory leaks are revealed about the technologically advanced Russian S-300 Missiles transferred to Syria and even some pro-Syria media claimed that soon these missiles are operated in Syria.

US Secretary of State John Kerry reacted to the news and said the sale of S-300 air defense systems by Russia to Syria would be “destabilizing” for the region.

The British weekly Sunday Times quoted an unnamed Russian official as saying Israel has managed to convince Moscow that if the missiles will fall into the wrong hands, they can be used to attack civilian aircraft at Ben Gurion Airport.

But Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Tuesday that the air defense system was a “stabilizing factor” that could dissuade “some hotheads” from entering the unrest in Syria.

“We consider these supplies a stabilizing factor and believe such steps will deter some hotheads from considering scenarios that would turn the conflict international with the involvement of outside forces,” Ryabkov said.

He added that Moscow would go ahead with the decision since the contract for the delivery of the system had been signed several years ago.

The post Iran And Hezbollah Never Compromise on Syria: MP first appeared on .

“Iran’s Mission in Geneva has an active and effective participation in all topics related to the disarmament initiatives around the world,” said Sayed Abbas Araghchi, Spokesman of Iran’s Foreign Ministry in a press conference on Tuesday.

“We will continue to this effective and strong presence and others’ pressures or absence is not a matter of us,” he said.

The United States said Monday it will refuse to send its ambassador to any meeting of the U.N. forum where nuclear disarmament is negotiated when it’s chaired by Iran because countries under U.N. sanctions shouldn’t be allowed to hold such positions.

Erin Pelton, the spokesperson for the US Mission to the United Nations, said in a statement issued on Monday that the US would not send its ambassador to the conference.

The 65-nation Conference on Disarmament, based in Geneva, is the world’s most important disarmament negotiating forum. Though members have been divided in recent years, the conference and its predecessors have negotiated the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, considered the cornerstone of nuclear disarmament efforts, and the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

Iran, which frequently calls for the elimination of all the weapons of mass destruction in the world, will accede to the rotating presidency of the 65-nation conference based in Geneva on May 27 and hand it over to another country on June 23.

US repeatedly accused Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program. 

Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. 

In addition, the IAEA has conducted numerous inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities but has never found any evidence showing that Iran’s civilian nuclear program has been diverted to nuclear weapons production. 

The post US’ Absence in UN Disarmament Conference Does Not Matter, Says Iranian Official first appeared on .

With fears the war, now in its third year, could turn even deadlier, diplomatic efforts have been ramped up, with Russia and the US last week renewing joint efforts to find a solution to the crisis.

Salehi told Spiegel his country was willing to take part in an international conference on Syria proposed by the US and Russia, which could take place later this month.

Salehi said he was “confident” that progress was being made in the conflict, which is estimated to have killed 70,000 and displaced millions more internally and in neighboring countries.

Iran’s foreign minister also condemned the use of chemical weapons and appeared to offer to mediate in the Syria crisis.

“We condemn chemical weapons,” Ali Akbar Salehi told 

Iran, a strong Damascus ally, was itself a victim of chemical warfare during its conflict with Iraq in the 1980s, Salehi recalled.

Tehran is “categorically against all weapons of mass destruction”, he said.

Damascus government accused militant opposition groups of using chemical weapons against Syrian people and called for a UN probe to investigate the file.

US Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday said there was “strong evidence” the Assad’s forces had used chemical weapons against militiamen, but the UN said there was no incontrovertible evidence yet.

The post Iran to Launch Talks Between Syria’s Government and Opposition: Salehi first appeared on .

“Our technical developments continue within the framework of our obligations,” said Deputy Secretary of the Iranian National Security Council said in a meeting with students of the University of Tehran. “Iran’s coming presidential election will insure the progress of the country’s nuclear technical development.”

Slamming Iran’s nuclear negotiating team during 2003-05 with Europe led by Hassan Rowhani, Bagheri said: “In the past we did not have real negotiations and our national interest and security was damaged. We accepted a false term of ‘suspension’ and then our nuclear file was referred to the UN Security Council.”

“Discussion of our nuclear technical field was ignored in that period, consequently the other side [the West] told us to suspend the whole fuel cycle,” he said.

Hassan Rowhani, a candidate of the upcoming presidential election critiqued the process of the current nuclear talks in his election campaign speeches, describing it as “slow” and unable to stop sanctions against Iran.

While the election race heats up in Iran, the nuclear issue is one of the main topics, candidates talk about it in their campaign speeches.

“Time is in our favor,” Bagheri answering a question asked by a student regard prolongation of talks with the P5+1. “In the past time was against us because we suspended our nuclear activities and they were pressing us. But now even though [the west] continues its pressure against us, we are continuing to develop technical aspects of [our nuclear program].”

The Deputy Secretary of Iran’s Security Council denied the suspension of all of Iran’s nuclear activities was endorsed by the Supreme Leader.

In answer to increasing critics against the mandate of Rowhani in nuclear talks with Europe and acceptance of suspension of nuclear activities, he said on several occasions that the supreme leader endorsed the initiative.

“As Mr. Rowhani wrote in his book, the Supreme Leader only accepted the suspension of Gas injection and not all of the nuclear activities. It is an injustice to attribute our mistakes to the leader,” said Bagheri.

At the end of the discussion between the University of Tehran students and the Iranian deputy nuclear negotiator Ali Bagheri the students handed a letter to Bagheri inviting Saeed Jalili (The chief negotiator) to be a candidate in the presidential election. 

The post Iran’s Deputy Nuclear Negotiator Reviews Past Mistakes in Negotiations first appeared on .

Despite US and UK claims, Del Ponte said there are no evidence of government forces might also have used chemical weapons.

On the question of whether chemical weapons had been used, he called for an “end to the politicization of this issue” and to the “whipping up of an anti-Syrian atmosphere”.

Damascus is “genuinely worried” that Syria’s enemies could provide chemical weapons to armed groups “and then claim they had been used by the Syrian government,” Syrian Ambassador to the UN Bashar Ja’afari said in letters to the UN Security Council and the UN secretary general on December 17, 2012.

“Our investigators have been in neighbouring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals. According to their report of last week, which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated,” she said.

Sarin is a powerful neurotoxin developed by Nazi scientists in the 1930s which can cause respiratory arrest and death, and is classed as a weapon of mass destruction, banned under international law.

In meantime, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Ali Akbar Salehi headed to Jordan today to “discuss a political breakthrough from Syria crisis,” according to a statement by Ramin Mehmanparast, spokesman of Iran’s Foreign Ministry.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Arab and African Affairs, Hossain Amir- Abdollahian, will visit Syria this week.

“We are concerned by the signs that global public opinion is being prepared for possible armed intervention in the internal conflict in Syria,” Sergey Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister said on Monday.

US Secretary of State John Kerry also will travels to Moscow this week to discuss Syrian issue with his Russian counterpart.

“ Russia calls on nations to stop politicizing the issue of the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria, escalating anti-Syrian sentiment,” Lavarov.

The post Militants Have Used the Nerve Gas Agent in Syria: UN Investigator first appeared on .

Military threats coupled with economic sanctions from the US and the EU has hurt Iran’s economy and its currency lost almost two thirds of its value; Meaning that the people can buy less and their income doesn’t match the increasing prices.

The People’s Participation in the Election Despite Domestic Instability

Military threats aren’t the only problem Iranian people are dealing with today. It has been quite some time since some Iranian officials are dissenting on domestic issues.

Iran is passing its most tense situation. As we move closer to the Presidential Election each party tries to gather the public’s attention and reach power. Even the patriot “Principalists” party is facing divisions among themselves.

This tension began after the Presidential Elections in 2009. Reformist candidates rejected the outcome and claimed fraud in the voting process and encouraged voters to take the protest to the streets. Protests began slowly and over time it turned Iran into turmoil and the street protests lasted 8 months. It all ended when masses of people came to the streets and demanded the trial of the leaders of the unrest.

Last year Iran held Parliamentary Elections which was the first elections after the 2009 unrest. International sanctions had the highest impact and people were facing growing economic problems. The dissent between the Majlis (Parliament) and the government flared up as the Majlis insisted on questioning the President for his actions. Because of the discontent among the people analysts expected a very low participation in the elections. But at 65% the voter turnout was even higher than the previous Parliamentary elections.

People Unity Regarding Nuclear Issue

Nuclear Energy is just the West’s bargaining chip to pressure Iran. With this in hand they have been able to enforce an all-out assault on Iran, ranging from psychological warfare to every kinds of sanctions and economic pressures.

Despite all the sanctions and pressures from the US to cancel Iran’s nuclear program Iran has been able to reach 20% uranium enrichment and claims that every details of the knowledge was achieved within Iran without any foreign help.

Four nuclear scientists have been murdered in terrorist acts in the past two years. This shows how advanced Iran’s nuclear program is that they are trying to stop it with terrorist acts. It is believed that these attacks were made by Mossad agents to cause fear among those associated with this technology. But after these attacks many Iranian college students said they wanted to change their field of study to nuclear physics to fill the place of those martyred scientists and insure that nuclear technology would thrive.

A Public Poll shows 63% of Iranians are in favor of the nuclear program.

The Gallop Institution revealed that its surveys show that Iranians blame the US for sanctions and they fully support their nuclear program. It seems that one of the goals of imposed sanctions by Obama is to distance people from their government. But Iranians are in favor of their nuclear program however the questionnaire was designed to indicate economic problems as the main result of the sanctions.

The question was this: Given the impact of the economic sanctions against Iran should Iran continue to develop its nuclear capabilities? About 63% said yes, 17% said no and 19% refused to answer. They blamed the US for sanctions and 1 in 5 of them blamed the Iranian government. While less than that blamed the EU and the UN.

With these surveys analysts knew that the Iranian people would close ranks and defend their national interests against foreign enemies. After 34 years of sanctions Iran is on its feet.

8 years of war between Iran and Iraq supports this fact. During this war Iran was effectively held hostage by 30 different countries. This means many countries were in the enemy front lines helping Saddam’s regime. Iran was under strict sanctions and countries refused to sell her military equipment. According to Iranian officials Iran couldn’t even purchase barbed wire.

Iranian regime with the help of the media showed there are other economic difficulties in the EU and the US so Iranians haven’t felt alone in the global financial crisis.

Iranians see OWS (Occupy Wall Street) as a result of the pressures that American people are facing. Many European countries are having a budget deficit and people in many countries like Spain Italy and Greece are showing the discontent in street violence.

But the Iranian government proudly says that unlike the US and the EU Iran’s problem are caused by outsiders and sanctions. Handling these pressures can result in Iran’s self-sufficiency, advancement and victory. This may be the reason why in Iran the economic pressures don’t end in street violence.

Street reports indicate that although the prices are overwhelmingly increasing especially for essential goods Iran is having calm days.

The post Iran Weathers The Not So Crippling Sanctions Storm first appeared on .

By Shenali Waduge

Eurasiareview: The British medical journal Lancet reported that the US-led unprovoked 2003 bombing, invasion and military take-over of Iraq—which NATO officially joined in 2004 in a ‘training’ capacity—had resulted in over 665,000 civilian deaths by 2006, and 200,000 in the UN-authorized, 1991 Desert Storm massacre led primarily by the US with several NATO allies. No cries for accountability, no Resolutions, no fact-finding missions and no Pillai statements. That is to be expected. We would all honor fair play. That however is lacking in Sri Lanka’s case.

Libya was said to be a humanitarian operation to free the people of Libya from Gaddafi. In reality it turned out not so and Libya was said to have been bombed to the stone age. The quickly compiled 200page UNHRC report on US/NATO intervention lacked clarity and avoided NATO war crimes. On February 15, 2012, NATO’s Legal Adviser Peter Olson wrote a strong letter to the Chair of the Commission that NATO’s “violations” during the conflict was not to be mentioned ““We would be concerned, however, if ‘NATO incidents’ were included in the Commission’s report as on a par with those which the Commission may ultimately conclude did violate law or constitute crimes.” and Navi Pillay says naught.

Why has our Foreign Minister not brought these arguments at least to the forefront of discussions? Sri Lanka knows it is targeted but we must fall with dignity not through servility which the foreign minister always advocated. It is a humiliation to the entire nation and an insult to our armed forces. Every area that we have been unjustly targeted we should have shown by examples how the UN/UNHRC has done otherwise in relation to bigger and more powerful states.

Since the creation of the UNHRC in 2006, 32 Resolutions have been brought against Israel (comprising 48% of all Resolutions). By 2007, 9 Resolutions even condemned Israel but then US is there to veto Resolutions against Israel. While films get VIP status against Sri Lanka on the halls of the UN/UNHRC the decision to allow a Hamas politician to address a NGO event was responded to critically by Israel’s PM “”He represents an organization that indiscriminately targets children and grown-ups, and women and men. Innocents – is their special favorite target.” Israel has now severed ties with the UN and not a hum.

Headlines chronicle US/NATO’s crime spree – NO Resolutions have been brought against the US or NATO states and UNHRC report after Libya’s intervention will reveal the hypocrisy that prevails.

US/NATO crimes in Iraq

US used 120,000 sorties and 265,000 bombs dropped in Iraq in 1991. From 1991 to 200341,000 sorties and 27,000 bombs dropped. US bombing of Iraq has left a legacy of deformed Iraqis. In 1991 Radioactive residue from the 800 tons of bombs and 1 million rounds of ammunition used was soon showing up in babies born with huge heads, abnormally large eyes, stunted arms, bloated stomachs and defective hearts. In 2010, the University of Ulster reported that increases in congenital birth defects, leukemia and infant mortality in Falluja were higher than in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. While insurgents are armed to ensure there will never be peace in Iraq whilst private paramilitaries guard all foreign investments as they plunder Iraq.

• “Cable Implicates Americans in Deaths of Iraqi Civilians.” New York Times, Sept. 2, 2011

• “Civilians Die in a Raid by Americans and Iraqis.” New York Times, Aug. 7, 2011

President Bush ordered the destruction of facilities essential to civilian life and economic productivity throughout Iraq (starting 16 January 1991 and continued for 42 days without any Iraqi defense resistance or fire). 110,000 air sorties against Iraq, dropping 88,000 tons of bombs, nearly seven times the equivalent of the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima. 93% of the bombs were free falling bombs, most dropped from higher than 30,000 feet. Of the remaining 7% of the bombs with electronically guided systems, more than 25% missed their targets, nearly all caused damage primarily beyond any identifiable target. Most of the targets were civilian facilities. The Pentagon later conceded that only seven percent of all bombs used against Iraq were the so-called “smart bombs.” These weapons hit their targets about 80 to 90 percent of the time, while their “dumb” counterparts missed their targets 75 percent of the time. In the end, 70 percent of the bombs dropped on Iraq missed their intended targets. Witnesses to the destruction said that the Coalition bombing leveled entire blocks of civilian homes….

Among the facilities targeted by US forces and destroyed were:

• electric power generation, relay and transmission;

• water treatment, pumping and distribution systems and reservoirs;

• telephone and radio exchanges, relay stations, towers and transmission facilities;

• food processing, storage and distribution facilities and markets, infant milk formula and beverage plants, animal vaccination facilities and irrigation sites;

• railroad transportation facilities, bus depots, bridges, highway overpasses, highways, highway repair stations, trains, buses and other public transportation vehicles, commercial and private vehicles;

• oil wells and pumps, pipelines, refineries, oil storage tanks, gasoline filling stations and fuel delivery tank cars and trucks, and kerosene storage tanks;

• sewage treatment and disposal systems;

•  factories engaged in civilian production, e.g., textile and automobile assembly; and historical markers and ancient sites.

Tens of thousands of people have died from dehydration, dysentery and diseases caused by impure water, inability to obtain effective medical assistance and debilitation from hunger, shock, cold and stress. The destruction of civilian facilities left the entire civilian population without heat, cooking fuel, refrigeration, potable water, telephones, power for radio or TV reception, public transportation and fuel for private automobiles. It also limited food supplies, closed schools, created massive unemployment, severely limited economic activity and caused hospitals and medical services to shut down. As a single illustration, Iraq consumed infant milk formula at a rate of 2,500 tons per month during the first seven months of 1990. From November 1, 1990, to February 7, 1991, Iraq was able to import only 17 tons. Its own productive capacity was destroyed. Many Iraqis believed that President Bush intended that their infants die because he targeted their food supply. The Red Crescent Society of Iraq estimated 3,000 infant deaths as of February 7, 1991, resulting from infant milk formula and infant medication shortages. The US has violated the UN Charter, Hague and Geneva Conventions, Nuremberg Charter and the laws of armed conflict – Navi Pillay, any comments? Sri Lanka took on the LTTE after it closed the sluice gates in Mavil Aru denying water and means of livelihood to thousands of civilians.

US/NATO crimes in Afghanistan

The 9/11 bombing of the US was used as an excuse to militarily intervene in Afghanistan though the hijackers were mostly Saudis and none was an Afghan.

• “U.S. troops posed with body parts of Afghan bombers.” Los Angeles Times, April 18, 2012

• “G.I. Kills 16 Afghans, Including 9 Children In Attacks on Homes.” New York Times, March 12, 2012

• “NATO Admits Airstrike Killed 8 Young Afghans, but Contends They Were Armed.” New York Times, Feb. 16, 2012

• “Informer Misled NATO in Airstrike That Killed 8 Civilians, Afghans Say.” (Seven shepherd boys under 14.) New York Times, Feb. 10, 2012

• “Video [of U.S. Marines urinating on dead Taliban fighters] Inflames a Delicate Moment for U.S. in Afghanistan.” New York Times, Jan. 12, 2012

• “Commission alleges U.S. detainee abuse.” Minneapolis StarTribune, Jan. 8, 2012

• “Six Children Are Killed by NATO Airstrike in Afghanistan.” New York Times, Nov. 25, 2011

• “American Soldier Is Convicted of Killing Afghan Civilians for Sport.” New York Times, Nov. 11, 2011

• “Pakistan: U.S. Drone Strike Kills Brother of a Taliban Commander.” New York Times, Oct. 28, 2011

• “Afghanistan officials ‘systematically tortured’ detainees, UN report says.” Guardian, & BBC Oct. 10; Washington Post, Oct. 11, 2011

• ·G.I. Killed Afghan Journalist, NATO Says.” New York Times, Sept. 9, 2011

• “Raid on Wrong House Kills Afghan Girl, 12.” New York Times, May 12, 2011

• “Disposal of Bin Laden’s remains violated Islamic principles, clerics say.” Associated Press, May 2, 2011

•  “Photos of atrocities seen as threat to Afghan relations.” St. Paul Pioneer Press, March 22, 2011

• “Afghans Say Attack Killed 52 Civilians; NATO Differs.” New York Times, July 27, 2010

• “Afgans Say NATO Troops Killed 8 Civilians in Raid.” New York Times, Aug. 24, 2010

• “A dozen or more” Afghan civilians were killed during a nighttime raid August 5, 2010 in eastern Afghanistan, NATO’s officers said. Chicago Tribune, Aug. 6, 2010

• “Afghans Die in Bombing, As Toll Rises for Civilians.” New York Times, May 3, 2010

US/NATO crimes in Libya

• “NATO Strikes Libyan State TV Transmitters.” New York Times, July 31, 2011

•  “NATO admits raid probably killed nine in Tripoli.” St. Paul Pioneer Press, June 20, 2011

• “Libya Effort Is Called Violation of War Act.” New York Times, May 26, 2011

• “NATO Accused of Going Too Far With Libya Strikes.” New York Times, May 2, 2011

• Gerald A. Perreira, “British Intelligence Worked with Al Qaeda to Kill Qaddafi,” Global Research, March 25, 2011

In July 2011, NATO aircraft bombed Libya’s main water supply facility, which provided water to approximately 70 percent of the nation’s population.

British Special Forces played a key role in steering and supervising Libya’s “freedom fighters” to victory.

US/NATO crimes Somalia

• “U.S. Expands Its Drone War to Take On Somali Militants.” New York Times, July 2, 2011

US/NATO Crimes in Yemen

• “Yemen: 2 Killed in Missile Strike.” Associated Press, May 5, 2011

US/NATO crimes in Pakistan

• “Missiles Kill 26 in Pakistan” (“most of them civilians”) New York Times, March 18, 2011

• In June 2008, NATO bombers attacked a Pakistani paramilitary force called the Frontier Corps killing 11 of its soldiers. New York Times, Nov. 27, 2011

• Did the US troops not enter Pakistan without Pakistani Govt knowledge and kill an unarmed Osama bin Laden including his unarmed son watched by the US President, the US Secretary of State and numerous other US military personnel?

The US/NATO crimes is nothing even the common man is not aware about. When organizations tasked to keep peace hide their crimes whilst going after smaller nations it spells doom for a world supposedly working towards peace.

When nations of the West are experiencing economic downfall we know that it is looking once again to the East to continue the second phase of their plunder – Asia and Africa will always be the targets as they are rich in resources STILL.

It is a pity that neither Russia or China are interested to bring any Resolution against the US/NATO for their crimes. It is a pity that there are some Sri Lankans who also join the bandwagon of destabilizing Sri Lanka showing little love for their motherland or even appreciation for the armed forces that sacrificed their lives to save the nation. Material and monetary benefits often gets the better of people unfortunately.

If the world is truly concerned about justice then the one’s pointing fingers need to first be investigated.

The views expressed are the author’s own.

The post What Is the OHCHR doing About US/NATO Atrocities? first appeared on .