Iran would try to deliver some weapons and other necessary equipment to Yemeni Houthis in every possible way either via Oman or Djibouti or some smugglers from Somalia. Moreover, Iran would try to provoke the Shiite people in Bahrain or Eastern province of Al-Ahsa in Saudi Arabia or the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in order to destabilize some countries within Saudi-led coalition. Furthermore, Iran would probably order Hamas, Jihad and even Hezbollah to fire some rockets toward Israel, if the Yemeni war would continue in the long term. To put it simply, Iran would try to increase the costs and destabilize every part of the Middle East including the two Straits of Hormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb in different terms and based on every possible reasons, if the war in Yemen would continue in the long term as it is currently.
But the chance that Iran would enter into a direct military confrontation with Saudi Arabia at this stage because of Yemen itself, is very low or i might say almost impossible. Due to the fact that Iran's proxy i.e. Houthis are steady and gradually wining the war in Yemen. In addition, Iran is trying to deceive the international community for a nuclear deal at the present. The decision makers in Tehran are smart enough to don't do a huge tactical mistake like that at least at this stage.
Unless Saudi Arabia would perform a direct military operation against Iran or Assad's forces in Syria or Iran's IRGC-Quds Forces in Iraq, for example. In such a scenario, Iran would undoubtedly retaliate by all means from different battlefields; but not at this stage.
M. Sirani 30.04.2015
Thursday, April 30, 2015
Exclusive: The Secret Activity of Iranian Nuclear Procurement Network Linked to Two Blacklisted Firms.
Trust, verification, sanctions, monitoring by IAEA inspectors and blah blah blah blah.
Read the whole article in the following link:
Title: Exclusive: Britain told U.N. monitors of active Iran nuclear procurement - panel
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/30/us-iran-nuclear-idUSKBN0NL09220150430
M. Sirani 30.04.2015
As i have repeatedly mentioned, you cannot stop Iran's adventurous and secret nuclear activity. Here below is a copy of my previous short note in this matter.
Deal or No Deal, Iran is Passing the Nuclear Red line Secretly Somewhere in the Future.
This is a real scenario with regards to Iran's secret and adventurous nuclear activity and you, the western countries, cannot do anything at all about it not only at this stage but also in the future, based on many reasons. When it comes to Iran's nuclear activity, you have some limited number of options. The first option was and is sanctions. The series of imposed sanctions might slowed down Iran's nuclear activity or as some claim it brought Iran back to the nuclear negotiations. But, as we have observed in the last couple of years, the sanctions couldn't/cannot totally stop Iran in this important matter.
Your second option might/would be a broad military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. In this respect, you cannot totally dismantle Iran's nuclear facilities by military strike based on its large and broad dimensions, which have been spread across the country and the negative consequences of such a operation. In addition. Iran has learned the nuclear technology, which cannot be destroyed by a military strike. Moreover, you cannot completely destroy an underground nuclear facility like Fordo by a military strike. Furthermore, a broad military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities not only would cause a huge collateral and environmental damages within Iran, it would damage the entire Middle East environmentally as well. As such, i don't think that any politician would dare to take a such a risk.
Based on brief explanation noted above, you (the western countries) are left with only one reasonable, logical and less costly option in comparison with two other options.This option is a fundamental Regime Change in Iran.
Note: By implementing Regime Change Policy, i don't mean the western countries should follow the path of the last 36 years. Because during all those years, you have been trapped within either Good Cup-Bad Cup policy of the Islamic Regime or you have been deluded by the Iranian Regime's lobbyists in different occassions. To put its simply, you have gambled on the wrong horses in the past 36 years. You should completely detach yourself from these two delusional options, if you really want to have a peaceful and stable Middle East in the future. Otherwise, be prepared for swallowing the whole Middle East and Africa by a nuclear-armed Iran beyond your will, control and power.
M. Sirani 20.03.2015
Read the whole article in the following link:
Title: Exclusive: Britain told U.N. monitors of active Iran nuclear procurement - panel
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/30/us-iran-nuclear-idUSKBN0NL09220150430
M. Sirani 30.04.2015
As i have repeatedly mentioned, you cannot stop Iran's adventurous and secret nuclear activity. Here below is a copy of my previous short note in this matter.
Deal or No Deal, Iran is Passing the Nuclear Red line Secretly Somewhere in the Future.
This is a real scenario with regards to Iran's secret and adventurous nuclear activity and you, the western countries, cannot do anything at all about it not only at this stage but also in the future, based on many reasons. When it comes to Iran's nuclear activity, you have some limited number of options. The first option was and is sanctions. The series of imposed sanctions might slowed down Iran's nuclear activity or as some claim it brought Iran back to the nuclear negotiations. But, as we have observed in the last couple of years, the sanctions couldn't/cannot totally stop Iran in this important matter.
Your second option might/would be a broad military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. In this respect, you cannot totally dismantle Iran's nuclear facilities by military strike based on its large and broad dimensions, which have been spread across the country and the negative consequences of such a operation. In addition. Iran has learned the nuclear technology, which cannot be destroyed by a military strike. Moreover, you cannot completely destroy an underground nuclear facility like Fordo by a military strike. Furthermore, a broad military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities not only would cause a huge collateral and environmental damages within Iran, it would damage the entire Middle East environmentally as well. As such, i don't think that any politician would dare to take a such a risk.
Based on brief explanation noted above, you (the western countries) are left with only one reasonable, logical and less costly option in comparison with two other options.This option is a fundamental Regime Change in Iran.
Note: By implementing Regime Change Policy, i don't mean the western countries should follow the path of the last 36 years. Because during all those years, you have been trapped within either Good Cup-Bad Cup policy of the Islamic Regime or you have been deluded by the Iranian Regime's lobbyists in different occassions. To put its simply, you have gambled on the wrong horses in the past 36 years. You should completely detach yourself from these two delusional options, if you really want to have a peaceful and stable Middle East in the future. Otherwise, be prepared for swallowing the whole Middle East and Africa by a nuclear-armed Iran beyond your will, control and power.
M. Sirani 20.03.2015
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
Australian Authority Should Not Complain About the Violation of Human Rights in Indonesia. Wonder Why?
Briefly:
I'm completely against death punishment no matter when, where, how or based on what reason or performed by which type of political system. In my opinion, execution is a clear violation of human rights. As such, i strongly condemn the recent execution of eight prisoners in Indonesia. But, in this respect, i don't think that i as an individual and the Australian authority share a common value or move in the same direction; no matter how strongly the Australian authority condemns the barbaric act of the Indonesian authority with regard to the recent executions. One might wonder why?
Since many years ago (beginning from 2007 as far as i know) the Australian authority has begun to return some asylum seekers (Migrant Boats) to Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and some other South East Asian countries. This behavior of the Australian authority raises some serious questions as follows.
1- Is this move of Australian authority according to the internationally accepted and ratified human rights laws and conventions?
2- Doesn't Australia violate the international human rights laws and conventions by this move?
3- Do the political systems in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea fully respect the human rights laws and conventions with regard to their own citizens and those asylum seekers that Australia returns them back to those countries?
4- If the political system, for example, in Indonesia does not respect the basic human rights laws and conventions, then why should a so-called democratic country like Australia return the desperate migrants and asylum seekers to an unsafe country?
5- Finally, who / which authority is responsible, if something happens to those asylum seekers in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, due to clear violation of human rights?
Based on brief explanation above, the current Australian authority should stop with crocodile tears and fundamentally change its own inhuman & barbaric laws and regulations with regards to migrant boats. Otherwise, there is no difference between Indonesian and Australian political systems in my opinion in terms of an important subject like human rights. Because, both violate the basic human rights conventions with different tools and methods.
Note: Human rights is not a eatable fruit just for the western citizens.
M. Sirani 29.04.2015
I'm completely against death punishment no matter when, where, how or based on what reason or performed by which type of political system. In my opinion, execution is a clear violation of human rights. As such, i strongly condemn the recent execution of eight prisoners in Indonesia. But, in this respect, i don't think that i as an individual and the Australian authority share a common value or move in the same direction; no matter how strongly the Australian authority condemns the barbaric act of the Indonesian authority with regard to the recent executions. One might wonder why?
Since many years ago (beginning from 2007 as far as i know) the Australian authority has begun to return some asylum seekers (Migrant Boats) to Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and some other South East Asian countries. This behavior of the Australian authority raises some serious questions as follows.
1- Is this move of Australian authority according to the internationally accepted and ratified human rights laws and conventions?
2- Doesn't Australia violate the international human rights laws and conventions by this move?
3- Do the political systems in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea fully respect the human rights laws and conventions with regard to their own citizens and those asylum seekers that Australia returns them back to those countries?
4- If the political system, for example, in Indonesia does not respect the basic human rights laws and conventions, then why should a so-called democratic country like Australia return the desperate migrants and asylum seekers to an unsafe country?
5- Finally, who / which authority is responsible, if something happens to those asylum seekers in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, due to clear violation of human rights?
Based on brief explanation above, the current Australian authority should stop with crocodile tears and fundamentally change its own inhuman & barbaric laws and regulations with regards to migrant boats. Otherwise, there is no difference between Indonesian and Australian political systems in my opinion in terms of an important subject like human rights. Because, both violate the basic human rights conventions with different tools and methods.
Note: Human rights is not a eatable fruit just for the western citizens.
M. Sirani 29.04.2015
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
Honestly; Who Should We Blame?
In his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to finish the two wars and bring back home the U.S. forces.
What happen after six years?
Due to some unknown circumstance/s, the USA is currently involved in war in 1-Ukraine, 2-Afghanistan, 3- Iraq, 4- Syria, 5-Yemen, along with many other secret and proxy wars in Libya, Somalia, Nigeria, Mali, etc.
This issue raises a serious question as follows.
Question: Who should we blame?
A: President Obama
B: Some genius advisers
C: Those powerful rich individuals or companies that supported Obama's presidential campaign.
D: Three Musketeers G. Bush, D. Cheney, D. Rumsfeld
E: E. Snowden
F: President Putin
G: The skeleton of Osama Bin Laden drowned somewhere deep in the ocean
H: The cook of the White House
I: Global warming and melting the ice bergs in both North & South pole
J: Wrong rotation of the Earth
K: Flying Hubble Telescope somewhere in the Milky Way
L: My naughty sense of humor.
Note: The best answer will receive a nice intellectual gift.
When it comes to the foreign policy, Obama administration should get the Nobel Price for most chaotic foreign policy in the entire history.
M. Sirani 28.04.2015
What happen after six years?
Due to some unknown circumstance/s, the USA is currently involved in war in 1-Ukraine, 2-Afghanistan, 3- Iraq, 4- Syria, 5-Yemen, along with many other secret and proxy wars in Libya, Somalia, Nigeria, Mali, etc.
This issue raises a serious question as follows.
Question: Who should we blame?
A: President Obama
B: Some genius advisers
C: Those powerful rich individuals or companies that supported Obama's presidential campaign.
D: Three Musketeers G. Bush, D. Cheney, D. Rumsfeld
E: E. Snowden
F: President Putin
G: The skeleton of Osama Bin Laden drowned somewhere deep in the ocean
H: The cook of the White House
I: Global warming and melting the ice bergs in both North & South pole
J: Wrong rotation of the Earth
K: Flying Hubble Telescope somewhere in the Milky Way
L: My naughty sense of humor.
Note: The best answer will receive a nice intellectual gift.
When it comes to the foreign policy, Obama administration should get the Nobel Price for most chaotic foreign policy in the entire history.
M. Sirani 28.04.2015
Monday, April 27, 2015
Ukraine's Signing Free Trade With EU Might Lead To Division of Ukraine into Two Pieces.
Briefly: I have warned about this event (Dividing Ukraine) in some of my previous short notes as well.
As the media reveal, Ukraine has signed the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the EU today. Regardless of this deal would be beneficial for the majority of Ukrainian people or not, this agreement would be inevitably accompanied with some unpleasant consequences at three domestic, regional and global levels each from different angles and scales as follows.
1- At domestic level: Since the beginning of the civil war, the majority of ethnic Russian rebels have been trying to achieve more rights and a type of semi- autonomy system within Ukraine under the central command of authority in Kiev. Moreover, the ethnic Russian rebels were / are totally against the idea that Ukraine would become a member of the EU and NATO based on many reasons, which exploring them is beyond the scope of this short note. Based on these issues, the Free Trade Agreement between Ukraine and the EU would be identified by ethnic Russian rebels as an unpleasant event; an event, which would threaten the social, cultural, economic and political interests of the ethnic Russians in short as well as long terms within Ukraine. As such, the deal would undoubtedly intensify the level of tension in Ukraine in the sense that the deal would force the ethnic Russian rebels to pursue a completely secession from Ukraine; the establishment of a new and separate state in the eastern parts of Ukraine.
2- At regional and global level: Ukraine's FTA with the EU would be identified by policy makers in Kremlin as an act of Western progressive aggression near to its borders; an act of aggression, which would threaten the interests of Russia in different terms including geopolitical aspect. This event would intensify the level of the tension between Russia and the Western countries in various forms and terms. As such, there is high probability that Russia not only would increase the level of its support and assistance to the ethnic Russian rebels in different terms, but also it would try to connect the Crimea to the mainland through Luhansk province by the help and assistance of the Russian Rebels. To put its simply, there is high probability that Ukraine would be divided into two separate states, as the map below illustrates. Should this happen, Russia would probably replace some of its nuclear weapons in the Crimea as a deterrence factor in order to 1- have more control in the Black Sea and Azov Sea and 2- prevent the further progress and aggression of the Western countries in both Black and Azov Seas.
Important: The Western countries should bear in mind that Russia might unilaterally leave the New START Treaty, if the tension in Ukraine will intensify due to the miscalculation and adventurous behavior of some policy makers in the West & Russia.
Note: I hope my prediction in this matter does not come true; because the negative consequences would be devastating for different actors particularly for the Ukrainian people.
M. Sirani 27.04.2015
As the media reveal, Ukraine has signed the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the EU today. Regardless of this deal would be beneficial for the majority of Ukrainian people or not, this agreement would be inevitably accompanied with some unpleasant consequences at three domestic, regional and global levels each from different angles and scales as follows.
1- At domestic level: Since the beginning of the civil war, the majority of ethnic Russian rebels have been trying to achieve more rights and a type of semi- autonomy system within Ukraine under the central command of authority in Kiev. Moreover, the ethnic Russian rebels were / are totally against the idea that Ukraine would become a member of the EU and NATO based on many reasons, which exploring them is beyond the scope of this short note. Based on these issues, the Free Trade Agreement between Ukraine and the EU would be identified by ethnic Russian rebels as an unpleasant event; an event, which would threaten the social, cultural, economic and political interests of the ethnic Russians in short as well as long terms within Ukraine. As such, the deal would undoubtedly intensify the level of tension in Ukraine in the sense that the deal would force the ethnic Russian rebels to pursue a completely secession from Ukraine; the establishment of a new and separate state in the eastern parts of Ukraine.
2- At regional and global level: Ukraine's FTA with the EU would be identified by policy makers in Kremlin as an act of Western progressive aggression near to its borders; an act of aggression, which would threaten the interests of Russia in different terms including geopolitical aspect. This event would intensify the level of the tension between Russia and the Western countries in various forms and terms. As such, there is high probability that Russia not only would increase the level of its support and assistance to the ethnic Russian rebels in different terms, but also it would try to connect the Crimea to the mainland through Luhansk province by the help and assistance of the Russian Rebels. To put its simply, there is high probability that Ukraine would be divided into two separate states, as the map below illustrates. Should this happen, Russia would probably replace some of its nuclear weapons in the Crimea as a deterrence factor in order to 1- have more control in the Black Sea and Azov Sea and 2- prevent the further progress and aggression of the Western countries in both Black and Azov Seas.
Important: The Western countries should bear in mind that Russia might unilaterally leave the New START Treaty, if the tension in Ukraine will intensify due to the miscalculation and adventurous behavior of some policy makers in the West & Russia.
Note: I hope my prediction in this matter does not come true; because the negative consequences would be devastating for different actors particularly for the Ukrainian people.
M. Sirani 27.04.2015
Sunday, April 26, 2015
Jason Rezaian, As a Bargaining Chip and Hostage, Would Be Released From Prison, Following the Useless Emerging Nuclear Deal.
I know this event is tough for J. Rezaian and his family. But this is the ordinary and regular tactic of the Islamic Regime for getting maximum advantage and ransom in every foreign affairs dispute. Those, who have a dream to invest in Iran following the emerging nuclear deal, should consider this special favor of the Iranian Regime in their analysis. This is, in fact, a small price that you should pay, when you are dealing with Iran; no matter who you are or what type of economic, cultural, political or diplomatic immunity you have. The Islamic Regime doesn't care.
M. Sirani 26.04.2015
M. Sirani 26.04.2015
Adjust Your Current Policy With Regards to Yemen or Face a Huge Fiasco Somewhere in the Near Future.
Briefly:
With current military operation you might be able to destroy all heavy weaponry equipment or some strategic roads or bridges across Yemen. But these achievements would never lead you toward a total victory in Yemen, based on many reasons, which are beyond the scope of this short note. You should fundamentally adjust your plan in this matter, before it's too late.
If you continue with this operation, the Yemeni tension would undoubtedly spillover into Saudi's territory probably in the Eastern province, somewhere in the future. In addition, your wrong policy might end up to total closure of Bab-el-Mandeb. Bear in mind that the 40 kilometers width Bab-el-Mandeb can be easily impassible for any ships by firing some light artillery or rockets from Somalia and Yemen by anyone or any terrorist group that have some basic knowledge about guerrilla warfare.
In such a scenario, your heavy equipped aircraft carrier cannot do anything at all. In short, when it comes to Yemen, you are too late, too short, too ineffective.
Thus, review and adjust your plan, before you end up into a huge fiasco.
M. Sirani 26.04.2015
With current military operation you might be able to destroy all heavy weaponry equipment or some strategic roads or bridges across Yemen. But these achievements would never lead you toward a total victory in Yemen, based on many reasons, which are beyond the scope of this short note. You should fundamentally adjust your plan in this matter, before it's too late.
If you continue with this operation, the Yemeni tension would undoubtedly spillover into Saudi's territory probably in the Eastern province, somewhere in the future. In addition, your wrong policy might end up to total closure of Bab-el-Mandeb. Bear in mind that the 40 kilometers width Bab-el-Mandeb can be easily impassible for any ships by firing some light artillery or rockets from Somalia and Yemen by anyone or any terrorist group that have some basic knowledge about guerrilla warfare.
In such a scenario, your heavy equipped aircraft carrier cannot do anything at all. In short, when it comes to Yemen, you are too late, too short, too ineffective.
Thus, review and adjust your plan, before you end up into a huge fiasco.
M. Sirani 26.04.2015
Friday, April 24, 2015
Why Don't You Impose Oil Embargo on Libya? Do We Have to Blame Putin for This Problem?
Libya is struggling with a severe civil war, since your genius move and removing Qaddafi from the power. The country has become a failed state and consequently a suitable platform for every terrorist and criminal groups across the Middle East and Africa. At the moment two different groups are fighting with each other uselessly to seize the power in the whole country.
Why don't you impose oil embargo on Libya? Why don't you use this only leverage in order to force those two groups for a compromise or a diplomatic solution for Libya? Is there any disagreement between U.S. or EU oil companies with regards to Libyan oil reserves and who should earn more or less in this matter?
Note: Billions of dollars Libyan money, whether state money or Qaddafi's money is in the U.S. and EU banks. Thus, you don't have any problem amid financial issue. What is the problem then? Do we have to blame President Putin and Russia for this disaster? Does Russia veto any resolution in this matter within the UN Security Council? Or do you need to see couple of thousands more body bags in Greece, Spain and Italy to fix the problem in Libya?
It's funny. The leaders of 28 EU countries had a conference about migrant boats; they have decided to destroy the boats, arrest the smugglers, more patrol in the Mediterranean Sea. But no one has suggested this issue and how to fundamentally fix the problem in Libya; a country, which has become the main platform for transporting the migrants from Africa to Europe.
Blame Putin; enjoy the cheap Libyan oil; forget the rest of the story.
M. Sirani 24.04.2015
Why don't you impose oil embargo on Libya? Why don't you use this only leverage in order to force those two groups for a compromise or a diplomatic solution for Libya? Is there any disagreement between U.S. or EU oil companies with regards to Libyan oil reserves and who should earn more or less in this matter?
Note: Billions of dollars Libyan money, whether state money or Qaddafi's money is in the U.S. and EU banks. Thus, you don't have any problem amid financial issue. What is the problem then? Do we have to blame President Putin and Russia for this disaster? Does Russia veto any resolution in this matter within the UN Security Council? Or do you need to see couple of thousands more body bags in Greece, Spain and Italy to fix the problem in Libya?
It's funny. The leaders of 28 EU countries had a conference about migrant boats; they have decided to destroy the boats, arrest the smugglers, more patrol in the Mediterranean Sea. But no one has suggested this issue and how to fundamentally fix the problem in Libya; a country, which has become the main platform for transporting the migrants from Africa to Europe.
Blame Putin; enjoy the cheap Libyan oil; forget the rest of the story.
M. Sirani 24.04.2015
Thursday, April 23, 2015
Intensifying Tension in Yemen is Equivalent to Increasing Uprising in Bahrain and Possibly in the Eastern Part of Saudi Arabia, More Terrorist Activities of Muslim Brotherhood and other Radical Groups in Egypt and Of Course Firing Rockets From Gaza to Israel.
Hamas has recently received some amount of money from the Islamic Regime, which is under severe sanctions. What would be the move of the Islamic Regime, when the sanctions are lifted?
Note: I repeat my words again: with current policy, the Saudi Arabia-led coalition will badly lose the battle in Yemen and consequently the Yemeni civil war will spread into Saudi Arabia's territory and other parts of the Middle East somewhere in the near future.
Trust me: If you deploy your best ground forces into Yemen, you lose the battle in that country. You are too late, too short and with current policy, you reach nothing, except the total destruction of the country and a huge amount of revenge left for the Houthis in the final stage. In the best possible situation, if you are lucky of course, you will again divide Yemen into two pieces. (Although, i personally doubt about this possibility; the Iranian Regime would not allow you to do that at this stage based on many reasons). Iran has the upper hand in Yemen and some other parts of the Middle East; as such, it undoubtedly goes for "All or Nothing".
M. Sirani 23.04.2015
Note: I repeat my words again: with current policy, the Saudi Arabia-led coalition will badly lose the battle in Yemen and consequently the Yemeni civil war will spread into Saudi Arabia's territory and other parts of the Middle East somewhere in the near future.
Trust me: If you deploy your best ground forces into Yemen, you lose the battle in that country. You are too late, too short and with current policy, you reach nothing, except the total destruction of the country and a huge amount of revenge left for the Houthis in the final stage. In the best possible situation, if you are lucky of course, you will again divide Yemen into two pieces. (Although, i personally doubt about this possibility; the Iranian Regime would not allow you to do that at this stage based on many reasons). Iran has the upper hand in Yemen and some other parts of the Middle East; as such, it undoubtedly goes for "All or Nothing".
M. Sirani 23.04.2015
The Unpleasant Combination of Poverty and Inhuman Judiciary System of the Islamic Regime in Iran.
We all have heard many sad stories about poverty; but this one is really heartbroken one. This is the sad story of a poor family in Iran; a country that is unbelievably rich in terms of oil, gas and other natural resources.
A young Iranian mother sold her new born baby for an amount less than $1000 dollars in order to pay the fine and release her husband from prison.
The story is that the man was arrested following a physical street fight with someone else. Iran's security and judiciary authorities arrested the man and consequently fined him by an amount of nearly less than $1000 dollars. The man couldn't pay the fine; as such, he was imprisoned. While in the prison, his wife gave birth to a baby. Due to the severe poverty, the young mother sold her new born baby for less than $1000 dollars in order to pay the fine and release her imprisoned husband.
The judiciary system was informed about this illegal transaction through an unknown phone call. Following this event, the Police arrested the mother and handed over the baby to the grand mother.
This is just a simple example of harsh condition of majority of the Iranian people, who are living under the poverty line due to the inhuman, totalitarian, barbaric and unlawful authority of the Islamic Regime.
M. Sirani 23.04.2015
A young Iranian mother sold her new born baby for an amount less than $1000 dollars in order to pay the fine and release her husband from prison.
The story is that the man was arrested following a physical street fight with someone else. Iran's security and judiciary authorities arrested the man and consequently fined him by an amount of nearly less than $1000 dollars. The man couldn't pay the fine; as such, he was imprisoned. While in the prison, his wife gave birth to a baby. Due to the severe poverty, the young mother sold her new born baby for less than $1000 dollars in order to pay the fine and release her imprisoned husband.
The judiciary system was informed about this illegal transaction through an unknown phone call. Following this event, the Police arrested the mother and handed over the baby to the grand mother.
This is just a simple example of harsh condition of majority of the Iranian people, who are living under the poverty line due to the inhuman, totalitarian, barbaric and unlawful authority of the Islamic Regime.
M. Sirani 23.04.2015
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
The UN: What is it Good For?
Re-uploaded
Briefly:
What would be our logical reaction, when we see an organization or an institute does not function properly as it should?In such a hypothetical scenario, we would perform some investigation in the first instance in order to find out what is / are the reason/s of such an unsuccessful performance. The result of our investigation would undoubtedly lead us to some limited conclusions as follows.
1- Either the director or the board of directors have not done their job in a professional and appropriate manner.
Or
2- Some parts or the whole structure of that organization /institute need a fundamental change/reorganization or some serious minor /major adjustments in different terms in various parts, for example.
Or
3- The combination of both issues mentioned above.
Generally speaking, i don't think it would be another option beyond the three issues mentioned above, in such a hypothetical scenario. Now, let's use this simple example with regards to the overall performance of the United Nations in response to our contemporary problems in the international arena.
A quick review in this matter reminds us to some tragic and still unsolved events such as: the Palestine and Israel conflict, genocide in Rwanda (1994), Yugoslav war (1991-2001), invasion of Afghanistan (2001), invasion of Iraq (2003), military intervention in Libya (2011), the current civil war in Syria (since 2011), Iraq, Yemen, Ukraine, and the rise and emergence of various Islamic terrorist groups in the Middle East and most parts of Africa could be mentioned. All these unbelievably horrific and tragic events have resulted to the deaths of millions innocent people, total destruction in different terms in various parts of the world, enormous waves of refugees and internally displaced people, who are living in a very inhuman and harsh conditions around the globe.
All examples mentioned above, indicates the fact that the United Nations as the only legitimate, legal, powerful and authoritative international institution in our world, has not been able to perform its job and responsibility in a professional and appropriate manner in response to various international conflicts and disasters particularly since 1990 onward.
This catastrophic and unacceptable resume leads us to some serious questions as follows. What was / or is the role of the United Nations in all these disastrous events? Why the UN has not been able to avoid all or some of these horrible events or at least decrease the level of total destruction in different terms in all these events? Does the current director of the UN, Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, and the directors of different departments of the UN, have enough qualification, competence and experience for performing their important tasks? Or does the structure of the UN need some fundamental change or some serious adjustment?
In response to these critics, some might claim that the UN has also done some positive job in different parts of the world with regards to various problems. I agree; this is something that can't be denied. But i illustrate my answer by using some simple examples.
Assume, we hire a taxi to drive us from point A to point B. Or we are visiting a doctor when we are sick. In both cases, there are a logical and unwritten agreements between us (as the passenger or patient) and the taxi driver or doctor. The agreement is that in return to an amount of money, we expect to get a reasonable, reliable and certain service. In case of hiring the taxi, we expect that the driver take us to our destination with a fair price, on time and in a very safety manner. So is the case of visiting the doctor. We expect that we get a certain treatment and get rid of our disease or sickness in return to an amount or money. In both these examples, we don't give a Noble Price to taxi driver or doctor in case of successful results. Because, they have paid to do their job in a fair, reasonable and professional manner. But, we criticize or in some cases we might probably file a lawsuit against them, if they don't do their job in a professional and good manner.
So is the case of the UN. If the UN has done some positive job, the organization has fulfilled parts of its responsibility and duty, as it should. Because,the UN has received some amount of money to provide some positive service in response to some conflictual or disastrous events around the world. As such, this is not a logical argument in response to enormous failure, neglection and incompetency of the UN with regards to various horrific events around the globe.
The whole responsibility of the UN has been limited to 1- Releasing reports about different economic, social, cultural or political events or violation of human rights somewhere around the world. (In this respect, lots of individuals, academicians or NGOs would provide such reports, which in most of cases their reports are more reliable than the UN).
2- Collecting money or charity for some parts of the world. (Lots of NGOs are doing this job. Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, for example, is doing this charity job much better than the UN. Even the students in the elementary school near my home can collect money for some disastrous area. In terms of violation of human rights, some organization like Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch are doing this job much better than the UN).
One might say the international community need a place to discuss some conflictual issues with each other. In this respect, those states can rent a conference saloon in a hotel or a coffee shop for their discussion. They don't need a huge expensive building like the UN offices in New York or somewhere else around the world. Honestly, what else, the UN is doing?
In sum: The UN might have been able to solve some problems during the Cold War era, based on the special characteristics of the international community in those years. But not anymore. Because, we have arrived into new era. In comparison with the Cold War era, the structure of international community has fundamentally changed in different terms. As such, the new challenges have emerged; some new challenges that need new laws. convention, regulation and the new type of implementation. The overall failure of the UN in various occasions indicates the fact that this huge costly bureaucratic organization is completely incompatible with our contemporary challenges in different terms. The current UN is like a dead body that different doctors would try to artificially pomp its heart and blood in a unrealistic and delusional hope to keeps it alive; an impossible and uselessly costly mission.
M. Sirani 19.04.2015
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
There is A Solution For the Syrian Civil War, Which Might succeed.
By solving the Syrian civil war, we would be able to get rid of many problems in the Middle East and North Africa including the presence and activity of ISIS in Syria and increasing number of migrant boats toward the EU.
Note: If you haven't been able to find a solution for the Syrian civil war yet; that does not mean there is no solution at all or somebody else does not have a solution for that. I have a plan in this matter and i can share it with a reliable authority or an international entity based on some terms and conditions.
M. Sirani 21.04.2015
Note: If you haven't been able to find a solution for the Syrian civil war yet; that does not mean there is no solution at all or somebody else does not have a solution for that. I have a plan in this matter and i can share it with a reliable authority or an international entity based on some terms and conditions.
M. Sirani 21.04.2015
You Can't Stop or Even Reduce the Influence of Iran in the Middle East and Africa By Only Using the Hard Power Leverages.
There are many other important factors that you didn't or maybe you don't want pay attention to them.
In short, some areas such as Iraq, Syria and Lebanon are completely out of your hands. Some area such as Yemen is on the verge of completely falling in the hands of the Islamic Regime. You are too late to do anything about these areas with your current policies. There are, however, some other areas, which are in the primary stage in the sense of Iranian Regime's influence. Unfortunately, you are doing nothing about these areas as well.
I'm wondering: don't you have some reliable experts in this matter? Or you don't want to do anything at all about it?
Whatever the reason/s of these failures might be, your weak and inefficient policy in this matter, is really shocking me.
Note: Based on my own experience about your reaction in the past 36 years, it is not difficult for me to anticipate that you will struggle with Iran about Djibouti or Eritrea somewhere in the future.
M. Sirani 21.04.2015
In short, some areas such as Iraq, Syria and Lebanon are completely out of your hands. Some area such as Yemen is on the verge of completely falling in the hands of the Islamic Regime. You are too late to do anything about these areas with your current policies. There are, however, some other areas, which are in the primary stage in the sense of Iranian Regime's influence. Unfortunately, you are doing nothing about these areas as well.
I'm wondering: don't you have some reliable experts in this matter? Or you don't want to do anything at all about it?
Whatever the reason/s of these failures might be, your weak and inefficient policy in this matter, is really shocking me.
Note: Based on my own experience about your reaction in the past 36 years, it is not difficult for me to anticipate that you will struggle with Iran about Djibouti or Eritrea somewhere in the future.
M. Sirani 21.04.2015
Just in: Saudi Arabia is Prepared its Special Guard Forces For a Possible Ground Operation In Yemen.
Briefly:
Regardless of the military skill, expertise and highly modern equipment of Saudi's Special Guard Forces, any foreign troop's ground operation in Yemen would end up to a huge failure based on many reasons.
Those, who may doubt my statement in this matter, should pay more attention to some issues such as: 1- the long period deprivation and ideological characteristic of Shiite Houthis, 2- historical background and the hard reaction of Yemeni people against the invasion of any foreign troop, 3- high level of resilient and adaptation of Yemeni people to survive in a very harsh, difficult and inhabitable environment and 4- the type of ongoing guerrilla warfare and many other factors, which exploring all of them are beyond the scope of this short note.
Based on brief explanation noted above, it would be wise that the Saudi's strategists reevaluate their move in this matter; before it's too late.
Note: You can't win a guerrilla war in a harsh and inhabitable land like Yemen with those special characteristics by a modern army. Ask yourselves: Did highly modern Soviet Union or the U.S. armies manage to win the guerrilla war in Afghanistan? (Learn something from history).
As i predicted in my earlier posts: there are many other important factors, which current policy of Saudi-led coalition do not pay any attention to them. As such, with current policy, Saudi-led coalition will badly lose the battle in Yemen. With your current wrong policy and additionally deploying ground forces to Yemen, You are: 1- losing the war in Yemen, 2- you will spillover the Yemeni civil war into Saudi Arabia's territory somewhere in the near future, and 3- You will lose the safety and security of the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb and consequently will make this strategic port completely impassable.
If you, however, are eager to get the patent right of another historical fiasco such as the Vietnam war, this time in Yemen, please go ahead; In our contemporary confused and chaotic world in every aspects, the road is also open for you. Why not?
M. Sirani 21.04.2015
Regardless of the military skill, expertise and highly modern equipment of Saudi's Special Guard Forces, any foreign troop's ground operation in Yemen would end up to a huge failure based on many reasons.
Those, who may doubt my statement in this matter, should pay more attention to some issues such as: 1- the long period deprivation and ideological characteristic of Shiite Houthis, 2- historical background and the hard reaction of Yemeni people against the invasion of any foreign troop, 3- high level of resilient and adaptation of Yemeni people to survive in a very harsh, difficult and inhabitable environment and 4- the type of ongoing guerrilla warfare and many other factors, which exploring all of them are beyond the scope of this short note.
Based on brief explanation noted above, it would be wise that the Saudi's strategists reevaluate their move in this matter; before it's too late.
Note: You can't win a guerrilla war in a harsh and inhabitable land like Yemen with those special characteristics by a modern army. Ask yourselves: Did highly modern Soviet Union or the U.S. armies manage to win the guerrilla war in Afghanistan? (Learn something from history).
As i predicted in my earlier posts: there are many other important factors, which current policy of Saudi-led coalition do not pay any attention to them. As such, with current policy, Saudi-led coalition will badly lose the battle in Yemen. With your current wrong policy and additionally deploying ground forces to Yemen, You are: 1- losing the war in Yemen, 2- you will spillover the Yemeni civil war into Saudi Arabia's territory somewhere in the near future, and 3- You will lose the safety and security of the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb and consequently will make this strategic port completely impassable.
If you, however, are eager to get the patent right of another historical fiasco such as the Vietnam war, this time in Yemen, please go ahead; In our contemporary confused and chaotic world in every aspects, the road is also open for you. Why not?
M. Sirani 21.04.2015
Javad Zarif Explained Briefly "the Khamenei Doctrine"; But Marie Harf Didn't Get it.
Briefly:
Following the publishing of Zarif's article in the New York Times (newspaper), the spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State, Marie Harf stated that still we (She and the USA) don't know what the proposal of Zarif is in this article.
I have read Zarif's article too. In this article, Zarif attempts to impose some ideas including:
1- Iran is the only stable and powerful state in the Middle East and the USA should accept it.
2- As such, in case of any conflict in the Middle East, the USA and any other world powers should discuss the problem with Iran not any other state in the region.
3- Rouhani government is the only golden chance for the USA and other world powers amid a nuclear deal with Iran.
4- In general, the USA and other world powers should accept and obey "the Khamenei Doctrine" (Like Monroe Doctrine). According to the Khamenei Doctrine, any efforts by the USA and other world powers to interfere in the Middle Eastern countries would be viewed by Iran as acts of aggression, requiring Iran direct or indirect intervention or a type of proxy war at least.
Note: Those politicians and scholars including Z. Brzezinski, who claim that a nuclear deal with Iran would pave the way for further "Cooperation" between USA and Iran in the region, should pay more attention to the essence of statements released by the Islamic Regime's officials. In the past 36 years, all high ranking of officials in Tehran have been repeating one statement but with different tunes and words and that is: the Islamic Regime's way or high way. Some delusional pundits as well as politicians do not want to believe to this simple fact, which they have experienced it in various occasions.
M. Sirani 21.04.2015
Following the publishing of Zarif's article in the New York Times (newspaper), the spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State, Marie Harf stated that still we (She and the USA) don't know what the proposal of Zarif is in this article.
I have read Zarif's article too. In this article, Zarif attempts to impose some ideas including:
1- Iran is the only stable and powerful state in the Middle East and the USA should accept it.
2- As such, in case of any conflict in the Middle East, the USA and any other world powers should discuss the problem with Iran not any other state in the region.
3- Rouhani government is the only golden chance for the USA and other world powers amid a nuclear deal with Iran.
4- In general, the USA and other world powers should accept and obey "the Khamenei Doctrine" (Like Monroe Doctrine). According to the Khamenei Doctrine, any efforts by the USA and other world powers to interfere in the Middle Eastern countries would be viewed by Iran as acts of aggression, requiring Iran direct or indirect intervention or a type of proxy war at least.
Note: Those politicians and scholars including Z. Brzezinski, who claim that a nuclear deal with Iran would pave the way for further "Cooperation" between USA and Iran in the region, should pay more attention to the essence of statements released by the Islamic Regime's officials. In the past 36 years, all high ranking of officials in Tehran have been repeating one statement but with different tunes and words and that is: the Islamic Regime's way or high way. Some delusional pundits as well as politicians do not want to believe to this simple fact, which they have experienced it in various occasions.
M. Sirani 21.04.2015
Monday, April 20, 2015
What Does An Old Persian Proverb Say About An Event Like Current Libya? (NATO Members Should Pay Attention).
The proverb says:
"A retarded person drops a stone in a well, that hundreds smart guys cannot take it out".
This is the exact story of those genius decision makers that invaded Libya. Those genius politicians are responsible for the deaths of thousands innocent migrants in the Mediterranean Sea. After a while, they might be retired, but the history of human race never forgets nor forgives them.
Note: NATO members should firstly clean up their mess in Libya, North Africa and the Middle East, then fix the problems in Ukraine, Russia, China and North Korea. In addition: stop the crocodile tears or promoting Human Rights and Liberal Values around the world. All of you have, to some degree, a dirty and bloody resume.
M. Sirani 20.04.2015
"A retarded person drops a stone in a well, that hundreds smart guys cannot take it out".
This is the exact story of those genius decision makers that invaded Libya. Those genius politicians are responsible for the deaths of thousands innocent migrants in the Mediterranean Sea. After a while, they might be retired, but the history of human race never forgets nor forgives them.
Note: NATO members should firstly clean up their mess in Libya, North Africa and the Middle East, then fix the problems in Ukraine, Russia, China and North Korea. In addition: stop the crocodile tears or promoting Human Rights and Liberal Values around the world. All of you have, to some degree, a dirty and bloody resume.
M. Sirani 20.04.2015
Your Plan for Stopping the Human Traffickers in Libya and Consequently Control the Wave of migrant Boats in the Mediterranean Sea Does Not Function Efficiently and Properly.
Bear in mind that before too long, you will face with extra wave of migrants from Yemen and Somalia as well, in addition to other previous chaotic parts of Africa.
You need a broad fundamental, realistic and practical plan beyond the borders of Libya alone; of course, if you really really are eager to save the lives of those desperate people.
Note: With current plan, you just: 1- Are uselessly wasting your resources, 2- Cannot stop the wave of migrant boats and consequently would cause the deaths of couple of thousands innocent people annually, 3- are finally ruining your political career and reputation.
M. Sirani 20.04.2015
You need a broad fundamental, realistic and practical plan beyond the borders of Libya alone; of course, if you really really are eager to save the lives of those desperate people.
Note: With current plan, you just: 1- Are uselessly wasting your resources, 2- Cannot stop the wave of migrant boats and consequently would cause the deaths of couple of thousands innocent people annually, 3- are finally ruining your political career and reputation.
M. Sirani 20.04.2015
Sunday, April 19, 2015
I Repeat My Statement Again: With Current Policy, You Will Lose the Battle in Yemen to Iran and the Houthis. In Addition, the Tension Will Spread into Saudi Arabia in the Near Future.
Change your plan fundamentally or adjust some parts of it. Otherwise, be prepared for an intensified tension in a larger scale and size in different terms.
M. Sirani 19.04.2015
M. Sirani 19.04.2015
Instead of Promoting Liberal Values and Human Rights in North Korea, Russia or China, The Developed Countries Should Firstly Clean Up Their Mess in the Middle East and Large parts of Africa.
The developed countries are directly or indirectly responsible for the capsizing of migrant boats and drowning of thousands innocent people in the Mediterranean Sea. Thus, instead of spending billions of dollars annually to promote human rights and other liberal values in some countries such as North Korea, Russia and China, the developed countries should clean up their own made mess in the Middle East and large parts of Africa.
Note: All the Western policy makers and politicians should pay attention to an important point that every time, when they are talking about human rights and liberal values in their speeches, they are making fun of themselves and nothing else.
Thus, clean up your own made mess or step down from your official position as a normal human being, who respects the basic moral and ethical principles.
M. Sirani 19.04.2015
Note: All the Western policy makers and politicians should pay attention to an important point that every time, when they are talking about human rights and liberal values in their speeches, they are making fun of themselves and nothing else.
Thus, clean up your own made mess or step down from your official position as a normal human being, who respects the basic moral and ethical principles.
M. Sirani 19.04.2015
The United Nations And The Secretary Ban Ki-Moon: To Be or Not To Be Anymore.
Briefly:
What would be our logical reaction, when we see an organization or an institute does not function properly as it should?In such a hypothetical scenario, we would perform some investigation in the first instance in order to find out what is / are the reason/s of such an unsuccessful performance. The result of our investigation would undoubtedly lead us to some limited conclusions as follows.
1- Either the director or the board of directors have not done their job in a professional and appropriate manner.
Or
2- Some parts or the whole structure of that organization /institute need a fundamental change/reorganization or some serious minor /major adjustments in different terms in various parts, for example.
Or
3- The combination of both issues mentioned above.
Generally speaking, i don't think it would be another option beyond the three issues mentioned above, in such a hypothetical scenario. Now, let's use this simple example with regards to the overall performance of the United Nations in response to our contemporary problems in the international arena.
A quick review in this matter reminds us to some tragic and still unsolved events such as: the Palestine and Israel conflict, genocide in Rwanda (1994), Yugoslav war (1991-2001), invasion of Afghanistan (2001), invasion of Iraq (2003), military intervention in Libya (2011), the current civil war in Syria (since 2011), Iraq, Yemen, Ukraine, and the rise and emergence of various Islamic terrorist groups in the Middle East and most parts of Africa could be mentioned. All these unbelievably horrific and tragic events have resulted to the deaths of millions innocent people, total destruction in different terms in various parts of the world, enormous waves of refugees and internally displaced people, who are living in a very inhuman and harsh conditions around the globe.
All examples mentioned above, indicates the fact that the United Nations as the only legitimate, legal, powerful and authoritative international institution in our world, has not been able to perform its job and responsibility in a professional and appropriate manner in response to various international conflicts and disasters particularly since 1990 onward.
This catastrophic and unacceptable resume leads us to some serious questions as follows. What was / or is the role of the United Nations in all these disastrous events? Why the UN has not been able to avoid all or some of these horrible events or at least decrease the level of total destruction in different terms in all these events? Does the current director of the UN, Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, and the directors of different departments of the UN, have enough qualification, competence and experience for performing their important tasks? Or does the structure of the UN need some fundamental change or some serious adjustment?
In response to these critics, some might claim that the UN has also done some positive job in different parts of the world with regards to various problems. I agree; this is something that can't be denied. But i illustrate my answer by using some simple examples.
Assume, we hire a taxi to drive us from point A to point B. Or we are visiting a doctor when we are sick. In both cases, there are a logical and unwritten agreements between us (as the passenger or patient) and the taxi driver or doctor. The agreement is that in return to an amount of money, we expect to get a reasonable, reliable and certain service. In case of hiring the taxi, we expect that the driver take us to our destination with a fair price, on time and in a very safety manner. So is the case of visiting the doctor. We expect that we get a certain treatment and get rid of our disease or sickness in return to an amount or money. In both these examples, we don't give a Noble Price to taxi driver or doctor in case of successful results. Because, they have paid to do their job in a fair, reasonable and professional manner. But, we criticize or in some cases we might probably file a lawsuit against them, if they don't do their job in a professional and good manner.
So is the case of the UN. If the UN has done some positive job, the organization has fulfilled parts of its responsibility and duty, as it should. Because,the UN has received some amount of money to provide some positive service in response to some conflictual or disastrous events around the world. As such, this is not a logical argument in response to enormous failure, neglection and incompetency of the UN with regards to various horrific events around the globe.
In sum: The UN might have been able to solve some problems during the Cold War era, based on the special characteristics of the international community in those years. But not anymore. Because, we have arrived into new era. In comparison with the Cold War era, the structure of international community has fundamentally changed in different terms. As such, the new challenges have emerged; some new challenges that need new laws. convention, regulation and the new type of implementation. The overall failure of the UN in various occasions indicates the fact that this huge costly bureaucratic organization is completely incompatible with our contemporary challenges in different terms. The current UN is like a dead body that different doctors would try to artificially pomp its heart and blood in a unrealistic and delusional hope to keeps it alive; an impossible and uselessly costly mission.
M. Sirani 19.04.2015
Saturday, April 18, 2015
Without a Clear Approval From Obama Administration, Putin Would Have Not Lifted the Ban on Delivery of S-300 Missiles to Iran.
Briefly: When i say Obama administration is the most chaotic administration in the entire U.S. history with regards to Foreign Policy, i really mean it. This administration follows neither any branches of Realism, nor Liberalism nor Constructivism, etc on its foreign policy. It's a total failure, chaotic and peculiar on its kind.
As i analyze the recent decision of President Putin amid lifting the ban on delivery of S-300 Defense Missiles to Tehran more and more, i become more convinced that without a clear green light from Obama administration, President Putin would have not done such a move at this critical stage.
The reason, which to some extent underpins my hypothesis in this matter, is the current tension in Ukraine between the Western countries particularly the USA and Russia. As we know, couple of months ago, some of U.S. lawmakers and high ranking officials within Obama administration had a plan to arm Ukraine with some high-tech weapons against Russia. This plan was halted due to many reasons including the Ukraine peace plan developed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande.
This issue raises some serious questions as follows. Considering some issues such as 1- the current nuclear dispute between Iran and the western countries particularly the USA, 2- the idea that Iran might secretly develop nuclear weapon, 3- the notion that the USA has been repeatedly claiming that the military option against Iran's nuclear facilities is on the table, if Iran would not meet its commitments with regards the IAEA standard laws and regulations, and 4- the delivery of a high-tech Defense weapon such as Russian S-300 to Iran would, to a large extent, diminish and undermine the U.S. military capability amid targeting Iran's nuclear facilities, what would be the automatic reaction of the USA, if Russia would deliver S-300 missiles to Iran without any direct approval from the Obama administration?
In such a scenario and in response to Russia's move, wouldn't USA arm Ukraine in retaliation? The answer to this question is a very strong "yes". Because this is the most usual and automatic response of every political system including the USA in such a hypothetical scenario. In addition, we should bear in mind that it is almost impossible that the policy makers in Kremlin have not considered the possibility of such a retaliation from USA in this matter, the same as i do.
Based on what briefly explored above, i can say that there is high probability that the USA has given a clear green light to Russia in this matter. Because, without a certain approval from Obama administration, President Putin would have not lifted the ban on delivery of S-300 Missiles to Iran due to his enormous concern with regards to arming Ukraine by the USA.
By this move, however, President Obama 1- has offered Iran a full security guarantee with regards to a possible unilateral Israeli air strike against its nuclear facilities and 2- has shown his loyalty, honesty and friendship to Ayatollah Khamenei and 3- has tried to encourage Iran for a nuclear deal in order to save his foreign policy sinking ship.
Note: As i have mentioned in my previous short notes in this matter, if my hypothesis is true, this event would be a huge scandal not only for President Obama but also for his entire administration, his political party "Democrats" and the USA among its close allies around the world.
Previous note entitled: Was / Not Delivering of Russian S-300 Missiles to Iran, Part of A Secret Deal Between U.S., Iran and Russia in the Lausanne Framework?
M. Sirani 18.04.2015
As i analyze the recent decision of President Putin amid lifting the ban on delivery of S-300 Defense Missiles to Tehran more and more, i become more convinced that without a clear green light from Obama administration, President Putin would have not done such a move at this critical stage.
The reason, which to some extent underpins my hypothesis in this matter, is the current tension in Ukraine between the Western countries particularly the USA and Russia. As we know, couple of months ago, some of U.S. lawmakers and high ranking officials within Obama administration had a plan to arm Ukraine with some high-tech weapons against Russia. This plan was halted due to many reasons including the Ukraine peace plan developed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande.
This issue raises some serious questions as follows. Considering some issues such as 1- the current nuclear dispute between Iran and the western countries particularly the USA, 2- the idea that Iran might secretly develop nuclear weapon, 3- the notion that the USA has been repeatedly claiming that the military option against Iran's nuclear facilities is on the table, if Iran would not meet its commitments with regards the IAEA standard laws and regulations, and 4- the delivery of a high-tech Defense weapon such as Russian S-300 to Iran would, to a large extent, diminish and undermine the U.S. military capability amid targeting Iran's nuclear facilities, what would be the automatic reaction of the USA, if Russia would deliver S-300 missiles to Iran without any direct approval from the Obama administration?
In such a scenario and in response to Russia's move, wouldn't USA arm Ukraine in retaliation? The answer to this question is a very strong "yes". Because this is the most usual and automatic response of every political system including the USA in such a hypothetical scenario. In addition, we should bear in mind that it is almost impossible that the policy makers in Kremlin have not considered the possibility of such a retaliation from USA in this matter, the same as i do.
Based on what briefly explored above, i can say that there is high probability that the USA has given a clear green light to Russia in this matter. Because, without a certain approval from Obama administration, President Putin would have not lifted the ban on delivery of S-300 Missiles to Iran due to his enormous concern with regards to arming Ukraine by the USA.
By this move, however, President Obama 1- has offered Iran a full security guarantee with regards to a possible unilateral Israeli air strike against its nuclear facilities and 2- has shown his loyalty, honesty and friendship to Ayatollah Khamenei and 3- has tried to encourage Iran for a nuclear deal in order to save his foreign policy sinking ship.
Note: As i have mentioned in my previous short notes in this matter, if my hypothesis is true, this event would be a huge scandal not only for President Obama but also for his entire administration, his political party "Democrats" and the USA among its close allies around the world.
Previous note entitled: Was / Not Delivering of Russian S-300 Missiles to Iran, Part of A Secret Deal Between U.S., Iran and Russia in the Lausanne Framework?
M. Sirani 18.04.2015
There is Some / High Probability That Obama Administration Has Approved the Delivery of S-300 Missiles to Tehran For: 1- Encourage Iran for a Nuclear Deal, and 2- Give A Security Guarantee to Iran Against A Possible Israeli Airstrike in the Future (18.04.2015).
This is the result of apologist and appeasement policy of Obama administration toward the Islamic Regime.
M. Sirani 18.04.2015
M. Sirani 18.04.2015
Was / Not Delivering of Russian S-300 Missiles to Iran, Part of A Secret Deal Between U.S., Iran and Russia in the Lausanne Framework?
You might call this short note a product based on conspiracy theory. But there is some or i might say high probability that the delivery of S-300 defense missiles was part of a secret deal between USA, Russia and Iran following the Lausanne Framework; a type of incentive offered by Obama administration in order to 1- encourage the Islamic Regime for a nuclear deal and 2- give a full security guarantee to Iran in case of a possible Israeli air strike against Iran's nuclear plants. Because, lifting the sanctions in this matter at this period of time, suddenly by Russia, was not an accidental move in my opinion.
Note: Both Russian and Iranian officials claim that S-300 missiles are a type of defensive weapon and delivery of this weapon to Iran is not the violation of the UN arm embargo imposed on Iran. In this respect, i should say that everybody knew and know that S-300 is a defensive weapon. The important point is how on earth suddenly out of the blue, Putin has decided to lift the ban in this matter at the present. The answer to this issue might lie in the secret triangle negotiation between USA, Iran and Russia. By this move, Obama administration has shown its honesty and loyalty to Ayatollah Khamenei and at the same has given Iran a full security guarantee in case of a possible unilateral Israeli air strike against Iran's nuclear plants.
Has anyone or any intelligence entity tapped or intercepted anything at all in this matter?
Note: Both Russian and Iranian officials claim that S-300 missiles are a type of defensive weapon and delivery of this weapon to Iran is not the violation of the UN arm embargo imposed on Iran. In this respect, i should say that everybody knew and know that S-300 is a defensive weapon. The important point is how on earth suddenly out of the blue, Putin has decided to lift the ban in this matter at the present. The answer to this issue might lie in the secret triangle negotiation between USA, Iran and Russia. By this move, Obama administration has shown its honesty and loyalty to Ayatollah Khamenei and at the same has given Iran a full security guarantee in case of a possible unilateral Israeli air strike against Iran's nuclear plants.
As i have repeatedly mentioned in my earlier posts, there are lots of secret deals between Tehran and Washington within Lausanne Framework. That's why, Iran has not published its fact sheet up until this moment, despite Khamenei's direct statement, which told Rouhani government: publish Iran's fact sheet; let Iranian politicians and intellectuals discuss and criticize it. That's why, there are huge differences between the statements of all actors involved in this negotiation with regards to the details of Lausanne Framework.
If my prediction in this matter would be true, this event could be the most dirty and scandalous trick of Obama administration; worse than Watergate Scandal for President Nixon.
M. Sirani 18.04.2015
If my prediction in this matter would be true, this event could be the most dirty and scandalous trick of Obama administration; worse than Watergate Scandal for President Nixon.
M. Sirani 18.04.2015
Friday, April 17, 2015
An Old Persian Proverb Describes the Current Position of Greece.
As an old Persian proverb says: Chinese and Russian financial institutes (Smart fishermen) are ready to catch a fat fish (heavily indebted Greece) in this murky water (Chaotic international environment).
M. Sirani 17.04.2015
Troika Would Probably Lose the Battle Against Greece Based on Its Miscalculation.
The main policy makers in Troika think that a no-deal with Greece might finally lead to the collapse of current left wing political system in Greece and consequently emergence of a new right wing government in this country; a new government, which would follow the austerity measures ordered by Troika.
This assumption is totally wrong and counterproductive. Due to the fact that the majority of Greek people were fed up with harsh austerity measures during the past couple of years. Moreover, the majority of Greek people have nothing to lose anymore due to those austerity measures. That's why, they voted for a left wing party in order to have a fundamental change in their daily hard lives.
As such, the chance that the left wing government and Greek people would retreat from their reasonable demands is very low.
Note: Troika not only would probably lose the battle against Greece but also would drag the whole world into another economic depression based on its greed and miscalculation.
As an old Persian proverb says: Smart fishermen (Chinese and Russian financial institutes) are ready to catch a fat fish (heavily indebted Greece) in this murky water (Chaotic international environment).
M. Sirani 17.04.2015
This assumption is totally wrong and counterproductive. Due to the fact that the majority of Greek people were fed up with harsh austerity measures during the past couple of years. Moreover, the majority of Greek people have nothing to lose anymore due to those austerity measures. That's why, they voted for a left wing party in order to have a fundamental change in their daily hard lives.
As such, the chance that the left wing government and Greek people would retreat from their reasonable demands is very low.
Note: Troika not only would probably lose the battle against Greece but also would drag the whole world into another economic depression based on its greed and miscalculation.
As an old Persian proverb says: Smart fishermen (Chinese and Russian financial institutes) are ready to catch a fat fish (heavily indebted Greece) in this murky water (Chaotic international environment).
M. Sirani 17.04.2015
Forget the Violation of Human Rights in China & Russia. Clean Up Your Mess Firstly in Libya; Before It's Too Late.
Guess what?
As i understood, some genius policy makers (Possibly within the EU) have established some asylum seeker camps in a totally failed state like Libya, in order to prevent the wave of illegal immigration toward the EU; or as they might claim: "in order to save the lives of immigrants and do not let them be drowned in the Sea".!!!!
1- Regardless of severe inhuman condition of those camps, these genius hotshots have absolutely no idea that in fact, they have opened some clear recruit centers for some Islamic Terrorist groups such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Al-Shebab and some other international criminal organizations by this wrong move.
From now on, all those Islamic terrorist organizations do not need to use massive resources in order to recruit new members for their inhuman and terrorist activities. Instead, they will directly and easily go to those camps and without any effort, possibly after an interview, recruit what they want among those desperate people.
2- Moreover, do these genius plan designers have any idea that some of those asylum seekers have escaped from their homes because of some civil war or ethnic or religious conflicts? in this respect, in a failed state like Libya, which reliable authority and security forces can preserve and maintain the safety of those desperate and innocent asylum seekers?
I'm wondering, do these genius policy makers want to recreate another Rwanda or Bosnian Genocide event, this time in Libya? Do these genius hotshots understand what they have created?
Note: To those genius designer of such a plan:
Couple of years ago, the UN established some asylum seeker camps, for example in Turkey or Pakistan, for the Iranian people. This plan functioned, to some extent, due to the the fact that Turkey and Pakistan were not failed state.
Warning: The EU is responsible for any horrible event, which might happen in those camps. All the policy makers in the EU should also bear in mind that almost all the EU countries have ratified the membership of ICC and ICJ.
M. Sirani 16.04.2015
As i understood, some genius policy makers (Possibly within the EU) have established some asylum seeker camps in a totally failed state like Libya, in order to prevent the wave of illegal immigration toward the EU; or as they might claim: "in order to save the lives of immigrants and do not let them be drowned in the Sea".!!!!
1- Regardless of severe inhuman condition of those camps, these genius hotshots have absolutely no idea that in fact, they have opened some clear recruit centers for some Islamic Terrorist groups such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Al-Shebab and some other international criminal organizations by this wrong move.
From now on, all those Islamic terrorist organizations do not need to use massive resources in order to recruit new members for their inhuman and terrorist activities. Instead, they will directly and easily go to those camps and without any effort, possibly after an interview, recruit what they want among those desperate people.
2- Moreover, do these genius plan designers have any idea that some of those asylum seekers have escaped from their homes because of some civil war or ethnic or religious conflicts? in this respect, in a failed state like Libya, which reliable authority and security forces can preserve and maintain the safety of those desperate and innocent asylum seekers?
I'm wondering, do these genius policy makers want to recreate another Rwanda or Bosnian Genocide event, this time in Libya? Do these genius hotshots understand what they have created?
Note: To those genius designer of such a plan:
Couple of years ago, the UN established some asylum seeker camps, for example in Turkey or Pakistan, for the Iranian people. This plan functioned, to some extent, due to the the fact that Turkey and Pakistan were not failed state.
Warning: The EU is responsible for any horrible event, which might happen in those camps. All the policy makers in the EU should also bear in mind that almost all the EU countries have ratified the membership of ICC and ICJ.
M. Sirani 16.04.2015
Thursday, April 16, 2015
Warning: Establishing Asylum Seeker Camps in A Failed State Like Libya? Are You Out of Your Mind? (Blood Oil).
Guess what?
As i understood, some genius policy makers (Possibly within the EU) have established some asylum seeker camps in a totally failed state like Libya, in order to prevent the wave of illegal immigration toward the EU; or as they might claim: "in order to save the lives of immigrants and do not let them be drowned in the Sea".!!!!
1- Regardless of severe inhuman condition of those camps, these genius hotshots have absolutely no idea that in fact, they have opened some clear recruit centers for some Islamic Terrorist groups such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Al-Shebab and some other international criminal organizations by this wrong move.
From now on, all those Islamic terrorist organizations do not need to use massive resources in order to recruit new members for their inhuman and terrorist activities. Instead, they will directly and easily go to those camps and without any effort, possibly after an interview, recruit what they want among those desperate people.
2- Moreover, do these genius plan designers have any idea that some of those asylum seekers have escaped from their homes because of some civil war or ethnic or religious conflicts? in this respect, in a failed state like Libya, which reliable authority and security forces can preserve and maintain the safety of those desperate and innocent asylum seekers?
I'm wondering, do these genius policy makers want to recreate another Rwanda or Bosnian Genocide event, this time in Libya? Do these genius hotshots understand what they have created?
Note: To those genius designer of such a plan:
Couple of years ago, the UN established some asylum seeker camps, for example in Turkey or Pakistan, for the Iranian people. This plan functioned, to some extent, due to the the fact that Turkey and Pakistan were not failed state.
Warning: The EU is responsible for any horrible event, which might happen in those camps. All the policy makers in the EU should also bear in mind that almost all the EU countries have ratified the membership of ICC and ICJ.
M. Sirani 16.04.2015
As i understood, some genius policy makers (Possibly within the EU) have established some asylum seeker camps in a totally failed state like Libya, in order to prevent the wave of illegal immigration toward the EU; or as they might claim: "in order to save the lives of immigrants and do not let them be drowned in the Sea".!!!!
1- Regardless of severe inhuman condition of those camps, these genius hotshots have absolutely no idea that in fact, they have opened some clear recruit centers for some Islamic Terrorist groups such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Al-Shebab and some other international criminal organizations by this wrong move.
From now on, all those Islamic terrorist organizations do not need to use massive resources in order to recruit new members for their inhuman and terrorist activities. Instead, they will directly and easily go to those camps and without any effort, possibly after an interview, recruit what they want among those desperate people.
2- Moreover, do these genius plan designers have any idea that some of those asylum seekers have escaped from their homes because of some civil war or ethnic or religious conflicts? in this respect, in a failed state like Libya, which reliable authority and security forces can preserve and maintain the safety of those desperate and innocent asylum seekers?
I'm wondering, do these genius policy makers want to recreate another Rwanda or Bosnian Genocide event, this time in Libya? Do these genius hotshots understand what they have created?
Note: To those genius designer of such a plan:
Couple of years ago, the UN established some asylum seeker camps, for example in Turkey or Pakistan, for the Iranian people. This plan functioned, to some extent, due to the the fact that Turkey and Pakistan were not failed state.
Warning: The EU is responsible for any horrible event, which might happen in those camps. All the policy makers in the EU should also bear in mind that almost all the EU countries have ratified the membership of ICC and ICJ.
M. Sirani 16.04.2015
Shameful Story: Genocide in Rwanda Under the Watch of Clinton Administration, Richard Clarke and Susan Rice.
For reading the article please visit the following link.
Title: Genocide under our watch; written by: Colum Lynch
Link: http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/16/genocide-under-our-watch-rwanda-susan-rice-richard-clarke/?utm_content=buffer2f09b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
M. Sirani 16.04.2015
Title: Genocide under our watch; written by: Colum Lynch
Link: http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/16/genocide-under-our-watch-rwanda-susan-rice-richard-clarke/?utm_content=buffer2f09b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
M. Sirani 16.04.2015
Compromise With Greece in A Fair and Reasonable Manner; Otherwise, Deal With A Huge Earthquake in the Eurozone.
Briefly:
The IMF, EU and the European Central Bank (Troika) should patiently compromise with over-indebted Greece in a very fair and reasonable manner. If Troika would repeatedly reject Greece's proposal in this matter, there is high probability that the country would apply for default and consequently would also exit from the EU. Such an event would inevitably cause a huge earthquake in Eurozone and consequently in the whole world. So this is the story.
Exiting Greece from the EU would undoubtedly mobilize tens of millions of people across the EU against the current political, social and economic status quo; tens of millions of European citizens, who are fed up with overall austerity measures, unemployment, weak economic growth and huge inequality in different terms. Such a chaotic environment, would facilitate a perfect ground for two main political parties across the EU: 1- Radical Right Wing Parties and 2- Radical Left Wing Parties, to easily lead their citizens in every direction they want; two main political parties, which both have one common main goal: Exiting from the EU.
We should bear in mind that Greece is not the only country within the EU that suffers from heavily debt and severe austerity measures. Other countries such as Italy, Portugal, Spain, etc within the EU are also suffering from the same problem as Greece. To put it simply, if Greece would exit from the EU, there is high probability that other countries such as Italy, Spain, Portugal, etc, as a result of domino effect, would follow the path of Greece and would exit from the EU, based on the mandatory demands of their citizens.
Such an event is equivalent to the total collapse of the EU and Eurozone. Should this happen, the economic crisis in the EU would inevitably drag the whole world into another deep global economic depression for many years to come.
Based on brief explanation noted above, thus, it would be wise and beneficial for Troika to compromise with Greece in a very fair, reasonable and no-greedy manner. In addition, Troika should pay attention to the notion that we are not living in the 60s or 70 and IMF, WB or EU Central Bank are not the only existing International Financial Institutes in the world. In sum, Troika should pay attention to the overall negative consequences of a no-deal with Greece. As an old proverb says: Those, who live in glass houses, should not throw stones. In other words, do not underestimate Greece. Over-indebted Greece can cause a huge global earthquake beyond the will and power of every strong local, regional and global authority. This is what i predict for the future in case of a no-deal with Greece.
M. Sirani 16.04.2015
Note: I have warned about this issue in some of my previous short notes as well.
The IMF, EU and the European Central Bank (Troika) should patiently compromise with over-indebted Greece in a very fair and reasonable manner. If Troika would repeatedly reject Greece's proposal in this matter, there is high probability that the country would apply for default and consequently would also exit from the EU. Such an event would inevitably cause a huge earthquake in Eurozone and consequently in the whole world. So this is the story.
Exiting Greece from the EU would undoubtedly mobilize tens of millions of people across the EU against the current political, social and economic status quo; tens of millions of European citizens, who are fed up with overall austerity measures, unemployment, weak economic growth and huge inequality in different terms. Such a chaotic environment, would facilitate a perfect ground for two main political parties across the EU: 1- Radical Right Wing Parties and 2- Radical Left Wing Parties, to easily lead their citizens in every direction they want; two main political parties, which both have one common main goal: Exiting from the EU.
We should bear in mind that Greece is not the only country within the EU that suffers from heavily debt and severe austerity measures. Other countries such as Italy, Portugal, Spain, etc within the EU are also suffering from the same problem as Greece. To put it simply, if Greece would exit from the EU, there is high probability that other countries such as Italy, Spain, Portugal, etc, as a result of domino effect, would follow the path of Greece and would exit from the EU, based on the mandatory demands of their citizens.
Such an event is equivalent to the total collapse of the EU and Eurozone. Should this happen, the economic crisis in the EU would inevitably drag the whole world into another deep global economic depression for many years to come.
Based on brief explanation noted above, thus, it would be wise and beneficial for Troika to compromise with Greece in a very fair, reasonable and no-greedy manner. In addition, Troika should pay attention to the notion that we are not living in the 60s or 70 and IMF, WB or EU Central Bank are not the only existing International Financial Institutes in the world. In sum, Troika should pay attention to the overall negative consequences of a no-deal with Greece. As an old proverb says: Those, who live in glass houses, should not throw stones. In other words, do not underestimate Greece. Over-indebted Greece can cause a huge global earthquake beyond the will and power of every strong local, regional and global authority. This is what i predict for the future in case of a no-deal with Greece.
M. Sirani 16.04.2015
Note: I have warned about this issue in some of my previous short notes as well.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
President Rouhani: The Sanctions Should Be Lifted The Same Day the Deal is Signed and Finalized. Otherwise, There Would Be No Deal.
High ranking Iranian officials state:
1- The sanctions should be lifted the same day the deal is finalized.
2- Iran would never allow any foreign entity or official visit its military bases.
3- Iran will use its IR8 modern centrifuge for its nuclear activity following the nuclear deal, as both Zarif and Salehi told the members of the Parliament.
Note: As i explore the released details of Lausanne Framework and the reaction of Iranian officials more and more, i discover more and more contradiction and disagreement between Iran and 5+1. I'm wondering what type of details Mr.Kerry and Javad Zarif were agreed on, during the Lausanne Honeymoon?
M. Sirani 15.04.2015
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
The U.S. Senate Panel Passed the Bill on Iran Nuclear Deal. This Move Would Put an End to Obama Administration's Appeasement Policy Toward Iran At least in Nuclear Issue (14.04.2015).
As an Iranian in exile, i fully support the bill. I'm sicking tired of the apologist and appeasement policy of the current U.S. administration and some other political systems within the EU toward Iran.
Note: As i had anticipated in some of my earlier posts; Your appeasement and apologist policy toward Iran will inevitably drag you into a much more critical point with regards to Iran's nuclear activity. The new bill passed by the U.S. Senate is the primary sign of that. This is just the tip of the nuclear dispute iceberg with Iran. Be prepared for more dilemma and chaos in this matter from every angles.
Not to mention that the combination of Khamenei's recent speech, which would undoubtedly develop new demands for the Iranian negotiators in nuclear dispute, the new bill passed by U.S. Senate, delivery of Russian S-300 to Iran, the Western countries wrong policy against ISIS, which is totally beneficial for the Iranian Regime and its puppets in both Iraq and Syria, and the current tension in Yemen will cause a huge headache for the international community in the next three months. The Western countries have a very tough road ahead in this matter. Unfortunately, the Islamic Regime of Iran has the upper hands in many of those issues mentioned above, As such, the chance that Iran would retreat from its demands and accept the 5+1 requests with regards to its nuclear activity is unbelievably very low.
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
Note: As i had anticipated in some of my earlier posts; Your appeasement and apologist policy toward Iran will inevitably drag you into a much more critical point with regards to Iran's nuclear activity. The new bill passed by the U.S. Senate is the primary sign of that. This is just the tip of the nuclear dispute iceberg with Iran. Be prepared for more dilemma and chaos in this matter from every angles.
Not to mention that the combination of Khamenei's recent speech, which would undoubtedly develop new demands for the Iranian negotiators in nuclear dispute, the new bill passed by U.S. Senate, delivery of Russian S-300 to Iran, the Western countries wrong policy against ISIS, which is totally beneficial for the Iranian Regime and its puppets in both Iraq and Syria, and the current tension in Yemen will cause a huge headache for the international community in the next three months. The Western countries have a very tough road ahead in this matter. Unfortunately, the Islamic Regime of Iran has the upper hands in many of those issues mentioned above, As such, the chance that Iran would retreat from its demands and accept the 5+1 requests with regards to its nuclear activity is unbelievably very low.
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi Asked U.S. For Weapon.
Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi Asked U.S. For Weapon.
Briefly:
There is no doubt that selling weapon to current Iraqi government would have a huge economical benefit for the U.S. economy. But, there are some serious considerations in this matter, which the combination of all of them indicate a fact that the current U.S. administration should respond to Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. In short, based on some reasons including:
1- The current Iraqi political system is the puppet of the Islamic Regime of Iran.
2- The current Iraqi political system is not an inclusive government.
3- Some Ministers within current Iraqi political system are the high ranking members of Badr Organization, which is a subset organization of Iran's IRGS and Quds Force. (Those, who are interested to know more about the three issues mentioned above, can read my short note entitled "You are shocking me General Dempsey" in the following link).
Link: http://irancare.blogspot.no/2015/01/honestly-you-are-shocking-me-general.html
4-- Unlimited increasing influence of IRGC and its numerous subsets Shiite Groups in Iraq.
5- Serious violation of the human rights and atrocities against Sunni people performed by various Shiite groups.
6- The ongoing civil war in Yemen and the important role of Iran in this country.
7- And the uncertainty about the final outcome of a nuclear deal with Iran.
The current U.S. administration should evaluate Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. Because, there is some possibility that some of these weapons would fall in the hands of IRGC and Quds Forces and will be used against U.S. forces somewhere in the future; exactly the same as those high-tech weapons that were ended up in the hands of Al-Qaeda and Taliban and later were used against U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan. Should we learn something from history or not?
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
Briefly:
There is no doubt that selling weapon to current Iraqi government would have a huge economical benefit for the U.S. economy. But, there are some serious considerations in this matter, which the combination of all of them indicate a fact that the current U.S. administration should respond to Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. In short, based on some reasons including:
1- The current Iraqi political system is the puppet of the Islamic Regime of Iran.
2- The current Iraqi political system is not an inclusive government.
3- Some Ministers within current Iraqi political system are the high ranking members of Badr Organization, which is a subset organization of Iran's IRGS and Quds Force. (Those, who are interested to know more about the three issues mentioned above, can read my short note entitled "You are shocking me General Dempsey" in the following link).
Link: http://irancare.blogspot.no/2015/01/honestly-you-are-shocking-me-general.html
4-- Unlimited increasing influence of IRGC and its numerous subsets Shiite Groups in Iraq.
5- Serious violation of the human rights and atrocities against Sunni people performed by various Shiite groups.
6- The ongoing civil war in Yemen and the important role of Iran in this country.
7- And the uncertainty about the final outcome of a nuclear deal with Iran.
The current U.S. administration should evaluate Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. Because, there is some possibility that some of these weapons would fall in the hands of IRGC and Quds Forces and will be used against U.S. forces somewhere in the future; exactly the same as those high-tech weapons that were ended up in the hands of Al-Qaeda and Taliban and later were used against U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan. Should we learn something from history or not?
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
As I Had Anticipated Earlier: The Civil War in Yemen Has Waked Up and Reactivated Al-Shebab Again.
Briefly:
If the International community including the hibernated UN would not be able to find a diplomatic solution for Yemeni civil war as soon as possible, the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb would be closed somewhere in the near future. Needless to explain that the 40 kilometers width Bab-el-Mandeb can be easily impassible for every ship by some mortars or rockets fired from unknown places within Somalia or Yemen. There are lots of terrorist actors in that region that eagerly wish to perform such a move and consequently cause a huge global challenge.
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
If the International community including the hibernated UN would not be able to find a diplomatic solution for Yemeni civil war as soon as possible, the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb would be closed somewhere in the near future. Needless to explain that the 40 kilometers width Bab-el-Mandeb can be easily impassible for every ship by some mortars or rockets fired from unknown places within Somalia or Yemen. There are lots of terrorist actors in that region that eagerly wish to perform such a move and consequently cause a huge global challenge.
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
Monday, April 13, 2015
I Don't Get it.
What is the benefit of a huge and expensive military entity like NATO, when this entity cannot preserve and maintain the security of western countries against some simple threats such as lone wolf, for example? Honestly for a second think about the next question. Can NATO save the security and safety of your citizens against some drones attached with C4, for example, flown by some Islamic terrorist?
Note: Don't you think that we have arrived in a new era? Don't you think that we need new international and regional institutions in different terms and forms? Do some terms such as "Update", and "Compatibility" have any meaning for you? and finally, we are going to conquer Mars; is that an impossible mission to decrease the size of our military industry and instead produce something else, another beneficial commodity?
Maybe some have decided to follow the footsteps of their grandfathers with closed eyes. Who knows!
M. Sirani 13.04.2015
Note: Don't you think that we have arrived in a new era? Don't you think that we need new international and regional institutions in different terms and forms? Do some terms such as "Update", and "Compatibility" have any meaning for you? and finally, we are going to conquer Mars; is that an impossible mission to decrease the size of our military industry and instead produce something else, another beneficial commodity?
Maybe some have decided to follow the footsteps of their grandfathers with closed eyes. Who knows!
M. Sirani 13.04.2015
Delivering Russian S-300 Missiles to Iran Means Obama's Military Option Against Iran's Nuclear Plants is Off The Table.
Briefly
One simple question:
1- Is seizing the power in Ukraine the most important issue or Iran's nuclear threat?
Note: The wrong policy of Obama administration with regards to Russia resulted to
1- Losing Crimea.
2- Ongoing civil war, total destruction of large parts of Ukraine and its devastating consequence in different terms including collateral damages and large numbers of internally displaced people.
3- Unsolved Syrian civil war and its negative consequences after 4 years.
4- Unknown and ambiguous nuclear deal with Iran.
5- Extra militarization of the Eastern European countries, which has imposed a huge unnecessary cost on these countries.
6- Repeatedly stagnation within the useless United Nations Security Council
7-
8-
9-
The story continues,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Those genius decision makers, who couldn't predict the overall negative consequences of their wrong policy in Ukraine should answer the following questions.
Did you manage to fully conquer Ukraine?
Did you manage to expand NATO territory into Ukraine?
Did you manage to once again rebirth NATO by creating a artificial conflict in Ukraine?
Did you manage to buy Putin the same as you bought Yeltsin and Gorbachev?
Did you manage to overthrow Putin from Kremlin or you increased the reputation and popularity of Putin among the Russian people and international community through your wrong policy in Ukraine?
,,,,
Those genius decision makers, who created this disaster in Ukraine, are physically living in 2015, but mentally they are flying and dreaming in the late 1980s.
M. Sirani 13.04.2015
One simple question:
1- Is seizing the power in Ukraine the most important issue or Iran's nuclear threat?
Note: The wrong policy of Obama administration with regards to Russia resulted to
1- Losing Crimea.
2- Ongoing civil war, total destruction of large parts of Ukraine and its devastating consequence in different terms including collateral damages and large numbers of internally displaced people.
3- Unsolved Syrian civil war and its negative consequences after 4 years.
4- Unknown and ambiguous nuclear deal with Iran.
5- Extra militarization of the Eastern European countries, which has imposed a huge unnecessary cost on these countries.
6- Repeatedly stagnation within the useless United Nations Security Council
7-
8-
9-
The story continues,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Those genius decision makers, who couldn't predict the overall negative consequences of their wrong policy in Ukraine should answer the following questions.
Did you manage to fully conquer Ukraine?
Did you manage to expand NATO territory into Ukraine?
Did you manage to once again rebirth NATO by creating a artificial conflict in Ukraine?
Did you manage to buy Putin the same as you bought Yeltsin and Gorbachev?
Did you manage to overthrow Putin from Kremlin or you increased the reputation and popularity of Putin among the Russian people and international community through your wrong policy in Ukraine?
,,,,
Those genius decision makers, who created this disaster in Ukraine, are physically living in 2015, but mentally they are flying and dreaming in the late 1980s.
M. Sirani 13.04.2015
Exclusive: Putin Lifted the Ban on Supplying Sophisticated S-300 Air Defense Missile Systems to Iran (13.04.2015).
Lifting the sanctions on Iran is equivalent to offering Iran enormous unlimited leverages in different terms; it means creating an untouchable-expansionist Islamic Regime in a volatile and strategic region of the Middle East.
Note: As i had repeatedly mentioned in some of my earlier posts, Russia would use Iran as a golden bargaining chip in different angles with regards to its tension with the West.
M. Sirani 13.04.2015
Note: As i had repeatedly mentioned in some of my earlier posts, Russia would use Iran as a golden bargaining chip in different angles with regards to its tension with the West.
M. Sirani 13.04.2015
Saudi Arabia and its Coalition Will Badly Lose the Battle in Yemen, If They will Continue With the Same Operation and Policy In the Future.
Hello
Is there any military strategist out there?
Note: With only military iron fist, no matter how powerful, you never win the civil war in Yemen. You are digging your grave by your own hands in Yemen.
M. Sirani 13.04.2015
Is there any military strategist out there?
Note: With only military iron fist, no matter how powerful, you never win the civil war in Yemen. You are digging your grave by your own hands in Yemen.
M. Sirani 13.04.2015
Sunday, April 12, 2015
Hillary Clinton Does Not Have Too Much Chance, if
Briefly:
Based on many reasons, Hillary Clinton does not have too much chance in the U.S. presidential election of 2016; of course, if the Republicans would manage to do their job in this matter in a very professional and appropriate manner.
Some of the weaknesses of Hillary Clinton in this matter are briefly as follows.
There are huge controversial issues with regards to political and private performances of both Mr and Mrs. Clinton. We leave aside Mr. Clinton's part in this matter. Mr.s Clinton couldn't fulfill her duty, as the Secretary of State, in a very reliable, precise and professional manner. Among her negative points in this matter:
1- Attacking Libya without Congressional Authorization or any United Nations Resolution happened during Mrs. Clinton watch.
2- 2012 Benghazi attack occurred during Mrs. Clinton watch.
3- Mrs. Clinton used a private email address for her sensitive official job a the Secretary of State.
4- Some might disagree with this point, but in reality age matters. Mrs. Clinton is 67 years old at the present. Next year, she will be 68 years old. Will she have enough capacity and ability in different terms to become the president of the United States of America in the next five years and further more, in the second term?
Some might claim that age is not an important issue by using the age of President Reagan as an example. That's true, Ronald Reagan became the President of U.S. at the age of 69. But there are huge differences between President Reagan and Mrs. Clinton in various terms. We should bear in mind that President Reagan : 1- was a charismatic leader, 2- He didn't have huge controversial issues such as Attacking Libya without Congressional Authorization or Benghazi attack or using private email address in his professional job in his resume. 3- In addition, the historical timing plays an important role in this matter. President Reagan (From Republican Party) took the office in 1981 after massive failure of President Carter (From Democratic Party) with regards to:
A- The emergence of Islamic Regime in Iran, B- Hostage taking of American Diplomats in Tehran, C- Failure of the Carter Administration to rescue the American Diplomats from Iran, D- Invasion of the Soviet Union Army into Afghanistan during Carter watch, etc. The combination of all these issues, facilitated a good opportunity for the Republican Party and its main candidate Ronald Reagan to become the president.
A simple comparison shows, that Hillary Clinton, 1- does not have the same characteristics, qualifications and reputation of President Reagan in different terms. 2- Moreover, the historical timing is to some degree against the Democratic Party and one of its candidate Mrs. Clinton. One might wonder how. Without any doubt, the Presidency of Barack Obama could be one of the worse one in terms of weak and chaotic foreign policy in the entire history of the United States of America. There are enormous examples in this matter, which mentioning them are beyond the scope of this short note. The weak and unprofessional performances of Obama administration with regards to an important issue such as foreign policy would automatically encourage and stimulate some American people to vote for a Republican candidate.
In short, based on brief explanation noted above, Mrs. Clinton does not have enough chance to become the president in 2016. On the contrary and based on what explored above, the Republican Party has the best opportunity to occupy the White House in the next year election; Of course, if the Party 1- would choose a smart and powerful candidate in different terms, 2- would update some of its outdated programs based on the contemporary needs and will of current American generation, and 3-would perform the presidential campaign in a very professional and appropriate manner.
M. Sirani 12.2015
Based on many reasons, Hillary Clinton does not have too much chance in the U.S. presidential election of 2016; of course, if the Republicans would manage to do their job in this matter in a very professional and appropriate manner.
Some of the weaknesses of Hillary Clinton in this matter are briefly as follows.
There are huge controversial issues with regards to political and private performances of both Mr and Mrs. Clinton. We leave aside Mr. Clinton's part in this matter. Mr.s Clinton couldn't fulfill her duty, as the Secretary of State, in a very reliable, precise and professional manner. Among her negative points in this matter:
1- Attacking Libya without Congressional Authorization or any United Nations Resolution happened during Mrs. Clinton watch.
2- 2012 Benghazi attack occurred during Mrs. Clinton watch.
3- Mrs. Clinton used a private email address for her sensitive official job a the Secretary of State.
4- Some might disagree with this point, but in reality age matters. Mrs. Clinton is 67 years old at the present. Next year, she will be 68 years old. Will she have enough capacity and ability in different terms to become the president of the United States of America in the next five years and further more, in the second term?
Some might claim that age is not an important issue by using the age of President Reagan as an example. That's true, Ronald Reagan became the President of U.S. at the age of 69. But there are huge differences between President Reagan and Mrs. Clinton in various terms. We should bear in mind that President Reagan : 1- was a charismatic leader, 2- He didn't have huge controversial issues such as Attacking Libya without Congressional Authorization or Benghazi attack or using private email address in his professional job in his resume. 3- In addition, the historical timing plays an important role in this matter. President Reagan (From Republican Party) took the office in 1981 after massive failure of President Carter (From Democratic Party) with regards to:
A- The emergence of Islamic Regime in Iran, B- Hostage taking of American Diplomats in Tehran, C- Failure of the Carter Administration to rescue the American Diplomats from Iran, D- Invasion of the Soviet Union Army into Afghanistan during Carter watch, etc. The combination of all these issues, facilitated a good opportunity for the Republican Party and its main candidate Ronald Reagan to become the president.
A simple comparison shows, that Hillary Clinton, 1- does not have the same characteristics, qualifications and reputation of President Reagan in different terms. 2- Moreover, the historical timing is to some degree against the Democratic Party and one of its candidate Mrs. Clinton. One might wonder how. Without any doubt, the Presidency of Barack Obama could be one of the worse one in terms of weak and chaotic foreign policy in the entire history of the United States of America. There are enormous examples in this matter, which mentioning them are beyond the scope of this short note. The weak and unprofessional performances of Obama administration with regards to an important issue such as foreign policy would automatically encourage and stimulate some American people to vote for a Republican candidate.
In short, based on brief explanation noted above, Mrs. Clinton does not have enough chance to become the president in 2016. On the contrary and based on what explored above, the Republican Party has the best opportunity to occupy the White House in the next year election; Of course, if the Party 1- would choose a smart and powerful candidate in different terms, 2- would update some of its outdated programs based on the contemporary needs and will of current American generation, and 3-would perform the presidential campaign in a very professional and appropriate manner.
M. Sirani 12.2015
Russia Offered Iran the Membership of Eurasian Economic Union; This Would Be Another Positive Step for Iran in Various Terms.
Iran is rapidly penetrating in every international treaty with the main members of the BRICS group.
I'm wondering how on earth, the current U.S. administration is severely defending the proposal, which claims that the international community would be able to reimpose the sanctions on Iran at any time, If Iran would not meet its commitments with regards to the emerging nuclear deal.
M. Sirani 12.04.2015
I'm wondering how on earth, the current U.S. administration is severely defending the proposal, which claims that the international community would be able to reimpose the sanctions on Iran at any time, If Iran would not meet its commitments with regards to the emerging nuclear deal.
M. Sirani 12.04.2015
212 Iranian Lawmakers, In An Open Letter, Asked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to Publish the Iranian Version of Lausanne Fact Sheet (12.04.2015).
We are reaching the moment of truth in the next couple of days. There are many controversial issues with regards to the Lausanne Framework and fact Sheets. As an example, there are many differences between the details of U.S., European and Iranian Fact Sheets. By publishing the Iranian version of fact sheet and a simple comparison between that and U.S. and EU fact sheets, we will easily understand, who or which administration is lying in this matter; Iranian Regime, the U.S. administration or the EU.
M. Sirani 12.04.2015
M. Sirani 12.04.2015
Saturday, April 11, 2015
What Happened in Obama's Press Conference in Panama?
When it comes to the questions with regards to Iran's nuclear deal and the recent statements of Khamenei, Obama responses were very weak, simple and shallow.
In addition, Obama's voice was shaking and he was scratching his ears constantly during the press conference. The combination of all these issues clearly showed that he was some how unprepared, very nervous and desperate with regards to Iran's nuclear deal.
Note: It's really shocking me. As a President of the USA, he should have performed in a very professional, diplomatic and powerful manner in such an important public event. Maybe those around him do not pay attention to these small motoric and body language movements, But, i'm pretty sure the Iranian Regime's psycho-analyst would do.
M. Sirani 11.04.2015
In addition, Obama's voice was shaking and he was scratching his ears constantly during the press conference. The combination of all these issues clearly showed that he was some how unprepared, very nervous and desperate with regards to Iran's nuclear deal.
Note: It's really shocking me. As a President of the USA, he should have performed in a very professional, diplomatic and powerful manner in such an important public event. Maybe those around him do not pay attention to these small motoric and body language movements, But, i'm pretty sure the Iranian Regime's psycho-analyst would do.
M. Sirani 11.04.2015
Improving USA & Cuba Relationship; The Whole World Should Cross the Finger loool
Improving USA & Cuba relationship is the only positive Foreign Policy move of Obama administration So Far. I emphasize on the term "So Far", because i don't have any clue what will happen to this relationship in the next two years, due to the chaotic characteristic of current U.S. administration in terms of foreign policy. Honestly, i'm worried that suddenly out of the blue, one of the high ranking officials of current U.S. administration would pick up the phone and in a very "professional and diplomatic" manner says "F,,, Cuba" "F,,, the rest of American Latin Countries" and................................................................................. ............................................................................................ you know the rest of the story. Either Guantanamo or imposing sanction on some people in Venezuela, for example, could be the theme and base of such a so-called "professional and diplomatic" phone call.
Note: Don't blame me, if i have reacted pessimistically in this matter. I have seen dozens shallow, inefficient and unprofessional policies in the past six years. Although, i'm an atheist, but i should say: God bless this relationship in the next two years; or maybe the international community should cross the finger lol
M. Sirani 11.04.2015
Note: Don't blame me, if i have reacted pessimistically in this matter. I have seen dozens shallow, inefficient and unprofessional policies in the past six years. Although, i'm an atheist, but i should say: God bless this relationship in the next two years; or maybe the international community should cross the finger lol
M. Sirani 11.04.2015
With Current Military Operation, You Will Never Win the War in Yemen. Your Current Operation Will, on the contrary, Spillover the Yemeni Tension Into Saudi Arabia's Territory in the Near Future (11.04.2015).
Your current inefficient operation, if it continues in the future as it is currently, will spillover the Yemeni tension, firstly, into Saudi Arabia and later in some other areas across the Middle East in the form of a total war between different Shiite and Sunni groups. Be aware about the consequences of your current military operation in Yemen. In addition, you might lose the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb to the Hothis. Bear in mind that the 40 kilometers width Bab-el-Mandeb can be easily impassible by some rockets fired from Yemen.
Note: Those responsible in this matter should bear in mind that starting a war is an easy task. Achieving the goal and how to finish the war in a victorious way is a very difficult task.
M. Sirani 11.04.2015
Note: Those responsible in this matter should bear in mind that starting a war is an easy task. Achieving the goal and how to finish the war in a victorious way is a very difficult task.
M. Sirani 11.04.2015
Keep Dreaming Mr. Minister, if You Would Be Allowed to Visit Iran's Military Bases (Chamberlain Type of Hibernation Mode).
I'm wondering why some politicians are eager to ruin their political reputation by proposing a demand that they know is almost unachievable.
Note: You are not allowed to fully visit all Iran's nuclear facilities; now you are demanding to visit Iran's military bases!!!! Sweet dreams Mr. Minister.
M. Sirani 11.04.2015
Note: You are not allowed to fully visit all Iran's nuclear facilities; now you are demanding to visit Iran's military bases!!!! Sweet dreams Mr. Minister.
M. Sirani 11.04.2015
Friday, April 10, 2015
The Backlash of Scandalous Lausanne Framework Will Shake Up Obama Administration in Both Domestic and International Arena in the Near Future.
Some talented journalists such as Thomas Friedman or Fareed Zakaria also cannot do anything at all in this matter anymore. The era of orchestrating an journalistic theater about Lausanne framework is over.
Note: Be patient and watch the political earthquake within Obama administration in the near future.
M. Sirani 10.04.2015
Note: Be patient and watch the political earthquake within Obama administration in the near future.
M. Sirani 10.04.2015
There is Seriously Something Fishy Within the Lausanne Framework Between the USA and Iran.
Due to massive contradictions between what the current U.S. administration claims and what the Iranian officials explain about the Lausanne Framework and the notion that the Iranian Regime does not want / has not published its factsheet yet, we can deduce that there is seriously something fishy within this Framework between the USA and Iran; a type of secret and hidden agenda that other members of 5+1 have absolutely no idea about that.
In this respect, Russia and China might be exception. Because these two states have close relationship with Iran in different terms. As such, they will highly likely get enough information about all the details of Lausanne Framework between Iran and the current U.S. administration including its hidden agenda from their Iranian counterpart.
But what about France, Germany and the UK? Do these countries like Russia and China get enough information about all the details of this framework from Iran or the USA from their American or Iranian counterparts?
I don't think so. As such, it would be wise that the policy makers in France, Germany and the UK would once again reevaluate what type of deal Iran and the current U.S. administration have privately and secretly agreed in this Framework.
Note: Be aware and do not jeopardize your political career and reputation by involving in the Lausannegate Scandal. There is seriously something fishy in the USA and Iran's part of this Framework. No wonder, some states such as Israel and the Arab countries do not trust the Obama administration anymore.
M. Sirani 10.04.2015
In this respect, Russia and China might be exception. Because these two states have close relationship with Iran in different terms. As such, they will highly likely get enough information about all the details of Lausanne Framework between Iran and the current U.S. administration including its hidden agenda from their Iranian counterpart.
But what about France, Germany and the UK? Do these countries like Russia and China get enough information about all the details of this framework from Iran or the USA from their American or Iranian counterparts?
I don't think so. As such, it would be wise that the policy makers in France, Germany and the UK would once again reevaluate what type of deal Iran and the current U.S. administration have privately and secretly agreed in this Framework.
Note: Be aware and do not jeopardize your political career and reputation by involving in the Lausannegate Scandal. There is seriously something fishy in the USA and Iran's part of this Framework. No wonder, some states such as Israel and the Arab countries do not trust the Obama administration anymore.
M. Sirani 10.04.2015
Thursday, April 9, 2015
The Name of President Obama Will Be Accompanied With Lausannegate Scandal in the Future.
We should bear in mind that all the details of this framework have not been publicly revealed yet. What would happen when all the secret and hidden parts of deal, much more than current Factsheets, between the Obama administration and the Islamic Regime would be revealed?
The Lausannegate Scandal would emerge. The whole this event just needs a real patriot defector within Obama administration and a brave journalist.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
The Lausannegate Scandal would emerge. The whole this event just needs a real patriot defector within Obama administration and a brave journalist.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
Has Iran Ruined Enough the Reputation of President Obama Among the U.S. Close Allies or Not Yet?
Has Iran Ruined Enough the Reputation of President Obama Among the U.S. Close Allies or Not Yet?
Influenced by Iranian Regime's lobbyists, Obama administration implemented various wrong policies with regards to different events in the Middle East. These wrong policies have caused a serious fragmentation between the USA and its close allies particularly Israel and the Arab countries in the region. At the present, the Obama administration has reached the point of no return. On the one hand, the nuclear deal with Iran, as the administration wished, has become an impossible mission following today's Khamenei speech. On the other hand, the USA has largely lost its credibility and trustworthiness among its close allies in the Middle East. This is a type of divide and govern policy of the Iranian Regime.
I warned about this event just couple of days ago through a short note. Here below is the copy of my previous short note in this matter.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
One of the Most Important Tactics of the Islamic Regime in Negotiation.
In the beginning of a negotiation, they use every leverages including smiley face and massive efforts of lobbyists and give you a false and unrealistic hope in one or some issues. They work hard until this false hope would seem so real to you. Gradually and steady, you portray a beautiful picture, which in reality is not true, for yourself about the final outcome of the negotiation. At this stage, you transfer many positive news to your political system, media and fellow citizens. Should this happen, they retreat suddenly from every promise that they had made in the beginning of the negotiation. By using this method, they crush your political reputation and push you into "the point of no return". This is the point that Mr. John Kerry has landed at this stage.
Following this event, they drag you wherever they want in the negotiation. This is one of the regular tactics of the Islamic Regime. This tactic is, to some extent, originated from ancient Parthian dynasty method against their enemies, but the Iranian regime has developed and updated it in this way. As an example, remember the export of Iran's extra uranium to Russia. In many occasions, different Iranian officials openly and publicly were agreed with this point. But, Iranian negotiators suddenly rejected and refused this idea yesterday.
Note: You need to learn more about the Iranian Regime's tactics; a series of tactics that Thomas Schelling, Joseph Nye or any other pundits have not discovered them yet.
M. Sirani 01.04.2015
All Dreams of Obama Administration Amid A Nuclear Deal With Iran Are Gone With the Wind Following Today's Khamenei Speech.
There is a fourth option.
Note: Obama administration repeatedly and publicly claims that there are only three options in response to Iran's nuclear activity. These options, as President Obama repeatedly claims, are: 1- the current nuclear framework that the administration is following, 2- Walk out of the nuclear negotiation, which does not change anything at all; on the contrary paves the way for Iran toward obtaining nuclear weapon 3- War against Iran. By this type of statement, the Obama administration would justify its wrong policy and would try to sell the world a false idea that Obama administration has chosen the only best possible option with regards to Iran's adventurous nuclear activity by following the Lausanne Framwork.
In response to this false claim and wrong policy, i say that there is a fourth option, which would function much effective and less costly in different terms than the other three options including the useless Lausanne Framework.
The fourth option is a combination of 1- imposing comprehensive sanctions on Iran and simultaneously 2- performing Regime Change policy with regards to Iran. This is the only reliable option, which would guarantee the peace and stability in the Middle East and avoid the rapid nuclear arm race in the region somewhere in the future.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
A Simple Message to Obama Administration: Stop Over-Exaggeration About the Lausanne Framework.
Pay attention carefully to today's Khamenei speech word by word and stop over-exaggeration in this matter immediately. Over-exaggeration in this matter might highly likely ruin your political reputation in the near future.
Note: The U.S. administration should use a neural, independent and professional translator, not one of those Iranian Regime's lobbyists, with regards to interpretation of this video clip from Persian to English language.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
Exclusive: Pay Attention Carefully to Today's Khamenei Speech Word By Word.
The chance that the Lausanne Framework will turn into a solid and long term agreement as the current U.S. administration optimistically-loudly claim and propagate is very low based on today's Khamenei speech; much less than what the Obama administration is dreaming.
Note: Obama administration repeatedly and publicly claims that there are only three options in response to Iran's nuclear activity. These options, as President Obama repeatedly claims, are: 1- the current nuclear framework that the administration is following, 2- Walk out of the nuclear negotiation, which does not change anything at all; on the contrary paves the way for Iran toward obtaining nuclear weapon 3- War against Iran. By this type of statement, the Obama administration would justify its wrong policy and would try to sell the world a false idea that Obama administration has chosen the only best possible option with regards to Iran's adventurous nuclear activity by following the Lausanne Framwork.
In response to this false claim and wrong policy, i say that there is a fourth option, which would function much effective and less costly in different terms than the other three options including the useless Lausanne Framework.
The fourth option is a combination of 1- imposing sanctions on Iran and simultaneously 2- performing Regime Change policy with regards to Iran. This is the only option, which would guarantee the peace and stability in the Middle East and avoid the rapid nuclear arm race in the region somewhere in the future.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
Note: Obama administration repeatedly and publicly claims that there are only three options in response to Iran's nuclear activity. These options, as President Obama repeatedly claims, are: 1- the current nuclear framework that the administration is following, 2- Walk out of the nuclear negotiation, which does not change anything at all; on the contrary paves the way for Iran toward obtaining nuclear weapon 3- War against Iran. By this type of statement, the Obama administration would justify its wrong policy and would try to sell the world a false idea that Obama administration has chosen the only best possible option with regards to Iran's adventurous nuclear activity by following the Lausanne Framwork.
In response to this false claim and wrong policy, i say that there is a fourth option, which would function much effective and less costly in different terms than the other three options including the useless Lausanne Framework.
The fourth option is a combination of 1- imposing sanctions on Iran and simultaneously 2- performing Regime Change policy with regards to Iran. This is the only option, which would guarantee the peace and stability in the Middle East and avoid the rapid nuclear arm race in the region somewhere in the future.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
The Lausanne Framework and its So Far Serious Complications.
The U.S. officials pretend that this is some type of misinterpretation, but it seems there are some serious complications with regards to the details of Lausanne Framework between Iran and its counterparts. These complications are, so far, as follows.
1- Type of centrifuge: According to the U.S. officials, Iran will not be allowed to use its modern centrifuges in its nuclear activities following the emerging nuclear deal.
Iran's response in this matter: In a closed parliamentary meeting, which took place last Tuesday, both Salehi and Zarif told the members of Parliament that Iran will use its modern type centrifuge IR8 in its nuclear activities following the emerging nuclear deal.
2- Lifting the sanctions: According to the U.S. officials, the sanctions will be gradually lifted based on Iran's verified commitment with regards to the emerging deal.
Iran's response in this matter: Today, Hassan Rouhani said, Iran would not sign any agreement, unless the sanctions were lifted on the first day of the implementation of agreement. This is an important issue that Ayatollah Khamenei has also emphasized on it in many official occasions. When it comes to the sanctions imposed on Iran, we should pay attention to an important issue, which evolved yesterday. Iran has become the founder member of AIIB (China-led Bank) since yesterday. Such a development, will give an extra power to Iran in different terms. As an example, the international community will not easily be able to reimpose economic sanctions on Iran somewhere in the future, if Iran will not meet its commitments within the charter of Lausanne Framework/emerging agreement.
3- IAEA unlimited and unexpected inspection: According to the U.S. officials including Ben Rhodes, the IAEA inspectors will be allowed to visit every suspicious nuclear sites including Iran's military sites, if it will be needed.
Iran's response in this matter: Both Iran's Minister of Defense Hossein Dehghan and Hassan Firuzabadi the Chief of Staff of Iranian Armed Forces state that Iran will not allow anyone visit Iran's military bases. Such an issue is Iran's red line as both Iran's military officials and other policy makers in Tehran repeatedly claim.
We should bear in mind that the Lausanne Framework is just nearly one week old and there are many complications in this Framework up until this moment. As the time passes, we will undoubtedly observe more flaws and complications in this matter. Such serious complications indicate the fact that Obama administration can hardly sell this Framework (and the emerging agreement) not only to the U.S. lawmakers but also to the close U.S. allies in the Middle East.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
1- Type of centrifuge: According to the U.S. officials, Iran will not be allowed to use its modern centrifuges in its nuclear activities following the emerging nuclear deal.
Iran's response in this matter: In a closed parliamentary meeting, which took place last Tuesday, both Salehi and Zarif told the members of Parliament that Iran will use its modern type centrifuge IR8 in its nuclear activities following the emerging nuclear deal.
2- Lifting the sanctions: According to the U.S. officials, the sanctions will be gradually lifted based on Iran's verified commitment with regards to the emerging deal.
Iran's response in this matter: Today, Hassan Rouhani said, Iran would not sign any agreement, unless the sanctions were lifted on the first day of the implementation of agreement. This is an important issue that Ayatollah Khamenei has also emphasized on it in many official occasions. When it comes to the sanctions imposed on Iran, we should pay attention to an important issue, which evolved yesterday. Iran has become the founder member of AIIB (China-led Bank) since yesterday. Such a development, will give an extra power to Iran in different terms. As an example, the international community will not easily be able to reimpose economic sanctions on Iran somewhere in the future, if Iran will not meet its commitments within the charter of Lausanne Framework/emerging agreement.
3- IAEA unlimited and unexpected inspection: According to the U.S. officials including Ben Rhodes, the IAEA inspectors will be allowed to visit every suspicious nuclear sites including Iran's military sites, if it will be needed.
Iran's response in this matter: Both Iran's Minister of Defense Hossein Dehghan and Hassan Firuzabadi the Chief of Staff of Iranian Armed Forces state that Iran will not allow anyone visit Iran's military bases. Such an issue is Iran's red line as both Iran's military officials and other policy makers in Tehran repeatedly claim.
We should bear in mind that the Lausanne Framework is just nearly one week old and there are many complications in this Framework up until this moment. As the time passes, we will undoubtedly observe more flaws and complications in this matter. Such serious complications indicate the fact that Obama administration can hardly sell this Framework (and the emerging agreement) not only to the U.S. lawmakers but also to the close U.S. allies in the Middle East.
M. Sirani 09.04.2015
Wednesday, April 8, 2015
Zarif And Salehi: After the Nuclear Deal, Iran Will Use the Modern Type Centrifuge IR8 injected With Gas For Its Nuclear Program.
In a closed meeting at the Islamic Parliament yesterday, both Javad Zarif and Ali Akbar Salehi has revealed something about the use of modern centrifuge in their discussion with the member of the Parliament as Fars News claims.
According to this news, both Zarif and Salehi has told the members of Parliament that after signing the nuclear deal with the world powers, Iran will use its modern type centrifuge i.e. IR8 injected with gas for its nuclear activity, based on Iran's Fact Sheet as both Zarif and Salehi stated. This statement is contradicting with what the US officials have publicly and openly announced.
Note: There are many vogue and ambiguous issues with regards to the Lausanne Framework as far as we discover step by step. I'm pretty sure we will discover more controversial points within this Framework in the next coming days, weeks and months. No wonder both the USA and Iran have been trying to keep everything secret behind the scene.
M. Sirani 08.04.2015
Reference:
Fars News (2015). http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13940118000184
According to this news, both Zarif and Salehi has told the members of Parliament that after signing the nuclear deal with the world powers, Iran will use its modern type centrifuge i.e. IR8 injected with gas for its nuclear activity, based on Iran's Fact Sheet as both Zarif and Salehi stated. This statement is contradicting with what the US officials have publicly and openly announced.
Note: There are many vogue and ambiguous issues with regards to the Lausanne Framework as far as we discover step by step. I'm pretty sure we will discover more controversial points within this Framework in the next coming days, weeks and months. No wonder both the USA and Iran have been trying to keep everything secret behind the scene.
M. Sirani 08.04.2015
Reference:
Fars News (2015). http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13940118000184
Iran's Minister of Defense: Iran Will Not Allow Any Inspection in Its Military Bases.
Iran's current Minister of Defense, Hossein Dehghan said: There is not any detail with regards to inspection of the Iran's military bases within the Lausanne Framework and Iran will not allow such an inspection. Such an issue is Iran's red line, as Dehghan emphasized.
Note: Those, who have a dream to visit the Parchin site or any other Iran's military base in case of any nuclear dispute somewhere in the future, should pay attention to Dehghan's statement in this matter. This is something that Ayatollah Khamenei himself has also emphasized on many occasions.
M. Sirani 08.04.2015
Note: Those, who have a dream to visit the Parchin site or any other Iran's military base in case of any nuclear dispute somewhere in the future, should pay attention to Dehghan's statement in this matter. This is something that Ayatollah Khamenei himself has also emphasized on many occasions.
M. Sirani 08.04.2015
Iran Deployed its 34th Flotilla of Warships to the International Waters in the Gulf of Aden For A Three Months Mission (08.04.2015).
This move might be a simple projection of power. But we should not forget that a single unintentional accident in the Gulf of Aden, can transform the proxy war era between Iran and Saudi Arabia into a direct broad military confrontation in the whole Middle East.
I hope the policy makers in both Tehran and Riyadh understand that they are closing to a critical and dangerous point with regards to current tension in Yemen.
M. Sirani 08.04.2015
I hope the policy makers in both Tehran and Riyadh understand that they are closing to a critical and dangerous point with regards to current tension in Yemen.
M. Sirani 08.04.2015
Exclusive: Iran Joined China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) As A Founder Member.
Briefly:
The decision has been made by existing members such as China, Britain, France, India and Italy. This is a huge beneficial step for the Islamic Regime in different terms. Let us briefly explore what does this development mean for the international community by using Iran's nuclear deal as a simple example.According to the Lausanne Framework and the emerging nuclear deal with Iran, the international community will lift the sanctions on Iran following the agreement. As the USA and other world powers involved in this matter emphasize, the sanctions will be implemented and reinforced again, if Iran will not meet its commitments according to the emerging agreement.
Hypothetically, after a certain period of time, let's say after two years, Iran will not follow the nuclear agreement and the country will not meet its obligations with regards to its nuclear activity based on some reason whatsoever. In such a scenario, what can the international community do? How will the international community be able to once again reimpose the sanctions on Iran? Will the international community be able to impose sanction on Iran as a Founder Member of the bank and consequently on AIIB? Are you able to impose sanctions on the Eastern Block IMF i.e. AIIB?
This is not the end of story. Sooner or later, Iran will join the Shanghai Treaty as well, as i predicted in some of my earlier short notes. Should this happen, the international community will not be able to control the Islamic Regime in different terms including its nuclear activity.
Note: Iran is quickly and broadly penetrating in every powerful international institutions alongside China and BRICS group. In the next coming years, you cannot do anything at all against Iran.
It should be added that Iran had deposited nearly $30 billion dollars in one or some of banks in China during Ahmadinejad presidency. This development is the fruit of that move. This development, in addition, shows how the policy makers in Tehran make the plan for the future.
M. Sirani 08.04.2015
Monday, April 6, 2015
Without A Clear Strategy, the Civil War in Yemen Will Undoubtedly Spillover in Saudi Arabia Somewhere in the Near Future (06.04.2015).
Briefly:
What we are observing in Yemen is not a regular or a classic warfare. It is a type of guerrilla warfare between different actors mainly 1- Al-Qaeda, ISIS and their affiliates, 2- Shiite Houthis rebels, 3- Yemeni government forces and Sunni rebels.
In addition, we should bear in mind that we cannot fundamentally win a guerrilla warfare by military air strike alone. The broad military air strikes of the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS targets in Syria and Iraq confirm this statement. The current dispute in Aden is also showing that despite Saudi-led coalition air strikes, the Yemeni Houthis are gaining the ground in this strategic port.
As such, the Saudi-led coalition is left with some limited options as follows.
1- Finding a diplomatic solution through negotiation with the Houthis. Pursuing this option needs massive effort and cooperation between various actors including 1- the UN, 2- Saudi-led coalition, 3- The current government of Yemen, 4- The Houthis rebels. This is a difficult task, but still is worthy to pursue.
2- Continuing with the same air strikes tactic across Yemen. Such a tactic does not function properly and is not effective in the long term as the Saudi-led coalition expects. Such a move in the long term, would spillover the Yemeni civil war beyond the geographical territory of Yemen. In this respect, Saudi Arabia is the most vulnerable state based on many reasons mainly: 1- Having border with Yemen, 2- the possible uprising of Shiite people in the Eastern Parts of Saudi Arabia itself somewhere in the near future.
3- Deploying the Saudi-led coalition ground forces into Yemen. Such a move would undoubtedly intensify the tension in a larger scale not only in Yemen but also in various parts of the Middle East in the name of war between different Shiite and Sunni groups for many years to come.
Note: the UN should play its role in a professional and appropriate manner with regards to current tension in Yemen immediately; before it's too late.
M. Sirani 06.04.2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)