Iran’s Khamenei endorses nuclear deal
By Staff writer, Al Arabiya News/Wednesday, 21 October 2015/Iran’s supreme leader has endorsed a landmark nuclear deal reached with world powers, but has warned the government to be vigilant, saying the United States “cannot be trusted,” in a letter published on his website. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on all major policies in Iran, endorsed the deal in a letter addressed to moderate President Hassan Rowhani that was read on state TV on Wednesday. He said Iran could go ahead but “ambiguities” in the agreement must be guarded against. Khamenei also said U.S. President Barack Obama has sent him two letters assuring him that the U.S. had no intention to topple Iran’s clerical establishment. Khamenei said he had approved the decision of the country’s top security committee, the Supreme National Security Council, to implement the nuclear deal but it must be “tightly controlled” and monitored “to prevent significant damage” to the country’s future. His endorsement comes after his long-absent public approval or rejection of the deal while expressing support for Iran’s negotiators. The agreement reached in July with the U.S., Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany would curb Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for the lifting of crippling international sanctions. Western nations have long suspected Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons alongside its civilian program, charges rejected by Tehran, which insists its program is entirely peaceful. Iran won’t give up uranium stockpile. In the same time, Khamenei said Iran will not give up its stockpile of enriched uranium or repurpose the heavy water nuclear reactor at Arak until the issue of possible military dimensions (PMDs) to its disputed nuclear program is solved. “Any action regarding Arak and dispatching uranium abroad … will take place after the PMD file is closed,” he said. (With agencies)’
What’s so special about Iran’s latest missile?
Abbas Qaidaari/Al-Monitor/October 21/15
TEHRAN, Iran — Last week, Iran’s Ministry of Defense managed to successfully test-fire its Emad medium-range ballistic missile. According to Defense Minister Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehghan, “This is the first ballistic missile developed by Iran that can be precision-guided until it reaches its target.” A few days later, for the first time, Iran’s state television broadcast a report on one of Iran’s biggest underground storage sites for Shahab ballistic missiles.Considering the imminent implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action struck between Iran and six world powers, the two moves are a sign that Tehran wants to flaunt its military might and determination to expand its military power. The Emad launch was Iran’s first ballistic missile test since the nuclear agreement was concluded. According to the JCPOA, Iran is not allowed to improve and test medium-range ballistic missiles designed to carry nuclear warheads. Iranian officials do not, however, interpret the rule as a restriction on its missile arsenal, arguing that the weapons are not designed to carry an atomic payload. Indeed, they have continuously talked about Iran’s right to expand its military capabilities, including its missile program. Along this vein, 220 parliament members have published a statement emphasizing that the Islamic Republic believes it has the right to expand its missile capabilities, and that the nuclear agreement cannot become an obstacle to such expansion. Indeed, senior nuclear negotiator and Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has stated that it is Iran’s fundamental right to reasonably expand its defense and missile capabilities, and that in doing so, it will not violate any of its obligations under the JCPOA.
Nonetheless, US officials have reacted to the recent missile test as a violation of Iran’s obligations. President Barack Obama stated that the nuclear deal “does not fully resolve all areas of dispute with Tehran. And so we are going to have to continue to put pressure on them through the international community.” Moreover, UN Ambassador Samantha Power said Oct. 16, “The United States is deeply concerned about Iran’s recent ballistic missile launch. After reviewing the available information, we can confirm that Iran launched on Oct. 10 a medium-range ballistic missile inherently capable of delivering a nuclear weapon. … This was a clear violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1929.” Meanwhile, the French Foreign Ministry published a statement emphasizing that Iran’s ballistic missile test was a violation of a UN Security Council resolution and sends “a worrying message.”
While neither US nor European officials have stated that Iran’s missile test violates the JCPOA, it appears that Iran and the world powers continue to have serious disagreements regarding the Iranian missile program. From Tehran’s perspective, only the installation of equipment to accommodate a nuclear warhead means that a missile is designed to carry nuclear warheads. For the United States, the criteria is whether the missile has the potential to carry an atomic payload.
How is the Emad different from other Iranian-made missiles?
Although Iranian military officials have not yet officially announced the range of the Emad, some Iranian news agencies have reported it as 1,700 kilometers (1,000 miles). Its fuel type has not yet been announced either, but it can be determined — based on footage of its firing — that its engine runs on liquid fuel. Liquid-fuel missiles are a fraction of the cost of solid-fuel missiles to produce. It thus appears that because of the economic restrictions of the past few years, and after many years of testing solid-fuel missiles, Iran has decided to once again produce liquid-fuel missiles.
The Emad has a single-stage design and its new warhead distinguishes it from the more prominent Shahab-3 ballistic missile. Most of Iran’s medium-range ballistic missiles can carry payloads of between 700 and 1,000 kilograms (1,500-2,200 pounds). Considering the size and possible range of the Emad, this liquid-fuel missile can likely carry a warhead weighing about 750 kilograms (1,700 pounds). When one carefully reviews the images captured of the warhead, one can see that there are winglets designed to increase the missile’s precision. Moreover, if the winglets are in fact aerodynamic, they can be guided as well. However, since Iran does not have geostationary military satellites, it is not capable of guiding ballistic missiles over a long distance, as it by default uses the American global positioning system. In the event of a war between Iran and the United States — or Iran and Israel — the Pentagon could disable the global navigation system. Therefore, considering that Iran does not have its own satellite system and does not use the Russian GLONASS, it is possible that the Emad will be guided via radio from Iran’s military stations or its unmanned aerial vehicles in Syria and Lebanon. The earlier successful testing and mass production of solid-fuel, two-stage ballistic missiles such as the Sejjil are considered a huge technological leap for Iran. However, the fact that Iran has decided to once again produce liquid-fuel missiles shows that there are probably enough solid-fuel missiles stored in silos to allow Iran to react quickly in time of war. Tehran can thus benefit from less expensive liquid-fuel missiles in the second phase of any hypothetical war. In conclusion, as far as aerodynamic and technical characteristics are concerned, the Emad shares many similarities with Iran’s earlier Qader, Shahab and Sejjil missiles. This lack of change shows that Tehran has not progressed beyond the North Korean Nodong and the Soviet Union Scud missiles. Although Iran has showcased many different types of ballistic missiles in the past few years, none of them are technologically noteworthy when it comes to structural design. This observation suggests that Iran has mastered the available technology, but has been somehow stopped from expanding its ability to produce other types of ballistic missiles with different platforms.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s brewing crisis
Mahmut Bozarslan/Al-Monitor/October 21/15
Demonstrations turned violent earlier this month as thousands of people protested the dire economic situation in Iraqi Kurdistan, with many demanding that Massoud Barzani step down as regional president. Developments that brought the Kurdish region to this crisis situation began when Barzani’s term officially ended Aug. 20, but the Ministry of Justice extended his tenure until 2017. That solved a political issue, but it did not end political squabbling. Leaders tried to resolve the issue by holding meetings of all parties represented in the parliament.
But before a solution was found, strikes and demonstrations began.
Earlier this month, as Sulaimaniyah province was hosting one of those meetings — the ninth — schoolteachers who had not been paid for three months walked off their jobs.
A group protested in front of the hotel where the meeting was being held, and police used force to prevent the demonstrators from entering the building. The group then resorted to a sit-in. As this was going on, health workers in the Iraqi Kurdistan capital, Erbil, walked off their jobs.
The protests that began in Sulaimaniyah quickly spread. Strikes and street demonstrations became commonplace. The next day at Kaladize, demonstrations turned violent. The office of Barzani’s Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) was set on fire. Three people were killed and 20 wounded in the clashes between demonstrators and security. Before Kaladize calmed down, street protests erupted in the center of Sulaimaniyah and in the towns of Ranya, Kelar, Pencewin, Halepce and Koysancak. The Kurdish region, which is not accustomed to popular protests, was facing major demonstrations. KDP offices were the main targetsin many places; some were set on fire, and the police saved others. The Islamic Komal and Yekgirtu parties were also targeted.
Several days of clashes ended with five deaths and about 200 wounded. The headquarters of Rudaw, the largest media outfit in the region, suffered an armed attack.
Street protests and violence amplified the political crisis. Most of the demonstrators were Gorran Movement for Change partisans, which brought Gorran and the KDP into confrontation. The KDP accused Gorran of being responsible, while Gorran blamed the KDP.
Party rhetoric escalated tension, which climbed yet another notch when parliamentary speaker Yusuf Muhammed, a Gorran member, was not allowed to enter Erbil. A KDP official claimed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) militants were among the demonstrators. While efforts were being made to resolve the crisis, Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani of the KDP removed four Gorran ministers from his Cabinet.
Mehmet Oguz, editor of Turkish media portal Rudaw Media Group, told Al-Monitor the central government in Baghdad’s refusal to pay the budget share of the Kurdistan region, combined with clashes with the Islamic State (IS) and the influx of refugees, has made life difficult for the Kurdish government. He said with declining oil prices, oil exports were not a solution. He added, “When Gorran was established, their slogan was ‘A social and just government.’ Its position against corruption and income inequality made it popular, and it quickly became the main opposition. But in the last term, although it became a coalition partner, it did not deliver its promises. It couldn’t have. It started losing popularity and thought it could make up for it with street actions.”
Oguz noted that the traditionally good relations between Sulaimaniyah and Tehran also played a role in the crisis.
“I think we have key problems of corruption and income distribution in the region,” he said. “All political parties are responsible. Gorran was represented by five ministers in the government, plus they had the parliamentary speaker post. How can one explain their efforts to expel the main partner of the coalition from the area, and threatening it with lynching, while we are surrounded by enemies?”
According to political analyst Siddik Hassan Sukru, who lives in Erbil, the crisis is caused by a deficiency in democracy. Answering Al-Monitor’s questions, Sukru claimed there are efforts to splinter the region. “Developments in the Middle East, the situation of Iraq and Kurdistan do not permit a return to dual governance, although there is heavy international pressure to do so. The US and Europe have high hopes for Kurdistan because it is fighting IS. They think Kurds can bring democracy and freedom to the Middle East. This region needs democratic culture more than money, guns and oil. Europe hopes that Kurdistan could be the primer of such a culture in the region. Kurdish intellectuals and politicians will not allow splitting Kurdistan and fratricide.”
Sukru said the United States and Europe have to intervene in the crisis. “America has to bring pressure,” said Sukru. “They are giving weapons to Kurdish parties. This could be one reason for the crisis. The party with heavier weapons could be a threat to others. Don’t forget that until today, there hasn’t been any state institution in Kurdistan. Everything was done by political parties. One party can instruct the police to prevent a minister from coming to his ministry. This is unprecedented. … The US and Europe have to press political parties to refrain from threatening others and claiming the upper hand. The US should tell them clearly that it is giving those guns to Kurds to fight IS, not each other.”
Economic problems in the region go back to 2014 when Baghdad stopped paying its agreed contribution to the Kurdish regional budget and accused the Kurds of exporting their own oil in violation of agreements. The economic situation worsened with IS attacks. Although Baghdad and Erbil reached an agreement on oil, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said the government did not have enough funds and delayed sending a reduced Kurdish share. The Kurdish government responded by exporting its own oil. But when oil prices dropped to $50 a barrel, the Kurdish budget and income calculations were disrupted. That is why the salaries went unpaid.
The economic crisis is really biting, especially considering that more than 1 million people of a total population of more than 7 million live on government salaries.
***Mahmut Bozarslan is based in Diyarbakir, the central city of Turkey’s mainly Kurdish southeast. A journalist since 1996, he has worked for the mass-circulation daily Sabah, the NTV news channel, Al Jazeera Turk and Agence France-Presse (AFP), covering the many aspects of the Kurdish question, as well as the local economy and women’s and refugee issues. He has frequently reported also from Iraqi Kurdistan.
