Informed Comment

“I suppose that anyone with sort of broad European culture has a fairly good idea of Persian history– he must have– it’s part of our history, as well. And, having been brought up in France, I was perfectly familiar with Lettres Persanes and all the rest of it. For that matter, Omar Khayyam was a part of the English heritage, almost, now. And, as my minister on various occasions, Anthony Eden, was a Persian scholar, one picked up a little. He always claimed that he read Hafiz before going to sleep, and so, if only to look like one’s minister, one pretended that one also read Hafiz before going to sleep at night.”

- Sir George Humphrey Middleton (21 January 1910 – 12 February 1998), British ambassador to Lebanon (1956–1958), Argentina (1961–1964) and Egypt (1964–1965), and “Chief Political Resident in the Persian Gulf Residency and Chargé d’affaires in Iran during the Abadan Crisis.”

Anthony Eden was British Prime Minister 1955-1957.

From the Harvard Oral History Project

Note: It is incredible the purchase that Persian culture had in the British political and cultural elite as late as the 1950s. But it is also incredible that they could confuse Montesquieu and Edward Fitzgerald’s Khayyam with the real thing.

Posted in Iran, UK | 3 Comments

Haaretz reports that hundreds of Israeli peace activists marched in Tel Aviv on Saturday to protest all the talk of striking Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. Their placards demanded “No to War with Iran,” and “Talks, not Bombs.”

The boldness of this march, given the rightwing political atmosphere in Israel, should not be underestimated. Devastated at the polls and quiescent for years, the Israeli left has in the past year begun finding its voice. The J14 movement of street protests for affordable housing and education brought hundreds of thousands of Israelis into the streets last summer and fall. It is well known that many of the protesters skewed left politically and privately oppose the concerted settlement of Palestinian land in the West Bank.

The peace activists and the social justice organizers are offering a new discourse about the good society that differs perceptibly from the old, Labor left. For instance, Uri Savir, President of the Peres Center for Peace, argues for a two-fold strategy. He admits that the Arab Spring makes it more important than ever for Tel Aviv to give up the dream of “Greater Israel” and to draw back from the West Bank, since Israel’s Arab neighbors will never accept that millions of Palestinians should continue to live under occupation. But he takes a harder line against Iran, urging a close American alliance, sanctions, and a military strike as “a last resort.” In essence, he is reversing the policy of the Likud government of PM Binyamin Netanyahu, which routinely risks strained relations with the executive in Washington, sees a strike on Iran as an urgent priority and not a last resort, and is redoubling efforts to colonize the Palestinian West Bank with Israeli squatters.

As welcome as Savir’s common sense is (and it seems to represent Israeli President Shimon Peres’s own thinking), he seems strangely tone deaf to the dangers that ‘crippling’ sanctions on Iran will lead to war, and strangely detached from reality in thinking it is still plausible that Israeli squatters in the West Bank can be removed or that there is enough of it left to form a basis for a Palestinian state. The UN is now reporting that the Israeli state is actively helping West Bank Israeli squatters to steal water resources and springs that belong to the Palestinians, depriving the latter of water and turning the springs into revenue sources and even tourist sites. Colonialism is theft.

In a context where Savir’s position is so far left that probably only a handful of members of the Israeli parliament would publicly sign on to it at this point, the Iran peace march in Tel Aviv is a breath of fresh air.

The dead end of conventional Israeli politics is well summarized by journalist Stav Shaffir of J14, who pointed out to Jweekly that the electorate seems to vote on security issues rather than social issues: “People vote like tomorrow there’s a war and they choose the best general. While doing that, we get a government that abandons all responsibilities. Society isn’t better when you build a better airplane, but when you [offer] a better education.”

Although unconnected to the peace march, another project of Israeli doves is a Facebook page set up by husband-wife team Ronny Edry and Michal Tamir to promote people-to-people positive relations between Israelis and Iranians.

The world-wide trend to big money dominating conventional politics has also affected Israel, where the country’s burgeoning prosperity is increasingly poorly distributed. This problem of creeping plutocracy is not only an issue for young people who can no longer afford apartment rent. It is the same plutocrats who own munitions factories and benefit from war, and who can buy parliamentarians to serve as their ventriloquist dummies. But when conventional politics is seized by gridlock, the people invent new forms of politics. We may be seeing glimmerings of a new Israeli politics of peace.

Posted in Iran, Israel/ Palestine, Uncategorized | 21 Comments

President Barack Obama campaigned on energy issues on Wednesday, visiting a handful of oil wellheads on Federal land in New Mexico and a solar installation in Boulder City, Nevada.

The subtext of this Obama campaign is public unhappiness with the price of gasoline and the hypocritical attacks on him over this issue by his Republican opponents. The fact is that there is only one thing Obama could have done to bring down oil prices, and that would have been to veto the National Defense Authorization Act until Congress took back out the provisions for crippling sanctions on Iran. Republicans back these sanctions to the hilt, which is why it is dishonest of them to attack Obama on high gas prices.

US politicians won’t say it. But Christine Lagarde, the head of the International Monetary Fund, has made it clear that the Israeli-US campaign against Iran, into which they have dragooned Europe, could put up petroleum prices by as much as 30% and endanger the world economic recovery. Likewise, India has lashed out at the US Israel lobbies for what it sees as a smear campaign and unrealistic pressure on Delhi to cut off imports of petroleum from Iran.

Back in the US, you can’t mention the elephant in the room or else the Neocons will accuse you of foaming at the mouth (they are the ones who are actually frothing).

President Obama said while at the solar site:

“Now you’d think, given this extraordinary sight, given the fact that this is creating jobs, generating power, helping to keep our environment clean, making us more competitive globally. You’d think that everybody would be supportive of solar power. And yet, if some politicians have their way, there won’t be any more public investment in solar energy. One member of Congress, who shall remain unnamed, called these jobs ‘phony.’ Called them ‘phony jobs.’ Think about that mindset, that attitude, that says because something is new it must not be real. You know if these guys were around when Columbus set sail, they’d be charter members of the flat earth society.”

The object of the attack, Rep. John Fleming, R-La., replied on Twitter: “POTUS uses flat earth society line again. Witty, but no help for folks paying $4/gal thanks to his failed energy policy. #phonygreenjobs ”

Obama lost that one. No one is interested in how modern the solar site looks, they are interested in the price at the pump. He has to do a better job of explaining why petroleum prices are high. If he would admit that it is in some part because of a US struggle with Iran, he might even be able to appeal to the patriotism of the public.

The price of gasoline depends on 1) petroleum supply, 2) refinery capacity (the ability of the world to turn raw crude into gasoline, kerosene, etc.), 3) global demand, and 4) investor confidence, which affects futures prices.

The Iran crisis is affecting demand for Iranian petroleum. Because of the boycott, Iran has been encouraged to produce less, so it is pumping about 300,000 barrels a day fewer now than it typically did last year on average. But over-all global demand is actually quite high, if not historically high, so the reduced demand for Iranian petroleum is artificial. In the context of high over-all demand, reduced Iranian supply contributes to high prices.

Likewise, crippling sanctions, which in some cases have the practical effect of a blockade of the country’s civilian economy, raise the real possibility of a military conflict. (The US has disarticulated Iran’s banks from the world banking system, making it difficult for e.g. Ukraine to export wheat to Iran because of payment difficulties. When you’re taking bread out of children’s mouths, those aren’t just ‘sanctions,’ they are effectively a blockade; and blockades often lead to war.) Iran made this point with naval exercises at the mouth of the Straits of Hormuz, through which about 20% of the world’s petroleum is shipped. Likewise, the saber rattling of Likud Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu of Israel has contributed to investor jitteriness. Republican presidential candidates, who have more or less been promising us that they would go to war with Iran if elected, have further made investors nervous, so that it is the height of hypocrisy for them to blame Obama for rising prices.

So although it is true that some 20% of the price run-up is speculation, and although many blame the speculators, these are actually mostly futures traders who are quite reasonably worried about the supply of petroleum 6 months out if their are hostilities with Iran. Iran tensions drive the speculation.

Supply is also constrained by political problems in South Sudan, Syria and Nigeria, as well as by increased use of automobiles in countries such as Mexico, reducing their exports over time.

Saudi Arabia is promising to flood the market by ramping up its production, increasing the supply of petroleum. But industry insiders doubt that the Saudis could produce signficantly more petroleum than they already do, at least for very long. Obama has probably fallen for these unrealistic Saudi pledges. (For one thing, they can’t control factors like increased world demand or the subtraction of supplies as a result of political instability).

The Iran issue is unrelated to increased global demand, which derives from continued strong Asian growth. Despite a slight slowdown in China’s perpetually heated economy and the ruling Communist Party’s increase in the price of gasoline, demand for petroleum imports there will likely grow 6% this year to 5.3 million barrels a day. (China is the second largest importer after the United States). A recent dip in China’s imports from Iran is temporary and has to do with a dispute over pricing.

India imports on the order of 3 million barrels a day now, some 10% of it from Iran, and it is hard to see where it will get enough kerosene / paraffin for its needs, much less gasoline/ petrol, if it gives up the 300,000 barrels a day it gets from Iran. (India says it will not kowtow to unilateral US sanctions, but will only follow the UN Security Council ones). Given India’s projected 7% economic growth rate in the next fiscal year, its demand for petroleum will likely be strong– though the high price could actually shave points off the country’s growth and so reduce demand.

South Korea, another significant oil importer, expects to grow at 3.3 percent in the coming year, which will also put pressure on petroleum prices.

Petroleum is mostly used for transportation; a bit for purposes like cooking.

That is why Obama’s visit to the solar plant was irrelevant. Solar energy generates electricity, used for heating, air conditioning, running factories, powering buildings and households, etc. Unless Americans drove a large fleet of electric cars, you could make all the electricity you liked from solar installations and it would not have much effect on the price of petroleum. And, at the slow rate the US is pursuing solar energy and electric vehicles, my grandchildren are the ones likely to see the day when it matters for petroleum prices. Don’t get me wrong. It is highly desirable that we move in this direction quickly, to forestall climate change and to gain energy independence. It is just that US corporations have kept the American public barefoot and spoonfed with propaganda on these issues and so the public is led by the nose to demand what is bad for them and what they can’t have (cheap petroleum).

As for his visit to the oil fields on federal land in New Mexico, they are also irrelevant. The US uses on the order of 18.5 million barrels a day of petroleum and other liquid hydrocarbons. It imports about 8.7 million of that. Although US production of oil is up slightly, and of distillates as well, there is no prospect that the US could produce 8.7 million barrels a day of petroleum and other liquid fuels in any relevant time frame, and probably it can’t do it at all; certainly it could not do it very long. And nobody is preventing drilling in most of the country, just offshore and in nature preserves, where the total likely production wouldn’t exceed 500,000 barrels a day in the lower 48, even if it was all drilled, with all the pollution and spoliation of nature that would ensue.

(The story you’ve heard about the US becoming a net exporter of refined petroleum products for the first time in years is irrelevant. That just means it is refining petroleum and selling the gasoline e.g. abroad. The US is still the world’s biggest net importer of petroleum, bringing in much more than does China.)

But Republican and some Democratic senators and representatives, and the presidential candidates who are in the back pocket of Big Oil are lying to the US public and saying that we can drill our way out of the problem. And they are trying to blame Obama, under whom US petroleum production has actually increased for the first time in years, for the so-called failure to drill.

That we’re paying a premium for the conflict in Iran is being dishonestly ignored. Obama needs to explain this fact to the people, or he is putting his second term in jeopardy.

Posted in Iran | 17 Comments

A new poll shows that the US public, showing a broad consensus across parties, wants the Iran nuclear enrichment issue dealt with through negotiations. They even want to entrust the issue to the UN security council. They think that the US should discourage Israel from attacking Iran. They are convinced that an attack would be a disaster and lead to a long-term conflict. And they hold that if Israel goes it alone and does strike Iran, the United States should remain neutral.

Israel- Iran Poll

All of these attitudes are the diametrical opposite of those held in the US Congress.

Only 24% of Americans said Israel should strike Iran. 69% want the US and Europe to pursue negotiations with Iran instead.

Some 71% of respondents want the US to discourage Israel from attacking Iran, including a majority of Republicans.

74% want the US to work through the UN Security Council to resolve the conflict with Iran! And fully 69% of Republicans concur.

A slight majority, 52%, want the US to remain neutral if Israel were to attack Iran. Some 60% of Democrats feel this way, while Republicans and independents are fairly evenly divided. But only 25% would want to see the US support Israel militarily in case a war breaks out.

This poll, if it is accurate, shows the resistance of the US public to the barrage of propaganda they have faced on the Iran nuclear issue. They don’t want a war, they don’t want the Likud Party initiating one, and they don’t want to get involved if Netanyahu goes off the reservation.

The Israeli public in polling also opposes PM Netanyahu’s war talk regarding Iran.

For more on the ways that the Israeli right wing has attempted to manipulate US public opinion on the Iran issue, see Richard Silverstein’s revelations.

Posted in Iran, Israel/ Palestine, Uncategorized | 14 Comments

So far, high petroleum prices are helping Iran beat the new, ‘crippling’ US and EU sanctions. And, ironically, it is the Obama reelection campaign that is suffering most from the sanctions, not Iran

While Iran is producing about 500,000 barrels a day less today than was typical for it in recent years, the price has risen over 20% in recent months.

As the Bernama article points out, if Iran made $250 million a day on petroleum exports of 2.5 million barrels a day at $100 a barrel (the Brent crude price of last fall), and if the exports have fallen to 2 million barrels a day but the Brent crude price has risen to $125, then the income isn’t that much reduced.

Moreover, it is likely that some of the reduced sales to China were temporary, as a result of a tough price renegotiation. As Iran’s Asian importers realize that Iranian petroleum is a buyer’s market because of the European boycott, they will seek a price reduction.

Some of Iran’s problems will come from tanker companies being unable to secure insurance if they carry Iranian petroleum. This obstacle, however, is likely to be overcome by trucking gasoline through Asia and by building overland pipelines to Pakistan, India and China. Pakistan is already openly defying the US on this score. Petroleum is fungible, and once it leaves Iran, it is hard to see how it can be sanctioned. In essence, it can be laundered. During the sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s, the Baath regime was able to smuggle petroleum through Jordan and Turkey and to squirrel away billions with which to cushion its officials. The Iraqi middle classes were destroyed, but that development benefited the regime, since they no longer had the wherewithal to oppose it.

That production by countries like Iraq could increase fast enough to offset strong Asian demand and bring down the price substantially seems to me unlikely in the short run.

But it is clear that if what Iran really wants is energy independence, it should rapidly expand its solar, wind and geothermal sectors, which would allow it to carry out another moratorium on its nuclear enrichment and jump start negotiations with Europe.

Posted in Iran | 13 Comments

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, gave an important policy speech on Thursday. In part, he was reacting to President Barack Obama’s remarks on Iran in his Super Tuesday press conference. While it contained a rare note of praise for the US president, the speech missed an opportunity to encourage negotiations and compromise.

These are the main points Khamenei made:

1. Khamenei praised President Obama for saying that the US had no present plans to go to war with Iran, and that Washington is content to let sanctions play out. The Iranian leader said,

” Two days ago, we heard the president of America say: “We are not thinking of war with Iran.” This is good. Very good. It is a wise word. This is an exit from illusion.”

2. Khamenei rejected, however, Obama’s contention that financial sanctions would cause Iran to mothball its civilian nuclear enrichment program. He said,

“In addition, he also said: “We will defeat the Iranian people with sanctions.” Not an exact quote. This is an illusion. The exit from illusion in the first part is good. The remaining within illusion, in the second part, will damage them. When one’s plans are based on illusion and not on realities, it is obvious that one will fail in plans based on such illusions. This is the reality.”

3. Khamenei gives as one piece of evidence that Obama is wrong about sanctions the enthusiasm with which Iranians voted in last month’s parliamentary elections. “The real majority that came to the scene, which was one of the highest turnouts during the past 33 years.” the ayatollah said.

4. Iran’s Supreme Leader maintains that the heavy turnout and enthusiasm show that people are still committed to the Islamic Republic and are unconcerned with the economic difficulties caused by US and international sanctions.

5. Khamenei reaffirms the importance of the elective sector of politics in the Islamic Republic. After the upheaval of 2009, some wondered whether he might not move away from a representative system. But he said

“This is our model, the model of the Islamic democracy. Islamic democracy the spirit, the main part and the main source of which consists of Islam. It should never be violated, there have not been any violations and with the help of God there never will be. Islam is our axis in the law, in creating laws and in choosing people. Democracy is the shape of the work, the essence of the work and the method of management.”

He also insists that the Iranian youth (reputedly among the more secular populations in the Middle East) have not in fact turned away from Islam.

That Iran has any vestiges of democracy, when who can run for parliament is so circumscribed or elective officials so easily overruled by Khamenei, is a questionable proposition. And every evidence is that the youth are not in fact interested in Khamenei’s form of government.

Khamenei much strengthened his position in parliament, and his tone of confidence reflects this buttressing of his importance.

Despite his backhanded compliment to President Obama for giving up the fantasy of military action against Iran, Khamenei offered nothing to Washington. He pledged that sanctions would not ‘defeat’ Iran. He made no concessions. This ungracious refusal to offer any sort of compromise, any opening, was unwise.

Posted in Iran | 5 Comments

The USG Open Source Center translates the speech of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei reacting to the comments of US President Barack Obama in favor of diplomacy and against a rush to war.

Iran: Supreme Leader Welcomes Obama’s Comments in Assembly of Experts Address
Speech by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamene’i on 8 March addressing the Assembly of Experts in Tehran — recorded
Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio 1
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Document Type: OSC Translated Text

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate. I would like to greet you, respected people, great and grand experts of the Islamic Republic system. I would like to express my thanks for the comments made by respected experts during the meeting. These comments show that you are sensitive to the country’s issues and events. In your comments, a person can feel your sense of responsibility before the country’s future. . .

In fact, our beloved people did their best and, in a battle with the front of opposition and enemies of the country and the people, they showed the power of faith and insight. Everyone who knows what kind of efforts the enemies were taking over the past few months in order to devalue and damage the day of 12 Esfand (2 March), would know how much they spent, how many people they recruited, how much they designed and how many sentences they created in their think tank in order to transfer their ideas to the minds of the people and affect people’s practice. Whoever is aware of these actions knows well how great the people’s action was and how enormous their movement was.

First of all, human beings should thank God…

Here I would like to speak about the election issue, this same election, as election is not an event which passes. It is an event which leaves an impact. Thus, we should contemplate this issue. First of all, elections are a firm pillar of the system, the religious democracy system, which relies on elections. There cannot be democracy without elections. Elections are the criteria of reliance on people that can be felt and measured. Thus, whoever believes in the Islamic system and is sincere in this belief, considers it his duty to participate in the election. He may criticize towards some points in the election, however, despite this criticism, he participates in the election. This is a duty, thus all people that enter the arena of elections across the country, carry out their duties.

They showed their real understanding. This real understanding is that elections are the pillar of the system. We cannot abandon them just because we object to someone or something. These objections cannot prevent it. This is the basic point. One of the effects of this election is dispelling illusions, and elections often have such effects. Elections are similar to a slap in the face to awaken and enliven those who are sunken into their own illusions.

They daydream about the future and the concept of the system, about the people, about the country, about the enemy. They have illusions and dreams in their minds and they are drowned in them. The elections relieve them of these illusions, and put the reality in front of them.

Two days ago, we heard the president of America say: “We are not thinking of war with Iran.” This is good. Very good. It is a wise word. This is an exit from illusion.

In addition, he also said: “We will defeat the Iranian people with sanctions.” Not an exact quote. This is an illusion. The exit from illusion in the first part is good. The remaining within illusion, in the second part, will damage them. When one’s plans are based on illusion and not on realities, it is obvious that one will fail in plans based on such illusions. This is the reality.

All right. It is now one year that we have been under sanctions. In fact, we have been under sanctions for 33 years. However, the latest season of sanctions, as they call it “crippling”, has been in fact very hard for one year. They saw the effects. They have said that their goal is to detach the people from the Islamic system. They saw that the people came and voted for the Islamic system. Voting for any candidate, and coming to any polling station is voting for the Islamic system. The people showed this. This is one fact. I said that the election was a slap in the face. There are several types of slaps. One type is awakening, enlivening. The last election did have this effect of slapping. Another fact that I said is that the elections show the people’s trust in the system.

Keep reading Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei Praises Obama (Full Text)

Posted in Iran | Comments Off