How the Private Sector Affects US Foreign Policy

Iran has expressed interest in buying Boeing commercial passenger planes if the US lifts trade sanctions on the Muslim nation.  

You can bet your ass Boeing and other aircraft trade organizations are flipping through their rolodexes in search of lobbyists in Washington right about now.  

Talking Heads

After years of suspicion, predating even the Iranian revolution of 1979, officials of the Islamic government have looked scornfully at the BBC as a propaganda machine for British, and in turn American, interests and ambitions.  

So it is no surprise that when the BBC launched a Farsi-language news station yesterday Iran's intelligence minister labeled the new station a "security threat" hours before the first broadcast of BBC Persian TV.

The official said Iran will take "necessary measures" to deal with the station, which is to be broadcast to Farsi-speakers in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan and the rest of the world.  

Read more about the tension and the roots of Iranian suspicion towards Britain at the United Arab Emirates daily paper The National. 

Still Flowing

Iran's Revolutionary Guard has called for an embargo/boycott on all business relations with Israel for their "uneven war" with Gaza, but to no avail.

A Saudi foreign minister said today that oil shipments will continue to the United States and its allies. "The oil producers who need their income are not going to do that," said Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal.

Most of Iran's oil is shipped eastward to Asian clients, perhaps making their calls for a Western embargo ring hallow to many in the region.

Hmm. . .

Iran is trying four citizens on charges of trying to topple the government with support from the U.S. government and the CIA, reports the Washington Post.

It'd be mighty presumptuous to make any connections, but it is a slight oddity that this comes a day after the NY Times report on Bush's expanded 2008 covert operations in Iran.  Hmm. . . 

Iran Frontin'

Iran makes extensive use of fraudulent front companies to purchase electronics for weapons parts in the U.S. for explosives in Iraq and elsewhere against U.S. troops, reports the Washington Post.

The article outlines a cat and mouse game where, like mutating bacteria in their arms race to circumvent antibiotics, Iran has adapted to U.S. enforcement against illegal electronics and weapon sales, continuing to buy extensively from the U.S.  The findings come from new reports released by the Justice Department and an independent Washington research institute.  

The findings paint a picture of a network increasingly internet-based and more sophisticated, where U.S. suppliers often have no idea who their end-users are and unwittingly sell to Iranian interests.  

Read all about it here.

Secrets

For those of you who missed this very interesting NY Times article yesterday, it appears that President Bush declined secret Israeli requests for bunker-busting bombs and permission to fly over Iraq for an attack on Iranian nuclear sites last year.  Bush told Israeli officials he had initiated covert operations on the ground aimed at dismantling Iranian nuclear ambitions from within and that an overt attack would not be necessary.  The report questions whether Israel had plans to carry out the attack or was seeking to engage Bush in more aggressive planning before he left office.  

Bush was continually briefed on the options for an overt American air strike on the Iranian nuclear targets but never told the Pentagon to move beyond contingency planning.  Some in the administration, led Defense Secretary Robert Gates, warned such an attack would be ineffective, likely result in the expulsion of international inspectors and possibly spark a broader Middle East war.  

The Israeli requests came after a National Intelligence Estimate (N.I.E.) from last year that painted a very calm picture of Iran's enrichment program and progress towards nuclear weapons manufacturing, but the report was viewed skeptically by almost everyone in the Bush administration and Israel.  

The covert operations, questions of their efficacy, questions of how they may or may not interfere with efforts to engage Iran in talks, as well as Israel's willingness to settle for such a plan will all be handed off to Barack Obama on the 20th, adding to an already staggering list of problems he will be confronting.  

The article is a fascinating read, one of those rare glimpses into the secret world of international negotiations and covert operations most often not revealed until decades after a conflict has cooled.  Certainly, check that out.  

Common Interests

Gen. David Petraeus spoke in D.C. yesterday about some shared interests the United States and Iran may have in Afghanistan.  Though making it clear that any increased cooperation was to be decided by policymakers, Petraeus did say that Iran does not want "ultrafundamentalist extremist Sunni forces" to gain control, nor see opium production increase.  

The idea coincides nicely with the incoming president, who has voiced considerations of a dialogue with Iran.  

'Having said that," the general said, "I'm sure there's an element (in Iran) that is determining how they can make life miserable for the coalition and the alliance and Afghan forces as well. NATO troops in Afghanistan have intercepted small amounts of weapons coming in from Iran.  

Also interesting is the reporter's use of the word "loggerheads" in describing the relationship between the US and Iran in the last paragraph.  Loggerheads?  Really?  

Intercepted

A package marked "tractor parts" traveling from Iran to Venezuela was intercepted by Turkish customs officials and found to contain lab equipment capable of generating explosives.  

There were no traces of radioactive materials, but an investigation is under way, say officials in Turkey.  

More on Iran

Heres a short blurb from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) about how involved Iran is and what the broader implications of the current conflict may mean.  

Obviously, a "loss" for Israel and "win" for Hamas would bolster Iran and make its meddling more aggressive, while a "win" for Israel may make Iran rethink its strategy.  Missing, however, is how we would define a loss and a win from either side.  

Iran into the Conflict

This guy over at Haaretz says that Iran is behind the rockets from the north of Israel, which is probably true.  He also says Hizbullah (funded by Iran) was in on it as well.