Sunday, February 28, 2021

MP stresses cooperation between Iran and IAEA is technical

TEHRAN- Abolfazl Amoui, spokesman for the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee of the Iranian Parliament, says that the cooperation between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is technical, according to Iran Press.

In an exclusive interview with Iran Press on the sidelines of the Parliament’s open session, Amoui criticized U.S. efforts to pass an anti-Iran resolution at the IAEA Board of Governors as Iran has reactivated certain aspects of its nuclear activities in response to the violation of the 2015 nuclear agreement, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

Emphasizing that Iran is determined to expand its nuclear program, he said, "Iran's new steps to speed up nuclear activities and suspend the voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol were a response to Westerners who did not fulfill their obligation to lift sanctions."

He stressed that Iran's new steps are in accordance to framework of paragraph 36 of the JCPOA which has provided a mechanism to resolve disputes and allows one side, under certain circumstances, to stop complying with the deal if the other side is out of compliance.

“The West must lift sanctions and fulfill its obligations, and the West is not expected to undermine Iran-IAEA cooperation,” Abolfazl Amoui remarked.

“Iran has a peaceful approach and Western countries must not use the IAEA Board of Governors for their goals otherwise it would have a detrimental impact on the IAEA-Iran cooperation process,” he warned. 

On February 21, the IAEA and the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) reached a temporary bilateral technical agreement under which Iran would continue to use cameras to record information at its nuclear sites for three months, but it would maintain the information exclusively. If the U.S. sanctions are lifted completely within that period, Iran will provide the footage information to the IAEA, otherwise it will be deleted forever.

Iran has threatened to end a deal struck with the UN nuclear watchdog temporarily salvaging much monitoring of its activities if the Agency’s board endorses the U.S.-led resolution, according to a Reuters report.
“Iran perceives this move as destructive and considers it as an end to the Joint Understanding of 21 February 2021 between the Agency and the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Iran purportedly said in its letter to the IAEA, according to Reuters.
The West is planning to table a motion at the IAEA board in the current week condemning Iran for reducing its cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog. 
According to the Guardian, Russia’s ambassador to the IAEA, Mikhail Ulyanov, has said “the common responsibility of all 35 governors is to ensure that the debates (even heated) do not negatively affect diplomatic efforts aimed at full restoration of the JCPOA.”
Iran has been insisting that if the sanctions are lifted it will immediately reverse its nuclear decisions.

Tehran rules out discrimination against ethnic groups

TEHRAN – Iran’s top human rights official on Sunday ruled out alleged discrimination against ethnic groups, saying the Islamic Republic observes the rights of all citizens regardless of their ethnicity.

Ali Baqeri Kani, secretary of the High Council for Human Rights, made the remarks in response to a statement by UN High Commissioner on Human Rights in which she had criticized Iran’s code-of-conduct toward minorities.

Ethnic groups in Iran are not minority, rather they are citizens of “the whole Iran”, Baqeri Kani asserted, according to IRNA.

Writing on his Twitter account, he said, "Ms. Commissioner, Iranian ethnic groups are not 'minority', they are 'the whole Iran'."

Baqeri Kani suggested if she had been able to visit Iran, she would have seen the realities.

"If politics didn't prevent you to take a trip to Iran and you were allowed to closely see Iran's realities, you would notice how Lurs, Kurds, Turks, Turkmens, Arabs, Baluchs, Fars people, etc. shout at the aliens: 'We are Iranians'," Iran’s human rights chief pointed out.

UN High Commissioner on Human Rights Michelle Bachelet has claimed that a coordinated campaign is underway in Iran targeting minorities in Sistan-Balouchestan and Khuzestan provinces.

Iran is famous in West Asia for its ethnic and religious diversity. It is home to a large Jewish community. However, it is a fact that in certain border areas people are not economically in a good situation in comparison to citizens in other parts of the country.

Why Is UAE Seeking Closeness to Lebanon’s Hariri?

Alwaght- While Lebanon's unprecedented financial and political crisis has paved the way for the involvement of foreign actors in the country, in recent months there has been a growing rivalry between the Persian Gulf Arab monarchies to play a role in Lebanon's developments and get a foothold. 

After the Qatari foreign minister's visit to Lebanon on February 9 and offering financial assistance once the crisis-hit country formed a government and announcing readiness to host a political meeting gathering all Lebanese groups in Doha to address the current crisis and limbo, now media reports suggest that the UAE is trying to become a major supporter of Saad Hariri, Lebanon's Prime Minister-designate. 

Al-Arabi Al-Jadid news outlet reported Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed made a financial offer to Hariri during the latter's recent visit to the UAE to reorganize Lebanese political and social institutions. 

The UAE de facto ruler also suggested to Hariri that his family, who have lived in Riyadh for 20 years, be transferred to Abu Dhabi. Three drivers may stand behind such proposals.

Countering Muslim Brotherhood 

The (Persian) Gulf Cooperation Council's atmosphere after signing the rapprochement agreement to end the anti-Qatari blockade last month remains immersed in political and geopolitical rivalry of the member states. In the meantime, the UAE's hostile policies towards the Muslim Brotherhood in Arab and Islamic worlds have not diminished. The UAE, which makes fight against the Brotherhood influence expansion one of its top policy pillars, continues to see the Islamist group, mainly supported by Qatar and Turkey, in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, and other regional states the leading threat to its interests. 

One of the important drivers behind the UAE's development of awareness and attention to Lebanon is feeling of threat marked by Brotherhood influence boost in Lebanon. Hariri traveled to Turkey in late January to meet President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and asked for aids. He then met Qatari officials in Doha a month later on February 17. 

Contrary to the crisis-making interventions of Saudi Arabia and the UAE in Lebanon, cooperation with Qatar is now welcomed by many Lebanese political factions, including Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement led by Michel Aoun. This, from Abu Dhabi's point of view, means that Lebanon carries the potentials to become a play field for Emirates rivals.  The Emirati foreign policy is based on investment strategy under the cover of political and financial assistance. The main aim of the Abu Dhabi ambitions is to build a sway over Lebanon. 

During Hariri's visit to Abu Dhabi, amid the start of popular protests in October 2019, the Emirates promise to deposit up to $1 billion in the Lebanese central bank and lift the 2016 ban on Emirati citizens' travel to Lebanon. 

Replacing Saudi Arabia in the US regional strategy 

Certainly, the UAE's turn to Lebanon is not an ordinary move. Rather, it represents a new strategy in dealing with Lebanon based on a new reading of the developments and in accordance with the US agenda. Under Trump administration, the US sought to keep Hezbollah out of the cabinet by increasing the pressures on the Lebanese economy, through sanctions such as the Caesar Act– which sanctions any party dealing with the Syrian government– and blocking international financial aids to Lebanon. 

The UAE now appears to be preparing to step out of Saudi Arabia's "big brother" shadow in the Cooperation Council, given its lead in normalization, cold Washington-Riyadh relations in the new period, and growing economic power and political influence compared to the Saudis. The invitation of Hariri to transfer his business and family from Saudi Arabia to the UAE can be precisely read as part of this strategy. 

Economic interests in the Mediterranean 

Financial interests are another driver behind the UAE push to move closer to Hariri. 

In terms of geopolitical and geoeconomic position, Lebanon lies on the Mediterranean coast and its rich energy resources, which in recent years have become the center of competition between sides such as Cyprus, Egypt, Turkey, Greece and the Israeli regime. 

Grappling with a severe economic crisis, Lebanon sets eyes on exploring and producing oil and gas from its fields in the Mediterranean. In the way of developing its energy infrastructures, Lebanon currently faces a serious challenge from the Israeli side. Still, planning to produce hydrocarbons from its fields in the Mediterranean for new sources of income occupies an essential place in the policies of the future government. 

Since the UAE and Bahrain signed a normalization agreement with the Israeli regime on September 15, the UAE has taken many steps to strengthen its presence in the eastern Mediterranean.

The UAE, OPEC's third-largest oil supplier, has signed various trade and transit deals with the Israelis as part of the normalization deal, and DP (Dubai Ports World ) has offered to lease the port of Haifa, which is being developed by a Chinese company. In October, the Israeli pipeline company EAPC signed a contract to transport UAE crude oil to Europe via a pipeline connecting the Red Sea city of Eilat and the Mediterranean port of Ashkelon. 

Towards this end, in December last year, the UAE joined as an observer member the EastMed Gas Forum (EMGF). Then Israeli and Emirati energy officials, accompanied by Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) representatives, discussed oil and gas cooperation. 

Therefore, the preliminary gas explorations in Eastern Mediterranean are another reason for the Emirati interest to involve in the Lebanese developments.

Coup Leaders, Aung San Suu Kyi Betrayed Democracy in Burma

by Dr Ramzy Baroud

What is taking place in Burma right now is a military coup. There can be no other description for such an unwarranted action as the dismissal of the government by military decree and the imposition of Min Aung Hlaing, the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, as an unelected ruler.

However, despite the endless talk about democratization, Burma was, in the years leading up to the coup, far from being a true democracy.

Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the country’s erstwhile ruling party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), has done very little to bring about meaningful change since she was designated State Counselor.

Since her return to Rangoon in 1989 and placement under house arrest for many years, Suu Kyi was transformed from an activist making the case for democracy in her country, into a ‘democracy icon’ and, eventually, into an untouchable cult personality. The title, ‘State Counselor’, invented by NDL following the 2016 elections, was meant to place her authority above all others in government.

The justification for this special status is that the military, which continued to have substantial sway over the government, would not allow Suu Kyi to serve as the Prime Minister, because her husband and children are British. But there is more to the story. On her relationship with her party, Richard C. Paddock recently wrote in the New York Times that Suu Kyi has controlled her party in a style that is similar to the previous military control of the country.

“Critics began calling the party a cult of personality,” Paddock wrote, adding, “Often criticized for her stubbornness and imperious style, she has kept the party firmly under her command and is known to demand loyalty and obedience from her followers.”

Those who have celebrated the ‘Lady’s’ legacy of yesteryear, were disappointed when the supposed human rights champion agreed to participate in the 2016 elections, despite the fact that millions of Burmese who belong to marginalized ethnic groups – like the country’s persecuted Rohingya – were excluded from the ballot box.

Faint and bashful criticism was overpowered by the global celebration of Burma’s fledgling democracy. No sooner had Suu Kyi been made the de facto leader, although with direct alliance with the country’s former junta, than international conglomerates – mostly Western – rushed to Rangoon to capitalize on Burma’s largesse of natural resources, left unexploited because of economic sanctions imposed on the country.

Many legitimate questions were brushed aside, so as not to blemish what was dubbed as a victory for democracy in Burma, miraculously won from a cruel military by a single woman who symbolized the determination and the decades-long struggle of her people. However, behind this carefully choreographed and romanticized veneer was a genocidal reality.

The genocide of the Rohingya, a pogrom of murder, rape and ethnic cleansing, goes back many decades in Burma. When the Burmese junta carried out their ‘cleansing’ operations of  Rohingya Muslims in the past, their violent campaigns were either entirely overlooked or conveniently classified under the encompassing discourse of human rights violations in that country.

When the genocide intensified in 2016-17, and continued unabated, many legitimate questions arose about the culpability of Burma’s ruling NLD party and of Suu Kyi, personally.

In the early months of the most recent episodes of the Rohingya genocide at the hands of government forces and local militias, Suu Kyi and her party behaved as if the country was gripped by mere communal violence and that, ultimately, blame was to be shared by all of those involved. That discourse proved unsustainable.

Internationally, the Rohingya became a recurring theme in the media as hundreds of thousands of refugees were forced to flee, mostly into Bangladesh. The magnitude of their misery became daily and horrific headlines. Stories of rape and murder were documented by the United Nations and other international rights groups. As a result, thanks to efforts championed by a group of 57 Muslim countries, a landmark lawsuit, accusing Burma of genocide, was filed at the UN International Court of Justice in the Hague in 2019.

For Suu Kyi and her party, ethnic allegiances and realpolitik superseded any platitudes about democracy and human rights, as she defiantly objected to international criticism and openly defended her government and military. In her testimony at the UN Court in December, Suu Kyi described the genocidal violence of the Rohingya as “cycles of inter-communal violence going back to the 1940s”.  Moreover, she harangued the ‘impatience’ of international investigators and human rights groups, blaming them for rushing to judgment.

By dismissing what “many human rights experts have called some of the worst pogroms of this century,” Suu Kyi turned from “champion of human rights and democracy to apparent apologist for brutality,” NYT reported.

Though we must insist that the return to rule by the military in Burma is unacceptable, we must equally demand that Burma embraces true democracy for all of its citizens, regardless of race, ethnicity or religion. A good start would be to disassociate Aung San Suu Kyi from any inclusive democratic movement in this country. The Lady of Burma had her opportunity but, sadly, failed.


– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center (AMEC).

Iran's Foreign Ministry: Time not suitable for unofficial meeting with EU, US officials on JCPOA


Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman says the present juncture is not a suitable time for holding an unofficial meeting with European Union and American officials on the landmark nuclear deal that Iran clinched with world powers in 2015, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Speaking to reporters on Sunday evening, Saeed Khatibzadeh said, “In view of the recent stances and measures taken by the United States and the three European countries [who are signatories to the JCPOA], the Islamic Republic of Iran believes that this is not a good time for holding an unofficial meeting on the accord as proposed by the EU foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell.”

Khatibzadeh’s remarks followed an earlier report by The Wall Street Journal, which quoted senior diplomats as saying that Iran has rejected a European Union offer to arrange direct nuclear talks with the US.

According to The Wall Street Journal, two senior Western diplomats said Iran has ruled out attending a meeting in Europe for now, saying it wanted a guarantee first that the US would lift some sanctions after the meeting.

“Implementation of commitments by all parties [to the JCPOA] is not a matter of negotiation and give-and-take, because all options for give-and-take were exhausted five years ago,” Khatibzadeh said.

He added, “The way forward is quite clear. The US must end its illegal and unilateral sanctions and return to its JCPOA commitments. This issue neither needs negotiation, nor a resolution by the Board of Governors [of the International Atomic Energy Agency].”

“The Islamic Republic of Iran will respond to actions with action and just in the same way that it will return to its JCPOA commitments as sanctions are removed, it will also answer in kind to all hostile measures and behaviors,” he emphasized.

Back in May 2018, former US President Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from the JCPOA, calling it the “worst deal ever”, and vowing to press Tehran into negotiating a new deal through a “maximum pressure” campaign that included tough economic sanctions and military provocations.

Tehran, which has verifiably asserted that it does not seek to develop nuclear weapons, adopted what it called the “maximum resistance” policy and successfully weathered the US pressure, while pushing the other parties to the deal, officially known as the JCPOA, to honor their commitments and stand up to US bullying.

Iran maintains that the three European parties to the deal, also known as the E3, have paid only lip service to Tehran’s calls to safeguard its interests against the United States’ illegal sanctions.

US cites national interests to justify why Biden let MBS off the hook in Khashoggi murder case

Indifferent to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s leading role in the assassination of US-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the White House has cited national interests to justify why President Joe Biden has let bin Salman, commonly known as MBS, off the hook.

“We believe there is more effective ways to make sure this doesn’t happen again and to also be able to leave room to work with the Saudis on areas where there is mutual agreement – where there is national interests for the United States,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” on Sunday morning.

“That is what diplomacy looks like,” added Psaki, who called Khashoggi’s murder a “horrific crime” earlier this month.

Jamal Khashoggi, a columnist for the Washington Post, was lured into the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October 2018, then strangled and dismembered with a bone saw by a Saudi hit squad.

While on the campaign trail, Biden claimed that his administration would not “sell more weapons” to the Saudis and make them “the pariah they are” for waging a devastating war on Yemen and killing Khashoggi.

On Friday, the Biden administration released a declassified intelligence report that said MBS directly approved the operation to eliminate Khashoggi, arguing that bin Salman’s control of the kingdom’s security and intelligence organizations is so strict that it makes it “highly unlikely that Saudi officials would have carried out an operation of this nature without the crown prince's authorization.”

The release of the report was followed by visa restrictions against 76 Saudis involved in harassing activists and journalists, but Biden’s promise to punish top Saudi leaders was completely forsaken. The decision has been widely condemned by human rights advocates.

During the Sunday interview, Bash pressed Psaki on why the White House is punishing those under the crown prince but not bin Salman himself.

“So isn’t punishing them like punishing the hitman and not the mob boss who actually put out the hit?” Bash asked.

“Well, first, Dana, historically and even in recent history, Democratic and Republican administrations, there have not been sanctions put in place for the leaders of foreign governments where we have diplomatic relations and even where we don’t have diplomatic relations,” Psaki falsely claimed.

At the end of the interview, Psaki reaffirmed that the United States’ national interests come before human rights issues when dealing with other countries.

“It needs to be clear that our relationship with Saudi Arabia is one in the interest of the United States to maintain while still being clear it will be recalibrated,” she said.

The Khashoggi report came less than a month after a former Saudi intelligence official said MBS had ordered two assassination missions against him. Saad al-Jabri, who currently resides in Canada, said in an amended complaint on February 4 that he had faced repeated threats on his life coming from bin Salman over the past few months.

In mid-February, bin Salman, who is also the kingdom’s defense minister, received a phone call from the new Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin, who reaffirmed the “strategic defense partnership” between the United States and the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Biden himself, while shunning MBS, called Saudi Arabia’s ruler King Salman prior to publishing the Khashoggi report. Psaki had said earlier that the White House was going to “recalibrate” its relationship with Saudi Arabia, and engage with the kingdom on a counterpart-to-counterpart basis.

Iran not interested in escalation with U.S.: ambassador

TEHRAN – Iran has no interest in escalating tensions with the United States, Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations Majid Takht-Ravanchi has said. 

The Iranian ambassador pointed out that the Islamic Republic of Iran has shown in practice that it has no interest in making provocative moves and escalating tensions even during the time when the Trump administration started to stoke tensions and make provocative moves.

The Iranian envoy made the remarks in response to Al Jazeera’s question about a possible escalation of tensions as a result of Tehran’s moves to scale down its commitments under the 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, officially known as the JCPOA, according to Press TV.

Iran has recently struck a deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency on how to continue cooperation in light of the Iranian Parliament’s nuclear law that came into effect on February 23.

The nuclear law, officially called “Strategic Action to Lift Sanctions and Protect the Nation’s Rights,” stipulates that the Iranian government should take certain nuclear measures such as raising the level of uranium enrichment to 20% and suspending the voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol in few months if the Western parties failed to honor their obligations under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, formally called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The sixth article of the law clearly stipulates that if the remaining parties to the JCPOA – Germany, France, China, Russia and the UK- failed to facilitate Iran’s oil exports and the return of Iranian oil revenues in two months, the Iranian government would be obligated to stop inspections beyond the IAEA safeguards, including the voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol, which allows unannounced and intensive inspections of nuclear sites.

The IAEA chief Rafael Grossi paid a visit to Iran two days before Iran starts implementing the nuclear law to make arrangements for the implementation of the law, according to Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif.

“Mr. Grossi came to Iran to make arrangements for the implementation of the law. We have reached an agreement in this regard, and the principle of this agreement is that the tapes recorded from our nuclear programs, which were never presented live to the Agency, but were provided on a daily and weekly basis, will be kept from now on and will not be presented to the Agency,” the chief Iranian diplomat said, noting that Iran will continue to implement the IAEA safeguards.

The IAEA and the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) issued a joint statement outlining the content of the deal moments after Grossi concluded his visit to Iran.

“The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recalled and reaffirmed the spirit of cooperation and enhanced mutual trust that led to the Joint Statement in Tehran on 26 August 2020, and the importance of continuing that cooperation and trust,” the statement said. “The AEOI informed the IAEA that in order to comply with the act passed by the Parliament of the Islamic Republic of Iran called “Strategic Action to Cease Actions and Protect the interest of Iranian Nation” (The “Law”) Iran will stop the implementation of the voluntary measures as envisaged in the JCPOA, as of 23 February 2021.”

The statement added, “In view of the above and in order for the Agency to continue its verification and monitoring activities, the AEOI and the IAEA agreed: 1. That Iran continues to implement fully and without limitation its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA as before. 2. To a temporary bilateral technical understanding, compatible with the Law, whereby the IAEA will continue with its necessary verification and monitoring activities for up to 3 months (as per technical annex). 3. To keep the technical understanding under regular review to ensure it continues to achieve its purposes.”

 ‘Deal with IAEA shows Iran still honoring obligations’

Takht-Ravanchi said this deal is yet another sign that Iran continues to honor its international obligations. 

He said the moves made by Iran in reaction to the failure of other JCPOA parties in living up to their commitments cannot result in an escalation of tensions.

“When the Trump administration decided to leave the JCPOA, the remaining parties to the JCPOA asked us not to adopt a stance similar to that of Trump. They said they will compensate for the damages caused by the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the deal. We waited for a year, but we didn’t get anything from their promises, and it was just an empty promise,” he was quoted as saying by Press TV.

Therefore, the envoy added, Iran had no other choice if it wanted to create a balance in the nuclear deal, and thus started to take certain measures in that regard.

“Recently, when our Parliament witnessed that the other parties to the JCPOA are not serious about making up for our damages, and that the E3 is not willing to fulfill its commitments, it decided to … pass a law that obliges the administration to take measures like increasing uranium enrichment.”

“What we did was based on paragraph 36 of the nuclear deal, and was in line with our commitments based on the text and spirit of the JCPOA,” he added.

“It wasn’t Iran that sent arms to a region far from its territory; it was rather the U.S. that sent arms and warships to our region, which is 7,000 miles away from America,” he said.

“All these provocative moves, including the assassination of our dear general Martyr Soleimani which was a very provocative terrorist attack, were made by the U.S. Iran hasn’t had and still doesn’t have any interest in making provocative moves,” Takht-Ravanchi said.

U.S. return to the JCPOA needs no mediator

The Iranian ambassador also commented on Qatar’s effort to mediate between Iran and the West, saying that there is no need for Qatar’s efforts in this regard. 

When asked about Qatar’s bid to mediate between Tehran and Washington, Takht-Ravanchi said the U.S. return to the JCPOA needs no mediator.

“We have good relations with our Qatari brothers. Qatar is a totally friendly country, but we believe the U.S. must return to its commitments in full, and that’s what needs to be done. Therefore, it needs no mediator.”

Takht-Ravanchi said the U.S. implementation of its commitments does not even need any negotiation.

“It is up to the U.S. to decide whether it wants to fulfill its commitments or not. The implementation of their commitments does not need any negotiation. The U.S. needs to make the necessary decisions,” he added.

He said the U.S. administration is well aware the sooner it returns to its JCPOA commitments, the better.

“The best way is that the U.S. returns to its commitments, and then Iran will do the same. In that way, talks can be held on the JCPOA-related issues within the P5+1 platform. This is an easy and diplomatic way, and I think this solution can be easily achieved,” he added.

Qatar has offered its good offices to settle the disagreements between Iran and the West over the 2015 nuclear deal. 

On Friday, Qatari Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani met with the ambassadors of the three European countries that are signatories to the JCPOA.

“During the meeting, they discussed the latest developments in restoring the diplomatic track and activating dialogue, in addition to the implementation by all parties of their obligations stipulated in the agreement between the P5+1 and Iran,” the Qatari Foreign Ministry said in a statement. 

According to the statement, Al-Thani affirmed the State of Qatar's tireless work in this direction, its firm stance on encouraging diplomacy and dialogue, and its permanent readiness for constructive work and support for all efforts in the interest of regional stability and international security and peace.

Earlier in December, Qatar even offered to mediate between Iran and Saudi Arabia. 

Hossein Amir-Abdollahian condemns U.S. attacks on Syrian soil

TEHRAN - Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, the Iranian Parliament speaker’s special aide for international affairs, has condemned the recent U.S. airstrikes on anti-terror Iraqi popular forces in eastern Syria, according to Fars news agency.

“The new American administration has just changed mask and continues the path of the former one in supporting the ISIS terrorist group,” he stressed. 

Amir-Abdollahian noted that the U.S. President Joe Biden’s claims of fight against terrorism during his presidential campaign were all lies as he has ordered the Pentagon to strike anti-ISIS forces.

“While @JoeBiden boasted abt war agnst terrorism & #ISIS during the campaign, his authorization to strike local anti-ISIS forces shows how @WhiteHouse is hypocrite vis-a-vis terrorism & keeps its friendship w/DAESH. Mask of White House occupants has just changed & nothing more! pic.twitter.com/5tPB2C2gEz,” he tweeted. 

The Pentagon issued a statement late Thursday confirming earlier reports that the U.S. had conducted airstrikes inside Syrian territory. The statement said the strikes, carried out at President Biden's order, targeted multiple facilities used by Shia groups, including Kata'ib Hezbollah and Kata'ib Sayyid al-Shuhada.

The U.S. Defense Department called the strikes a "proportionate military response" in the wake of rocket attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq by unknown assailants.

TAGS

General Nasirzadeh says Iran capable of building jet engine

TEHRAN - Brigadier-General Aziz Nasirzadeh, the commander of the Air Force, says Iran is able to build jet engines.

Some universities in Iran ask the Air Force to build a piece of jet engine “while today some of our university workshops can build different generations of jet engines,” he explained.

He added, “One of our demands is that education officials increase the hours of workshop training. Our universities provide basic training, and we will use capable officers who will increase our military and national strength in accordance with our training programs as in the past.”

He also said, “The country’s Air Force has operational dominance over the region.” 

“The Islamic Republic's Air Force’s power has been proven in the region so that no air force, whether fighter or otherwise, has the right to cross the country's airspace without Iran’s permission and coordination,” Nasirzadeh remarked, according to the IRNA news agency. 

By reinforcing the Air Force, political will and pressure can be imposed on enemies internationally, he stressed.

Elsewhere in his remarks, the Air Force chief said, “Regional states make a major strategic mistake by not relying on themselves and resorting to foreign pilots and equipment provided by foreign military advisers.”

He added, “Not only they will not become self-sufficient, but in the long-run foreign forces will not have the incentive to fight and defend their country.”