LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
August 25/2018
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.august25.18.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006

Trump's Fake Allies in the Gulf
Burak Bekdil/Gatestone Institute/August 24/18
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12908/turkey-qatar
Ahmed Charai, in an article for The National Interest, has forcefully reminded the world that: "As Qatar faces international pressure to stop harboring senior [Muslim] Brotherhood figures, there are clear indications that it will facilitate their migration to Turkey. So among the urgent challenges for the U.S. allies to address is the question of how to weaken this budding alliance."
Charai has a point. There is a "more-mature-than-emerging" anti-U.S. alliance among U.S.'s presumed Middle East allies
What should matter to Washington in this Turkish soap opera is the fact that Turkey is getting support, in its confrontation with the U.S., from "like-minded" countries: Russia, China and Qatar. It is clearly time for Washington to rethink its theoretical but fake alliance with Qatar, a tiny Gulf sheikhdom that is trying to neutralize U.S. efforts to sanction Turkey -- another theoretical ally that is more like-minded with Russia than with the West.
In theory, the oil-rich sheikhdom of Qatar is an ally of the United States. The peninsula hosts more than 10,000 U.S. military personnel and approximately 72 F-15 fighter jets at its Al Udeid military base. In this turbulent part of the world, alliances, like enmities, can be treacherous. In March, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US House of Representatives was already looking at four alternatives that could become the military headquarters when the Al Udeid contract with Qatar will expire in 2023. After "closely observing its [Qatar's] financial and banking system due to fears of support for terrorist organisations and individuals associated with them," Washington apparently decided it had to rethink Al Udeid and its Qatari "allies."
Enter Turkey. The Qataris, not knowing that their grandchildren would one day be the best strategic allies of their Ottoman colonialists' grandchildren, fought the Ottomans to gain their independence in 1915, thereby ending the 44-year-long Ottoman rule in the peninsula. Independence had come at last. It lasted for about a year, until 1916, when Qatar became a British protectorate until 1971. Today, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's Turkey is Qatar's best ally. This alliance is structured on common ideology featuring pro-Hamas, pro-Muslim Brotherhood Islamism.
Ahmed Charai, in an article for The National Interest, has forcefully reminded the world that:
"As Qatar faces international pressure to stop harboring senior [Muslim] Brotherhood figures, there are clear indications that it will facilitate their migration to Turkey. So among the urgent challenges for the U.S. allies to address is the question of how to weaken this budding alliance."
Charai has a point. There is a "more-mature-than-emerging" anti-U.S. alliance among U.S.'s presumed Middle East allies.
The Qataris nevertheless seem not to want to disturb Washington's sweet sleep. According to O'Dwyer's, in June, Qatar signed a $12 million contract with Blueprint Advisors, "a firm that has close ties with president Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani." Under the deal, in an apparent lobbying effort, Blueprint Advisors "will assist Qatar's attorney general Ali Al-Marri to keep American decision-makers informed of his country's anti-terrorism and pro-peace policies."
When in 2017 four Arab countries -- Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Bahrain -- imposed a blockade on Qatar, accusing it of supporting terrorism and fostering ties with their rival, Iran, Erdoğan rushed to the aid of his Qatari friends. In a show of solidarity, Turkey sent cargo ships and hundreds of planes loaded with food to break the blockade. Turkey also deployed more troops at its military base in Qatar.
A year later, Turkey is being sanctioned by the U.S. and Qatar has rushed to its aid.
Turkey's troubles with its NATO ally has a multitude of reasons: divergences over the future of Syria; Turkey's decision to buy and deploy the Russian-made S-400 anti-aircraft and anti-missile system on its soil, a first for a NATO member state; U.S. sanctions on two Turkish government ministers due to Turkey's refusal to free Andrew Brunson, an American evangelical Christian pastor living in Turkey and facing bogus charges of terrorism and espionage; a U.S. congressional decision to block delivery of arms systems to Turkey, including the F-35 stealth fighter; potential U.S. sanctions on a Turkish state bank; and President Donald Trump's decision to double tariffs on Turkish steel and aluminum, which prompted retaliatory Turkish actions against U.S.-made goods, and prompting President Erdoğan's call for a national boycott on U.S. electronics, including Apple devices.
This diplomatic crisis between the U.S and Turkey comes at a time when the Turkish economy seems vulnerable, unable to endure the combination of economic and political warfare with a superpower.
Turkey's 12-month current account deficit was $57.4 billion in June, representing a record high of approximately 6% of the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The annual interest rate on 10-year government bonds hovers around 21%. "Debt piled up elsewhere in the economy, too", according to Foreign Policy. "[T]he government, banks, factories, restauranteurs, and homeowners all binged on cheap credit from abroad—to the tune of $460 billion, more than half of Turkey's GDP."
On August 21, 2017, the U.S. dollar closed at 3.49 liras on the foreign currency markets. Exactly a year later, the dollar was being traded at 6.06 liras. The Turkish lira's value fell by almost a third against the dollar in the first three weeks of August alone.
On August 17, two international ratings agencies, Moody's and S&P, pushed Turkey's debt rating deeper into junk territory, now on par with Argentina and Greece. "The absence of an orthodox monetary policy response to the lira's fall, and the rhetoric of the Turkish authorities have increased the difficulty of restoring economic stability and sustainability," said Fitch, a third ratings agency, which had downgraded Turkey in July.
Erdoğan accused the U.S. of waging "economic war" against his nation. He warned that Turkey would "start looking for new friends and allies" if Washington did not give up the "misguided notion that our relationship can be asymmetrical."
Three "new friends" gave signs of solidarity with Turkey, a part-time NATO ally. Russia declared that "it will decrease its holdings of US assets in retaliation against crippling tariffs imposed by US President Mr Trump on Russia and Turkey."
Then Beijing came into the picture:
"China offered moral support to Turkey on Friday as Ankara reeled from a currency crisis and U.S. sanctions, saying it believed the country could overcome its 'temporary' economic difficulties, in Beijing's first comment on the issue."
Finally, Erdoğan's Gulf allies in Doha, Qatar, rushed to Ankara in a show of solidarity full of greenbacks. After meeting with Erdoğan in Ankara, Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani pledged $15 billion in direct investment to help Turkey get through the crunch. In similar efforts to provide Turkey's ailing economy with a lifeline, the central banks of Qatar and Turkey signed a currency swap agreement, a deal that aims to enhance bilateral cooperation between the two banks through setting a "two-way currency exchange line."
The markets, however, have not been impressed. Ahmet Doğan, founder of Sigma Insight, an Ankara-based think tank, was quoted in the August 18-24 print edition of The Economist as saying: "That's too small an amount to stabilize Turkey's currency, markets and economy." The lira kept falling after the Qatari help was announced. As The Economist put it: "... promises of investment from allies like Qatar will provide dollars but not credibility."
What should matter to Washington in this Turkish soap opera is the fact that Turkey is getting support, in its confrontation with the U.S., from "like-minded" countries. Russia, it appears, would like cracks as large as possible inside the NATO bloc. Qatar, an ideological partner for Turkey, is united around anti-Semitic, Islamist sentiments so powerful that, based on the idea of a "common enemy" and despite its Sunni supremacism, it has allied itself with Shiite Iran.
It is clearly time for Washington to rethink its theoretical but fake alliance with Qatar, a tiny Gulf sheikhdom that is trying to neutralize U.S. efforts to sanction Turkey -- another theoretical ally that is more like-minded with Russia than with the West.
*Burak Bekdil, one of Turkey's leading journalists, was recently fired from the country's most noted newspaper after 29 years, for writing in Gatestone what is taking place in Turkey. He is a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
© 2018 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Washington’s sanctions and Tehran’s empty threats
Salman al-Dosary/Al Arabiya/August 24/18
After much shouting and howling, many empty threats and 17 days since the first batch of re-imposed US sanctions took effect on Iran …. nothing has changed. The surprise that the Iranians spoke at length about did not happen. Iran accepted the sanctions. US national security adviser John Bolton said earlier this week that the sanctions were more effective that expected and they have left their mark on the country’s economy and public opinion. The Iranian regime lashed out and made its threats, but, sooner than expected, accepted the sanctions. It backed down from escalatory rhetoric that reached such an extent as to threaten to block oil shipments from the Arab Gulf. This would have led to a military confrontation, which the regime is incapable of waging.
Iran and sanctions from gold to carpets
Iran’s supreme leader eased the heated rhetoric in his latest speech, but delivered a clear message that the most his country can do to retaliate to the sanctions is refuse to hold negotiations. This revealed that all previous comments on the issue were misleading statements. He asserted that “there will be no war. This is in sum what the Iranian people should know.” The American administration’s strategy focused and is still focused on economic pressure instead of military measures. It did not threaten to wage a war, so where did all the Iranian regime’s threats come from? The truth revealed Iran’s early succumbing to the sanctions and acknowledgment that its escalatory rhetoric was aimed at garnering as much European sympathy as possible and to divert attention from the mounting pressure its economy is coming under. Two weeks after the sanctions took effect, Iran is suffering from the withdrawal of major energy, automaker and shipping companies from its market. So far, Total, Peugeot, Maersk and several major international banks, such as Germany’s Deutsche Bank, have stopped doing business in Iran. Multi-national banks and companies will ultimately do what best serves their interests, not what their governments demand.
The second batch of sanctions takes effect on November 4. They demand that companies doing business with Iran reduce their oil purchases from it or risk forfeiting doing business in the US.
The new phase will be very complicated for the Iranian economy and its repercussions will be felt by the suffering Iranian people. The currency has already lost half of its value in only four months. Deposits in Iranian banks have dropped to half of what they were in April. What will the situation be like when the next round of sanctions are imposed?
It is true that the Iranian regime has eased its rhetoric because its means do not allow it to carry out its threats. There are, however, other reasons that have forced it to back down from its war of words. It is no secret to the regime that the Iranian people have been growing increasingly frustrated by the impact Iran’s foreign wars are having on their daily lives. Continuing with the heated rhetoric will only increase the internal pressure against the government, especially since the living conditions have become stifling. In the end, the Iranian warning to block oil shipments from the region were yet another in a series of threats that have never been implemented. In fact, the regime quickly yielded to the sanctions without a single reaction taking place. It made many empty threats and then surrendered to the sanctions, counting on a change in the American administration in 2020. Perhaps then, it will be able to negotiate a new nuclear deal. In the meantime, it will be hard for the Iranian economy to withstand at least three years of strict sanctions.

Why Trump will not be impeached
Mamdouh AlMuhaini/Al Arabiya/August 24/18
This is the most common question after a court convicted one of his lawyers, Michael Cohen, and Paul Manafort who was his presidential campaign chairman for a short period of time. The answer is that these two incidents will not impeach Trump because they are not of the heavy weight required to impeach an American president. Paul Manafort was pursued and besieged by the team of the special counsel Robert Mueller who is looking into Moscow’s meddling in American elections and whether there’s collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
The investigation did not come up with anything in this regard but Manafort was convicted with other charges related to tax evasion and bank fraud. Yes, he’s convicted in eight major cases but Trump and his campaign has nothing to do with his problems and corruption, therefore, he will not implicate Trump with him and drag him downwards but the president may issue a pardon in his favor.
As for Cohen, who is one of Trump’s lawyers, he’s also involved in five charges, two are related to tax and bank fraud while two are related to violating laws of funding the presidential campaign.
He also involved Trump with him in a case that’s been known for a long time now, which includes paying $130,000 and $150,000 to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, to buy their silence over a reported affair. Cohen confessed that Trump asked him to pay this hush money after denying this for some time.
Yes, this is a more serious case but it’s not with the heavy weight that can remove a president from office. Even if the Democrats sweep the House of Representatives, they will not be able to impeach Trump because they would need two thirds of the votes in the Senate which has never happened in America’s history.
Even if the Democrats sweep the House of Representatives, they will not be able to impeach Trump because they would need two thirds of the votes in the Senate which has never happened in America’s history. Out of 45 American presidents, this “nuclear” weapon was only used with two presidents: Clinton due to the Monica Lewinsky scandal and Andrew Johnson after he violated the law and replaced the Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. In both cases, the impeachment process failed (Nixon resigned, and was not impeached, after his frank involvement in the Watergate Scandal).
The American constitution is designed in a way where it is difficult to remove a president from office in order to maintain the stability of the political system. The American constitution is designed in a way where it is difficult to remove a president from office in order to maintain the stability of the political system.
The case is not that dangerous for more than one reason. First of all, it happened at a time before Trump became president, during the presidential campaign (i.e. the hush money paid happened then and not the reported affairs which happened in 2006). Second of all, we’ve begun to see Trump’s legal payments as he stated that he used his own money to make the payment and did not use the money of the presidential campaign, which would have been a violation of the electoral campaigns’ law. Therefore, we will witness a long term legal fight.
Third of all, Cohen’s reputation is stained due to his corruption, changeful character and contradicting statements. Once he said he likes Trump to the extent that he will take a bullet for him but he changed his mind and decided to expose the facts after he saw him submissively stand next to Putin in Helsinki.
The devious and deceitful lawyer who is up to his ears in legal cases suddenly became a patriotic fighter. It’s difficult to remove a president from office no matter how bad he is by relying on the testimony of a deceptive lawyer. All these reasons will not remove Trump from his throne. Doing so requires a strong storm and this is a mere whirlwind.
Trump is like a cat, he succeeds at landing on his feet one time after the other. The talk about impeaching Trump will benefit him and harm his Democrat rivals.
This is why Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader of the US House of Representatives, and who is an experienced politician, warned her colleagues of making any impeachment statements because they would mobilize the Republican base which thinks that its leader is facing a dirty conspiracy that seeks to get rid of him and it will thus throw its weight behind him especially given his economic success. This is why Trump said in his recent interview with Fox News that if he were impeached, the economy would collapse, there would be recession and poverty would spread.
He is linking his impeachment project with a panic and fear that could happen and he is sending messages to his supporters who could take to the to the streets in the upcoming midterm elections and the 2020 elections.
Thus, we’ve seen how impeachment transformed from a gun directed to Trump’s head into a weapon in his hand!

Trump's condolence letter to families of two Saudi heroes
Abdullah bin Bijad Al-Otaibi/Al Arabiya/August 24/18
Investing in people is the best kind of investment because supporting a good, productive and creative person always yields amazing results, not only in the realm of knowledge and science but also in the field of ethics and good conduct.
This is the real-life story of two young Saudis: Theeb Alyami and Jaser Alyami. In brief, these two Saudi students, who were studying in the US, heard a mother screaming for help after her children had fallen into a river. Without any hesitation, they jumped into the river in an attempt to rescue them but they drowned. These are our ethics and values. The great example set by these two students is an expressive model of our culture, customs and traditions. These are the ethics that political Islam groups and violent religious groups have sought to bury and distort by sending out a message that we are savage terrorists.
In 2001, Al-Qaeda tried to drive a wedge in Saudi-American relations by selecting a large number of Saudis to play secondary roles in that terrorist crime in order to prove that the Saudis hate America. However, the result was the opposite of that and the whole world headed towards fighting terrorism and particularly al-Qaeda.
Trump's condolence letter
Earlier this month, American President Donald Trump sent condolence letters to the families of the two Saudi heroes. He soothed their families and acknowledged their heroism, courage and high moral values. Indeed, the two young men’s act is an example of heroism, honor and morality.
Gulf countries, led by Saudi Arabia, are shaping a new history in the region and building role models in all fields. Their main asset is their people with high moral values and ethics and who have inherited a culture that embraces the virtues of magnanimity, generosity and chivalry. The act of valor by the two Saudi students presents a good example of our culture, customs and traditions
These are our children and not the terrorists and murderers belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda or ISIS.
Look around you, there are some people who always show great chivalry and who are always ready to help others. There are different types of heroism, and glory is its discourse. The youths in Gulf countries send a message to the whole world that these countries love peace, tolerance and reject hatred.
Defaming citizens of Gulf States and the attempt to create a negative image about them have been on for decades. These attempts targeted all Gulf countries, primarily Saudi Arabia, and there have been various sources behind it. For example, some Arab intellectuals tried to distort the image of Gulf countries and their people due to the conflict that existed during the times of the nationalist Arab tide and during the times of Nasserism and leftism. Those who were upset that monarchies in the Gulf were steadfast and stable and away from destructive military coups also attempted to do the same.
Many organized campaigns were planned by countries hostile to the Gulf States such as the Vilayat-e Faqih regime. These campaigns have infiltrated many media institutions, human rights organizations and thinktanks and disseminate black propaganda against the Gulf.
Among those who spread this propaganda is the third generation of political Islam groups’ cadres in the US and the West and who hold a grudge against the rich Gulf countries where they failed to reach power and topple regimes. These new generations are seeking revenge from these states by infiltrating Western countries and their state and civil institutions.
Defining excellence
Each Gulf citizen can recall dozens of names from their countries who have excelled in various fields of life, knowledge and heroism. Our martyrs in Yemen clearly exemplify the major sacrifices and unmatched heroism. Their brothers learn and excel in all academic fields and create a new and wonderful image for their countries and their culture. In the end, the story of the two Saudi heroes presents an inspiring story and a model. What the Gulf countries are investing in their people brings the greatest rewards in the near and long terms.

Glory to journalism
Mashari Althaydi/Al Arabiya/August 24/18
Photos of journalists enthusiastically running and racing after attending the trial of Paul Manafort, the former chairman of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, attracted my attention. They were running as if they’re in a marathon in order to inform their newsrooms of the news and publish it since cellular phones were prohibited inside the court.
This scene brings up an old renewed question about the role of “traditional” journalism compared with the so-called individual journalism on social media networks. Who defeated who? Activists on Twitter, Facebook and other similar networks brag that they’re the fastest and the “most graceful” in hunting news and making scoops in search for more followers and enlarging and fattening their social media accounts to then sell this “fat” to advertisers or rather to governmental and semi-governmental parties.
Who is the party with the trusted news? Some individual no matter how “good” he is or a registered media institution governed by laws and that has a board of directors and a general assembly and perhaps stocks in the stock exchange?
Who is the party with the trusted news? Some individual no matter how “good” he is or a registered media institution governed by laws and that has a board of directors and a general assembly and perhaps stocks in the stock exchange?
Media mogul Rupert Murdoch once said that Facebook, which has the lion’s share of advertising activity via the internet besides Google, must pay fees to publishers if it wants to promote authentic and accurate news via its social network. This came after Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said he will prioritize the articles and videos of news institutions based on users’ polls about the authenticity of news websites.
Truth is it’s not possible to compare – if we are to talk seriously – between the responsibility of an individual, who may have nothing to do with journalism and media and whose capital is the increase in the hormone of activity and continuous gossip on social media and a media institution.
This is based on all the considerations we just mentioned. Of course this angers those who won in the social media market – the market praises those who won in it – however what’s sad is seeing governmental institutions scrambling over some people who have no real journalistic worth so they can promote their news and “accomplishments” for financial compensation of course. This made some young journalists focus on promoting themselves on Snapchat, Twitter..etc. at the expense of working hard and making effort in favor of their media institutions. They have thus engaged in a fatal cycle of pettiness.
We will remain before this scene for some time before what is right prevails as at the end of the day, only what’s right prevails.

Why Iran is using social media to spread misinformation
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/August 24/18
I have long suggested that the giant social media outlets ought to look into the Iranian regime’s major role in disinformation and the dissemination of fake news.
What the most recent revelations have brought to light is that it is not only Russia engaged in such activities, but also Tehran, following in the same footsteps as its close ally. In a statement, Facebook, the predominant social media platform, on Wednesday pointed out that it had removed “652 pages, groups and accounts for coordinated inauthentic behavior that originated in Iran and targeted people across multiple internet services.”
In addition, other popular social media outlets such as Twitter and Alphabet have also identified many “inauthentic” accounts that originate in Iran. These fake accounts and profiles have now been removed.
The Iranian regime uses sophisticated campaigns and operations on social media. Several crucial components of the Iranian state’s apparatuses — including the state-owned news outlets such as Press TV, hard-line organizations and individuals affiliated with the regime — use various social media platforms to spread disinformation and fake news.
What is the Iranian regime attempting to accomplish? First of all, through deliberate misinformation or hoaxes, Tehran is trying to shape the political discourse of other countries and intentionally mislead people in order to advance the ruling mullahs’ revolutionary, ideological and geopolitical interests.
By relying on the latest technology and employing various methods, such as generating and disseminating fabricated headlines and videos, and propagating fake news and inaccurate pictures, the theocratic establishment of Iran is directly interfering in the internal affairs of other countries.
The regime’s deliberate misinformation and spread of fake news through popular Western social media outlets is aimed at inciting anti-Saudi, anti-Western — particularly anti-American — and anti-Israeli sentiments. This also makes it extremely difficult for legitimate news organizations and credible journalists to provide accurate coverage and truthfully inform the public about important social, political and cultural landscapes.
Secondly, Iran’s leaders are seeking to promote specific policies in other countries that are inimical to the interests of those nations, while benefiting Tehran and strengthen the ruling mullahs’ hold on power. For example, one of these policies includes maintaining the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the Iran nuclear deal, in order to provide the Iranian regime with sanctions relief, extra revenues and lucrative business deals with Western firms.
Third, the Islamic Republic is attempting to promote specific narratives in other parts of the world that suit its parochial interests. Some of these false narratives consist of projecting that Iran’s militaristic involvement in Syria, Iraq and Yemen is for humanitarian purposes; that the government enjoys widespread support domestically and regionally; that Iran is fighting a battle with other regional and global powers that are committing crimes against humanity in the region; that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is a major force fighting Daesh; that European countries are as malignant as the US; that Iran’s nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes; that negotiations with the West are always a mistake; that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states are enemies; and so on.
To advance such inaccurate narratives, Iran’s politicians and agents across the political spectrum use various social media outlets in languages such as English, Arabic, Spanish and Persian.
The Iranian regime uses sophisticated campaigns and operations on social media.
It is worth noting that a two-pronged strategy is employed here. On the one hand, Iranian officials are focused on spreading the regime’s larger themes and narratives. On the other hand, many of the Iranian regime’s fake accounts and profiles go into more detail on social media by targeting, verbally attacking, and naming and shaming those who merely disagree with the Iranian regime’s policies, destructive behavior, aggressive foreign policy, human rights abuses and military adventurism in the region.
The irony is that, while Iranian officials, including President Hassan Rouhani, Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif and their affiliates, are active on popular social media outlets, the Iranian regime is taking extensive measures by waging a war to crack down on its population’s use of social media.
Developing new filtering software, blocking access, hacking and censorship are rampant, and utilized by the Iranian authorities as a powerful means to further restrict the use of social media outlets by its own citizens. For example, Tehran recently blocked the messaging app Telegram because it was popular and used by many Iranians to inform the world about the nationwide protests against the regime.
**Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist. He is a leading expert on Iran and US foreign policy, a businessman and president of the International American Council. Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh

Appeasement for profit: Europe’s perilous policy on Iran
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/August 24/18
Iran’s leaders and the state-owned Persian news outlets have been boasting about Europe’s collegial relationship with the Islamic Republic. Iran proudly praises the EU’s act of defiance against the US.
It seems surreal that the EU is taking the side of the ruling mullahs — even agreeing last week to provide €18 million ($20 million) in aid— rather than staying neutral or supporting its old transatlantic partner, who stood by Europe in many challenging circumstances over the past six decades.
Nevertheless, from the perspective of the Islamic Republic, one of its core ideological, religious and revolutionary beliefs has finally come true: Tehran has turned global powers against the US, or, as the ruling mullahs would say, the “Great Satan.”
Iranian leaders also emphasize that such an opportunity must not go to waste. Instead, from their perspective, the rift between the US and EU must be cemented and finalized. Iran’s Arman newspaper flaunted the headline: “We will take advantage of the opportunity of the rift between US and Europe.” Abrar newspaper’s front page included a statement from Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif saying he was not naive to think that the Islamic Republic could create a rift between the EU and the US.
Through the prism of Iran’s leaders, not only does the EU appear to be disagreeing with the Trump administration on policy toward Tehran, but several EU leaders seem to be actually taking a step farther and lobbying for the Iranian regime.
Some analysts may argue that the EU is attempting to pursue an Iran policy that preserves peace around the world. But the reality is that, for the EU, this is less about global security and peace, and more about profit from trade and business deals with the Iranian regime.
EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian and British Foreign Minister Jeremy Hunt acknowledged that when they issued a joint statement saying: “The remaining parties to the JCPOA have committed to work on, inter alia, the preservation and maintenance of effective financial channels with Iran, and the continuation of Iran’s export of oil and gas. On these, as on other topics, our work continues, including with third countries interested in supporting the JCPOA and maintaining economic relations with Iran.”
But the reality is that, for the EU, this is less about global security and peace, and more about profit from trade and business deals with the Iranian regime
It is also worth noting that, while the EU is beating the drum for Iran and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — aka the Iran nuclear deal — as well as strongly supporting the subsequent sanctions relief for the regime, European countries were not even the major players in the negotiations that lead to the JCPOA in the first place.
Were it not for the US, and specifically President Barack Obama’s willingness to give the Iranian leaders an unprecedented level of concessions, to mislead Congress and grant favorable secret deals to the mullahs, there would probably not have been any JCPOA at all.
In addition, while the EU continues to criticize and condemn the US for imposing sanctions on Iran, two issues should be considered. First, the US sanctions on Iran are not new, as some may attempt to portray. These are economic sanctions that were in place until the Obama administration lifted them, with President Donald Trump now re-imposing them. Secondly, if some European leaders are indeed eager to work with the theocratic regime in Iran, they enjoy the freedom to do so; but they ought to at least respect the decision of their old transatlantic ally toward the mullahs.
Unfortunately, the bottom line is that the EU does not appear to have any articulate, coherent and informed policy toward the Islamic Republic. On the one hand, it is investing significant political capital in order to keep the Iranian leaders satisfied and shield the regime from US sanctions. On the other hand, Europe has increasingly become the target of the Iranian regime’s terrorist plots and concerted efforts to penetrate its governmental institutions.
Iran is operating a sophisticated espionage network across Europe in an attempt to accomplish several ideological and political objectives, such as carrying out assassinations against individuals or organizations that oppose the regime’s policies. A senior US official told Fox News: “Iran has a long history over the last 39 years of conducting and planning assassinations and terrorist actions against opponents of the Iranian regime, including a series of assassinations and attack plots in recent years in European countries.”
The EU’s policy to shield and appease Iran’s ruling mullahs is short-sighted and aimed at preserving business profits. Such a short-term policy toward the top state sponsor of terrorism is more likely to cause critical repercussions in the long term — including endangering global peace and security.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist. He is a leading expert on Iran and US foreign policy, a businessman and president of the International American Council. He serves on the boards of the Harvard International Review, the Harvard International Relations Council and the US-Middle East Chamber for Commerce and Business. Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh