Iranian Alert -- September 3, 2003 -- LIVE THREAD PING LIST

The Iranian Student Movement Up To The Minute Reports ^ | 9.3.2003 | DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movment in Iran from being reported.

From jamming satellite broadcasts, to prohibiting news reporters from covering any demonstrations to shutting down all cell phones and even hiring foreign security to control the population, the regime is doing everything in its power to keep the popular movement from expressing its demand for an end of the regime.

These efforts by the regime, while successful in the short term, do not resolve the fundamental reasons why this regime is crumbling from within.

Iran is a country ready for a regime change. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a nation. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary.

Please continue to join us here, post your news stories and comments to this thread.

Thanks for all the help.

DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

Discover all the news since the protests began on June 10th, go to:

[DoctorZIn]

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread

Live Thread Ping List | DoctorZin

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”

[DoctorZIn]

Danger from Tehran

Bill Gertz
WashingtonTimes
9.3.2003

Faced with mounting evidence that Iran has lied about its nuclear program and is developing ballistic missiles capable of delivering mass destruction weapons, Washington is stepping up the political pressure to force Tehran to come clean about its nuclear programs. Both the United States and Israel have hinted that, if the international community remains unable or unwilling to persuade Iran to jettison these programs, military action to take out the radical Islamic regime's nuclear facilities cannot be ruled out.

In June, the United Nations-affiliated International Atomic Energy (IAEA) issued a report which confirmed longstanding U.S. complaints that Iran was secretly attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Since that time, the IAEA has sought unsuccessfully to persuade Iran to permit its inspectors to make surprise visits to suspected nuclear facilities in the country. (Agency inspectors have already found traces of highly enriched, weapons-grade uranium at Iran's Natanz nuclear facility.) These issues are expected to come up again on Monday, when the IAEA Board of Governors meets in Vienna, Austria.

A major problem is that the IAEA has been putting out mixed signals as to whether it seriously intendstochallengeIran'scontinued stonewalling. The trade publication Nucleonics Week reported July 3 that, at the IAEA's board meeting in June, the agency's director-general, Mohammed ElBaradei, resisted pressure from Washington to declare that Iran had failed to comply with IAEA regulations which covered the handling of nuclear materials. Last Friday, however, Mr. ElBaradei sounded somewhat tougher, declaring that Iran had shopped for nuclear components on the black market and appeared to acknowledge that Iran might be running a secret weapons program. Noting Tehran's refusal to sign a protocol allowing surprise inspections of suspected nuclear facilities throughout the country, Mr. ElBaradei said that, along with Iraq and North Korea, Iran has "been giving the international community the runaround."

While Iran continues to stonewall, the combination of a) an unchecked nuclear weapons program; and b) an ongoing program to develop ballistic missiles with a range of many hundreds of miles creates a potentially dangerous combination. In July, U.S. officials confirmed that Iran had deployed the new Shihab-3 missile, which is capable of hitting Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey and Pakistan. At a White House meeting last month, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon warned of an Israeli pre-emptive strike against one or more Iranian nuclear facilities. And The Washington Times' Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough reported Friday that Israel has actually mapped out a route its jet fighters would take to destroy Iran's two-reactor nuclear plant at Bushehr. The Times report also said that Pentagon officials talk "unofficially" about what action would need to be taken in order to knock out that facility.

The bottom line is that, in both Washington and Jerusalem, there is a growing sense that it would be intolerable if a regime like the one currently in Tehran were to possess nuclear weapons. (Pentagon officials, in particular, have declined to rule out using force.) It would certainly be preferable to have the problem resolved peacefully through cooperation with the IAEA. But so far, there seems little to justify that hope. At some point in the next few years, the United States and/or Israel may decide that pre-emptive action to remove the Iranian nuclear threat is the least unpleasant alternative.

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20030902-090703-6950r.htm

[DoctorZIn]

Danger from Tehran

Bill Gertz
WashingtonTimes
9.3.2003

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/975010/posts?page=3#3

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”

[DoctorZIn]

Disunity in the US makes Iraq look like a failure

September 02, 2003
Opinion
Times of London
Amir Taheri

The reality isn't grim; but Bush must find a clear strategy to win the peace

For the world’s 300 million Shia Muslims, Najaf, a dusty city in central Iraq, is the gateway to paradise: to be buried there is a privilege. Today Ayatollah Muhammad Baqr al-Hakim, one of Iraq’s senior religious leaders, will enjoy that privilege when his mortal remains are laid to rest near the tomb of Ali, the first imam of the faith.
Hakim’s death in a terrorist attack in Najaf last Friday is a major loss for the Shias, who comprise 60 per cent of the Iraqi population. He represented a new generation of mullahs who believe that Islam should engage with other cultures, rather than sulk on the sidelines or throw bombs. Hakim had hoped to continue in the tradition of such grand ayatollahs as his late father Muhsen al-Hakim who opposed the participation of the clergy in government.

While the shock of Hakim’s death could take a long time to absorb in religious terms, its political consequences have been exaggerated. His murder does not mean that the political moderates are weakened; it won’t give more power to religious hardliners; nor, though he was important to US plans, will it scupper the formation of a new Iraqi government.

Ayatollah al-Hakim was the leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Sciri), the largest anti-Saddam movement. He had assumed that position after his brother Mahdi, a Sciri founder, was murdered by Saddam’s agents in 1988. Even then, Ayatollah al-Hakim was careful not to become too absorbed in politics to endanger his religious status. He left the effective leadership of the party, and the command of its military wing, the Badr Brigade, to his younger brother Abdel-Aziz, now a member of the Iraqi Governing Council.

So those who hoped that Hakim’s murder would break Sciri are likely to be disappointed. In the 1980s and 1990s Saddam murdered 28 members of the Hakim family, including five of Ayatollah al-Hakim’s brothers, but he failed to crush its spirit of resistance. The Sciri was never a one-man show. But Ayatollah al-Hakim’s death increases pressure on the religious hierarchy in Najaf, especially the Grand Ayatollah Ali Muhammad Sistani, the primus inter pares of Shia clerics in Iraq. Sistani faces a dilemma. His theological position, a form of quietism, is based on the principle that religion and politics must have distinct spaces.

Right now, however, Iraqi Shias need leadership that can come only from religious figures. This is why Sistani published a statement yesterday calling on Shias to play a greater role in ensuring the security of the country in co-operation with the coalition. Despite the gloomy impression given by the Western media, it is important to recognise that not one of the five major Shia parties wants the US to leave: in fact, all agree that they need the US Armed Forces. Sciri leaders I talked to yesterday insisted that there would be no change in the strategy of co-operation with the US-led coalition.

That strategy, however, is in trouble. It is not because Iraqis want the Yankees to go home; or because al-Qaeda and the Baathist rump are unbeatable. The cause of the trouble is outside Iraq’s borders. The first is the Bush Administration’s failure to end its internal squabbles and present a coherent policy. Iraq’s political elite is being divided into supporters of Colin Powell and the State Department, and the Rumsfeldians who enjoy the support of the Pentagon.

Outside Iraq, the Powell camp is desperately trying to bring in as many flags as possible by giving the UN a role that it is not equipped to play in this difficult period of transition. The Rumsfeldians, for their part, are reluctant to have any flags other than that of the US and the UK, and reject even what the UN can do best, which is to help with humanitarian aid.

In some cases, such as the “abolition” of the Iraqi army, Washington acted with haste and arrogance. In other cases, such as barring anyone who ever had a Baath party card from holding office, it has been duped by returning exiles who wish to settle old scores.

Washington has also been stingy in spending on urgently needed public services. At the same time the Americans have raised Iraqi expectations and created a “room-service mentality”. Iraqis in Baghdad moan about the US failure to provide round-the-clock electricity, new jobs, better schools and hospitals, and democracy, all in just four months. But not even the grumpy Baghdadis want the US to leave now: they know that the coalition’s presence is protecting Iraq against predatory neighbours and ensuring that there are no revenge killings, ethnic conflicts, or religious wars.

Iraq has become a codename for the disputes of domestic British and US politics. Those who dislike Tony Blair and/or George Bush, for reasons that have nothing to do with Iraq, amplify every act of terrorism to score points and sap political will. But the fact is that Iraq, since liberation, has witnessed only 21 terrorist attacks. This is not a high figure by the region’s bloody standards. Baghdad is not what war-shattered Beirut was in its time and, even now, is a safer place to move about in than Algiers or Karachi.

Iraqis know that there are only two sides. On the one side are those who would stop at nothing to plunge Iraq into chaos in the hope of restoring the fallen regime or replacing it with another despotic moustache. Supported by Islamist terrorist groups, these elements have attacked the UN headquarters and the Jordanian Embassy and have killed far more Iraqi civilians than American and British troops.

On the opposite side there are those who wish to root out what is left of Saddam’s tyranny. With all its shortcomings and mistakes, Iraqis know that this side deserves support if their country is to become a beacon of light in one of the last remaining corners of darkness in the world.

The author is an Iranian commentator on Middle Eastern affairs

[DoctorZIn]

Disunity in the US makes Iraq look like a failure

September 02, 2003
Opinion
Times of London
Amir Taheri

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/975010/posts?page=5#5

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail me”

Another great article by Amir Taheri. -- DoctorZin

[FairOpinion]

"Iraq has become a codename for the disputes of domestic British and US politics. Those who dislike Tony Blair and/or George Bush, for reasons that have nothing to do with Iraq, amplify every act of terrorism to score points and sap political will. But the fact is that Iraq, since liberation, has witnessed only 21 terrorist attacks. This is not a high figure by the region’s bloody standards. Baghdad is not what war-shattered Beirut was in its time and, even now, is a safer place to move about in than Algiers or Karachi. "

===

An excellent article. I think it's worth posting it as a stand alone article, starting a thread of its own, so more people will read it.

[DoctorZIn]

Uneasy Alliance;Iran and India move closer

uploaded 03 Sep 2003
Khilafah.com

India's deepening ties with Iran could redraw the political map of Central Asia, even as the Bush administration commences what some say is an attempt at regime change in Tehran.

On May 18, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld warned Iran that it would be "dealt with aggressively" if it continued its alleged support of Islamic extremists in Afghanistan and Iraq. A day later in New Delhi, Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes met with Iranian Ambassador Siavosh Yaghoobi and offered to cooperate with Iran in all strategic areas, including defense. Saying that unilateralism posed a great danger to the world, Fernandes affirmed India's commitment to a strategic and military partnership with Iran.

The move capped a series of quiet diplomatic maneuvers that have complicated security equations in Central and South Asia. Even as Washington has been building military ties with India, which it sees as a natural ally and potential counter to China, New Delhi has been forging a close relationship with Iran, which President Bush has declared a part of the "axis of evil."

On January 26, in the shadow of the then-looming Iraq war, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami was the guest of honor at India's grand Republic Day parade. During the visit the two nations signed a strategic cooperation agreement that set in place energy and military deals valued at more than $ 25 billion.

Jane's Defense Weekly and Defense News reported that India and Iran signed a secret accord that gives India access to Iranian bases in the event of war with Pakistan. Both governments deny there is such a deal, but India is building a new port at Chahbahar, Iran, a project that is being closely watched by foreign powers.

In March, India and Iran conducted their first-ever joint naval exercises. Such close military cooperation between India and Iran is "unprecedented," says Rahul Bedi, New Delhi-based correspondent for Jane's Defense Weekly. India and Iran were on opposite sides during the Cold War, and later their relations were compromised by Iran's fraternal ties with Islamic Pakistan.

Iran is "focused on breaking out of the pincer" that the United States' continuing trade embargo and its expanded military presence in the region have created, Bedi says. "Iran is keen to acquire new energy markets," he adds. Militarily, it "is seeking to build up its missile and military software capabilities. It has also acquired four Russian Kilo-class submarines, and, like India, it also has some aging MiGs that need upgrading. Given the common equipment, [the Iranians] are keen to have India support and train them."

But the deepest concern to the U.S. and Pakistani governments is the possibility of Indo-Iranian nuclear cooperation. India and Russia have a long history of nuclear cooperation, and Russia is the key player in Iran's controversial bid to expand its German-built light water reactor at Bushehr. According to the CIA, Iran is also operating a heavy water plant at Arak and a uranium enrichment facility at Natanz.

In 1983 India helped Iran restart its nuclear program, and in 1988 New Delhi almost sold Iran a 10-megawatt nuclear reactor for its Ma'allem Kelayah facility near Qazvin on the Caspian Sea. When that deal fell through, the CIA reported that India helped Iran set up a manufacturing plant for phosphorus penta-sulfide, a nerve gas precursor, at the same site. In 1996, the CIA also reported that India had provided Iran with technology that could be used to make biological weapons. When three Indian companies approached German suppliers to buy the equipment needed for the manufacture of Sarin and Tabun nerve agents, German intelligence traced the end-user to Iran.

Anthony H. Cordesman, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and author of the report Iran and Nuclear Weapons, writes that Tehran is seeking increased nuclear cooperation with India and other suppliers because the United States has nixed its nuclear cooperation with South Africa, Ukraine, Argentina, and China. Iran's options were further squeezed when Russia supported the Bush administration's call for intrusive inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities.

But even if Indo-Iranian nuclear cooperation seems logical, Bedi argues, it is unlikely. "India is not a proliferating country," he says. "This fact is well established." Indian government officials enjoy pointing out that it was the United States that built Iran's first nuclear plant at Amirabad, and then turned a Nelson's eye when the Shah initiated a low-grade weapons research program in 1967.

Shifting sands

Instead Bedi, like many analysts, sees an Indo-Iranian alliance as a stabilizing force in the region and in accord with the long-term interests of the United States.

"India and Iran's cooperation began in Afghanistan, where their support was key in overthrowing the [Pakistan-supported] Taliban," Bedi says. "Their continued cooperation will promote the stabilization and development of Central Asia. Perhaps India can also act as a bridge between Iran and the United States."

For now it is a bridge that the United States is unlikely to cross. Though the administration's initial reaction to burgeoning Indo-Iranian ties was circumspect, and President Bush couched his concerns in soft language, the war in Iraq has changed attitudes.

Anxiety over Iran's alleged attempts to create an Islamic republic in Shia-dominated Iraq has once again flared tensions with Washington. An increased U.S. presence in the region is also making both Iran and India uncomfortable.

In addition to Iran's obvious concerns, Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee has also voiced unease over the United States' aggressive posture in the region. Speaking at a rally in Kashmir, he pointed to American intervention in Iraq as a reason for India and Pakistan to get serious about settling their dispute over the troubled state.

Syed Geelani, chairman of the Jamaat-e Islami, a separatist political party in Kashmir, says that the driving force behind the recent thaw in Indo-Pak relations "is not the desire to give Kashmiris their rights but the desire to keep the United States from meddling here in the name of terrorism."

Publicly, both Iran and India have been trying to allay U.S. fears over their new relationship. "The text of our agreement clearly states that it is not directed against any other nation," Ambassador Yaghoobi says of the rationale behind India and Iran's strategic cooperation.

India's foreign ministry says it refuses to see international relations as a zero-sum game. "The United States has its relationship with Pakistan, which is separate from our own relationship with them," says Navtej Sarna, the ministry spokesperson. "Our relationship with Iran is peaceful and largely economic. We do not expect that it would affect our continuing good relations with the United States."

Diplomatic and official sources in India agree. They say the Indo-Iranian partnership stems from both nations' longtime allergy toward the Saudi-funded fundamentalism gripping their common neighbor, Pakistan.

"India's new ties with Iran make it more, not less, valuable to Washington," says Stanley Weiss, chairman of Business Executives for National Security, which wants President George W. Bush to "join New Delhi and Tehran in an axis of friendship."

"Both countries played a vital role in creating and sustaining the U.S.- backed government in Kabul, [and] the United States will need Iran to help stabilize a post-Saddam Iraq," Weiss says. "New Delhi will also be an increasing asset to Washington thanks to its military partnership with Israel."

But India and Iran's growing involvement in Afghan politics, along with energy-hungry India's establishment of its first overseas military base at Farkhor in Tajikistan, indicate both nations are pursuing their own interests in oil- and gas-rich Central Asia.

There is also a deeper, more profound layer to the relationship between India and Iran. Both nations see themselves as great civilizational forces and are eager to restore their primacy in the world.

As neighboring countries, India and Iran have deep historical ties dating to the Persian Empire of Cyrus the Great, which included parts of India. India's latter-day Muslim rulers were of Persian descent, and Urdu, a mix of Hindi and Persian, is widely spoken in India. Iran's Sufi Islam is substantially influenced by Indian thought, and many of India's religious and cultural traditions owe great debts to Iran.

When discussing Indo-Iranian ties officials from both countries often allude to these civilizational bonds. "We are from the same motherland and share deep cultural links," Yaghoobi says. "Though political differences separated us during the Cold War, President Khatami and Prime Minister Vajpayee have brought us back to our natural relationship."

Pipeline for peace?

Clearly, the public aspects of the Indo-Iranian accord envisage widespread economic and strategic cooperation. Iran will provide India with 5 million tons of liquefied natural gas a year for the next 25 years, giving it much-needed, revenue. Significantly, Indian firms will upgrade Iranian oil refineries and be granted concessions in Iranian oil fields. The possibility of constructing a $ 4 billion gas pipeline from Iran to India -- possibly via Pakistan, if politics permit -- is also being pursued.

"In effect, all this means that India is now a member of OPEC," Yaghoobi says.

The January agreement also includes plans for India to construct a new road and rail network in Iran. Both countries will use this as a trade and transit route to get their goods into Russia and Europe.

Since Pakistan's involvement will make both the pipeline and transit route much easier to build and operate, observers on all sides hope these projects will provide a strong incentive for India and Pakistan to resolve their disputes.

"This is a pipeline for peace," Yaghoobi says. In the recent rapprochement with India, he explains, "Pakistan has given emphasis to commercial aspects of their bilateral relations. . . . Both need cheap energy, and so we hope this project will help them resolve their issues."

"In the long run we hope for an economic bloc of India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, and maybe Central Asia," Yaghoobi says. "Currently there is a gap between the Association of South East Asian Nations and the EU. As the only two democracies in the region, India and Iran can start a partnership to fill this gap."

How the United States will accommodate such Indo-Iranian visions of a strategic region rich in energy and linking Europe with Asia is a prime example of what of Kennedy School of Government Dean Joseph Nye calls "the paradox of American power." Even as America is equipped to pursue its interests unilaterally, it needs the cooperation of many nations with diverse, even conflicting, interests to ensure a stable world order.

Source: IPA

http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=8197&TagID=2

[DoctorZIn]

Iran Envoy Leaves UK Amid Row

September 03, 2003
BBC News
BBCi

Iran has temporarily recalled its ambassador to Britain amid an escalating dispute between the two countries.

The foreign ministry in Tehran said Ambassador Morteza Sarmadi had returned for "consultations", but did not specify how long he would stay away.

He is said to have been recalled after failing to win concessions following the arrest of another Iranian diplomat in Britain, Hade Soleimanpour.

Mr Soleimanpour's extradition is being sought by Argentina in connection with the bombing of a Jewish centre in Buenos Aires in 1994, when he was Iranian ambassador there.

The Foreign Office in London denied that Mr Sarmadi's departure amounted to a downgrading of relations.

Iran has threatened to withdraw some of its diplomats, but not its ambassador to London, over the arrest.

Denial

The BBC's Jim Muir in Tehran says it is unclear what actions the Iranian authorities are planning to take.

There is speculation that they are considering expelling the British ambassador to Iran, our correspondent adds.

Relations between the two countries have been strained since Mr Soleimanpour's arrest on 21 August, following an extradition request from Argentina.

The Argentine authorities believe he was involved in planning and commissioning the Jewish centre bombing, which killed 85 people.

He has strenuously denied any involvement, but has been refused bail after his arrest in Durham, where he was a research student at the city's university.

Iranian President Ali Mohammed Khatami has demanded Mr Soleimanpour's release and an apology from Britain.

Last month, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister, Ali Ahani, visited London to discuss the matter with UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw.

The British Government says it cannot intervene in what it calls a purely judicial, and not political, process.

Mr Soleimanpour was on sabbatical from the Iranian embassy when he was arrested.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3076662.stm

[F14 Pilot]

Shots fired at UK embassy in Tehran hours after Iran recalled ambassador

03-09-2003, 08:40

Britain's embassy in the Iranian capital of Tehran has been shut down Wednesday after receiving direct hits from a number of shots fired from a nearby street.

According to an embassy spokesman, cited by the BBC, the five shots were fired on the embassy building just before midday (local time) Wednesday, breaking windows and entering the building.

Nobody was injured in the attack which comes hours after the announcement that Iran had recalled its ambassador to the UK.

The ambassador had been recalled to Tehran over the detention in Britain of Iran's former ambassador to Argentina, Hadi Soleimanpour, wanted in connection with a "terrorist attack" in Argentina, nearly a decade ago as well as western pressure on Tehran over its alleged nuclear weapons ambitions, according to the British Guardian.

In its Wednesday edition, the newspaper said Ambassador Morteza Sarmadi flew back to his country after failing to settle any compromise from British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw during a meeting held at the Foreign Office earlier this week.

A diplomat in London, cited by the paper, said that although Sarmadi has officially returned for consultations with his superiors, "he may not return."

Such a diplomatic row, according to the paper, could prompt Iran to expel the British envoy to Tehran, Richard Dalton.

Last week Sarmadi said "The arrest of former Iranian ambassador to Argentina, Hadi Soleimanpour, by British authorities is technically wrong and baseless."

Sarmadi told IRNA that based on international law under the 1961 Vienna Convention ambassadors and embassy staff are immune from prosecution.

Spokesman for Iranian Foreign Ministry Hamid-Reza Asefi Asefi confirmed the news about Sarmadi's return to Tehran. However, he dismissed as "baseless and unfounded" news claiming Iran has recalled 400 of its diplomats to the country.

The Qatar-based al-Jazeera news network claimed Tuesday that Iran, following the Argentina case, had recalled 400 of its diplomats back home. Asefi stressed that the news was utterly baseless and false. (Albawaba.com)

http://www.albawaba.com/news/index.php3?sid=257687&lang=e&dir=news

[F14 Pilot]

Iran's ambassador to Britain returns to Tehran

LONDON, Sept. 2 — The Iranian ambassador to London has returned to Tehran, British and Iranian officials said on Wednesday, amid a dispute over the arrest in Britain of an Iranian diplomat and pressure over Iran's nuclear programme.

http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/reuters09-02-203908.asp?reg=EUROPE

[F14 Pilot]

Shots close UK Iran mission

The UK embassy in the Iranian capital, Tehran, has been closed after a number of shots were fired at the building from a nearby street.
A spokesman said that five shots had hit the embassy but nobody was hurt in the attack which took place just before midday local time (0730 GMT).

The incident comes hours after the announcement that Iran had temporarily recalled its ambassador to Britain amid an escalating dispute between the two countries.

Iran's ambassador to Britain, Morteza Sarmadi, was recalled after allegedly failing to win concessions following the arrest of another Iranian diplomat in Britain, Hade Soleimanpour.

Mr Soleimanpour's extradition is being sought by Argentina in connection with the bombing of a Jewish centre in Buenos Aires in 1994, when he was Iranian ambassador there.

Diplomatic tension

The attack on the main office building in the embassy compound was launched from nearby Ferdowsi Street on a busy working day.

The first and second floors of the building were hit, breaking windows and causing damage.

The embassy has been closed down while investigations begin.

It has been on a heightened state of alert since the current diplomatic crisis with Iran.

The BBC's Jim Muir in Tehran says the shooting will be an embarrassment to the Iranian authorities - it will also make it more difficult for them to approach London on the former ambassador's issue.

And, with ongoing US-led pressure over Tehran's alleged nuclear weapons programme, this is no time for Iran to lose friends, our correspondent says.

Apology demand

Relations between Britain and Iran have been strained since Mr Soleimanpour's arrest on 21 August, following an extradition request from Argentina.

The Argentine authorities believe he was involved in planning and commissioning the Jewish centre bombing, which killed 85 people.

He has strenuously denied any involvement, but has been refused bail after his arrest in Durham, where he was a research student at the city's university.

Iranian President Mohammad Khatami has demanded Mr Soleimanpour's release and an apology from Britain.

But the British Government says it cannot intervene in what it calls a purely judicial, and not political, process.

Tehran has threatened to withdraw some of its diplomats, but not its ambassador to London, over the arrest.

There is speculation that they are considering expelling the British ambassador to Iran, our correspondent adds.

The Foreign Office in London denied that Mr Sarmadi's departure amounted to a downgrading of relations.

Britain and Iran resumed full diplomatic relations at ambassadorial level in 1999 after a long break following the overthrow of the shah in the 1979 Islamic revolution.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3076920.stm

[F14 Pilot]

This map shows where shooting happened.

[F14 Pilot]

British Embassy in Iran Shuts After Shots Fired

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Unknown assailants fired shots at the British embassy in Tehran on Wednesday and Britain temporarily closed the building for business, British officials said.

Bullets hit windows in upper stories of the building which stand near the perimeter wall next to a busy Tehran street, officials said. No one was injured.

The incident occurred at a time of rising tension between Iran and Britain over Britain's arrest of a former Iranian diplomat in connection with the 1994 bombing of a Jewish center in Argentina.

Iran's ambassador to London returned to Tehran for consultations following the row over the arrest of diplomat Hadi Soleimanpour in connection with the Buenos Aires bombing which killed 85 people, Iranian and British officials said on Wednesday.

Staff at the British embassy in Tehran said up to six shots were fired but they said it was not clear who fired them.

"Just before midday (0730 GMT), five shots were fired from the street at the British embassy in Tehran," a Foreign Office spokesman in London said, adding that the bullets hit offices in the first and second floors of the building.

"Nobody was injured in this incident. The embassy has been temporarily closed for business," the spokesman said.

A Reuters witness said one pierced window in the embassy building was visible from the street. A British embassy official said toughened glass stopped any shots entering the offices.

Some embassy staff were sent home, while others moved to offices away from the street.

On the diplomatic front, Britain said it understood the recall of Iran's London envoy, Morteza Sarmadi, did not mean a downgrading in relations.

Soleimanpour, who was Iran's ambassador to Argentina at the time of the 1994 bombing and who is in custody at Argentina's request, has protested his innocence.

Iran says his detention is politically motivated and has promised "strong action," warning Britain that the issue would harm bilateral ties.

Iran is also facing growing international pressure over its nuclear program. The United States accuses it of secretly developing a nuclear weapons program -- a charge Tehran denies -- and wants the issue referred to the U.N. Security Council.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030903/wl_nm/iran_britain_embassy_dc

((( FINAL DAYS OF THIS REGIME IS TO COME )))

[F14 Pilot]

Asefi denies recalling of diplomats

Tehran, Sept 3 - Spokesman for Iranian Foreign Ministry Hamid-Reza Asefi dismissed as "baseless and unfounded" news claiming Iran has recalled 400 of its diplomats to the country.

The al-Jazeera news network claimed yesterday that Iran, following the Argentina case and the arrest of Iranian ex-ambassador of Iran to Buenos Aires, had recalled 400 of its diplomats back home.

Asefi stressed that the news was utterly baseless and false.

However, Asefi confirmed the news about Iranian ambassador to London Morteza Sarmadi's return to Tehran.

Some British media had quoted "diplomatic sources" yesterday as saying that Sarmadi had returned to Iran.

Asefi said that Sarmadi was in Tehran for some consultations.

He did not elaborate on how long the Iranian ambassador is going to stay in Tehran.

http://www.iribnews.com/Full_en.asp?news_id=187246&n=32

[F14 Pilot]

2003/09/03
Iran launches probe into shootout case

Tehran, Sept 3 - Iran's Law Enforcement Forces (LEF) have launched a serious investigation into the case of the shooting at the British embassy in Tehran, foreign ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi said Wedneday.

Reports said unknown gunmen fired five rounds of bullets to the British embassy in Tehran in midday at about 11 local time.

"The situation is under control", Asefi stressed. The officials have launched a probe into the irresponsible incident, he continued.

Reports said that Iran have tightened security after the shootout on the embassy.

http://www.iribnews.com/Full_en.asp?news_id=187295&n=32

[F14 Pilot]

El Baradei urges Iran to accelerate cooperation

BERLIN: The head of the UN nuclear agency urged Iran Tuesday to speed up cooperation, expressing hope that it will “very soon” sign a protocol allowing unfettered inspection of its nuclear facilities.

“I would like to see more acceleration of cooperation on the part of Iran, more transparency on the part of Iran,” Mohammed El Baradei, the chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said after talks with German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer. “The earlier we finish the job in Iran the better, both for Iran and the international community.”

The United States accuses Iran of developing a clandestine nuclear weapons program.

Iran, which insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes, has said it would agree to unfettered inspections under an additional protocol of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty if it is granted access to advanced nuclear technology, as provided for under the treaty.

“I hope they’ll sign it very soon,” El Baradei said of the protocol. “They told me last week that they have taken a decision to conclude the protocol.”

Iran said last week it is ready to begin talks on signing an additional NPT protocol to provide stronger inspection powers to the IAEA.

“I would also hope that Iran, until they sign and ratify the protocol, act as if the protocol is in force, because the more transparency we see from Iran, the more confidence we can create that their programme is dedicated to peaceful purposes,” he added.

The IAEA has said traces of weapons-grade uranium have been found at a nuclear facility at Natanz in central Iran, but Iran said the equipment was contaminated before it was purchased. On Monday, Iran said that, before signing the NPT protocol, it wanted the IAEA to admit Iran’s right to peaceful use of nuclear energy.

El Baradei said the IAEA “would like to assist Iran with nuclear electricity.”

“I support, of course, the peaceful use of nuclear agency but I would like also at the same time to strengthen nonproliferation,” he added. —AP

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_3-9-2003_pg4_8

[the Real fifi]

Dr. Zin this is a fabulous article. I'd like to send it and post it, but I need the cite. If anyone has it, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

[DoctorZIn]

The original link takes you to a "by subscription only" section of the Times of London.

But here is a link to the article at his agent's web site:
http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/541

Hope it helps.

[DoctorZIn]

12 Iranian Intelligence Agents Arrested in Baghdad (whoops!)
Geostrategy Direct Backgrounder and Baghdad 'New Era'

Newspaper ^ | Week of Sept. 9, 2003 | Bill Gertz
Posted on 09/03/2003 6:38 AM PDT by prarie earth

Iraqi security personnel have arrested 12 Iranian Intelligence agents in Iraq. The Iranians were preparing to conduct bombing attacks in Baghdad, the Arabic newspaper Al-Ahd al-Jadid, or 'The New Era,' reported.

The Baghdad newspaper calls itself a 'democratic, liberal independent' newsweekly whose editor is Abd-al-Basit al-Naqqash.

The director of security patrols in the Al-Sulihiyah district of Baghdad arrested the Iranians at the offices of the Al Mashriq Money Exchange Company, the newspaper reported.

The Iranians were carrying counterfeit dollars and hotel bankcards. They also had visitor cards identifying them as with the Al-Sharq Al-Awsat Vehicle Trading Company.

While Al Qaeda terrorists and pro-Saddam Iraqis are key suspects,United States Intelligence officials have not ruled out the possibility that Iranian Intelligence was behind the August 29th bombing of a mosque in Najaf that killed Ayatollah Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim, a leading moderate Shiite who headed the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq....

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/975192/posts