Turkey said on Monday that Syrian forces had fired at a second Turkish plane
which was searching for an F-4 reconnaissance jet shot down by Syria last week,
but the second plane was not brought down.
Deputy prime minister Bulent Arinc told a news conference that Turkey would
protect itself, within the framework of international law, against what it
called Syria's "hostile action" of downing its warplane last week.
He said at the end of a seven-hour cabinet meeting on the incident that
Syria's downing of the reconnaissance jet would not go
unpunished.
Was that jet over Syrian airspace for "only 5 minutes" too?
Russia has no interest in success of Iran nuclear talks
When it comes to the ongoing (and so far fairly ineffective) Iran nuclear talks, it is likely that the Russians simply do not want to see a resolution at this stage. The Russians have successfully inserted themselves in the middle of these talks and will probably do whatever they can to stall them. Why? The chart below gives us the answer. It is the breakeven oil price for various exporters - the all-in cost to deliver a barrel of oil to the market. And at current Brent prices Russia's oil industry is losing money.
Source: DB
Euronews: - The slump is bad news for energy-reliant Russia, with Brent the reference for its oil prices. This remains the case despite Putin’s expressed desire to cut the country’s dependence on energy exports [see the video on this topic]
The last thing the Russians need is for the Iran sanctions to be lifted any time soon. In fact they could probably benefit from some escalation of tensions. Russia obviously walks a fine line between wanting higher energy prices, but not so high that it will choke global growth, which is already extremely fragile. But they absolutely can not afford to have oil prices drop much further.
Von Türkei aus CIA koordiniert Waffenlieferungen nach Syrien
21.06.2012 · Eine Gruppe CIA-Agenten ist offenbar im Süden der Türkei aktiv. Medienberichten zufolge koordiniert sie von dort aus, welche syrische Widerstandsgruppe welche Waffen erhält.
Der amerikanische Auslandsgeheimdienst CIA überwacht den Fluss von Waffen an die syrischen Rebellen und versucht diesen zu koordinieren. Wie amerikanische Medien unter Berufung auf Regierungsmitarbeiter in Washington und in arabischen Staaten berichteten, ist eine kleine Gruppe von CIA-Agenten im Süden der Türkei im Einsatz, um mit den Diensten verbündeter Staaten zu entscheiden, welche Widerstandsgruppe welche Waffen erhält.
Die Waffenlieferungen an die syrischen Rebellen umfassen Maschinengewehre, Munition, schultergestützte Raketen sowie Panzerabwehrwaffen. Die Waffen werden von der Türkei, Saudi-Arabien und Qatar bezahlt und zum großen Teil über die Landgrenze von der Türkei aus nach Syrien geschmuggelt.
Wie die Tageszeitungen „New York Times“ und „Wall Street Journal“ übereinstimmend berichteten, sind die CIA-Mitarbeiter seit einigen Wochen in der Süd-Türkei im Einsatz. Sie sollen unter anderem verhindern, dass Waffen in die Hände von Kämpfern des Terrornetzes „Al Qaida“ fallen. Das amerikanische Außenministerium hat medizinische Hilfsmittel sowie Kommunikationsausrüstung im Wert von 15 Millionen Dollar für zivile Oppositionsgruppen in Syrien bereitgestellt. Washington beharrt darauf, dass sich die amerikanische Hilfe für die syrische Opposition auf „nicht tödliche Mittel“ beschränkt.
Syrien
Briten stoppen russisches Schiff mit Hubschraubern
19.06.2012 ·
Die britischen Behörden haben ein russisches Schiff vor
Schottland gestoppt, das offenbar in Russland reparierte
Kampfhubschrauber nach Syrien transportieren sollte. Das bestätigte das
britische Außenministerium in London.
Ein syrischer Militär-Hubschrauber russischer Produktion über Daraa, veröffentlicht am 16. Juni
Ein russisches Schiff, das offenbar in
Russland reparierte syrische Kampfhubschrauber zurückbringen sollte, ist
von den britischen Behörden vor Schottland gestoppt worden. Das
bestätigte das britische Außenministerium am Dienstag in London.
Die britische Versicherungsgesellschaft Standard
Club habe ihren Versicherungsschutz für das Schiff, das zur russischen
Frachter-Linie Femco gehört, auf Geheiß der Regierung in London
zurückgezogen. Auch alle anderen Schiffe der Gesellschaft seien nicht
mehr versichert. Nach Informationen des „Daily Telegraph“ war das Schiff
bereits zuvor von den niederländischen Behörden verfolgt worden. Es
habe deswegen den Kurs gewechselt. Vor Schottland sei es nun von den
britischen Behörden übernommen worden.
Hague: Lieferungen müssen aufhören
Die
Lieferung von Waffen nach Syrien fällt unter das EU-Embargo, das gegen
Syrien verhängt wurde. Der Waffentransport als solcher ist davon nicht
berührt. Allerdings gelten die Sanktionen auch für Versicherungen. Nach
Angaben des Ministeriums in London hat Außenminister William Hague
seinem russischen Amtskollegen Sergei Lawrow deutlich gemacht, dass
„alle Lieferungen von Verteidigungsausrüstung aufhören müssen“.
Die britische Regierung arbeite eng mit ihren
internationalen Partnern zusammen um sicherzustellen, dass alle gegen
Syrien verhängten Maßnahmen, darunter auch das EU-Waffenembargo, voll
umgesetzt werden.
The question of whether conflict between US
and China is inevitable is among the most important for the world as the
US-China relationship, as JPMorgan's Michael Cembalest notes, is likely
to be one of the most important issues of the 21st century. The
inevitability view is sometimes explained by the thesis that countries
rarely rise economically without also doing so militarily. The
chart below looks at the major economic powers of the world since the
year 1 at various intervals. Ignore for the moment some of the abstract
issues which this kind of data involves; it’s pretty clear that China’s
rise, fall and subsequent rise is something that hasn’t happened a lot
over the past 2,000 years, and that the United States is on the front
lines of having to adjust to it. Cembalest's recent interview
with Henry Kissinger noted the impact of China's troubled relations with
the West during the 19th century, which remains on China's political
consciousness, and how China might define its interests in different ways than the West would, whether they relate to global energy security, North Korea, global warming, currency management or trade. On China, and the not-so-inevitable clash of civilizations
At a client event in Beijing last week, I had the opportunity to
interview Henry Kissinger on the 40th anniversary of his secret 1971
mission to meet with Zhou Enlai, and 1972 summit meeting with Richard
Nixon and Mao Zedong. There are not many missions as impactful as this
one was: within a few years, China’s re-opening began, propelled by Deng
Xioping’s economic reforms. Reintegrating 20% of the world’s population
following China’s central planning disasters of the 1950’s and 1960’s
has not been easy for China or for the West, which has since benefited
from lower imported goods prices from China, but saw an end to post-war
manufacturing-led prosperity. The US-China relationship is likely to be
one of the most important issues of the 21st century.
One topic we discussed was the question of whether conflict between the US and China is inevitable,
a theme which has permeated a lot of academic and political science
journals over the last 20 years. The “inevitable conflict” view has been
advanced in different degrees by Yale’s Paul Kennedy, Princeton’s
Robert Gilpin and most forcefully, by John Mearshimer at the University
of Chicago. Similar concerns are found in “The End of China’s Peaceful Rise”,
a 2010 article in Foreign Policy magazine by Elizabeth Economy,
Director of Asia Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. The
inevitability view is sometimes explained by the thesis that countries
rarely rise economically without also doing so militarily. The chart
below looks at the major economic powers of the world since the year 1
at various intervals. Ignore for the moment some of the abstract issues
which this kind of data involves; it’s pretty clear that China’s
rise, fall and subsequent rise is something that hasn’t happened a lot
over the past 2,000 years, and that the United States is on the front
lines of having to adjust to it.
Any discussion of China’s engagement with the world needs to
factor in China’s troubled relations with the West during the 19th
century. Kissinger spoke about the impact this era continues to have on China’s political consciousness,
which you can grasp by looking at some data and charts: opium imported
into China which addicted up to 25% of its adult population, the exodus
of Chinese silver to England and India to pay for it, and the collapse
in China’s trade surplus. The Chinese Imperial Commissioner sent a
letter to Queen Victoria asking her to cease the opium trade, which was
banned in China in 1729 and again in 1836. Britain ignored the request.
After a Chinese blockade of opium ships, the British invaded in 1840,
and easily defeated the Chinese. China was forced to sign the Treaty of
Nanking, one of the more one-sided treaties in history. The opium trade
then doubled, leading to another war (and Chinese defeat) 20 years
later. The Opium Wars played a large part in the collapse of the Qing
Dynasty and subsequent occupation by foreign powers. This is not seen as
ancient history in China.
With this backdrop, Kissinger encouraged our guests to understand how China might define its interests in different ways than the West would,
whether they relate to global energy security, North Korea, global
warming, currency management or trade. Kissinger acknowledges the
pressures that come from an ideological predisposition in the US to
confront the non-democratic world, and Chinese tendencies to sometimes
view cooperation with the US as being self-defeating. However,
engagement with the West is now central to China achieving its economic
goals, and incoming governments in both China and the United States have
every incentive to maintain the status quo. According to Kissinger, while
conventional theories of realism in international politics point to
potential conflict, it would be an overly literal interpretation to
consider conflict inevitable. Both sides have a lot to lose and little
to gain from conflict escalation, creating conditions in which
compromises should be able to be found. If he’s right, US-China
relations would be another thing that could go right in the world,
confounding more negative expectations.
AtomprogrammRussland setzt im Irankonflikt auf Diplomatie
17.06.2012, 11:07 Uhr
Russland
spielt im Atomstreit mit dem Iran eine Schlüsselrolle - und müsste im
Fall eines Krieges mit vielen iranischen Flüchtlingen rechnen. Mit viel
Geschick ist es Moskau bislang gelungen, die Eskalation zu vermeiden.
Vladimir Putin und Mahmud Ahmadinedschad bei einem Treffen in Peking Anfang Juni. Quelle: AFP
Moskau / TeheranAuf
heimischem Parkett will Russland eine Eskalation des Atomstreits mit
dem Iran verhindern. Denn ein Scheitern der Gesprächsrunde an diesem
Montag und Dienstag in Moskau würde wohl nicht nur das Ende der
diplomatischen Bemühungen bedeuten, sondern auch den Beginn
militärischer Optionen. Irans Erzfeind Israel, der Teherans Atomprogramm
als ernsthafte Bedrohung einstuft, ist gegen Verhandlungen und für
Militärschläge gegen Atomanlagen.
Von den negativen Folgen eines Waffengangs wäre kein Land so
betroffen wie Russland“, sagt der Politologe Jewgeni Satanowski. Moskau
fürchtet einen Ansturm iranischer Kriegsflüchtlinge über das Kaspische
Meer und eine Destabilisierung an seiner Südflanke.
Bereits
vergangenen Monat in Bagdad war es Moskau, das die Atomgespräche
rettete. Die Verhandlungschefs, die EU-Außenbeauftragte Catherine Ashton
und Irans Unterhändler Said Dschalili, waren schon auf dem Weg zur
Pressekonferenz, um die Gespräche für gescheitert zu erklären. Dann aber
beruhigte angeblich Russland beide Seiten, brachte sie wieder an einen
Tisch und schlug ein neues Treffen vor.
„Russland will, dass beide
in Moskau endlich mal miteinander reden und nicht wieder aneinander
vorbei“, sagt ein ausländischer Diplomat in Teheran. Erst vor kurzem
besprach Präsident Wladimir Putin am Rande eines Gipfeltreffens in
Peking den Atomstreit auf höchster Ebene mit seinem iranischen
Amtskollegen Mahmud Ahmadinedschad.
Russland glaubt, bei
technischen Streitfragen vorankommen zu können. Im Atomstreit mit dem
Iran geht es derzeit vor allem um zwei Punkte: Inspektionen von
Militäranlagen, wo laut westlichen Geheimdienstberichten Atomtests
durchgeführt werden, und die Urananreicherung auf 20 Prozent. „Das kann
man lösen, nur müssen beide Seiten guten Willen haben und dabei geduldig
und tolerant sein“, sagt der iranische Außenminister Ali Akbar Salehi
bei einem Treffen mit seinem russischen Amtskollegen Sergej Lawrow in
Teheran.
Der
Iran ist bereit, die von der Internationalen Atomenergiebehörde IAEA
geforderte Inspektion seiner Militäranlage in Parchin in der Nähe
Teherans zuzulassen. Und Teheran ist auch bereit, die Anreicherung
einzustellen. Doch der Iran beharrt weiter auf einem zivilen
Nuklearprogramm, Urananreicherung inklusive. Der Westen müsse seine
Sanktionen aufheben, fordert Chefunterhändler Dschalili. „Kooperation
und gleichzeitig Drohungen - das geht nicht.“
Rückendeckung kommt
aus Moskau. Lawrow warnt vor neuen „einseitigen“ Zwangsmaßnahmen wie
etwa einem Öl-Embargo. Das Staatsunternehmen Rosatom kündigte unlängst
Interesse am Bau weiterer Atomkraftwerke im Iran an.
Doch vor
allem die westlichen Vertreter in der 5+1-Gruppe - die UN-Vetomächte
USA, China, Russland, Frankreich und Großbritannien sowie Deutschland -
wollen vor der Aufhebung der Sanktionen zunächst konkrete Schritte
sehen. Dazu gehören Antworten auf noch offene Fragen zu möglichen
Atomwaffenprogrammen.
Als
eine Art Gegenleistung hat die Gruppe wirtschaftliche Erleichterungen
angeboten, etwa Ersatzteile für iranische Passagierflugzeuge. Doch das
lehnt Teheran empört ab. „Wir wollen unser legitimes Recht, keine
Bonbons“, schimpft Parlamentspräsident Ali Laridschani. Beobachter sehen
eine Einigung in weiter Ferne. Das Treffen in Moskau sei wohl eher
Zeitverschwendung, sagt ein europäischer Diplomat am IAEA-Sitz in Wien
hinter vorgehaltener Hand.
EGYPT STATE TV SAYS PARLIAMENT NO LONGER LIGITIMATE
EGYPT STATE TV CITES CONSTITUTIONAL COURT ON PARLIAMENT
And more from Reuters:
A constitutional court ruling on Thursday means that the whole of the
lower house of Egypt's parliament will be dissolved and a new election
will have to be held, the court's head Farouk Soltan told Reuters by
telephone after the ruling was issued.
"The ruling regarding parliament includes the dissolution of
the lower house of parliament in its entirety because the law upon which
the elections were held is contrary to rules of the constitution," he said, speaking two days before another election to pick a new president.
Soltan said the ruling was binding on all institutions of state,
adding that it would be up to the executive to call for the new election
that he said would take place.
In other words, the military is once again preparing to take over. A big hint came yesterday via AP:
Egypt's Justice Ministry on Wednesday gave the country's military
police and intelligence agents the right to arrest civilians over wide
range of suspected crimes, including "resisting authorities," sparking charges that the country's military rulers want to extend their grip on power even after handing over to civilians.
The decision comes during heightened tensions in Egypt, three days
before a highly polarized presidential runoff election and a day before
rulings by the country's highest court that could dissolve the
Islamist-dominated parliament and even cancel the Saturday-Sunday
presidential vote.
The decision, published in the official gazette, would remain in
effect until a new constitution is in place. The process of writing a
constitution has hit snags. On Tuesday the Islamist-dominated parliament
voted on an assembly to draft the document, but liberals boycotted the
session. An earlier attempt to name the body collapsed because of
opposition from liberals. Both times they charged that Islamists were
unfairly dominating the procedure.
...
Military analysts said the military arrest powers were a temporary
measure intended to fill a security vacuum resulting from last year's
uprising, when the police force collapsed and disappeared from the
streets during the first days of the mass protests.
"The police force has not recovered completely, and security is not
back," said Sayyed Hashim, a former military prosecutor, in a TV
interview.
Rights activists warned the new decision creates a reproduction of
notorious emergency laws that expired recently and said that it also
could extend the rule of the generals, even if they transfer power to
civilians on time by the end of the month.
"This is a declaration of martial law, as if we are living in banana republic," said Gamal Eid, a prominent rights lawyer.
So things are going from bad to worse? Yep. As Art Cashin has been warning for quite a while, here is his latest assessment:
Weekend Elections - Everyone is talking about Sunday’s Greek elections but there are also key elections in France and Egypt.
The Greek election has been made somewhat less important by the
“still under construction” Spanish bailout. The lack of a clear quid pro
quo up front for Spain opens the door to renegotiations for all the
other European bailouts.
Whichever party wins in Greece will have latitude to negotiate a less
onerous deal. That would also make a coalition government easier - “we
were all part of easing the peoples burden.”
The French elections may make Europe less functional. They will
likely strengthen Hollande’s hand in reversing the Sarkozy “reforms”. He
has already rolled back the retirement age to 60 from 62. The Germans
are not happy.
The most important election this weekend may have nothing to do with
the Eurozone - at least directly. The election in Egypt may change the
face of the Middle East. The implications to Israel, Iran and Saudi
Arabia are enormous. Will the most populous Arab nation become a
theocracy? This will be some weekend.
And as Egypt falls to the counter-revolution, this time military, 2012 is once again nothing more than a repeat of 2011
Saudi Arabia is putting severe pressure on Iran by pumping record
amounts of crude. It is starting to look more like a geopolitical move
rather than an OPEC based targeting of supplying the market. The Saudis
have gone beyond simply marginalizing Iran as a major oil producer.
SFGate:
- Traditional rivals Saudi Arabia — a Sunni Muslim nation — and Shiite
Muslim Iran are jockeying for influence in the Middle East as well as in
OPEC.
Iran has warned the Saudis not to use the oil weapon against it
by increasing supplies to countries that no longer get Iranian crude due
to the sanctions. Saudi oil minister Ali Naimi has denied such
intentions, telling reporters his country sells to whoever buys.
"We don't sit and say `we want to sell to this country or that country (or) whatever," he said.
But Saudi overproduction is clearly rankling the Iranians. In
comments to Iran's Mehr news agency, former Iranian oil minister Gholam
Hossein Nozari noted that "political issues have overshadowed OPEC,"
while analysts say the political implications of Saudi Arabia's
production policy cannot be ignored.
"You do wonder what's tied up perhaps with the Iranian political issue,"
said Neil Atkinson, director of Energy & Utilities Research and
Analysis. "Of course the lower the price at the moment the more damage
that does to Iran."
It's happening at the time when Iranian crude production is at
multi-year low and Brent is below $98/barrel. By severely limiting
Iran's financial strength, the Saudi's will certainly be able to
increase their influence in the region.
Source: OPEC/Bloomberg
Iran is clearly feeling the pain. The World Bank has moved its Iran GDP
forecast for 2013 growth from positive 2.9% just six months ago to
negative 0.7% now. Iran's banks are isolated as SWIFT (Society for
Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) - the international
money transfer system - has cut them out of its network. Inflation (even
the official number) is closing in on 25%. The Israelis now believe
Iran's economy is near collapse.
Arutz Sheva:
- "The Iranian economy is near collapse, therefore it is time to
continue to tighten the sanctions without letting up," Finance Minister
Dr. Yuval Steinitz told visiting the Italian Prime Minister Monday.
With this backdrop in place, tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia are
escalating. Apparently the Saudis recently executed some Iranian
citizens for "drug trafficking".
Tehran Times:
- Iran will send a “legal-consular” delegation to Saudi Arabia to probe
the recent execution of a number of Iranian prisoners in the Arab
country, a Foreign Ministry official told the Persian service of IRNA on
Wednesday.
...
The Mehr News Agency also reported on Wednesday that the planned visit
of the Iranian deputy foreign minister to Saudi Arabia had been
cancelled over the executions.
In spite of the current international focus on Syria, it is Iran that
poses the greatest risk to the region. Isolated and denied a great deal
of its foreign currency revenue, Tehran can become highly unpredictable
and possibly quite dangerous. It is also possible that the current
leadership's grip on power is somewhat tenuous. The Saudi'd may be
closer to a destabilized Iran than the bargained for.
SyrienKonflikt wird zum Zankapfel zwischen USA und Russland
14.06.2012, 03:35 Uhr
Für
Zündstoff zwischen den beiden Staaten sorgen vor allem russische
Waffengeschäfte mit der Regierung in Damaskus. Unterdessen steigt die
Zahl der Syrer, die in die Türkei fliehen, stetig an.
UN-Blaumhelme in Damaskus. Quelle: dpa
Washington/New York
er Syrien-Konflikt wird immer mehr zum Zankapfel zwischen den USA und
Russland. Russlands Aussagen, wonach seine Waffenlieferungen nichts mit
dem Konflikt in Syrien zu tun haben, seien "schlicht und einfach
unwahr", erklärte US-Außenministerin Hillary Clinton. Aus Sicht eines
ranghohen UN-Vertreters hat der Machtkampf in Syrien mittlerweile den
Charakter eines Bürgerkriegs angenommen. Die Regierungstruppen besiegten
einem Bericht des Staatsfernsehens zufolge die Rebellen in der
umkämpften Stadt Haffe.
Indeed, terrorist rebels have been responsible for much of the violence inside Syria. And outside monitors have confirmed that the situation on the ground is much different
than it is being portrayed in the Western media. (And according to the
large German newspaper FAZ, those recently massacred in Hama were on the same side as Syrian leader Assad).
Russia has repeatedly stated
that it would consider an attack on Syria as an attack on its national
security. (And Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said that if the
U.S. invades the sovereignty of countries like Syria, it could lead to nuclear war. And see this.)
Now, Russia is selling attack helicopters to the Syrian government, and defending the sales because the U.S. is supplying rebels with weapons to fight against the government.
Cold War 2.0. And this time, China may participate. Of course, Iran and Syria have had a mutual defense pact for years. So war in Syria could well drag Iran into a hot war.
