Former White House staffer Raymond Tanter discusses latest events in DPRK

5 de enero 2015On January 3 2015, Professor Raymond Tanter was on CCTV America. Discussing about the latest events in DPRK.

The United States said its new round of sanctions against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is just the opening salvo in its response to an unprecedented cyberattack on Sony. Yet there may be little else the U.S. can do to further isolate a country that already has few friends in the world.

Even the latest sanctions, handed down by President Barack Obama in an executive order, may not sting quite as badly as U.S. would have hoped. After all, the DPRK is already under a strict sanctions regime imposed by the U.S. over the North’s nuclear program.

The new round of sanctions unveiled Friday hit three organizations closely tied to the North’s defense apparatus, plus 10 individuals who work for those groups or for the DPRK’s government directly. Any assets they have in the U.S. will be frozen, and they’ll be barred from using the U.S. financial system.

But all three groups were already on the U.S. sanctions list, and officials couldn’t say whether any of the 10 individuals even have assets in the U.S. to freeze.

Still, American officials portrayed the move as a swift and decisive response to DPRK behavior they said had gone far over the line. Never before has the U.S. imposed sanctions on another nation in direct retaliation for a cyberattack on an American company.

“The order is not targeted at the people of North Korea, but rather is aimed at the government of North Korea and its activities that threaten the United States and others,” Obama wrote in a letter to House and Senate leaders.

To watch the complete interview please go to:

Is Washington Forgetting Its Allies in the Iranian Nuclear Negotiations?

BELGIUM-SYRIA-IRAQ -CONFLICT-US-COALITIONAs Secretary of State John Kerry rushed in 2013 to sign an interim nuclear deal with Iran, Sen. John McCain, (R-Ariz.), incoming chair of the Senate Arms Services Committee, stated that Kerry “has been a human wrecking ball.” Regarding extension of current talks to July 2014, McCain, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) said a “bad deal” with Iran would start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

If Ashton Carter is confirmed as secretary of defense, he may temper Kerry’s overemphasis on nuclear diplomacy with little regard for regional implications; Carter would marry diplomacy with military elements in an overall strategy for Iran’s nuclear program.

Simon Henderson and Olli Heinonen wrote in a post for the Washington Institute that as far back as April 2009, Saudis told U.S. Special Envoy Dennis Ross, “if [the Iranians] get nuclear weapons, we will get nuclear weapons.” On Nov. 1, 2013, just prior to the Nov. 24 interim nuclear accord between Iran and the Permanent Five Members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany (P5+1), the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI),reported Riyadh’s concerns before Kerry’s visit two days later about a Tehran-Washington rapprochement: It increases Iran’s regional influence at the expense of the Arab States; a year later, Nov. 23, 2014, Saudi newspaperscriticized Obama for cooperating with Iran while abandoning his Arab allies and called on Riyadh to conduct a strategic reassessment of the alliance with Washington.

Contrast how America’s Middle East allies are cut out of the nuclear talks with Iran versus nuclear talks with North Korea. Gulf states and Israel are excluded while European allies play a prominent role in the P5+1 negotiation with Tehran. In Asia, U.S. regional allies like Seoul and Tokyo are in a contact group with Beijing, Pyongyang, and Moscow. Although talks with Pyongyang have a mixed record, Arab States are absent from talks on Iran’s nuclear program and pay the price of a deal or no deal, whether good or bad. Although Kerry often travels to Jerusalem and Riyadh before talks with Iran, he does so at his discretion, and there is not formal consultation with regional allies before each secret bilateral or multilateral with Tehran.

Washington’s participation in nuclear talks with Iran while ignoring Iranian dissidents to curry favor with Tehran are intertwined stories of diplomatic appeasement of the Ayatollahs.

The Islamic Republic wields outsize influence in councils of power in Baghdad. According to the Washington Post, appointment of Iraq’s interior minister in October 2014 opened the door to Shiite militia and Iranian influence in Baghdad. Mohammed Ghabban, a Shiite politician with the Badr Organization has ties to Hadi al-Amiri, head of Badr and its military wing. He is likely to wield huge power in the ministry. The Badr militia ran Shiite death squads during Iraq’s sectarian war, after infiltrating the Interior Ministry. A leaked 2009 State Department cable said Amiri may have personally ordered attacks on up to 2,000 Sunnis. The Post also stated that head of Iraq’s human rights ministry is also affiliated with Badr.

Meanwhile, Iranian dissidents are not well represented by the American Embassy in Baghdad during the past three years, while nuclear talks have been taking place. Memorializing an accord with Baghdad, on Dec. 25, 2011, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, under pressure from pro-Iran Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, urged some 3,000 Iranian dissidents to abandon their home in Camp Ashraf, where they had lived for decades, in favor of Camp Liberty. In that statement, Secretary Clinton promised“officials from U.S. Embassy Baghdad will visit regularly and frequently.” This pledge was never fulfilled, except for a few short visits to the camp without discussing security concerns of the dissidents. Trying to please Tehran with unfilled efforts by U.S. Embassy staff is a macabre example of the adage, “Promises are made to be broken and lies are meant to be kept.”

To continue reading please go to:

How to Tell if Tehran Is Lying About Its Nuclear Ambitions

noviembre 11How to counter Iran’s bold cheating on its nuclear commitments? Publicize and act on revelations of mendacity alleged by the Iranian opposition group with a track record of valid revelations — the National of Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) and its office in Washington, NCRIUS.

The narrative of talks between the major powers and Iran focuses on whether Iran will agree to curb uranium enrichment by cutting down on centrifuges in exchange for sanctions relief. But the backstory — Tehran’s serial cheating — should be the front narrative.

Is President Barack Obama hoping for a deal so much that he ignores Iran’s prior record of defiance of its obligations to be transparent? Our president’s desperate October letter to an unresponsive and uncooperative Supreme Leader of Iran signals weakness in face of defiance and cheating is of little consequence.

Doubling down on desperation, Secretary of State John Kerry has lamented how difficult it would be to reach a deal with Iran if negotiations extend beyond the Nov. 24 deadline: “I want to get this done,” he said, reported the Washington Post, “And we are driving toward the finish with a view of trying to get it done.” He has compounded desperation with unfounded optimism about demonstrating Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful, saying, “We believe it is pretty easy to prove to the world that a plan is peaceful.”

But it is difficult for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify whether Iran is cheating: IAEA inspectors are not allowed to gain access to a major facility indicating marrying fuel to a delivery system — Parchin — on the grounds it is a military site for conventional weapons research and off-limits to the IAEA.

Recalcitrance has prompted the IAEA regularly to issue statements like: “Since 2002, the Agency has become increasingly concerned about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed nuclear related activities involving military related organizations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile.”

In support of the international community, NCRIUS released details of Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons activities at a press conference on Nov. 7, 2014.

To continue reading please go to:

Gunfire exchanged between North and South Korea’s security forces

Octubre 24

On October 19 2014, Professor Raymond Tanter was on CCTV America. Security forces from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and from the Republic of Korea exchanged gunfire across the de-militarized zone.

Unlike DPRK Iran has opposition: National Council of Resistance of Iran w/ its PMOI in Camp Liberty Iraq

To watch the complete interview please go to:

Professor Raymond Tanter on Bloomber TV.

bloomberg october 17On October 14 2014, Professor Raymond Tanter was on Bloomberg  TV discussing; Does U.S. Need Iran in Fight Against Islamic State?

Professor Emeritus Raymond Tanter talks with Trish Regan about the fight against the Islamic State as militants draw closer to Baghdad and the role of Iran in the battle. He speaks on “Street Smart.”

To watch the complete interview please go to:

On October 17 2014, Professor Tanter was on Bloomberg  TV discussing; Mistake to Further Inflame Relations With Iran: Sachs.

To watch the complete interview please go to:

Are U.S. Ground Troops in the Middle East Inevitable?

bloomberg september 23On September 23 2014, Professor Raymond Tanter was on Bloomberg  TV. Discussing the U.S. battle against the Islamic State military group in Syria with Trish Regan on “Street Smart.”

US Boots On Ground unnecessary for Obama  to Succeed if Arab States Keep Iran from Iraq & Help Kurds.

To watch the complete interview please go to:

Where does Turkey fit in the coalition against IS?

cctv september 23For more now on the coalition against the Islamic State, CCTV America was joined by Raymond Tanter. He’s a professor of political science and a former member of the National Security Council in the Reagan-Bush White House.

Tanter Iran worsened Iraq Shiite-Sunni split, allowing ISIS 2 Gain Sunni support + Proxy Threats 2 CampLiberty PMOI.

To watch the complete interview please go to:

U.S. attacks on IS in Syria not in Iran’s interest

USA_Iran_250609Baku, Azerbaijan, Sept. 11

By Umid Niayesh – Trend:

U.S. President Barack Obama said in a televised address to the nation that the United States would strike at the Islamic State in in Iraq and in Syria, too, if needed. This is not at all in Iran’s interest. The Islamic Republic has failed to incorporate the Syrian regime into the anti-IS coalition, an Iranian expert says.

Syrian president, Bashar Assad has no place in the United States new anti-IS strategy, despite all efforts made by Iran, Hassan Hashemian, Iranian expert on Arab region issues told Trend on Sept. 11.

Hashemian also said that Iran itself will be excluded from international anti-IS efforts in Syria, but may be permitted to continue its current position in Iraq.

Iran first tried to dissuade the U.S. from attacking the IS in Syria, the expert explained. When it failed, as second step the Islamic Republic tried to be a part of the coalition that would have made Assad a strategic ally of anti-terrorism coalition.

However, the U.S. refused to accept Iran’s participation and over 40 countries including some regional countries which are against Iran’s policies in Syria will be part of the coalition, Hashemian underlined.

What will be Iran’s reaction towards the forecasted air strikes?

Raymond Tanter, the president of Iran Policy Committee Publishing, believes that Iran is likely to condemn any violation of Syrian airspace and double down on its support for Assad in view of prospective U.S. air attacks and support for Free Syrian Army.

Tanter who served at the White House as a Senior Member on the National Security Council staff told Trend that Tehran can support Assad even more by ordering additional Hezbollah forces into the fight against the Free Syria Army before it becomes more of an effective fighting force with training in Saudi Arabia.

Iran also might transfer more units of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Qods Force units to Syria, from where they are operating now in Iraq, Tanter said. He went on to add that Tehran could provide Assad with surface to air missiles to attack American aircraft operating in eastern Syria, but it is unlikely.

Iranian officials have started making statements against the possible air strikes as well as formation of the anti-IS coalition.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Marzieh Afkham expressed suspicion about the international anti-IS coalition, saying there are fundamental questions in the seriousness of the coalition to fight terrorism honestly. She noted that “some countries that join the coalition are supporters of the terrorists in Iraq and Syria.”

To continue reading please go to: