Iran-U.S.A

[Rasputin]

خبرگزارى فرانسه گزارش داد، آمريكا در آستانه برگزارى كنفرانس حساس منطقه*اى در مورد عراق، از تمايل احتمالى براى مذاكرات جديد دوجانبه با ايران خبر داده است.

كنفرانس سه جانبه ( ايران - سوريه و آمريكا ) در مورد عراق قرار است امروز در بغداد انجام شود.

"زلمى خليل زاد"، سفير آمريكا در عراق كه دوره خدمتش روبه اتمام است، روز جمعه تمايل احتمالى آمريكا را به برگزارى مذاكرات دوجانبه با تهران مطرح كرد.

اين ديپلمات آمريكايى گفت: "چنانچه تشخيص دهيم كه نشست دوجانبه مفيد خواهد بود، براى انجام آن آماده خواهيم شد و مايل به انجام اين كار هستيم."
خليل زاد افزود:" مدتى است اعلام كرده*ايم اگر اين كار مفيد باشد، مايل به نشستن (برسر يك ميز) با ايرانيان و گفت وگو درمورد عراق هستيم." وى خاطر نشان كرد: "من اين مسئوليت را حدود يك سال به عهده داشتم اما قادر به انجام آن نشديم، زيرا يا زمان آن طورى بود كه ما احساس كرديم اين اقدام مفيد نخواهد بود يا اينكه ايرانيان تمايل به شركت نداشتند." خبرگزارى فرانسه نوشت: مذاكرات امروز بغداد، نشست بي*سابقه*اى بين نمايندگان ايران و سوريه و آمريكاست.

جورج بوش كه با لشكر كشى به عراق اين كشور را در آستانه جنگ داخلى قرار داده با توجه به از دست رفتن گزينه*هاى مختلف براى اجتناب از يك جنگ داخلى تمام عيار در عراق و اعمال فشار براى پايان اشغال اين كشوراز جانب دمكرات*هاى مخالف كه اكنون كنترل كنگره آمريكا را در اختيار دارند، اجازه برگزارى نشست*هاى رو در رو را داده است.

مقامات آمريكايى در حالى كه تلاش مي*كنند چنين وانمود كنند كه نشست بغداد نشانگر يك تغيير عمده در سياست واشنگتن نيست، اصرار دارند توجه*ها به تحولات در مورد عراق فقط بر بهبود اوضاع امنيتى آن كشور و آينده سياسى دولت "نورى المالكى" نخست*وزير عراق متمركز باشد.

بوش كه در حال ديدار از "سائو پائولو"ى برزيل است، روز جمعه برخلاف روال هميشگى كه عليه ايران و سوريه سخن مي*گويد، ابراز اميدوارى كرد نشست بغداد از حمايت ايران و سوريه برخوردار شود.

در همين حال خبرگزارى آمريكايى آسوشيتدپرس نيز از بغداد گزارش داد نشست عراق كه آميزه*اى از يك دستور كار منعطف و وساطت*گرى است و به منظور كمك به اداره آينده عراق برگزار مي*شود، نخستين فرصت براى شكستن يخ*هاى رابطه بين ايران و آمريكاست.

اين خبرگزارى افزود: اما حصول هرگونه پيشرفي، تحت*الشعاع ترديدها و نارضايتي*هاى طرفين به عنوان دشمنان ديرينه و بانفوذترين متحدان عراق قرار دارد.

آسوشيتدپرس به نقل از يك استاد علوم سياسى دانشگاه تهران در اين رابطه گفت: "انتظار هيچ معجره*اى نداشته باشيد."
در واقع، انتظارات از اين نشست كه با حضور نمايندگانى از كشورهاى همسايه عراق، اعضاى دايم شوراى امنيت سازمان ملل و برخى كشورهاى عرب برگزار مي*شود، در سطح بسيار پايين است.

"ديويد ساترفيلد"، رييس هيات آمريكايى در كنفرانس بغداد نيز گفته است كه در صورت پيشنهاد ايران و سوريه براى گفت وگو درباره عراق، ما نيز رويگردان نيستيم.

وى بدون اشاره به اتهاماتى كه به دولتش در مورد اشغال عراق و تقويت تروريسم در اين كشور وارد است افزود: اما آمريكا تصميم دارد از اين نشست براى تقويت اتهاماتشان عليه دو كشور استفاده كند.

آمريكا مدعى است كه سوريه به جهادگران خارجى و شورشيان اجازه تردد در مرزهاى مشتركش با عراق مي*دهد و ايران نيز تسليحات در اختيار شيعيان عراق مي*گذارد اما تهران و دمشق اين اتهامات را به شدت رد مي*كنند.

"عباس عراقچى" رييس هيات ايرانى شركت*كننده در كنفرانس بغداد، بدون اشاره*اى به آمريكا، ابراز اميدوارى كرده است كه گام*هاى بيشترى در زمينه حمايت از دولت "نورى المالكى" تحت حمايت آمريكا كه روابط بسيار نزديكى با ايران دارد، برداشته شود.

خبرگزارى آسوشيتدپرس ضمن اعتراف به اقدام غير عرف ديپلماتيك آمريكا به در روبودن و بازداشت ديپلمات*هاى ايرانى در عراق نوشت: ايران حضور نظامى آمريكا در منطقه را به*شدت محكوم مي*كند.

[Rasputin]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When U.S. and Iranian officials sit down at a regional meeting in Baghdad on Saturday it will be far from the first time they have been in the same room since the United States severed ties with Iran in 1980.

From the U.S. point of view, such contacts have ranged from the vital Bonn conference in 2001, when Iran helped to shape an Afghan government to succeed the ousted Taliban regime, to the ultimately embarrassing visit by U.S. officials to Tehran in 1986 as part of what became the Iran-Contra scandal.

Saturday's meeting will gather Iraq's neighbors and major world powers at talks the United States hopes will yield more regional support to help quell the violence that rages in Iraq four years after the U.S.-led invasion toppled Saddam Hussein.

It could provide an occasion for bilateral U.S.-Iranian talks, something the Bush administration has generally resisted although it has been willing to deal with the Iranians as part of larger groups.

Former U.S. diplomat James Dobbins had extensive dealings with Iranian officials in December 2001 when the United Nations organized a conference in Bonn that established a political process for Afghanistan after U.S.-led forces toppled the Taliban for harboring Osama bin Laden.

"I was told I could deal with them any time, any where under any circumstances as long as we were talking about Afghanistan," said Dobbins, now a Rand Corporation analyst, saying he had breakfast with the Iranian envoy several times and met with him once or twice a day during the conference.

He described the Iranians' role as crucial in persuading the Northern Alliance, the Afghan coalition that helped topple the Taliban, to accept a smaller number of ministries in the new Afghan government and paving the way to a political deal.

"They took the Northern Alliance (envoy) aside ... and whispered in his ear 'This is the best deal you are going to get. You probably ought to take it,' He did," Dobbins said in an interview, echoing an account he gave the Los Angeles Times.

SECRET ARMS SALES

Not all contacts with Iranians have been productive for the United States.

In the biggest scandal of Ronald Reagan's presidency, U.S. officials were involved in the secret sale of arms to Iran and channeling the proceeds to Contra rebels who were fighting Daniel Ortega's Marxist Sandinista government in Nicaragua.

The United States cut diplomatic relations with Iran in April 1980, five months after Iranian students occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Fifty-two Americans were held hostage for 444 days.

As part of the agreement that led to their release, the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal was set up at the Hague to handle legal claims between the countries. U.S. officials have dealt with Iranian officials there for 26 years, routinely shaking hands with them and with the Iranian judges on the tribunal.

"We don't generally make much small talk, but it is very cordial," said State Department Legal Adviser John Bellinger.

The big question about Saturday's meeting is whether the Bush administration will overcome its reluctance to deal with Iran bilaterally in the hopes of bringing stability to Iraq.

It has offered to talk to Iran if Tehran first suspends its uranium enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for power plans or for atomic bombs. Iran has so far refused to do that and says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

U.S. officials this week have signaled a willingness to talk bilaterally to the Iranians about Iraq.

Asked if he thought there would be such talks at the Baghdad meeting, Dobbins replied: "I think it is going to be hard. It seems to me to be too brief an occasion for more than the very beginnings of a dialogue, but we'll see."

"The problem has been that whenever one side is ready to talk seriously, the other side either feels too weak or to self-confident," he added. "It is very seldom that we are both in the middle of that cycle."

[Rasputin]

The one-day conference of Iraq's neighbours, attended by other interested parties including the Americans and British, seems to have passed off as well as anybody expected.


Iraqi PM Nuri al-Maliki (left) greets US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad

It was the first formal encounter between the Americans and Iranians - who have no diplomatic relations - for more than two years. US relations with Syria are almost as bad.

Both countries are accused by Washington of fostering terrorism and enabling arms, fighters and money to cross their borders into Iraq - charges they deny.

This ice-breaking encounter seems to have gone down well all round.

Positive atmosphere

The US ambassador in Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, who led the US team, spoke later about the positive and businesslike atmosphere.

Despite controversy over contacts with the US, Iranian and Syrian newspapers on Sunday generally welcomed the outcome of the meeting.

Given the deep differences between those taking part, the potential for acrimonious wrangling was clearly there.

There was a good spirit of constructive engagement and the Americans played their full part in that

Dominic Asquith
British ambassador to Iraq


Media caution over conference

But according to those who took part, the atmosphere was positive even when some of those differences were aired.

"Issues were debated, but in a very respectful way," the conference host, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, told the BBC.

"Everybody was concerned to accentuate the positive, not to issue provocative confrontational statements."

British ambassador Dominic Asquith, who headed the UK delegation, added: "It was a good meeting, with a very positive tone.

"All those who were round the table were clear in their emphasis of support for the government of Iraq and for the Iraqi people in their efforts to confront terrorism and sectarian violence."

From Iraq's point of view, one of the most important practical results of the meeting was agreement to set up security committees with the neighbouring states, with a brief to tackle the issue of cross-border infiltration.

Iraqi officials said they would be pressing to ensure that all sides lived up to the commitments given.

'Lively exchanges'

Iraq also seemed to attach much importance to opening a dialogue between the US and the UK on one side, and Iran and Syria on the other.

"The other important achievement was that Iraq became a forum for some lively exchanges between the US and Iran, as well as Syria and the UK, which really created a good and positive atmosphere," Foreign Minister Zebari said.

"Despite what you may hear about it being just a handshake and some formalities, it was much deeper than that, and it was all focused on Iraq."

"The chemistry was good, and there were some very lively exchanges both between them, and with others."


Iraq security talks have raised hopes of a thaw in US-Iran relations

Mr Zebari said that Iraq needed its neighbours' help to secure internal stability, and in return, could offer them a forum and an issue on which they could talk to the US and the UK.

While much of the interest was focused was on the situation between the US and Iran, British ambassador Dominic Asquith said Syria had also played a positive role.

"The Syrian participant was particularly constructive, indeed came up at the end with some compromise language for the final statement which received full backing, indeed applause, from everybody around the table, so there was a good spirit of constructive engagement and the Americans played their full part in that."

Next steps

If this first encounter was positive despite the obvious limitations, what comes next?

One disappointment was that the participants were not able to agree on the timing, venue and level for the follow-up meeting that all agree should take place soon.

It had been hoped that there would be agreement on a conference at foreign ministerial level - including Condoleezza Rice - in April, possibly in Istanbul.

The Turks have offered to host such an "expanded" meeting.

But given differences over the agenda, scope and level of participation, the most likely scenario seems to be an initial meeting restricted to the foreign ministers of Iraq and its six neighbours, who would then decide whether to broaden it to include the permanent members of the UN Security Council and others.

[Rasputin]

Claims by western intelligence to have scored a coup by securing the defection of a senior Iranian general were contradicted yesterday by the man's relatives, who claimed he had been kidnapped by US or Israeli agents.
Relatives of Ali Reza Asgari, an Iranian former deputy defence minister who disappeared during a trip to Turkey, said reports that he had fled to the west were "lies". They said he would never have spied on Iran or abandoned his family.

Their appearance, outside the Turkish embassy in Tehran, seemed to counter speculation that General Asgari had arranged for his family to move to the west.
Media reports based on unnamed intelligence sources have suggested that he is cooperating with western agencies after escaping from Iran because he feared his cover as a mole was about to be blown.He was said to have fled to the Syrian capital, Damascus, and then to Istanbul after securing the escape of 10 relatives. However, Gen Asgari's wife, Ziba Ahmadi, emerged with his brother and three of his children to talk to reporters. They said all the general's close relatives remained in Iran. "We are here in Iran and have not gone anywhere," said Mrs Ahmadi. "These are enemies' rumours. My husband did not have any problems with Iran that would have led him to seek asylum. The person who wants to seek asylum first takes his family with him."

Gen Asgari has two wives. However, his brother, Davoud, said: "His wives, children, father and brother are all in Iran."

Mrs Ahmadi said Gen Asgari went missing on December 9, contradicting reports that he disappeared last month. His trip has been depicted as part of an elaborate escape operation. However, his wife said he went to attend to business interests.

[Rasputin]

Smokin' Old Time in Tehran

Why U.S. cigarettes are all the rage today in Iran


To punish Iran for backing terrorism and going nuclear, Washington has slapped on trade sanctions and moved aggressively against its banking industry. But in one area, business between the two nations is booming: smokes. Exempted from the sanctions regime as agricultural products, U.S. tobacco exports to Iran have grown to $142 million over the past five years and now dwarf those of all other American goods shipped there.


The shipments are allowed under a U.S. law, passed in 2000, that eased the embargoes against Iran, Libya, and Sudan, allowing exports of medicine and agricultural goods. The law-the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act-was pushed hard by interests from food-farming states, but the tobacco industry has become the big winner. While exports of U.S. cigarettes to Libya and Sudan never amounted to much, shipments to Iran-considered a premier market by tobacco exporters-have soared.

From 2002 to 2005, tobacco made up nearly half the value of all U.S. exports to Iran, according to trade data compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau. The $50 million worth of tobacco products shipped there in 2005, the last year for which figures are available, is nearly three times that of the next largest category, pharmaceuticals, and over six times the amount of all other farm goods. "It's obviously not what was intended," says Rep. Brad Sherman, a California Democrat and chairman of the House Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade Subcommittee. Sherman, who has pushed for tougher sanctions on Iran, says the embargo was eased because of concern over deprivation. "That's why it was about food and medicine," he said. "It would have been ironic to put in medicine and cigarettes."

As a top oil producer, Iran earns some $50 billion a year from petroleum exports, enough to amply fund the nuclear and missile programs that have Washington on edge. But its leaders are also profiting from the tobacco trade, because sales are run by a government monopoly. According to Iran's state-owned Islamic Republic News Agency, the IRNA, 50 billion cigarettes are consumed there annually, resulting in some 50,000 smoking-related deaths each year.

Smugglers. U.S. export records show that last year, British American Tobacco-maker of Kent, Pall Mall, and Lucky Strikes-shipped over 1 million pounds of cigarettes from Charleston, S.C., to the Iranian port of Khorramshahr. A BAT spokeswoman told U.S. News that the company, concerned over possible new restrictions, no longer exports to Iran from the United States. Cigarette makers R. J. Reynolds and Philip Morris also say they do no business with Iran.

One concern not reflected in official trade statistics is smuggling. By evading taxes and embargoes, tobacco smugglers can earn enormous profits, and Iran is a magnet for many. As much as 70 percent of the cigarettes sold in Iran are smuggled into the country, reports IRNA. Moved from U.S. ports to Cyprus, the shipments are typically diverted to Lebanon, Turkey, Oman, or the U.A.E. before ending up in Iraq and Iran, according to a 2003 World Health Organization report.

U.S. officials hope to tighten the embargo on Iran. "As we see the conduct coming out of Tehran, more and more companies are making decisions not to do business with the regime," says Treasury Department spokesperson Molly Millerwise. Leading international banks UBS, HSBC, and Standard Chartered, among others, have taken steps to limit their exposure to Iran, according to a speech in Dubai last week by Treasury's counterterrorism chief, Stuart Levey.

To get its message across, Treasury-which enforces the U.S. sanctions-has blacklisted some 20 individuals, banks, and companies tied to Iran's nuclear program and support for terrorism. Last week, Rep. Tom Lantos, the California Democrat who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, introduced legislation that would further tighten trade restrictions on Iran, including a ban on U.S. subsidiaries of foreign oil companies operating there. Although the measure doesn't target tobacco exports, Lantos also wants a full stop to the few Iranian imports still allowed into the United States. While Iranians may be able to get their U.S. smokes, Americans may have to get by without Persian rugs, pistachio nuts, and caviar.

[donsaeid]

آمریکا: ویزای احمدی نژاد سریع صادر می شود

آمریکا می گوید روند صدور ویزا برای محمود احمدی نژاد، رئیس جمهور ایران، را تسریع می کند تا وی امکان حضور در مقر سازمان ملل را به هنگام رای گیری اعضای شورای امنیت برای قطعنامه تازه علیه فعالیت های هسته ای این کشور داشته باشد.

روز جمعه اعلام شد که همزمان با توافق پنج عضو دائم شورای امنیت بعلاوه آلمان بر سر پیش نویس قطعنامه ای علیه ایران، نماینده دائم این کشور در سازمان ملل متحد درخواست رسمی آقای احمدی نژاد را برای حضور در جلسه شورای امنیت به این نهاد ارائه کرده است.

شان مک کورمک، سخنگوی وزارت امور خارجه ایالات متحده، نیز با تایید اینکه درخواست ویزای رئیس جمهور ایران و هیات همراهش در سفارت آمریکا در سوئیس دریافت شده، گفته است: "ما آنچه بتوانیم در راستای تعهداتمان به عنوان میزبان (سازمان ملل) انجام می دهیم تا صدور اینگونه روادیدها را تسریع کنیم."

وی با این حال اعلام کرده که با توجه به قوانین آمریکا، تا پیش از آنکه ویزا صادر شود، نمی توان تضمینی در رابطه با صدور ویزا به درخواست کنندگان داد.

آقای مک کورمک ابراز امیدواری کرده که آقای احمدی نژاد از فرصت حضور در جلسه شورای امنیت برای اعلام چرخش در مواضع استفاده کند و بگوید "دستی را که از سوی کشورهای ۵+۱ برای مذاکره با ایران دراز شده می فشارد... نه اینکه باز به سخنان خصمانه بپردازد."


ین در حالی است که روز جمعه شانزدهم مارس (بیست و پنجم اسفند ماه) آقای احمدی نژاد بار دیگر بر ادامه فعالیت های اتمی این کشور به رغم مخالفت های بین المللی تاکید کرد و گفت: "چرخه سوخت هسته ای در اختیار ملت ایران است و از آن عقب نشینی نخواهد کرد."

وی افزود: "بی جهت در این فکر نباشید که ایران را محاصره می کنیم یا تحریم می کنیم ... خیال نکنید با این نشست و برخاست ها و جلسات می توانید خللی در مسیر ملت ایران ایجاد کنید."

پیشتر الهاندرو وولف، سرپرست موقت هیات نمایندگی ایالات متحده در سازمان ملل، با اشاره به درخواست آقای احمدی نژاد گفته است: "عجیب است که یک رییس جمهور که به نقل از وی گزارش شده که مصوبات شورای امنیت را پاره می کند و برای اقدامات شورای امنیت احترامی قایل نیست، علاقمند باشد که در جلسه شورا سخنرانی کند."

شش کشور موسوم به گروه ۵+۱ (متشکل از آمریکا، روسیه، چین، بریتانیا و فرانسه همراه با آلمان) در پیش نویس قطعنامه تازه از ایران خواسته اند که بدون تعلل بیشتر به خواست های شورای حکام آژانس بین المللی انرژی اتمی برای اعتماد سازی در مورد صلح آمیز بودن برنامه های هسته ای خود و رفع ابهامات موجود در این زمینه و موارد مطرح شده در قطعنامه قبلی (شماره 1737) شورای امنیت عمل کند.

منابع ایرانی در مورد مطالبی که ممکن است آقای احمدی نژاد در شورای امنیت مطرح کند اظهار نظری نکرده اند اما به گفته برخی ناظران، انتظار می رود وی علاوه بر طرح مواضع خود در این سخنرانی، انتقاداتی را نیز متوجه ساختار شورای امنیت از جمله حق وتو اعضای دایم کند.

[Rasputin]

The peril of taking on Iran

are in power in Iran, and they are mounting a direct challenge to the West. Some in Washington want the United States to depose them by force.
The Bush administration is not the first to consider this question. The conditions it sees in Iran today are the same ones the Eisenhower administration saw there more than a half century ago. President Eisenhower decided to intervene. The world is still paying for his misjudgment.

A military strike against Iran would probably have the same result as the CIA intervention of 1953. These interventions seem successful at first. Many of them, however, plunge target countries into tyranny or upheaval. From these whirlpools of instability, threats emerge that undermine US national security in unimagined ways.

There is no better example than Iran. In the early 1950s, Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh directed the nationalization of the Iranian oil industry. American and British leaders took this as an unpardonable affront and overthrew him.

The CIA agent who staged this coup, Kermit Roosevelt, was heartily congratulated upon his return to Washington, and even received a medal from Eisenhower at a secret White House ceremony. From the perspective of history, though, his coup does not look so successful. It brought Shah Reza Pahlavi back to the Peacock Throne. He ruled with increasing brutality for 25 years. His repression set off the Islamic Revolution of the late 1970s. That revolution brought to power a clique of fanatically anti-American mullahs who have worked intensely, and sometimes very violently, to undermine US and Western interests around the world.

The United States is now facing a crisis with Iran over its nuclear program. This crisis would probably never have emerged, and this religious government would probably never have come to power, if the United States had kept its hands off Iran in 1953. Iran might instead have become a thriving democracy in the heart of the Muslim Middle East, with incalculable consequences for the region.

Calls for a new American intervention in Iran ignore lessons of the last one. Violently overthrowing a political order in the hope that something better will emerge is a dangerous gamble.

Iranians know this well. In the 1970s they put aside their differences and banded together to overthrow the shah. The basis of their unity was their shared assumption that whatever regime came next would be an improvement. It wasn't.

From this tragic disappointment, Iranians learned a bitter lesson: No matter how bad a regime may be, there can always be something worse. What could be worse for the United States than a snarling anti-American regime in Tehran that seems bent on developing nuclear weapons? No regime at all. Decapitating the Iranian government or throwing the country into turmoil would produce anarchy. Militant groups would operate free of any constraints.

That would make Iran more dangerous than it is now. If the United States attacks, Iran may become so chaotic that we would look back almost fondly on the mullahs.

In the radically changed security environment of the modern world, dealing with Iran and other countries that challenge the West requires a new strategic vision. Big powers instinctively try to keep their rivals from becoming strong. Today, however, strong states are no longer the real enemy; weak ones are. Strong states produce security, even if not always in ways the West likes. Weak states produce instability that hurts everyone, especially the United States.

Iran and the United States are not fated to be enemies. In fact, they share important strategic interests. No one knows what may come from direct, unconditional talks between them. For more than a quarter-century, the United States has refused to consider such talks.

American leaders have not forgiven the religious regime for its anti-American acts, beginning with its overthrow of the the shah in 1979 and the subsequent hostage crisis. They should overcome this psychological barrier and explore the possibility of a negotiated "grand bargain" with Iran.

The alternative may be violent intervention. That is what the United States tried in 1953. The results were disastrous. They would be no better this time.

[Rasputin]

انتقاد وزيرخارجه روسيه از
سياست يک جانبه جهانی امريکا در برابر ايران


خبرگزاری آسوشيتدپرس- وزير امور خارجه روسيه روز گذشته به شدت سياست خارجی يکجانبه آمريکا انتقاد کرده و اعلام داشت که روسيه قصد دارد برای بالانس کردن اين سياست ها فعاليت های جهانی خود را افزايش دهد.

اعتراض سرگئی لاوروف آخرين مورد از اعتراض روسيه نسبت به مواردی از قبيل نصب سيستم های دفاع ضد موشکی آمريکا در کنار روسيه و همچنين روش برخورد با فعاليت های هسته ای ايران و جنگ در عراق و موارد ديگر است.

لاوروف گفت که آمريکا از اينکه ابرقدرت های ديگری نيز وجود داشته باشند ناراحت است."من نمی فهمم چرا چند قطبی بودن از ديد آمريکا يک بحث تنش زا است. روسيه قصد ندارد برای خود حقوق ويژه ای قائل شود، بلکه هيچ زمينی برای روسيه وجود ندارد تا در آن نقش گل را ايفا کند"

لاوروف از سياست آمريکا در قبال کره شمالی ستايش کرد اما اذعان داشت که واشنگتن هنوز نمی خواهد روابط خود با تهران را نيز با روشی مشابه آنچه که با کره شمالی کرد به حالت عادی در آورد.

[Rasputin]

روزنامه آمريكايى "نيويورك تايمز" روز سه*شنبه در يكى از مقالات خود با انتقاد شديد از عملكرد "ديك چنى" معاون بوش، نوشته است كه اقدامات وى بيشتر در خدمت ايران بوده تا آمريكا و مي*توان گفت كه چنى عامل ايران در كاخ سفيد است.

"نيكلاس كريستوف" NICHOLAS D. KRISTOFمي*نويسد: اگر سرباز ۱۸ساله آمريكايى در حالى دستگير مي*شد كه قصد داشت اسناد نظامى را به جاسوسان ايرانى تحويل دهد آنگاه او را دستگير و به چهارميخ مي*كشيدند و سال*ها به زندان مي*افكندند اما واقعيت اين است كه يك آمريكايى وجود دارد كه بيشترين خدمات ارزشمند را به ايران ارايه كرده به گونه*اى كه اين ترديد در انسان ايجاد مي*شود آيا ديك چنى واقعا عامل ايران نيست؟
نويسنده نيويورك تايمز نوشته است: نخستين مداخله نظامى عمده دولت بوش سرنگونى نظام طالبان و به عبارتى بزرگترين دشمن شرقى تهران بود و پس از آن نيز واشنگتن بزرگترين دشمن غربى ايران يعنى صدام را سرنگون كرد.

نيويورك تايمز افزوده است:آيا اين اتفاقى است كه از ميان ۱۹۳كشور دنيا ما دو همسايه ايران را سرنگون كرديم؟ در نظر بگيرد اوضاع عراق پس از جنگ چگونه پيش رفت، آمريكا ارتش عراق را منحل ، نظام بعث را از هم پاشيد و به استقرار دولتى طرفدار ايران در بغداد كمك كرد. اگر روحانيون ايران سناريوى عراق را مي*نوشتند نمي*توانستند اوضاع را بهتر از اين براى خود پيش بينى كنند.

به نوشته اين روزنامه ،ما در عراق جنگيديم و ايران پيروز شد،آيا اين هم اتفاقى است. اگر سياست كلى دولت بوش در خاورميانه مدنظر قرار گيرد، به مدت شش سال كاخ سفيد از تندروهاى اسرائيلى حمايت و از وارد شدن جدى در مناقشه اسراييل و فلسطين خوددارى كرد نتيجه اين شد كه احساسات ضدآمريكايى و بنيادگرايى اسلامى در منطقه شدت گرفت.

"كاخ سفيد تابستان گذشته نيز از تهاجم به لبنان حمايت كرد كه اين امر باعث شد جنبش مقاومت اسلامى حزب*الله لبنان كه عوامل ايران به شمار مي*روند به قهرمانان جهان عرب بدل شوند".

در اين مقاله همچنين به شيوه عملكرد دولت بوش در دور كردن همپيمانان سابق واشنگتن در اروپا و آسيا اشاره و از اين امر به عنوان كاهش*دهنده فرصت ايجاد جبهه مشترك در مقابله با برنامه هسته*اى ايران نام برده شده است.

نويسنده نيويورك تايمز تصريح مي*كند: گذشته از همه اين موارد، چشم*پوشى از شكنجه و ادامه بازداشتهاى غيرقانونى در زندان پايگاه دريايى ارتش آمريكا در خليج گوانتانامو باعث شد تا كاخ سفيد دشمنى در جهان اسلام را به همراه آورد و زمانى كه واشنگتن به انتقاد از سابقه حقوق بشر در ايران و كشورهاى عربى پرداخت به حيله*گرى متهم گشت.

كريستوف با اشاره به تاييد شكنجه توسط ديك چنى به پاسخ چنى اشاره مي*كند كه گفته بود از نظر او اين اقدامات دردآور نيستند چرا كه شكنجه*هاى رايج در زندان اوين نيز با تاييد صورت گرفته است.

به نوشته نيويورك تايمز ،حتى سران ايران در داخل نيز توسط اقدامات چنى و بوش تقويت شده*اند و تندروهاى ايران كه زمانى در داخل كشور منفور بودند اما سياستهاى دولت بوش ملي*گرايان ايران را تقويت كرد و بهانه به دست محمود احمدي*نژاد، رييس جمهورى بنيادگراى ايران داد.

نويسنده با طرح اين سوال كه چرا تمركز بر چنى است تا بوش، مي*نويسد:
بخشى از علت اين امر اين است كه چنى بيش از بوش بر دستورالعملهاى تندرويانه تاكيد كرده است اقداماتى كه به نفع اهداف ايران تمام شدند. در داخل آمريكا نيز نقش وى در رسوايى اطلاعاتى "اسكوتر ليبى" و امتناع وى از اعتراف به خطاها به از كار افتادن دولت آمريكا و از بين رفتن وجهه آن منجر شد.

كريستوف مي*نويسد: آيا همه اين مسايل اتفاقى رخ داده و يا اين كه مي*توان اين امر را به عنوان راهنمايى تازه از سوى روساى چنى در تهران براى تخريب وجهه آمريكا تفسير كرد.

نيويورك تايمز با طعنه افزوده است: بسيار خوب! آقاى چنى بطور حتم عامل ايران نيست و حتى عامل كره*شمالى هم نيست چرا كه با شعار "ما با اشرار مذاكره نمي*كنيم" خود باعث توسعه زرادخانه هسته*اى پيونگ يانگ شد.

"همچنين بعيد است آقاى چنى مامور القاعده باشد حتى اگر اكنون پايگاه مهمى در عراق براى اين گروه تروريستى فراهم آورده باشد".

نويسنده نيويورك تايمز تصريح دارد:بوش و چنى مانند كندى و جانسون كه جنگ ويتنام را به راه انداختند، به منافع آمريكا زيان وارد كردند اقدامات آنها هنوز نيز اوضاع را بدتر مي*كند.

نيويورك تايمز توصيه مي*كند: منافع ملى ما به همان اندازه در برابر بي*لياقتى آسيب پذير است كه دربرابر اقدامات جاسوسى. ما بايد اين اقداماتى را كه نتيجه معكوس مي*دهند شناسايى كرده و از آن دست بكشيم. اين بار سخن از يك جاسوس در ميان نيست بلكه صحبت از سياست شكست خورده در ميان است و زمان آن فرا رسيده كه اين سياست*ها را كه سالهاست به ضرر منافع آمريكاست و بيش از آسيبهاى جاسوسان و يا عوامل خارجى در ۲۰۰سال گذشته به منافع ملى ضرر رسانده، ريشه كن كنيم.

[Rasputin]

[Rasputin]

Once again Russians have reneged on their commitment to supply more than 200 tons of low enriched uranium (LEU) for the Bushehr nuclear power plant reactor. Based on numerous discussions between officials from Moscow and Tehran in the past several months, it was believed that by the end of March 2007 the necessary LEU fuel would be shipped to the southern Iranian city of Bushehr in order to meet one of the critical milestones for this highly overdue project.

But contrary to what Iranian officials had expected, Russians dragged their feet once again, as they had done repeatedly in the past 8 years. This time they complained about not getting paid their monthly installment of $25 million or so that they were promised. This unconvincing excuse raises a few serious questions and observations that demonstrate Russians are not reliable partners, and Iran should realize that as long as they have not suspended enrichment activity, the Bushehr fuel will not be delivered. It seems that Russians are not willing to decouple Bushehr project from Iran’s inalienable rights to enrich uranium, and continue to mislead the Iranians officials.

Why would Iran delay payments for such a showcase project that they have been waiting to complete for years, in particular for such a meager payment dispute when they just dispensed $700 million to purchase a Russian missile defense system? Iranians are claiming that they have payment receipts for the most recent installments of the reactor project. Even assuming that Iran did not honor their payment commitment, why should Russia refuse to proceed with the fuel delivery? After all there are still a few critical steps left before this reactor which is 96% completed becomes operational.

Iran has to pay additional installments to the Russians before generating any electricity from Bushehr. If delivered, the fuel would be under the auspices of the IAEA at all times while waiting for the start of the reactor. Moreover, unless the fuel rods are irradiated, which only happens when the reactor begins operation, there will be no chance of any diversions to weapon grade plutonium. Thus, this delay is not a rational one from business or nuclear proliferation points of view. It is purely a political decision to secure Russia’s relationship with US.

One of the advantages of the delivery of this fuel, in addition to making substantial progress towards decades old dream of nuclear power generation in Iran, is that Bushehr had to be removed from the target list of US aerial attacks. Simply because the catastrophic environmental risks associated with the destruction of this reactor would have been unacceptable for US allies in the Persian Gulf. Hence, because of Russia’s refusal to deliver the fuel one has to believe that Bushehr is back on the target list and will stay there as long as Iran has not succumbed to the wishes of the Security Council for permanent suspension of enrichment activity.

Under these circumstances, it is natural for hardliners in Iran to cry wolf about lack of confidence in the nuclear fuel supply for power generation from the international community if they abandon domestic nuclear fuel enrichment facility. Will the current impasse with Russia be repeated under another condition? For instance, even if Iran suspends enrichment activity but continues the support of Shiite insurgencies and Palestinian factions, will she run into another delay for the completion of Bushehr reactor because of additional pressure from US?

Will Iranian support for Islamic movements in the Newly Independent States territories of the former Soviet Union, constitute another delay for delivering nuclear fuel for Bushehr? Or will the delivery of the fuel be contingent on Iran buying more antiquated commercial Tupolov aircrafts from Russia? When and where is the stopping point for the Russian’s shrewdness for further milking Iran.

The dangerous game of the Russian Roulette is not exciting anymore; the world is witnessing another nasty game being developed by Russians: It is the “Russian Blackmail,” it is not a “board” game but rather it’s a “table” game played on the negotiation table between desperate Iranians and shrewd Russians.

Given the current state of affairs, the future of Bushehr project seems bleak, unless Russia begins to honor their contractual obligations, independent of UN sanctions on Iran.

[Rasputin]

On a Saturday in 1983, when we were still students, I was sitting at the table paying my bills, listening to the Iranian program on television. I heard them advertise a new Iranian restaurant, located in the Town and Country Village in Palo Alto, letting us know that they have the “Best Chelo Kabab In The Area.” I called my sister and a few other friends, and they all agreed to go there for lunch. Starving students on a tight budget, we were going to splurge and eat the “Best Chelo Kabab In The Area.” All nine of us piled into a beat-up Chevrolet Impala station wagon, and started the long journey from Berkeley to Palo Alto. On the way, we were singing “Sepideh dam oomad o vaghte raftan...” on top of our lungs, laughing and feeling generally happy.

We got to the Town and Country Village and realized that the “restaurant” was really just a food stand in the mall food court, where we had to wait in line to pick up our food one by one and go sit in the general sitting area of the food court. Not to worry, we got into the task immediately! I was first in line. I ordered a Chelo Kabab Soltani, complete with dough, onions, and somagh. As the man behind the counter handed me my tray (the one who had dared call his food stand a “restaurant”), he said to me that the Dough-e-Abali he was putting on my tray had a little too much carbonated water in it, that he had already shaken it for me, and that I didn’t need to shake it any further. I paid and returned to the general dining area and picked us a large table. Soon, the next person in our group got his meal and came to join me at the table.

My sister was the third one to come to the table with her tray of Chelo Kabab and dough. We were so happy to smell this divine food, waiting impatiently for the others to join us, so we could start eating. My sister reached for her dough, picked it up, shook it vigorously (as we used to do with dough bottles back home, to re-mix the yogurt and water inside the bottle), twisted the cap, and suddenly a big explosion happened. Dough flew out of the bottle, way up high into the air, and landed first on an unsuspecting American family sitting at the next table, and then on the back of a man sitting two tables over. In what must be the “Super Slow Motion” experience reserved for car accidents and explosions, we saw the surprised faces of the hapless American family (blond Mom, blond Dad, blond Boy, and blond Girl), following the dough trail to the table where the other man was sitting. Oh My God. That table had 10 men sitting at it. They all had uniform black leather jackets, looking almost identical in appearance, with long hair in ponytails (remember, this was 1983, a long time before ponytails became fashionable for men), except for the guy at the head of the table who also was wearing similar clothes, only his hair and ponytail were grey, not jet black like the others’. Back to the “Super Slow Motion” scene, two of us picked up paper napkins off the table and ran to the American family to clean up and to apologize for the mess. I was the lucky one to go to the man in black leather jacket, whereby I started apologizing profusely, wiping his jacket covered with dough. He was so angry, but I guess I must have looked really genuine in my apology, because he was just grumbling as I left.

We went back to the table, sat down, and all shaken up, stared at our food in silence as we waited for the others to pick up their food and join us. At this point my brother-in-law, the jolly food-lover, who was waiting in line with others on the other side of the food court showed up with his tray brimming with Chelo Kabab Soltani, Koobideh Ezafeh, his onions, salad, and, what else? Dough. He was so happy and cheerful. Oblivious to our shocked faces and demeanor, he sat down right next to my sister, and before any of us shaken up souls had a chance to tell him what had just happened, he reached for his dough, picked it up, shook it up vigorously, and unscrewed the cap! The “Super Slow Motion” action reached new heights now, where first we were mouthing “Nooooooooooooo,” as no sound escaped our mouths, and then, as the dough flowed heavenward out of the bottle and onto the heads and faces of the same American family and then landed on the back of the very same gangster-looking guy, we all scrambled on our feet with the napkins, running towards the victims, for the second time in 5 minutes. The American family left quickly and quietly, fearing another imminent dough attack, I guess. I was responsible for walking to the angry man in the black leather jacket, again. This I did with such fear, with leaden feet, and what must have been the most embarrassed look on my pale face. The man was so angry, his face was all red and the venom in his look was so frightening to me. Nonetheless, I pushed forward, wiping his jacket and mumbling words of apology.

The man was aware by this time, that the stuff that kept hitting him in the back of his neck and jacket was white and thick. So, he yelled at me: “What the **** is this shit, anyway?” By this time the crowd in the food court was all aware of us, looking uncomfortably at this scene, and there was a hushed silence in the room. I was thinking there is no time for silence; that I must offer my explanation as swiftly and as honestly as possible, to keep this man’s escalating anger, really his rage, to a minimum. So I broke into a speedy explanation of what dough was. I told him: “Sir, this is dough--Iranians’ ‘national drink.’ It is made of plain yogurt and carbonated water. I believe there was too much carbonation in the liquid, hence the explosion. I am so sorry. Please let us pay for your jacket to be cleaned.”

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, well, back at our table, our remaining friends had returned with their trays, laden with Chelo Kabab, and yes, dough. They knew nothing about what had happened, and all they could see was this silence and everyone looking uncomfortably at me and the men at the other table, the man looking enraged and repeatedly saying the F word. So, naturally, this disaster must now take a new dimension, because dough wasn’t the only thing that demonstrated our Iranian-ness in this mayhem. Our honor (namoos) was now on the line, as my 150 centimeter Shirazi friend, Behnam, who had just arrived at the scene, believed. So, just as I thought I had poured my heart out to the belligerent gentleman and his friends, successfully diffusing the situation, and I was ready to return to our table, Behnam ran over and said to the guy: “****? **** Who? **** You!” Oh My God. The guy stood up, all 6’ 4” of him, stared down at Behnam and said: “No, **** You!” My whole life flashed before my eyes. This guy was going to kill Behnam first and then all of us! Over Dough-e-Abali! At this time, a miracle happened. The older gentleman at the table moved his hand slightly and signaled to the angry man to stop and to sit down…and the man did, like a boy obeying his father. I pulled Behnam’s hand and whispered “Shut up, just shut up Behnam” in his ear, and dragged him back to the table, while he was making sounds and movements, daring this guy to come forward!

We sat at our table in silence, looking at our cold Chelo Kabab’s, realizing that the whole food court was now empty of the happy crowd sitting there earlier. We had no appetite and no joy to eat anymore. The group of men at the said table left. My friends said we should leave, too. I just sat there and refused to get up for the next half an hour. I told them that I was sure those men were waiting for us in the parking lot, trying to get even! After much deliberation and looking through the window, sending one of the guys (not Behnam!) out to scout the parking lot, making sure they were gone, we left and got into the station wagon and drove quietly back to Berkeley.

It took weeks before we developed the requisite sense of humor about what happened that day. Now my friends and family always joke around with me about how I tried to “clean up that mess,” from running over with the bunch of paper napkins to the heart-felt speech I delivered on what the *@#) dough was! We tease Behnam mercilessly about his attempt to defend his honor (gheirat), and what poor timing it had in erupting, much like the dough that day! I call my sister and my brother-in-law the “Cultural Ambassadors of Iran,” who promoted our cuisine in the best possible way, hands-on!

Just the same, you should know, I never drink dough again.

[Rasputin]

کاخ سفید اعلام کرد که ایالات متحده ضمن حمایت از بریتانیا برای آزادی ملوانان بازداشت شده این کشور به دنبال تشدید بحران با ایران نیست.
دانا پرینو، سخنگوی کاخ سفید به خبرنگاران گفت که آمریکا از بریتانیا برای آزاد کردن ملوانان و تفنگداران این کشور که در آب های خلیج فارس توسط نیروهای ایرانی بازداشت شده اند حمایت می کند.

بازداشت این افراد باعث بروز تنش های دیپلماتیک میان ایران و بریتانیا شده و لندن روابط تجاری خود با تهران را تا زمان آزادی نظامیانش به حالت تعلیق در آورده است.

به دنبال امتناع ایران از تعلیق فعالیت های مرتبط با غنی سازی اورانیوم و تاکید بر ادامه این فعالیت ها از سوی مقام های ایرانی، دو قطعنامه در شورای امنیت سازمان ملل به تصویب رسید و تحریم هایی علیه ایران وضع شد. ایران این قطعنامه ها را رد کرده است.

خانم پرینو به خبرنگاران گفته است که آمریکا با مانورهای نظامی خود در خلیج فارس قصد افزایش فشارها علیه ایران را ندارد.

وی افزوده که این مانورهای نظامی از مدت ها قبل برنامه ریزی شده بود و آمریکا به دنبال گسترش بحران با ایران نیست.

ارتش آمریکا اعلام کرده که در حال برپایی بزرگ ترین مانور نظامی در خلیج فارس از زمان اشغال عراق در سال ۲۰۰۳ است.

آمریکا گفته است که این مانور نظامی در پاسخ به بازداشت نیروهای بریتانیایی توسط ایران انجام نمی شود و تهدیدی هم علیه جمهوری اسلامی نیست.

در مانور نظامی آمریکا در خلیج فارس، دو ناو هواپیمابر دوایت آیزنهاور و جان استنیس و ۱۵ ناو جنگی و بیش از یکصد جنگنده شرکت دارند.

آمریکایی ها گفته اند که هدف از این مانور، نشان دادن اهمیت گروه های ضربت این دو ناو هواپیمابر و برنامه ریزی و انجام عملیات مشترک در راستای تعهدات دراز مدت آمریکا در برقراری امنیت دریایی و ثبات در منطقه است.

یک سخنگوی پنتاگون، وزارت دفاع آمریکا هم تاکید کرده که این کشور به دنبال برخورد نظامی در منطقه نیست.

برخی رسانه ها و محافل خبری از احتمال اقدام نظامی آمریکا علیه ایران سخن گفته اند اما مقام های آمریکایی خاطرنشان کرده اند که برای حل مناقشه اتمی ایران، راه حل دیپلماتیک را ترجیح می دهند.

[Rasputin]

Almost exactly five years ago I was lucky enough to be granted a journalist visa to Iran.

I am not being facetious.


Iranian women must be careful when it comes to clothing
Journalist visas are like gold dust and Iran is a memorable country to visit.


There's the majesty of Isfahan with its blue mosques, giant squares and scented bazaars; the ancient courtyard mansions of Kashan; the sophistication of Tehran, where beautiful women are forced to wear headscarves and anoraks in public and look like supermodels masquerading as spies.

Like all other journalists I made my weekly pilgrimage to the Friday prayer meeting at Tehran University.

Tens of thousands of students and other devotees converged in what could best be described as a giant car-park covered with the kind of roof you expect to find in an aircraft hangar.

We were allowed onto a viewing gallery.

Below us, the veterans of the Islamic revolution, the heavies from the Revolutionary Guard and thousands of students wearing the white clothes of would-be martyrs listened to Iran's spiritual leader Ayatollah Khamenei berate the Great Satan - America - and its understudy the Little Satan - Britain - for their aggression.

'Axis of evil'

Afghanistan had already been invaded. Iraq was next on the list.

Iran had just been named by President Bush as a founding member of the axis of evil.

So, even a cursory glance at the map and American troop movements would have created a lump in the average Iranian throat.

If only the B-52 [bombers] could stop off in Tehran before going on to Kabul

Iranian man
A well-dressed man in his 30s wandered up to me. He looked angry. "How dare you call us an axis of evil?" he said in Farsi and waited for our translator to deliver every word of his diatribe.

"What about your President Bush?" he soldiered on. "He's a top-class aggressor!"

Then he looked around and motioned me to come and stand behind a pillar.

He leant so close to me I could smell the tobacco and garlic on his breath. My personal space was definitely being invaded and I was pondering options.

"There is a joke doing the rounds," he suddenly said in a whisper and in perfect English. "If only the B-52s [bombers] could stop off in Tehran before going on to Kabul.

"After all, it is on the way!" He motioned to the ayatollahs on the podium next to us. "We can't get rid of them without your help!"

Chewing the fat

Later in the day I came across a similar if less brazen view.

The editor of a 'liberal' newspaper which had been shut down no fewer than seven times and reopened under a different name told me he approved of sanctions because they would put pressure on the regime.

Military action, he said, would be counter-productive.

We were invited to attend an editorial board meeting.

The discussion ranged from domestic issues, like the latest arrests of human rights activists, to the turmoil on Tehran's nascent stock market and the war in Afghanistan and how the regime was not sure whether to thank the US for getting rid of its old enemy the Taleban or be afraid of Uncle Sam's designs on the region.

As far as I could tell through the translation, the conversation was sophisticated, funny and relaxed - scribblers chewing the fat. It could have been London or Washington.

Pelted with eggs

Here's the point: Iran is complicated, mercurial and rife with internal divisions.


Iran has allowed some protest against President Ahmadinejad
President Ahmadinejad is no Saddam Hussein, even if he has hosted a "Holocaust Denial" conference, and does want to develop a nuclear capability.

Saddam Hussein personally shot people he didn't like.

The president of Iran has been pelted by unruly students with eggs and insults and no-one was shot.

I'm not saying he's been grossly misunderstood. I am saying that Iran is far less monolithic than many in Washington like to think. The trick is to sweat out the differences.


Saddam Hussein cursed Iran as he neared death, some say
Today Iran is more isolated than it has been for a long time. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan are lining up with Israel to work against the thing they fear most - a Persian nuke.

Consider that among the last words uttered by Saddam Hussein, of all people, before the noose tightened around his neck: "Damn the Americans and damn the Persians!"

The Russians are annoyed because the Iranians won't pay their dues on the nuclear reactor at Busher. This is hardly ideological opposition, but it's better than nothing.

The Chinese are voting with the other members of the UN Security Council against Iran even though they can't get enough Iranian light crude.

The pressure may be working but it isn't enough.

Lure with iPods

If I were the US government I would issue Iran with 10,000 student visas and 1,000 technology grants to Silicon Valley.

Iran boasts five million college students with higher degrees, the largest proportion in the Middle East.

Instead of encouraging them to turn into head-bashing extremists I would seduce them into becoming head-banging, iPod-wearing computer geeks.


Was it wise to detain UK sailor Faye Turney and 14 others?
Unfortunately none of this will ever happen.

Even if the administration thought of it, the Democrats, flexing their muscles on Capitol Hill or positioning themselves to race for the White House, would oppose it.

They were, after all, the ones who kicked up a stink about the Dubai ports deal even though the Gulf States actually quite like America and Dubai is already the biggest US naval base overseas.

But subtlety doesn't play well in election campaigns.

What's more, the rhetoric coming from the US is music to Tehran's ears.

Every time there's a tiff the price of oil inches above $65 a barrel, making the Iranian government a little bit richer still.

So - with US Iran policy struck in a groove, Tehran thriving on adversity, an extra US carrier group in the Gulf, the Revolutionary Guards building IEDs [bombs] for Shia death squads in Iraq and the Israelis feeling distinctly twitchy about the prospect of a nuclear Iran - the stars are dangerously aligned for a show-down, even if the White House and Tehran don't actually want one.

Now imagine "an event", an unforeseen crisis that pushes everyone to the brink - like 15 British sailors being held hostage by the Revolutionary Guard Navy in the Shatt al-Arab waterway.

[Rasputin]

President George W Bush has condemned Iran's "inexcusable behaviour" after its capture of 15 Royal Navy personnel.
The US leader added that he would "strongly support" the British government over the crisis.

However, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has attacked the UK as "arrogant and selfish".

He insisted that "British occupier forces" trespassed into Iranian waters and that his country's border guards had displayed "skill and bravery".

'Inexcusable behaviour'

Speaking at his mountain retreat in Camp David, Maryland, Mr Bush told reporters: "The British hostages issue is a serious issue because the Iranians took these people out of Iraqi water.

"And it is inexcusable behaviour.

"I strongly support the Blair government's attempts to resolve this peacefully.

"And I support the prime minister when he made it clear there were no quid pro quos.

"The Iranians must give back the hostages."


The captured navy personnel have been shown on Iranian TV

His calls were echoed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the current holder of the European Union presidency.

"Britain has the full solidarity of the European Union. We demand the immediate release of the 15 British soldiers," she said during a visit to Israel.

But in a speech in the city of Andinmeshk, Iranian President Mr Ahmadinejad attacked Britain for failing to apologise.

He said: "The British occupier forces did trespass our waters. Our border guards detained them with skill and bravery."

"But arrogant powers, because of their arrogant and selfish spirit, are claiming otherwise.

"After the arrest of these people, the British government, instead of apologising and expressing regret over the action taken, started to claim that we are in their debt and shouted in different international councils.

"But this is not the legal and logical way for this issue."

UK VERSION OF EVENTS
1 Crew boards merchant ship 1.7NM inside Iraqi waters
2 HMS Cornwall was south-east of this, and inside Iraqi waters
3 Iran tells UK that merchant ship was at a different point, still within Iraqi waters
4 After UK points this out, Iran provides alternative position, now within Iranian waters


Britain denies Iran's claims that the UK crew was in its waters when seized on 23 March and is demanding their "immediate" return.


Iran's official IRNA news agency had carried a report saying Gholamreza Ansari, Iran's ambassador to Moscow, had told Russian television that legal moves had already started against the 15 and that there was a possibility they could stand trial.

But the agency later quoted Mr Ansari saying the television channel had made a "translation mistake" and that he had not mentioned the prospect of a trial.

IRANIAN VERSION OF EVENTS
1 Royal Navy crew stray 0.5km inside Iranian waters
2 Iran gives set of co-ordinates to back up their claims
3 According to seized GPS equipment, the Royal Navy crew had previously entered Iranian waters at several other points
4 Iran informs Britain of the position where the crew were seized, inside Iranian waters



Both versions in more detail

UK Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said Mr Ansari's comments were "unhelpful".

The Scottish Secretary, Douglas Alexander, told BBC One's Sunday AM programme Britain would continue to use diplomacy and a "twin track approach".

"On one hand, working closely with international partners to make clear the strength of international feeling that these British service personnel should be returned," he said.

"And on the other hand exploring the potential for dialogue with the Iranians."


BBC diplomatic correspondent James Robbins said that, although there was no sign of a major diplomatic breakthrough in the crisis, there was now a sense of dialogue between the two countries.

Both sides appeared to be "lowering the temperature", he added.



HAVE YOUR SAY
They will have to be released by diplomatic means and I believe that this will happen

Neil Whittaker, Lancashire, UK


Send us your comments

Meanwhile, former hostage Terry Waite, who was held captive for 1,760 days in Beirut before being released in November 1991, has offered to travel to Iran to negotiate with those holding the Britons.

Mr Waite said threatening the Iranian government was counterproductive and said he would be able to "cut through some of the rhetoric".

The Britons, based on HMS Cornwall, were seized by Revolutionary Guards as they returned from searching a vessel in the northern Gulf.