Russia has reminded the U.S. what happens when you stack the deck and then ask your opponent to pick a card: he might just upset the table and storm out of the room. Russia did the equivalent when it dismissed the IAEA report on Iran’s nuclear program and rejected calls for further economic sanctions against that country, calling it a step toward “regime change”:
“The world community will see all additional sanctions against Iran as an instrument of regime change in Tehran,” Gennadi M. Gatilov, Russia’s deputy foreign minister, said in comments to the Interfax news agency. “This approach is unacceptable to us, and the Russian side does not intend to consider such a proposal.”
There are a number of issues bugging the Kremlin. First, the IAEA rejected Russian and Chinese entreaties that the final report not include certain material that they deemed objectionable. Second, the IAEA’s director, Yukio Amano is increasingly seen as a creature of the U.S. and Israel, thus rendering his credibility close to nil. Third, the Russians are bridling at the pressure the U.S. and Israel are trying to exert on them to invoke draconian new sanctions. Fourth, they can’t have enjoyed seeing a scientist, Vyacheslav Danilenko, who worked at one time in Russia deceitfully raked over the coals in the report.
When you put your relationship with a country under such pressure it’s only natural that it might break. That’s what happened today. The reaction may help quiet the braying dogs here and in Israel calling for a military attack. If you can’t even get Russia and the Chinese to go for more sanctions imagine what they and others similarly disposed in the world community might do if Israel attacked Iran.
My only concern is that Israel may not care what anyone says or thinks. It may go ahead with an attack and leave the U.S. to clean up the mess that will remain of the Russian relationship afterward.
The russians are speaking the truth. US which leads the spearhead on Iran (on behalf of israeli interests) are not interested in seeing a solution. They are only interested in regime change, thus giving Iran a actually a reason to possess the capability to develope this deterrence if they want.
The talks are just a cover up, a delay. Because everytime Iran go ahead with US wishes, US keep moving the goal posts, and impose more sanctions and isolation. Then they portray Iran as the part that doesnt want talks and so on.
US, or the israeli lobby want to use the nuclear-“issue” as a pretext to invade Iran. To do that they sanctions and isolate and demonize the regime 24/7, when Iran is fully disconnected to the outside world and weak they seek an attack.
It went through without problem in Iraq 2003, because in the end of the day, who will punish those starting wars on lies? No one, Bush, Cheyney, BLiar, Rice and the other warcriminals still running wild in the street even warmongering for a new war based on the exact same premises.
“on behalf of israeli interests” – Mmmm… The oil in the Persian gulf is the intrest of Israel. Nice to know.
“The talks are just a cover up, a delay” – For the Iranians who want to complete their nuclear project.
“because everytime Iran go ahead with US wishes, US keep moving the goal posts, and impose more sanctions and isolation…” – Say who? You? When did they go ahead with US wishes? I suppose that they went ahead with their wishes when they financed terror in Iraq against US troops.
“and demonize the regime 24/7…” – The regime in Iran doesn’t need Israel or the US to demonize it. It demonizes itself by threatening the “big and the small satans” since the revolution in 1979. Of course it demonizes itself by changing the results of the elections there too.
@Richard – “When you put your relationship with a country under such pressure it’s only natural that it might break.” I hope you read Tzvi Magen’ article in “Yediot” today where he explains what are the purposes of the Russians. It seems that he knows what he is writing.
And one more thing – How do you explain the report that quoted a general in the Russian army saying: “We want cry if Iran will be attacked”? I guess that it’s all about intrests (i.e. OIL).
“Mmmm… The oil in the Persian gulf is the intrest of Israel. Nice to know.”
Who said anything about oil? US policy towards middle east is driven by two things.
1. Oil, and therfore hegemony.
2. The security of the occupational regime of Israel. That is secure the occupation, annexation, settlement and keep Israel a powerful regime. And this is manily driven by the religious fundamentalists in the congress and the lobby. They await the second coming.
“For the Iranians who want to complete their nuclear project”
Doesnt make sense due the fact that there is:
1. No evidence of nuclear weapons nor diversion of uranium for weaponization.
2. Since Iran have agreed to the aim US have put up. Iran for example offered once again talks and offered once again to stop enrichment if US could export that to Iran. But US refuse and its on behalf of the israeli lobby.
If you remember how wars start that should give you a reminder. Take example the iraqi-war 2003, up until that Iraq was isolated and sanctioned until it was weak politically, domestic and military. Its the same thing here, US keep delaying a solution since they dont want to solve this.
“Say who? You? When did they go ahead with US wishes? I suppose that they went ahead with their wishes when they financed terror in Iraq against US troops.”
I say yes (and not just me) just study the history of relations between Iran and US. Most ample evidence and pathetic is when Iran, Turkey and Brazil agreed on a deal that was identical to the goal US put up in advance. What happend when Turkey, Brazil and Iran annonced the deal? Well as usual US couldnt accept this and moved on with more sanctions.
Also people under occupation that fights against an aggressor is not a terrorist. People under occupation enjoy the legal right to strike back. According to you the victim, that is the occupied is the aggressor.
“The regime in Iran doesn’t need Israel or the US to demonize it. It demonizes itself by threatening the “big and the small satans” since the revolution in 1979. Of course it demonizes itself by changing the results of the elections there too.”
There is no denial of the perverted obsession Israel have with Iran, constant threats, constant assassinations, constant violent rhetoric, kidnappings, lies, deception.
The difference between Israel and Iran is that Israel actually make use of its violent rhetoric and thats what making Israel such a big threat, not only to Iran but to the arabs and world in general since they want the world to fight their wars. Thats reckless and a pathetic approach which also show that Israel is futile.
Moving the goal posts and making new demands is a typically Israeli strategy. And for Jonds: Sure the oil is important to the US but it is not threatened, not like Israel’s bid for hegemony in the region is threatened. The rush to war is on behalf of Israel not the US, I consider this obvious.
Bob Mann says
Russia and China are not really countries whose record on peace, fairness, and justice are to be taken all too seriously, are they?
I understand if you are suggesting that, in terms of geopolitical alliances, their support (or lack of opposition) is important, but if you are suggesting that they represent some sort of voice of moral clarity on this subject, I would suggest that their record implies otherwise and their motives are questionable.
Of course its realpolitik when it comes to big players like Russia, China, US etc, no one denies that but if you take a look, its not Russia, China who starts war after wars and they have, whatever you like their respective regimes or not, a much more balanced and reasonable approach to such thing as this issue. I dont think anyone could deny that. I dont think any nation is free of compuctions but in this case Russia acting reasonable.
“its not Russia, China who starts war after wars” – They aren’t. They just support the regimes who start the war.
Sorry but China and Russia arent the staunch supporter of Israel, the starter of some 7 wars and thousands acts of minor military conflicts.
Vietnam and Korea. Except the fact that Israel doesn’t have connection to the term “big players”, the last time Israel started a war was on 1982.
“Vietnam and Korea. Except the fact that Israel doesn’t have connection to the term “big players”, the last time Israel started a war was on 1982.”
Vietnam and Korea? What?
I didnt say Israel was a big player (however it enjoys the same power).
Israel have started all wars except 1973 and Wars of attrion, however those were even wars that Israel could have avoided if they just accepted international law and the proposal Egypt made. That was, give back our land according to UN resolutions and international law, or we will get it back by force.
“Israel have started all wars except 1973 and Wars of attrion, however those were even wars that Israel could have avoided if they just accepted international law and the proposal Egypt made. That was, give back our land according to UN resolutions and international law, or we will get it back by force” – Remind me what proposal Egypt made.
Furthermore – you should learn why the wars of 1948 and 1967 were errupted. Let’s talk about invasion of five Arab armies to Israel. And let’s talk about the Egyptians close the route to Eilat.
“Vietnam and Korea? What?” – “its not Russia, China who starts war after wars” – They just support the regimes who start these wars.
Richard Silverstein says
I directed you to observe a 3 comment a day limit & you’ve published 5 today. When I tell you to do something I mean it. So follow the rules.
” Remind me what proposal Egypt made. ”
In 1971 Sadat offered peace with Israel if Israel gave back the occupied egyptian land areas Israel were holding at the moment. Israel rejected the offer only to sign a treaty years later on the same principles.
Furthermore – you should learn why the wars of 1948 and 1967 were errupted. Let’s talk about invasion of five Arab armies to Israel. And let’s talk about the Egyptians close the route to Eilat.”
I know full well how these war started, in 1947 the ethnic cleansing of palestinians began by zionist terrorist groups and paramilitary groups. In 1948 the arab states intervened as a response to this.
In 1967 Israel and Syria enjoyed a pact, when Egypt learned that Israel was about to attack – as you may remember Israel constantly provoked Syria in the Golan – according to moshe dayan Israel sent in tractors to provoke the syrian to respond with fire etc,
then Egupt mobilized on the Sinai. You should look into Finkelsteins splendid pulverization of the israeli narrative on 1967. Israel started the war. Link:
“” They just support the regimes who start these wars.”
Again, Korea? Vietnam? What are you talking about. I just made clear Israel is the war starter in the mideast.
[comment deleted for comment rule violation]
Richard Silverstein says
This is a bunch of horse manure & completely contrary to what I know of the history. You offer no link to yr source & what you present isn’t even coherent English so I don’t know if you’re paraphrasing a source or simply making it up. As for using Sadat’s widow as an expert on Egyptian affairs of state, sorry don’t buy it. If you can prove that she was one of Sadat’s trusted advisors involved in day to day affairs of running the state, I might. Till then, sorry.
Your comment is a complete violation of the comment rules. No one asked you to go back over the Israeli Arab conflict In fact, I strongly discourage this sort of nonsense. For that reason I’ll be moderating yr future comments which will only be published if you show you’ve read the comment rules & are following them.
This is not a point scoring debating society in which you need to win the I-P conflict through massive presentation of so called facts. You debate the issues I write about & stay on topic at all times. You do not choose topics on which we debate. If you do you won’t remain here.
I see you are using the obsolete historic revisionism.
I am not going to comment on the recycled israeli narrative you copy-pasted from Wikipedia, who do you take me for?
The fact that you must copy+paste and from wikipedia of all places(!) clearly shows that you lack knowledge on the subject. I once again urge you to view the Finkelstein video on Youtube I gave earlier, his speech is based on new information and everything i sourced. See the video, come back and refute his claim.
There is no denial Israel is the war starter, look for example what the prolific israeli, zionist historian Zeev Maoz write in his book.
“Most of the wars in which Israel was involved, Maoz shows, were entirely avoidable, the result of deliberate Israeli aggression, flawed decision-making, and misguided conflict management strategies. None, with the possible exception of the 1948 War of Independence, were what Israelis call “wars of necessity.”
They were all wars of choice-or, worse, folly.”
Its 728 pages, I read it. Now its your turn.
“Let’s talk about invasion of five Arab armies to Israel. ”
Indeed, let’s talk about that claim that in May 15 1948 five (count ’em, five!) Arab armies “invaded Israel”.
It’s all nonsense, of course, because on May 15 1948 the Armed Forces Of Israel were already well over the borders of the “Jewish state”, precisely because they were already knee-deep into an invasion of the nascant “Arab state”.
Q: Why were they doing that?
A: D’uh! They Were Intent On Conquest.
Far from “invading Israel” those five arab armies were actually intervening into the territory of the “Arab state”, and were doing so in order to prevent *that* state from being overrun by Israel.
Don’t take my word for it: look up the words of the Provisional Government of Israel, because on May 18 1948 the UN Security Council asked that provisional govt to identify just where, exactly, it was being “invaded”.
The answer (UNSC Document S-776, 22 May 1948): “Arab forces have penetrated into the territory of the State of Israel in certain corners of the Northern Negev and in the Jordan Valley south of Lake Tiberias.”
Not much of an invasion, is it?
Mind you, the Security Council had the common sense to also ask the Israelis the OTHER question i.e. was Israel invading anyone else?
The Israeli answer (again, from UNSC document S-776): “the Provisional Government exercises control over the city of Jaffa; Northwestern Galilee, including Acre, Zib, Base, and the Jewish settlements up to the Lebanese frontier; a strip of territory alongside the road from Hilda to Jerusalem; almost all of new Jerusalem; and of the Jewish quarter within the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem. The above areas, outside the territory of the State of Israel, are under the control of the military authorities of the State of Israel, who are strictly adhering to international regulations in this regard. The Southern Negev is uninhabited desert over which no effective authority has ever existed.”
Hmmmmmmm, so remind me again who was invading whom in May 1948?
Because those two answers (and, remember, supplied by the Israeli govt) suggest to me that it was the Haganah that was on the offensive, and not vice versa.
Bob Mann says
What about Chechnya?
That was a pretty brutal conflict where many Muslims were killed including large numbers of civilians.
In fact, more Muslim civilians were killed by Russian forces during the two Chechnyan conflicts than during all of the wars Israel has been involved with since it came into existence.
You seems to miss my point, thats why I said:
“its not Russia, China who starts war after wars”.
No one denies Tibet, no denies Chechnya but taking into account and compared to israelis and americans Russians and Chinese are nowhere close. Thats why they are acting more reasonable and not warmongering like 2 you-know-who states regarding this issue.
Oh, I could I forget the invasion of the Soviet army to Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan and Georgia? Mmmm… Who said the siege on Berlin? Oh, and of course who played the game of putting some nuclear missiles in Cuba?
“Oh, I could I forget the invasion of the Soviet army to Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan”
Yes in a debate about Russia you could forget about what Soviet did.
” and Georgia? ”
What about it?
Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili blamed for starting Russian war
Ex-Diplomat Says Georgia Started War With Russia
Georgia ‘started unjustified war’
What you say now? Turning your world upside down. I debate with alot of people but staunch aggressive zionists like yourself seems to have skipped the history homework. Always have to point out the obvious facts.
Richard Silverstein says
WAY, way, way off topic. Stay on the topic of the post & do not introduce extraneous subjects.
Richard Silverstein says
WAY off topic. If I wanted to debate Russia’s sins in Chechnya I would. I don’t. Stay on topic.
Which wars? Korea? Well maybe but really that started because the North chose Communism. Vietnam – more or less the same reason. Russia/China chose to support the Communists in a civil war about forms of government in each case. And since then? Where have Russia or China fomented war other than in supporting existing *local* struggles for regime change?
On the other hand would you like me to list wars started by the US? The Mexican War – a war of expansion by the US. The Spanish-American war was provoked by a US false-flag operation.
Let’s leave aside the two World Wars where in each case the US casus belli is questionable but it makes interesting reading. Iraq? Afghanistan? Panama?
And then need I talk about Israel. The only war it has been involved in that it did not start or provoke is the 1973 War where Egypt was attempting to regain territory lost in the 1967 War.
But isn’t the bottom line the world is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy and the new thinking is wars no longer wipe the financial slates clean. The world cannot even solve its insolvency and bankruptcy problems, war will simply complicate the mountain of shite we’re already dealing with. Israel can’t afford a war and they and everyone will have to live with a nuclear Iran. India and Pakistan, both nuclear powers have agreed to start a ‘new chapter’, this is the way the world is going and Israel will have to accept that. Israel will not attack.
because you think the world was shining with prosperity when WWII started ?
Wars are the best tabula rasa method for bankers after they suck all people’s money blood, they go for real blood, then the game restarts after a few dozen millions dead and nations to rebuild. Perpetual bingo
Let’s speculate on the fallout from this falling out between Russia and the USA regarding this IAEA report, because *that* is the important discussion to have.
Here is something you can bet the house on: additional UN Security Council sanctions are history.
Indeed, it’s now possible that the Americans dare not even REFER this report to the Security Council, for fear that the Russians will turn the debate into a witch-hunt against Amano.
Fact: the P5+1 is now useless, because convening it will only reveal to the world that its members are now hopelessly divided.
Russia may well decide to form a new group with China, Brazil, etc. (i.e. countries that have previously tried to help only to be shafted by Obama), and that group will then ignore American objections and negotiate directly with the Iranians.
My prediction? Sometime soon the Russians will announce a formal agreement with the Iranians, and although the text won’t actually say it the MEANING of that agreement will be immistakable: Iranian will tacitly agree never to assemble a warhead nor to brag about their ability to do so, and in return Russia will veto any American moves in the UNSC and will guarantee Tehran’s security against military attack.
What does Obama and Netanyahu do then, I wonder?
Annnnnnnnd, in completely unrelated news, Dennis Ross has just announced his resignation.
So the man who held the Iran portfolio is leaving just when it is becoming obvious that s.o.m.e.b.o.d.y. in Washington misjudged the fallout from “sexing up” of the IAEA reports on Iran.
Or, as the White House spokesman said: [Ross] “was very much a part and an architect of the sanctions regime and the effort to pressure and isolate Iran”.
Gosh, if you’re looking for a fallguy for a policy fiasco then you can’t find a better resume.
After all, Ross is a man so devoid of talent that he couldn’t even get Netanyahu to agree to take twenty F-35 fighter jets off his hands.
Piotr Berman says
Russians and Chinese indeed are not paragons of probity. But they have some credibility, and our side, basically none.
Once our stooges at IAEA used in their report stuff that has uncanny resemblance to “aluminum pipes” story that was peddled against Saddam, namely that some technology was detected with no non-nuclear application — when it manifestly has such applications — they lost the benefit of the doubt. Also, another strangely familiar motif is an alleged Soviet weapon master who happens to work on very civilian technology — that reminds Ukrainian teachers of Abu Sisi.
It makes me wonder if these stories — aluminum pipes, Abu Sisi as a Soviet trained weapon wizard, IEAE revelations — do not originate from the same shop of writers. I would also venture that the writers were not British, as UK has its own distinct style of “sexing up”.