Tag Archives: Persian Gulf

May 1 2012

US deploys F-22 fighter jets to UAE base

The US has deployed F-22 fighter jets to a military base in the UAE, it was reported, as tensions between the Persian Gulf state and Iran rise.

According to AFP news agency, anonymous US officials confirmed that the US-administered Al-Dhafra air base  in the UAE had received an unspecified number of F-22 Raptors.

The fighter jet, manufactured by Lockheed Martin and Boeing, includes stealth capabilities and is considered one of the most advanced aircraft in the US Air Force.

The move comes as diplomatic relations between the UAE and Iran have soured over three Iranian islands in the Persian Gulf.

Responding to the news on the deployment of F-22s in the region, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ramin Mehmanparast claimed the move could “endanger the security of the region”.

“We do not approve of the presence of foreign forces in the region and believe that their presence undermines regional security,” he told the semi-official Mehr news agency.

Iranian authorities have bolstered the Islamic Republic’s military presence on Abu Musa and insisted its ownership over the three islands is “non-negotiable” as per the 1971 agreement that was signed by Iran, England and then the Emirate of Sharjah.

FACTS about the history of the Islands: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Musa#Ownership

The ownership of Iran on Abu Musa has been disputed by UAE. The dispute between Iran and UAE started in 1974, three years after the latter’s establishment. The island had been under Persian control until the early 20th century.  After 1908, the UK controlled the island along with the other British-held islands in the Persian Gulf, including what is today the UAE. In the late 1960s, Britain transferred administration of the island to the British-appointed Sharjah, one of the seven sheikdoms that would later form the UAE.

A map from 1891 showing Abu Musa part of Iran. two dotted lines shows Transatlantic telegraph cables

After Britain announced in 1968 that it would end its administrative and military positions in the Persian Gulf, Iran moved to reattach the island politically to the mainland. In November 30 1971 (two days before the official establishment of UAE), Iran and Sharjah signed a Memorandum of Understanding. They agreed to allow Sharjah to have a local police station and Iran to station troops on the island according to the map attached to the Memorandum of Understanding.

Sheik Saghar Welcoming Iranian Troops to Abu Musa and Visiting Iran‘s Artmis Navy Ship-1971

One day before the UK officially left the region, Iran stationed its troops on the island and was welcomed with the Sheik of Sharjah‘s brother; Sheik Saghar; officially.

In 1980, the UAE took its claim to the United Nations.  But it was rejected by the UN security council, and the issue was closed.  In the same year, Saddam Hussein attempted to justify the Iran-Iraq War by claiming that one of the objectives was to “liberate” Abu Musa and Greater and Lesser Tunbs in Persian Gulf. In 1992, Iran expelled foreign workers who operated the UAE-sponsored school, medical clinic, and power-generating station.  In 2012 a visit to the island by Iranian president Ahmedinejad provoked a diplomatic incident. Iran’s historical claim to ownership over the islands roots back to the Parthian and Sassanid Empires, among others. Iran considers the island to have been occupied by the UK and refers to the the agreement between Iran and emirate of Sharjah at 1971.

May 21 2010

The Prince of Persia …

Saw the movie The Prince of Persia and I thought it was a much better personification of Persians, modern day Iranians, despite being a mystic fairytale story made by Disney.    It’s the story of a young street kid recognized for his bravery and taken in by the King to be raised as one of his own.  With all the twists and turns it ends-up being a story of good vs evil and an unbreakable bond between brothers.

O and on a seperate note, it was also nice to see that Hollywood got the name of the Persian Gulf right as well. Well done on getting that historical fact right.

Apr 6 2010

The Israel factor and the drumbs of war against IRAN

The drums of war in the Persian Gulf

When people like Daniel Pipes and Bernard Lewis try to influence political decision makers in America by painting a false picture of Iran it worries me. Today, men of such nature hold the belief that Israel’s existence is in imminent danger of a nuclear Iran and therefore this threat must be eliminated through what has been coined as a “strategic surgical strike” on the country’s nuclear facilities in Natanz (near Isfahan) and near Qom (holy city of Iran).  General David Petraeus on CNN’s Amanpour echoed this belief that America still reserves such an option in case dialogue between the P5+1 countries and the government in Tehran failed to achieve its objectives.

Evidently the talks have broken down and so my question is why is the option of dragging America into yet another war in the Middle East is still on the table when there is a low cost alternative plan available that will meet regional stability goals more effectively? Why are the so called experts trying to push for military confrontation based on false assumptions much like those presented to support the war against Iraq? The facts are clear but let’s recap for a second.

Fact – Many in the nuclear science community including the IAEA have come out on record stating that Iran’s capabilities for acquiring nuclear bomb grade enrichment is far from reach and while president un-elect Ahmadinejad likes to make outlandish statements against Israel, the reality on the ground is that his rhetoric’s are more for domestic consumption and political posturing in the region than anything else. Today Mr. Ahmadinejad has lost all credibility both in Iran and abroad.

Fact – With the current turn of events in Iran since the June 12th 2009 election and the emergence of a movement that now demands democracy, human rights and peaceful engagement with the world, any talk of a military confrontation will derail this revolt and unite the nation behind the Islamic regime against a foreign enemy.

Fact – Any form of military strike on Iran under international law is an act of aggression and an act of war, and Iran has the right to use any and all means to defend herself. This will not only mean direct military confrontation through traditional warfare but what is of grave concern is the launch of unconventional warfare with the awakening of sleeper cells across the Middle East and in Europe.

Fact – One of Iran’s strategic retaliatory moves will be to destabilize world markets by cutting oil flow through the straits of Hormouz in the Persian Gulf. This will have catastrophic impact on the global economy.

Fact – A war on Iran will unite Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Hezbollah, Hamas, and other Islamist groups in Iraq and Afghanistan against America. Once this conflict escalates the Arab countries in the region, unlike their position during the US – Iraq war will also be pulled into the conflict against Israel. We are already hearing the murmurs from some of the rulers of the Arab countries. Furthermore Russia and China will take sides once America backs Israel and we could potentially be looking at world war 3. And last but not least,

Fact – Israel, without the United States will have no chance in a war against Iran and for this reason it needs to think long and hard before it draws up battle plans.

So why are so-called supporters of Israel sounding the drums of war in Washington once again, well the answer in my view is three fold.

A) They sense that once Iran and America rekindle new ties Israel may potentially lose its most favorite nation status and therefore become less important as an ally of the United States in the Middle East. It will also put a lot of lobbyists in Washington who raised millions of dollars in the name of Israel out of work but I digress.

B) In the absence of any regional distraction, Israel will have to focus on dealing with the Palestine issue and addressing the final status agreement for a two state solution. In doing so it is certain that Israel will be encouraged by the Obama administration to make hard concessions on key issues such as stopping settlement building on occupied land, the border disputes and the status of Jerusalem.  And,

C) To neutralize A and B Israel will need a war to eliminate Iran’s hopes of bettering ties with America and at the same time by taking out Iran’s involvement in the Arab – Israeli conflict win a decisive victory on the two state solution with more favorable terms.

In my view those who take a hard-line stance benefit from a doctrine of conflict even when it is at odds with the will of most Israeli’s whom today want nothing more than peace, first and foremost with the Palestinians and second with their Middle East neighbors.

And so I strongly believe that war between Israel and Iran is not the right answer when we have a much better option before us, supporting the people of Iran to achieve their rights to a free and democratic regime. I hope America will understand what’s at stake.

Apr 5 2010

It’s all GAS – why Iran can afford to call the Wests’ bluff

If you thought OPEC had a grip on oil and oil prices wait till GPEC comes into play.  The truth of the matter is that 3 countries control 90% of the worlds gas supplies and an alliance between them will be enough to bring the world to its knees.

The three countries that make up this exclusive club are Russia, Iran and Qatar and amongst them they have very strong ties, both in diplomatic and trade terms. Feel free to watch this news story made by Al Jazeera in 2008 and you will see why the Middle East has a such a strategic interest to the world, namely the West.

Mar 27 2010

Naval battle between UAE and Saudi Arabia raises fears for Persian Gulf security

UAE and Saudi Arabia clash on the waters of the Persian Gulf

Richard Spencer in Dubai – The United Arab Emirates navy is thought to have opened fire on a small patrol vessel from Saudi Arabia after a dispute over water boundaries.

According to one report, two Saudi sailors were injured in the alleged bombardment.

The Saudi vessel was forced to surrender, and its sailors were delivered into custody in Abu Dhabi for several days, before being released and handed over to the Saudi embassy earlier this week.

The incident has shocked diplomats who hope the countries, both key American allies, will help implement the West’s strategy to constrain Iran’s nuclear and military ambitions.

The clash happened in disputed waters between the coasts of Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and the peninsula on which the gas-rich state of Qatar sits.

The seabed is rich with oil deposits, while the Dolphin pipeline project to carry natural gas direct from Qatar to Abu Dhabi has provoked irritation in the Saudi authorities. Nevertheless, direct conflict between the two countries’ armed forces is highly unusual.

The Persian Gulf is one of the most heavily armed regions in the world. The Saudi government has been building up its army and air force for years in response to what it sees as a regional threat from Iran.

The UAE was slower to join the arms race, despite a long-running row with Iran over three Gulf islands previously under Abu Dhabi control which were seized by the late Shah in 1971 on the night the Emirates celebrated their independence.

But now the UAE, despite its small size, is the fourth largest purchaser of weaponry on the international market in the world.

Western governments are exasperated that the two countries are unable to co-operate because of a series of long-running border disputes, largely influenced by oil reserves.

Saudi Arabia is the world’s largest oil producer, while Abu Dhabi, though ranking only number four in OPEC, is by some counts the richest city per head of population in the world.

“It looks as though attempts were made to keep this quiet, which is predictable given the important relationship between the two countries and the strategic relationship with Iran,” a Gulf-based diplomat said. “But it does remind us of the simmering rows that there are in this part of the Gulf.”

The Persian Gulf is the shipping route for 40 per cent of the world’s oil trade. The lack of agreed naval boundaries leads to repeated arrests of civilian vessels, including a British yacht by the Iranian navy last November, but more serious is the threat of Iranian retaliation for any attack by Israel or American forces on its nuclear installations.

The Iranian government has threatened to mine the Straits of Hormuz at the tip of the Gulf, or target the western navies moored in Persian Gulf Arab ports.

“This is getting serious,” a local defence analyst said. “The Dolphin pipeline is a critical interstate energy project to bring gas from Qatar to the UAE, so a fight (with Saudi Arabia) is affecting the relations between these three countries at a time when they should be co-operating.”

A spokesman for the UAE ministry of defence said he was unable to give details of the incident.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/unitedarabemirates/7521219/Naval-battle-between-UAE-and-Saudi-Arabia-raises-fears-for-Gulf-security.html

Mar 16 2010

Iran warns GCC over U.S. presence in the Persian Gulf

TEHRAN – This past week Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned Persian Gulf countries against the U.S. presence in the region, saying Washington aimed to dominate their energy resources in the name of fighting terrorism.

Iran opposes the U.S. military presence on its borders in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf, saying western military intervention is the root of insecurity in the region.

“We warn the countries in the region over the presence of bullying powers … they have not come here to restore security or to counter drug trafficking,” Ahmadinejad said in a speech during a visit to the southern province of Hormuzgan.

The hardline president accused the West of planning to dominate energy resources in the Gulf and said: “People in the region will cut off their hands from the Persian Gulf’s oil.”

Tension between Iran and the West has risen over the Islamic state’s nuclear programme, with Western powers calling for a fourth round of U.N. sanctions over Tehran’s refusal to halt uranium enrichment.

The West suspects Iran is seeking nuclear weapons. Tehran says it plans only civilian nuclear facilities.

Washington and its western allies say they want a diplomatic solution but have not ruled out military action against the Islamic republic.

“Iran’s message to the countries in the region is nothing but the message of friendship and brotherhood,” Ahmadinejad told a crowd in the provincial capital, Bandar Abbas.

Mar 14 2010

Arab military and defense spending shoot through the roof

From the Foreign Policy – According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies report Military Balance 2010, Saudi Arabia’s defense budget grew from $24.9 billion in 2001 to $41.2 billion in 2009, a 65 percent increase. The budget of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) grew a whopping 700 percent, from $1.9 billion to $15.47 billion, in the same time period. Kuwait and Bahrain also dramatically expanded the dollars devoted to security over the last decade; their defense budgets increased 35 percent and 80 percent, respectively.

The UAE announced the purchase of the THAAD missile defense system for $7 billion, becoming the first foreign country to take delivery of the U.S.-built system. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin also received a contract to provide the UAE with the Patriot air-defense system.

For small countries in the Persian Gulf why the massive stockpiling and who is the threat?

Mar 9 2010

War Games or Game of Words?

Eight months after a rigged presidential election that infuriated millions of Iranians by having their vote stolen followed by a series of street protests that lead to violence and the death of hundreds, the imprisonment of thousands, and the execution of many protesters, the calendar date approaches yet another occasion for Iranians to demonstrate their discontent with the regime, February 11th, the day the Islamic revolution was won back in 1979.

The social media networks are already in full communiqué, twitter and facebook are blistering with messages, posters and fliers in preparation for yet another showdown between the people and the junta. This time however the tone and nature of the demands are very different. It’s no longer about the election or votes, but rather, the legitimacy of the theocracy and its incompetent rulers is in question.

But while an historic movement is going on in Iran, America has sent warships to the Persian Gulf and additionally has announced the installation of surface to air antimissile systems in neighboring Persian Gulf states such as the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Why is military build-up, this option of last resort as President Obama had stated, all of a sudden become an imminent option?

The answer can come from three different assumptions with three possible scenarios.

The first, as reported by various Middle East analysts is the assumption that in response to international sanctions namely the blockage of oil and gas into and from Iran, the Islamic regime may consider this an act of war and retaliate by launching missiles into Israel and other US interests in the region. With this assumption it is necessary for the United States to protect its allies and to prevent such strikes from hitting hard targets. Thus to build assurance in the event of an escalation of tension between the United States and Iran, America has prepared itself to defend its allies, including Israel.

The second assumption is that Israel may engage in adventurism of its own by attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities. In anticipation of such a scenario, an American presence will in fact reduce the likelihood of such a devastating move that can enflame the entire region into war by curbing Israeli interest in an airstrike.

And the third assumption is that once the sanctions regime starts to have impact on the Islamic regime Iran, as part of its defense strategy, may attempt to block the straits of hormoz thus crippling the global economy by preventing oil flow from the Persian Gulf. In such a case the American warships will be able to deter such destabilizing maneuvers or in a worst-case situation be able to unblock the water way expeditiously and protect it from Iranian influence.

However, what really concerns me is the thought that America and the free world have somehow given up on the democracy movement in Iran ahead of February 11th and the subsequent days and months thereafter. In my opinion any thought of war with Iran at this stage is a grave mistake now that Iranians have found the courage to stand up to this brutal and anti-Iranian regime. A movement that is rapidly uniting workers unions, teachers, diplomats, clerics, students, professors, women’s groups and other sectors of society who no longer want to live a life under the Islamic regime.

It would be a grave mistake if America would once again give in to outside pressures and foreign influence on matters of foreign policy with respect to Iran by marginalizing or dismissing the green movement as a serious and viable option that can bring about peace and stability not only within Iran but to the greater Middle East. I hope this does not happen while democracy is on the march in that country.