IRAN: Will Tehran get Russian weapons or not?

Confusion reigned over reports that Russia might sell Iran sophisticated antiaircraft weapons despite a pledge not to.

It's no secret that Iran wants the S-300s, mobile long-range defensive weapons that could thwart potential missile or aircraft strikes on its controversial nuclear facilities.

Under Israeli pressure, Russians have promised not to make the sale.

But the chatter continues.

Today, Iran's foreign ministry spokesman was cagey. Hassan Qashqavi told reporters that he had not "received any report" regarding the missiles from "relevant" officials.

"You know we have cultural, economic and political as well as defense cooperation with Russia," he said. "I cannot confirm or deny the news. You all know that we have several agreements with Russia. Some of the agreements have been implemented, some not."

LEBANON: Russia to provide free fighter jets to Beirut

If the United States is not willing to deliver the heavy weapons that Lebanon seeks, no problem.

Russia will do so.

In a move sure to provoke the U.S. and its ally Israel, Russia will give Lebanon 10 Mikoyan MiG-29 fighter jets as a donation and commit to supply the teetering Arab democracy abutting Israel's northern border with more war machines, an official told reporters today, according to Russia's Interfax news agency.

"As a trend toward stabilization of the situation has become visible, Lebanon has decided to intensify  military-technological cooperation" with Russia, said Mikhail Dmitriyev, the director of Russia's Federal Service for Military Technological Cooperation.

Dmitriyev also said Russia could soon provide "ground equipment," such as tanks and artillery, to Lebanon.

"We consider the Lebanese army as a key element of political stability within this country and are ready to provide it with arms," he said.

Lebanon has descended frequently into war during the last four decades. It's American-funded army must contend with the powerful armed forces of the Shiite political organization Hezbollah, the Iranian and Syrian backed militia committed to fighting Israel.

IRAN: Anti-American axis tightens business and military ties

 

Talk about provocative.

Not only did Venezuela's foreign minister reiterate today that Russia and his nation would conduct joint war games in Caribbean waters just a few hundred miles from America's shores later this year, he also chose an interesting venue to emphasize the news, just as Russian ships entered the Atlantic Ocean: the Islamic Republic of Iran, where he was hobnobbing with top Iranian officials.

At a joint press conference with his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki today, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro told reporters that in November and December 2008, a contingent of the Russian fleet will come to Venezuelan waters to conduct war exercises.

He also said that Iran and Venezuela were tightening bilateral relations "on a daily basis" in order to become role models for other developing countries (and, presumably, any country with an ax to grind against the U.S.).

IRAN: If no sanctions and no war, then what?

Iran has managed to escape sanctions, but it didn't walk away completely unscathed from the latest United Nations General Assembly meeting.

The U.N. Security Council over the weekend passed a largely symbolic resolution against Iran for its refusal to stop producing enriched uranium, a key step in a certain type of nuclear weapons program, as well as in producing fuel for peaceful power generation.

The five-paragraph resolution reaffirmed four previous resolutions containing three sets of sanctions and urged Iran to comply with U.N. demands "without delay."

Of course Iran was flabbergasted.

Its office at the U.N. issued a news release calling the unanimous move "unfortunate" and an "unpleasant surprise" for the whole world. Iran downgraded its participation in an International Atomic Energy Agency conference set to begin today, a reminder that it could also boot U.N. arms inspectors out of the country if it's pushed too hard.

But the resolution fell far short of the harsh punitive sanctions the U.S. and Israel wanted. With veto-wielding Russia virtually ruling out the possibility of even mild sanctions, it was the best deal they could get, affirming the Bush administration's ninth-inning conversion to the type of painstaking multilateral consensus-building it decried during its first years in power.

IRAQ: Georgian troops trade one war for another

Georgian troops began leaving Iraq today to return to their homeland, where a showdown with Russian forces over the breakaway Georgian province of South Ossetia has exploded in bloodshed. The departure leaves the United States suddenly 2,000 soldiers short of what it once had, but the commander of the Georgian contingent said his forces have no choice but to defend their own country.

"It is of course preferable to go home and do everything we can for our country, not Iraq," said Col. Bondo Maisuradze after getting his redeployment orders. "Sorry," he added. "This may sound strange, but this is what we are feeling."

Col. Steven Boylan, a U.S. military spokesman, said U.S. aircraft began flying the Georgian contingent out of Iraq on Sunday. There was no word on how long it would take to get all 2,000 troops back home.

Georgia deployed troops to Iraq in 2004, and five of its soldiers have died in the war. Most recently, the Georgians were deployed along the Iranian border in Wasit province to bolster security and to try to prevent smuggling of weapons and bombs that are used by Shiite militiamen. It has represented the third-largest contingent of foreign troops in Iraq, after Americans and British soldiers.

U.S. officials say the loss of the Georgians, despite being unplanned, will not derail security gains made in recent months. "We had already been shuffling forces around in Wasit province before the recent events," Boylan said. "We can and are accomodating the changes."

— Tina Susman in Baghdad

JORDAN: Guns galore at Middle East weapons fair

The specter of conflicts in the Middle East intensifying and widening worries many countries in the region. But some Arab nations are showing a growing interest in acquiring or selling sophisticated weapons as suggested by the wide participation in an international exhibition for military hardware, held in Jordan over the last few days.

The event, Special Operations Forces Exhibition and Conference (SOFEX) 2008 was a muscular display of tanks, armored vehicles, high-tech surveillance equipment, gunboats, machine guns, etc.

Check out the first minute or two of the promotional video for the event and you'll get the idea.

IRAN: Foreign policy ain't no popularity contest

An annual poll commissioned by the British Broadcasting Corp. ranked Iran as the country with the most negative influence on the world.

But its arch-rival Israel shouldn't gloat too much: the Jewish state ranked as the country with the second most negative influence.

The poll results, released this week, show that while Israel's negatives slipped from 57% to 52%, negative views of Iran’s influence have held steady at 54%, making it the most negatively rated of the countries tested for the second year in a row.

“The poll suggests that Iran continues to pay a price for its nuclear stand-off with the United Nations," said Doug Miller or GlobeScan, who was among the pollsters.

Pakistan followed Israel as the third most unpopular country.

The pollsters asked 17,457 people across 34 countries between Oct. 31, 2007, and Jan. 25, 2008, to rate whether Brazil, Britain, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Israel, Japan, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the U.S.A. and the European Union had a mostly positive or negative impact on the world.  In addition to GlobeScan, the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland oversaw the survey.

Among the countries that fared well in the study were Japan, Germany and the European Union who scored the highest marks, while America's standing improved slightly after years of deterioration.

Those who say the U.S. has a negative influence declined from 52% to 47%, while those who give Uncle Sam the big thumbs up increased from 31% to 35%.

Pollster Steven Kull suggests the worldwide hoopla over the prospect of a President Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton may have bolstered America's image abroad:

It may be that as the US approaches a new presidential election, views of the US are being mitigated by hope that a new administration will move away from the foreign policies that have been so unpopular in the world.

Russia's image showed the greatest improvement. Its positives jumped from 29% to 37% this year and negatives dropped from 40% to 33%.

Tell us below which countries you think have the best and worst influence on the world.

— Borzou Daragahi in Beirut

Graphic: Changing attitudes toward the U.S. Credit: BBC World Service

LEBANON: U.S. warship draws Moscow's ire

The crisis in Lebanon continues to draw world powers into its vortex, this time Russia.

A U.S. show of force off the Lebanese coast has not only jolted U.S. foes in the region, Syria and Iran, but apparently also Moscow.

On Monday, Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin criticized the U.S. for deploying warships in the eastern Mediterranean at a closed Security Council meeting. He said that the presence of the ships was simply not helping solve the political crisis in the small nation; quite the opposite actually, according to his comments in the Associated Press:

"We pointed out the fact that basically all Lebanese political forces expressed their concern about that, including the government of Prime Minister (Fuad) Saniora, and we have said that such acts were bringing up some unwanted historical analogies. So we did not see it as a constructive contribution to the situation in Lebanon."