Vector, I inked out your title URL. It was invalid. The link below is good, but not the title (for the whitepress article)
Printable View
Vector, I inked out your title URL. It was invalid. The link below is good, but not the title (for the whitepress article)
Thanks Rick,
I found it and they added a paragraph.
I left the original to see if any verbiage changed compared to the original story.
Something maybe up, time will surely tell.
Did you copy it as it was originally?
Might be telling to copy and paste the new version into the same message (by quoting each to differentiate them or something)?
Analysis: Iran could close Hormuz -- but not for long
- http://www.chicagotribune.com/hive/i...email_icon.png
- http://www.chicagotribune.com/hive/i...print_icon.png
- Comments
0
http://snsimages.tribune.com/media/p...1/67171033.jpg Iran's Navy Commander Sayari points at a map during a news conference in Tehran (Fars News Reuters, REUTERS / January 5, 2012)
Peter Apps, Political Risk Correspondent Reuters 7:20 a.m. CST, January 5, 2012
LONDON (Reuters) - Should Iran's rulers ever make good their threats to block the Straits of Hormuz, they could almost certainly achieve their aim within a matter of hours.
But they could also find themselves sparking a punishing -- if perhaps short-lived -- regional conflict from which they could emerge the primary losers.
In recent weeks, a growing number of senior Iranian military and civilian officials have warned that Tehran could use force to close the 54 km (25 mile) entrance to the Gulf if Western states impose sanctions that paralyze their oil exports.
In 10 days of highly publicized military exercises, state television showed truck-mounted missiles blasting towards international waters, fast gunboats practicing attacks and helicopters deploying divers and naval commandos.
Few believe Tehran could keep the straits closed for long -- perhaps no more than a handful of days -- but that alone would still temporarily block shipment of a fifth of all traded global oil, sending prices rocketing and severely denting hopes of global economic recovery.
But such action would swiftly trigger retaliation from the United States and others that could leave the Islamic republic militarily and economically crippled.
"They can cause a great deal of mischief... but it depends how much pain they are willing to accept," says Nikolas Gvosdev, professor of national security studies at the U.S. Naval War College in Rhode Island.
He said he believed Tehran would only take such action as a last resort: "They are much more likely to threaten than to act."
The true purpose of its recent saber-rattling, many analysts suspect, may be more a mixture of deterring foreign powers from new sanctions and distracting voters from rising domestic woes ahead of legislative elections in March.
With the United States signing new sanctions into law on New Year's Eve -- although they will not enter force until the middle of the year -- and the European Union considering similar steps, few expect the pressure on Tehran to let up.
"This is probably less a genuine military threat than a bid to put economic pressure back on the West and split Western powers over sanctions that threaten Iran's oil economy," says Henry Wilkinson, head of intelligence and analysis at London security consultants Janusian.
"Iran now does not have much to lose by making such a threat and a lot to gain."
But many fear the more Iran is pushed into a corner, the greater the risk of miscalculation.
Its ruling establishment is also widely seen as deeply divided, with some elements -- particularly the well-equipped and hardline Revolutionary Guard -- much keener on confrontation than others.
SEA MINES, MISSILES, SUBMARINES, SPEEDBOATS
"I cannot see strategic sense in closing the straits, but then I do not understand the Iranian version of the 'rational actor'," said one senior Western naval officer on condition of anonymity.
"(But) one can be pretty certain that they will misjudge the Western reaction... They clearly find us as hard to read as we find them."
The capability to wreak at least temporary chaos, however, is unquestionably there.
The U.S. Fifth Fleet always keeps one or two aircraft carrier battle groups either in the Gulf or within striking distance in the Indian Ocean.
Something is coming to Iran... war?
Quote:
Iran clamps down on internet use
Restrictions on cyber cafes and plans to launch national internet prompt fears users could be cut off from world wide web
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...-inter-007.jpg Iran has given internet cafe owners two weeks to adopt new rules requiring them to check customers' identity cards before permitting any services. Photograph: Getty
Iran is launching a major clampdown on web users before parliamentary elections in March with draconian new rules on cyber cafes and preparations to launch a national internet.
A series of tests for the launch of a countrywide network aimed at substituting services run through the world wide web has been carried out by Iran's ministry of information and communication technology, according to a newspaper report. The move has prompted fears among its online community that Iran may withdraw from the global internet.
Speculation over the ministry's intentions comes amid a major clampdown on Iranian internet users by the police, which this week imposed new regulations on internet cafes.
The cafe owners have been given a two-week ultimatum to adopt fresh rules requiring them to check the identity cards of their customers before providing any services.
"Internet cafes are required to write down the forename, surname, name of the father, national identification number, post code and telephone number of each customer," said an Iranian police statement, according to the news website Tabnak.
"Besides the personal information, they must maintain other information of the customer such as the date and the time of using the internet and the IP address, and the addresses of the websites visited. They should keep these informations for each individuals for at least six months."
In recent weeks, users in Iran have complained of a significant reduction in the speed of their internet, reported an Iranian reformist newspaper, Roozegar, which has recently resumed publication after months of closure. The newspaper said it appeared to be the result of testing the national internet.
"According to some of the people in charge of the communication industry, attempts to launch a national internet network are the cause of disruption in internet and its speed reduction in recent weeks," Roozegar reported. Some government websites, however, cited other reasons for the drop in speed.Speaking to the Guardian on condition of anonymity, an Iranian IT expert with close knowledge of Iran's national internet project, which he described as corporate-style intranet, said: "Despite what others think, intranet is not primarily aimed at curbing the global internet but Iran is creating it to secure its own military, banking and sensitive data from the outside world.
"Iran has fears of an outside cyber attack like that of the Stuxnet, and is trying to protect its sensitive data from being accessible on the world wide web." Stuxnet, a computer worm designed to sabotage Iran's uranium enrichment project hit the country's nuclear facilities in 2010.
The authorities in the Islamic republic have said for some years that Iran should have its own internet, a parallel network which would conform to Islamic values and provide "appropriate" services.
For Iranian officials, the need for such a network became more evident after the events in the aftermath of the disputed presidential elections in 2009, when many protesters used social networks.
Less than two months before Iran's parliamentary elections in March, its first national election since 2009, the regime appears to be attempting to bring the country's online community under control.
In June, the US was reported to be funding plans to launch new services facilitating internet access and mobile phone communications in countries with tight controls on freedom of speech, such as Iran, through a project called "shadow internet" or "internet in a suitcase". Iran responded to the move by stepping up its online censorship by upgrading its filtering system.
More than 5m websites are filtered in Iran, but many Iranians access blocked addresses with help from proxy websites or virtual private network services. An Iranian official said last year that more than 17 million Iranians have Facebook accounts, although the site remains blocked in Iran.
So far every country that has clamped down on the internet has wound up in a massive turmoil.
And the UK joins the chorus.
Quote:
U.K. Warns Iran Over ‘Illegal’ Threat to Close Strait of Hormuz
January 05, 2012, 8:43 AM EST
More From Businessweek
- EU Moves Closer to Iran Oil Ban as Greece Lifts Objections
- U.S. Spurns Iran’s Demand to Keep Aircraft Carrier Out of Gulf
- Iran Warns U.S. Against Sending Aircraft Carrier Back to Gulf
- Lee Says ‘New Era’ Possible After N. Korea Calls Him Traitor
- Pro-Saleh Troops Fire Shells on Yemen Capital, Opposition Says
By Thomas Penny
Jan. 5 (Bloomberg) -- The U.K. may take military action against Iran if it carries out its threat to block the Strait of Hormuz, Defense Secretary Philip Hammond will warn in a speech in Washington today.
Any attempt by Iran to block the strategically important waterway in retaliation for sanctions against its oil exports would be “illegal and unsuccessful” and the Royal Navy will join any action to keep it open, Hammond will say, according to extracts of the address released by his office.
“Our joint naval presence in the Arabian Gulf, something our regional partners appreciate, is key to keeping the Straits of Hormuz open for international trade,” Hammond will say. “Disruption to the flow of oil through the Straits of Hormuz would threaten regional and global economic growth,” he will say, arguing that “it is in all our interests that the arteries of global trade are kept free, open and running.”
Iran will block the strait if sanctions are imposed on its crude-oil exports in an attempt to force the Islamic republic to abandon its nuclear program, Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi said on Dec. 27. Britain and France will press for the EU to impose an embargo on Iranian oil imports when foreign ministers meet in Brussels on Jan. 30.
About 15.5 million barrels of oil a day, or a sixth of global consumption, flows through the Strait of Hormuz, between Iran and Oman at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. The Royal Navy will continue to play a “substantial” role in the combined maritime force to help maintain freedom of navigation, Hammond will say.
Europeans Criticized
Hammond, who will meet with U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta today, will also use the speech, at the Atlantic Council, to criticize other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for not being willing to commit resources to joint operations, including in Libya and Afghanistan, his office said.
“Too many countries are failing to meet their financial responsibilities to NATO, and so failing to maintain appropriate and proportionate capabilities,” Hammond will say. “Too many are opting out of operations or contributing but a fraction of what they should be capable of. This is a European problem, not an American one. And it is a political problem, not a military one.”
Budget cuts mean that many nations are having to trim defense spending and they need to find “smarter ways of working together to get greater capability from the resources that exist,” Hammond will say.
“Without strong economies and stable public finances it is impossible to build and sustain, in the long term, the military capability required to project power and maintain defense,” Hammond will say. “That is why today the debt crisis should be considered the greatest strategic threat to the future security of our nations.”
--With assistance from Robert Tuttle in Doha. Editor: Eddie Buckle.
To contact the reporter on this story: Thomas Penny in London at tpenny@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: James Hertling at jhertling@bloomberg.net
Iran ramps up warning to US over Strait of Hormuz
Iran on Wednesday renewed its warning to America against keeping a US navy presence in the oil-rich Gulf, underlining a threat that Washington has dismissed as a sign of "weakness" from Tehran.
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...n_2098132b.jpg Image 1 of 2
Iran's military gave a warning that it would unleash its "full force" if a US aircraft carrier is redeployed to the Gulf Photo: Reuters
10:30AM GMT 05 Jan 2012
"Iran will do anything to preserve the security of the Strait of Hormuz" at the entrance to the Gulf, Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi said, according to the website of Iran's state television.
"The presence of forces from beyond the (Gulf) region has no result but turbulence. We have said the presence of forces from beyond the region in the Persian Gulf is not needed and is harmful," he was quoted as saying.
The comments echoed a warning issued on Tuesday by Iran's military that it would unleash its "full force" if a US aircraft carrier is redeployed to the Gulf.
"We don't have the intention of repeating our warning, and we warn only once," Brigadier General Ataollah Salehi, Iran's armed forces chief, said as he told Washington to keep its aircraft carrier out of the Gulf.
The White House on Tuesday had brushed off the warning, saying it "reflects the fact that Iran is in a position of weakness" as it struggles under international sanctions.
The US Defence Department said it would not alter its deployment of warships to the Gulf.
But on Wednesday, Salehi reinforced his warning, and called 10 days of Iranian navy war games just held near the Strait of Hormuz a "message" to the United States.
"The forces from beyond the region have received the appropriate message from these manoeuvres," he said, according to the official IRNA news agency.
"Those who have come as enemies should be afraid of our manoeuvres," he said.
The exercises climaxed on Monday with the Iranian navy test-firing three types of missiles designed to sink warships.
The head of Iran's parliamentary national security and foreign policy commission, Aladdin Brujerdi, was also quoted by the Fars news agency as saying the US description of Iran being weak "is a completely illogical stance."
He added: "The US talks about sanctioning our oil but they should know that if Iran's oil exports from the Persian Gulf are sanctioned, then no one will have the right to export oil through the Strait of Hormuz."
The developments have helped send the prices of oil soaring, though they pulled back a little on Wednesday.
Brent North Sea crude contracts in London were selling for $111.58 per barrel. New York trading of West Texas Intermediate crude was at $102.30 per barrel.
"The situation with Iran remains worrisome," said Nick Trevethan, a senior commodities strategist at ANZ Research in Asia.
"The consequences of any military action in the Middle East will be enormous. A spike in crude prices will kill off any recovery in the US," he added.
Iran's war games were meant to show the Islamic republic could close the strategic Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 per cent of the world's oil flows, if it is attacked or its oil exports are curbed by sanctions.
Last week, a US aircraft carrier, the USS John C Stennis, passed through the strait and eastward, through the Gulf of Oman and a zone being used by the Iranian navy for its drill.
Iranian military officials said that, if the carrier tried to return through the Strait of Hormuz to the Gulf, it would be attacked.
The US carrier would face the "full force" of Iran's navy, a navy spokesman, Commodore Mahmoud Mousavi, told Iran's Arabic television service Al-Alam on Tuesday.
The US Defence Department said in a statement it would continue the rotation of its 11 aircraft carriers to the Gulf to support military operations in the region.
"Our transits of the Strait of Hormuz continue to be in compliance with international law, which guarantees our vessels the right of transit passage," it said.
The Pentagon also underlined its pledge to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, saying "we are committed to protecting maritime freedoms that are the basis for global prosperity; this is one of the main reasons our military forces operate in the region."
The increasingly tense situation in the Gulf was taking place as Iran struggled with turmoil on its domestic currency market.
Foreign exchange shops on Wednesday were shuttered as traders refused to comply with a central bank order putting an artificially low cap on the value of the dollar against the Iranian rial, which has come under intense pressure in recent days.
Iranian authorities were trying to shore up their currency after it slid 12 per cent on Monday to a record low against the dollar days after the United States enacted new sanctions hitting Iran's central bank.
Iran, however, insisted the volatility of the rial is not the result of sanctions.
It "definitely has nothing to with sanctions," foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said on Tuesday.
The United States and other Western nations have imposed sanctions on Iran's economy over Tehran's controversial nuclear programme, which they believe is being used to develop atomic weapons.
Iran has repeatedly denied that allegation, saying the programme is purely for energy and medical uses.
The REASON I said a few days ago that the admiral ought to have turned that ship around and rolled back through is due directly to something in the article above.
It's called "International Law". Here's an overview.
Basically, NO country can stop another country from transiting an area, or interfere with commercial shipping or Naval vessels, or even domestic pleasure craft.
This is why it pisses me off so bad when the Somali Pirates get away with attacking anyone, let alone smaller vessels with civilians in the boats. Why the countries aren't fighting this with a vengeance I don't know.
I'm a student of piracy, have been for many years and moreso now that I'm a sailor myself. And given the history, it amazes me that the US, UK and Australia at LEAST don't go out of their way to hunt down and blow up, kill and destroy pirates both on the sea and on land.
Piracy got so bad in the Caribbean, the "Spanish Main" (along the Spanish held coast of what is now Venezuela) that eventually all the countries agreed to go after pirates, and to stop creating "Privateers". They indeed hunted down pirates and hanged them.
Americans were a "late comer" to that fight, but they were involved in a cursory manner, going after people like Black Beard (Edward Teach). It was an American - well, all Americans were technically British Citizens then - who stopped Teach in Okracoke Island area.
I bring all this up because this was one of many piracy stories where notorious pirates who were greatly feared were finally dealt with as they should be, like the criminals they are.
When a STATE (which can set their limits up to 12 miles) starts acting like pirates, they should be dealt with in the same manner.
IF the Iranian Navy attempts to stop up traffic in that region, they are doing so against International Law.
This isn't, as someone pointed out "ego" on the Skipper of a US Naval vessel to defy such rules. It's LAW. He can go back and forth through there as often as he wishes.
And if America says "We're putting vessels in this region to protect our other assets in the area" then we have every right to do so, as do Russians. Or the Iranians to wander around our shores if they are making passage or feel they have to "protect" something.
Obviously, this places the Iranians in danger doing it around US coast line.
Or Russians. However, Russian, Chinese and many, many other countries ROUTINELY bring ships near our shoreline. In general, we know about it.
If *I* want to sail my vessel around the world and pass through that area, the Iranians can not legally touch me, or anything else. They may board me as any coast guard would do, but they have no right to stop me for other than "safety checks".
I don't have to stop technically if they are a threat. Then again, as a small vessel of less than about 100 feet, I wouldn't have a lot of choice in the matter.
On the other hand, LEGALLY, if they take me off my vessel at sea they are then kidnapping me. And America would consider this a hostile act.
Though, given times as they are, we won't do much about it.
Davutoglu: We won't allow attacks on Iran from Turkey
By JPOST.COM STAFF01/05/2012 16:29
http://img.irna.ir/1390/13901015/307...48-2148247.jpg
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu vowed Thursday that his country would not allow attacks on Iran to be carried out from its territory, Turkish daily Hurriyet reported.
Davutoglu made the comments at a joint press conference in Tehran with his Iranian counterpart Ali Akbar Salehi.
The Turkish foreign minister attempted to dispel rumors that the NATO missile shield recently stationed in Turkey, should pose as a threat to Iran or damage relations between the countries.
Davutoglu stated that Turkey and Iran trust each other. "I certainly do not see Iran as a threat," Hurriyet quoted Davutoglu as saying.
And that is exactly why Iraq was and is so important.
And precisely the reason Obama GAVE UP IRAQ.
Now we can't fly out of there EITHER.
Iran is threatening Straits of Hormuz war games now.
Iran tests West with plans for more war games in Strait of Hormuz
Reuters Jan 6, 2012 – 8:31 AM ET
http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpr...an-1.jpg?w=620 REUTERS/Jamejamonline/Ebrahim Norouzi
Iranian ships participate in a naval parade on the last day of the Velayat-90 war game on the Sea of Oman near the Strait of Hormuz in southern Iran January 3, 2012.
By Robin Pomeroy
TEHRAN — Iran announced plans on Friday for new military exercises in the world’s most important oil shipping lane, the latest in weeks of bellicose gestures towards the West as new sanctions threaten Tehran’s oil exports.
Real Admiral Ali Fadavi, naval commander of the Revolutionary Guards Corps, said exercises next month would focus directly on the Strait of Hormuz, which leads out of the Gulf and provides the outlet for most Mid-East oil.
Iran held a 10-day drill which ended on Monday in neighboring seas.
“Today the Islamic Republic of Iran has full domination over the region and controls all movements within it,” Fadavi said in remarks reported by the Fars news agency.
Iranian officials have threatened in recent weeks to block the strait if new sanctions harm Tehran’s oil exports, and this week said they would take action if the United States sails an aircraft carrier through it.
The United States, which has a massive naval fleet in the area that is overwhelmingly more powerful than Iran’s sea forces, says it will ensure the international waters of the strait stay open. Britain said on Thursday that any attempt to close it would be illegal and unsuccessful.
New financial sanctions signed into law by U.S. President Barack Obama on New Year’s Eve are aimed at making it difficult for most countries to buy Iranian oil. The European Union is expected to announce tough measures of its own at the end of the month.
Most traders believe Iran will still be able to find buyers, at least in the short term, for its exports of 2.6 million barrels of oil per day (bpd). But it may have to offer steep discounts that reduce the hard currency revenue it needs to feed its 74 million people.
The sanctions are already having an effect on Iran’s streets, where prices have been rising and the rial currency is falling. Iranians have been queuing up at banks to convert their savings into dollars.
http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpr...if?w=300&h=275National Post Graphics
Click to enlarge this map of the region
The economic hardship comes less than two months before a parliamentary election, Iran’s first since a 2009 presidential election that led to mass street protests across the country.
Iran’s rulers successfully put down those demonstrations two years ago with force, but since then the Arab Spring has shown the vulnerability of authoritarian governments in the region to public protest fueled by anger over economic hardship.
NUCLEAR PROGRAMME
Washington and its allies are imposing the measures to force Iran to abandon a nuclear program which they say is aimed at producing an atomic bomb. Iran says the program is peaceful.
European Union officials say the EU, which collectively buys about 500,000 bpd of Iranian oil, rivaling China as the largest market, has agreed to impose an embargo halting all imports.
EU diplomats said they are discussing how long they will give member countries to halt purchases, with France, Germany and others wanting the ban imposed within three months but Greece favoring a grace period of up to a year.
China has also cut its imports by more than half in January and February while haggling with Tehran over the size of the discount it wants in return for doing business with it.
Other big buyers, including Turkey and Japan, say they are seeking a waiver from the U.S. sanctions.
The new American law allows Obama to give temporary waivers to allies to continue to buy Iranian oil to prevent a price shock, but to receive the permits, countries are meant to show they are reducing trade with Iran.
Iran has put on a brave face over the sanctions. Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said on Thursday the country would “weather the storm.”
“Iran, with divine assistance, has always been ready to counter such hostile actions and we are not concerned at all about the sanctions,” he told a news conference.
But in a sign it is seeking to alleviate the pressure, Salehi said Tehran was interested in resuming negotiations over its nuclear program with Western powers.
Turkey’s visiting foreign minister brought an offer from Catherine Ashton, the EU foreign policy chief who negotiates on behalf of major powers.
Talks over Iran’s nuclear program collapsed a year ago. Iran has repeatedly offered to restart the talks since then, but has insisted it will not negotiate over its right to continue enriching uranium.
Western countries say talks are pointless unless a halt to enrichment is on the table. Enriched uranium can be used to fuel a reactor or build a bomb.
OIL PRICES IN SPOTLIGHT
After years of sanctions that had little impact, Western countries have adopted a far more direct approach in recent months, with sanctions that explicitly impact the oil industry that provides 60 percent of Iran’s economy.
The new U.S. measures would cut off any institution that deals with the Iranian central bank from the U.S. financial system. If implemented fully, it would make it impossible for most countries’ refineries to buy Iranian crude.
But Washington has to balance its determination to isolate Tehran with concern that driving its oil off markets will raise prices and hurt the fragile global economy. Brent crude futures hovered above $113 a barrel on Friday, up nearly $7 since Obama signed the new sanctions law.
To ease the impact on markets, the new U.S. measures take effect over several months, and the leeway given to Obama to offer waivers allows countries time to find other suppliers. Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest oil exporter and a foe of Iran, says it will make up for any supply shortfall.
Traders and analysts believe it is unlikely Iran will actually carry out its threats to block the strait.
“We’ve seen this movie before,” said Cliff Kupchan, an Iran analyst at the Eurasia Group. “Neither side wants a war. A lot of this rhetoric is overstated.”
Even if it tried, Iran could not blockade the strait for long in a direct challenge to a U.S. fleet led by the giant supercarrier John C. Stennis, accompanied by a guided-missile cruiser and flotillas of destroyers and submarines.
The Combined Maritime Force protecting Gulf shipping also includes other countries such Britain, France, Canada, Australia and the Gulf Arab states, under the command of a U.S. admiral.
Still, Iran has many ways it could provoke a Western response, from missiles within range of U.S. targets in the region, to small boats that could attack a ship near shore, to allied militia in Palestine and Lebanon that can strike Israel.
And just a small side note here...
US Navy rescues Iranians from Somali pirates – no 'thank you' expected
A US Navy search-and-seizure team rescued the crew of an Iranian fishing vessel that had been hijacked by Somali pirates in November. Maybe Iran will send a fruit basket.
By Anna Mulrine, Staff writer / January 6, 2012
The guided-missile destroyer USS Kidd responds to a distress call on Thursday from the master of the Iranian-flagged fishing dhow Al Molai, who claimed he was being held captive.
US Navy/AP
Enlarge
Tweet
0 http://cache.addthiscdn.com/icons/v1...2x32/email.png http://cache.addthiscdn.com/icons/v1...x32/reddit.png http://cache.addthiscdn.com/icons/v1...tumbleupon.png
Washington
Troops from a US Navy carrier strike group on Thursday rescued Iranians who had been held on a pirate mother ship for more than a month in “horrific” conditions, according to US military officials.
The gesture seems an unlikely one at a time when relations between the US and Iran – always strained – have been growing even tenser. As the US leads international efforts to ramp up sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program, Iran has warned a US aircraft carrier not to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.
But a member of the search-and-seizure team from the USS Kidd that stormed the pirate ship said he and other members of the crew “went out of our way” to treat the Iranian fishermen “with kindness and respect.”
RECOMMENDED: Top 5 blunders of Somali pirates
“They had been through a lot,” said Josh Schminky, a Navy Criminal Investigative Service agent aboard the USS Kidd, in a statement.
One US military official notes that the Iranians had been held aboard a ship infested with three-inch cockroaches for 40 to 45 days. The US is not anticipating any “thank you’s” from the Iranian government, though maybe, the US military official joked, “They won’t threaten our ships for another week or so in gratitude.”
It is conceivable that a low-level Iranian official could acknowledge the rescue and even officially express gratitude for it, says Anthony Cordesman, a defense analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
RECOMMENDED: Could accelerating covert war with Iran spiral into military action?
That does not, however, augur any change in relations between two countries. “The problem is [Iran’s] drive to move forward with its nuclear program – to expand Iranian power at a time it feels US power is weakening,” Mr. Cordesman says.
“Does rescuing fishermen change anything? No,” he adds. “Even if you get a fruit basket, it’s just a fruit basket.”
The saga began when an Iranian-flagged fishing vessel and its 13-member crew was seized in November by pirates operating in the northern Arabian Sea.
Two US military officials said the pirates were from Somalia, though a US Navy spokesperson says the pirates’ origin is still under investigation.
US sailors aboard the guided-missile destroyer USS Kidd saw a suspected pirate skiff Thursday alongside the Iranian shipping vessel, the Al Molai. At the same time the captain of the Al Molai was able to make a distress call claiming he was being held by pirates.
The search-and-seizure team from the USS Kidd seized the Al Molai and detained the pirates, who “surrendered quickly,” according to a US Naval Forces Central Command statement. There were no deaths or injuries reported.
The pirates had turned the Al Molai into a mother ship, which was being used to conduct piracy operations in the region.
Three satellite ships operated by the pirates were operating nearby, according to a Navy officer who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Some members of the Iranian crew also appear to have been force “against their will to assist the pirates with other piracy operations,” said Mr. Schminky in the statement.
The Iranian crew told the US Navy rescue team that they “were forced by the pirates to live in harsh conditions, under the threat of violence with limited supplies and medical aid,” according to the statement.
“There were three-inch cockroaches – it was just horrific,” said the US military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not cleared to speak on the matter publicly.
The search-and-seizure team gave the Iranian mariners food, water, and medical care.
The pirates were detained by the USS Kidd boarding party until Friday morning, when they were transferred to the USS John Stennis “where the matter will be reviewed for prosecution,” according to the statement.
RECOMMENDED: Top 5 blunders of Somali pirates
By the way, I LOVE the name of the ship... "USS Kidd"
Quote:
William "Captain" Kidd (c. 1645 – May 23, 1701)[1] was a Scottish sailor remembered for his trial and execution for piracy after returning from a voyage to the Indian Ocean. Some modern historians deem his piratical reputation unjust, as there is evidence that Kidd acted only as a privateer. Kidd's fame springs largely from the sensational circumstances of his questioning before the English Parliament and the ensuing trial. His actual depredations on the high seas, whether piratical or not, were both less destructive and less lucrative than those of many other contemporary pirates and privateers.