China's strategic alliance with Iran is off most radar screens

[vector7]

China's strategic alliance with Iran is off most radar screens

By Fariborz Saremi

Tuesday, December 22, 2009



Since the 1990s China has successfully been expanding its influence in the Middle East and Iran in particular without attracting the attention of the global community.

China views Iran as a significant potential ally in its attempts to counter-balance western power. Clearly Iran serves as a major source of oil. In addition, it is a leading geopolitical player in the region, capable of heavily affecting the political balance in the Middle East.

In addition to energy, China is extensively involved in many areas of Iran's economic development. To help develop Iran's economy, empower it, and open up consumer markets for Chinese-made goods as well as investment opportunities have become China policy priorities. More than 100 Chinese state companies are working in Iran to help build infrastructure projects-highways, ports, shipyards, airports, dams, steel complex and more.

One becomes impressed by the supply of inexpensive Chinese products in the supermarkets and department stores of Tehran and other large Iranian cities like Esfahan, Shiraz, Tabriz and Mashhad. Two-way trade reached $ 11 billion in 2008.

China, Russia and Iran have all become major players in the Asian Energy Security Grid, which was established to counter perceived Western hegemony over the World's energy resources. Furthermore Iran is a passive member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which sets out to promote Beijing's interests. Established in June of 2001, the SCO is an expansion of the "Shanghai Five, a regional grouping begun in 1996. China appears to be receptive to Iranian efforts to expand its role in this grouping.

The national interests of Iran and China are in clear contradiction to the presence of the American military forces in Central Asia. Its members are China, Russia, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Many observers believe that one of the original purposes of the SCO is to serve as a counterbalance to NATO.

Since the 1980s Iran's eagerness to bolster its military and its weapons production capabilities has been given considerable assistance by China, which is very cleverly gaining influence and popularity by transferring arms technology. These arms sales have earned China billions of dollars and billions of gallons of oil through "oil for arms" schemes and enabled Iran in its sponsoring of insurgents and Shiite terrorists in Iraq and other Persian Gulf states. Thus, Iran is now a major threat to the Arab states, Israel and even the USA.

The serious military hardware China has supplied to Iran has included over $1 billion dollars worth of Silkworm cruise missiles, some of which were fired at two U.S. oil tankers in 1987 in the Persian Gulf and the Silkworm's successor, the Chinese Eagle Strike.

Iran has a large number of Chinese made C-801 and C-802 anti-ship missiles deployed in coastal batteries along the eastern shore of the waterway, aboard ships and on island in the Strait of Hormuz. The missiles are expected to play a key role in any effort to block or control the waterway. The narrow shipping lane is ideal for the use of anti-ship missiles. Over the past several years, U.S. coalition naval forces in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea have conducted a series of exercises aimed at countering possible Iranian attempts to close the Strait of Hormuz whether the Iranians use large swarms of small, high-speed armed craft or maritime suicide attacks.

Iran claims it has massed a fleet of 1000 low-tech speedboats to counter the U.S. Fifth Fleet's armada of 30-40 high-tech warships. Broadsides of cruise missiles would be more dangerous. Iran has three frigates and 20 fast attack craft including Chinese supplied Huodong boats, capable of mounting such attacks.

In 2008, Iran also again test-fired Shihab 3 missile, which it says put Israel within range. Such an intermediate range ballistic missile and much longer versions, the Shihab 4 and 5 are under development with China's assistance. On Dec. 16, Iran also test-fired what it said was a faster version of a medium-range missile which could allow it to strike Israel, drawing international censure and warnings of "serious" fallout.

The Sejil 2, powered by solid fuel, is capable according to Iran of traveling 2,000 kilometers, which would put arch-foe Israel, the Arab states and even parts of Europe within range. North Korea and even China may have assisted Iran in developing this missile.

Although China has vehemently denied it, it would seem from international intelligence reports that Beijing has also been supplying Iran and other rogue states with WMD, including nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. China has reportedly been a major focus of Iranian procurement activities, with Iranian front companies successfully acquiring nuclear-related materials from China in recent years. The two countries are known to have signed nuclear accords in 1989, and again in 1991, paving the way for what would become a vibrant and multifaceted atomic partnership.

China's assistance is not just confined to hardware. Clearly China's secret services gave the Tehran regime intelligence assistance during and after the disputed presidential election in June 2009, we are informed. There has even been some hints that Russian and Chinese services have cooperated in providing the Clerics and particularly the IRGC military intelligence.

Some western observers regard China, a long time ally of Iran and a major buyer of Iranian oil and gas, as key in persuading Iran to give up its sensitive nuclear work. In reality, however, Beijing has its own agenda toward Iran and the Middle East and is reluctant to consider steps that might hurt its strategic ties with Iran and endanger its crucial economic interests.

Economically China's strategic ties with Iran have to some extent been made easier. Since Royal Dutch Shell and Respol withdrew in 2008 and France's Total announced it was to abandon its investment in a huge gas project in Iran's South Pars Field, Iran's Pars Oil and Gas Company and the China National Offshore Oil Corp. have agreed to exploit the North Pars Gas field and sell the gas on international markets.

Only Angola and Saudi Arabia supply more oil to China than Iran. China is Iran's biggest oil customer. In the future their relationship will be given long-term stability via an agreement by which China's oil giant Sinopec Group will help develop Iran's Yadavaran oil field in return for Iran's commitment to supply 150,000 barrels of oil a day for 25 years at market price.

Beijing policy toward Iran epitomizes its policy toward other major states of the Middle East region, with some variations. Arms sales, especially missiles, have been a very effective instrument in China's efforts to make inroads to the Middle East. This approach in addition to earning valuable foreign exchange, has helped China to foster diplomatic and strategic ties with Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

All indications suggest that China will not stop at building up strategic alliances in the Middle East and Africa, where it already has strong economic ties. It also has a significant relationship with North Korea. In South America, Panama, Venezuela and Brazil are all keen to develop closer relations with China. Brazil Indeed, in its attempts to extend its own global reach has forged links not only to China but also to Iran.

To some extent the USA has neglected China's growing influence. It has failed to recognize the skill with which China has been able to expand its geopolitical will. Iran, the new regional power in the Middle East, has at least one guaranteed ally among the permanent members of the UN Security Council.

Dr.Fariborz Saremi is a political and military analyst living in Germany. He is the spokesperson for the Azadegan Foundation in Germany and a contributor to the Defense & Foreign Affairs Special Analysis.

[vector7]

* JANUARY 4, 2010
Chinese Evade U.S. Sanctions on Iran

By PETER FRITSCH
Comments

Chinese companies banned from doing business in the U.S. for allegedly selling missile technology to Iran continue to do a brisk trade with American companies, according to an analysis of shipping records.

A unit of state-owned China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corp., for example, has made nearly 300 illegal shipments to U.S. firms since a ban was imposed on CPMIEC and its affiliates in mid-2006, according to an analysis of shipping records by the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, a nonprofit proliferation watchdog.

A Wall Street Journal review of the records and interviews with officials at some of the American companies indicate that the U.S. firms likely were unaware they were doing business with banned entities, and in many cases were tripped up by altered company names.

The CPMIEC shipments, worth millions of dollars, include everything from anchors and drilling equipment to automobile parts and toys. In many cases, CPMIEC acted as a shipping intermediary -- activity also banned under a 2006 presidential order.

The ability of CPMIEC and other foreign companies to continue doing business in the U.S. despite the sanctions comes as the Obama administration considers fresh economic sanctions against Iran. The illegal shipments suggest that U.S. sanctions have become so numerous and complex that they have become difficult to enforce.

More

* Iran Plans Large-Scale War Games

"We spend a lot of time convincing other countries that we need tighter sanctions on Iran when we need to better enforce our own laws already on the books," says Wisconsin Project director Gary Milhollin, a former consultant to the Pentagon on nuclear-proliferation matters.



Responsibility for enforcing sanctions falls to the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, an office with 69 investigators and a 2009 budget of $29 million. OFAC is responsible for enforcing more than 20 sanctions programs targeting everything from nuclear proliferators and terror financiers to illegal imports of Cuban cigars.

OFAC hasn't fined any U.S. companies for trading with CPMIEC or other Chinese companies banned in 2006. In response to inquiries from the Journal, Treasury Department officials investigated CPMIEC and its subsidiaries further. On Thursday, OFAC added one CPMIEC unit to its list of banned companies.

"If we see U.S. companies that are knowingly engaging in transactions with a proliferation target or front company, or that those targets are attempting to circumvent U.S. sanctions, we pursue those cases aggressively," says OFAC Director Adam Szubin in an interview. Overall, he says, the sanctions program makes it difficult for nuclear proliferators to do business in the U.S.
[iran sanctions and china business]

In June 2006, the U.S. banned CPMIEC and three other Chinese companies from conducting business in the U.S., citing their alleged sales of missile technology to Iran in defiance of previous sanctions. Two months later, a shipment of oil-drainage tanks from Shanghai landed at the port of Tacoma, Wash., bound for a New York City firm, American Forge & Foundry Inc. The shipper: a unit of CPMIEC, according to a shipping record known as a bill of lading.

Officials at CPMIEC didn't respond to written questions from the Journal.

U.S. enforcement officials say it can be difficult for U.S. companies to avoid doing business with foreign companies and individuals under sanction. Problems with translating company names can be an issue, they say. Sanctioned companies also have proved adept at creating aliases or subsidiary shell companies to mask their ownership, they say.

"To the extent that a U.S. institution does process a transaction for a designated entity, those transactions tend to be inadvertent and are corrected quickly upon detection," says the OFAC's Mr. Szubin.

It is unlikely that most U.S. companies knowingly flout the import bans: Criminal penalties for doing so include prison time.

John Iliff, general manager of American Forge & Foundry, says the single shipment of oil-drainage tanks it received in 2006 from the CPMIEC unit set off no alarms. "Trading in illegal goods certainly never crossed our minds," he says.

The shipment came from China JMM Import & Export Shanghai Pudong Corp., which didn't appear on any sanctions list until Thursday. Records indicate the company shares an address and phone number with a CPMIEC unit that was previously banned: CPMIEC Shanghai Pudong Corp. The Treasury determined that the two companies are affiliated.
[iran and chinese companies and u.s. sanctions] Bloomberg News

A Wall Street Journal review of shipping records and interviews with officials at some of the American companies indicate that the U.S. firms likely were unaware they were doing business with banned entities, and in many cases were tripped up by altered company names. Above, a boat passes by a container port in Shanghai, China in June.

Faced with simple tweaks to company names, even large U.S. corporations with sophisticated procedures for screening vendors can end up doing business with sanctioned firms.

Greenlee Textron, a unit of Textron Inc., in 2008 and 2009 purchased hand-held pipe benders used by plumbers from Chinese firm Shanghai Kayama Industrial Co. Kayama hired China JMM to facilitate payment and shipping of those goods.

Textron spokesman Michael Maynard says Greenlee was unaware of China JMM's relationship to CPMIEC before receiving an inquiry from the Journal. He says none of the parties to the 14 shipments appeared on any U.S. lists of sanctioned companies.

Many companies rely on software that is supposed to alert users if a company is subject to sanctions. But China JMM didn't register a "hit" on the sanctions-screening software used by Kohler Co. of Kohler, Wis., according to a company spokesman. Until July 2009, Kohler purchased lawn-mower parts from a Shanghai firm that used China JMM as its export broker.

After Kohler was alerted last summer to China JMM's affiliation with CPMIEC, it "immediately halted all orders...until our supplier found a new export broker," the spokesman says.

U.S. authorities have called CPMIEC a "serial proliferator." The U.S. first sanctioned the firm in 1991 and 1993 for selling short-range-missile technology to Pakistan. After passage of the Iran Nonproliferation Act in 2000, the company was sanctioned in 2002 and 2003 for missile-related sales to Iran.

The Chinese government, CPMIEC's owner, has objected to U.S. trade sanctions on nonproliferation grounds. "This kind of mistaken practice...damages the atmosphere for Sino-American cooperation on nonproliferation, and is not beneficial to promoting international nonproliferation efforts," says Jiang Yu, a spokeswoman for China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

In 2006, LIMMT Economic & Trade Co., a Chinese seller of metallurgical products, was blocked from selling goods in the U.S. for allegedly selling high-strength metals and sophisticated military materials to Iran.

In April 2009, a New York grand jury indicted LIMMT and its owner, Li Fang Wei, for allegedly conspiring to evade that ban by using aliases, and the U.S. Treasury updated its sanctions list to include those aliases.

In 2006, Dalian Sunny Industry & Trade Co. sent seven shipments of steel parts to Coastal Flange Inc. in Houston. (The 2009 case established that Dalian was an LIMMT affiliate.) In 2007, the shipments began coming from Dalian Orient Pipe Components Co. Bills of lading reveal that Dalian Sunny and Dalian Orient share the same address and telephone number.

Officials at LIMMT, Dalian Sunny and Dalian Orient didn't return calls seeking comment.

Mark Mekeel, president of Coastal Flange, says U.S. prosecutors contacted him about his trade with Dalian, but told him he had done nothing wrong.

"Each day I'm pounded on email by offers from Chinese companies," he says. "But I'm not part of some scam. I'm just a guy trying to bring in some product."

Write to Peter Fritsch at peter.fritsch@wsj.com

[vector7]

Chinese firms evade U.S. Iran sanctions: report

WASHINGTON
Mon Jan 4, 2010 12:27am EST



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Chinese companies accused of selling missile technology to Iran have managed to get around a U.S. trade ban, with millions of dollars worth of goods from these companies shipped to the United States, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.

One Chinese firm, a unit of state-owned China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corp., has made nearly 300 illegal shipments to U.S. firms since a ban was imposed on CPMIEC and its affiliates in mid-2006, the newspaper said, citing an analysis of shipping records by the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control.

The U.S. companies probably didn't know they were trading with banned entities, the newspaper said.

Shipments from China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corp. were worth millions of dollars in goods ranging from anchors to toys. The Chinese firm often acted as a shipping intermediary, which is also banned under a 2006 U.S. presidential order.

The Obama administration, increasingly frustrated by Iran's defiance over its nuclear program, is considering new sanctions focused on Iran's leadership rather than broad-based penalties that could harm the protest movement.

The illegal Chinese shipments suggest U.S. sanctions have become difficult to enforce, the newspaper said.

The report quoted Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin project: "We spend a lot of time convincing other countries that we need tighter sanctions on Iran when we need to better enforce our own laws already on the books."

[vector7]

January 01, 2010
China's Army Sends Armoured Vehicles To Iran

Looks like China has joined the mad mullahs fight against pro-democracy protesters.

(the information about the armoured vehicles in this text has been confirmed by multiple sources): Finally, with the arrival of the first shipment of armoured vehicles, China has officially joined in to repress the Iranian people, most likely to prevent the downfall of the “Supreme Leadership” and its own illegitimate interests in the region. The vehicles are built by military complex of Dalian DES-516B. Here is the description of the manufacturer:
Dalian Eagle-Sky Co.
Tel: +86-411-8681-3362
Fax: +86-411-8681-3763
Email: eagle@eagle-sky.net
http://www.eagle-sky.net/
The armoured anti-riot vehicles have a capacity of 10,000 liters to shoot cold and hot water, and three 100 liter tanks to shoot burning chemical liquids. The water is mixed with paint or tear gas that cannot be washed away. Each vehicle has two guns for shooting liquid up to a distance of 70 meters- it is controlled from inside the cabin. The price tag for each unit is 650,000 dollars. Also, a lot of extra burning liquid, paint, and tear gas was purchased.
It took four months for the delivery of the armoured vehicles, and since the Iranian regime was in a hurry, they had them delivered from China’s army organization- this is rare! China’s government was in as much of a hurry to get these to Iran.

Other developments: Injured students of mashads universities disappear
Three students of Mashad Azad University Martyred

Iran News Agency - December 31, 2009 Iran News Agency’s correspondent: Based on received news, yesterday, three students at Mashhad’s Azad University were martyred by plainclothes forces. Two boys were killed by a knife and a girl was thrown off the third floor of the dormitory.
- Arash Azizi, Persian2English

Maryam Zia, childrens activist arrested Gawd I hate the mad mullahs of Iran

[vector7]

From The Times
January 18, 2010
Chinese Whispers
International diplomacy to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions is being thwarted by Beijing’s inaction and obstructionism



It is not quite true that China’s diplomacy defends every repressive regime from A to Z. The range does, however, extend from Burma to Zimbabwe, and it includes Iran on the way. China has continually stymied international efforts to prevent the acquisition of nuclear weapons by the Iranian regime. The latest phase of this obstructionism is to object to the imposition of a new round of sanctions against Iran. China thereby isolates itself not only from the United States and the EU3 (the UK, Germany and France) but also from Russia on the most pressing security task of the age.

Diplomats representing each of the countries in this six-power group met in New York on Saturday to discuss Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. China indicated uninterest in the proceedings by sending only a junior member of its UN mission. It then prevented the group from issuing a statement of new sanctions. The meeting promised only talks about possible sanctions.

It is hardly surprising that Iran should have responded to this outcome with derision, as derision is what it merits. President Obama set a deadline of December 31, 2009, for the regime to respond to a generous offer of political and economic incentives. In return, the country would have undertaken to halt uranium enrichment. No such undertaking has been received.

The history of Iran’s nuclear programme is dispiritingly regular. It is a pattern of deceit, followed by stern words from the UN Security Council (UNSC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency, and a superficial retreat by Iran to what these international bodies require. Then the cycle begins again. The process is farcical, but it does at least demonstrate that the mullahs, unlike North Korea, which has withdrawn from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, are susceptible to pressure. China is now undermining even that minimal degree of leverage. If the six-power group cannot agree on sanctions, then the Iranian regime will consider itself exempt from UNSC resolutions because it will be immune to attempts to enforce them.

Iran’s insistence that it has a right to develop nuclear energy is bluster, as no one is disputing it. The problem is that its nuclear programme is plainly not designed purely to generate electricity. Its uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and heavy-water plant at Arak were exposed by foreign media. They are unnecessary for a civil nuclear programme. Iran has since been able to proceed while barely checked, because of divisions within the UNSC.

China’s role in the six-power group and the UNSC is crucial. Its economic strength matters in the application of sanctions. Its diplomatic importance, as a permanent member of the UNSC and with the power of veto, will determine whether Iran feels constrained in its nuclear ambitions. China, as a rapidly industrialising power and a massive consumer of energy, is a huge market for Iranian exports. It is, in return, supplying Iran with Silkworm missiles. The relationship replicates China’s import of oil from Sudan and export of weapons for the atrocities committed by that regime in Darfur. The difference is merely that in Darfur the genocide has already happened, whereas President Ahmadinejad looks forward to the annihilation of Israel.

There is a terrible precedent for the failures of international diplomacy over Iran. From the end of the first Gulf War, Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq knew that it could exploit divisions in the UNSC. The task of implementing and policing what the UNSC required fell to the US and the UK. The outcome was a war that Saddam provoked and that inflicted immense human suffering. Against the nuclear adventurism of Iran, international diplomacy must work. China is ensuring that it fails even before it starts.

[vector7]

China "under pressure" on Iran sanctions: Clinton

By Andrew Quinn Andrew Quinn – Fri Jan 29, 2:11 pm ET

PARIS (Reuters) – The United States is trying to persuade Beijing that it's time to get tough with Iran on its nuclear program, even though Tehran is a major oil supplier to China, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday.

China was "under pressure" to agree to new sanctions on Iran, Clinton told an audience in Paris, saying that efforts to negotiate with Tehran were clearly failing.

In unusually blunt comments addressed to China, Clinton said all members of the U.N. Security Council needed to move ahead with sanctions on Iran over the nuclear dispute.

"The argument we and others are making to China is: we understand that right now it seems counterproductive to you to sanction a country from which you get so much of the natural resources your growing economy needs," she said.

"But think about the longer term implications," added Clinton, who personally lobbied Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi on Thursday while they were both in London.

Western governments fear that Iran wants to produce nuclear weapons but Tehran says the program is for peaceful purposes.

The five permanent Security Council members -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China -- along with Germany have been negotiating with Iran, but U.S. officials say drafts of possible sanctions should circulate among the group soon.

Russia and China, which reluctantly supported three earlier rounds of sanctions, have appeared less eager to impose fresh curbs this time, complicating efforts to show a united front.

FRANCE SEES NO RUSSIAN PROBLEM

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said after meeting Clinton that Russia's position was not problematic.

"We are very pleased with the position taken by our Russian friends and we are still working with our Chinese friends," he told reporters, adding that he hoped to reach a deal over a fourth round of U.N. sanctions.

Clinton noted that China also got oil from elsewhere in the Gulf region.

"As we move away from the engagement track, which has not produced the results that some had hoped for, and move forward (on) the pressure and sanctions track, China will be under a lot of pressure to recognize the destabilizing impact that a nuclear-armed Iran would have in the Gulf," she said.

Clinton said among the dangers posed by Iran acquiring nuclear weapons would be a regional arms race and the possibility that Israel would feel a threat to its existence, which many fear could provoke a preemptive strike.

"All of that is incredibly dangerous," she said.

Clinton made her comments during a question-and-answer session after a speech in which she emphasized the need for international cooperation to improve security worldwide.

During her quick trip to Europe, Clinton has worked hard to raise support for tightening sanctions on Iran.

Following discussions in London with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Wednesday, Clinton said she felt that the international community was moving toward a common understanding of what the next steps on Iran should be.

But China's Yang appeared less cooperative on Thursday, repeating Beijing's contention that Iran should be given more time to negotiate before any sanctions are considered.

(reporting by Andrew Quinn; editing by Tim Pearce)

[vector7]

China, Iran Spur U.S. to Develop Air-Sea Battle Plan

By Viola Gienger and Tony Capaccio



Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. military is drawing up a new air-sea battle plan in response to threats such as China’s persistent military buildup and Iran’s possession of advanced weapons, according to the Pentagon’s latest strategy review.

The Air Force and Navy are seeking more effective ways to ensure continued access to the western Pacific and counter potential threats to American bases and personnel, according to the Quadrennial Defense Review that was released today along with the Pentagon’s proposed budget for fiscal 2011.

The joint Air Force-Navy plan would combine the strengths of each service to conduct long-range strikes that could utilize a new generation of bombers, a new cruise missile and drones launched from aircraft carriers. The Navy also is increasing funding to develop an unmanned underwater vehicle, according to the report.

The battle plan is among a range of new initiatives outlined in the review, which is conducted every four years to revise U.S. military strategy for the coming decade or more. The new report places top priority on the fights in Afghanistan and Iraq and against terrorist threats elsewhere, while also preparing for future threats.

“This is truly a wartime QDR,” Defense Secretary Robert Gates wrote in a cover letter for the report. “For the first time, it places the current conflicts at the top of our budgeting, policy and program priorities.”

Two-War Capability

The review deemphasizes but does not abandon the Pentagon’s doctrine that calls for the military to be able to fight two major wars nearly simultaneously. It acknowledges this mission but says planning should focus more closely on other scenarios, such as irregular warfare including conflicts involving insurgents or drug traffickers and even humanitarian disasters.

“In the mid- to long-term, U.S. military forces must plan and prepare to prevail in a broad range of operations that may occur in multiple theaters in overlapping time frames,” the Defense Department says in the review.

“This includes maintaining the ability to prevail against two capable nation-state aggressors,” it states.

Gates said the wider array of threats includes “sophisticated new technologies to deny our forces access” to areas of the sea, air, space and cyberspace. Briefing reporters at the Pentagon today, Gates also cited the threat of al-Qaeda and other groups “developing more cunning and destructive means to attack and terrorize.”

“We have learned through painful experience that the wars we fight are seldom the wars we planned,” Gates said. “As a result, the United States needs a broad portfolio of military capabilities, with maximum versatility across the widest possible spectrum of conflicts.”

Tensions With China

Alluding to China in his cover letter, Gates cited longer- term threats such as “the military modernization programs of other countries.”

U.S. officials have often called on their Chinese counterparts to provide explanations and assurances that their moves are purely defensive. The two countries resumed military talks last June, then China halted visits again over the Defense Department’s Jan. 29 announcement of a new arms sale to Taiwan. Gates said today he still plans to visit China this year.

“I hope that, if there is a downturn” in relations, “that it will be a temporary one and that we can get back to strengthening this relationship,” Gates said today.

Assurances Lacking

China is developing and deploying “large numbers” of advanced missiles, new attack submarines, long-range air defense systems and capabilities to wage electronic warfare and target computer systems, according to the report, which echoes an assessment of China’s military power issued almost a year ago.

China’s refusal to provide adequate assurances of its intentions raises “a number of legitimate questions regarding its long-term intentions,” the Pentagon says in the review.

Citing “more complex” security conditions in the region, including North Korea and terrorist threats in Southeast Asia, the review calls for “a more widely distributed” and flexible U.S. presence in Asia that relies more on allies. Partners would include Australia, Thailand, the Philippines, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam.

Threat From Iran

In the Middle East, Iran is fielding small attack boats in the Persian Gulf, a development that U.S. officials have cited in the past. That compounds the threat to naval operations from the acquisition by Iran and other nations of weapons such as quiet submarines and advanced cruise missiles that can target ships, according to the report.

Iran also has provided drones and shoulder-fired missiles to the Islamic militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Russia and other nations have contributed to the spread of surface-to- air missiles, the department said.

Among the solutions proposed are more ways to deploy U.S. forces abroad, such as naval assets, “in regions facing new challenges.”

Existing bases also need to be either hardened to protect against potential attacks or reinforced with backup locations or by dispersing them in multiple places, the department concluded.

The Pentagon has about 400,000 U.S. military personnel stationed overseas, either in war zones or elsewhere. The review emphasizes “taking care of our people” serving in multiple long deployments that take a “significant toll” on them and their families.

“We now recognize that America’s ability to deal with threats for years to come will depend importantly on our success in the current conflicts,” Gates said in his remarks at the Pentagon.

Other Concerns

In addition to supporting existing wars, the quadrennial review emphasizes the need for more unmanned aircraft, intelligence, special forces, helicopters and long-range strike capabilities as well as skills such as foreign languages and training of foreign military forces.

The U.S. military also must find better and faster ways to strengthen foreign allies and partners to share the burden, the Pentagon said.

The Pentagon should continue to maintain a nuclear arsenal as a “core mission” until “such time as the administration’s goal of a world free of nuclear weapons is achieved,” according to the report.

The potential threat of cyber attacks and the need to conduct “high-tempo operations” will require more expertise in that field and centralized command of cyber operations, the department said.

Climate Change

This year’s review also is the first to address the effects of climate change and energy dependence, Michele Flournoy, the undersecretary of defense for policy, said in a Pentagon briefing.

Climate change might create “a new operating environment in the Arctic” and increase the demand for U.S. forces in humanitarian disasters, she said.

The military’s dependence on energy for its operations also creates a vulnerability that the Pentagon aims to reduce, Flournoy said.

“We see an extremely complex environment with a multiplicity of challenges,” she said. “And we can’t afford to ignore any of them.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Tony Capaccio in Washington at acapaccio@bloomberg.net; Viola Gienger in Washington via vgienger@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: February 1, 2010 17:03 EST

[vector7]

Iran And The Chinese Gambit

February 12, 2010

Iran, in response to Russia's refusal to deliver S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems it bought several years ago, announced that it had gone ahead and designed its own, which will have similar capabilities as the S-300.

Now Iran regularly announces it has designed and built modern weapons (which it cannot buy because of three decades of embargos).

These weapons rarely show up, although some are seen in prototype form. Meanwhile, the S-300, and similar systems, have not been delivered because Western nations have told Russia and China that if they arm Iran with modern weapons, there will be consequences. But an "Iranian" S-300 might be more likely. That's because last year, Iran sought to purchase the Chinese made HQ-9 anti-aircraft missile system.

China buys a lot of oil from Iran, and is considered an ally. China is believed to have secretly supplied Iran with a lot of military technology.

By not delivering actual weapons, China avoids a confrontation with angry Western nations.

China has been offering its HQ-9 system to foreign customers, as the FD-2000, for several years now. The Russians are not happy with this, given the amount of stolen S-300 technology believed to be in the HQ-9.

Russia has been pointed in warning China not to export weapons containing stolen Russian tech. But the Chinese have done it, apparently believing there's really nothing the Russians can do about it.

China, in this case, may have followed past practice and quietly sold Iran the technology for the FD-2000, and let them build their own, and call it whatever they want.

A decade ago, China began introducing the HQ-9 for use by its army and navy (on ships). Over a decade of development was believed to have benefitted from data stolen from similar American and Russian systems.

The HQ-9 missile is similar to the U.S. "Patriot," while the radar apparently derived much technology from that used in the Russian S-300 system. The HQ-9 missile has a max range of about 100 kilometers, weighs 1.3 tons and has a passive (no broadcasting) seeker in the missile.

Most of the systems used by the army are mobile. Army HQ-9 brigades have a brigade headquarters (with a command vehicle, and four trucks for communications and maintenance), six battalions (each with a missile control vehicle, a targeting radar vehicle, a search radar vehicle and eight missile-launch-vehicles, each carrying four missiles in containers).

Neither the S-300 or HQ-9 have been tested in combat. Most earlier Russian designed air defense systems performed poorly in combat. Even the Russian SA-6 missile systems, that Egypt used in 1973, which were initially a surprise to the Israelis, were soon countered, and did not stop the Israelis from getting through.

While the best sales technique is to push the products track record, you have to do just the opposite with Russian anti-aircraft missiles.

Thus the Russians, and now the Chinese with their FD-2000, emphasize low price, impressive specifications, good test results and potential.

[vector7]

China, Iran Creating 'No-Go' Zones to Thwart U.S. Military Power

Posted: 03/1/10
Filed Under:National Security
David Wood
Comments



During the Cold War, the Pentagon built the greatest naval and air forces the world had ever seen, endowing the United States with the superpower ability to land huge military forces anywhere in the world, at any time, whether invited in or not.

So it was that Washington, using its armada of aircraft carriers, cruise missile-launching submarines, fast cargo ships, long-range bombers, airlifters, and air refueling fighters, could eject the Iraqis from Kuwait (1991), bomb Serbia (1999), kick over the Taliban regime in Afghanistan (2001), and knock off Saddam and his cronies (2003). Everybody else had to meekly follow along (or sit on the sidelines).

But now the party's over. The United States, Pentagon strategists say, is quickly losing its ability to barge in without permission. Potential target countries and even some lukewarm allies are figuring out ingenious ways to blunt American power without trying to meet it head-on, using a combination of high-tech and low-tech jujitsu.

At the same time, U.S. naval and air forces have been shrinking under the weight of ever more expensive hardware. It's no longer the case that the United States can overwhelm clever defenses with sheer numbers.

As Defense Secretary Robert Gates summed up the problem this month, countries in places where the United States has strategic interests -- including the Persian Gulf and the Pacific -- are building "sophisticated, new technologies to deny our forces access to the global commons of sea, air, space and cyberspace.''

Those innocuous words spell trouble. While the U.S. military and strategy community is focused on Afghanistan and the fight in Marja, others – Iran and China, to name two – are chipping away at America's access to the Taiwan Strait, the South China Sea, the Persian Gulf and the increasingly critical extraterrestrial realms.

"This era of U.S. military dominance is waning at an increasing and alarming rate,'' Andrew Krepinevich, a West Point-educated officer and former senior Pentagon strategist, writes in a new report. "With the spread of advanced military technologies and their exploitation by other militaries, especially China's People's Liberation Army and to a far lesser extent Iran's military and Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, the U.S. military's ability to preserve military access to two key areas of vital interest, the western Pacific and the Persian Gulf, is being increasingly challenged.''

At present, "there is little indication that China or Iran intend to alter their efforts to create 'no-go' zones in the maritime areas off their coasts,'' writes Krepinevich, president of the non-partisan think tank, the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

What will save America's bacon, Gates and others hope, is something called the Air-Sea Battle Concept. Problem: It has yet to be invented.

The most worrisome of the "area denial/anti-access'' strategies being deployed against the United States (and others) is by China, which groups its defenses under the term "shashoujian,'' or "assassin's mace.'' The term refers to an ancient weapon, easily concealed by Chinese warriors and used to cripple a more powerful attacker.

In its modern incarnation, Krepinevich explains, shashoujian is a powerful combination of traditional but sophisticated air defenses, ballistic and anti-ship missiles, and similar weapons to put at risk nearby U.S. forces and regional bases, together with anti-satellite and cyberwar weapons to disable U.S. reconnaissance and command-and-control networks.

Dennis Blair, the top U.S. intelligence official, described these developments in detail in a report to Congress last month, adding that taken together, they "improve China's ability to execute an anti-access and area-denial strategy in the western Pacific.''

Iran's area-denial arsenal includes coastal and inland missile batteries, ballistic missiles to threaten U.S. bases and Arabian oil facilities, mines and shallow-draft missile boats that can quickly swarm around heavy, slow-moving U.S. warships. Iran's ability to threaten any would-be invaders, or simply to shut off access to the Gulf, would be enhanced if it acquires a nuclear weapons capability, which some analysts believe could happen within President Obama's current term in office.

As these new challenges have grown, America's air and naval forces have been quietly shrinking, a function of the staggering increase in complexity and cost of the hardware. Although other factors are at play, the bottom line is that the Pentagon can afford fewer planes and ships because each one costs more and more. As former Lockheed Martin chairman Norm Augustine pointed out in 1983, the cost of a fighter aircraft has quadrupled every 10 years, since the dawn of the age of aviation.

The F16 fighter, for instance, originally cost about $35 million each (adjusted for inflation). It is being replaced by the F-35, currently priced at $266 million each. The pattern holds for the F-22, which the Pentagon has bought to replace its F-15s, and the B-1 and B-2 bombers built to replace B-52s and F-111s. Small wonder the Air Force inventory of fighter-attack planes and bombers has sagged 20 percent during the past 15 years from 2,073 to 1,649.

The Navy also has fallen victim to the rising-cost, falling-inventory phenomenon. During the Vietnam War it boasted 932 warships. By 1985 the Navy could barely maintain 571 ships (despite the Reagan administration's rallying cry of a "600-ship Navy!''). Today's Navy has dwindled to 283 expensive warships.

Robert Work, currently the under secretary of the Navy, pointed out as a private researcher last year that not only is the current naval force inadequate for a bust-in-the-door mission, the Navy's plans for a larger future fleet are still inadequate – and unaffordable to boot. The Navy's planned future fleet of 313 ships, he wrote in a major paper on naval strategy, "lacks the range to face increasingly lethal, land-based maritime reconnaissance/strike complexes (networks), or nuclear armed adversaries.'' And, he said, it ignores the growing challenge of China's shashoujian.

Anyway, Work added, "the signs are that the Navy's plans are far too ambitious given likely future resource allocations ... the Navy needs to scale back its current plans; they are simply too ambitious for expected future budgets.''

So what's the plan? The plan is to develop a plan, for now being called the Air-Sea Battle Concept. The idea is based loosely on a strategy the Army came up with during the Cold War when the generals realized they were out-manned and out-gunned by the Red Army. Their solution was AirLand Battle, based mostly on the early work of Army Gen. Donn Starry, who advocated using closely coordinated air and ground combat power to attack deep into the enemy's rear at the outset of the fight, rather than waiting for the enemy to advance up to "the front.''

AirLand Battle became a reality after much headbutting among senior generals not willing to share the glory (or the budget dollars). It arguably helped to deter Soviet aggression in Europe. And it proved highly successful in Desert Storm and in the invasion of Iraq.

The hope for Air-Sea Battle is to achieve similar synergy by joining naval and air power with space and cyberspace war-fighting capabilities for "defeating adversaries across the range of military operations, including adversaries equipped with sophisticated anti-access and area denial capabilities,'' according to the Pentagon's most recent strategic plan, the Quadrennial Defense Review, published earlier this month.

If that sounds vague, it's because there's not much behind the words. A laconic sentence in the QDR hints that no one has any idea what Air-Sea Battle might mean in practice: "As it matures, the concept will also help guide the development of future capabilities needed for effective power projection operations.''

Last fall, the leaders of the Air Force and Navy, two services not known for cozy relations, signed an agreement to share work on this concept.

They immediately recruited a small working group, which set off on a listening tour to hear the views of senior U.S. commanders on what Air-Sea Battle should look like.

While the Air-Sea Battle task force is at work, Iran's extremist Revolutionary Guards are slowly taking over control of the government, according to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, suggesting that Iran's keep-out defenses will continue to be hardened. And China's work on cyberwar continues.

As all that unfolds, the Pentagon's attention will be elsewhere. Gates has directed that the Defense Department's strategic and budgeting focus in 2011 be directed at fighting "the wars we are in today,'' in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[vector7]

China takes over from West as Iran's main economic partner

by Staff Writers

Tehran (AFP) March 15, 2010

China has emerged as Iran's top economic partner, investing heavily in the energy sector and filling the gaps left by Western firms forced out by international sanctions. In 2009, China became Iran's premier trade partner, with bilateral trade worth 21.2 billion dollars against 14.4 billion dollars three years earlier.

The figures confirm the exponential growth in commercial ties between the two countries, which were almost non-existent 15 years ago, when trade volumes amounted to just 400 million dollars.

According to official data, Western sanctions have opened the way for Chinese companies, which last year directly supplied Iran with 13 percent (7.9 billion dollars) of its imports.

Iranian estimates also suggest that an equivalent amount was imported indirectly through the United Arab Emirates in 2009.

The West is pressuring China, one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, to back further sanctions against Iran over its controversial nuclear programme.

But new sanctions could harm the Asian powerhouse's burgeoning economic ties with the Islamic republic and Beijing insists diplomacy is the best way to end the standoff.

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband is in China this week for talks in which Iran's nuclear programme and sanctions are certain to be raised.
Prior to China's ascendancy, Germany was Iran's largest importer for more than 20 years.

Now the growth in Sino-Iranian trade ties is expected to continue in 2010 with the recovery of the global economy, according to a European analyst.

Chinese companies are also making investments in a number of major projects in Iran, like the construction of a motorway linking Tehran and the Caspian Sea, via the Alborz mountains.

China is investing significantly in Iran's energy sector, although its oil purchases from the Islamic republic are a meagre 11.4 percent, far behind Angola and Saudi Arabia, which supply more than half of Beijing's crude imports.

With some 15 to 20 billion dollars worth of oil and gas contracts signed and an equivalent amount of new investments being negotiated, according to oil experts in Tehran, energy-hungry China has emerged as Iran's largest foreign investor.

"There is only Beijing which is still investing massively in Iran," said one expert, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"The political pressures, financial problems caused by the banking restrictions and the uncertain economic returns have discouraged companies like Total, Shell, ENI and Statoil from renewing their investments in Iran," he added.

"China, which does not have these constraints and is concerned with securing its long-term energy needs, has taken the lead since 2005."
Iranian Oil Minister Masoud Mirkazemi backs this arguments, saying Chinese leaders will not "allow others to intervene" when it comes to Beijing's ties with Tehran.

"We have good cooperation with China. I congratulate the Chinese leadership which is seeking its nation's interest and wants to have a secure source of energy," Mirkazemi told reporters on Monday.
China National Petroleum Corp, the country's largest oil firm, and its subsidiary Petrochina agreed last year to invest some eight to nine billion dollars in one gas and two oil projects in Iran.

The oil projects are in Khuzestan, in southwestern Iran, while the gas project is at the giant South Pars field in the Gulf, where the Chinese firms replaced France's Total.

Sinopec, China's largest oil refining company, has also been involved since 2007 in exploiting Khuzestan's Yadavaran oil field, which envisages an investment of nearly three billion dollars.

Britain's Financial Times said in a report this month that Chinese companies are now supplying one-third of Iranian imports of petroleum products following the withdrawal of major Western suppliers.

However, analysts say the development of Sino-Iranian relations could run up against serious obstacles.

"Tehran wants China to invest, but at the same time it is very protective of its own businesses," said Hatef Haeri, who runs Bedigest.com, an Iranian economic information service.

"So Chinese companies face real mistrust in Iran, and must also overcome big cultural and linguistics barriers."

For its part, Beijing could be reluctant to sacrifice other more important interests if Western pressure intensifies.

Zhu Weilie, head of the Middle East Studies Institute at Shanghai International Studies University, said Iran's trade influence with China was far outweighed by China's commercial ties to the West.

"The US certainly matters most to China in terms of interests," he said. "China has extremely big trade volumes with the US, Europe and Japan, while trading volumes between China and Iran are just 20 billion dollars a year."

Two-way trade between China and the United States totalled 409 billion dollars in 2009, according to the US Congressional Research Service.

[vector7]

Clinton either naïve or disingenuous on China's stance on Iran

Tuesday, March 30, 2010 [ Reads:321 / Comments:0 / 4289 ]



The narrow victory of secular politician and former Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi in the recent elections was welcomed by many Sunni Arab states who saw it as a means to curtail the growing Iranian influence in Iraq. This has been a cause of major panic for the United States and its Arab allies since 2003.

That result however now hangs in the balance after six winning candidates were advised that they are in danger of losing their seats – thereby depriving Allawi's bloc its narrow victory – if a federal court upholds a broad purge of candidates who are suspected of past involvement with the late dictator Saddam Hussein's outlawed Baath Party.

It would then occasion another Shiite-dominated Iraqi government with Iran supplying further money, weapons and training to what could become its major partner in the region and Sunni majority governments continuing to distance themselves from Baghdad.

While U.S. officials blame the banning by a Shiite-led vetting body of hundreds of candidates from running in the March 7 election for their alleged ties to the Saddam regime on Tehran, that will be of little moment if Iraq's U.S. trained army joins hands with Iran.

The prospect of a powerful Iraq allied to a militant Iran will send shivers down the spine of every Sunni Arab government in the region and present them with a Shiite coalition the likes of which they have never seen before.

Unfortunately it gets a lot worse.

In July 2008 - despite the U.S. and Britain spending every bit of political capital they could muster - Russia and China vetoed a U.S. sponsored Security Council resolution that would have imposed an arms embargo on Zimbabwe and sanctioned President Robert Mugabe and his top advisers for rigging the country's presidential elections.

Russian and Chinese envoys said U.N. sanctions amounted to unwarranted interference in Zimbabwe's domestic affairs and would have threatened preliminary talks between Mugabe's government and representatives of his chief political rival, Morgan Tsvangirai, to resolve the country's crisis.

At that stage according to aid agencies 5 million Zimbabweans stood on the brink of starvation.

Accordingly in a country that represented no major strategic interest to either Russia or China and in circumstances as compelling as any that you could find anywhere on the planet both Russia and China bludgeoned a U.S. resolution to death.

The veto by Russia and China coming a few days after President Medvedev agreed a tough statement at the G8 summit in Japan threatening sanctions against Zimbabwe.

In the case of Iran the situation is far trickier.

As confrontation between the U.S. and Iran escalates, Tehran has moved closer to Moscow and Beijing. Tehran, like Russia, are concerned about Turkey's regional ambitions and both share a common goal in limiting the political influence of the United States in Central Asia. This common interest has led the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation - which is dominated by Russia and China - to offer Iran full membership in 2006.

There can be no doubting that Russia and China are putting pressure on Iran behind the scenes. Western diplomats told Reuters that the two powers quietly admonished Iran’s government in Tehran earlier this month, saying they wanted it to accept a UN-backed nuclear fuel offer and to change its nuclear policy.

The problem is that thus far Tehran has not budged an inch nor is it likely to.

While Russia and China previously backed three resolutions in 2006, 2007 and 2008 imposing limited sanctions against Iran – travel bans and asset freezes targeting some Iranian individuals and firms linked to Tehran’s nuclear and missile programs - that was only after they had substantially watered them down.

In the end they were considered largely symbolic and in the main unsubstantial.

Which brings us to Hillary Clinton.

In response to the seemingly relentless push for nuclear weapons by Iran US President Barack Obama and Clinton have been attempting a largely unsuccessful stick and carrot approach.

Their efforts so far being thwarted by Russia and China.

Now the US Secretary of State has said that China will play a role in international efforts to pen sanctions against Iran at the United Nations, and that Beijing recognises the threat of Iran's nuclear program. That role at present appears to be in confirming why they are totally opposed to sanctions.

"I think as the weeks go forward and we begin the hard work of trying to come up with a Security Council resolution, China will be involved," Clinton said Monday in an interview with Canadian television.

Undoubtedly China and Russia will be involved but - as in the case of Zimbabwe - primarily to ensure that Iran is not backed into a corner.

There was some good news for Clinton from the Brussels based International Crisis Group (ICG) which issued a report recently which suggests that : “Beijing will not side with Iran at the expense of its relations with the US. Despite recent troubles in the Sino-US relationship, China still values those ties more than its ties to Iran.”

The same however applies to the Obama administration who won't risk its ties to Beijing or Moscow over Tehran. This can be seen by its aborting of the European missile shield and backing off over Georgia.

While Clinton suggests that China has been part of a consultative group that has been unified all along the way and which has made it very clear that a nuclear-armed Iran is not acceptable to the international community, she fails to make mention of the fact that due to Russia and China's presence Iran has been able to accelerate its programme and ignore any warnings or threats the U.S has made.

China has been the most resistant member of the so-called "P5-plus-1" - the five permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany that are negotiating with Iran - over imposing further sanctions. Based upon current circumstances there is no reason to believe that this will change substantially.

While Clinton says that an attempt will be made "to try to come to some consensus" that will at best result in a material watering down of any sanctions if Beijing is to be appeased.

Last week China joined the other five nations in a conference call to weigh proposed new UN sanctions against Iran.

Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said Monday that Chinese officials were willing to talk to him about cooperation on Iran when he visited Beijing earlier this month.

"We've had a recognition, I think, by our Chinese counterparts of the danger of the Iranian nuclear program and the fact that there does not seem to be a willingness on the Iranians to take the very generous offer that the P5-plus-1 made to them," Steinberg told reporters in Washington.

"Despite the very serious efforts, which we support, of the Chinese to encourage diplomacy on the part of the Iranians, they don't seem to be responsive," he said.

The Bottom Line

Any resolution passed by the Security Council of the U.N, which is agreed to by Russia and China, will once again be symbolic and have no effect on Tehran who are adamant that they are pressing ahead.

This will mean that on the ground a nuclear Iran is on the way.

Under the umbrella of nuclear warheads, which will deter any outside intervention, the ground forces of a new Shiite coalition can start to project power in this strategic region.

[vector7]

Wonder where these are bound for?

Russia ships China 15 S-300 missile systems--report

Agence France-Presse
First Posted 05:11:00 04/03/2010

MOSCOW--Russia has shipped China 15 advanced surface-to-air missile systems, the director of the Russian plant which produces the weapons was cited by news agencies as saying on Friday.

The truck-mounted air defence S-300 batteries, known by NATO as SA-20 Gargoyles, can target aircraft and ballistic missiles at a range of over 15 kilometres.

"We just fulfilled a large contract for the delivery to China of 15 batteries of the new S-300 missile defence systems," Igor Ashurbeili, director of the Almaz-Antei plant was quoted as saying.

The contract included the supply of a total of 15 batteries, each usually consisting of four S-300 missiles, he said. He did not disclose the value of the deal.

Russia has acknowledged making a contract with Iran for the supply of the same advance missiles, alarming Israel and its allies, who believe the Islamic state could use the systems to guard against a potential strike on its nuclear installations.

The United States and Israel worry that Iran's civilian nuclear energy programme, including a power plant Russia is helping build at Bushehr, is a cover for ambitions to build an atomic bomb. Tehran has long denied such plans.

First deployed by the USSR in 1979, the S-300, nicknamed "the favorite" by Russians, is still seen as one of the most powerful anti-aircraft missiles on the market. It can simultaneously track up to 100 targets and engage 12.

China has long been a major client for Russian weaponry but the trade has become sensitive due to Russian concerns about piracy of its technology by the Chinese as Beijing strives to develop a home-grown weapons complex.

[vector7]

China Reiterates Opposition to Iran Sanctions… Again

By Jason Ditz, April 13, 2010

The eternal push for additional sanctions against Iran never changes too much.

Earlier today, President Barack Obama declared that he was “confident” China would back the sanctions, a confidence expressed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton several times over the past few weeks.

But as has happened every other time this confidence was expressed, China was quick to dismiss the idea and reiterate its opposition to sanctions.

“China always believes that dialogue and negotiation are the best way out for the issue. Pressure and sanctions cannot fundamentally solve it,” insisted China’s Foreign Ministry.

Despite this opposition, the US is still hoping to push forward sanctions against Iran in the next few weeks to punish it over its refusal to accept a third party enrichment deal. Iran has actually agreed to that deal in principle, and reiterated their support again today.

Iran’s willingness to accept a deal and its repeated calls for dialogue do not appear to be stopping the US push for sanctions, ostensibly to punish it for not accepting a deal and not accepting dialogue.

This is perhaps unsurprising, however, as the fact that the IAEA has repeatedly confirmed that Iran is not enriching uranium to anywhere near weapons grade and is not diverting it to any non-civilian use has likewise done little to dissuade the US from sanctions on the completely false basis of Iran enriching uranium for military purposes.

[vector7]

China opens missile plant in Iran

by Staff Writers
Tehran (UPI) Apr 23, 2010

China inaugurated a missile plan in Iran last month, even as the United States and its allies were pressing Beijing to support a new round of tough economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic over its nuclear program, Jane's Defense Weekly reports. It's a military relationship that goes back two decades and, in light of Russia's reluctance to provide the Iranians with advanced air-defense missile system to counter possible U.S. or Israeli airstrikes, is set to expand.

Robert Hewson, editor of Jane's Air-Launched Weapons, reported that the factory for assembling and producing Iran's Nasr-1 -- Victory 1 -- anti-ship missile was opened March 7.

The Nasr is identical to China's C-704 anti-ship missile, Hewson says. Iran's burgeoning defense industry, much of it controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, has been producing Chinese-designed anti-ship missiles such as the C-801 since the early 1990s.

The C-704, developed by China Aerospace Group, targets ships of 1,000-4,000 tons displacement and is the equivalent of the U.S. AGM-119 anti-ship missile. With a range of 106 miles and a 240-pound warhead, the C-704 has a kill probability of 95.7 percent.

The Iranians, possibly with Chinese assistance, have even developed improved versions such as the Noor, an upgraded version of China's C-802, with a longer range than the original and over-the-horizon capabilities.

Indeed, Hewson observed that "Iran has gone further than China in fielding the C-802, taking what was previously a land- and ship-launched weapon and producing an air-launched version that can be carried by Mi-17 helicopters and fast-jet types."

Over the years Iran has developed a range of anti-ship missile systems from the Chinese weapons that gives the Islamic Republic's regular navy and the IRGC's naval arm the capability to exert a considerable degree of control over waters in the Gulf and the Arabian Sea.

This is the area from which U.S. naval forces would strike if hostilities erupt.

On Saturday, the IRGC concluded its annual three-day Great Prophet exercises in the Strait of Hormuz, the choke point gateway to the Gulf and a key energy artery, in a show of defiance against the United States.

The Nasr is a medium-range weapon that can be launched from warships or shore batteries and its development and planned mass production has been trumpeted by Tehran at a time when Iran's military forces are making preparations to counter possible attacks.

"In a methodical and deceptively modest manner China has helped Iran take charge of all its surrounding waters and this work between the two nations continues," Hewson reported.

"Follow-on versions of the Nasr are being developed to include an air-launched variant.

"There are other cooperative tactical missile programs under way and China's design bureaus have displayed several 'export only' weapons (such as the C-705 lightweight cruise missile) that would seem set to follow the established route into Iran," Hewson added.

"With such a solid relationship established between the two countries it is not difficult to see why China has been reluctant to commit to the Western push for sanctions against Iran."

China, ever hungry for energy sources to fuel its expanding economy, imports around 12 percent of its oil from Iran and seeks to secure Iranian natural gas through overland pipelines -- another reason it has shown little enthusiasm for new U.N. sanctions on Iran.

Hewson said no Chinese envoys were seen at the opening of the Nasr factory conducted by Iran's hard-line defense minister, Brig. Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, but the event marked "another milestone in the continuing military/industrial bond between the two countries."

Hewson observed that unlike Russia, China "has been very successful in offering Iran technology and capabilities that are actually wanted, as opposed to those that might be 'nice to have.'

"A path has been found through the factions within Iranian officialdom (and its armed forces) to deliver products that build trust in Beijing. In return, China gains influence with Tehran that can be parlayed into access to Iran's natural resources."

While these Chinese-origin systems have provided Iran with invaluable missile technology, this has had little or no impact on the development of its ballistic missile capabilities.

"Iran's strategic weapons can only (ultimately) involve it in a losing battle with the United States,' Hewson concluded, "but its tactical weapons have already altered the regional balance of power in a much more practical way."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iran Guards test missiles, warn enemies

Ramin Mostafavi
TEHRAN
Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:22pm EDT


TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's Revolutionary Guards test-fired five missiles during war games in a waterway crucial for global oil supplies on Sunday, and a commander warned the Islamic Republic's enemies they would regret any attack.

Iran, which is locked in a dispute with the West over its nuclear program, often announces advances in its military capabilities and tests weaponry in an apparent bid to show its readiness for any strikes by Israel or the United States.

The Guards' exercises in the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz coincided with rising tension between Iran and the West, which says Tehran's nuclear work is aimed at making bombs. Iran denies this.

Last week, the Pentagon said U.S. military action against Iran remained an option even as Washington pursues diplomacy and sanctions to halt the country's atomic activities.

Speaking on the drills' fourth day, Guards commander Massoud Jazayeri said Iran had a deterrence plan which would make the enemy "regretful" if they launched any attack against the country, the official IRNA news agency reported.

He also reiterated Iran's position that foreign forces in the region should leave, apparently referring to the presence of U.S. troops in neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Those who came from (far away) to our region must leave, because we consider them as the enemy," he said.

Semi-official Fars News Agency said Guards' naval units fired five missiles at a target, without making clear if they were newly designed missiles.

"Despite the different places from which the missiles were fired , they all hit the target simultaneously and completely destroyed it," Fars said.

The missiles were surface-to-surface and surface-to-sea.

A second Guards commander, Brigadier General Ali Hajizadeh, said mass production of a new reconnaissance drone which was tested in the exercise would soon be launched, Fars reported.

On Thursday, Iranian media said the Guards successfully tested a new speedboat capable of destroying enemy ships.

The United States is pushing for a fourth round of U.N. sanctions on Tehran over its refusal to halt sensitive nuclear activities as demanded by the U.N. Security Council, including proposed moves against members of the Guards.

Israel, widely believed to have the Middle East's only atomic arsenal, has described Iran's nuclear program as a threat to its existence and has not ruled out military action.

Iran, a predominantly Shi'ite Muslim state, has said it would respond to any attack by targeting U.S. interests in the region and Israel, as well as closing the Strait of Hormuz. About 40 percent of the world's traded oil leaves the Gulf region through the strategic narrows.

(Writing by Fredrik Dahl; Editing by Louise Ireland)

[vector7]

Iran opens airspace to China warplanes

Sun Oct 3, 2010 6:40PM
Share | Email | Print



Chinese fighter jets, file photo

The Islamic Republic of Iran has reportedly opened its airspace to Chinese warplanes taking part in joint military maneuvers with Turkey.

Ankara and Beijing conducted the drills in Turkey's Central Anatolia region last month.

The war games, codenamed the Anatolian Eagle, were the first involving Turkey and China. Turkey had previously carried out Anatolian Eagle maneuvers with the US and other NATO members as well as Israel.

Turkish F-16, Chinese Su-27 and Mig-29 fighter jets took part in mock dogfights during the drills.

The maneuvers come ahead of a planned visit by Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao to Turkey.

Turkey and China took their first step in military cooperation in the late 1990s with joint missile production, manufacturing weapons with a 150-kilometer range, the Hurriyet daily reported on its website.

The multinational Anatolian Eagle exercise is hosted by the Turkish Air Forces and is aimed at boosting aerial cooperation and training. The exercises have been performed since June 2001.

NN/HGH/MMN

[vector7]

Chinese warplanes refueled in Iran en route to Turkey

Font Size: Larger|Smaller

Monday, October 11, 2010
ISTANBUL - Daily News with wires



This file photo shows Chinese ground crew members equipping a warplane before a military drill. AP photo

Iran indirectly supported a secret military drill between the Turkish and Chinese air forces that took place in September, sparking concerns in the United States, daily Hürriyet reported Monday.

The Turkish and Chinese air forces secretly participated in “Anatolian Eagle” war games in Konya, which two years ago involved Turkey’s fellow NATO members the United States and Italy, in addition to Israel.

Four drill-bound Chinese SU-27 warplanes that took off from bases in China refueled in Iran – the first time the Islamic Republic has ever allowed foreign warplanes to refuel at its airbases, the report said.

The Russian-made SU-27s used by the Chinese air force had to refuel in both Pakistan and Iran because of their limited 3,500-kilometer range.

Official letters were sent to the two countries prior to the military drill requesting the use of airspace and passage and refueling privileges.

The warplanes refueled a second time in Iran on their return to China.

The drill was conducted after two years of deliberations, the report said, adding that its sole purpose was to improve mutual cooperation between the two friendly countries.

Ankara excluded Tel Aviv from the 2009 war games, reportedly because of the political tensions that followed Israel’s invasion of Gaza in January 2009. The move prompted fellow NATO members the United States and Italy to withdraw from the drills and Turkey held them at the national level. The Turkish government then decided to freeze all military exercises with Israel in response to the killing of eight Turkish citizens and an American of Turkish descent by Israeli commandos aboard a Gaza-bound aid flotilla in May.

Memorandum from Washington received ahead of drill

Washington contacted Ankara ahead of the drill to express concerns over the planned use of F-16 warplanes in a military drill involving China – which the U.S. considers a possible threat.

"We expect you to honor the agreement article that requires the exercise of caution regarding the transfer of technology to third countries," the memorandum read.

American concerns were taken into consideration and F-16 fighters were replaced by older F-4 models in the exercises.

[vector7]

Chinese firms bypass sanctions on Iran, U.S. says

By John Pomfret
Monday, October 18, 2010; A1

The Obama administration has concluded that Chinese firms are helping Iran to improve its missile technology and develop nuclear weapons, and has asked China to stop such activity, a senior U.S. official said.

During a visit to Beijing last month, a delegation led by Robert J. Einhorn, the State Department's special adviser for nonproliferation and arms control, handed a "significant list" of companies and banks to their Chinese counterparts, according to the senior U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue in U.S.-Chinese relations. The official said the Obama administration thinks that the companies are violating U.N. sanctions, but that China did not authorize their activities.

The Obama administration faces a balancing act in pressing Beijing to stop the deals and limit Chinese investments in Iran's energy industry.

U.S. officials say they need to preserve their ability to work with China on issues ranging from the value of its currency to the stability of North Korea. But the administration also wants to make progress in efforts to dissuade Iran from building a nuclear weapon and to convince other powerful states that China is not receiving lenient treatment because of its energy needs.

"My government will investigate the issues raised by the U.S. side," said Wang Baodong, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy.

Einhorn's trip is part of a worldwide effort by the Obama administration to persuade countries to push Iran to enter into negotiations over its nuclear program, which the Islamic Republic says is peaceful. The Obama administration has cobbled together a growing network of countries and companies that have announced measures to cut investments in Iran.

China's involvement in Iran's energy sector and the role that some of its companies are believed to be playing in Tehran's military modernization could disrupt U.S.-Chinese relations. In a recent meetings on Capitol Hill, China's outgoing deputy chief of mission, Xie Feng, was told that "if he ever wanted to see Congress united, Democrats and Republicans, it would be on the issue of China's interaction with Iran," one participant said, speaking on condition of anonymity to disclose a private discussion.

After the U.N. Security Council authorized enhanced sanctions against Iran in June, the United States, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Australia and Canada passed laws to further restrict investment in Iran's energy sector. The U.S. law authorized the president to sanction any company found to be selling gasoline to Iran or that had invested $20 million or more in Iran's energy sector. INPEX, the Japanese energy giant, announced last week that it was pulling out of Iran.

China thus becomes the last major economy with significant investments in Iran's energy industry. Russia does not have major investments there and recently canceled the sale of an advanced antiaircraft missile to Iran, refunding the $900 million sticker price.

"China now is the only country with a major oil and gas industry that's prepared to deal with Iran," the U.S. official said. "Everyone else has pulled out. They stand alone."

Each nation, particularly permanent members of the Security Council such as China, is responsible for abiding by the U.N. sanctions.

If one country does not, others can point out those failures, which is what Einhorn did. Other nations can also ban their companies from doing business with the wayward firms. The U.S. government did that at least 62 times with Chinese companies during President George W. Bush's first term, generally regarding missile-technology deals with Iran.

The U.S. official speaking anonymously said U.S. intelligence thinks that Chinese companies and banks have been involved in providing restricted technology and materials to Iran's military programs. He said that these deals occurred both before and after the enhanced U.N. sanctions were approved in June.

The U.S. official said that most of the deals concerned Iran's missile program. However, a senior official from a Western intelligence agency said Chinese firms were also discovered selling high-quality carbon fiber to Iran to help it build better centrifuges, which are used in enriching uranium. The official said he had no information to corroborate that reporting.

The official declined to say how many companies were on the list or to name the companies. He added that some of the company names were provided to the Chinese as case studies of how sanctions were being violated and that others were cited as examples of "ongoing concerns."

Other officials and analysts said the number of firms involved in not following sanctions was less important than the quality of the technology Iran was obtaining. In 2008, for example, Iran obtained 108 pressure gauges, which are critical to the functioning of a centrifuge, from one Chinese company.

A year earlier, a small company in the Chinese port city of Dalian provided Iran with a range of sensitive materials, including graphite, tungsten copper, tungsten powder, high- strength aluminum alloys and high-strength maraging steel, again for its nuclear program. That firm allegedly received payment from Iran via U.S. banks.

The U.S. official credited China with working hard to establish the bureaucratic structures and laws to control the export of sensitive technologies, but he said China so far has not devoted resources to crack down on violators.

"China has come a long way in putting in place an export-control system," he said. "But it's one thing to have a system that looks good on the books and it's another thing to have a system that they enforce conscientiously. . . . Where China's system is deficient is on the enforcement side."

China is generally believed to have supplied Pakistan with a blueprint for a nuclear weapon in the 1970s. But Bonnie S. Glaser of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said most experts agree that since the late 1990s, China has taken the issue more seriously. Some have argued that President Bill Clinton's administration persuaded China to embrace the issue because it was important to the United States.

Others have said China itself understood that selling missile and nuclear weapons-technology, especially to neighbors such as North Korea, was a bad idea.

Both the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations determined that China's government was no longer intentionally proliferating. That conclusion allowed Bush to open the door for U.S. nuclear-energy technology to be sold to China in contracts that are expected to be worth billions.

During the trip to China, the U.S. delegation also pushed oil companies, specifically the China National Petroleum Corp. and the China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation, to stop or limit their investments in Iran. Both firms have been in negotiations to invest billions in Iran's energy sector although, according to Erica Downs of the Brookings Institution, it is unclear how much they have spent there.

The delegation informed the Chinese of the ramifications that the new U.S. law - the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 - might have for Chinese firms and banks that continued to conduct business in Iran.

"Any Chinese enterprise that has . . . a big stake in good business relations with the United States would have to be mindful of U.S. laws," the U.S. official said.

Still, the official said, the U.S. delegation emphasized that China did not have to cut back on purchases of energy from Iran, from which China obtains around 8 percent of its oil. Nor does China need to end its "energy cooperation with Iran on a permanent basis," he said.
"What we want is some near-term pragmatic restraint," he said.

This approach, according to Downs, could spell trouble with European and Asian firms and their governments.

"What the Japanese and European companies are most concerned about is that they've left projects that are real prizes in Iran," she said. "Their biggest concern is stepping away under pressure and having the Chinese go in."

"We believe normal trade and economic cooperation with Iran that don't violate U.N. resolutions should not be hurt or disturbed," said Wang, the embassy spokesman.

[vector7]

04 Jan 2011

Iran invites Russia, China to atomic sites but not US

By Jay Deshmukh

TEHRAN, Jan 04, 2011 (AFP) - Iran is to open its atomic sites to some world powers, officials announced on Tuesday, as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted the West was wrong to confront Tehran over its nuclear programme.

Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said in Tehran that invitations to visit Iran's nuclear sites in Natanz and Arak have been sent to ambassadors of some of the nations represented in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Diplomatic sources at the IAEA in Vienna said, however, that invitations had gone out to Russia and China but that the United States, Britain, France and Germany were not on the list.

The invitees also include Hungary as rotating president of the European Union, Egypt and Cuba, according to the sources.

The rare move to open up its facilities comes as Tehran works to garner support for its atomic drive in the run-up to talks with the six world powers in Turkey at the end of January.

"The representatives of some European Union countries, NAM (Non-Aligned Movement) and some representatives of the five-plus-one (six world powers) have been invited to visit our nuclear sites," Mehmanparast told a news conference.

When asked whether the United States was invited for the trip, he said "the list of the countries invited for the visit will be unveiled when it is finalised."

Mehmanparast said the initiative was part of the Islamic republic's attempt to demonstrate "cooperation with the IAEA" and showed "the goodwill of our country and the peaceful and cooperative nature of our (nuclear) activities."

ISNA news agency cited Iran's envoy to the IAEA, Ali Asgar Soltanieh, as saying the visit was scheduled for January 15-16 and would be to the country's main uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and the heavy water facility at Arak.

"This invitation is within the framework of Iran's transparent nuclear policy," Soltanieh said.

Such visits to Iran's atomic facilities are rare and the last trip which Tehran arranged for members of the IAEA, the UN nuclear watchdog, dates back to February 2007.

The proposed new visit to the nuclear facilities in central Iran, Mehmanparast said, is to "take place before the Istanbul meeting," for which a final date has yet to be fixed.

Iran and Britain, China, France, Russia, the United States and Germany are to meet for another round of talks on Tehran's atomic programme. The previous round of talks, after a 14-month hiatus, was held in Geneva on December 6-7.

The talks are aimed at ascertaining whether Iran is seeking nuclear weapons or is indeed looking only to meet the energy needs of its growing population, as it insists.

China, a close ally and economic partner of Iran, confirmed it was among those invited to visit the atomic sites.

"China has received the invitation from the Iran side and will maintain communication with Iran on this," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said, without giving details.

Ahmadinejad was adamant on Tuesday that the West had made a mistake by confronting Iran over its atomic programme.

"You should accept that you have made mistakes. You should accept that you chose the wrong path," the hardliner said in a speech in his hometown of Semnan that was broadcast live on state television.

The "previous path (of confronting Tehran) will have no result but defeat," the president said, adding that the West must respect the rights of other countries.

Ahmadinejad and other Iranian officials have maintained that pursuing nuclear technology is the Islamic republic's "inalienable right."

The United States has not ruled out a military strike to stop Iran's growing nuclear programme under Ahmadinejad, and Tehran has been slapped with four sets of UN sanctions.

Washington has been spearheading a campaign of sanctions against Iran over its nuclear programme, which world powers suspect is masking a drive for atomic weapons.

Apart from initial unilateral punitive measures imposed soon after the fourth set of UN sanctions, Washington placed new sanctions last month, targeting Iran's Revolutionary Guards and its energy and shipping sectors.

Those targeted included Guards member Parviz Fattah, a former energy minister, and the Pars Oil and Gas Company, which is responsible for tapping some of the world's largest gas fields.

burs-jds/hc/bpz
© Copyright AFP 2011.

[vector7]

Chinese weapons fall into hands of insurgents

Chinese-made weapons have fallen into the hands of insurgents fighting Coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan because of China’s failure to enforce export controls on arms to Iran, the leaked cables show.


Insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq have obtained Chinese-made weapons Photo: AP

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter 7:00AM GMT 03 Feb 2011

US diplomats also feared that Chinese companies were selling materials to Iran that could be used to build nuclear missiles and other weapons of mass destruction.

Chinese-made guns, as well as rocket-propelled grenades and surface-to-air missiles containing Chinese-made components, have all been used against Coalition forces or civilian targets in Iraq, the US claims, while other weapons have been obtained by militants in Afghanistan.

The US was so concerned about Chinese arms and components being sold to Iran that in September 2008 the State Department launched a major diplomatic offensive to put pressure on Beijing.

It decided to share intelligence with eight “key allies” including Spain and Italy to “persuade China to enforce its export control laws more effectively” and to “aggressively implement” UN Security Council resolutions on the sale of arms and weapons materials.

Ambassadors were told to encourage the foreign governments to point out to the Chinese that arms sales to Iran “could ultimately damage China’s reputation and its bilateral relationship with” each of the countries.

Patricia McNerney, of the US Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, listed examples of Chinese-made weapons seized from insurgents in Iraq in a cable sent from Washington to US diplomats abroad.

They included “new-condition Chinese produced small arms” which were “found together with newly-produced Iranian military materiel”; a surface-to-air missile fired at a Boeing 747 civilian airliner over Baghdad in August 2004 “assembled in Iran using a mix of Chinese and Iranian parts”; “two Chinese-origin QW-1 MANPADS (surface-to-air missiles) that Iran had transferred to Iraqi insurgents” and “hundreds of newly-produced Iranian PG-7-AT1 rocket-propelled grenades that contain Chinese-made base detonators” that had been “repeatedly fired at Coalition forces” by Shia militants.

Raising concerns about Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons programme, Ms McNerney added: “Certain state-owned Chinese entities and private firms continue to export or transship key items and/or dual-use technology needed to develop weapons of mass destruction or their means of delivery, as well as conventional weapons to Iran.”

She told US diplomats: “Getting China to aggressively implement United Nations Security Council resolutions as well as more effectively enforce its own export controls regarding transfers of dual-use and military items to Iran is an essential component of our overall diplomatic strategy to thwart Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction.”

In 2008 the US also confronted China over a shipment to Iran of 208 tonnes of potassium perchlorate, which can be used as rocket fuel.
The alleged breaches were highlighted a year after President Bush had raised the issue of arms sales with Chinese President Hu at a summit in Australia.

China is by no means the only country accused of failing to implement export controls on arms and materials sales to Iran. In April 2009 the ambassador to the EU in Brussels noted concerns that smaller EU member states were failing to take seriously enough the threat posed by Iran.

One EU official told US diplomats that he had to “continually remind” European countries “that the situation is dangerous and unabated will lead to nuclear war in the Middle East”.

Later the same year the German computer firm Siemens was forced to recall 111 boxes of computers that it had sold to a Chinese company linked to Iran’s nuclear programme. A cable from the US Embassy in Berlin noted:

“Siemens needs to be more careful about whom they sell to,” though it had “technically” done nothing wrong, as the computers were not controlled export items.

The US also raised concerns about the French firm Sofradir selling infrared detectors to a Chinese firm that were being used in thermal imaging systems sold on by China to Iran.

[Ryan Ruck]

LOL! Yeah, that's definitely why they have Chinese weapons.