FPI Overnight Brief: February 10, 2010

Iran

In recent weeks, security officials have unleashed an epidemic of arrests across Iran in an effort to neutralize the political opposition, silence critical voices and head off widespread protests when the nation observes the anniversary of the revolution on Thursday, Iran analysts inside and outside the country said.  Though the government has refrained from arresting the principal leaders of the opposition, the category of people it has pursued has grown broader over time.  While a number of well-known reformists were detained shortly after the contested presidential election last June, the ranks of those imprisoned now include artists, photographers, children’s rights advocates, women’s rights activists, students and scores of journalists. Iran now has more journalists in prison than any other country in the world, with at least 65 in custody, according to Reporters Without Borders. – New York Times

Russia expressed greater concern over Iran’s nuclear programme on Tuesday, with one of the closest allies to Vladimir Putin, prime minister, describing western anxiety over Tehran’s plans as “valid”. As Iran took an important step towards the possible manufacture of weapons grade uranium, Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of the Presidential Security Council, said there was a “limit” to how much diplomacy could be used to solve the crisis. In recent months, Dmitry Medvedev, president, has expressed growing concern over Iran’s programme, while Mr Putin – often regarded as the real source of power at the Kremlin – has resisted tough new United Nations sanctions against Tehran. - Financial Times

Editorial:  Over the last four years, the United Nations Security Council has repeatedly demanded that Iran stop producing nuclear fuel. Iran is still churning out enriched uranium and has now told United Nations inspectors that it is raising the level of enrichment — moving slightly closer to bomb-grade quality.  President Obama was right to offer to negotiate with Tehran. Washington and its allies were right to look for possible compromises even after Tehran was caught — again — hiding an enrichment plant.  Enough is enough. Iran needs to understand that its nuclear ambition comes with a very high cost. – New York Times

Mohsen Sazegara, cofounder of the IRGC and an opposition figure tells Josh Rogin:  At the end of the day, the nation is fighting with the Revolutionary Guard for its human rights and freedom…Sanctions against the Revolutionary Guard are something that can help, especially if they are connected to the democratic and human rights situation in Iran…I hope that the Obama administration and other democratic countries will be more supportive of the struggle of the people of Iran for democracy and human rights. I can summarize it in four items. First, sanctions against the Revolutionary Guard. Second, technical support like satellite Internet for Iran and pressure on companies like Nokia which have sold devices to control SMS, cell phones, and Internet in Iran. Third, help asylum seekers. Some of the activists, journalists and freedom seekers are now out of Iran in Turkey, Iraq, or Dubai. We need to help to bring them to Western countries. The last one is, please everybody, help to prevent any military strike against Iran, especially from Israel, because it would be a gift for this regime. We believe that this regime will be overthrown by the people, and a military strike would be the only solution for this regime to save the government. – The Cable

Joshua Murvachik writes:  If on Thursday few protesters appear or make their sentiments known, then we will know that repression is working, at least for now, and the people have been cowed. But if large numbers turn out for the Green—rivaling or exceeding the numbers the authorities can produce, despite the fact that the former group face dire consequence while the latter are offered emoluments and transportation—then the movement’s momentum will continue to mount, and the deadly fissures that have been apparent within the regime will widen, perhaps fatally. If confrontations on Thursday claim even more lives, then this process is likely to be accelerated, with increasing numbers of clerics swinging against the authorities. By Friday morning we will have a clearer idea how much time is left for this sad, bizarre chapter in human history called the Islamic Republic. – World Affairs Journal

The United States and other nations seeking to restrain Iran's nuclear ambitions are offering to help the Islamic republic purchase medical isotopes on the international market, administration officials said Tuesday. The offer, officials said, is meant to persuade Iran to halt its controversial push to produce fuel for a medical research reactor. – Washington Post

President Obama said Tuesday that the United States and its allies are moving quickly to develop "a significant regime of sanctions" against Iran over its nuclear program, which he described as being headed toward eventually producing nuclear weapons…In response to a question at the briefing, which was largely devoted to domestic issues, Obama said, "We have bent over backwards to say to the Islamic Republic of Iran that we are willing to have a constructive conversation about how they can align themselves with international norms and rules and reenter as full members of the international community." – Washington Post

Editorial:  Concentrating on the complexities of Iran’s nuclear programme and its leadership’s subterfuge skews a more important reality: Iran’s investments in its nuclear programme do nothing to address the country’s greatest challenges. More than 60 per cent of Iran’s population was born after its revolution 31 years ago. These young people care less about upholding Khomeinist ideals than about building a better life for themselves and their families. The unrest that followed the contested presidential election of June 2009 reflected this generation’s widespread frustration. Iran is unable to supply them with jobs and decent wages. The isolation that comes with its aggressive foreign and nuclear policy makes coherent, sustainable economic development impossible in Iran. That an oil-producing country of 75 million is forced to import petrol for its domestic needs speaks for itself. And the Revolutionary Guard’s hold over the economy ensures that cronyism and corruption will continue. – The National

Will Inboden writes:  In at least 3 respects, the lessons from Sharansky and Reagan might be relevant here. First, it is a standard part of the playbook of dictatorial regimes to accuse their dissidents of being tools of the West. While Western governments need to act with prudence and be mindful of local conditions, the tiresome canard of being "American agents" should not deter principled support for human rights activists. Second, Reagan demonstrated that nuclear negotiations do not have to be separated from human rights, but can be linked together, particularly when both are connected to the legitimacy and trustworthiness of the regime. Third, Western support -- even just rhetorical support -- for dissidents can be encouraging and even game-changing in assuring them that they are not alone. Hence the joy among Sharansky's fellow inmates on learning of Reagan's words; hence the chants of Iranian protestors "Obama, Obama -- either with us, or with them!" – Shadow Government

The War

Marc Thiessen writes:  President Barack Obama's escalation of drone strikes is one area in the counterterrorism fight where he has earned plaudits from even his most vocal critics on the right. Hold the applause. Obama's escalation of the "Predator War" comes at the very same time he has eliminated the CIA's capability to capture senior terrorist leaders alive and interrogate them for information on new attacks. The Predator has become for President Obama what the cruise missile was to President Bill Clinton -- an easy way to appear like he is taking tough action against terrorists, when he is really shying away from the hard decisions needed to protect the United States… The problem is that Obama is increasingly using drone strikes as a substitute for operations to bring terrorist leaders in alive for questioning -- and that is putting the country at risk. – Foreign Policy

In the coming days, thousands of U.S. Marines will seek to transform Marja…Working in partnership with Afghan soldiers, the Marines are planning a major operation to flush out insurgents and allow the Afghan government to reassert control. "We intend to go in big, strong and fast," said Brig. Gen. Larry Nicholson, commander of the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade. British forces plan to conduct simultaneous operations intended to push into other Taliban strongholds in Helmand. The combined operations are expected to involve about 15,000 U.S., British and Afghan troops, NATO military officials said. U.S. forces have moved into positions around Marja over the past week in preparation. About 200 Marines and Afghan soldiers, traveling by helicopters, seized a key intersection northeast of Marja on Tuesday morning, military officials said… There are so many insurgents and roadside bombs in Marja that the Marines have not entered the area since arriving in Helmand last summer. Speaking to his troops Tuesday, Nicholson called Marja "the last spot where the enemy feels secure" in the Marines' area of operations in Helmand. – Washington Post

Pakistan has told the United States it wants a central role in resolving the Afghan war and has offered to mediate with Taliban factions who use its territory and have long served as its allies, American and Pakistani officials said.  The offer, aimed at preserving Pakistan’s influence in Afghanistan once the Americans leave, could both help and hurt American interests as Washington debates reconciling with the Taliban. Pakistan’s army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, made clear Pakistan’s willingness to mediate at a meeting late last month at NATO headquarters with top American military officials, a senior American military official familiar with the meeting said. – New York Times

Dana Perino and Bill Burck write: [No one] suggested that Abdulmutallab could not be charged and convicted in a criminal trial eventually. The unanswered question is why the administration rushed to put him in the criminal system from the get-go. This was completely unnecessary: The law is clear that a foreign terrorist affiliated with al-Qaeda who is captured on U.S. soil may be lawfully held as an enemy combatant. Once Abdulmutallab had been thoroughly interrogated, the administration would have been free to choose whether to charge him in the civilian or military system (though we think the latter would be preferable). The point of interrogation, and holding Abdulmutallab even temporarily as an enemy combatant, is to get information to stop future attacks; the point of a trial, whether civilian or military, is to punish the wrongdoer. Conflating the two is Brennan’s — and the administration’s — most frustrating and dangerous mistake. – The Corner

Pakistani Taliban chief Hakimullah Mehsud has died, the country's top civilian security official told The Associated Press Wednesday, giving the government's first categorical confirmation of the death of the feared militant leader. Reports of Mehsud's death emerged after a spate of U.S. missiles hit his stronghold in Pakistan's northwest tribal belt in mid-January. Mehsud was said to have died of wounds suffered in one of the strikes. The Taliban have denied his death, but have backed off an initial promise to prove the 20-something still lives. – Associated Press

Ukraine

Supporters of losing candidate Yulia Tymoshenko said Tuesday they were preparing legal challenges to returns from Ukraine's presidential election, as her rival's party maneuvered to have parliament oust her as prime minister…[M]embers of her party said they planned to call for recounts at 1,000 of the 33,000 polling stations, claiming irregularities there favored Mr. Yanukovych. They said the party was also preparing an appeal asking the courts to nullify the overall result as fraudulent. – Wall Street Journal

Democracy and Human Rights

Kelley Currie writes:  It is almost painful to compare Liu's eloquent defense of freedom of expression to President Obama's awkward rhetoric on the same topic in Shanghai last fall -- "I am a big supporter of non-censorship" -- or to contrast Liu's defense of the universality of human rights with President Obama's insulting comment that "different countries have different traditions."  Someday Chinese history will honor Liu Xiaobo as his country's Vaclav Havel or Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.  For now, it would be nice to see the United States and other free nations show at least as much concern for Liu, and the principles he is in jail for defending, as is routinely given to the sensitive feelings of China's dictators.  To start with, Liu's statement should be required reading for everyone in the U.S. government who is working on China policy, and for those cynical "experts" who are calling for the U.S. to soft-pedal issues of principle in order to preserve the facade of cooperation with Beijing. – The Weekly Standard Blog

Melanie Verveer writes:  I want to make it clear: “culture” cannot justify the violation of human rights. Addressing violence against women is the responsibility and imperative of every nation. In terms of its moral, humanitarian, development, economic, and international security consequences, violence against women and girls is one of the major impediments to progress around the globe. We need the kind of serious and coordinated response to it that we give to other threats of this magnitude…Our response to violence against women must include men and women working together to elevate the problem beyond “a domestic matter,” and beyond a “women's issue.” Ending violence against women around the world is a human rights issue, and a worldwide crisis that must be resolved if we are to make gains in global stability, security, and prosperity. It is long past time that ending violence against women became a priority for us all. - DipNote

Defense

Daniel Goure writes:  The key assumption behind the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) is that the United States will have sufficient time and warning with which to win the wars it is in now and then “pivot” to address future high-end or more complex threats. In the meantime, the military will also be participating in lots of disaster relief, conflict prevention and partnership building exercises. The reality is that we may have much less time than the QDR assumes before major conflict again preoccupies the Department of Defense’s time, attention and resources. – Early Warning

[O]n a reporter’s conference call last week, DOD Buzz had a chance to ask Kathleen Hicks, deputy undersecretary of Defense for strategy and force planning and the lead QDR author, about some of the pointed criticism aimed at the QDR. She was clearly more than a little irritated by the critical reviews that have poured in since its release. We asked Hicks how she answered critics who said the strategy review is not forward looking enough and focuses inordinately on the current wars. “It would be nice if we lived in a world with no operational requirements and we could, as we did in the ’90s, simply focus forward. We couldn’t do that,” she said. “It would be irresponsible… We have men and women in harm’s way, and I don’t think the American public or their representatives would very much appreciate our ignoring the realities.” – DoD Buzz

James Kirchick writes:  Nuclear weapons provide an enormous strategic benefit to the nations that acquire them, which is why governments spend vast sums in their obtainment. It is why, to take the situation that has captivated the world for the past several years, the Iranian regime has risked so much ­ in terms of its isolation on the world stage and the threat of economic hardship that will come with tighter sanctions ­ to join the nuclear club. No number of briefing papers, commissions, and security conference panels have yet to describe a realistic way by which the world will divest itself of these weapons—and Saturday's discussion in Munich was no different. Even if the goal were to be achieved and all nuclear arms were abolished, that still would not erase nuclear know-how, the intangible knowledge contained in the brains of thousands of scientists around the world. Given that know-how, and the funds to support it, what treaty's verification mechanism would realistically prevent one of the world's less trustworthy and transparent states—and several come to mind—from using the global elimination of nuclear weapons as an opportunity to start a Nuclear Club of One? – World Affairs Journal

Middle East

Jordan is in advanced talks with the Obama administration to conclude a civilian nuclear-cooperation agreement with the U.S., according to Jordanian and U.S. officials. Successful completion of the negotiations would make Jordan the second Arab state in less than a year, following the United Arab Emirates, to secure nuclear assistance from Washington. Any pact would constitute an international treaty and need the approval of Congress. The talks come as Iran is accelerating its production of nuclear fuel, raising the prospect of an expanding nuclear-arms race in the Middle East. An accord with King Abdullah II's government in Amman would allow U.S. firms to transfer nuclear equipment, fuel and expertise to Jordan, which is one of only two Arab countries to have signed a peace agreement with Israel. – Wall Street Journal

Americas

Haiti's government says around 230,000 people died in last month's earthquake, 18,000 more than its previous estimate.  The toll from the 12 January quake is approaching that of the 2004 Asian tsunami, which killed 250,000 people...About 300,000 were injured. The latest figure does not include bodies buried by private funeral homes in private cemeteries, or the dead buried by their own families. - BBC

Editorial:  Despite the adoption in 2001 of a "democracy charter," the OAS has done little to stem what has been a steady erosion of free elections, free press and free assembly in Latin America during the past five years. When Honduras's president was arrested and dispatched to exile by the military last year, the organization was aggressive but clumsy -- and ended up making a democratic outcome harder to achieve. In the case of countries where democracy has been systematically dismantled by a new generation of authoritarian leaders, including Venezuela and Nicaragua, the OAS has failed to act at all… The United States should make clear that it will not support any secretary general whose platform on democracy issues is inadequate. Congress should meanwhile consider whether the United States should continue to provide the bulk of the funding for the OAS when it fails to live by its own charter. – Washington Post

Jamie Daremblum writes:  An oil-rich country—among the largest economies in Latin America—has established a growing alliance with Iran, has successfully encouraged its regional allies to do the same, has bought more than $6 billion worth of arms from authoritarian Russia in just the last five years, and is supporting one of the hemisphere’s deadliest terrorist outfits. That makes Venezuela a continuing—and substantial—threat to U.S. strategic interests, regardless of Chávez’s problems at home. – The Weekly Standard Blog

Russia

U.S. missile-defense plans are a threat to Russian national security and have slowed down progress on a new arms-control treaty with Washington, Russia's top military officer said Tuesday. Gen. Nikolai Makarov said that a revised U.S. plan to place missiles in Europe undermines Russia's national defense, rejecting Obama administration promises that the plan is not directed at his country.  "We view it very negatively, because it could weaken our missile forces," Gen. Makarov, the chief of the Russian military's General Staff, said in televised remarks. Gen. Makarov's comments are the strongest yet on the revamped U.S. missile effort and signal potential new obstacles to an agreement on a new nuclear arms reduction treaty to replace the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which expired Dec. 5. – Associated Press

Vladimir Ryzhkov writes: The authors of the Institute of Contemporary Development report focused on the creation of modern institutions and on forming a civil environment for citizens and business. What’s more, they offer very concrete and feasible proposals for reforming the military, police, secret service, economy and social services. The main reforms are not technologically based but institutionally. The report addressed one of the most important reasons behind the country’s backwardness and lack of competitiveness — the country’s weak and dysfunctional institutions…[P]olitical competition, freedom of the press, an authentic multiparty system, direct elections of governors and mayors, the rule of law and an independent judiciary were not simply characteristic of the 1990s. They are, as the authors justly point out, clearly mandated by the Constitution. Moreover, they are fundamental attributes of any modern, developed state. – Moscow Times

Europe/Russia

Budget cuts and relentless fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan have left more than half of the ships, aircraft and ground units of the Armed Forces with “serious or critical weaknesses”, MPs say today. Britain’s military is creaking under the strain of ongoing operations and is being forced to deploy faulty equipment, suspend training and cancel the replacement of outdated kit, the report by the Commons Defence Committee says. The report, which comes ahead of a post-election Strategic Defence Review, concludes: “For some considerable period now ... the Armed Forces have operated above the overall level of concurrent operations which they are resourced and structured to sustain over time.” James Arbuthnot, the Conservative chairman of the committee, told The Times: “I think we have reached a really serious stage and it is because we have been fighting two wars on a peacetime budget. It is not a surprise that we are concentrating heavily on the operations in Afghanistan, and that has to be right, but the consequences for our ability to deal with the unexpected are serious.” – Times of London

Alan Dershowitz and Elizabeth Samson write:  The UK is notorious for its plaintiff-friendly libel laws which have been accused of being "contemptuous of free speech" and making a "mockery of British justice" and because they silence writers through expensive litigation. But even as Britain attempts to prevent frivolous libel suits, the battle continues in the US. American courts are being utilised by radical Islamic groups to stifle writers through "lawfare" – the use of law as a weapon of warfare – a tactic that has had a "chilling effect" on free speech. In contrast to the British laws, American libel law favours defendants. However, plaintiffs in the US have learned to sue their critics for defamation, not with the intent to win the case, but with the hope of imposing an unaffordably high cost on criticism of their actions. - Guardian

Sally McNamara writes:  Rather than representing a genuine attempt to increase Europe’s military contribution to vital missions, such as Afghanistan, the EU is merely seeking to advance its own political ambitions. Rather than realizing America’s need for Europe to take on more of its own security burden, a European army is more likely to drain the already limited military capabilities of member states, and draw resources away from NATO. The Lisbon Treaty has not created a stronger Europe capable of handling global, or even regional, security. As the Haitian earthquake demonstrated, the EU will continue to stand impotent before crises, incapable of independently mounting major humanitarian or security operations…Foreign policy is an attribute of statehood that must remain at the nation-state level if it is to be meaningful or effective. If the United States wishes to continue enjoying the benefits of its long-stand­ing relationships with the countries of Europe, it must oppose the creation of a supranational EU foreign policy and the undermining of NATO by the European Union. – The Foundry

South Asia

Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa dissolved the country's parliament Tuesday, making way for a national election two months earlier than scheduled. The move toward an early parliamentary election came a day after the arrest of the former army chief that had run against Mr. Rajapaksa in last month's presidential election, the country's first since last year's defeat of separatist Tamil rebels. Mr. Rajapaksa, the incumbent, handily won. The former head of Sri Lanka's army, Sarath Fonseka, is now facing a court martial on charges of alleged fraud and military offenses. The sacking of the country's parliament could be an attempt for the president to ride the wave of popularity from his own election to strengthen his party's position in parliament. In last month's election, he attracted 58% of the votes, according to the official tally, while Gen. Fonseka got 40%. – Wall Street Journal

Faced with a shortage of small banknotes, people in Myanmar are resorting to bartering cigarettes, shampoo and other items.The bartering illustrates the effects of sanctions on one of the world's most isolated, repressive countries, along with surging inflation and the military junta's curious decision to stop printing small notes, experts say. – Reuters