Connect with us

Middle East

From Nuclear to NewClear

Published

on

In the course of many visits to Iran over the years I have come to realise that no country is the subject of such fascination and mistrust in Iran as the United Kingdom. So my friends at ‘Tehran Times’ are interested to hear my thoughts in relation to Anglo-Iranian relations following the recent UK election. 

This election was fought and won by Johnson’s Conservative party in order to “Get Brexit Done” so that the UK will now definitively – after three years of political paralysis – leave the European Union. I believe this result to be positive for Iran for two reasons, the first being Prime Minister Johnson as a person, and the second being the new role and responsibilities of Johnson’s office as UK Prime Minister in international diplomacy and commerce for an independent UK.

Johnson as a Person

“Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them….well, I have others…..” Groucho Marx.

As with President Trump it is a mistake to view Prime Minister Johnson through the lens of rational statecraft. Johnson combines intelligence, idleness and pure expedience in equal measure. He owes his success to his capacity to delegate strategy and responsibility to capable and diligent subordinates such as Dominic Cummings, the Grand Vizier to Johnson’s Byzantine Caliph.

Perhaps the most important point for Iran’s decision-makers to bear in mind with PM Johnson is that, like his father Stanley before him, he genuinely likes and respects Iran and Iranians, and the country’s great culture, history and heritage. So, all things being equal, the accession to power of Johnson as a person is positive for Iran.

Johnson as UK Prime Minister

Unfortunately, all things are very far from equal for Iran in terms of access to the global economy, and the question is to what extent Iran’s access may improve after UK’s imminent Brexit departure from the European Union under Johnson’s leadership.

While much is made of the UK’s special relationship with the US, this has been poisoned by a unilateralist Trump administration which is thoroughly despised by the UK ruling class from which PM Johnson springs.  Despite a great deal of pro-American and anti-European rhetoric from within Johnson’s party, the reality is that, not least for geographic reasons, two thirds of UK trade is with EU members and this is unlikely to change soon. 

PM Johnson is  pragmatic enough, and has a big enough parliamentary majority for the next five years, to allow his more anti-European & pro-US elements to say what they like while he does what he likes. So what practical steps could be taken to improve UK/Iranian relationship?

Trade Clearing

That PM Johnson is willing to engage with Iran was clear from his visit to Tehran two years ago in December 2017. Unfortunately for him, his predecessor PM Theresa May, under instructions from the US, killed the release to Iran via the banking system of long outstanding funds which could open the way to further trust-building measures. 

New financial technology (Fintech) presents new options for innovative UK trade clearing which enable bank payment channels to be transcended. In the energy field, the UK may go beyond the political EU Energy Union project which aimed to both create a pan-European market in energy as a commodity and support the Euro as a currency by securing € denominated debt on energy. 

The fundamental flaw of the INSTEX mechanism is that it is reliant on banks as payment channels, and no major bank wishing to clear dollars is prepared to participate in INSTEX even for trade permitted under US sanctions. The UK may now transcend the INSTEX Euro trade clearing mechanism by creating a complementary trade clearing system in London. 

So a new UK/Iran trade clearing system may directly connect businesses wishing to supply for use in Iran permissible technologies such as desalination and renewable energy in particular.

How may this be achieved?

Petro Fintech

Financial Technology is the combination of law & accounting with information and communications technology (ICT). A new generation of online businesses emerged around 2001 from the ‘Internet Bubble’ of complex and crazy ventures. A similar new wave of Fintech is now emerging from the initial wave of “Blockchain” secure shared databases and “Coin” financial instruments with complex and vulnerable connections to the conventional financial system.

In the field of energy fintech Venezuela’s Petro instrument is an excellent case study. The first problem with this Petro is that it is technically backed, not by (say) gasoline or diesel fuel which the average Venezuelan can use, but by heavy grades of crude oil useful only to a few complex refineries. Secondly, this technical oil backing is useless even to complex refineries because Venezuela will not accept the Petro from them instead of dollars or even Euros in payment for oil.

In October 2008, the global banking system froze and the oil price collapsed, which OPEC mistook for lack of demand, but was simply due to the inability of oil buyers to clear payments using bank channels. Meanwhile, in Tehran I proposed, at a major conference chaired by H E Nematzadeh, a simple prepay instrument (“Petro”) returnable in payment for fuel supply. 

As an energy prepay (“credit”) instrument Iran’s reality-based Petro will be issued by fuel producers or refiners, not by Iran’s banks or government. The NewClear combination of transparent issuance, professional system management and mutual assurance by a Protection and Indemnity (P&I) club agreement will enable a Petro Clearing Union. 

Proofs of Concept

Every network is founded by its first connection. There is no reason why Iran’s frozen assets in the UK, whether long outstanding debts, or ongoing gas production, cannot be mobilised using simple effective energy credit clearing. In this way, projects may be mobilised in Iran exempt from US sanctions and with suppliers and contractors willing and able to implement them, but unable to access conventional payment via banking channels.

Moreover, in Iran itself, all of the elements now exist to rapidly introduce the Petro domestically in order to reduce the initial frictions from reducing subsidies. 

My colleagues and I stand ready, as we have since 2004, to at last commence the implementation of a new generation of financial technology both domestically and in bilateral UK/Iran trade clearing: in this way Iran may advance from nuclear to NewClear agreements.

From our partner Tehran Times

Middle East

Turkey and Iran find soft power more difficult than hard power

Published

on

The times they are a changin’. Iranian leaders may not be Bob Dylan fans, but his words are likely to resonate as they contemplate their next steps in Iraq, Iraqi Kurdistan, Lebanon, and Azerbaijan.

The same is true for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The president’s shine as a fierce defender of Muslim causes, except for when there is an economic price tag attached as is the case of China’s brutal crackdown on Turkic Muslims, has been dented by allegations of lax defences against money laundering and economic mismanagement.

The setbacks come at a time that Mr. Erdogan’s popularity is diving in opinion polls.

Turkey this weekend expelled the ambassadors of the US, Canada, France, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, and Sweden for calling for the release of philanthropist and civil rights activist Osman Kavala in line with a European Court of Human Rights decision.

Neither Turkey nor Iran can afford the setbacks that often are the result of hubris. Both have bigger geopolitical, diplomatic, and economic fish to fry and are competing with Saudi Arabia and the UAE as well as Indonesia’s Nahdlatul Ulama for religious soft power, if not leadership of the Muslim world.

That competition takes on added significance in a world in which Middle Eastern rivals seek to manage rather than resolve their differences by focusing on economics and trade and soft, rather than hard power and proxy battles.

In one recent incident Hidayat Nur Wahid, deputy speaker of the Indonesian parliament, opposed naming a street in Jakarta after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the general-turned-statemen who carved modern Turkey out of the ruins of the Ottoman empire. Mr. Wahid suggested that it would be more appropriate to commemorate Ottoman sultans Mehmet the Conqueror or Suleiman the Magnificent or 14th-century Islamic scholar, Sufi mystic, and poet Jalaludin Rumi.

Mr. Wahid is a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) and a board member of the Saudi-run Muslim World League, one of the kingdom’s main promoters of religious soft power.

More importantly, Turkey’s integrity as a country that forcefully combats funding of political violence and money laundering has been called into question by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an international watchdog, and a potential court case in the United States that could further tarnish Mr. Erdogan’s image.

A US appeals court ruled on Friday that state-owned Turkish lender Halkbank can be prosecuted over accusations it helped Iran evade American sanctions.

Prosecutors have accused Halkbank of converting oil revenue into gold and then cash to benefit Iranian interests and documenting fake food shipments to justify transfers of oil proceeds. They also said Halkbank helped Iran secretly transfer US$20 billion of restricted funds, with at least $1 billion laundered through the US financial system.

Halkbank has pleaded not guilty and argued that it is immune from prosecution under the federal Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act because it was “synonymous” with Turkey, which has immunity under that law. The case has complicated US-Turkish relations, with Mr.  Erdogan backing Halkbank’s innocence in a 2018 memo to then US President Donald Trump.

FATF placed Turkey on its grey list last week. It joins countries like Pakistan, Syria, South Sudan, and Yemen that have failed to comply with the group’s standards. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned earlier this year that greylisting would affect a country’s ability to borrow on international markets,  and cost it an equivalent of up to 3 per cent of gross domestic product as well as a drop in foreign direct investment.

Mr. Erdogan’s management of the economy has been troubled by the recent firing of three central bank policymakers, a bigger-than-expected interest rate cut that sent the Turkish lira tumbling, soaring prices, and an annual inflation rate that last month ran just shy of 20 per cent. Mr. Erdogan has regularly blamed high-interest rates for inflation.

A public opinion survey concluded in May that 56.9% of respondents would not vote for Mr. Erdogan and that the president would lose in a run-off against two of his rivals, Ankara Mayor Mansur Yavas and his Istanbul counterpart Ekrem Imamoglu.

In further bad news for the president, polling company Metropoll said its September survey showed that 69 per cent of respondents saw secularism as a necessity while 85.1 per cent objected to religion being used in election campaigning.

In Iran’s case, a combination of factors is changing the dynamics of Iran’s relations with some of its allied Arab militias, calling into question the domestic positioning of some of those militias, fueling concern in Tehran that its detractors are encircling it, and putting a dent in the way Iran would like to project itself.

A just-published report by the Combatting Terrorism Center at the US Military Academy West Point concluded that Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) faced “growing difficulties in controlling local militant cells. Hardline anti-US militias struggle with the contending needs to de-escalate US-Iran tensions, meet the demands of their base for anti-US operations, and simultaneously evolve non-kinetic political and social wings.”

Iranian de-escalation of tensions with the United States is a function of efforts to revive the defunct 2015 international agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program and talks aimed at improving relations with Saudi Arabia even if they have yet to produce concrete results.

In addition, like in Lebanon, Iranian soft power in Iraq has been challenged by growing Iraqi public opposition to sectarianism and Iranian-backed Shiite militias that are at best only nominally controlled by the state.

Even worse, militias, including Hezbollah, the Arab world’s foremost Iranian-supported armed group, have been identified with corrupt elites in Lebanon and Iraq. Many in Lebanon oppose Hezbollah as part of an elite that has allowed the Lebanese state to collapse to protect its vested interests.

Hezbollah did little to counter those perceptions when the group’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, threatened Lebanese Christians after fighting erupted this month between the militia and the Lebanese Forces, a Maronite party, along the Green Line that separated Christian East and Muslim West Beirut during the 1975-1990 civil war.

The two groups battled each other for hours as Hezbollah staged a demonstration to pressure the government to stymie an investigation into last year’s devastating explosion in the port of Beirut. Hezbollah fears that the inquiry could lay bare pursuit of the group’s interests at the expense of public safety.

“The biggest threat for the Christian presence in Lebanon is the Lebanese Forces party and its head,” Mr. Nasrallah warned, fuelling fears of a return to sectarian violence.

It’s a warning that puts a blot on Iran’s assertion that its Islam respects minority rights, witness the reserved seats in the country’s parliament for religious minorities. These include Jews, Armenians, Assyrians and Zoroastrians.

Similarly, an alliance of Iranian-backed Shiite militias emerged as the biggest loser in this month’s Iraqi elections. The Fateh (Conquest) Alliance, previously the second-largest bloc in parliament, saw its number of seats drop from 48 to 17.

Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi brought forward the vote from 2022 to appease a youth-led protest movement that erupted two years ago against corruption, unemployment, crumbling public services, sectarianism, and Iranian influence in politics.

One bright light from Iran’s perspective is the fact that an attempt in September by activists in the United States to engineer support for Iraqi recognition of Israel backfired.

Iran last month targeted facilities in northern Iraq operated by Iranian opposition Kurdish groups. Teheran believes they are part of a tightening US-Israeli noose around the Islamic republic that involves proxies and covert operations on its Iraqi and Azerbaijani borders.

Efforts to reduce tension with Azerbaijan have failed. An end to a war of words that duelling military manoeuvres on both sides of the border proved short-lived. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, emboldened by Israeli and Turkish support in last year’s war against Armenia, appeared unwilling to dial down the rhetoric.

With a revival of the nuclear program in doubt, Iran fears that Azerbaijan could become a staging pad for US and Israeli covert operations. Those doubts were reinforced by calls for US backing of Azerbaijan by scholars in conservative Washington think tanks, including the Hudson Institute and the Heritage Foundation.

Eldar Mamedov, a political adviser for the social-democrats in the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament, warned that “the US government should resist calls from hawks to get embroiled in a conflict where it has no vital interest at stake, and much less on behalf of a regime that is so antithetical to US values and interests.”

He noted that Mr. Aliyev has forced major US NGOs to leave Azerbaijan, has trampled on human and political rights, and been anything but tolerant of the country’s Armenian heritage.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Process to draft Syria constitution begins this week

Published

on

The process of drafting a new constitution for Syria will begin this week, the UN Special Envoy for the country, Geir Pedersen, said on Sunday at a press conference in Geneva.

Mr. Pedersen was speaking following a meeting with the government and opposition co-chairs of the Syrian Constitutional Committee, who have agreed to start the process for constitutional reform.

The members of its so-called “small body”, tasked with preparing and drafting the Constitution, are in the Swiss city for their sixth round of talks in two years, which begin on Monday. 

Their last meeting, held in January, ended without progress, and the UN envoy has been negotiating between the parties on a way forward.

“The two Co-Chairs now agree that we will not only prepare for constitutional reform, but we will prepare and start drafting for constitutional reform,” Mr. Pedersen told journalists.

“So, the new thing this week is that we will actually be starting a drafting process for constitutional reform in Syria.”

The UN continues to support efforts towards a Syrian-owned and led political solution to end more than a decade of war that has killed upwards of 350,000 people and left 13 million in need of humanitarian aid.

An important contribution

The Syrian Constitutional Committee was formed in 2019, comprising 150 men and women, with the Government, the opposition and civil society each nominating 50 people.

This larger group established the 45-member small body, which consists of 15 representatives from each of the three sectors.

For the first time ever, committee co-chairs Ahmad Kuzbari, the Syrian government representative, and Hadi al-Bahra, from the opposition side, met together with Mr. Pedersen on Sunday morning. 

He described it as “a substantial and frank discussion on how we are to proceed with the constitutional reform and indeed in detail how we are planning for the week ahead of us.”

Mr. Pedersen told journalists that while the Syrian Constitutional Committee is an important contribution to the political process, “the committee in itself will not be able to solve the Syrian crisis, so we need to come together, with serious work, on the Constitutional Committee, but also address the other aspects of the Syrian crisis.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

North Africa: Is Algeria Weaponizing Airspace and Natural Gas?

Published

on

In a series of shocking and unintelligible decisions, the Algerian Government closed its airspace to Moroccan military and civilian aircraft on September 22, 2021, banned French military planes from using its airspace on October 3rd, and decided not to renew the contract relative to the Maghreb-Europe gas pipeline, which goes through Morocco and has been up and running since 1996–a contract that comes to end on October 31.

In the case of Morocco, Algeria advanced ‘provocations and hostile’ actions as a reason to shut airspace and end the pipeline contract, a claim that has yet to be substantiated with evidence. Whereas in the case of France, Algeria got angry regarding visa restrictions and comments by French President Emmanuel Macron on the Algerian military grip on power and whether the North African country was a nation prior to French colonization in 1830.

Tensions for decades

Algeria has had continued tensions with Morocco for decades, over border issues and over the Western Sahara, a territory claimed by Morocco as part of its historical territorial unity, but contested by Algeria which supports an alleged liberation movement that desperately fights for independence since the 1970s.

With France, the relation is even more complex and plagued with memories of colonial exactions and liberation and post-colonial traumas, passions and injuries. France and Algeria have therefore developed, over the post-independence decades, a love-hate attitude that quite often mars otherwise strong economic and social relations.

Algeria has often reacted to the two countries’ alleged ‘misbehavior’ by closing borders –as is the case with Morocco since 1994—or calling its ambassadors for consultations, or even cutting diplomatic relations, as just happened in August when it cut ties with its western neighbor.

But it is the first-time Algeria resorts to the weaponization of energy and airspace. “Weaponization” is a term used in geostrategy to mean the use of goods and commodities, that are mainly destined for civilian use and are beneficial for international trade and the welfare of nations, for geostrategic, political and even military gains. As such “weaponization” is contrary to the spirit of free trade, open borders, and solidarity among nations, values that are at the core of common international action and positive globalization.

What happened?

Some observers advance continued domestic political and social unrest in Algeria, whereby thousands of Algerians have been taking to the streets for years to demand regime-change and profound political and economic reforms. Instead of positively responding to the demands of Algerians, the government is probably looking for desperate ways to divert attention and cerate foreign enemies as sources of domestic woes. Morocco and France qualify perfectly for the role of national scapegoats.

It may be true also that in the case of Morocco, Algeria is getting nervous at its seeing its Western neighbor become a main trade and investment partner in Africa, a role it can levy to develop diplomatic clout regarding the Western Sahara issue. Algeria has been looking for ways to curb Morocco’s growing influence in Africa for years. A pro-Algerian German expert, by the name of Isabelle Werenfels, a senior fellow in the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, even recommended to the EU to put a halt to Morocco’s pace and economic clout so that Algeria could catch up. Weaponization may be a desperate attempt to hurt the Moroccan economy and curb its dynamism, especially in Africa.

The impact of Algeria’s weaponization of energy and airspace on the Moroccan economy is minimal and on French military presence in Mali is close to insignificant; however, it shows how far a country that has failed to administer the right reforms and to transfer power to democratically elected civilians can go.

In a region, that is beleaguered by threats and challenges of terrorism, organized crime, youth bulge, illegal migration and climate change, you would expect countries like Algeria, with its geographic extension and oil wealth, to be a beacon of peace and cooperation. Weaponization in international relations is inacceptable as it reminds us of an age when bullying and blackmail between nations, was the norm. The people of the two countries, which share the same history, language and ethnic fabric, will need natural gas and unrestricted travel to prosper and grow and overcome adversity; using energy and airspace as weapons is at odds with the dreams of millions of young people in Algeria and Morocco that aspire for a brighter future in an otherwise gloomy economic landscape. Please don’t shatter those dreams!

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Middle East52 mins ago

Turkey and Iran find soft power more difficult than hard power

The times they are a changin’. Iranian leaders may not be Bob Dylan fans, but his words are likely to...

Intelligence3 hours ago

The impact of the joint security coordination between Israel and Turkey in Afghanistan

First: Analysis of the potential scenarios of (Israeli-Arab or Iranian-Arab security coordination on Afghanistan), or the extent of success of...

Economy5 hours ago

United World of Job Seekers and Job Creators Will Boost Recovery

Why is there so much disconnect between entrepreneurial thinking and bureaucratic thinking? Has the world of education, certification, occupation divided...

International Law7 hours ago

Debunking the Sovereignty: From Foucault to Agamben

“Citing the end of Volume I of The History of Sexuality, Agamben notes that for Foucault, the “threshold of modernity”...

South Asia13 hours ago

Did India invade Kashmir?

Pakistan has decided to observe 27th October as Black Day. This was the day when, according to India’s version, it...

Environment15 hours ago

Landmark decision gives legal teeth to protect environmental defenders

A 46-strong group of countries across the wider European region has agreed to establish a new legally binding mechanism that...

Environment17 hours ago

Plastic pollution on course to double by 2030

Plastic pollution in oceans and other bodies of water continues to grow sharply and could more than double by 2030, according to an assessment released on Thursday by the UN Environment...

Trending