Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may complain about “psychological war” being waged against his nation. But the stiff sanctions imposed by Canada and others aim to head off the real thing. Increasingly, Iran risks a military strike unless it persuades the United Nations that it is not trying to get nuclear weapons.

In a show of resolve with the United States and European Union, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has just reinforced the message that “international standards cannot be flouted without consequence.”

Canada has banned dealings with key figures in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard and others involved in the weapons program. As well, Ottawa will ban investment in Iran’s important but underdeveloped oil and gas sector, and the export of goods that could spur nuclear proliferation. There’s a banking ban as well.

Canada’s measures are in line with four sets of UN sanctions, the most recent on June 9.

All this is cutting off Iran from finance, investment and trade.

If there’s any truth to Tehran’s claim that it has no interest in building weapons, now would be a good time for Iran to cooperate with the UN and abandon uranium enrichment and reprocessing – before a crisis erupts or the Iranian people, suffer more.

The sanctions, activated through the Special Economic Measures Act, restrict Canadian economic cooperation with Iran in a variety of strategic sectors, including: petroleum; banking; and, research and development. Significantly, the measures also prohibit the provision of services to any ship associated with the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL). Although initiated independently, Canada’s sanctions take effect in coordination with international measures undertaken by key western allies in Europe and the U.S. The global effort is intended to peacefully divert Iran from its drive to acquire nuclear weaponry.

"The Iranian regime continues to brutally oppress the people of Iran, arm terrorist networks around the world and refuses to abandon its nuclear weapons program,” said CIC National Chair, Moshe Ronen. “By confronting the Iranian regime with innovative, peaceful measures to avert its nuclear ambitions, Canada is assuming a leadership role in this crucial international effort."

The government’s announcement comes on the heels of expanded global sanctions, adopted by the UN Security Council in June. Iran’s nuclear program, which operates in violation of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, was uncovered in 2002. Since then, Iran’s government – controlled by a theocratic council – has flouted all international negotiations and incentives to halt its drive towards nuclear weapons capacity.

"The Canada-Israel Committee has worked hard with all political parties in Ottawa to make the case for tough, peaceful measures against Iran’s nuclear program," commented Shimon Fogel, the CEO of the Canada-Israel Committee. "A nuclear Iran will destabilize the region and only encourage further human rights abuses. We are very grateful that the Canadian government, with the support of opposition members, has taken the lead in confronting the regime now."

Iranian regime a threat to the world and itself: human-rights activists

The Responsibility to Prevent Coalition, chaired by former Canadian justice minister, urges international community bring Tehran to heel

by Patrick Martin

It may be a woman’s sentence to “death by stoning” that has grabbed international attention, but that’s just the tip of the deadly iceberg when it comes to Iran, says a star-studded group of 100 international law and human-rights activists.

The Responsibility to Prevent Coalition, chaired by former Canadian justice minister Irwin Cotler, says that a “toxic mix” of four dangerous policy streams has made the government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad “a clear and present danger to international peace and security … and to its own people.”

Iran’s threat of developing nuclear weapons, its incitement to genocide, sponsorship of terrorism as well the widespread abuse of its own citizens’ rights, add up to a responsibility for the international community to act.

“States have a legal obligation,” said Mr. Cotler, speaking at the coalition’s first press briefing Tuesday in Jerusalem, “to prevent Iran from carrying through with its deadly course of action.”

“This is not just a policy option, but an international legal obligation of the first order,” he emphasized.

“Iran has already committed the crime of incitement to genocide prohibited by the Genocide Convention,” he noted, referring to statements by Mr. Ahmadinejad de-legitimizing Jews in general and Israel in particular. States party to that convention therefore are required to act against any state that violates the convention, and Iran is a signatory of that international treaty.

The RTP Coalition, which includes Nobel Peace Prize laureate Elie Wiesel, Lebanese scholar Fouad Ajami, former Canadian prime minister Paul Martin, and Egyptian democracy advocate Saad Eddin Ibrahim among its members, has amassed an impressive dossier of Iran’s alleged violations of the Genocide and other conventions, and other international laws.

As well as citing brutal forms of capital punishment and the murder of political dissidents, the group’s report, entitled The Danger of a Nuclear, Genocidal and Rights-Violating Iran, also notes that more juveniles have been executed in Iran in recent years, and more journalists have been imprisoned, than in any other country.
 

Click here to read the entire article »

Top U.A.E. diplomat endorses striking Iran nuclear sites
'It's a cost-benefit analysis: There will be economic consequences, as well as protesting and rioting, but we cannot live with a nuclear Iran.'
By Natasha Mozgovaya and Haaretz Service

The United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States, Yousef Al-Otaiba, said Tuesday that the benefits of bombing Iran's nuclear sites eclipse the short-term costs such an attack would entail, the Washington Times reported.

"It's a cost-benefit analysis," Al-Otaiba said during an interview with The Atlantic correspondent Jeffrey Goldberg at the Aspen Ideas Festival. "There will be consequences, there will be a backlash and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country; that is going to happen no matter what."

"We cannot live with a nuclear Iran," he concluded.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in June that Iran would not hold talks with the West over its nuclear program until late August to punish world powers for imposing tougher sanctions against the country. He added that those countries interested in resuming talks must first make clear whether they oppose Israel's purported atomic arsenal.

Ahmadinejad vowed that Iran will retaliate should its ships be searched over suspicions that the cargo may violate the new sanctions approved by the UN Security Council earlier this month.

The European Union and U.S. Congress followed with new punishing measures of their own to discourage the Iranian government from continuing its uranium enrichment program, which they fear could be used to produce a nuclear weapon.

Iran insists its program is for peaceful purposes.

Ahmadinejad accused the world powers of approving the latest sanctions to give them the upper hand in talks over the issue.

"We call this bad behavior," he said, adding talks on the issue would be postponed until the end of the Iranian month of Mordad, which would be about Aug. 20. "This is a fine to punish them a bit so that they learn the custom of dialogue with our nation."

The Iranian leader also set two additional conditions for an eventual resumption of talks, saying countries who want to participate should make clear whether they support the Nonproliferation Treaty and whether they want to be friends or enemies with Iran.

"However," he said, "participation in the talks was not contingent on the answers."

The U.S. and its allies accuse Iran of seeking to use its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop atomic weapons. Iran has denied the charge.

The new UN sanctions call for an asset freeze of another 40 additional companies and organizations, including 15 linked to Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard and 22 involved in nuclear or ballistic missile activities. The resolution also bans Iran from pursuing any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.

Click here to read the entire article »

A lot of forces, some deliberately some unwittingly, are pushing us towards war.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan cares nothing for the Palestinian people. He is driven by personal ambition to bring Turkey once again to the leadership of the Islamic world. He knows that the best way to do so is by the time honored and proven tactic of "Israel bashing. To date, there is no better method of acquiring legitimacy in the Arab world. His lies and incitements have been consistent and have only been enhanced by the recent flotilla events. He is single minded in his drive towards conflict with Israel, the results of which will be disastrous to Israel, but much worse for the Palestinians.

U.S. President Barack Obama's policies, as stated by the president himself, are geared to pave a road to the heart of the Muslim and Arab world (for the record: the American way of life is in conflict with Islam and, yes, there is such a thing as radical Islam). Obamas actions indicate that he too believes that he must pay with an Israeli coin to achieve popularity in the Arab world. (He has a chance to change that perception during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's upcoming visit.)

Still, Obama is perceived as weak and indecisive against foes, strong and resolute against friends. His policies emboldens leaders like Erdogan to continue throwing matches onto this explosive powder keg. By allowing the Palestinians to continue to refuse direct negotiations and by pressuring Israel to make more concessions without getting anything in return, he is not promoting peace and a better life for Palestinians, but pushing the region towards war. Once again, the result will be disastrous, mostly to Palestinians.

Following the flotilla fiasco and the knee-jerk, Israel-blaming reaction, the world demanded that Israel lift its blockade of Gaza. Congratulations world, it worked. Hamas leaders Ismail Haniya and Khaled Mashal can take another step toward becoming a legitimate, recognized government. And, by doing so, the world condemns Gaza's Palestinians to many more years of suffering under the tyrannical boot of extremists.

I've written previously how some "peace activists" and self proclaimed "human rights activists" have nothing to do with real human rights. People who care about human rights can not support a Hamas regime just as they can't support the brutal Iranian regime.

But, does anyone really care about peace anymore?

Do all the anti-Israel demonstrators and self appointed saviors of the Palestinian cause truly have the best interest of the Palestinians in mind?

To me the answer is clear – they don't. Here's why:

• A true pro-Palestinian, one who cares about the human rights and the independence of the Palestinian people, would demand the international community apply pressure to relieve the Palestinians from the oppressive, murderous and brutal regime of Hamas with at least the same fervor as they demand an end to the "Israeli occupation."

• A true supporter of the two-state solution would demand that Israel and the PA meet face-to-face to negotiate and work out an agreement.

• A true supporter of a peaceful and stable Middle East will fear a nuclear Iran and will demand their leadership do something about it.

• A true supporter of peace will understand that the only solution is a mutual recognition between Israelis and Palestinians, and not a one-sided blame game.

• A true supporter of peace understands that de-legitimizing Israel, calling for the destruction of Israel, vilifying Israel as a horrible regime that must be eradicated, isolating Israel, calling for BDS, singling out Israel with false charges while ignoring true violations of human right in other parts of the world, does not promote peace. It bolsters tyranny. It begs the question – why make peace with such an evil country to begin with? It promotes war.

Ironically, to be truly pro-Palestinian, to hope for the best future for the Palestinian people one must also be a supporter of a safe and secure Israel. It is only with both these parameters filled can we hope for real peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Indeed, one can be a Zionist and pro-Palestinian. I am.

If you find yourself in a place that de-legitimizes Israel, calls for the destruction and eradication of Israel – know this – you are an enemy of peace.
 

Doomsday scenario
The Ottawa Citizen
June 23, 2010

It is entirely appropriate that, on the eve of hosting heads of government from around the world, Canada has adopted a leadership role in the most urgent matter of global security.

For several years, the Islamic revolutionaries who control Iran have single-mindedly dedicated the resources of their state to the construction of a nuclear arsenal. In old James Bond movies, genocidal madmen typically appear out of nowhere with their doomsday weapons, and proceed to hold the world hostage. The Iranian situation is different only in that the ayatollahs have openly and defiantly made known their intentions well before acquiring the weapon.

On Tuesday, the Canadian government announced new sanctions against the Iranian regime. The sanctions are consistent with recent United Nations resolutions, and while they won't disable Iran's nuclear program, they might at least slow it down.

This isn't, however, only about depriving the Iranian government of the matériel to construct weapons of mass destruction. It's about building a consensus that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his acolytes reside outside the community of nations. Canada is right to use our position as G8 president to strengthen that consensus.

Canadian Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon correctly drew a distinction between the Iranian government and the Iranian people. The Iranian government is illegitimate, having rigged last year's elections. The young dissidents who have taken to the streets in protest, who want to live in a modern state rather than a medieval one, continue to be harassed, imprisoned and executed. As frightened as the West is of the wild-eyed Ahmadinejad, his victims so far have been his own people. There are not many ways to envision a decent resolution to the Iranian problem. One of the few such scenarios, however, would have the reformist movement taking their country back from the theocrats. Slowing down the regime's nuclear program through sanctions might just buy the reformists enough time.

Click here to read the entire article »

June 22, 2010

For Immediate Release

Canada-Israel Committee Responds to Canada’s Announcement on Iran

The Canada-Israel Committee (CIC) welcomes today’s announcement on Iran by both Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon.

“We are deeply appreciative of today’s confirmation that the government has implemented all the measures aligned with United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1929, and Canada’s intention to use its G-8 Presidency to maintain international focus on Iran’s nuclear program,” stated CIC National Chair Moshe Ronen.

The CIC urges the government to impose additional sanctions through the Special Economic Measures Act (SEMA). SEMA is the most appropriate tool by which Canada can address the threat posed by Iran. Indeed, the legislative framework and previous invocations of SEMA demonstrate the Act’s flexibility, expediency and efficacy in responding to threats to international peace and security. In addition to the important signal to Iran represented by the invocation of SEMA, this initiative will reinforce Canada’s role as an important leader within the international community and as a champion of non-military intervention whenever possible.

It is our hope that the Iranian regime will respond positively to the newest UNSC resolution and halt its illicit nuclear enrichment program. Ronen observed that “If Iran’s only intention is to build a nuclear energy program for peaceful purposes, then it is clear that the international community has offered Iran alternative means to obtain the materials it needs. However, Iran’s continued intransigence and obfuscation over its nuclear programme clearly demonstrates that it has other malevolent ambitions.”
 

It is surely one of the great paradoxes of this age that while many of our cleverest minds have fallen headlong in love with peoples whose causes are more or less entirely alien to us, we can find no stirring in our hearts for peoples whose greatest hope is to become . . . well, more like us.

Thus we artlessly dispatched our hearts on a sentimental journey to Gaza designed for our benefit by the canny Islamists in Ankara and their bloodstained allies in Gaza; people who, in any other context, would treat our Western soft-heartedness and woolly-mindedness with undisguised contempt.

And yet our hearts have no space whatever for the thousands of young Iranian students who, on Saturday, defied the threats of their government, the beatings of the extra-legal militias, and the pusillanimity of their erstwhile leaders, merely to ask for the right to have their votes treated with dignity, rather than being fabricated out of some dodgy Russian software in Iran's Ministry of the Interior.

To the best of my knowledge, not one single person has died at the hands of Iran's green opposition, even as thousands of their number have been arrested, hundreds sexually and physically tortured in prison, and dozens murdered in loneliness, often in the most squalid and humiliating of circumstances. Their cause has been Gandhian, almost to a fault. ("The students will die, but they will not accept humiliation", they chanted at Tehran University.)

And yet their plight leaves us entirely cold. Who knows: if they strapped bombs to themselves, or professed a secret admiration for the racial policies of the Third Reich, would they then become sufficiently exotic to pique our jaded imaginations, and would we then love them a little more?

Click here to read the entire article »

The Canada-Israel Committee (CIC) today welcomed United Nations Security Council resolution 1929, imposing additional international sanctions against Iran.

"The Iranian government's drive towards nuclear weapons poses a grave threat to the stability of the Middle East and to the security of the State of Israel," said CIC national chair Moshe Ronen.

"We are particularly encouraged that Prime Minister Stephen Harper has signalled that Canada will use its presidency of the G-8 to maintain pressure on Iran, and we are hopeful that Canada will also consider implementing unilateral sanctions with like-minded countries," Ronen continued. "The sustained effort of the international community will be required if there is to be any chance of compelling Iran to honor its international obligations."

-30-

The Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) is a functional commission of the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Every year, at this commission, representatives of 45 member states, international organizations, NGOs and civil society gather at the UN headquarters in New York to evaluate progress on gender equality, identify challenges, set global standards and formulate concrete policies to promote gender equality and the advancement of women worldwide.

During the past decade there has been a massive proliferation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) all over the world. They have gained more prominence in comparison with governmental institutions. Although NGOs are often identified as powerless groups, they have become powerful and influential, especially because of their open agendas, non-political views and advocacy.

The Islamic Republic of Iran was elected in April, 2010 to the CSW by acclamation. The number of seats on the commission is based on the number of countries in a region, no matter how small their populations or how slight their respect for human rights. As is standard in UN election practice, when the number of interested candidates is the same as the number of available seats, the slate of candidates is automatically endorsed. For the four-year term beginning in 2011, the Asia Group put forward two candidates – Iran and Thailand – for two available vacancies, meaning that Iran was virtually guaranteed a seat.

It is well known that the UN is a highly politicized organization. Blocks of countries that have the same religious persuasion or political orientation get together and secure an automatic majority.

In this case we have been witnessing in the last few weeks countries like Iran and Libya who are chronic violators of essential freedoms being elected to bodies such as the CSW and the HRC.

Iran’s treatment of women has frequently drawn harsh criticism from human rights advocacy groups and Western governments. How incongruous then that a country which consistently fails to uphold women’s rights was elected as a member of a UN body charged with advancing women's rights and women's empowerment.

“Putting fundamentalist Iran in charge of a women’s rights commission is like putting a pyromaniac as chief of the fire department,” said Hillel Neuer, director of the Geneva-based U.N. Watch. He added: “It’s an outrage, and completely unacceptable.”

Mrs Shirin Ebadi, the exiled Nobel Peace Prize laureate from Iran, an open advocate of women's rights in her country, mentioned that Iran has annulled laws passed during the regime of the Shah which supported women's rights. After the Iranian revolution the Ayatollahs gained power and wasted no time in doing what they know to do best: subdue women in the name of Islam.

Last week a senior Iranian Cleric, Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi declared that "Many women who do not dress modestly … lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes."

All logic not withstanding, Iran will be one of the players in the international arena of women's rights!

The second incredible case is that of Libya. With such an abysmal human rights record, Libya has won a seat on the HRC with 80% support! The HRC, which invariably targets Israel for human rights violations, has sadly shown once again how politicized it is when it comes to electing member countries to their council, countries with dictatorial regimes and countries which sponsor terrorism. In the long run the credibility of the HRC will decline, as happened with the previous HRC, which operated contrary to the hopes of its founders and had such a poor record in defending human rights that it had to be replaced by the present HRC… which turned out to be just as bad.

Libya is ranked not-free by Freedom House and was one of only 9 countries to receive the worst possible ranking for both political rights and civil liberties in 2009, qualifying as one of the world's most oppressive societies. Countries like Angola, Mauritania, Qatar and Malaysia share the same honorable list.

So, again, what can we expect from the HRC regarding future resolutions if in the past, without the participation of these countries, it adopted 32 resolutions specifically against Israel?

When referring to Israel's situation, I have mentioned in other articles that one of the goals that we have to aim for is that the huge population that keeps silent today will speak out and voice its opinions.

To conclude I would like to quote from an article written by Ms. Anne Bayefsky, Since when is Iran a Champion of Human Rights?, where she states the following:

"This is another example of just one more UN body created to do one thing and now doing the opposite for which American taxpayers foot 22% of the bill. And it will continue unless those with their hands on the spigot in Congress finally decide to turn off the tap".

In the past, women attending the CSW conference came with high hopes of gaining a platform to present their grievances and testimonies against those countries who are violators of women's rights. What chance do they have to do so today? What is the CSW going to do about these matters? Will countries like Iran take a resolute, strong standing against women being lapidated, lashed and murdered in honor killings? Don't bet on it!