The Department of Defense announced late Thursday the death of a soldier who was part of a Security Assistance Organization in Saudi Arabia.
Sgt. 1st Class David G. Robinson, 28, of Winthrop Harbor, Ill., died Oct. 25Tuesday in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He was assigned to “United States Military Training Mission to Saudi Arabia, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,” according to an Army Central Command spokesman.
The spokesman said that Robinson’s death was noncombat-related and under investigation, but would not provide specifics.
The Chicago Tribune reported that family members said they had gotten no additional information.
According to the Tribune, Robinson was a father of two, and was stationed in El Paso, Texas, where he lived with his wife, Emily, 28, and sons Matthew, 7, and Jackson, 4.
Robinson’s parents, Dennis and Marijo, tole the Tribune that their son met his wife while both were in high school and working at Six Flags Great America in Gurnee, Ill.
Robinson enlisted in 2003, his father said.
“It was a period of time when most young men were feeling patriotic about 9/11 and the war that was going on in Baghdad,” Dennis Robinson told the Tribune.
It’s challenging to get either Americans or policy wonks excited about the European debt crisis. Foreign countries are having problems to which there are no clever policy solutions? I’d rather listen to a panel discussion of Mitt Romney’s hair.
But my fellow wonks should pay close attention to the eurozone crisis — not because it’s big and important, but because it’s a serendipitous natural experiment on the distribution of power between western governments.
The crisis is easy enough to explain. European governments — particularly Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Spain, and Italy — borrowed too much money. The size of these debts are a problem in and of themselves, but their magnitude also has the effect of convincing creditors that they won’t be repaid, which leads to higher interest rates. Higher interest rates, in turn, make it harder for the indebted countries to pay, which begets doubt that the debts will be repaid and produces even higher interest rates. Hence, a debt crisis.
The fact that these countries share a common currency is only tangentially relevant to the problem. European countries with struggling economies would like a looser monetary policy than what might best serve the median state, and as those with massive debt pay their markers by trading in their euros for dollars, the issue will be forced — either the euro will be allowed to devalue and countries like Germany will experience inflation, or debt repayment will have a deflationary effect in the debtor countries.
But such problems plague any monetary union; Europe has had fights over the direction of monetary policy before, as has the United States — Rick Perry’s belief that expansionary monetary policy is “treasonous” is no doubt subtly influenced by his state’s stronger economic performance relative to the national average. And still, during the mortgage crisis, no one argued things would be easier to solve if California operated off a different currency than Texas; the Eurozone crisis is a threat to Europe, the political entity, not the euro, its common currency.
The real issue is that the prospect of Greece and its ilk repaying their debts is highly uncertain. And it’s uncertain for good reason: for the indebted countries, default is likely the solution that best serves their citizens. Such an action has consequences — it’s hard to open up a new line of credit after giving the finger to those who provided the old credit. But historically, sovereign theft works — it gets a nation out of the pesky problem of actually paying its debt, and lenders are not so harsh on deadbeat countries as one might believe. In fact, sometimes a complete default is better than some sort of restructuring — a country that only gets rid of half of its old debt might leave some doubt as to whether it can actually make good on fresh obligations, but a country that starts from a clean slate — so long as doing so doesn’t bring trade sanctions and other punitive responses from its neighbors — may regain effective access to foreign credit markets sooner.
What makes the default of say, Portugal, a touchy political matter for the European Union is that Portugal’s creditors are predominantly other European countries. And so there are two effects: the first is that some members of the union would like to have a free lunch at their peers’ expense — if French banks are the major backers of Portugal’s sovereign debt, then France can avoid financial losses by convincing less exposed union members (say, Britain or Germany) to help bail out Portugal and assume some of the risk of a default. The second is that it is unclear who is actually backing whom — no one is quite certain which banks are holding which bonds, which has contributed to a Europe-wide credit crunch, as lenders are wary of offering loans to European banks that might be reduced to insolvency as soon as a default is announced.
In an ideal world, there would be a bailout, much as there was for U.S. banks. Sovereign bonds and bills are assets with a highly uncertain value, and are paralyzing the European financial system. An international fund could purchase these assets from banks (at a highly discounted value, so as not to lose money on the whole), and thus free up liquidity for private lending. The international fund could be backed by countries in proportion to their exposure (i.e. France would chip in more than Germany) so as to avoid redistribution between states.
In the practical world, this is a massive coordination problem, made nearly impossible by lack of information on where the bad debt lies, conflicts of interest between states on how much each should contribute to the fund, how much of a haircut the owners of the bad assets must suffer, and finally the opaqueness of the risk — the bailout planners in Brussels cannot peer into the minds of Pedro Coelho, Peter Robinson, or Georgios Papandreou and determine whether they plan on honoring their debts. Reaching some sort of modus vivendi with debtor states is a prerequisite to arranging a bailout.
And so, Europe faces two measurements of its distribution of power. The first is in whether, and to what extent, sovereign defaults occur — to the extent they do, it suggests that creditor countries within the union lack the diplomatic leverage necessary to prevent debtor countries from running off with their money. The second is test is in whoever gets the losing side of things in whatever inevitably flawed bailout plan is reached — should one nation pressure its peers to shoulder more than their rightful share of the risk, that country should be judged to wield greater power than its neighbors.
The United States is not exempt from this calculation of relative power. As the prospects of a “reset” with Russia grow ever dimmer, and as Russia reasserts itself in Eastern Europe, the U.S. would find it convenient if Europe remained a coherent political bloc, capable of denying Russian inroads to the west. Though its exposure to European sovereign debt is tiny, if the U.S. cannot, through threat of sanction and other levers, convince debtor countries to fulfill their financial promises, it reflects poorly on American might.
There isn’t any policy Hail Mary to get abuzz about, and there’s very little skin in the fight, but American wonks should get out their popcorn and keep their eyes glued to the Eurozone crisis nonetheless. An opportunity to take as clear a reading of the multi-nation balance of power as this one comes along only once or twice in a generation.
Normal 0 14 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
Anonymous’s free-for-all nature confused matters. As the Daily Dot reported earlier, the call-to-arms video was refuted by a tweet by AnonOps, the Twitter stream of Anonymous Operations, only to be partially retracted with another tweet explaining that some members still might partake in the raid.
This dissension is not unusual, as Anonymous is a loose collective, or “hive-mind,” and nothing—including raids—ever receives unanimous support.
In the run-up to the “operation,” Internet denizens have taken to leaving encouraging messages for Anonymous on their YouTube videos.
“DO IT!!!!! Hopefully Anonymous doesn’t get too drunk with power… Nonetheless I think they’re amazing and have supported every attack thus far” commented gggginaa1 on YouTube.
“I support this 100% though iI use facebook myself, companies like this should not be selling personal info about a person to governments. Shut it down” wrote Unnsteinsson.
Of course, there is no credible evidence at all to suggest that Facebook is in fact selling personal information to governments.
Anonymous’s raid on banks, announced in two different videos, with two different names, is less of a hack and more of a call for community protest.
“Operation Cash Back,” was announced two weeks ago via YouTube video, and the call-to-arms has already been duplicated various times. “Operation Cash Run,” announced on Oct. 22, is the same operation but with a different name.
Both are is reminiscent of the “Move Your Money” project, which asks supporters to close down their accounts with large international banks. They also coincide with Bank Transfer Day, a Facebook group with over 25,000 like, which has a similar objective.
“Operation Cash Run will both strengthen your community and weaken the forces of global corruption” says the modulated anonymous voice in the Operation Cash Run video. The Operation Cash Back video shares a similar message, and even links to the Bank Transfer Day Facebook page
Normal 0 14 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
Anonymous’s raid on Fox News, announced three days ago, again via YouTube video, has picked up considerably more attention following a second call-to-arms video released yesterday.
Named “Operation Fox Hunt,” the first video calls Fox News’ broadcasts “conservative right-wing propaganda” and states that Anonymous is motivated to punish Fox news for “belittling” Occupy movement protesters.
The second video, released today, has received so many views since it was linked on Gawker, RT, Raw Story and other media outlets that its viewcount is frozen—a typical phenomenon on popular YouTube videos.
Normal 0 14 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
“I’ve always looked at Fox News as publishing news that borderline Libel (the publication of matter in a defamatory manner). It would be nice for someone to show the truth for once and not the skewed version of it” wrote Bolderdash in a supportive comment on a Reddit thread about the video.
At time of publication, Fox News had yet to make a statement regarding the “Operation Fox Hunt” videos.
Fox News is no stranger to Anonymous. In fact, it is credited with broadcasting the first mainstream media report on Anonymous in 2007, calling them “hackers on steroids” and “an Internet hate machine.” Both phrases went on to become memes.
Whether any of this will actually happen remains to be seen. Anonymous’s success rate with raids is somewhat high—though as the earlier tweet by AnonOps made clear, not all members of Anonymous will be participating in the raids.
To be fair, Bank Transfer Day has broad-ranging support, so Anon may well simply be piggy-backing on the already-established movement.
Then again, it also might be a complete wash. As Gawker opined, the whole thing looks “like some teenager got fancy with the iMovie…and posted a video which was picked up by an overeager media.”
Sharia, or Islamic law,influences the legal code in most Muslim countries. A movement to allow sharia to govern personal status law, a set of regulations that pertain to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and custody, is even expanding into the West. “There are so many varying interpretations of what sharia actually means that in some places it can be incorporated into political systems relatively easily,” says Steven A. Cook, CFR senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies. Sharia’s influence on both personal status law and criminal law is highly controversial, though. Some interpretations are used to justify cruel punishments such as amputation and stoning as well as unequal treatment of women in inheritance, dress, and independence. The debate is growing as to whether shariacan coexist with secularism, democracy, or even modernity.
What is Sharia?
Also meaning “path” in Arabic, sharia guides all aspects of Muslim life including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. It is derived primarily from the Quran and the Sunna–the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed. Precedents and analogy applied by Muslim scholars are used to address new issues. The consensus of the Muslim community also plays a role in defining this theological manual.
Sharia developed several hundred years after the Prophet Mohammed’s death in 632 CE as the Islamic empire expanded to the edge of North Africa in the West and to China in the East. Since the Prophet Mohammed was considered the most pious of all believers, his life and ways became a model for all other Muslims and were collected by scholars into what is known as the hadith. As each locality tried to reconcile local customs and Islam, hadith literature grew and developed into distinct schools of Islamic thought: the Sunni schools,Hanbali, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanafi; and the Shiite school, Ja’fari. Named after the scholars that inspired them, they differ in the weight each applies to the sources from which sharia is derived, the Quran, hadith, Islamic scholars, and consensus of the community.The Hanbali school, known for following the most Orthodox form of Islam, is embraced in Saudi Arabia and by the Taliban. The Hanafi school, known for being the most liberal and the most focused on reason and analogy, is dominant among Sunnis in Central Asia, Egypt, Pakistan, India, China, Turkey, the Balkans, and the Caucasus. The Maliki school is dominant in North Africa and the Shafi’i school in Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam, and Yemen. Shia Muslims follow the Ja’fari school, most notably in Shia-dominant Iran. The distinctions have more impact on the legal systems in each country, however, than on individual Muslims, as many do not adhere to one school in their personal lives.
Controversy: Punishment and Equality under Sharia
Marriage and divorce are the most significant aspects of sharia, but criminal law is the most controversial. In sharia, there are categories of offenses: those that are prescribed a specific punishment in the Quran, known as hadd punishments, those that fall under a judge’s discretion, and those resolved through a tit-for-tat measure (ie., blood money paid to the family of a murder victim). There are five hadd crimes: unlawful sexual intercourse (sex outside of marriage and adultery), false accusation of unlawful sexual intercourse, wine drinking (sometimes extended to include all alcohol drinking), theft, and highway robbery. Punishments for hadd offenses–flogging, stoning, amputation, exile, or execution–get a significant amount of media attention when they occur. These sentences are not often prescribed, however. “In reality, most Muslim countries do not use traditional classical Islamic punishments,” says Ali Mazrui of the Institute of Global Cultural Studies in a Voice of America interview. These punishments remain on the books in some countries but lesser penalties are often considered sufficient.
Despite official reluctance to use hadd punishments, vigilante justice still takes place. Honor killings, murders committed in retaliation for bringing dishonor on one’s family, are a worldwide problem. While precise statistics are scarce, the UN estimates thousands of women are killed annually in the name of family honor (National Geographic). Other practices that are woven into the sharia debate, such as female genital mutilation, adolescent marriages, polygamy, and gender-biased inheritance rules, elicit as much controversy. There is significant debate over what the Quran sanctions and what practices were pulled from local customs and predate Islam. Those that seek to eliminate or at least modify these controversial practices cite the religious tenet of tajdid. The concept is one of renewal, where Islamic society must be reformed constantly to keep it in its purest form. “With the passage of time and changing circumstances since traditional classical jurisprudence was founded, people’s problems have changed and conversely, there must be new thought to address these changes and events,” says Dr. Abdul Fatah Idris, head of the comparative jurisprudence department at Al-Azhar University in Cairo. Though many scholars share this line of thought, there are those who consider the purest form of Islam to be the one practiced in the seventh century.
Sharia vs. Secularism
The issue of sharia law versus secular law gained new scrutiny in 2011 in the wake of uprisings in several Arab countries, such as Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt, which ousted pro-Western autocrats and helped Islamist political parties gain prominence. A 2010 Pew poll conducted in seven countries including Egypt found strong support for Islam in politics and for harsh punishments for crimes such as theft, adultery, and conversion away from Islam. At the same time, a majority of those polled in every country except Pakistan believed democracy is the best form of governance. Whether democracy and Islam can coexist is a topic of heated debate. Some Islamists argue democracy is a purely Western concept imposed on Muslim countries. Others feel Islam necessitates a democratic system and that democracy has a basis in the Quran since “mutual consultation” among the people is commended (42:38 Quran). John L. Esposito and John O. Voll explain the debate in a 2001 article in the journal Humanities.
Noah Feldman, a former CFR adjunct senior fellow, wrote in a 2008 New York Times Magazine article that the full incorporation of Islamic law is viewed as creating “a path to just and legitimate government in much of the Muslim world.” It places duplicitous rulers alongside their constituents under the rule of God. “For many Muslims today, living in corrupt autocracies, the call for [sharia] is not a call for sexism, obscurantism or savage punishment but for an Islamic version of what the West considers its most prized principle of political justice: the rule of law,” Feldman argues.
On the other hand, some Muslim scholars say that secular government is the best way to observe sharia. “Enforcing a [sharia] through coercive power of the state negates its religious nature, because Muslims would be observing the law of the state and not freely performing their religious obligation as Muslims,” says Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im, a professor of law at Emory University and author of a book on the future of sharia. Opinions on the best balance of Islamic law and secular law vary, but sharia has been incorporated into political systems in three general ways:
Dual Legal System. Many majority Muslim countries have a dual system in which the government is secular but Muslims can choose to bring familial and financial disputes to sharia courts. The exact jurisdiction of these courts varies from country to country, but usually includes marriage, divorce, inheritance, and guardianship. Examples can be seen in Nigeria and Kenya, which have shariacourts that rule on family law for Muslims. A variation exists in Tanzania, where civil courts apply sharia or secular law according to the religious backgrounds of the defendants. Several countries, including Lebanon and Indonesia, have mixed jurisdiction courts based on residual colonial legal systems and supplemented with sharia. Western countries are also exploring the idea of allowing Muslims to apply Islamic law in familial and financial disputes.In late 2008, Britain officially allowed sharia tribunals (NYT) governing marriage, divorce, and inheritance to make legally binding decisions if both parties agreed. The new system is in line with separate mediation allowed for Anglican and Jewish communities in England.Criminal law remains under the gavel of the existing legal system. “There is no reason why principles of sharia law, or any other religious code, should not be the basis for mediation,” Britain’s top judge, Lord Nicholas Phillips, said in a July 2008 speech (PDF). Supporters of this initiative, such as the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, argue that it would help maintain social cohesion (BBC) in European societies increasingly divided by religion. However, some research suggests the process to be discriminatory toward women (BBC). Other analysts suggest the system has led to grey areas. Britain’s Muslims come from all over the world, Ishtiaq Ahmed, a spokesperson for the Council for Mosques in England, told the BBC, noting that this makes it hard to discern at times “where the rulings of the sharia finish and long-held cultural practices start.” Sharia has recently become a topic of political concern in the United States. The state of Oklahoma passed a ballot measure in November 2010 to ban the use of sharia law in court cases, which supporters are calling “a preemptive strike against Islamic law” (ABCNews).Several opponents of new mosques being built around the United States, including one near Ground Zero, have cited fear of the spread of sharia as a reason for opposition. And about a third of Americans in an August 2010 Newsweek poll suspect U.S. President Barack Obama sympathizes with Islamist goals (PDF) to impose sharia.
Government under God. In those Muslim countries where Islam is the official religion listed in the constitution, sharia is declared to be a source, or the source, of the laws. Examples include Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Yemen, and the United Arab Emirates, where the governments derive their legitimacy from Islam. In Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, and Iraq, among others, it is also forbidden to enact legislation that is antithetical to Islam. Saudi Arabia employs one of the strictest interpretations of sharia. Women are not allowed to drive, are under the guardianship of male relatives at all times, and must be completely covered in public. Elsewhere, governments are much more lenient, as in the United Arab Emirates, where alcohol is tolerated. Non-Muslims are not expected to obey sharia and in most countries, they are the jurisdiction of special committees and adjunct courts under the control of the government.
Completely Secular. Muslim countries where the government is declared to be secular in the constitution include Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Chad, Somalia, and Senegal. Islamist parties run for office occasionally in these countries and sharia often influences local customs. Popular Islamist groups are often viewed as a threat by existing governments. As in Azerbaijan in the 1990s, secularism is sometimes upheld by severe government crackdowns on Islamist groups and political parties. Similar clashes have occurred in Turkey. Under the suspicion that the majority party, the Islamist Justice and Development Party, was trying to establish sharia, Turkey’s chief prosecutor petitioned the constitutional court (Economist) in March 2008 to bar the party from politics altogether. One of the politicians indicted, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, told Newsweek, “Turkey has achieved what people said could never be achieved–a balance between Islam, democracy, secularism and modernity.” Secular Muslim countries are a minority, however, and the popularity of Islamist political parties are narrowing the gap between religion and state.
Modern Economies and Sharia
Growing at an estimated 15 percent annually, Islamic banking and finance is a worldwide industry that modifies modern business practices to conform to the rules of sharia. Central to this field is riba, the charging or payment of interest, banned under Islamic law. Clever twists on standard financial products like credit cards, savings accounts, mortgages, loans, and even trust funds bypass the interest business model. A 2008 report by the General Council for Islamic Banks and Financial Institutions estimates the Islamic banking industry to stand at $442 billion. Even big name banks such as Citigroup, HSBC, and Deutsche Bank are developing Islamic banking sectors to cater to the demand. The industry is small in comparison to the global market, but may grow as some non-Muslims are turning to sharia-compliant services.Some of the ethically minded are also switching over to sharia-compliant investments. Businesses are required to avoid transactions related to forbidden things, such as weapons, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, pornography and pork, and investors are guaranteed that their money won’t end up financing those industries. Governments are also looking to get a piece of the pie: Malaysia is the largest issuer of sharia-compliant bonds and Indonesia launched its own in January 2009.
At least ten Norwegian top leaders have been exposed to espionage attacks, according to the National Security Authority (NorCERT). It is feared that state secrets may end up in the wrong hands.
Espionage attempts against Norwegian key personnel have become more sophisticated, according to NorCert (Norwegian Computer Emergency Response Team) which coordinates preventative work and responses against IT security breaches aimed at vital infrastructure in Norway.
The number of cases handled by NorCERT have trebled over the past four years, according to its latest report.
- People are naive. Top leaders and key personnel are in the posession of sensitive information which is of interest to others, says NorCERT CEO Erlend Løkken to public broadcaster NRK.
China is already Venezuela’s second main commercial partner and Chavez has made all efforts to tie his regime to China, what could be called the CHI-CHA connection. He has obtained from China significant amounts of cash, promises of more money to come and technical assistance, amounting to some $80 billion in the last four years.
The breakdown is as follows: $32 billion in loans, some in dollars, some in yen, not all delivered in cash; financing of $4 billion in weapons and airplanes; a promise by the Chinese to invest $40 billion in the heavy oil deposits of the Orinoco river region (not yet materialized) and some $4 billion in technical assistance in railroad, port and housing construction, as well as mining, agriculture and space technology.
An excellent paper by Evan Ellis (“China’s cautious Economic and Strategic Gamble in Venezuela”, China Brief, Volume XI, September 2011), states that the association with China has given Chavez much needed money, without the need to be transparent on how he manages it.
Predictably, the Chinese have increasingly demanded that Chavez acquire their products and services. Some 300,000 Chinese made electrical appliances, iceboxes and the like have been bought. Other contracts include the construction of 26,000 houses with Chinese company CITIC, a $7.5 billion railroad construction project, some $470 million in mining projects, the acquisition of commercial and military aircraft, a $500 million artificial satellite and radar equipment. According to Ellis the number of joint projects nears 140.
Such an association has given the Chavez’s regime temporary oxygen but has also made it more vulnerable and dependent. Venezuela will have to pay the Chinese with future oil production, some 200,000 barrels per day for the next ten or more years. Being over dependent on the Chinese has made Chavez especially vulnerable, since China’s withdrawal from Venezuela would lead to Chavez’s political collapse.
Why would China withdraw their support of Chavez? Because Chavez could fail to deliver what China needs: oil and a convenient political vehicle to extend their presence in Latin America. In plain terms Chavez has become a political pawn of China in the Western Hemisphere.
The main threat to this Chi-Cha link is represented by a change in government in Venezuela, something that seems not only possible but also probable in the short term. For a new, democratic, government some of the characteristics of the China-Chavez relationship are clearly not in the national interest and, even, unconstitutional. A new government could denounce this association, endangering China’s money and objectives in Venezuela.
Another obstacle could be the posture of the U.S. regarding the relationship. In case of strong U.S. objections China might have to downsize it or abandon it altogether, since the U.S. is clearly more important to China than Venezuela in a geopolitical sense.
As things stand today Chavez has become a Chinese puppet in Latin America.
A selection of the latest news stories and editorials published in Iranian news outlets, compiled by Ali Alfoneh, Ahmad Majidyar and Michael Rubin. To receive this daily newsletter, please subscribe online.
(E) = Article in English
Politics
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei addressing Hajj Pilgrimage Organization employees comments on the $3 billion embezzlement:
“For some years it was said many times that we should not allow corruption to grow its roots, since as the time passes, uprooting it would be very difficult and it will also take the hope away from sincere… investors, but unfortunately it was not listened to… Of course, there are some who want to use this issue to question the authorities at a time the authorities in the cabinet, the parliament and Judiciary are living up to their responsibilities… The media should not create more mayhem about this issue, but should allow the authorities to pursue and investigate the issues in a forceful, managerial and precise way… The people should know that the authorities will investigate this issue to the very and will severe the treacherous hands.”
Hojjat al-Eslam Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi, Chief Inspectorate head, says his organization has many new legal cases in the embezzlement case.
Fazel Mousavi, parliamentarian, urges the Judiciary to intervene in the embezzlement affair.
Hojjat al-Eslam Mojtaba Zolnour, former representative of the Supreme Leader to the Revolutionary Guards and current parliamentary candidate, attacks “the current of deviation” within the Ahmadinejad cabinet.
According to Mahramaneh News, opposition leader Mir-Hossein Mousavi is severely ill and has been hospitalized for more than two weeks.
Abdollah Eraqi, Revolutionary Guards Ground Forces deputy, says PEJAK has “capitulated” to Iran.
Navy Commander Habibollah Sayyari appoints Amir Rastegari Navy Coordination commander, Hossein Azad 1st Operational Zone commander chief, Abbasi 1st Operational Zone commander deputy, Zamini Navy technical commander and Saidi Navy factories commander.
Mohammad-Karim Abedi, parliamentary National Security Committee member, on Iran-Russia relations: “First of all, we are not interested in being military allies of Russia and military unity with Russia is not on our agenda. Second, our country is not in need of being in a military alliance with any country, since the military strategy of the Islamic Republic is not offensive, but defensive and our country will never be considered as a threat to other states… Strategic unity is an issue different than a military alliance and it is better that the Russians take steps to achieve strategic unity with the Islamic Republic, since Iran is a neighbor of Russia and the regional interests of the two countries are tied to each other. When a threat emerges in the region, it is directed against both countries…”
Trade
According to Ramezan Tahmasbi, Mazandaran Water director, Chinese companies will build the Haraz dam near Amol.
At least ten Norwegian top leaders have been exposed to espionage attacks, according to the National Security Authority (NorCERT). It is feared that state secrets may end up in the wrong hands.
