WarSclerotic

Ukraine’s PM: Russian intervention will mean war | The Times of Israel.

As Moscow’s forces take over Crimea, Kiev places its military on high alert and UN, EU officials call emergency meetings

By AP, AFP and Times of Israel staff March 1, 2014, 10:32 pm

Ukraine’s newly appointed Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk (Photo credit: Sergei Supinsky/AFP)

UN Security Council to hold urgent meeting on Ukraine crisis, Ynet News, March 1, 2014

(Breaking update: The Ladies Knitting Society of Lake Wobegon, Minnesota has also called an urgent meeting on the crisis to decide whether Russian tea biscuits should continue to be served at their meetings. Although Russia lacks veto power there, unlike at the Security Council, the results of their meeting not are anticipated to have significantly more impact on the Ukraine crisis than those of the Security Council. President Obama was not available for comment. However, off-record remarks by high White Officials appeared to support efforts to boycott Russian tea biscuits as among the higher of the costs he contemplates for Russia.  — DM)

Russian parliament authorizes Putin’s request to use military. Demonstrators clash as Russian troops descend on Crimea.

The United Nations Security Council will be holding a closed door meeting for the second consecutive day to discuss the current situation in Ukraine.

The President of the Security Council said informal consultations among council members would begin at 2 pm (1900 GMT) Saturday. The council also held closed door consultations on Friday at the request of Ukraine’s UN Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev who referred to “the deterioration of the situation” in the Crimean Peninsula which he said “threatens the territorial integrity of Ukraine.”

Russia’s parliament approved a motion to use the country’s military in Ukraine after a request from President Vladimir Putin as protests in Russian-speaking cities turned violent Saturday, sparking fears of a wide-scale invasion.

The motion follows President Barack Obama’s warning Friday “there will be costs” if Russia intervenes militarily, sharply raising the stakes in the conflict over Ukraine’s future and evoking memories of Cold War brinkmanship.

“I’m submitting a request for using the armed forces of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine pending the normalization of the socio-political situation in that country,” Putin said in his request sent to parliament.

Russia’s upper house also recommended that Moscow recalls its ambassador from Washington over Obama’s comments.

Ukraine had already accused Russia on Friday of a “military invasion and occupation” in the strategic peninsula of Crimea where Russia’s Black Sea fleet is based. Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk called on Moscow “to recall their forces, and to return them to their stations,” according to the Interfax news agency. “Russian partners, stop provoking civil and military resistance in Ukraine.”

As a permanent member, Russia has veto power on any council resolution.

Ignoring Obama’s warning, Putin said the “extraordinary situation in Ukraine” was putting at risk the lives of Russian citizens and military personnel stationed at a naval base that Moscow has maintained in the Black Sea peninsula since the Soviet collapse.

Putin’s motion loosely refers to the “territory of Ukraine” rather than specifically to Crimea, raising the possibility that Moscow could use military force in other Russian-speaking provinces in eastern and southern Ukraine, where many oppose the new authorities in Kiev. Pro-Russian protests were reported in the eastern cities of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk and the southern port of Odessa.

In Saturday’s parliamentary session in Moscow, a deputy house speaker said Obama had insulted Russia and crossed a “red line,” and the upper house recommended the Russian ambassador in Washington be recalled. It will be up to Putin to decide whether that happens.

Earlier Saturday, dozens of people were hurt in clashes when pro-Russia activists stormed the regional government’s headquarters in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv and raised the Russian flag, local media said.

The UNIAN news agency said thousands of people had gathered outside the building during a protest against the country’s new leaders who ousted President Viktor Yanukovich a week ago.

The violence signaled that Ukraine’s new leaders could face a challenge in mainly Russian-speaking regions that oppose the largely pro-Western course charted by the newly installed government.

The leaders of Crimea, a Black Sea peninsula with an ethnic Russian majority that is home to a Russian naval base, say they have joined forces with Russian servicemen to exert control over key buildings.

Protests against the new authorities also took place on Saturday in other cities, including Odessa, Dnipro and Donetsk, Yanukovich’s home town and power base.

The Russian flag was raised over the regional government building in Donetsk by several thousand pro-Russia activists waving the Russian tricolour and chanting “Russia! Russia!, witnesses said.

Donetsk authorities issued an appeal for a referendum to be called on the future status of the region.

The crisis was sparked when Ukraine’s deposed president, Victor Yanukovych, ditched a deal for closer ties to the European Union and instead turned toward Moscow. Months of protests followed, culminating in security forces killing dozens of protesters and Yanukovych fleeing to Russia.

Ukraine’s population is divided in loyalties between Russia and Europe, with much of western Ukraine advocating closer ties with the European Union while eastern and southern regions look to Russia for support. Crimea, a semi-autonomous region of Ukraine, is mainly Russian-speaking.

In Crimea, the pro-Russian prime minister who took office after gunmen seized the regional Parliament claimed control of the military and police there and asked Putin for help in keeping peace, sharpening the discord between the two neighboring Slavic countries.

Ukraine’s acting president, Oleksandr Turchynov, said the election of Sergei Aksyonov as prime minister of Crimea was invalid.

Ukrainian officials and some Western diplomats said that a Russian military intervention is already well underway after heavily armed gunmen in unmarked military uniforms seized control of local government buildings, airports and other strategic facilities in Crimea in recent days.

Crimea only became part of Ukraine in 1954 when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred jurisdiction from Russia, a move that was a mere formality when both Ukraine and Russia were part of the Soviet Union. The Soviet breakup in 1991 meant Crimea landed in an independent Ukraine.

Russians strike Ukraine army post in Crimea. Kiev fears Ukraine army putsch. US warships on standby.

Russian armored forces build up for Ukraine

As Moscow’s master plan for Ukraine continued to unfold, Russian forces Saturday, March 1, staged their first attack on a Ukraine military installation in Crimea, while completing their takeover of the region and its severance from Ukraine.

Interfax reported from a Ukrainian source that 20 soldiers had entered an anti-aircraft missile command post in western Crimea and that negotiations rather than a clash were under way.

Earlier Saturday, Crimea’s new pro-Moscow prime minister Serhiy Aksyonov asked President Vladimir Putin for help in “maintaining peace in the region,” saying he was in control of the region’s interior ministry, armed forces, fleet and border guards.

The invitation set the scene for Russian military intervention in Crimea at the request of its government. Moscow said the appeal would not go “unnoticed,” while the Russian foreign ministry declared itself “extremely concerned” by developments in Crimea – cynically echoing US President Barack Obama’s expression Friday of “deep concern” about Russian military movements inside Ukraine and his warning of “costs.”

The Crimean premier, appointed Thursday by parliament in Simferopol, later announced that a referendum would be held on March 30 to determine the peninsula’s status. Meanwhile, he said, Russian Black Sea fleet servicemen were guarding important buildings.

In Kiev, interim defense minister Igor Tenyukh, addressing the first new cabinet’s first meeting, accused Russia of an armed invasion of Ukraine and pouring an additional 6,000 troops into the peninsula. Western correspondents reported that Crimea is now cut off from the rest of Ukraine after “unidentified troops” in combat fatigues, armed with automatic rifles, machine guns or RPGs, seized control of Crimea’s sea and air ports and its main road network in the last 24 hours.
Interim Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk told the Kiev cabinet that Ukraine forces were on alert, but he would not be ”drawn into a military conflict by Russian provocations in the Crimea region.”

debkafile’s military sources report that this announcement was hollow.

The 160,000-strong Ukrainian army is no match for the Russian army’s operational capabilities and fire power, although it too is equipped with Russian weapons and trained in Russian military tactics.
But above all, it is far from certain that the new authorities in Kiev control the Ukraine army. No one knows where the loyalties of its officers lie, whether with the new pro-European regime or the absconding pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych.

This confronts the troubled country with a fresh peril, a possible army putsch to oust the interim regime set up by the Ukraine opposition in Kiev, and its replacement with a military government for containing continuing Russian expansion beyond the borders of Crimea. The former Independence Square protesters would have no answer to this.

Moscow, while insisting that its military actions were not an invasion but a legal bid to protect its interests, has also moved to offset any financial assistance the West may offer Kiev. Russia’s energy giant Gazprom bluntly warned Kiev that it had accumulated a “huge” debt of $1.5 billion for natural gas that needed to be urgently paid if the supply is to continue.

This is the exact amount of the loan guarantees the US and EU propose to offer the stony-broke Kiev authorities.
Along with US warnings to Moscow, a high alert was secretly declared Saturday by the US Mediterranean Sixth Fleet. Two US warships which had been deployed in the Black Sea to back up Russian security for the Olympic Winter Games in Sochi – the USS Taylor Frigate and the USS Mount Whitney Blue Ridge-class command ship – have moved over to the western side of the Black Sea opposite Crimea and facing the Russian navy base of Sevastopol.

The Mount Whitney is outfitted with sophisticated intelligence-gathering systems. Its current location  means that ongoing Russian military movements across central, southern and western Russia, around its borders with Ukraine and inside the Crimean peninsula, are being monitored and beamed to the White House and the Pentagon. Obama’s response is anyone’s guess. So far, the only hints thrown out are that Western leaders are planning a boycott of the G8 summit Putin plans to host in Sochi this summer, in protest against Russia’s takeover of Crimea.

Kremlin Prepares for Military Intervention – NYTimes.com.

SIMFEROPOL, Ukraine — As Russian-backed armed forces effectively seized control of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula on Saturday, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia requested —and received — authorization from the Russian Senate to use military force in Ukraine.

The actions signaled publicly for the first time the Kremlin’s readiness to intervene militarily in Ukraine, and it served as a blunt response to President Obama, who just hours earlier pointedly warned Russia to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty.

Within hours after receiving Mr. Putin’srequest, Russia’s upper house of parliament, the Federation Council, voted to approve it, after a debate that warned of the apocalyptic consequences of failing to stop a fascist threat from spreading to Russia’s borders. The lawmakers direct considerable fury at President Obama and others in the West they accused of fomenting the upheaval in Ukraine.

The vote was unanimous among the 90 members present for the debate, and it was clear that forces allied with Moscow were largely in control of the disputed peninsula.

The region’s two main airports were closed, with civilian flights canceled, and were guarded by heavily armed men in military uniforms. Similar forces surrounded the regional Parliament building and the rest of the government complex in downtown Simferopol, the Crimean capital, as well as numerous other strategic locations, including communication hubs and a main bus station.

At the entrance to Balaklva, site of Ukrainian customs and border post near Sevastopol, the road was blocked by a long column of military vehicles bearing Russian license plates. The column, comprising 10 troops trucks with 30 soldiers in each, two military ambulances and five armored vehicles, was not moving. Troops, wearing masks and carryoing automatic rifles, stoold on the road keeping people away.

Some 60 locals, all apparently ethnic Russians, were gathered in a nearby square waving Russian flags and shouting “Russia, Russia.”

Just a few hours earlier on Saturday, the newly installed, pro-Russia prime minister of Crimea had declared that he was in sole control of the military and the police in the peninsula and he appealed to Mr. Putin for help in safeguarding the region.

The prime minister, Sergei Aksyonov, also said a public referendum on independence would be held on March 30.

On a day of frayed nerves and set-piece political appeals that recalled ethnic conflicts of past decades in the former Soviet bloc — from the Balkans to the Caucasus — pro-Russian forces were said to have taken control of a government building in Kharkiv, and a crowd in the center of Donetsk in eastern Ukraine and pulled down the blue-and-yellow Ukrainian flag and raised a Russian one.

On Friday, officials in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev had accused Russian armed forces of invading Crimea and violating Ukraine’s sovereign territory, and President Obama pointedly warned Russia against military intervention. On Saturday, officials in Kiev reiterated their objections but, for the moment, seemed otherwise powerless.

There was no immediate new comment from Washington, where officials seem to have very limited options in responding to Russian military intervention in Ukraine.

In his statement Saturday, Mr. Aksyonov, said, “Understanding my responsibility for the life and safety of citizens, I appeal to the president of Russia, Vladimir V. Putin, for assistance in providing peace and tranquillity on the territory of the autonomous Republic of Crimea.”

“As chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea,” Mr. Aksyonov said, “I make the decision to temporarily put the armed units and groups of the Interior Ministry, the Security Service, the armed forces, the Emergency Situations Ministry, the fleet, the Tax Service, and the border guards under my direct control. All commanders shall follow only my orders and instructions”

He added, “I ask anyone who disagrees to leave the service.”

The Kremlin, in a statement released to Russian news services, said it “will not ignore” Mr. Aksyonov’s request for assistance.

And separately, in what appeared to reflect coordinated Russian responses after the Crimean appeals for help, the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that unidentified gunmen “directed from Kiev” had tried to size control of the Ministry of Internal Affairs building in Simferopol.

The Foreign Ministry said that “vigilante groups” trying to seize the building had been repelled but that the attack “confirms the desire of prominent political circles in Kiev to destabilize the situation in the peninsula.” Local officials said an exchange of gunfire had occurred.

Elsewhere in Ukraine, there were signs of concern among business leaders over an effort by several European countries, including Austria and Switzerland, to freeze Mr. Yanukovych’s assets as well as those of his family members and other prominent associates.

Systems Capital Management Group, the company controlled by Ukraine’s richest man, Rinat Akhmetov, issued a statement saying that its operations were not affected by the freezing of assets. In its statement, the company said that it “operates in full compliance with the law and beyond politics” and that the freezing of assets “have not affected our operations in any way.”

Mr. Akhmetov is long known as a close ally of Mr. Yanukovych and his company’s statement suggested that he wanted to distance himself from the ex-president. On Friday, Mr. Yanukovych held a news conference at a shopping mall in Rostov-on-Don, Russia, where he insisted that he was still the legitimate president of Ukraine and planned to return.

The new government in Kiev has said that Mr. Yanukovych and other top officials are now wanted on charges of mass murder in connection with the deaths of more than 80 people in clashes between antigovernment protesters and the authorities late last month.

Mr. Akhmetov’s company said it “remains committed to the common principles of corporate ethics, business transparency and responsibility to our partner and the society and, in particular, does not carry out any joint business activity with Viktor Yanukovych and his family.”

Although American officials did not directly confirm athat Russian troops were being deployed to Crimea in violation of the two countries’ agreements there, Mr. Obama,

in his statement on Friday, cited “reports of military movements taken by the Russian Federation inside of Ukraine,” and said, “Any violation of Ukrainian sovereignty would be deeply destabilizing.”

“There will be costs,” Mr. Obama said in a hastily arranged statement from the White House.

Putin asks parliament to use military in Ukraine | The Times of Israel.

( The wages of fecklessness.  So much for Obama’s “warning”… –  JW )

Russian president moves to formalize troop deployment as Kiev says Moscow is amassing forces in its east

By AP and AFP March 1, 2014, 4:49 pm

Troops in unmarked uniforms stand guard in Balaklava on the outskirts of Sevastopol, Ukraine, Saturday, March 1, 2014. An emblem on one of the vehicles and their number plates identify them as belonging to the Russian military. (Photo credit: Andrew Lubimov/AP)

Russian President Vladimir Putin asked parliament Saturday for permission to use the country’s military in Ukraine, moving to formalize what Ukrainian officials described as an ongoing deployment of Russian troops in the strategic region of Crimea.

Putin’s motion loosely refers to the “territory of Ukraine” rather than specifically to Crimea, raising the possibility that Moscow could use military force in other Russian-speaking provinces in eastern and southern Ukraine where many oppose the new authorities in Kiev.

US President Barack Obama warned Moscow on Friday “there will be costs” if Russia intervenes militarily.

“I’m submitting a request for using the armed forces of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine pending the normalization of the socio-political situation in that country,” Putin said in a statement released by the Kremlin.

He said the move is needed to protect ethnic Russians and the personnel of a Russian military base in Ukraine’s strategic region of Crimea. Putin sent the request to the Russian legislature’s upper house, which has to approve the motion, according to the constitution. The rubber-stamp parliament is certain to approve it in a vote expected Saturday.

Obama called on Russia to respect the independence and territory of Ukraine and not try to take advantage of its neighbor, which is undergoing political upheaval.

“Any violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity would be deeply destabilizing,” Obama said in a statement delivered from the White House. Such action by Russia would not serve the interests of the Ukrainian people, Russia or Europe, Obama said, and would represent a “profound interference” in matters he said must be decided by the Ukrainian people.

Ukraine accused Russia on Saturday of sending thousands of extra troops into Crimea, with Defense Minister Igor Tenyukh telling the Ukrainian government’s first cabinet session that Russia’s armed forces had sent in 30 armored personnel carriers and 6,000 additional troops into Crimea in a bid to help local pro-Kremlin militia gain broader independence from the new pro-EU leaders in Kiev.

Tenyukh accused Russia of starting to send in these reinforcements on Friday “without warning or Ukraine’s permission.”

The defense chief spoke as dozens of pro-Russian armed men in full combat gear patrolled outside the seat of power in Crimea’s capital Simferopol, a day after similar gunmen seized control over airports and government buildings in the territory.

Iran, Poland to boost research cooperation, Trend, March 1, 2014

(With her entry into the international arms trade and increasing commercial and other areas of cooperation, Iran is becoming more “open for business” daily. Can the sanctions — which did not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons capabilities — be renewed if and when the P5+1 talks fail? If they can, will they have any effect on Iran’s development of nukes? — DM)

Iran and Poland have signed an agreement to boost cooperation in the field of research, IRIB reported on March 1.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and his Polish counterpart Radoslaw Sikorski signed the agreement in Tehran.

On the sidelines of the meeting, Zarif said Iran is ready to expand economic ties with Poland, especially in food, medicine, and petrochemical industries.

Grounds are prepared for the presence of Polish companies in the Iranian market, Zarif added.

A comprehensive plan is being developed by the two sides to boost cooperation in educational, cultural, and scientific fields, he noted.

Washington watch: On Iran, US bets everything in Vienna | JPost | Israel News.

By MICHAEL WILNER

LAST UPDATED: 03/01/2014 15:42

The White House and Congress agree on one thing: If negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program fail in Vienna, America’s remaining options are terrible.

In Washington, an assumption has taken hold that a great partisan gap exists over how best to handle Iran and its nuclear program. That impression is false.

The disagreements are tactical, deep in the weeds in the implementation of a largely bipartisan policy: delaying an inflection in the crisis for as long as possible, hoping that, before such a point comes to pass, the Islamic Republic will capitulate under the pressure of economic sanctions. It is, first and foremost, a policy of hope.

The first problem with policy on Iran reliant on hope is that, in the foreseeable future, some parties— namely, Israel’s leadership— may well run out of patience tolerating Iran as a nuclear-threshold state.

The second problem concerns credibility— not just that of US President Barack Obama, but of the US as a strategic force in the world. Cutting through the politics and the assignment of blame, multiple “red lines” have been drawn both by Congress and the president on a nuclear Iran. And yet, all parties refuse to discuss the consequences of their red lines being crossed.

That is why everyone seems to agree on the importance of negotiations currently underway in Vienna, geared toward definitively ending Western concerns with Iran’s expansive nuclear program once and for all.

But what if those negotiations fail?

Since the January 20 implementation of the Joint Plan of Action— the interim deal temporarily delaying the crisis, granting world powers six months to negotiate—The Jerusalem Post has asked senior Obama administration officials, Senate leadership aides and foreign policy experts across party lines just that question.

More specifically, they have been asked the following: What is the logic behind revisiting sanctions as policy, should diplomacy definitively fail during the JPOA, if the purpose of sanctions thus far has been to compel Iran to negotiate in the first place?

Realistically, would the goal be a future, second round of talks? Would the US seek another pause in Iran’s nuclear work?

Reflecting unity on this issue already well-established – and widely denied – responses have been virtually the same across party lines: nobody likes the question, because nobody has a good answer. Washington is at a loss for words on what happens next if negotiations fail.

That eventuality is not just a potentiality, but a likelihood: the president himself, with a vested interest in the outcome, puts the odds of success at less than 50 percent.

“The administration has made it additionally more complicated by positing only two futures: negotiations succeed, or war,” David Albright, founder and president of the Institute for Science and International Security, said.

In actuality, the administration has posited multiple futures that come very close to contradicting one another.

Sanctions have brought Iran to the table, officials say, providing the world not with its “last,” but with its “best” chance at a peaceful resolution to the crisis. In this regard, sanctions have purportedly succeeded.

“For the sake of our national security and the peace and security of the world,” Obama has said of the stakes in Vienna, “now is the time to give diplomacy a chance to succeed.”

And yet, in dissuading Congress from passing a bill that would trigger new sanctions tools against Iran if talks fail, Obama and US Secretary of State John Kerry have promised to support the new penalties without hesitation, should the JPOA expire without a comprehensive deal.

In other words: if negotiations do not succeed this year, the current plan is to revert back to a policy that might further entice Iran to negotiate, yet again, hopefully with better results.

While the White House says it will not engage publicly in hypotheticals, in practice, the administration has planned far enough ahead to have the confidence to proclaim this to Congress. That declarative was not issued subtly; the president said it in his fifth State of the Union address last month.

“I think sanctions are still central to this issue,” said Nicholas Burns, undersecretary for political affairs in the Bush administration and currently a professor at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.

“Effective diplomatic strategy on Iran cannot succeed without continuous pressure on the Iranian government, and that includes the prospect of future sanctions.”

“The threat of further sanctions is to serve a larger strategic purpose,” Burns added, “and that is to convince the Iranians that there are real red lines in place here.”

What are those red lines? Obama has said he will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon during his presidency.

Foreign policy leaders in Congress, alternatively, have adopted Israel’s red line: that Iran cannot retain nuclear weapons capacity, a higher bar requiring greater dismantling of their program’s infrastructure.

Entering talks in Vienna with the P5+1 world powers – the US, UK, France, Russia, China and Germany— Iranian officials publicly ruled out the dismantlement of “any” of its nuclear facilities.

“There’s only a few scenarios that come out of this: either we resolve it diplomatically, or we resolve it a different way,” State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf said on February 1. “And it’s just common sense that that different way could involve– is likely to involve – military action.”

Harf said failure in Vienna would leave the US with “less durable and, quite frankly, riskier” options.

“If in six months this doesn’t work, yes, we will ask for more sanctions,” she added. “I’m not predicting that we would take military action right away.”

Surprised by the frank assessment provided by Harf, Dennis Ross, a veteran diplomat of the George H. W. Bush, Clinton and Obama administrations now with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said a blunt threat of force might ultimately be necessary at the tail end of talks.

“That’s actually what I think the position should be, because its the best way to ensure that you obtain a diplomatic outcome,” Ross said. “For me, the irony is: if you want the diplomacy to succeed, you need that coercive element to it.”

The administration’s harshest critics in the Republican Party charge the president with weak leadership; they do not believe he will order a strike against Iran under any circumstances. And yet those same members are advocating a policy almost identical to their Democratic counterparts: they consider their options limited to sanctions. The only question left for them is one of timing.

In private, senior Republican aides say their members believe change will only come from Tehran when change comes to the Iranian regime. And yet no Senate Republican is publicly discussing a trigger bill authorizing the use of force when the JPOA expires.

“There’s a good reason to believe that sanctions are what brought the Iranians to the table in the first place,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) said on Wednesday, echoing the White House. “So it just stands to reason if the Iranians break the interim deal, they should get tougher sanctions. If nothing happens, we should send a message: you can’t just keep talking forever.”

“That’s especially true given the fact that we’re running out of tools here,” McConnell conceded, “short of the use of force.”

Irking Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Robert Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat who wrote the trigger sanctions bill and has pushed for its passage during the negotiations period, the White House suggested last month that, “if certain members of Congress want the US to take military action, they should be upfront with the American public and say so.”

And yet the administration’s warning has an unintended effect. It shows that the White House recognizes the steep political cost of even appearing amenable to military action against Iran. And the reaction of many senators, demanding apologies for being labeled warmongers, reveals their concerns over that reputation as well.

If the JPOA expires without a comprehensive deal, “the sanctions would be increased, and there would also be an effort to truly cripple the Iranian economy,” Albright said. “In that, you’d be showing them that they’ve made a big mistake.”

“It would be pretty gloves-off,” he added, “and at that point, I would expect talk of regime change.”

Ross expects an extension of the Vienna negotiations from six to 12 months, which is allowed by the JPOA if all parties agree – and perhaps a second extension, if world powers feel they are close to reaching a deal.

“I think there’s a certain tension when they say, ‘This is a march to war,’ when they are also saying there might be another shot at this,” Ross said. “The real hard question is, if we impose more sanctions, presumably the Iranians will ratchet up their program. And then we have to decide whether they’re shortening their breakout time so dramatically that we have to act.”

Administration officials tell this paper that their actions, and their words, are in no small part an effort to maintain international consensus on pressuring Iran. Should the crisis come to a point of conflict, that unity will be of great value to the US when the administration has to make a case for action.

“We took the initiative and led the effort to try to figure out if, before we go to war, there actually might be a peaceful solution,” Kerry said on Wednesday, insisting the US would “exhaust all the remedies available” before taking such moves.

Officials also take from their standoff with Syria over the use of chemical weapons a lesson in brinksmanship: that only at the last moment, under the rare but viscerally authentic threat of American action, might Iran be prepared to make the concessions required of their program’s harshest critics. If that is the case, expect sharp rhetoric from the White House in the heat of summer.

If it is not – if the debate over Iran is simply a game of hot potato over who wants war least– it should be clear to all that no one is truly prepared for that eventuality, and that the probable outcome of the conflict is something between war and peace, satisfactory to few, conclusive to none.

Iran’s president urges Defence Ministry to export weapons, Trend, March 1, 2014

(We need to be open for business in armaments as well as oil and petrochemicals. — DM)

Rouhani went on to say that weapon trade is important in terms of foreign relations with other countries. . . .This kind of trade develops semi-strategic ties between countries, he added.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has called on the country’s defence ministry to export its military products to the other countries, Iran’s state-owned IRINN TV channel reported on March 1.

The president made the remarks during a meeting with senior Iranian military officials in Tehran.

Rouhani went on to say that weapon trade is important in terms of foreign relations with other countries.

This kind of trade develops semi-strategic ties between countries, he added.

Iranian president also remarked that the country’s development is impossible without security.

Rouhani said “defence diplomacy” can be effective in both creating better relations with the world and conducting deterrence.

He stressed the importance of deterrence in Iran’s military strategy, saying that “the armed forces should pay attention to prevention of threats against the country, but they also should be ready to confront any possible attacks by the enemies”.

Rouhani added that Iran’s deterrence strategy is based on military equipments including missiles, UAVs, trained army and people’s support as well.

“Our behaviour is also important in deterrence,” he said, adding that “threatening does not only mean firing missiles or conducting military exercises. Sometimes your speech style maybe also considered as a threat against other countries. Even if you don’t intend to fight, your words will be deemed as threat”.

Iran’s foreign policy is based on peace and confidence-building with the world, he remarked.

Iran does not deal on its honour, independence, national interests and values, Rouhani said, adding that within these redlines Iran is ready to negotiate and cooperate with all countries.

Referring to Iran’s military redlines Rouhani said that manufacturing mass destruction weapons is Iran’s redline.

The Islamic Republic rejects the manufacture of nuclear weapons because it is out of principle, not because it is prevented by international conventions such as Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) agreement, Rouhani said.

He added that if Iran wanted to have mass destruction weapons, it would have been easier for it to make chemical or biological weapons.

The U.S. and its Western allies suspect Iran of developing a nuclear weapon, something Iran denies. The Islamic Republic has on numerous occasions stated that it does not seek to develop nuclear weapons, using nuclear energy for medical research instead.

Iran and the P5+1 reached a nuclear agreement on November 24, 2013. Iran has agreed to curb some of its nuclear activities for six months in return for sanctions relief. Iran and the P5+1 group have agreed to implement the agreement starting from Jan. 20.

Ukraine: Russia sending ‘thousands’ of troops to Crimea | The Times of Israel.

Moscow said to send 30 armored personnel carriers and 6,000 extra troops to the peninsula without warning or Kiev’s permission

By Bertrand de Saisset and Dmitry Zaks March 1, 2014, 1:50 pm

Anti-Yanukovych protesters wearing fatigues guard a barricade in Kiev’s Independence Square, the epicenter of the country’s current unrest, Ukraine, on Saturday, March 1, 2014. (photo credit: AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)

SIMFEROPOL (AFP) — Ukraine accused Russia on Saturday of sending thousands of extra troops into Crimea as the Kremlin vowed to help restore calm on the flashpoint peninsula and Washington warned of “costs” to Moscow should it use force.

Defence Minister Igor Tenyukh told the Ukrainian government’s first cabinet session that Russia’s armed forces had sent in 30 armored personnel carriers and 6,000 additional troops into Crimea in a bid to help local pro-Kremlin militia gain broader independence from the new pro-EU leaders in Kiev.

Tenyukh accused Russia of starting to send in these reinforcements on Friday “without warning or Ukraine’s permission.”

The defence chief spoke as dozens of pro-Russian armed men in full combat gear patrolled outside the seat of power in Crimea’s capital Simferopol, a day after similar gunmen seized control over airports and government buildings in the territory.

The rugged peninsula jutting into the Black Sea — host to a Kremlin fleet and with an ethnic Russian majority — has now effectively been cut off from mainland Ukraine, with airports shut down and a pro-Kremlin militia establishing a tightly-controlled checkpoint on the main road from the mainland.

Crimea has come to the fore of a Cold War-style confrontation between the West and Russia over Ukraine, a faceoff that has also exposed the ancient cultural rifts between the pro-European west and Russian-speaking south and east of this country of 46 million.

Nowhere has that divide been more apparent than in Crimea — a Black Sea peninsula of nearly two million people that has housed Kremlin navies for nearly 250 years and which a Soviet leader gifted to Ukraine when it was still a part of the USSR in 1954.

Pro-Russian gunmen seized Crimea’s government and parliament buildings in Simferopol on Thursday before allowing lawmakers to appoint a new prime minister and call for a regional referendum — moved forward on Saturday to March 30 — that would proclaim even greater independence for the already-autonomous region.

Dozens of soldiers with no insignia but dressed in Russian battle fatigues and armed with Kalashnikovs then seized Crimea’s main airport in Simferopol and Ukraine’s Belbek military air base near Sevastopol — home of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.

Crimea’s newly-chosen prime minister followed that up on Saturday by fervently calling on Russian President Vladimir Putin to help restore “peace and calm” amid his standoff with Kiev’s Western-backed authorities.

“Taking into account my responsibility for the life and security of citizens, I ask Russian President Vladimir Putin to help in ensuring peace and calm on the territory of Crimea,” Sergiy Aksyonov said in an address broadcast in full on Saturday by Russian state television.

Aksyonov also said that all of Crimea’s security forces — including the regional armed forces and police — would now be subordinate to him.

“All those who do not agree, I ask to leave the service,” Aksyonov said in the address.

A source in the Kremlin administration soon told Moscow’s three main news agencies that “Russia will not leave this request without attention.”

The ex-Soviet country’s bloodiest crisis since its 1991 independence erupted in November when ousted president Viktor Yanukovych — who has since fled to Russia — rejected an historic deal that would have opened Ukraine’s door to eventual EU membership in favour of tighter ties with old master Moscow.

A week of carnage in Kiev claimed nearly 100 lives last week.

Gazprom warns Ukraine

Ukraine’s interim president Oleksandr Turchynov had made his own dramatic appeal to Putin late on Friday as the pace of Russian troop movements intensified around their bases and armored personnel carries patrolled Simferopol’s main streets.

“I personally appeal to President Putin to immediately stop military provocation and to withdraw from the Autonomous Republic of Crimea,” a sombre Turchynov said on national television.

“It is a naked aggression against Ukraine.”

Western governments have been watching with increasing alarm as Kiev’s new rulers grapple with the dual threats of economic collapse and secession by Russian-speaking regions that had backed Yanukovych.

But the more immediate threat of a debt default that Kiev leaders warn could come as early as next week looked even more ominous when Russia’s state-owned Gazprom — often accused of being wielded as a weapon by the Kremlin against uncooperative ex-Soviet states — warned that it may be forced to hike the price it charges Ukraine for natural gas.

“The debt is $1.549 billion, it is huge,” Gazprom spokesman Sergei Kupriyanov told the RIA Novosti news agency.

“Clearly, with this debt Ukraine may not be able to keep its discount (to market price) for the gas. The agreements on the discount forsee a full and timely payment.”

Ukraine won a one-third discount from Gazprom under a deal signed by Yanukovych with Putin that also saw Russia promise to buy $15 billion in the Kiev government debt.

But Russia has only bought $3.0 billion in Ukrainian obligations and has effectively frozen further deliveries of aid.

Ukraine’s new leaders have said that the economically-teetering country needs $35 billion over the coming two years to keep the economy afloat.

Obama to skip Russia summit?

Ukraine had filed a formal protest on Friday after claiming that Russian helicopters had entered its airspace as part of snap military drills involving 150,000 troops that Putin had ordered in a region bordering Ukraine last week.

The UN Security Council discussed the crisis behind closed doors while US President Barack Obama — although not referring to Russia directly — warned that “there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine.”

“We are now deeply concerned by reports of military movements taken by the Russian Federation inside of Ukraine,” Obama said in a hurriedly scheduled statement at the White House.

A senior US official separately told AFP that Obama and some key European leaders could skip June’s G8 summit in Sochi if Moscow’s forces became more directly involved in Ukraine.

The Foreign Office said British Foreign Secretary William Hague will arrive in Kiev on Sunday for talks with the new government.

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski — a top proponent of Ukraine’s future EU membership — also cut short a visit to Iran to handle the deepening crisis.

© 1994-2014 Agence France-Presse

Rouhani: We don’t want weapons of mass destruction | The Times of Israel.

Iranian president, invoking Khameini, says republic would pursue chemical and biological weapons if it wanted WMDs — because they’re ‘easier to make’

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI March 1, 2014, 1:43 pm Updated: March 1, 2014, 2:14 pm