1UA TV

VOA contributor Greta Van Susteren spoke Friday to Senator Ben Cardin, the highest ranked Democrat on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.  Below are some excerpts.

Van Susteren: “Senator, there is a lot going on in Iran. There have been a series of protests sparked, at least at first, according to many as an economic issue, they have now somewhat subsided but what are your thoughts on these protests?”

Cardin: “Well, the Persian people, the Iranians, are great people; they want freedom, they want economic opportunities. They were promised a lot that has not been delivered so there’s a great deal of frustration among the Iranians that why aren’t they doing better why aren’t there better opportunities. They see their leadership, their government, is holding them back so they’re expressing themselves and I think we should all be proud of their courage.”  

Van Susteren: “What about the response by the Trump administration to these protests? I know that there was criticisms—President Trump and, even Vice President Pence, has been critical of the Obama administration and President Obama waited a number of days before making a statement. Maybe President Trump made a statement earlier on Twitter; but, nonetheless they are just statements. Is there anything more that we should be doing in Iran about these protests?”

Cardin: “The question is what can you do? I mean these are obviously internal issues and it’s hard for us to get directly involved. But to the extent that the Iranian officials violate established international human rights standards we should take action. We have tools that we can use to take action against violations of human rights. People have a right to peacefully protest about their government, they should have the right to be able to speak out without intimidation or fear. In Iran that’s not true. So, it is right for us and we do impose sanctions against Iran for human rights violations. We’ve recently passed a new law, known as the Global Magnitsky, we can sanction individuals and in regards to our banking system or visas. So, there are steps that we can take against those who are perpetrating violations of human rights and we should working with the international community.”

Van Susteren: “How fast can we do those sanctions? I mean if sanctions are the proper response, how fast can we do that?”

Cardin: “Well, they can be done quickly. I mean obviously there’s some—when you are dealing with banking issues there’s due process that has to follow and the Treasury Department follows that pretty closely; but we can impose sanctions pretty quickly we have against Iran. We do have sanctions imposed against Iran for human rights we can strengthen those.”
…

The United States is promising support for protesters in Iran, condemning Iranian officials for a crackdown that has left 21 people dead and more than 1,000 others under arrest.

A White House official Thursday said the U.S. would look for “actionable information” and seek to impose new sanctions against those responsible for stifling protests that began just last week.

The State Department also said it would not stand by idly.

“We have ample authorities to hold accountable those who commit violence against protesters, contribute to censorship, or steal from the people of Iran,” it said in a statement. “To the regime’s victims, we say: You will not be forgotten.”

New U.S. sanctions

Though not tied directly the protests, the U.S. Thursday sanctioned five Iranian companies linked to Tehran’s ballistic missile program.

“These sanctions target key entities involved in Iran’s ballistic missile program, which the Iranian regime prioritizes over the economic well-being of the Iranian people,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said in a statement. 

“As the Iranian people suffer, their government and the IRGC fund foreign militants, terrorist groups and human rights abuses,” Mnuchin added.

And at the United Nations, U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley has requested an emergency U.N. meeting Friday on the situation.

But Russia and other members of the U.N. Security Council are criticizing the U.S. call for a meeting, saying the protests are a domestic issue and do not involve threats to international peace and security. 

The U.S. statements and sanctions are unlikely to sit well with Iranian officials, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who have blamed foreign governments for instigating the protests.

The protests, which seemed to erupt spontaneously last week, have spread to many of Iran’s smaller cities, towns and rural areas, with protesters focused on economic hardships and government corruption.

Iranian public’s discontent

But Iranian officials Thursday insisted the wave of anti-government protests had waned.

General Abdolrahim Mousavin, the head of the army, thanked security forces for “putting out the fire of sedition.” 

“This blind sedition was so small that a portion of the police force was able to nip it in the bud,” Mousavin was quoted as saying in state-run media.

Interior Minister Abdolreza Rahmani Fazli said only 42,000 people had taken part in the protests. And an official with the country’s elite Revolutionary Guards force said the number of “troublemakers” was less than 15,000.

Instead, state television Thursday showed huge crowds marching in support of Iranian leaders in several major cities, including Isfahan, Ardebil and Mashhad, where the protests started.

Still, U.S. intelligence officials warn Tehran is at a crossroads, noting the protests are the biggest outpouring of public discontent since Iranians took to the streets in 2009 following a disputed presidential election.

“The protests are symptomatic of long-standing grievances that have been left to fester,” an intelligence official told VOA on condition of anonymity. “Will it address the legitimate concerns of its people or suppress the voices of its own populace?”

“What is clear is that these concerns are not going away,” the official said.

Critics of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani say he has abandoned the poor, pointing to rising prices for key commodities like fuel, bread and eggs.

And even Ali Akbar Velayati, an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, told the semi-official ISNA news agency, “The people’s main demand now is for the government and officials to deal with the economic problems.”

Growing U.S. pressure on Iran?

In the meantime, Iran could face additional economic pressure from Washington.

U.S. President Donald Trump is set to decide next week whether to continue to waive sanctions against Iran that were suspended under the 2015 international agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear weapons development. Trump has repeatedly attacked the agreement and assailed Tehran’s military actions in Syria, Iran and Yemen.

But some analysts warn the administration runs a risk of taking too harsh a line on Iran and seeing it backfire.

“There’s really no reason for us to not waive the nuclear sanctions now,” said Michael Eisenstadt, director of the Military and Security Studies program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

“Don’t pull out of JCPOA [nuclear deal] because that will redirect the attention of the Iranian people from the regime’s inability to solve their financial problems to us,” Eisenstadt said. “We shouldn’t make the United States the issue here.”

Margaret Besheer at the United Nations contributed to this report
…

The U.S. Department of the Interior has announced plans to open up 90 percent of America’s coastal waters to oil drilling, including off California and Florida, two areas where activists have worked for years to protect marine ecosystems from oil spills.

The proposed five-year plan released Thursday is much more expansive than one issued by President Donald Trump in April last year. The Interior Department is proposing 47 possible auctions of drilling rights in nearly all parts of the U.S. continental shelf.

It is a major increase from the 11 lease sales during the Obama administration.

The draft plan would allow the sale of drilling leases in 25 of the nation’s 26 offshore planning areas, including 19 areas in the waters around Alaska, seven in the Pacific Ocean, and nine in the Atlantic Ocean.

One area considered off-limits is the waters near Alaska’s far-western Aleutian Islands, which were protected by former President George W. Bush.

“We are going to become the strongest energy superpower this world has ever known,” Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke told reporters Thursday in a conference call. “We want to grow our nation’s offshore energy industry, instead of slowly surrendering it to foreign shores. We will produce enough energy to meet our needs at home, and we will export enough energy to lead the world.”

Zinke also said in a news release Thursday that “responsibly developing our energy resources” is important to the U.S. economy and will help fund coastline conservation. He said the broad proposal is meant to kick off a “lengthy and robust” public comment period.

“Not all areas are appropriate for offshore drilling, and we will take that into consideration in the coming weeks,” he said.

The Department of the Interior is in charge of setting the start date of the 60-day public comment period. 

Some critics of the proposal have already let their feelings be known. 

Florida Governor Rick Scott, an ally of Trump, has already vowed to fight attempts to drill in Florida. In a statement Thursday, Scott said, “I have already asked to immediately meet with Secretary Zinke to discuss the concerns I have with this plan and the crucial need to remove Florida from consideration.”

Another Trump ally in Florida, Representative Matt Gaetz, has also said he is opposed to drilling off the Florida coast.

The administration is currently operating under the five-year plan set by the Obama administration, which covers 2017-2022. Initially, President Barack Obama had proposed drilling off the Atlantic Coast and off Alaska’s Arctic shore, but both proposals were dropped in the final plan.

Last year, Zinke took a number of steps to make it easier to lease and explore for onshore and offshore oil, including removing some safety regulations put into place after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Eleven people died in the initial explosion on the Deepwater Horizon in 2010, and the resulting oil spill — an estimated total of 4.9 billion barrels over five months — is considered the largest industrial spill in the history of the petroleum industry.
…

Ankara has slammed the conviction in the U.S. of a Turkish banker for violating U.S. sanctions on Iran.

“This is the scandalous verdict of a scandalous case,” Presidential Spokesperson İbrahim Kalin told reporters at the presidential palace. “Unjust and unfortunate,” said the Turkish foreign ministry in a statement, adding, “the evidence was fake and open to political exploitation.”

Mahir Unal, the spokesman for Turkey’s ruling AKP, pointed the finger directly at Washington. “The purpose of the case in United States is interference in the internal affairs of Turkey. This case is a violation of international law and a legal disaster. It is clear that this decision has no provision for us,” tweeted Unal.

But Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has in the past been at the forefront of condemning the case, has remained silent on the verdict.

That silence is telling, claimed political consultant Atilla Yesilada of Global source partners.

“Erdogan was misled by his advisers, who told him Mr. [Hakan] Atilla would be acquitted. Now he understands that if the United States really intends to kick Turkey in the shin, they have received the perfect excuse to do so. At this point, he realizes it’s not wise to antagonize the United States. Now I am sure there are high-level contacts with Washington on how to make this case ago away,” said Yesilada.

On Wednesday, Mehmet Hakan Atilla, who headed international banking at the Turkish state-owned Halkbank, was convicted by a New York court on 5 of 6 charges of violating U.S. sanctions on Iran. With prosecutors presenting evidence of several Turkish banks involved in extensive laundering of money to avoid Iranian sanctions, analysts warn the door is open to a potential wide range of financial sanctions.

Such measures range from fines on Turkish banks to extensive restrictions on banks’ ability to borrow from U.S. financial markets. Turkey borrows on average about $16 billion a month to sustain existing loans and meet its financial obligations.

Joon Kim, the acting U.S. attorney in Manhattan, speaking after the conviction, made clear there would be consequences. “Foreign banks and bankers have a choice: You can choose willfully to help Iran and other sanctioned nations evade U.S. law, or you can choose to be part of the international banking community transacting in U.S. dollars. But you can’t do both.”

“Best-case scenario is a couple of billion dollars in fines against Halkbank for violating sanctions and the American administration closing the file, and that’s the end of it,” said consultant Yesilada.

The Turkish finance minister, Mehmet Simsek, already has guaranteed that any fines would be covered by the government.

Despite international investors reportedly closely watching the New York case, Turkish financial markets Thursday were largely unaffected by Wednesday’s verdict.

The experience of previous foreign banks caught violating U.S. sanctions suggests the repercussions could be severe for Turkish banks. 

In 2015, the French bank BNP Paribas was fined about $9 billion for violating U.S.-Iranian sanctions. An economist specializing on financial matters relating to Turkey — working for an international bank and speaking anonymously — warned that given the scale of the violations outlined by prosecutors in the New York case, Halkbank could face fines of up to $40 billion. Last year Turkey’s Haber Turk newspaper reported U.S. authorities were considering a similarly large fine. 

Observers single out the Halkbank case from previous sanction-busting cases. During the New York trial, the prosecutor witness implicated Turkish government involvement in sanctions violations, including then-Prime Minister Erdogan.

“If the Trump administration wants to portray this as a state crime, as Ankara systematically violating Iranian sanctions, I don’t think anyone can stop them,” said political consultant Yesilada.

Analysts suggest the price of leniency by Washington could be Ankara having to cool its warming relationship with Moscow, and Tehran, as well as the toning down of its hostility toward the Syrian Kurdish militia, which has been backed by the U.S. in fighting Islamic State militants.

Ankara accuses the militia of being terrorists linked to an insurgency in Turkey. Both issues have contributed to recent deep strains in U.S.-Turkish relations. But Washington’s decision in December to restore normal visa services after being severely curtailed was seen as a sign of its commitment to improving ties.

Even if Ankara can come to an agreement with the White House, Congress still remains a problem. 

“The American Congress acts independently of both the judiciary and the executive, and the information I receive from my sources in the United States, it’s extremely angry with Turkish behavior, and it might consider a sanction law against Turkey,” warned consultant Yesilada. “But I think the financial markets collectively don’t think that the United States does want to push this any further. There, I don’t agree with the markets, but as the American game plan is crystallized over the coming weeks, market sentiments will change to a negative.”
…

The recreational use of marijuana is now legal in California. But only a few cities in the U.S. state are ready to start selling pot, which was officially legalized on Jan. 1. The logistics of creating new business models is complicated, but it’s clear the demand is high. VOA’s Kevin Enochs reports.
…

Attorneys for three men accused of plotting to bomb a mosque and apartment complex housing Somali refugees urged a federal judge on Wednesday to include prospective jurors from rural western Kansas because they are more likely to have voted for President Donald Trump.

But the government countered that granting the request would as a matter of policy “wreak havoc,” saying the defense is seeking to pick a jury pool based on ideology while “opening a dangerous door” to similar requests in other cases. 

U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren took the matter under consideration after a hearing in U.S. District Court in Kansas, saying he would try to rule quickly. The trial begins March 19 in Wichita. 

Gavin Wright, Patrick Stein and Curtis Allen are charged with conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction and conspiracy against civil rights for allegedly planning to detonate truck bombs in the meatpacking town of Garden City the day after the November 2016 election. Wright also faces a charge of lying to the FBI.

The three men, who were indicted in October 2016, have pleaded not guilty.

Prosecutors have argued the men formed a splinter group of the militia Kansas Security Force that came to be known as “the Crusaders.” Wright is quoted in a wiretap transcript as saying he hoped the attack on the Somalis would “wake people up” and inspire others to take similar action against Muslims.

The defense contends the case will require jurors to weigh whether the alleged conduct constitutes a crime or whether it is constitutionally protected speech and assembly and the right to bear arms.

Defense attorneys had argued that court plans to only summon citizens in the more urban counties closest to the federal courthouse in Wichita is a discriminatory practice that excludes rural and conservative jurors. But the judge during the hearing noted several counties surrounding the federal courthouse in Wichita already used to draw potential jurors are rural counties.

Kansas voted overwhelmingly for Trump in the 2016 election, and Melgren mused during the hearing that he does not see a material difference between picking a jury pool from a group that voted two-thirds for Trump as compared to a group that voted three-fourths for Trump. During the campaign Trump called for a crackdown on immigration and a ban on Muslims entering the country.

But attorney Kari Schmidt, who represents Wright in the case, told the judge there is a difference in the belief systems between people in rural southwest Kansas where the crimes allegedly occurred and people in the other rural counties near Wichita that the judge cited in making his comparison. 

“I don’t think I can say it’s legally recognizable, but factually recognizable,” she said.

The government cited legal cases finding that groups of prospective jurors defined by geographical location are not “distinctive” groups for purposes of a constitutional attack on a prospective jury pool. By contrast, women and racial groups are considered distinctive groups for such purposes. Prosecutors contended the defense request would set a “dangerous precedent.”

“At its core, it is seeking to stack the deck,” Justice Department attorney Risa Berkower said.
…

Questions about U.S. President Donald Trump’s latest tweets about North Korea appear to be exposing some possible rifts between the White House and the U.S. intelligence community over how best to read North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders Wednesday suggested the North Korean leader was mentally unstable when asked about the most recent tweet, despite previous, public assessments from Central Intelligence Agency officials that for all the dangers, Kim is a “very rational actor.”

“The president and the people of this country should be concerned about the mental fitness of the leader of North Korea,” Sanders said. “He’s made repeated threats. He’s tested missiles time and time again for years.”

It is not the first time the U.S. president has disparaged Kim.

In the past, Trump has also referred to Kim Jong Un as “Little Rocket Man,” and in one tweet said he was “obviously a madman.” 

CIA: Kim not crazy

Those assessments from the White House, though, seem to stand in contrast to what CIA officials have been saying for months, arguing that while the threat from North Korea is grave, Kim Jong Un is not crazy.

Instead, they have said the North Korean leader displays “clarity of purpose” even as he antagonizes and provokes on the world stage.

“Kim Jong Un is a very rational actor,” Yong Suk Lee, deputy assistant director of the CIA’s Korea Mission Center, said at an agency-sponsored event this past October.

“Bluster and rhetoric aside, Kim Jong Un has no desire to go toe to toe with [U.S. and South Korea’s] combined forces command,” Lee said. “Kim Jong Un wants what all authoritarian rulers want … to rule for a long time and die peacefully in his own bed.”

Pyongyang’s goal, according to Lee and other intelligence officials, is to gain recognition as a major nuclear power and eventually negotiate a deal with the United States that sees American forces leave the Korean Peninsula.

Other U.S. intelligence agencies have been in agreement.

“We have long assessed that Pyongyang’s nuclear capabilities are intended for deterrence, international prestige, and coercive diplomacy,” the Office of the Director of National Intelligence wrote in its 2017 World Wide Threat Assessment, issued this past May.

Limits to rationality?

Asked about the apparent differences in the White House and CIA assessments of the North Korean leader’s rationality, a U.S. intelligence official said, “there is no daylight between the idea that Kim is someone who acts with clear goals of self-preservation and the fact that he uses brutal and abnormal methods to achieve these goals.

“To some, testing nuclear weapons while your people are starving is not rational,” the official added. “But when you believe those weapons are critical to your survival, it is not so irrational.”

There are also concerns that Kim’s ability to think and act rationally is limited.

“We don’t think he has an understanding about how tenuous his position is,” CIA Director Mike Pompeo said at the Reagan National Defense Forum in California last month, suggesting, “Those around him are not feeding him the truth about the place he finds himself and how precarious his position is in the world today.”

Questions to the National Security Council about differences between the White House and the intelligence community went unanswered.But on Tuesday, U.S. National Security Adviser, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, offered little hope that Kim Jong Un and North Korea would be willing to negotiate away its nuclear weapons program.

“The only way to do that really now short of war is through coercive economic power,” McMaster told VOA.

“What’s important to recognize is that North Korea is pursuing this nuclear weapon, not for just defensive purposes that you hear some people argue about, but really for coercive purposes, for offensive purposes, and the world has to recognize that,” he added.
…

While much of the nation shivers in bone-aching cold, people in Alaska’s largest city are basking in warmer weather, jogging in short sleeves, ice-skating in T-shirts or walking dogs while just lightly bundled up.

Anchorage saw an official high of 44 degrees Tuesday, tying the record set in 1981 and 2011. That was warm enough for Patricia Bierer, who was visiting Alaska this winter from Montana.

“I am from the Bitterroot Valley in Montana, and it’s colder there today than it is here in Alaska,” said Bierer, dressed in a pink parka as she strolled with family members around Anchorage’s Westchester Lagoon. “And my children that are there are jealous because I’ve got 40-degree temperatures here.”

National Weather Service meteorologist Michael Kurtz said areas of high and low pressure are working together to push tropical air to the north. But temperatures are expected to begin dropping Tuesday night, and below freezing by Wednesday. That freeze-thaw vacillation should bring slick conditions to the area.

“I jokingly refer to it as freezy, skid stuff,” Kurtz said.

It comes as the weather service issued wind chill advisories and freeze warnings covering a vast area, from South Texas to Canada and from Montana to Maine. 

The unseasonable temperatures brought Anchorage resident Cassandra Sullivan out to walk her pit bull Athena along downtown streets. She said it helped jolt her out of the winter blues.

“For some reason, with the weather out today as it is and just the breeze and the warm air, it kind of brings me out of it,” she said. 

Ashley Durst, walking her dog at the downtown lagoon during her lunch break, admitted that the warmer weather was a little unusual because it can be minus-30 this time of the year. 

But she doesn’t mind that others are feeling that bite instead.

“I just think maybe it’s time they get their little taste of it for a while,” she said with a smile.
…

A senior Palestinian official said Wednesday the Palestinians “will not be blackmailed” by U.S. President Donald Trump’s threat to cut aid funding.

Trump wrote on Twitter that the U.S. sends hundreds of millions of dollars each year and gets “no appreciation or respect.”

“They don’t even want to negotiate a long overdue peace treaty with Israel. We have taken Jerusalem, the toughest part of the negotiation, off the table, but Israel, for that, would have had to pay more. But with the Palestinians no longer willing to talk peace, why should we make any of these massive future payments to them?” Trump said in a series of tweets.

Palestinian official Hanan Ashrawi responded with a statement Wednesday.

“President Trump has sabotaged our search for peace, freedom and justice. Now he dares to blame the Palestinians for the consequences of his own irresponsible actions!” Ashrawi said.

Trump earlier broke with longstanding U.S. policy by recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and setting in motion the processes of moving the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was sharply critical of that move, saying it amounted to the U.S. abandoning the role it had played in the peace process. The U.N. General Assembly also overwhelmingly rejected Trump’s declaration.

Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said Tuesday the United States will stop contributing to a U.N. agency that gives humanitarian aid to Palestinians.

“We still very much want to have a peace process, nothing changes that,” she said. “As of now, they’re not coming to the table, but they ask for aid. We’re not giving the aid. We’re going to make sure they come to the table.”

The Palestinians want east Jerusalem as the capital of a future state. The United Nations has long considered Jerusalem’s status as a negotiating point in a two-state solution.

Under the previous U.S. administration, Secretary of State John Kerry made the peace process a major focus of his agenda, but his shuttle diplomacy ended more than three years ago with no agreement.
…