03/30: "The Winds of War" - U.N. Calls on Iran to Free Britons

=
03/29: "The Winds of War" - Iran's Unacceptable Behaviour
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?t=235490





<B><font size=+1 color=red><center>U.N. Calls on Iran to Free Britons </font>

March 29, 2007
The Associated Press
Edith M. Lederer
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4673736.html </center>
The U.N. Security Council expressed "grave concern" Thursday over the capture of 15 British sailors and marines and called for an early resolution of the problem, including their release. Britain failed to win support for a stronger statement deploring weeklong Iran's detention of the Britons and calling for their immediate freedom, primarily because of Russian opposition. </b>

Britain sought Security Council help as Iran rolled back on its promise to release Faye Turney, the sole woman among the captives, and a senior Iranian official suggested all 15 Britons might be put on trial.

Iran's military chief, Gen. Ali Reza Afshar, said that because of the "wrong behavior" of the British government, "the release of a female British soldier has been suspended," the semiofficial Iranian news agency Mehr reported.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan urged Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to allow a Turkish diplomat to meet with the British captives and also urged the release of Turney, Iranian state television reported.

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett condemned Iran's use of Turney for what she called "propaganda purposes," calling it "outrageous and cruel." Iran issued two letters purportedly written by Turney and broadcast footage of her and the other captives.

The standoff and broader tensions in the Persian Gulf region helped fuel a spike in world oil prices.

Also Thursday, Iranian TV broadcast about five seconds of video it says was of the operation that seized the British sailors and marines. In the video, a helicopter is shown hovering above inflatable boats in choppy seas. Then, the British seamen and marines appear seated in an Iranian boat.

The video showed a coast guard officer identified only as Col. Setareh, who displayed a GPS device purported to belong to the British crew. He said it proved the British had "violated Iranian waters" several times before they were detained.

The British draft language sent to the Security Council was in the form of a press statement. The text circulated to the 14 other council members said: "Members of the Security Council deplore the continuing detention by the government of Iran of 15 (United Kingdom) naval personnel."

It added that the British crew was "operating in Iraqi waters as part of the Multinational Force-Iraq under a mandate from the Security Council under resolution 1723 and at the request of the government of Iraq" and it called for their "immediate release."

A press statement is the weakest action the Security Council can take, but must be approved by all council members.

The council diplomats said informal discussion of the British proposal indicated the issue of where the incident took place raised problems for some council members, including Russia. Some members also want to hear the Iranian side, the diplomats said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private.

Britain said its sailors and marines were seized Friday after completing a search of a civilian ship near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab waterway, which forms the border between Iran and Iraq. Iran says the Britons were inside its territorial waters.

Prime Minister Tony Blair said Britain would not negotiate for the captives.

"The important thing for us is to get them back safe and sound, but we can't enter into some basis of bargaining," Blair told ITV News. "What you have to do when you are engaged with people like the Iranian regime, you have to keep explaining to them, very patiently, what it is necessary to do and at the same time make them fully aware there are further measures that will be taken if they're not prepared to be reasonable."

"What you can't do is end up negotiating over hostages; end up saying there's some quid pro quo or tit for tat; that's not acceptable," he said.

Blair's office dismissed a suggestion by Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki that Britain should resolve the crisis by admitting that its personnel had made a "mistake" and crossed into Iranian waters.

Mottaki had said Wednesday that Turney would be released within 48 hours. Britain said it was halting all discussion with Iran except negotiations to free the sailors, and expressed outrage over Iran's broadcast of images of the captives.

Top Iranian negotiator Ali Larijani said on Iranian state radio that: "British leaders have miscalculated this issue."

If Britain follows through with its policies toward Iran, Larijani said "this case may face a legal path" — a clear reference to Iran's prosecuting the sailors in court.

Blair's official spokesman said Britain wanted to resolve the crisis quickly and without having a "confrontation over this."

"We are not seeking to put Iran in a corner. We are simply saying, 'Please release the personnel who should not have been seized in the first place,'" said the spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with government policy.

But in a briefing to reporters, the spokesman said British officials had been angered by Tehran's decision to show the captives on Iranian television.

"Nobody should be put in that position. It is an impossible position to be put in," he said. "It is wrong. It is wrong in terms of the usual conventions that cover this. It is wrong in terms of basic humanity."

Beckett said there were "grave concerns about the circumstances in which it was prepared and issued. This blatant attempt to use Leading Seaman Turney for propaganda purposes is outrageous and cruel."

In the video broadcast Wednesday on Iran's Arab-language satellite channel, Turney said her group had "trespassed" in Iranian waters. The segment showed her wearing a black head scarf, sitting in a room before floral curtains and smoking a cigarette.

"Obviously we trespassed into their waters," Turney said. "They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we've been arrested. There was no harm, no aggression."

In Thursday's video from Iran that was shown on Sky News, another letter apparently written by Turney called for withdrawal of British troops from Iraq.

The letter asked British lawmakers: "Isn't it time to start withdrawing our forces from Iraq and let them determine their own future?"

=




<B><font size=+1 color=brown><center>Ominous Similarities to 1979 Hostage Crisis in Tehran</font>

March 29, 2007
London Evening Standard
Simon Henderson
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC06.php?CID=1041 </center>
Tony Blair is on the edge of a hostage crisis similar to when diplomats were seized in the US embassy in Tehran in 1979. Today it has emerged that both the UN Secretary-General and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana have held talks with Iran on the issue. But Iran has refused to release the 15 British personnel until Britain apologises for the alleged incursion. </b>

The parallels with the holding of 66 Americans in 1979, most for 444 days, are ominous. For a few days the world watched while Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution, decided whether to back the actions of the students. Declaring it was a "second revolution", Khomeini smashed the hopes for any early resolution of that crisis.

Will Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Khomeini's successor, see this as an opportunity to announce a "third revolution"?

The temptation is clear. Iran is under intense international pressure over its controversial uranium enrichment programme which it insists, implausibly, is for peaceful purposes. Domestically, Iran's economic woes are, perhaps only temporarily, alleviated by high oil prices. The ideologues still believe in the revolution, but many Iranians are just cynical.

For the moment Khamenei and the less powerful but noisier firebrand president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are silent.

This is partly a reflection of the continuing Nowruz (Persian new year) holiday. It is also probably because each man wants to see which way the wind is blowing and how he can best use the circumstances. Humiliating Mr Blair, like President Carter 28 years ago, must be tempting.

There is little doubt the seizure was planned by Tehran rather than being the action of an impulsive local commander. A few days earlier, speaking of the impending United Nations Security Council vote that condemned Tehran for its nuclear stance, Khamenei had declared that such a vote would be "illegal" and that Iran's response could therefore be similarly "illegal".

The Foreign Office has tried being discreet. Bilateral contacts, except on the hostages issue, are suspended. The US has so far remained quietly supportive of Britain's diplomacy. This week one of America's two aircraft carriers in the Gulf skipped a planned visit to Dubai in a show of strength to Iran and support for London.

Now, via the UN as well directly on a bilateral basis, Britain could also reach out to the Third World. Such countries might be hostile to Britain's role in Iraq and closeness to Washington but they also value the UN.

But Blair's preference, indeed best hope, is probably the UN. After all, the seized personnel were operating under the mandate of a Security Council resolution. A non-nuclear resolution condemning Iran would shock the mullahs. But would it shock them further into or out of the crisis?

Tehran has to be convinced this is a predicament for Iran, rather than an opportunity.

Simon Henderson reported from Iran during the 1979 crisis. He is now director of the Gulf and Energy Policy Programme at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=green><center>Blair Livid at Tehran Change of Tactics on Female Hostage</font>

March 29, 2007
The Times
James Bone in New York, Dominic Kennedy and Philip Webster
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1588818.ece </center>
Iran twisted the knife in the hostage crisis last night, releasing a letter said to be from the captured Servicewoman Faye Turney in which she calls for British troops to be withdrawn from Iraq. </b>

The letter, in which Tehran appeared to be using the hostages to try to dictate British foreign policy, was apparently designed to heap humiliation on Tony Blair. Its release came minutes after the Prime Minister refused to be drawn into a “tit for tat” deal to secure the release of the 15 Servicemen and took the stand-off into increasingly unpredictable territory. A livid Mr Blair denounced the new letter, the second to be released by the Britons’ captors. “It is cruel and callous to do this to somebody in this position and playing this kind of game — it is a disgrace,” said the Prime Minister’s spokesman.

According to a text of the letter, released by the Iranian Embassy in London, the 26-year-old mother wrote: “Isn’t it time for us to start withdrawing our forces from Iraq and let them determine their own future?”

Iran had earlier reneged on its promise to release Leading Seaman Turney and gone back on a pledge to let British diplomats visit the detainees, who have been held in secret locations since Friday. As the stand-off deteriorated, Iran threatened to put the 15 on trial and claimed it had satellite evidence that they breached its borders six times.

The letter, dated Tuesday, was addressed to “representatives of the House of Commons”. It said: “Unfortunately during the course of our mission we entered into Iranian waters.

“Even through our wrongdoing they have still treated us well and humanely, which I am and always will be enternally grateful” for. “I ask the representatives of the House of Commons, after the government have promised that this type of incident would not happen again, why have they let this occur, and why has the government not been questioned over this?” A written and video confession by Leading Seaman Turney had previously been shown on Iranian TV, increasing concerns that she was being pressurised into making propaganda statements.

Mr Blair’s efforts to unite world opinion on his side hit a hitch at the United Nations, where diplomats questioned whether the detained Britons were innocent. Britain ran into stiff opposition as it tried to persuade the Security Council to accept that the Royal Navy search team had been captured in an Iraqi rather than Iranian part of the Gulf.

It was an unexpected affront to Mr Blair, who had told ITV News that he was stepping up the pressure on Iran, announcing: “The next step is the UN statement.”

Iranian TV last night imitated a Ministry of Defence briefing which launched Mr Blair’s offensive. A Tehran military officer was shown in front of a map of the Gulf, holding up an electronic positioning device seized from the Britons and pointing at numerous spots where he claimed they had trespassed. The promised home-coming of the lone female among the captured sailors was cancelled by Iran, whose leaders adopted a menacing new tone by threatening to put the party on trial. Iran appeared to be punishing Mr Blair for a diplomatic and media offensive built around claims that Iranians deliberately lied when saying the Royal Navy had violated their waters.

At the UN, Russia, China, Qatar, Indonesia, and Congo (Brazzaville) all expressed reservations about the British initiative to demand the immediate release of the 15.

Britain raised the sailors’ fate even though the ambassador, Sir Emyr Jones-Parry, had told the Security Council last week that it was a “bilateral issue.”

British officials conceded that they faced an uphill stuggle in convincing the 15 council-members to sign up to a statement placing blame whole-heartedly on Iran.

‘Leave Iraq’

Letter purporting to be from Faye Turney, sent by Iranian embassy in London

“ Representative of the House of Commons, I am writing to inform you of my situation. I am a British serviceperson currently being held in Iran. I would like you all to know of the treatment I have received here. The Iranian people are kind, considerate, warm, compassionate and very hospitable.

“ They have brought me no harm but have looked after me well. I have been fed, clothed and well cared for. Unfortunately during the course of our mission we entered into Iranian waters. Even through our wrongdoing, they have still treated us well and humanely, which I am and always will be eternally grateful.

“ I ask the representatives of the House of Commons, after the Government have promised that this type of incident would not happen again, why have they let this occur, and why has the Government not been questioned over this? Isn’t it time for us to start withdrawing our forces from Iraq and let them determine their own future?

Iron Pants or Peanut Farmer.

Lately Peanut Farmer seems to be leading by a goober.

=




<B><font size=+1 color=blue><center>Blair Warns of 'whole Series of Measures' Against Iran</font>

March 29, 2007
AFX News
Orange.com
http://orange.advfn.com/news_Blair-...inst-Iran-over-detained-sailors_20024223.html </center>
LONDON -- British Prime Minister Tony Blair has warned Iran that there is a "whole series of measures" that could be taken to pressure the Islamic republic to hand over 15 British navy detainees. "What we have to do in a very firm way, is step up the pressure," he told ITV television, as British sought an agreement on a United Nations Security Council statement about the dispute. </b>

"The next step is the UN statement. There's a whole series of measures we can take," he added, giving no further details.

"We are going to have to step up pressure not just with them in the UN and the European Union, but see what further measures are necessary to get them to understand it's not merely wrong but only going to result in further tension so it's sensible to resolve it now.

"I'm not interested in confrontation for its own sake, the most important thing is to get 15 personnel back safe and sound."

"The important thing is we just keep making it very, very clear to the Iranian government it is not a situation that will be relieved by anything but the unconditional release of all our people," Blair said.

"There's no alternative but to release them and the longer it goes on, the more the pressure will be stepped up.

"I think we should take this a day at a time at the moment," Blair added.

The 15 were captured on Friday in the northern Gulf in what Iran insists were its territorial waters, but the UK says they were picked up while on a routine patrol to check cross-border smuggling of vehicles on the Iraqi side.

=






<B><font size=+1 color=purple><center>Is a U.S.-Iran War Inevitable? </font>

March 29, 2007
Time Magazine
Robert Baer
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1604546,00.html </center>
You wouldn't be wrong to wonder if Iran hasn't lost its mind seizing the fifteen British marines and sailors, and in so doing, handing Bush a causus belli even he couldn't have imagined. </b>

But then again you'd be missing the grim fatalism that has settled over Iran of late, the resigned belief that a war with the U.S. is all but inevitable. This week Iranian diplomats are telling interlocutors that, yes, they realize seizing the Brits could lead to a hot war. But, they point out, it wasn't Iran that started taking hostages — it was the U.S., when it arrested five members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Erbil in Northern Iraq on January 11. They are diplomats, the Iranians insist. They were in Erbil with the approval of the Kurds and therefore, they argue, are under the protection of the Vienna Convention.

Iranian grievances, real and perceived, don't stop there. Tehran is convinced the U.S. or one of its allies was behind the March 2006 separatist violence in Iranian Baluchistan, which ended up with twenty people killed, including an IRGC member executed. And the Iranians believe there is more to come, accusing the U.S. of training and arming Iranian Kurds and Azeris to go back home and cause problems. Needless to say the Iranians are not happy there are American soldiers on two of its borders, as well as two carriers and a dozen warships in the Gulf. You call this paranoia, they ask.

The Bush Administration is doing nothing to allay Tehran's paranoia. With the largest build up in the Gulf since the start of this Iraq war, it's actually fanning it. You have to wonder if Bush is counting on the Iranians over-reacting like they did when they seized our embassy in 1979. And lest we forget, this was driven by paranoia that we were plotting to destroy the revolution.

Add this to the rest of the bad news coming out of the Gulf, and things look pretty grim. The "surge", despite what some claim, has barely made a dent in the violence in Iraq. Our Arab allies are jumping ship, apparently as fast as they can. At the opening of the Arab summit on Wednesday Saudi King 'Abdallah accused the U.S of illegally occupying Iraq. The day before, the leader of the United Arab Emirates sent his foreign minister to Tehran to tell the Iranians he would not allow the U.S. to use UAE soil to attack Iran. That leaves us with Kuwait and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki to face Iran.

I called up an Arab Gulf security official and asked him what he thought about it all. He said the view from his side of the Gulf is that if Iran does not soon release the Brits, a war between the U.S. and Iran is in the cards. "I for one am taking all the cash I can out of my ATM," he said before he hanging up.

Robert Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, is the author of See No Evil and, most recently, the novel Blow the House Down.

=




<B><font size=+1 color=red><center>U.S. Unprepared For Oil Supply Crisis: Government Report</font>

Topics:Energy
By CNBC.com
29 Mar 2007 | 05:59 PM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/17860269 </center>
As crude oil prices surge on rising political tensions with Iran, a new government report released Thursday said that the U.S. is unprepared to face an oil supply crisis and urged U.S. policymakers to develop a strategy in order to reduce potential risks related to an oil shock.</b>

The report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office concluded that the U.S. has no plans in place to address "peak oil," the future point in history of maximum oil production, which would be followed by irreversible declines in oil fields around the world.

"While the consequences of a peak would be felt globally, the United States, as the largest consumer of oil and one of the nations most heavily dependent on oil for transportation, may be particularly vulnerable," the GAO report said.

An expert told CNBC on Thursday that peak oil is the "the single biggest issue to threaten sustainable society" in the United States.

"We are on the verge of actually replacing global warming by this term peak oil," said Matthew Simmons, author of Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Oil Shock and the World Economy. "We have demand roaring ahead and supply is faltering."

Most studies predict oil production will peak sometime between now and 2040, the agency said.

"We're basically held hostage by countries that aren't friendly to us in terms of what's available," John Kilduff, senior vice president of energy risk management at Fimat USA, told CNBC. "That is so dangerous to the United States economy you can't believe it. We have big problems on our hands."

© 2007 CNBC.com

=




<B><font size=+1 color=brown><center>'Hang the British' cry Teheran students </font>

By Our Correspondent in Teheran
Last Updated: 3:14am BST
30/03/2007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/30/wiran130.xml </center>
Iranian students carried out a mock trial of the British military captives yesterday, chanting "death to Britain" and demanding punishment for the 15 sailors and Marines.

A handful of bearded militants gathered outside the foreign ministry in Teheran and called for the prisoners to be hanged. One poster read: "15 British aggressors must be executed".</b>

But the rhetoric of the demonstrators, who would have gathered with the regime's approval, does not represent public opinion.

Most people in Teheran have no personal enmity towards westerners and seem more worried about the rainy weather ruining their new year holiday.

"It's all right. It's just Britain and Iran playing a game and God willing it will all be sorted out in a few days," said Reza Kesharvarzi, a Teheran resident.

Initially, state television news barely touched the issue but, since footage of the captives was broadcast on Wednesday, the subject has dominated the local media, which blames Britain for an "act of aggression" against Iranian borders.

advertisement
An earlier promise to release 26-year-old leading seaman Faye Turney has been revoked. Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, accused Britain of escalating the crisis by referring the matter to the United Nations security council.

"Instead of sending a technical team to examine the problem, they kicked up a media storm, announced a freeze in relations and spoke about the security council. That will not resolve the problem. They have miscalculated," he said.

Britain's "incorrect attitude" had derailed the release of Miss Turney.

The demonstrations and the official media's hostility make it harder for Iran to free the sailors. Above all, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's conservative regime will not want to give any impression of caving in.

The crisis has brought to the fore Iran's complicated attitude towards Britain. Many Iranians remember how British strategists manipulated their country's politics for decades, paying off politicians, newspaper editors, gang leaders and activists to maintain a firm grip on the oil industry.

In 1953, the British helped to overthrow Mohammed Mossadeq, a popular prime minister who infuriated London by nationalising BP's assets. Iranians often see - or imagine - a hidden British hand behind events in their country.

Mr Ahmadinejad's supporters see this confrontation as part of a long period of escalation, deliberately co-ordinated by London and Washington. They believe this started almost six years ago when British and American forces arrived on their eastern frontier in Afghanistan - and continued in 2003 when they invaded Iraq.

The coalition's presence in the Persian Gulf - symbolised by the patrolling of the frigate Cornwall - is a continuation of older imperialist policy stretching back some two centuries.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=green><center>Captured Britons may face show trial in Iran </font>

By Thomas Harding and George Jones
Last Updated: 3:09am BST 30/03/2007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/30/wiran30.xml </center></b>

<i>The 15 British sailors and Marines held in Iran could face a show trial.
The second letter said to be written by Ldg Seaman Turney was released by Iran last night</i>

<b>The threat emerged last night as Iran reneged on its promise to free Ldg Seaman Faye Turney, who has a three-year-old daughter.

Its leaders instead tried to blackmail Britain by saying that, if further diplomatic action was taken, the eight sailors and seven Marines would not be released.
</b>
The Prime Minister said Teheran's actions were a "disgrace". Tony Blair threatened "further measures" if the troops were not freed and for the first time he referred to them as "hostages".

In an interview with ITV News, Mr Blair was asked about the treatment of 26-year-old Ldg Seaman Turney who was paraded on TV in Iran.

"I just think it's completely wrong, a disgrace actually, when people are used in that way," Mr Blair said.

"That's contrary to all international laws and conventions, and is not going to make any difference to us. We need all 15 released because they were doing their job under a UN mandate. There is no justification whatsoever for taking them in that way."

advertisement
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, the Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett appeared to extend an olive branch to Iran, saying that she believed the sailors' detention was "clearly very much like a cock-up" and not a conspiracy.

She said there were difficulties in communicating with the right Iranian leadership as the country was celebrating its equivalent of our New Year holiday.

Ldg Seaman Turney's husband, Petty Officer Adam Turney, was said to be "deeply upset" after seeing pictures of his wife looking distressed as she confessed to straying into Iranian waters.

It is thought the sailor and their daughter, Molly, have been removed to a new location from their home in Plymouth.

"It was a shocking thing for him to watch," said one neighbour.

"He had a visit from MoD officials who were with him when the pictures were shown for the first time on British television."

However, Iran raised the stakes further last night by releasing a second "letter" said to have been written by Ldg Seaman Turney.

In the hand-written note, she is said to have called for the withdrawal from British troops from Iraq.

It is likely to raise concerns fresh concerns that it was written under some form of duress.

The letter, dated March 27, was addressed to "representatives of the House of Commons" and states: "Isn't it time for us to start withdrawing our forces from Iraq and let them determine their own future?"

As the prisoners enter a second week of captivity the angry exchanges between London and Teheran intensified.

Responding to Iran's release of a second letter, Downing Street said the treatment of the sailor was "cruel and callous".

On Wednesday, Manouchehr Mottaki, the country's foreign minister, had said that Ldg Seaman Turney, 26, would be released.

But yesterday Ali Larijani, who is secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, warned that if the country was faced with "fuss and wrong behaviour" the release would be suspended.

The intervention of Mr Larijani - who is the chief international negotiator on Iran's nuclear programme - represented a fresh hardening of the Iranian position.

"British leaders have miscalculated this issue," he told Iranian state radio.

He also indicated the British group could be put on trial if the British Government escalated the situation. "This case may face a legal path," he said.

News footage released by Iran claimed that the two Navy tenders had entered Iranian territory by 450 metres.

The "evidence" produced amounted to a senior officer pointing to crosses on a map in Iranian territory and a vague picture of a GPS device with coordinates.

The Iranian's claim that the Britons were in its waters have been undermined by the country giving two different sets of co-ordinates, one that placed the troops in Iraq and then a later version that put them well inside Iran.

Threats were also made by student protesters in the Iranian capital who called for the "aggressors to be executed" and said the penalty for "espionage" was death.

As the likelihood of the prisoners early release recedes, a YouGov poll for The Daily Telegraph shows that over half the population would support military action to retrieve the prisoners.

With two aircraft carrier battle groups in the Gulf America has so far declined to offer overt military support for a rescue mission.

Speaking on a visit to London at the American embassy, Eric Edelman, the US Under Secretary of Defence, the detainees "should be released, no ifs or buts about it."

Tempers with the Iranians' intransigence and threats were raised as Tony Blair said he would make its leader "fully aware there are further measures that will be taken if they're not prepared to be reasonable".

But Whitehall remained steadfast in its assertion that the sailors were two miles within Iraqi territorial waters and had documentary proof.

"The facts are the facts," the Prime Minister's spokesman said.

The UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, attempted to defuse the situation by meeting Mr Mottaki and discussing servicemen's detention.

Britain was last night attempting to pressure the UN in New York make Iran give up the prisoners.

Saudi Arabia also increased the international pressure on Iran with its foreign minister urging the prisoners to be released.

Iraq's foreign minister also confirmed that his Iranian counterpart had promised the female sailor would have been released by today.

Javier Solana, the EU foreign minister, said the troops should be "liberated immediately".

Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, warned that Iran could seek to escalate the situation to draw attention away from its ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons.

He said it was possibly an opportunity to "ramp up" the dispute to "try to deflect attention from its military aspirations for a nuclear capability".

=




<B><font size=+1 color=blue><center>Britain plans reply to Iran note on sailor crisis By Deborah Haynes </font>

53 minutes ago
March 30 2007
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070330/ts_nm/iran_britain_dc </center>
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain was preparing a response on Friday to a note from the Iranian government about 15 British sailors and marines seized by Iran a week ago.

Speaking after a day of escalating tension between London and Tehran, which pushed oil prices sharply higher, a Foreign Office spokeswoman said Britain was giving "serious consideration" to the note but gave no details.</b>

Britain wants to increase international pressure on Iran to free its military personnel and plans to urge the European Union to help isolate Tehran.

The U.N. Security Council has agreed a watered down statement expressing "grave concern" at the situation and supporting calls for the crew's release.

Britain and Iran are at odds over whether the 15 Britons were in Iranian or Iraqi waters when captured carrying out patrols authorized by the United Nations and Iraq's government.

London says satellite data prove last Friday's seizure happened in Iraqi waters, but Tehran has video footage and charts it says show the event took place in Iranian waters.

Ratcheting up emotions, Iran on Thursday released a second letter purportedly by the only female member of the crew, Faye Turney, in which she again said her patrol had "entered into Iranian waters."

Britain reacted angrily to what it said was blatant propaganda, labeling the note's release "outrageous and cruel."

INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE

Both letters from Turney, a 26-year-old mother and wife from south-west England, were in stilted English, leading some linguistic experts to suggest the text may have been written originally in Farsi and translated into English.

The spiraling dispute pushed oil prices up more than 3 percent to $66 a barrel on Thursday on worries oil supplies could be affected, and stoked Middle East tensions, already heightened over concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Hoping to use international channels to force Iran's hand, Britain wanted the U.N. Security Council on Thursday to adopt a tough stance. But after hours of negotiations, Russia blocked a statement that would have demanded an immediate release of the British crew. This resulted in the more softly worded outcome.

London now plans to raise the matter at a two-day summit of EU foreign ministers in Bremen, Germany, starting on Friday.

Britain, which has frozen all diplomatic business with Tehran apart from discussions over the prisoners, will ask foreign ministers from the 27-nation bloc to follow its lead and adopt tough measures, government sources said.

Iran, however, said its dispute with Britain should be solved through bilateral routes.

"The British government's attempt to engage third parties, including the Security Council, with this case is not helpful," Iran's U.N. mission said in a statement.

The British Foreign Office spokeswoman said Britain's embassy in Tehran received the formal note from the Iranian government, but she was unable to say when.

"Such exchanges are always confidential, so we cannot divulge any details," a Foreign Office spokeswoman said.

"But we are giving the message serious consideration, and will soon respond formally to the Iranian government."

In a further development on Thursday, Iranian state television said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would consider a Turkish request to free Turney.

It said Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan asked Ahmadinejad to free her in a telephone call.

=




<B><font size=+1 color=purple><center>Australian navy reviews security</font>

March 30, 2007 - 12:24PM
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Australian-navy-reviews-security/2007/03/30/1174761718262.html </center>
The Royal Australian Navy is reviewing security procedures for its personnel in the Persian Gulf following the seizure of 15 British sailors by Iranian forces.

The ongoing detention of the British personnel has sparked a diplomatic crisis, with London warning negotiations could "move into a new phase" if they are not released immediately.</b>

The crew were taken prisoner at gunpoint in the disputed Shat al-Arab waterway between Iraq and Iran seven days ago.

HMAS Toowoomba, which is crewed by about 190 personnel, is the Australian warship currently patrolling the area.

The British were conducting searches of cargo vessels at the time, operating from small inflatable speed boats.

The work is also undertaken by Australian sailors, operating from similar speed boats with helicopter support.

Asked if Australian forces were stepping up security measures in light of the drama, a spokesman for Defence Minster Brendan Nelson said: "The Australian force in the Middle East continually monitors the situation and level of threat and adjusts force protection measures to meet those conditions."

Australian vessels have had several tense incidents with Iranian gunboats in the area.

Last year two Australian servicemen received the Distinguished Service Medal for coolly diffusing a situation that threatened to blow up into a major international incident.

On December 6, 2004, crew from HMAS Adelaide were sent to check a cargo ship run aground at the mouth of the Shat al-Arab, but once the Australians boarded the vessel they were surrounded by six heavily armed Iranian gunboats.

Following a long and tense stand off, all members of the boarding party were winched into an Australian helicopter and to safety.

Tensions between Britain and Iran have escalated in recent days, with Tehran putting off freeing a female prisoner and London calling her treatment "outrageous and cruel".

Britain has drafted a strongly worded statement for the UN Security Council seeking to persuade European Union members to join it in cutting back diplomatic relations with Tehran.

Prime Minister Tony Blair said he was disgusted by Iran's treatment of the prisoners, adding he would not enter "tit-for-tat" negotiations to secure their release.

Iran has shown the prisoners and has distributed letters purportedly from the only female captive, Faye Turney, confessing to entering Iranian waters.

Britain denies their boat was in Iranian waters.

The dispute has further stoked Middle East tensions, already heightened over concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions, and sent tremors through the oil market.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=red><center>Iran cruelty to female prisoner</font>

By Sophie Walker And Peter Graff
March 30, 2007 12:00
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21473874-5006009,00.html </center>
IRAN has refused to free the British female soldier Faye Turney it is holding prisoner, leading London to call her treatment "outrageous and cruel".

Britain immediately launched a diplomatic offensive, drafting a strongly worded statement for the UN Security Council protesting at Iran and its treatment of Turney and 14 other British sailors captured by Iran in the Gulf.</b>

It is also seeking to persuade European Union members to cut back diplomatic relations with Tehran.

But Britain failed today to secure strong UN security council support for its tug-of-war with Iran.

The 15-member body adopted a watered down statement expressing "grave concern" at the detention of 15 British sailors and marines but stopped well short of London's call for censuring Tehran.

Prime Minister Tony Blair said he was disgusted by Iran's treatment of the prisoners, adding he would not enter "tit-for-tat" negotiations to secure their release.

Iran has shown the prisoners on television and today distributed a second letter purportedly from the only female captive, Faye Turney, confessing to entering Iranian waters.

Both letters were in stilted English, with unusual phrases that linguistic experts said appeared to have been translated from Farsi into English.

"Unfortunately during the course of our mission we entered into Iranian waters. Even through our wrongdoing, they have still treated us well and humanely, which I am and always will be eternally grateful," Thursday's letter said. It called for British forces to withdraw from Iraq.

"We have not seen this letter but we have grave concerns about the circumstances in which it was prepared and issued. This blatant attempt to use Leading Seaman Turney for propaganda purposes is outrageous and cruel," British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said in a statement.

Iran had promised yesterday it would free Turney soon. But today Iranian military commander Alireza Afshar said her release had been "suspended".

"The wrong behaviour of those who live in London caused the suspension," he said.

Britain must apologise for entering Iran's waters and promise it would not happen again, he added.

Iranian state television reported today that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would consider a Turkish request to free her.

Blair said the prisoners' treatment was "a disgrace".

"Obviously I felt the same way most people do, which is a sense of disgust that people would be used in that way," he told ITV news.

"What I'm afraid we can't do is end up in negotiation over hostages. What we can't do is say there's some kind of quid pro quo or tit-for-tat that goes on," he said.

"This is not a situation that can be resolved by anything other than the unconditional release of all our people."

The six-day-old dispute has stoked Middle East tensions, already heightened over concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions, and sent tremors through the oil market.

Britain says satellite data proves its 15 sailors and marines were seized last week in Iraqi waters. Iran responded on Thursday by showing video of the capture and charts it says show the capture took place in Iranian waters.

Britain proposed a text of a UN Security Council statement deploring Iran's action and calling for the prisoners' release.

The council was considering the statement today but could tone down its language. Diplomats reported that several council members – including Russia, China, Indonesia and Qatar – said they had no way of independently ascertaining where the incident took place and were therefore wary of condemning it.

Government sources said Britain, which has frozen all diplomatic business with Iran apart from discussions over the prisoners, would ask EU foreign ministers to follow its lead and adopt tough measures at a foreign ministers' summit on Friday.

The French Foreign Ministry summoned Iran's ambassador today to demand the sailors' swift release, a sign of support among other EU heavyweights for the British position.

Oil prices remained near six-month highs on concerns that any escalation could hit oil supplies from the Gulf.

The crisis comes at a time of tension on several fronts.

It coincides with a UN Security Council resolution at the weekend hitting Tehran with sanctions over its nuclear program.

Tehran says it is not seeking atomic weapons and also denies US and British accusations that it stokes violence in Iraq.

This week the United States has conducted its biggest war games in Gulf waters for years, with a second aircraft carrier arriving for the first time since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said the war games were not intended to provoke Iran.

But he also said limiting petrol imports – Iran imports 40 per cent of its petrol – would be a way to exert pressure on Tehran.

At the United Nations, a Western diplomat quoted Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin as telling the council during the closed-door consultations that Moscow would not back Britain's call for UN support.

"We will not be able to accept a call for the immediate release of the 15 UK naval personnel," Churkin said, according to the diplomat.

Several diplomats said Russia, backed by some other council members such as Indonesia, was keen to avoid giving the impression that the council was taking sides in what is seen as a bilateral dispute, particularly on the issue of exactly where the 15 Britons were seized.

The Flying Dutchman said:

=






<B><font size=+1 color=purple><center>Is a U.S.-Iran War Inevitable? </font>

March 29, 2007
Time Magazine
Robert Baer
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1604546,00.html </center>
You wouldn't be wrong to wonder if Iran hasn't lost its mind seizing the fifteen British marines and sailors, and in so doing, handing Bush a causus belli even he couldn't have imagined. </b>

But then again you'd be missing the grim fatalism that has settled over Iran of late, the resigned belief that a war with the U.S. is all but inevitable. This week Iranian diplomats are telling interlocutors that, yes, they realize seizing the Brits could lead to a hot war. But, they point out, it wasn't Iran that started taking hostages — it was the U.S., when it arrested five members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Erbil in Northern Iraq on January 11. They are diplomats, the Iranians insist. They were in Erbil with the approval of the Kurds and therefore, they argue, are under the protection of the Vienna Convention.

Iranian grievances, real and perceived, don't stop there. Tehran is convinced the U.S. or one of its allies was behind the March 2006 separatist violence in Iranian Baluchistan, which ended up with twenty people killed, including an IRGC member executed. And the Iranians believe there is more to come, accusing the U.S. of training and arming Iranian Kurds and Azeris to go back home and cause problems. Needless to say the Iranians are not happy there are American soldiers on two of its borders, as well as two carriers and a dozen warships in the Gulf. You call this paranoia, they ask.

The Bush Administration is doing nothing to allay Tehran's paranoia. With the largest build up in the Gulf since the start of this Iraq war, it's actually fanning it. You have to wonder if Bush is counting on the Iranians over-reacting like they did when they seized our embassy in 1979. And lest we forget, this was driven by paranoia that we were plotting to destroy the revolution.

Add this to the rest of the bad news coming out of the Gulf, and things look pretty grim. The "surge", despite what some claim, has barely made a dent in the violence in Iraq. Our Arab allies are jumping ship, apparently as fast as they can. At the opening of the Arab summit on Wednesday Saudi King 'Abdallah accused the U.S of illegally occupying Iraq. The day before, the leader of the United Arab Emirates sent his foreign minister to Tehran to tell the Iranians he would not allow the U.S. to use UAE soil to attack Iran. That leaves us with Kuwait and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki to face Iran.

I called up an Arab Gulf security official and asked him what he thought about it all. He said the view from his side of the Gulf is that if Iran does not soon release the Brits, a war between the U.S. and Iran is in the cards. "I for one am taking all the cash I can out of my ATM," he said before he hanging up.

Robert Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, is the author of See No Evil and, most recently, the novel Blow the House Down.

Click to expand...

According to the blog Iraqthemodel the surge is working. This blogger is no Bull Shi***. The key is what happens with Iran??? All are sitting on the fence to see if the USA is going the way of Congress (CUT & RUN from the middle east OR The Bush Way to Invade & topple the Mullahs).


http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

=





<B><center>09:06, March 30, 2007

<font size=+1 color=brown>Blair calls for "unconditional release" of sailors detained by Iran </font>

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200703/30/eng20070330_362319.html </center>
British Prime Minister Tony Blair Thursday called for "unconditional release" of 15 British Navy personnel detained by Iran last week.

In an interview with ITV television, Blair said that "the important thing is we just keep making it very, very clear to the Iranian government it is not a situation that will be relieved by anything but the unconditional release of all our people."
</b>
"There's no alternative but to release them and the longer it goes on, the more the pressure will be stepped up," Blair said.

"The next step is the UN statement. There's a whole series of measures we can take."

On Thursday, Britain asked the UN Security Council to support a statement that would call for the release of its sailors detained by Iran. And a draft press statement circulated to council members by the British mission was to be discussed by the council at a closed-door meeting on later Thursday,

Asked about the footage of detained British service personnel aired by Iranian state television, Blair said, "I just think it's completely wrong, a disgrace actually, when people are used in that way."

"That's contrary to all international laws and conventions, and is not going to make any difference to us. We need all 15 released because they were doing their job under a UN mandate," Blair said.

Last Friday, the Iranian navy detained 15 British navy personnel, allegedly for their illegal entry into Iranian territorial waters in the Shatt al-Arab waterway. Teheran claimed that the sailors strayed into Iranian territory.

On Wednesday, Blair said it was time to "ratchet up" the diplomatic and international pressure on Iran to release 15 sailors detained by Iran.

Source: Xinhua

=


<B><center>ArabNews

Friday, 30, March, 2007 (11, Rabi` al-Awwal, 1428)

<font size=+1 color=green>Ratcheting Up Iran Conflict Is the Wrong Tactic</font>

Adrian Hamilton, The Independent
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=93669&d=30&m=3&y=2007 </center>
It’s, on the whole, not a good idea for ministers to rush back to London in an air of dramatic crisis. Prime ministers, perhaps. Tony Blair has been attacked more than once for failing to cut short a holiday when events back home demanded his attention. But ministers?</b>

Margaret Beckett’s return from Turkey to address the Commons on Wednesday was completely unnecessary. The talks, or nontalks, with the Iranians are unlikely to be affected one way or another. All she did was to bring on a classic bit of Iranian teasing, when Tehran showed pictures of healthy British captives eating good Persian fare, along with the promise of the early release of the sole female marine.

Mrs. Beckett’s return was really just a political gesture, made to keep the populist press at bay and to give added emphasis to Blair’s dour warning this week that the crisis with Iran was moving to “another phase”. By which he presumably meant a step escalation in the confrontation by giving coordinates to prove that the British boats were in Iraqi waters and demonstrating British anger by freezing diplomatic relations.

Fair enough. Britain does have a strong case in international law to argue both that it was operating in Iraqi waters and that the Iranian response contravened every international convention. But that is not really what it is all about, or at any rate what it is in danger of becoming. Context is all in international relations, and the context in this case has become positively explosive.

Obsessed with the idea that Iran is fuelling and coordinating resistance in Iraq, the US has raised the temperature by seizing five Iranian nationals in the northern city of Erbil. The British, meanwhile, have now openly accused Iran of not only exporting sophisticated bombs to Iraq (a claim disputed by some experts), but also paying insurgents to attack British troops.

The incident in the Gulf comes as the British have taken over the lead role in patrolling the coastal waters and conduct stop-and-search of commercial shipping, ostensibly to prevent smuggling of goods. When the UK servicemen were taken, they were returning in small vessels from just such a search of a cargo vessel. Given the background, and the speed at which the UK inflatables were surrounded by Iranian Revolutionary Guard vessels, it seems unlikely that it was a pure accident.

But that doesn’t really tell you whether the British were taken as a deliberate provocation, a gesture of defiance at US-UK attempts to control the Gulf waterways or as a bargaining chip to use to get the Iranians taken in Kurdistan freed. Nor does it tell you whether the seizure was planned or sanctioned by Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, with the knowledge of the president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

What we do know is that there are considerable tensions within the Tehran government, brought on partly by the failure of the government of Ahmadinejad to deliver the economic benefits he’d been elected to provide and partly because of the criticism of Iranian diplomats and politicians, who fear the president is leading them into an unnecessary and damaging confrontation with the West.

The trouble is that the more pressure that there is from the inside, the more seductive it is for the regime to encourage confrontation abroad as a means of solidifying support at home. The seizure of British sailors may or may not be a tactic in this politics, but it may well be becoming one now.

The quandary for the British government is how to adopt a robust response to what is an international outrage, and yet not fall into the trap of playing the Revolutionary Guards’ game on their terms. We need to encourage the forces of common sense in Iran not marginalize them by overreaction.

So far, it has to be said, we and the Americans have done our best to fire the confrontational elements in Tehran and to embarrass the forces of moderation. Over the nuclear issue, as over the question of alleged Iranian interference in Iraq, we have kept using the language of confrontation.

Even WEdnesday, in a relatively downbeat statement, the foreign secretary was talking of “our demands” and Iran’s failure to meet them.

There is another way. It is the way we seemed to be following until Mrs. Beckett took her flight from Ankara. It is to quietly, but emphatically, assert our rights, in international courts if necessary, but to look to the Iraqi government and the countries of the Gulf to bring Iran to a sensible resolution of the affair.

The more we trumpet our determination at home, the more we make it difficult for our friends abroad. Keep cool and build your alliances is a wise tactic in international relations, as it is in domestic politics.

Very scary what's happening here. (Thanks Dutch for the info)
Here's some Canadian news on this. There is also a video on this link worth watching. First link if it works here?

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/HTMLTempl...0329&slug=iran_banmoon_070329&archive=CTVNews


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...9/iran_banmoon_070329/20070329?hub=TopStories

UN shows 'grave concern' over seized sailors

Updated Thu. Mar. 29 2007 8:44 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

The UN Security Counsel has shown "concern" over Iran's detainment of 15 British sailors and marines, falling short of the stern reproach Britain had wanted.

All 15 Counsel members spent more than four hours before finalizing the statement, which reads:

"Members of the Security Council expressed grave concern at the capture by the Revolutionary Guard and the continuing detention by the government of Iran of 15 United Kingdom naval personnel and appealed to the government of Iran to allow consular access in terms of the relevant international laws.

"Members of the Security Council support calls including by the secretary-general in his March 29 meeting with the Iranian foreign minister for an early resolution of this problem including the release of the 15 U.K. personnel."

Russia disproved of adopting Britain's position that the sailors were captured in Iraqi territory, an official told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

Rather than help the situation, the statement seemed to escalate tensions between the two nations even further. While Iran had initially said it would release Faye Turney, the lone female sailor of the seized group, it altered its position Thursday.

Iranian military chief, Gen. Ali Reza Afshar, said that "the release of a female British soldier has been suspended."

Prime Minister Tony Blair said that Britain would not negotiate with Iran over the group's release.

"The important thing for us is to get them back safe and sound, but we can't enter into some basis of bargaining," Blair said in an interview with ITV News.

His statement came on the same day Iranian state television released another video purportedly showing a few seconds of the seizure of 15 Royal Navy sailors and marines last week.

Blair called once again for the unconditional return of the sailors.

"What you have to do when you are engaged with people like the Iranian regime, you have to keep explaining to them, very patiently, what it is necessary to do," he said, "and at the same time make them fully aware there are further measures that will be taken if they're not prepared to be reasonable."

"What you can't do is end up negotiating over hostages; end up saying there's some quid pro quo or tit for tat; that's not acceptable."

The new footage shows a Revolutionary Guards boat closing in on what it believed to be a British vessel, reports Reuters. One voice, apparently from a boat where the film was taken, shouts: "Are they British?" Another answers: "They are British, they are British."

In another exchange, somebody says: "So where is the other one (British boat)?" Another person says: "There it is."

The footage also shows a helicopter hovering above inflatable boats in choppy waters and gunshots are heard on the tape, reports AP.

The video then cuts to the British crew seated in an Iranian guard boat.

Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mattaki has called for Britain to admit that the crew made a "mistake" and entered Iranian waters, but Blair's office rejected the suggestion Thursday.

A Foreign Office official in London told AP that the department couldn't admit to trespassing because the allegation simply wasn't true.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, pointed to the satellite positioning coordinates released by the defence ministry on Wednesday that the military said showed the crew was seized 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters.

Instead of admitting guilt, Britain is seeking a UN declaration that would condemn the detentions.

Meanwhile, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon met with Iran's foreign minister on Thursday, marking the first direct intercession by the UN in the increasingly tense standoff.

The two met at an Arab summit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Ban's spokeswoman, Soung-Ah Choi, released few details, but said the UN chief was addressing a number of issues in the talks, including the ongoing detention of the sailors.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=blue><center>Britain simmers as Iran refuses to free captured crew and standoff intensifies</font>

PAISLEY DODDS, Associated Press Writer
March 29, 2007 1:54 PM
http://www.newspress.com/Top/Article/article.jsp?Section=WORLD&ID=564989345896204061 </center>
LONDON (AP) - A boy's question cut to the chase. ''My family lives in Iran and I'm worried that you might invade my home country,'' the 10-year-old told Prime Minister Tony Blair's likely successor.

The reply was that Britain was seeking a diplomatic solution - for now.</b>

As the crisis over Iran's capture of 15 sailors deepens, Britain faces fresh criticism at home over its military presence in the Persian Gulf and anger over failed efforts to free the crew. Few fear an invasion like that in Iraq, but many worry any military operation - however small - could end in bloodshed and upset plans for a British troop withdrawal from the region.

Britain has been pummeled by fierce protests since it became America's strongest ally in the war in Iraq, sentiment that has weakened Blair's government and caused his Labour Party to lose a significant number of parliament seats in 2005 elections.

Most Britons have rallied behind the captured crew - some even want the government to attempt a rescue - but others say they can't stomach the possibility of another Middle East conflict.

''We want a resolution of the particular problems we've got at the moment where some of our British troops are being held in Tehran,'' Treasury chief Gordon Brown told his young questioner on a Channel Five News forum. ''And I think the Iranian government should want that solution as well. And let's hope we can get a peaceful solution to this. Everybody wants to live in peace.''

The crisis began last Friday when armed Iranian forces detained the British naval crew near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab waterway, which forms the border between Iran and Iraq.

Tempers flared in newspaper editorials, radio talk shows and online forums once Iran broadcast video of the British crew - including footage focusing on the lone female sailor, 26-year-old Faye Turney, a blonde mother of a toddler named Molly.

Iranian television aired pictures of her wearing a head scarf and offering soft-spoken words on how her crew allegedly entered Iranian waters; Tehran also issued a letter attributed to Turney saying she was sorry they had done so. The British government suggested she may have been forced to make the statement.

Iran released a second letter Thursday, also attributed to Turney, who asked whether it wasn't time for Britain to withdraw its troops from Iraq.

In Plymouth, where her ship is based, readers vented their frustration and fears.

''It's time to show how tough we can be and let's pull troops out of Iraq - a war which isn't going far - and into Iran and let's fight a war that has meaning,'' a reader identified as Peter Wilkes wrote to the Plymouth Herald.

Some pointed to Israel's invasion of Lebanon after two Israeli soldiers were captured by Hezbollah guerrillas last summer. Others said the Americans would have taken tougher action.

''Show some backbone Blair, just like the Iron Lady!'' a reader identified as Dan wrote, referring to former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

Britain's popular tabloid, the Daily Mail, printed a column on its front page that read: ''A British mother paraded on state TV. Forced to wear the hijab. Made to praise her Iranian kidnappers. And the response from our mighty Foreign Office? This is unacceptable, they squeaked.''

''Everyone is worried this is going to end in another military conflict,'' said Charlotte Kampel, a London lawyer. ''It's really stressful and doesn't seem to end.''

Politicos said the cat-and-mouse game was typical of Iran but admitted the crisis came at a bad time.

''This comes at time when there's the biggest concentration of military forces in the region ... it seems like a very tense time, when even a spark can ignite a war,'' said Nadim Shehadi, an Iran expert at Chatham House.

''It looks like Iran is holding all the cards right now,'' said Peter Tilley, 48, a book shop manager. ''My only hope is that it will end peacefully.''

AP-WS-03-29-07 1648EDT

=




<B><center>World Spotlight:

<font size=+1 color=purple>Iran's Shadow Army</font>

Thursday, Mar. 29, 2007
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1604895,00.html </center>
The damaging detail behind the seizure of 15 British Royal Marines and sailors is that the troops were captured by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Soaked with nationalist ideology, the IRGC is controlled by hard-line cleric Ayatullah Ali Khamenei, the ultimate font of religious and political power in Iran, and exists in many ways apart from the rest of the Iranian government.</b>

The Guards' activities are often a thorn in the side of Iran's Foreign Ministry, which is forced to repair the ruptures in Tehran's diplomatic relations. Nevertheless, the IRGC has been one of Iran's main instruments in projecting power and influence over the past few decades.

It has its own army, air force and navy. And it is known for actively supporting militant groups like Hizballah in Lebanon and is suspected of aiding Shi'ite militias within Iraq. Iran had indicated it would release the lone female sailor, Faye Turney, but first, its tactics with her began to look more like those of an Iraqi kidnap group than of a nation-state. On March 28, Iran broadcast footage of Turney wearing a black head scarf and smoking a cigarette. In a halting voice, she said, "Obviously we trespassed into their waters ... They were very, very compassionate."

=


<B><center>Thu., March 29, 2007 Nisan 10, 5767

<font size=+1 color=red>Mossad chief warned: Home front isn't ready </font>

By Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/843866.html </center>
Mossad head Meir Dagan recommended after the abduction of two IDF soldiers in the North last July 12 that Israel delay its military response against Hezbollah. Dagan explained it would be advisable to take basic steps to better protect the home front from possible Katyusha rocket attacks before striking in Lebanon. The full story will appear in the Passover supplement in Haaretz Monday. </b>

Dagan gave his recommendation during an urgent discussion in Defense Minister Amir Peretz's chambers on the day of the abduction. He believed a strike in Lebanon would trigger an escalation, which turned out to be the case. Shin Bet Chief Yuval Diskin and the Defense Ministry's chief official for diplomatic affairs, Amos Gilad, both concurred with that assessment.

The discussion with Peretz was one of several that day, and all led to the government's decision to retaliate with a massive bombardment. Among the first targets were Hezbollah's medium-range rockets, which were almost completely destroyed the following night. Hezbollah responded with repeated Katyusha barrages until the fighting's last day on August 14.

During the discussion, Dagan said Israel would be involved in a prolonged confrontation. "The risk of damage to home front targets is very high. In my opinion, we don't have to strike right away. We can prepare and plan. What's to lose by striking in two days' time?" he said.

Dagan added that "if that means we have to wait for a couple of hours, then I suggest we wait."

To the surprise of the officials at the meeting, Peretz headed for Jerusalem without receiving further details on Hezbollah's threat to the home front, and the fact the home front was ill-prepared for war. In the subsequent cabinet meeting that followed, Peretz did not relay the projected difficulty of exposing the North to a Katyusha onslaught. Therefore, the recommendation by Dagan as Mossad chief did not go up for discussion with the ministers.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=brown><center>Russian media reports imminent US strike on Iran</font>

Compiled by Daily Star staff
Friday, March 30, 2007
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=80975 </center>
Russia told the United States on Thursday it must take care not to aggravate tensions over Iran with its naval presence in the Gulf, amid Russian press reports of an imminent US strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. The US Navy has this week been conducting its biggest exercises in Gulf waters for four years. The Pentagon said the war games were brought forward because of mounting tensions between Iran and Western states.</b>

"The Persian Gulf is today in such an agitated state that any action in this region, especially one that involves the navy or other military forces, must take into account the need not to aggravate the situation even further," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters.

Al-Arabiyya reported on its Web site on Thursday that the Bush administration is preparing to launch a military operation, dubbed "The Sting," to strike 20 Iranian nuclear plants, disabling Iran's atomic program for at least five to seven years.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb

"The Unites States will launch a military operation ... on Iran starting 4 a.m. of April 6 till 4 p.m.," Al-Arabiyya said, quoting Russia's RIA-Novosti news agency.

The report said the operation will target "the hidden part of the nuclear program," launching missile strikes from warplanes and gunships, RIA-Novosti said, adding that the operation will not attack the Bushehr nuclear plant being built by Russia.

RIA-Novosti quoted an unidentified "high-ranking security official" as saying the military games could be more than flexing muscles.

"The latest military intelligence data points to heightened US military preparations for both an air and ground operation against Iran," the official said. - Reuters, The Daily Star

Watch the video link on my post with John Bolton!!!! He sure calls things a spade a spade.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=green><center>American missiles, Middle Eastern oil, and the EU divided</font>

By Joschka Fischer
Commentary by
Friday, March 30, 2007
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=5&article_id=80965 </center>
As if things weren't bad enough for Europe after the French and Dutch rejection of the European Union draft constitution, a new divisive issue now threatens to strain Europe's cohesion. The United States wants to establish an anti-missile defense system that is supposed to protect America and parts of Europe against missiles from the Middle East. The American missiles are to be stationed in Poland, with a radar system to be set up in the Czech Republic.</b>

Russia is up in arms about the US plan. A month ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a fiery speech against the project during the Munich Conference on Security Policy. American representatives were perplexed; the Europeans were shocked. Now the US says it has reached agreement with Poland and the Czech Republic to study the concrete details of the stationing of the necessary defense systems. Once again, Europe is shocked: The US and Russia seem not to be taking Brussels seriously.

Are we threatened with a new arms race between Russia and the US, with Europe once again the theater of their rivalry? Indeed, is a new Cold War looming? There is no reason to panic about America's proposed anti-missile defense system. Nor can the political climate, old differences, and the renewed power rivalry between Russia and the US justify pessimism.

No doubt, Russia has regained strength from high oil and gas prices, and it is reclaiming its position as an independent global actor. Putin's policies are popular in Russia, which of course does not make them right. But, in criticizing Putin, the West should be mindful of his domestic support.

Russia's return to the world stage means that new and old rivalries will develop and may even intensify in the future. But we are light years away from a new Cold War. There is now no longer any ideological hostility between Russia and the West. Estrangement yes, but hostility no. Eleven defensive US missiles in Poland will not threaten Russia's security. And they will not mark the beginning of a new arms race.

But it is also hard to understand, why the US needs this decision now. Timing? Priorities? The US policy seems unreasonable. The threat from Iran, against which the missiles are to defend, is still far away and can be avoided by diplomatic means. In fact, the West needs Russia's cooperation on almost every important international issue of the day, be it North Korea, Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, the South Caucasus, Central Asia, Kosovo, Darfur, climate change, energy security, and nuclear non-proliferation.

For some time now, American policy toward Russia has been anything but consistent. Apparently, Washington can't decide whether to treat Russia as a rival power or a difficult partner. It would be in America's interest, with Iraq, Iran, and the broader Middle East as its foreign-policy priorities, to pursue the partnership option.

Europe's policy toward Russia is in even worse shape. Indeed, it increasingly resembles a chicken farm after a fox has broken in. And now, with the US

announcement that it will build the anti-missile defense system on a bilateral basis with Poland and the Czech Republic, there is also a hawk circling overhead. Confusion and panic are spreading in Europe.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb

What is most frightening about all this is not the American anti-missile project or Putin's rhetorical muscle-flexing, but rather the increasingly dramatic European weakness that the episode has exposed. The EU has been working for a decade on a common foreign and security policy. So how can discussion of an issue as crucial as the establishment of an American anti-missile defense system in Europe be ignored at the EU level, with no attempt being made to find a joint European position?

An anti-missile defense system in Europe is a European, not a bilateral, issue. However important NATO may be, it would be a dramatic admission of its own helplessness and insignificance if the EU were to remain silent on this crucial issue for Europe's future.

Europe's weakness becomes even more obvious given that it is not at all clear whether the American missile defense system will ever work. This doubtful project is not worth seriously dividing Europe. But bilateral treatment of the issue threatens to do just that: to divide Europe along the same fault lines as did the war in Iraq.

All the while, Moscow is playing a game of divide and rule by exploiting Europe's dependence on Russian oil and gas supplies. As the EU's Russia policy is blocked by the Polish government's intransigence, Russia blithely continues to sign more bilateral treaties with individual EU member states, most recently with Greece and Bulgaria. The only effective answer that Europeans can give to the Kremlin is to adopt a common energy policy that will hinder any further division of Europe. This will not be easy to achieve, but the EU has accomplished more difficult tasks in the past.

The EU must also develop a common position with respect to all significant, strategic issues in its foreign relations. Otherwise, Europe will be at the mercy of the interests of others. No European country - not even the "big three" of France, the United Kingdom, and Germany - can any longer assert its central foreign policy interests alone, outside of the common European framework. So any weakening of the EU in its foreign relations entails a corresponding weakening of the member states' individual interests.

Everyone agrees to a "Europe of common values." What we need now is a "Europe of common interests." Objectively, it is already a reality. Subjectively, the only remaining question is this: How long will it take before Europe's governments finally start taking it into account?

Joschka Fischer was Germany's foreign minister and vice chancellor from 1998 to 2005.

My heart and prayers go out for those 15 hostages. What is being done to these prisoners while that Iranian maniiac plays his power game? He surely knows that this will probably be the cause of the war he's been waiting for. It will be his fault but the US will be blamed for the destruction and devistaion that will snowball worldwide. God help us all.

Sully

=




<B><font size=+1 color=blue><center>Gold Rises in Asia as Oil Prices Gain on Iran Dispute Tensions</font>

By Xiao Yu
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601012&sid=aEeyhHIWRg2U&refer=commodities </center>
March 30 (Bloomberg) -- Gold prices rose in Asia as crude oil prices climbed on heightened international tensions over Iran as the Middle East's second-largest oil exporter refused to release British sailors. </b>

Gold often moves in line with oil prices, which rose for a ninth day after the United Nations Security Council yesterday expressed ``grave concern'' at Iran's continued detention of the Britons and urged the Islamic republic to give diplomats access to them.

``Gold is slightly up this morning as Iran tensions are building up, and oil prices moved higher,'' said Mao Jian, a trader at Beijing-based Bank of China.

Gold for immediate delivery rose as much as 0.3 percent, or $1.75, to $663.25 an ounce today and traded at $662.55 at 10:41 a.m. Beijing time. It fell to $661.50 an ounce yesterday.

Crude oil for May delivery rose as much as 68 cents, or 1 percent, to $66.71 a barrel in after-hours electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. It was at $66.63 at 10:34 a.m. Beijing time.

In Japan, gold futures for February delivery added 2 yen to 2,534 yen a gram ($670 an ounce) at the mid session break.

In the spot market, silver for immediate delivery was little changed at $13.31 an ounce at 10:35 a.m. Beijing time. Platinum added $6.50, or 0.5 percent, to $1,241 and palladium added 0.4 percent, or $1.50 to $354.50 at 9:21 a.m.

A futures contract is an obligation to buy or sell a commodity at a set price for delivery by a specific date.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=purple><center>Blair calls for ''unconditional release'' of sailors</font>

Posted: 2007/03/30
From: Mathaba
http://mathaba.net/rss/?x=552420 </center>
LONDON, March 29 (Xinhua) -- British Prime Minister Tony Blair Thursday called for "unconditional release" of 15 British Navy personnel detained by Iran last week.

In an interview with ITV television, Blair said that "the important thing is we just keep making it very, very clear to the Iranian government it is not a situation that will be relieved by anything but the unconditional release of all our people."</b>

"There's no alternative but to release them and the longer it goes on, the more the pressure will be stepped up," Blair said.

"The next step is the UN statement. There's a whole series of measures we can take."

On Thursday, Britain asked the UN Security Council to support a statement that would call for the release of its sailors detained by Iran. And a draft press statement circulated to council members by the British mission was to be discussed by the council at a closed-door meeting on later Thursday,

Asked about the footage of detained British service personnel aired by Iranian state television, Blair said, "I just think it's completely wrong, a disgrace actually, when people are used in that way."

"That's contrary to all international laws and conventions, and is not going to make any difference to us. We need all 15 released because they were doing their job under a UN mandate," Blair said.

Last Friday, the Iranian navy detained 15 British navy personnel, allegedly for their illegal entry into Iranian territorial waters in the Shatt al-Arab waterway. Teheran claimed that the sailors strayed into Iranian territory.

On Wednesday, Blair said it was time to "ratchet up" the diplomatic and international pressure on Iran to release 15 sailors detained by Iran.

Sully said:

My heart and prayers go out for those 15 hostages. What is being done to these prisoners while that Iranian maniiac plays his power game? He surely knows that this will probably be the cause of the war he's been waiting for. It will be his fault but the US will be blamed for the destruction and devistaion that will snowball worldwide. God help us all.

Sully

Click to expand...

There is no way the British will back down on this! I mean they won't say they were in Iranian waters if they were not. I'm praying to. The Iranians better let them go if they know what's good for them.

Just to add: The Brit's are doing everything right to justify action by going to the UN and EU for help first. Thanks again for the posts Dutch. Wow! Who nows where this will go.

What do you want to bet that this strike happens earlier just because of the increasing oil market? We know the "hit" is going to make the oil price shoot through the roof, right? If oil starts really getting up there, before our target date; lets not let the economy suffer for a long period of time. Let's just get in and get it done.

TheDoberman said:

What do you want to bet that this strike happens earlier just because of the increasing oil market? We know the "hit" is going to make the oil price shoot through the roof, right? If oil starts really getting up there, before our target date; lets not let the economy suffer for a long period of time. Let's just get in and get it done.

Click to expand...

If you are going to invade Iran you need get your forces in place & not jump the gun. Maybe that's what Iran wants.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=red><center>Oil prices gain in Asian trade on rising tension between West and Iran</font>

Fri, Mar 30 2007, 04:14 GMT
http://www.afxnews.com
http://www.fxstreet.com/news/forex-news/article.aspx?StoryId=c715a5cc-f737-4f7c-aafd-f0c023afbaad </center>
SINGAPORE (XFN-ASIA) - Oil prices jumped to new highs for this year in Asian trading hours as tensions over Iran's detention of UK naval personnel increased, dealers said.</b>


At 11.39 am here (0339 GMT), the New York Mercantile Exchange's main oil futures contract, light sweet crude for delivery in May, was <b><u>up 0.62 usd at 66.65 usd a barrel from 66.03</b></u> usd in late trading in the US overnight. It was the highest price since early September. Brent North Sea crude for May was up 0.73 usd at 68.61 usd.


Geopolitical risk in Iran, the world's fourth biggest producer of oil, remains the main upward influence on crude futures prices, analysts said.


"Iran is more aggressive in handling the issue of the detained sailors. They won't beg. They're making a pretty tough stance, driving up the possibility of military conflict in the Gulf," said CFC Seymour senior investment strategist Dariusz Kowalczyk.


He said the market was pricing-in the possibility of further risks over the weekend.


"The market will continue to reassess the risk to supply," he said. "The potential for conflict and the disruption of oil supply is real because Iran is directly involved and oil could hit record highs if anything happens."


Iran detained 15 UK sailors and marines in the Persian Gulf Friday, prompting UK to freeze ties with Iran.


Oil prices are being supported also by Iran's refusal to bow to international pressure over its disputed nuclear program.

=




<B><font size=+1 color=brown><center>UK says gives 'serious consideration' to note received from Iran</font>

Published: 03.30.07, 07:04 / Israel News
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3383094,00.html </b></center>
Britain is giving "serious consideration" to a formal note from the Iranian government about 15 captured British military personnel, a Foreign Office spokeswoman said on Friday.


"Such exchanges are always confidential, so we cannot divulge any details. But we are giving the message serious consideration, and will soon respond formally to the Iranian government," the spokeswoman said. (Reuters)

KateCanada said:

Watch the video link on my post with John Bolton!!!! He sure calls things a spade a spade.

Click to expand...

Go John! Whew, broke a sweat watching that clip!

skip1 said:

If you are going to invade Iran you need get your forces in place & not jump the gun. Maybe that's what Iran wants.

Click to expand...

The thing is, I think we DO have our forces in place. Did you know the USS Nimitz CVBG is coming to relieve the Eisenhower quite soon? That puts THREE (3) Carriers and Attack/Support fleets in the Persion Gulf at the same time.

Our collective firepower will be devastating if we end up using it.

=




<B><font size=+1 color=red><center>The Next War? </font>

March 30, 2007
FrontPageMagazine.com
Kenneth R. Timmerman
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27629 </center>
The capture by Iran of fifteen British sailors and marines while they were inspecting a trading dhow in international waters for smuggled goods could be the spark that ignites the next war. Whether that happens or not will not depend on us, or on the Brits. It will depend on President Ahmadinejad, his backers in Tehran, and Iran’s Supreme Leader. </b>

Clearly, Ahmadinejad and his supporters have been planning this sort of thing for some time.

One week before the kidnapping of the British hostages, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards weekly newspaper, Sobh-e Sadeq, published these incendiary remarks from Reza Fakr, a writer said to have close links to Ahmadinejad:

“We’ve got the ability to capture a nice bunch of blue-eyed blond-haired officers and feed them to our fighting cocks. Iran has enough people who can reach the heart of Europe and kidnap Americans and Israelis.”

At the time, the Revolutionary Guards were seeking to ”retaliate” for moves by multinational forces in Iraq to crackdown on Iranian intelligence networks in Iraq, including the capture of five Iranian intelligence operatives in Irbil on the night of Jan. 10-11, 2007.

But they had already exacted tit-for-tat retribution in the attack on Karbala on January 20, when what now appears to have been an Iranian snatch team posing as American security guards kidnapped five U.S. soldiers inside an Iraqi army base.

That attack went awry, and the Iranians slaughtered all five Americans instead of taking them hostage.

My sources in Iran tell me that the IRGC leadership realized it was going to be too hard to go after U.S. forces, given stepped up protection measures the Americans instituted after the Karbala incident. So they sought British targets as a substitute.

This hostage-taking was no accident. It didn’t just “happen.” It was part of a centrally-planned and organized strategy to step up tension with the West.”

As we learned on Wednesday, the Iranians most likely sent their snatch teams into international waters where the Brits were conducting maritime inspections to catch smugglers. In fact, the initial GPS coordinates the Iranians themselves released showed that they captured the Brits 1.7 miles beyond their territorial waters. Then conveniently “altered” those GPS coordinates in subsequent communications with the British government.

So what can the Iranians possibly hope to gain? Are they miscalculating? Do they simply believe that Tony Blair is a “wimp” and won’t respond? That they can tweak the noses of the Brits, perhaps even compel them to withdraw their forces from Iraq

This is what I heard earlier this weak from an eminent, former CIA analyst of Iraq at a forum on Iranian policy sponsored by the Center for Naval Analysis.

Judith Yaphe believes the Iranians are “rational” and calculating, but may have “over-reached.” (She also believes that Iran is seeking a stable, unified, but weak Iraq, something that simply defies the facts).

Yaphe “advised” the Baker-Hamilton commission – no surprise there. She has been consistently wrong on everything involving her area of expertise for over twenty years. Her views tend to parrot those of the Saudis and the Jordanians, who have shown little insight into the psychology or eschatology of Iran’s current leaders.

A far better interpretation was offered by the CNA’s own Alireza Nader. He believes the Iranian hostage-taking was “Iran’s way of saying, don’t mess with us, because we can mess with you.” He also noted that it was timed just the day before the March 24 vote at the UN Security Council on the latest sanctions resolution on Iran.

But instead of convincing the Brits to walk away from the UN Security Council resolution, the Iranian regime’s actions only hardened Britain’s resolve.

So what’s happening here? How could the Iranians be so stupid as to miscalculate so totally the Western response?

The answer, of course, is that Ahmadinejad and his supporters don’t think as Westerners think. They aren’t making cost-benefit analyses. They aren’t looking at their “bottom line.”

The only bottom line that counts for them is the perpetuation of their regime. They believe that by attacking Britain and America they can rally their supporters, rally the faithful beyond Iran, and launch their worldwide jihad to “destroy America” and “wipe Israel of the face of the earth” – the two goals Ahmadinejad set for his presidency.

In the April issue of Newsmax magazine, which will be on newsstands next week, I run through a detailed, blow-by-blow scenario of what a six-day military confrontation with Iran could look like.

One thing is very clear: the spark that could ignite such a confrontation could come from any number of different sources.

It could be a kidnapping such as this one. It could be an attack on a U.S.warship by Iran, using its Russian and Chinese-supplied bottom-tethered sea mines. Or it could be something completely different.

But what’s clear is this: Ahmadinejad and his faction want war. They believe that war with the West is their ticket to victory.

Even if they lose large portions of their country, or if their nuclear sites are destroyed, they believe that they will emerge victorious. Because in their eyes, this type of war with the West will hasten the return of the Imam Mahdi, the savior figure of the radical hojjatieh sect of Shia Islam in which Ahmadinejad and his faction believe.

But don’t make the mistake some have made in placing all your bets on Ahmadinejad. If somehow the U.S were able to wave a magic wand and get rid of him overnight, we would still be facing a security and political establishment in Iran that is devoted to confrontation with the West, and to the destruction of Israel.

Don’t forget that it was Hashemi-Rafsanjani, the “moderate” former president of the Islamic Republic, who first evoked publicly the possibility of a nuclear weapons exchange with Israel. I quote him in my book, Countdown to Crisis: the Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran.

“The use of an atomic bomb against Israel would destroy Israel completely, while [the same][against [Iran] would only cause damages. Such a scenario is not inconceivable,” Rafsanjani said in a sermon at Tehran University on Dec. 14, 2001 .

Decoded, the message is chilling. Iran has no fear of an Israeli nuclear attack, because Iran is a vast country, with deep underground bunkers for its leadership, and clandestine nuclear sites that most likely are not on anyone’s target list. If the Israelis were to attack, or to respond to an Iranian nuclear attack, Iran will suffer great losses. But Israel will cease to exist.

Such is the calculus of a “moderate” leader of Iran’s Islamic “Republic.”

But the Iranian regime does not believe it will fight for its survival in Iran alone. Over the past nine months, since Hezbollah’s infrastructure in Lebanon was devastated by Israeli air strikes last summer (after Hezbollah’s unprovoked attack on Israel), the Iranians have been shipping massive quantities of advanced weapons to Hezbollah in preparation for the coming war.

Iran’s clerical leaders and Ahmadinejad believe that they actually defeated Israel last summer during Iran’s first proxy war with Israel. And that they can do even greater damage in the next war, which could come next month, this summer, or next year.

Arieh Eldad, a leader of the opposition National Union Party in Israel’s Knesset, or Parliament, told me this week while on a trip to the United States that he is convinced there is “no way to avoid the next war” in Lebanon.

He sees the massive rearmament of Hezbollah by Iran, with Syrian assistance, as clear evidence of Iran’s strategy to launch another war against Israel. “Hezbollah is becoming stronger every day,” he said.

Eldad believes Israel must “neutralize Hamas, Hezbollah, and Syria as a preliminary step, or we will not be able to engage Iran.”

By “engaging” Iran he does not mean economic or diplomatic “engagement,” as the State Department might use the term. He is talking about having Israel’s military take out Iranian nuclear and missile sites.

Now that’s engagement.

Dr. Eldad is a plastic surgeon who headed the burns at Hadassah hospital for twenty years. He has personally treated Palestinian suicide bombers, only to see them come back after their treatment with bombs strapped to their chests to blow themselves up in the very hospital that saved their lives.

The foes that oppose Israel and America do not reason as we do, he says. “When states have missions that are bigger than life, they are not obeying the basic rules of logic that Western civilization obeys.”

He believes the Islamic Republic of Iran, as a state, is following the same logic as a suicide bomber. “If the goal is to kill the Big Satan [America] or the Small Satan [Israel], then your own life is not to be considered under their logic,” he told me. “The Iranian regime is willing to sacrifice millions and millions of their own people to defeat the Big Satan and the Small Satan.”

Because of this, we need to understand that Tehran regime will not comply with sanctions, and does not care about sanctions. “It’s just not the same logic,” he said.

Dr. Eldad’s fear is that Israel will be “left alone” and have to confront a nuclear Iran. And if that day arrives, he warns, “the world should know that we will be ready to destroy the nuclear infrastructure of Iran at whatever the cost it takes.”

“That means we will be ready to use unconventional weapons, because conventional weapons will not be enough,” he added.

These are stakes.
A seemingly simple hostage-taking could be how this begins. A series of mushroom clouds could be how it ends.

In the meantime, the U.S.is conducting naval and air exercises in the Persian Gulf with two carrier battle groups. The message to Iran, one administration official told me yesterday, was clear: Don’t make any false moves.

=




<B><font size=+1 color=brown><center>Release British Sailors "Immediately," Solana Tells Iran </font>

March 30, 2007
Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Monstersandcritics.com
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/....php/Release_British_sailors_&quotimmediately </center>
Bremen, Germany -- Chief European Union diplomat Javier Solana on Friday demanded the urgent release of 15 British naval personnel captured last week by Iran. 'It is a big mistake ... they should release the sailors immediately,' Solana said as EU foreign ministers opened talks in Bremen, Germany. </b>

The two-day meeting, chaired by German Foreign Minister Frank- Walter Steinmeier, is expected to issue a strong joint EU call for an end to the current standoff between Britain and Iran.

EU ministers will send a 'signal of solidarity' with Britain on Iran's action, Steinmeier told reporters.

Replying to questions ahead of the meeting, British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said she was confident that EU governments wanted to help Britain.

She said EU countries 'completely understand the circumstances' of London's standoff with Tehran.

Beckett also said she was satisfied with a United Nations Security Council resolution voicing serious concern over the worsening dispute between London and Tehran.

'This is a clear indication ... that people want to see this resolved peacefully and as speedily as possible ... this is exactly what we all want,' Beckett said.

In separate comments, Steinmeier said Britain could count on the support of its EU partners. 'It goes without saying that this meeting will send a signal of solidarity with Britain,' he said.

Details of the expected EU statement were not available. Diplomats said the wording of the text was still under discussion.

Steinmeier said ministers would listen carefully to a report by Beckett on latest developments on the issue.

In addition foreign ministers from Britain, France, Italy and Slovakia - the four EU states which are currently in the UN Security Council - were meeting separately to discuss the current standoff between Britain and Iran, Steinmeier said.

Britain is reportedly asking its EU partners to follow London's lead by freezing official bilateral business with Iran. But diplomats said it was not clear if EU ministers would agree on such measures in Bremen.

The EU appeal will, however, make it clear that Iran's action is 'unacceptable,' diplomats said.

EU discussions on the crisis follow a UN Security Council resolution earlier this week expressing 'grave concern' over the detentions.

The statement, however, did not call for the captives' 'immediate release' as demanded by Britain.

Britain insists that the two British patrol boats were in Iraqi waters when the 15 were seized in the Shatt-al-Arab waterways on March 23, but Iran says they violated Iranian territory.

The dispute has added to tensions between the EU and Iran over Tehran's disputed nuclear programme.

EU diplomats said earlier this week that despite the seizure of the sailors, they were still trying to persuade Iran to end uranium enrichment activities which western countries fear are aimed at producing nuclear weapons.

Iran says its nuclear programme is aimed at civilian purposes only.

Solana earlier this week telephoned Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani to discuss a possible reopening of talks but aides said no date had been set for a face-to-face meeting between the two men.

Solana also discussed the British sailors predicament in talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki at an Arab League summit in Riyadh this week.

=





<B><font size=+1 color=green><center>Iran Airs Second Sailor 'Apology' </font>

March 30, 2007
BBC News
BBCi
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6509813.stm </center>
A second member of the Royal Navy crew captured in the Gulf has apologised for trespassing in Iranian waters, in a broadcast on Iranian television. He was quoted as saying: "We entered Iranian waters without permission and were arrested by Iranian coastguards. "I would like to apologise to the Iranian people for that." </b>

The Foreign Office described the latest "confession" video as "disgraceful exploitation". The UK denies the crew had trespassed.

Iranian state news agency IRNA named the crewman as Nathan Thomas Summers.

On Wednesday, the only woman, Leading Seaman Faye Turney, was shown on Iranian TV making similar comments. The UK denies the crew had trespassed.

The latest video came as Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, called on Britain to apologise to Tehran.

On Friday, the UN Security Council agreed a statement voicing "grave concern" at Iran's actions.

The statement also calls on Tehran to allow the UK consular access to the personnel and an "early resolution" including release of the crew, but stops short of "deploring" Iran's action, as requested by the UK.

Iran said it was not helpful to try to engage third parties in the dispute.

Later, European Union foreign ministers are expected to express their solidarity with Britain, at a meeting in Germany, over the detention of the navy crew.

The Foreign Office said a "formal note" had been sent to the British embassy by the Iranian government.

Confidential

A spokeswoman said: "Such exchanges are always confidential, so we cannot divulge any details, but we are giving the message serious consideration and will soon respond formally to the Iranian government."

Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, said the note may contain "matters of substance" which may be the beginning of a "proper exchange" and could "offer the possibility of a solution".

On a visit to British troops in Afghanistan on Friday, Chancellor Gordon Brown welcomed the UN resolution.

He said: "The UN resolution is calling definitively for [the navy crew's] release. That's the unanimous view of the international community."

Mr Brown described the treatment of captured Leading Seaman Faye Turney, 26, an interview with whom has been shown on Iranian TV, as "cruel, callous, inhuman and unacceptable".

Responding to the UN statement, David Cameron, the Conservative leader, said: "Really there's only one right outcome to this which is for Iran to release those people that they took captive, that they should be released without any further ado. It's as clear and as simple as that."

The British ambassador to the UN, Sir Emyr Jones Parry, said the UN's statement was a "good outcome" for the UK.

Sir Emyr added that it sent the "right message" to Iran to allow access to the sailors and marines, and secure their prompt release.

The UK failed to win support for a stronger statement deploring Iran's actions, following opposition led by Russia.

Iran's UN mission said in a statement: "This case can and should be settled through bilateral channels.

"The British government's attempt to engage third parties, including the Security Council, with this case is not helpful."

The UN Security Council statement was agreed following more than four hours of negotiations on Thursday.

The Britons, based on HMS Cornwall, were seized a week ago by Iranian Revolutionary Guards as they returned from searching a vessel in the northern Gulf.

Iran says they had strayed into Iranian territorial waters, a claim which the UK has denied.

Earlier this week, the Royal Navy produced satellite data it said proved its case.

=

<i>This might be the reason why a Iranian UAV was shot down over Yeman yesterday; (The iranians were checking to see about troop movements?).</i>



<B><center>Russia:

<font size=+1 color=blue>Border Movments by U.S. Signal Plans to Strike Iran</font>

March 29, 2007
World Tribune.com
Special to World Tribune.com
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2007/eu_russia_03_29.html </center>
MOSCOW -- Russian military sources said U.S. ground troops in eastern Iraq have been operating along the border with Iran. The sources said the United States appears to be preparing for an air and ground strike against the Islamic republic.

"The latest military intelligence data point to heightened U.S. military preparations for both an air and ground operation against Iran," a Russian official told the official RIA Novosti news agency on Wednesday. </b>

The assertion came one day after the U.S. Navy launched a major exercise in the Gulf near the coast of Iran. The United States said the exercise did not mark preparations for any war against the Teheran regime. Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. ally, asserted that the United States has not conducted any wargames in the Gulf.

The Russian official said the Pentagon has been examining a range of scenarios to defeat Iran. He said that at this point no decisions have been made.

[On Wednesday, the government in Ankara was said to have rejected a U.S. request to expand air combat training in Turkey. Turkey's Cehan news agency quoted Turkish military sources as saying that the U.S. Defense Department sought Ankara's approval for a night air combat exercise.]

Russia has been regarded as Iran's leading ally. Moscow has rejected U.S. efforts to impose harsh sanctions on Iran, and Russian contractors have been helping Teheran's nuclear and missile programs.

This was not the first time that Russia warned of a U.S. attack on Iran. Last week, Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Academy of Geopolitical Sciences, said the United States was planning an imminent air strike on Iran's military infrastructure.

At the same time, Britain has escalated the war of words against Teheran in wake of the Iranian capture of 15 British Navy sailors in Shatt Al Arab on March 23. British Prime Minister Tony Blair, asserting that Iran entered Iraqi waters to abduct the sailors, said Britain and its allies would increase pressure on Teheran.

"It is now time to ratchet up the diplomatic and international pressure," Blair said.

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said the government has suspended all relations with Teheran. Britain has been a supplier of dual-use equipment to Iran's military and security forces.

"We need to focus all our bilateral efforts during this phase on the resolution of this issue," Ms. Beckett said. "We will therefore be imposing a freeze on all other official bilateral business with Iran."

=




<B><font size=+1 color=purple><center>Iran Calls on U.K. to Guarantee Not to Violate Waters</font>

March 30, 2007
Bloomberg
Robin Stringer
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ao9kN6z7Su4A&refer=worldwide </center>
Iran called on the U.K. government to guarantee British forces won't enter Iranian territorial waters in the future. In a letter to the U.K. Embassy in Tehran, the Iranian Foreign Ministry said U.K. forces ``trespassed'' into Iran's waters and called ``for the guarantee to avoid the recurrence of such acts.'' The letter, delivered yesterday, was reprinted today by the official Islamic Republic News Agency. </b>

The diplomatic letter didn't repeat the demand by Iran's military for a British apology. The U.K. should give ``apologies to the great Iranian people and pledge that such aggression into Iranian waters won't happen anymore,'' General Alireza Afshar was cited by state-run Mehr news as saying yesterday.

Fifteen U.K. sailors and Marines were detained by Iranian forces on March 23 in the Shatt al-Arab waterway, which runs between Iran and Iraq. The U.K. has said the British crew's two boats were 1.7 nautical miles (3.1 kilometers) inside Iraqi waters at the time of the seizure. Iran says the vessels were half a kilometer inside its territorial waters.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will ``look positively'' at a request by Turkey to release Leading Seaman Faye Turney, the only woman among the detainees, a spokesman for Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said today.

Erdogan asked Ahmadinejad to free Turney during a phone call late yesterday, Erdogan's spokesman Akif Beki said in a telephone interview today. He declined to provide further details.

Turney was singled out by Iranian authorities for an interview broadcast two days ago in which she said the group had ``obviously trespassed.'' Two letters purported to have been written by Turney, one to her family and one to the U.K. House of Commons, also have been released by the Iranians. The U.K. government has dismissed the Iranians' treatment of Turney as ``propaganda.''

=





<B><font size=+1 color=red><center>Britain Considering Iranian Demands</font>

March 30, 2007
The Associated Press
Edith M. Lederer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/30/AR2007033000373.html </center>
UNITED NATIONS -- Britain said it was giving "serious consideration" to a message from Iran that appears to propose a new condition for freeing 15 British navy personnel and ending the crisis over their capture without a "confrontation."

Britain's Foreign Office told The Associated Press about the Iranian proposal late Thursday, after Britain failed to win U.N. support for a statement deploring Tehran's seizure of the Britons off Iraq's coast last week. </b>

"We can confirm that as reported in the Iranian media, that the Iranian government has sent a formal note to the British Embassy," a spokeswoman said. "Such exchanges are always confidential but we are giving the message serious consideration and will soon respond formally to the Iranian government."

The spokeswoman, who spoke on condition of anonymity in keeping with Foreign Office policy, refused to elaborate.

Iran claims the British sailors and marines, part of a Royal Navy force patrolling the Persian Gulf for smugglers, were operating in its waters when captured last Friday. The incident came several months into the escalating standoff between Iran and the United Nations over Tehran's nuclear program.

An Iranian news agency reported earlier in the day that Iran's Foreign Ministry sent a message to the British embassy in Tehran calling for a guarantee by London to avoid violating Iranian territorial waters in the future.

Until now, Iran has said the matter could only be resolved if Britain admitted its sailors were trespassing.

The report came as Britain took its case to the United Nations, asking the Security Council to "deplore" Iranian actions and urge the immediate release of the prisoners.

But after four hours of private talks, the 15-nation council opted for a softer statement that expressed "grave concern" over Iran's actions and called for an early resolution of the dispute.

On Saturday the council imposed new sanctions on Iran over its refusal to abandon uranium enrichment, a program that has raised fears Iran is trying to produce nuclear weapons.

Crude oil prices rose to a new six-month high, above $66 a barrel, on concerns that the tensions with Iran could jeopardize oil exports as U.S. gasoline supplies wane and demand swells.

Hours before the council issued its statement, a top Iranian official suggested his country may put the Britons on trial.

If Britain continued its current approach, "this case may face a legal path," Ali Larijani, the main negotiator in Iran's foreign dealings, said on state radio. "British leaders have miscalculated this issue."

Turkey, NATO's only Muslim member, reportedly sought to calm tensions by urging Iran to let a Turkish diplomat meet with the detainees and to free the only woman among the Britons.

Iran retreated from a pledge by Iranian Foreign Minister Mottaki that the female sailor, Faye Turney, would be released soon. Gen. Ali Reza Afshar, Iran's military chief, blamed the "wrong behavior" of the British government.

"The release of a female British soldier has been suspended," the semiofficial Iranian news agency Mehr said.

But the spokesman for Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Iran is willing to reconsider the possible release of the female sailor.

Erdogan called Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Thursday evening to discuss the captive soldiers, Erdogan's spokesman Akif Beki said. Ahmadinejad told Erdogan Iran was "willing to reconsider the issue of the release of the woman crewmember," Beki said.

Turkey is one of the few countries that has good relations with both Iran and the West.

The report said Ahmadinejad promised that Erdogan's appeal would be studied, but also told the Turkish leader that the detention case had entered a legal investigation phase.

Britain's Foreign Office insisted again that the navy personnel were seized in an Iraqi-controlled area while searching merchant ships under a U.N. mandate and said no admission of error would be made.

Iranian state television reported what was believed to be Ahmadinejad's first comment on the standoff, saying he accused Britain of using propaganda rather than trying to solve the matter quietly through diplomatic channels.

State television also broadcast a video it said showed show the operation that seized the British sailors and marines. In the clip, a helicopter hovers above inflatable boats in choppy seas, then the Royal Navy crews are seen seated in an Iranian vessel.

The video came a day after Iran broadcast a longer video showing the Britons in captivity. That video included a segment showing Turney saying her team had "trespassed" in Iranian waters.

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett condemned Iran's use of Turney for what she called "propaganda purposes," calling it "outrageous and cruel."

A spokesman for Prime Minister Tony Blair said Britain wanted to resolve the crisis quickly and without having a "confrontation over this."

"We are not seeking to put Iran in a corner. We are simply saying, 'Please release the personnel who should not have been seized in the first place,'" said the spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with government policy.

But in a briefing to reporters, the spokesman said British officials had been angered by Tehran's decision to show video of the captives.

"Nobody should be put in that position. It is an impossible position to be put in," he said. "It is wrong. It is wrong in terms of the usual conventions that cover this. It is wrong in terms of basic humanity."

=




<B><font size=+1 color=brown><center>Iran Kidnappings Could Result In Higher Gas Prices In Southeast Texas</font>

( Air Date: 3/30/2007 )
http://www.kbtv4.tv/news/default.asp?mode=shownews&id=14199 </center>
Texas motorists are once again paying higher prices at the gas pump.

Triple-A Texas spokesperson Carol Thorp says there are several contributing factors to the steady increase.</b>

She says there are lower gas inventories due to the switchover from winter to summer-grade fuel, and often refineries go down for maintenance during this time so supplies are tighter.

Thorp adds tighter supplies already have energy traders feeling some anxiety and with the capture of British soldiers in Iran, that anxiety increases.

She says when energy traders are uneasy, they tend to drive prices up.

The statewide average is two-dollars-49-cents a gallon, up six-cents from last week.

Beaumont - Port Arthur customers are paying an estimated $2.45 for a gallon or regular gasoline.

Amarillo has the highest average in the state, up five-cents at two-61.

Corpus Christi has the lowest average in the state at two-38, up three-cents.

Dallas motorists are paying an average of two-50 a gallon, which is an increase of about seven-cents in only a week.

Dallas was one of two Texas cities that posted a slight decrease last week.

Houston drivers are paying eight-cents more this week at two-49 a gallon.

The national average is two-dollars-62-cents a gallon this week, which is an increase of five-cents.

=




<B><font size=+1 color=green><center>Captured British sailor says she has been 'sacrificed' to Bush/Blair policies</font>

March 30 2007
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2007/03/30/3871181-ap.html </center>
LONDON (AP) - The Iranian Embassy released a third letter purportedly written by British sailor Faye Turney saying she has been "sacrificed" to the policies of the British and U.S. governments. </b>

The letter, addressed to the British people, also said that Turney had been treated well, unlike the prisoners held by the at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

"I'm writing to you as a British serviceperson who has been sent to Iraq, sacrificed due to the intervening policies of the Bush and Blair government," the letter said.