IR Iran Says it Broke Up U.S.-Backed Cyber Networks

The Associated Press /

Iran said Saturday it has dismantled several U.S.-backed opposition networks that were gathering information on nuclear scientists and finding ways to circumvent controls on the Internet meant to deprive the opposition of its most crucial tool. A judiciary statement carried on the official IRNA news agency said the networks were set up by Iranian opposition groups, including the People's Mujahedeen, and that 30 of their members were arrested. "A number of organized American cyber war networks were dismantled and 30 influential suspects were arrested ... in a series of complicated security operations in the information technology and communications field," IRNA quoted the statement as saying. The government has repeatedly accused the U.S. and Britain of provoking the unrest that followed June's disputed presidential election — charges both Washington and London have denied. The statement comes as Washington is pushing for tougher sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, which the U.S. and other nations fear is aimed at producing weapons. Iran denies such an intention and says its nuclear work is only for peaceful purposes like power generation. The Iranian statement did not say when the suspects were arrested but it accused the U.S. of using such networks to undermine Iran's ruling system under a policy that it asserted originated in 2006 during George W. Bush's presidency.

"The new intelligence battle known as cyber warfare was made part of the U.S. government's agenda," IRNA quoted the statement as saying. The statement claimed the U.S. Congress approved a $400 million budget for the covert operation that also involved groups seeking to restore Iran's monarchy. Iranian authorities have launched a broad clampdown on many Web sites, including blogs, independent news outlets and sites linked to opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, who claims he was deprived of the presidency through fraud in the June election. With anti-filtering software and the use of Web proxy sites, some Iranians have been able to circumvent those controls to browse YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Farsi-language news sites that were blocked. The judiciary statement said the targeted networks were using such software to enable the opposition to access the Web, which it depends upon to organize protests and spread its calls for political and social reform. "Members of the network, after being identified and arrested, confessed that their proxy anti-filter software ... was employed and unfortunately extensively used for espionage purposes," IRNA quoted the statement as saying. Iran has also brought many activists and opposition leaders to trial throughout the postelection unrest. (Read more...)

Abbas: IR Iran Hampering Unity Talks

The Jerusalem Post /

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has blamed Iran for impeding reconciliation between his Fatah faction and its archrival Hamas. “Iran doesn't want Hamas to sign the Cairo reconciliation document,” Abbas said during a visit to Tunisia on Friday. Abbas said Hamas objected to signing an Egyptian-brokered deal with Fatah because of opposition from Teheran, and argued that the Palestinians should be “free from Iranian tutelage.” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast denied the accusations on Saturday, claiming Iran’s position regarding the Palestinian issue involved “unity and solidarity of Palestinian factions in face of the Zionist regime.” “Both Fatah and Hamas are unable, for whatever reasons, to reconcile at the moment,” Dr. Samir Awwad, a professor of international relations at Birzeit University told The Media Line. “President Abbas would want to come up with reasons to justify why the national reconciliation has failed after so many months of disagreement. He’s pointing to possible involvement of regional powers, and this time he’s naming Iran.” Abbas’s statements come in the run-up to the Arab League summit in Libya starting March 27. Analysts have suggested the accusations might be an attempt by Abbas to garner more support from Arab countries against Iran and Hamas.

Sunni Arab countries are anxious over the prospect of Iran becoming a regional nuclear power in the Middle East as Tehran continues to defy international demands to abandon its nuclear program. Regional powers, including Egypt, are concerned Iran is gaining political clout, which might tip the local balance of power. “Iran is trying to create a coalition with Hizbullah, Syria and Hamas and that’s how [Abbas] interprets many of Hamas’ positions,” Awwad said. “There is regional support for Hamas from that coalition.” Awwad said that despite coalition attempts, he does not believe Iran carries much weight in internal Palestinian politics, rather that Hamas itself wants to hamper the talks in order to defer a reconciliation deal and buy time before setting a date for elections, at a time when opinion polls suggest Hamas’s popularity is waning. But Israeli intelligence sources claim there are close ties between Iran and Hamas, and supporters of Abbas’s position say Iran has an interest in involving itself in local Palestinian issues in order to show Egypt that it is a dominant power in the region. Egypt’s recent efforts to bring about an agreement between the Palestinian factions have so far failed, despite going on for more than a year. (Read more...)

IR Iran's 'Double Game' in Afghanistan

guardian.co.uk /

It must have felt very uncomfortable for President Hamid Karzai to have his guest and "brother", Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, use a press conference in Kabul to attack Afghanistan's main donor and ally, the United States. "They themselves created terrorists and now they're saying that they are fighting terrorists," said Ahmadinejad, accusing the US of playing a "double game" in Afghanistan. Ahmadinejad was in fact returning a compliment by the US defence secretary, Robert Gates, who only hours earlier had accused Tehran of "playing a double game" of offering friendship to the Afghan government while at the same time giving "low-level support" and money to the Taliban. Karzai had always hoped to be the mediator between Iran and America, yet on this occasion, unwittingly, he became the messenger of abuse. He looked distinctly uneasy in the press conference, never knowing what Ahmadinejad may come up with in his next sentence. "Your country is located on the other side of the world, so what are you doing here?" said Ahmadinejad, criticising the US presence in Afghanistan. Yet he didn't seem to be full of novel ideas for resolving the complex web of problems facing Afghanistan. He suggested empowering "the Afghan government, the legal Afghan government, and the legal government's running of the country and its security issues".

His stress on the word "legal" was not without reason. Like his own second term, Karzai's election was marred by fraud. Both men in fact share the precarious status of being regarded as contested presidents. They were both the first to congratulate each other after the doubtful results of their election were announced. Yet despite sharing this relative lack of authority, and despite the deep historical and cultural ties that link Iran and Afghanistan, the two men have a lot that sets them apart. In Ahmadinejad's frame of mind, Karzai is regarded as an American stooge and weak. Karzai, in turn, views Ahmadinejad as being far too much of a fundamentalist and not necessarily as well-intentioned as he likes to pretend. Thus there is lingering underlying distrust. While Karzai has frequently praised Iran's aid, he is watching cautiously where Iran's hundreds of millions of dollars are spent. Although much has gone towards drug eradication and humanitarian aid, the bulk of projects funded by Iran are focused in Herat province in western Afghanistan, near the border with Iran. Funds have been pouring in for road and rail reconstruction along the main transit route between the two countries. This aids the flow of trade – especially non-oil exports from Iran to Afghanistan – steadily rising from over £50m in 2001, now estimated to be £665m. (Read more...)

Lessons from a Proxy War

Haaretz.com /

Last month's cease-fire between the Yemeni government and Shi'ite rebels hopefully spells an end to the largest military mobilization in the Arabian Peninsula since the 1991 Gulf War. To many observers, the fighting constituted no less than a regional front line between Shi'ite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia. The end, or at least the partial containment of the conflict, might spell some relief for the Yemeni government, which is concurrently battling Al-Qaida and an active secessionist movement. Although Sana'a has fought the rebels intermittently since 2004, the latest round was the bloodiest to date. The conflict intensified last summer when the Yemenis launched Operation Scorched Earth. Saudi Arabia actively entered the fray in early November after rebels seized a strategic mountaintop inside the kingdom, occupying a few villages and killing two Saudi soldiers. Working in coordination, the Yemeni army attacked the rebels from the south and the Saudis attacked from the north, in a classic pincer movement. The well-equipped Saudis used infantry and artillery as well as European-made Tornado and U.S.-made F-15 fighters, in their attempt to crush the rebellion deep inside Yemeni territory. They also enforced a partial naval blockade in Yemen's northwest corner to cut off any lines of future arms supplies to the Shi'ite rebels from Iran - the same route Yemeni smugglers use to transfer arms from Iran to Hamas in Gaza.

Although Riyadh and Sana'a both barred journalists from the war zone, numerous reports indicated that the population suffered tremendously and that atrocities were committed by all sides. According to some reports, the death toll of Yemeni rebels and non-combatants was in the thousands; aid agencies claim that up to a quarter of a million people have fled their homes in North Yemen since the conflict started. The Saudis didn't hesitate to use overwhelming force. In one case, it was reported that Saudi jets attacked a few hundred rebels who refused to evacuate a border area: "They didn't respond, so we killed them all," said an assistant to the Saudi defense minister. The rebels, numbering around 7,000 fighters, have evolved from an ideological revivalist movement into more of an insurgency that employed guerrilla warfare in the region's mountainous areas. While the rebellion is focused on the government in Sana'a, the November incursion into Saudi Arabia was reportedly in response to the kingdom's alleged support for Yemeni forces. Indeed, it is not clear if the Saudis were able to attain their goal of a rebel-free zone extending 10 kilometers inside Yemeni territory. Despite their advantage in firepower, the Saudis lost more soldiers and military equipment than they anticipated (at least 133 dead at last count), and some 240 villages near the Yemeni border were evacuated. The rebels also claimed they shot down a few Yemeni MiG fighter aircraft and a Saudi Apache attack helicopter. (Read more...)

The Iranian Regime's Efforts Keep Region Tense

The Jerusalem Post /

Despite Iranian influence and pressure on Assad, current assessments in Israel are that both Hizbullah and Syria are deterred from war, each for its own reasons. March 8 was a day of celebrations in Syria, marking the anniversary of the coup d’etat that brought the Ba’ath Party to power in 1963. President Bashar Assad received a number of congratulatory cables from Arab and Muslim leaders from across the Middle East. King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa, the leader of Bahrain, for example, wished Assad “good health” and that the Syrian people should continue to progress under Assad’s “wise leadership.” The cable from Bahrain was especially interesting in light of tense ties the tiny Gulf state has with the Iranian-led axis in the region, of whichSyria is a prominent member – a fact demonstrated by the recent terror summit in Damascus consisting of Assad, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hizbullah chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah. Bahrain, home to the United States Navy’s 5th Fleet, is a country made up of two-thirds Shi’ites and ruled by Sunnis, and has been marked as one of the first countries that could fall with the right amount of Iranian pressure. Israel, of course, did not send a cable to Syria on Monday, although it has been sending some clear messages to its northern neighbor in recent weeks in an effort to avoid a conflict that the defense establishment believes neither country really wants, but into which they could be lured by Iran.

While the IDF has taken action – for example, refraining from drafting reserves during a recent exercise in the North – and the political establishment has made the right remarks – Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said last week that he would be willing to meet Assad “any time and any place” – the tension along the border has yet to be totally defused. The main reason is Iranian efforts to escalate the situation among Israel, Syria and Hizbullah in an effort to thwart additional sanctions by the international community. If war were to erupt in the North, for example, a new round of sanctions would be postponed indefinitely. For this reason, Israel carefully scrutinized every public statement made by Nasrallah, Assad and Ahmadinejad two weeks ago during their meeting in Damascus, on the sidelines of whichSyria and Iran signed a number of new defense pacts. While the agreements do not bind Syria to defend Iran if it is attacked by Israel or the United States, the continued alliance between the countries is of major concern for the Israeli defense establishment, primarily considering that at the same time that Assad sat down for dinner with Ahmadinejad, the Obama administration announced that it had decided to return its ambassador to Damascus. This seemingly allows Assad to continue being part of the Iranian axis on the one hand, and to improve ties with the West on the other. (Read more...)

IR Iran Says it Has Started Cruise Missile Production

By NASSER KARIMI,
The Associated Press /

Iran said Sunday it has launched a new production line of highly accurate, short range cruise missiles, which would add a new element to the country's already imposing arsenal. Gen. Ahmad Vahidi told Iranian state TV that the cruise missile, called Nasr 1, would be capable of destroying targets up to 3,000 tons in size. The minister said the missile can be launched from the surface but would eventually be modified to be fired from helicopters and submarines. The world is already concerned about Iran's military capabilities, especially the implications of its nuclear program. The U.S. and some of its allies, as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency, say Iran is apparently trying to produce nuclear weapons, a charge Iran denies. The West is considering stiffer sanctions against Iran to try to force it to halt uranium enrichment, a process that has civilian uses but can be also used for nuclear arms if the uranium is enriched over 90 percent. Iran also has an array of missiles from short to medium range that could hit targets including Israel, U.S. military bases in the region and much of Europe.

Iran frequently makes announcements about new advances in military technology that cannot be independently verified. Gen. Vahidi said the production of the cruise missiles, which took two years to develop, showed that sanctions on Iran have failed. He said the cruise missiles would strengthen Iran's naval power. Cruise missiles are highly advanced, usually subsonic rocket-powered weapons that can hug the ground and hit targets with great precision. U.S. forces used large numbers of cruise missiles in its attack on Baghdad in 2002. Most were launched from warships in the Persian Gulf. The state TV showed a video of boxes in a warehouse containing several missiles. It also showed footage of Iran's cruise missile test in 2007. That missile was apparently imported. Iran began a military self-sufficiency program in 1992, under which it produces a large range of weapons, including tanks, missiles, jet fighters, unmanned drone aircraft and torpedoes.

New Iranian Missile Launch Pad Revealed

By YAAKOV KATZ,
The Jerusalem Post /

North Korea reportedly assisting Teheran in building launch pad for new missile. Iran has built a new missile launch pad that could accommodate the firing of the Islamic Republic’s next-generation satellite launch vehicle (SLV) called Simorgh, which Israel fears is being developed to serve as an intercontinental ballistic missile that could reach all of Europe. Satellite footage taken by Jane’s with the DigitalGlobe and GeoEye satellites revealed that Iran has constructed a new launch site near the current Semnan space center. The imagery shows a new site four kilometers from Semnan with a 13-meter wide gantry tower approximately 20 meters tall. The site, Jane’s said, appeared to be midway toward completion. According to an analysis of the imagery conducted by Jane’s, a London-based defense publication, the construction of the new facility and the development of the Simorgh missile likely demonstrated collaboration between Iran and North Korea.

The tower, Jane’s said, resembled a similar tower at North Korea’s launch pad at Tongchang. Iran unveiled the Simorgh missile in early February leading Israeli defense officials to warn that it could one day become an ICBM with a range of several thousand km., putting almost all of Europe within its reach. A model of the Simorgh was displayed at a space show in Teheran, along with the three new Iranian-built satellites – Mesbah-2, Tolo and Navid-e-Elm-o-Sanat. Iranian officials said the 87-ton Simorgh could carry a satellite weighing 100 km. and put it into orbit in space. Hailing the new technology, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at the time that the Simorgh would carry Mesbah-2 into space, but gave no time-frame.

Ahmadinejad Calls 9/11 ‘A Big Fabrication’

By ROBERT MACKEY /
The New York Times News Blog /

Perhaps concerned that his repeated suggestions that the Holocaust might not have happened have become less shocking over time, Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad upped the ante on Saturday, telling intelligence officials in Tehran that the destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 was staged. In remarks reported by IRNA, an official Iranian news agency, and translated by Reuters, Mr. Ahmadinejad said, “The September 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan.” Mr. Ahmadinejad also reportedly described the attacks in New York as a “complicated intelligence scenario and act.” Conspiracy theorists in the Middle East have suggested that the attacks were not the work of Al Qaeda, but carried out by Israeli or American intelligence operatives.

In a speech during Iran’s annual anti-Israel day in September, Mr. Ahmadinejad said of the Holocaust, “The pretext for the creation of the Zionist regime is false.” He added: “It is a lie based on an unprovable and mythical claim.” Mr. Ahamdinejad’s claims come at the end of a week in which Radovan Karadzic, the former leader of Bosnia’s Serbs, told a war crimes tribunal in the Hague that both the siege of Sarajevo and the massacre at Srebrenica were “myths,” and a mentally ill gunman from California, who had written that he was interested in “establishing the truth of events such as the September 11 demolitions,” opened fire at the Pentagon.

Dubai Hit - Another Move in the Israel-Iran Cold War

Haaretz.com /

The assassination of Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mahbouh in Dubai, allegedly perpetrated by Israel, was another expression of the all-out cold war between Israel and Iran. The two regional powers are fighting for clout and influence in the Middle East, threatening mutual destruction and harassing each another with clandestine action. The hostility has been going on for years, but this month there has been more talk of an actual war breaking out, during the "crucial year" of 2010. The American administration is now trying to avoid an explosion; that is President Barack Obama's main challenge in the region. The current Israeli-Iranian hostilities are reminiscent of the U.S.-Soviet Cold War, and Israel's war for influence against Gamal Abdel Nasser's Egypt in the 1950s and '60s, and against Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization in the '70s and the '80s. They have similar characteristics: profound ideological rejection of the foe, threats against its existence, an arms race, clandestine global activity, supplying arms to allies, diplomatic alliances with regional and global powers, an economic boycott and diplomatic isolation. Every few days, the Iranian news agency IRNA posts to its Web site a promise by an Iranian leader that the Zionist regime is on the verge of collapse. Or a soothing message that Israel is weak and incapable of attacking Iran, or that if it does attack, it will be punished.

Or encouragement for anti-Zionist rabbis in Europe and calls to try "Israeli war criminals" over their deeds in Gaza. Even Prof. Ilan Pappe, "the Israeli dissident," is mentioned favorably. The Iranian message: Zionism is a criminal ideology responsible for shocking war crimes. The Zionist regime is not legitimate, and will inevitably collapse if faced with determined "resistance." Furthermore, according to the Iranians, Saudi Arabia is attacking Yemen as part of an American and Israeli plot. This sounds ridiculous until we recall the story the Israeli Air Force journal published two years ago about the secret military aid Israel gave the pro-Saudi royalists in their war against Nasser. History is repeating itself. Just as the Iranians are saying they are not against Jews, but only Zionism, the Israeli leaders are explaining they love and respect the Iranian people but oppose only the regime. They blame Iran for all the security troubles facing Israel, from suicide attacks to rockets and Qassams, but add that if the ayatollahs were to be cast out, we could love again, as in the days of the shah. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calls Iran "the new Amalek" because of its attempts to obtain nuclear weapons. The Book of Deuteronomy (25:19?) exhorts: "Thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven." (Read more...)

Yemeni Official Accuses I.R. Iran & Al-Qaeda for Rebel Support

The Earth Times Online Newspaper

The speaker of Yemen's parliament accused Iran and al-Qaeda of supporting Shiite rebels fighting Yemeni forces along the country's northern border, in an interview published Tuesday. "We used to avoid accusing the Iranian government of directly financing the Houthis," Yehia Ali al-Rai said in an interview with the Saudi daily Okaz. "Then we realised that the Iranian government had a role, as if it wants to spread its wings over the Arab world," he charged. Al-Rai said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's January 13 speech blasting Saudi Arabia for its role in the conflict had convinced him that the Iranian government directly supported Houthi rebels fighting along the Saudi-Yemeni border. Al-Rai said that al-Qaeda militants had moved into Yemen from Saudi Arabia and Iraq while Yemeni security forces were busy battling the Houthi rebels, and that al-Qaeda and the rebels were now acting in concert. There are confirmed contacts between al-Qaeda and the Houthis," al-Rai asserted, saying the two groups coordinate their actions, and that al-Qaeda finances and trains the Houthis. "Those who finance al-Qaeda in Yemen are the same who finance it in Afghanistan and Iraq, and used to finance it in (Saudi Arabia) before they were defeated," the speaker of the Yemeni parliament said. Al-Rai denied rumours that al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden had found refuge in Yemen. "He will never make Yemen a home," al-Rai said. On the domestically sensitive question of US involvement in Yemen's battle against al-Qaeda militants, al-Rai said that any US military intervention in the country would take place only with Yemen's consent.

Three Charged in U.S. Over Illegal I.R. Iran Shipments

Agence France Presse (AFP)

Three men have been charged in the United States with illegally shipping sensitive technology to Iran in violation of federal trade laws, justice officials said Wednesday. A federal court has accused two men, Jiraiir Avanessian, 56, of Los Angeles and Iranian national Farhoud Masoumian, 42, of a conspiracy which includes allegations of smuggling, money laundering and other crimes. Avanessian was arrested on Monday at his home in the Los Angeles suburb of Glendale while an arrest warrant has been issued for Masoumian. A third man, Amirhossein Sairafi, was arrested earlier this week in Frankfurt, Germany by law enforcement authorities acting on a provisional arrest warrant from the United States. According to a federal indictment and criminal complaint, Iran-born Avanessian is the owner and operator of California-based XVAC.

Avanessian allegedly corresponded with Masoumian and Sairafi via e-mail for at least two years to arrange the export of high-value vacuum pumps and related equipment to Iran through a trade zone located in the United Arab Emirates. According to US law, individuals are prohibited from exporting such technology to Iran without a license. Law enforcement officials told the Los Angeles Times the technology in the case could possibly be used for "development of nuclear capabilities." If convicted on all counts, Avanessian and Masoumian face statutory maximum sentences of 615 years and 525 in federal prison, respectively, according to the US Justice Department.

British Troops Tried to Rescue Hostages at Iran Border

guardian.co.uk / Richard Norton-Taylor and Julian Borger

British troops in southern Iraq were scrambled to the Iranian border after the abduction of five British hostages in May 2007, in a failed attempt to stop them being taken into Iran, the Guardian has learned. The troops were sent to the border area north of Basra to intercept the kidnappers after receiving intelligence that they were heading to the frontier from Baghdad, but failed to find them. It is unclear whether the British unit arrived too late or went to a different crossing point along the 1,500km border. British officials today refused to give details of the attempted rescue operation, describing the issue as "extremely sensitive", but a British journalist visiting the Iraq-Iran border a few months after the abduction was briefed on the operation by British officers who had taken part. As the abortive rescue attempt was being launched, the five British hostages were being driven from Baghdad to the border by their kidnappers, the day after their abduction in the centre of the Iraqi capital. A year-long investigation by Guardian Films found that Iraqi intelligence trailed the abductors – who included members of the special Quds force of Iran's Revolutionary Guard – and their victims to a brickworks across the border from the Iranian town of Mehran, which the Quds force used as a base for its operations in Iraq. The hostages were seen being transferred from one set of vehicles to another at the brickworks and then driven off. The Foreign Office has maintained that it has no evidence that the British hostages were taken across the border but the head of US central command, General David Petraeus has confirmed that the Britons – Peter Moore, Jason Swindlehurst, Jason Creswell, Alec Maclachlan and Alan McMenemy – spent some of their subsequent captivity inside Iran.

The abductions of the five men came at a time when many British officers in Basra believed they were being sucked into a proxy war with Iran. Their troops were locked in intense urban conflict with Shia militias, believed to have been trained in Iran, armed by Iran, and even supported by Iranian forces. Farsi communications were intercepted between mortar teams targeting British positions in central Basra. The kidnapping team who seized the five Britons at Iraq's finance ministry in May 2007 were also overheard speaking what some thought was Farsi. By the summer of 2007, intelligence officials in the US-led multinational coalition in Iraq estimated that Iranian-backed insurgents were responsible for roughly half of the attacks on their forces. So concerned were British military commanders in Basra about the support, notably arms and roadside bomb technology, that Iran was giving Shia militia elements in the southern Iraqi city that they set up a separate battle group on the border specifically to try to stop the supplies. Furthermore, British units in the region were told to expect abduction attempts by Iranian-backed groups and rehearsed counter-measures against such a threat. In June 2007, less than a month after the abduction of the five British hostages in Baghdad, the Ministry of Defence said an Iranian-backed plot to kidnap British troops in Basra had been foiled. A Shia Iranian-backed "special group" – elements of the Jayish al-Mahdi, Moqtada al Sadr's Mahdi army – had planned to wear stolen British army uniforms and target a small military liaison team based at the provincial joint operations centre in Basra where British soldiers were mentoring Iraqi forces. The plot was thwarted when the liaison team was tipped off by a loyal Iraqi policeman. A military spokesman in Basra said at the time: "We have procedures to combat this particular threat and they are effective." (Read more...)

Gordon Brown to Ask I.R. Iran to Stop Taliban Support

The Daily Telegraph

The Prime Minister is also planning to ask China to take a larger role in rebuilding Afghanistan’s shattered economy. The new approach to Iran’s neighbours is part of a new diplomatic strategy that British officials hope will accelerate the withdrawal of British troops from Afghanistan. British sources have told the Daily Telegraph that Iran has been invited to the London conference on Afghanistan in January and will be asked to play a more “constructive” role in the country. Tehran has not yet replied to the invitation. Mr Brown has invited the Iranians to London despite growing international concern over their nuclear programmes, and public accusations from Britain and the US that hardline elements in Tehran are supporting the Taliban. David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, told MPs in December that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is “training, equipping and supplying” groups including the Taliban. UK intelligence agencies say that since 2006, the Guards have been supplying some Taliban commanders with small arms, explosives and other weapons. Tehran denies supporting the Taliban and publicly supports the Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai. British diplomats believe the conference could be used to put international pressure on Iran to cut of military support for the Taliban. Diplomats believe that the Iranian regime is “sensitive” over the issue and could be shamed into ending its backing for the Afghan insurgents. British officials also think that parts of the Iranian elite are deeply uncomfortable about helping the Taliban, who are Sunni Muslims. One source said the “The Iranians have to be very careful – they can’t be seen to be supporting the Taliban and they can’t hand the Taliban any major victories. They’re in a difficult situation, and that’s a point that could be made in London.” The Revolutionary Guards have links to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, but also have considerable autonomy from the Iranian regime. Twice in the last two years, Guard units have captured British sailors in the Persian Gulf.

Mr Miliband said the Guards’ interference in Afghanistan “further undermines international confidence in the Iranian regime's intentions, and is at odds with the regime's claims to the international community and its own people to want to work for stability, security and prosperity.” Douglas Henderson, a former Labour defence minister who has visited Afghanistan for talks with Nato commanders, said that any attempt to bring long-term stability to Afghanistan will require an “understanding” with Tehran. He said: “There are issues in western Afghanistan that can only be resolved by having an understanding with Iran. It is clear to me that in Western Afghanistan there needs to be some co-operation with Iranian intelligence and the Iranian military.” Before Parliament rose for Christmas, Mr Brown told MPs the London meeting would attempt to draw Afghanistan’s neighbours into the international process there. The summit “must encourage a new set of relationships between Afghanistan and its neighbours,” the Prime Minister said. Dennis Blair, the US Director of National Intelligence told a US Senate committee earlier this year that Iran is covertly supplying arms to Afghan insurgents while publicly posing as supportive of the Afghan government. He said: “Shipments typically include small arms, mines, rocket propelled grenades, rockets, mortars, and plastic explosives.” According to US intelligence agencies’ monitoring of Afghanistan, Taliban commanders have publicly thanked their Iranian supporter for successful operations against Nato forces. Despite strained relations over the Copenhagen climate deal, China has also been invited to send a foreign minister to the London talks. The London conference, on January 28, will bring together more than 60 countries in all. China has investments in Afghanistan including a $3 billion copper mine in Logar province near Kabul. Some diplomats think China should be doing more to support the Nato mission in Afghanistan.

The Iranian Regime Backs Hezbollah and Hamas

IranPressNews.com

Iran commits to paving for Russian weapons supplied to the Lebanese Army in return for the Lebanese government's authorization for Hezbollah's continued armament on 2nd of December 2009 the Lebanese government ratified its guidelines. One of its key guidelines deals with Hezbollah. According to this guideline, Resistance (Hezbollah) has a key role together with the Lebanese Army for protecting Lebanon. This implies that Hezbollah has received the government authorization to continue to hold weapons, contrary to UN Security Council Resolution 1559. The ratification of this guideline is a clear victory for Iran, which has worked in the past years behind the scenes in Lebanon, in all echelons, while providing incentives for Lebanon to maintain Hezbollah's special status there. Iran views Hezbollah's weapons as a reserve for exporting the revolution, and it is not prepared to lose this card. It has been learned that Iran, headed by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad, enticed Lebanese President Michel Sulayman, during his visit on 23 November last year (2008), with finance for large-scale Lebanese weapon deals with Russia, in return for Sulayman supporting maintaining Hezbollah's ongoing special status as a resistance organization protecting Lebanon, and for his recruiting supporters among the government and parliament. This proposal came up during one of the discussions between the parties in this visit, which dealt with Lebanon's domestic policy and the power relations between the various camps.

During the discussion, Sulayman proposed considering an idea he presented as a 'brainstorming idea', to integrate Hezbollah operatives in the Lebanese Army after the elections of the summer of 2009. He even suggested considering the integration of units, and not just individuals. Khamenei congratulated Suleiman for his part in the conciliation talks held between the various ethnic communities under Sulayman's personal mediation and sponsorship, and wished him and the Lebanese people peace and prosperity. However, he completely rejected the very idea, even as a brainstorming idea', and clarified that Hezbollah is working to protect Lebanon and the Lebanese people in full coordination with the Lebanese Army. He added that the common enemy of the Lebanese, in particular, and the Arabs in general is the Zionist regime, and preparations must be made accordingly due to concerns over possible Israeli aggression against Lebanon, as was the case in 2006. In any case, he promised Sulayman that Hezbollah weapons will directed only against the Zionist enemy and for the release of sacred lands, and will not be turned against any Lebanese.

Iran said that its promise to finance weapons deals for the Lebanese army relates to the agreement between Lebanon and Russia during the visit of Michail Demitriev, the Russian service's head for military-technical cooperation. With regard to the deals themselves, on 6 December 2009 Demitriev visited Lebanon to finalize the principles of the weapon deals between Russia and Lebanon. The deals include several naval radars, vessels and moderate and light weapons (such as mortars, Kalashnikov rifles and grenades). In addition, in 2009 Russia promised to supply Lebanon with about 10 MIG 29 combat aircraft and a Russian delegation even travelled to Lebanon recently (in the last quarter of 2009) in order to examine Lebanon's airports. According to the agreement with the Russians, the MIG's will be supplied after the airports are prepared for accommodating them. Iran Plans to Supply Weapons to the Lebanese Armv so that they will End up, with Hezbollah On 30 November 2009, during a speech and press conference held by Hezbollah General Secretary, Hassan Nasrollah, he commented on a question about arming the Lebanese military. Nasrollah answered that any effort to arm Lebanon's military is a positive effort.

He says Hezbollah does not oppose this, even if the US arms the Lebanese army, although he does not believe this will happen. He says this should not prevent investing efforts and mentioned that Iran could assist, Syria had assisted in the past and was prepared to continue assisting, and other Arab countries could also offer assistance. This is not the first time that Iran and Hezbollah's comments have been heard in the media concerning Iran arming the Lebanese military, and Nasrollah's ongoing lobbying on this issue is in fact designed to promote a covert program, formulated by the upper echelons of Iran's leadership, and of course welcomed by Nasrollah. These weapons are to be used by Hezbollah if it decides that the time has come for a greater show of force internally, or when the day comes and Hezbollah decides to take over Lebanon whether by political means or by force.

When presenting their program, Iran told Hezbollah that weapons supplied to Lebanon, as a country, would not arouse the international community's condemnation of Iranian support for Hezbollah terrorism as was the case when Iran transferred weapons directly to Hezbollah. Another advantage would be that these weapons would be available in the arena and in emergency, Hezbollah would be able to use them. Hezbollah for its part pointed to the advantage of the fact that some of the Shiite military personnel in Lebanon's Military would train, acquire skills and gain experience in using the Iranian weapons as part of their military service and in emergency, would desert from the military with their weapons and put themselves at Hezbollah's disposal. Hezbollah added that some of the Shiite military personnel in Lebanon's military had already been "recruited" by Hezbollah and others were at various stages of "recruitment." Hezbollah said that it had become the key element with which Shiites in Lebanon identified. Hence, at the critical hour, when each ethnic community pulled in its own direction, the Shiite military personnel would join Hezbollah's militia. This comment by Nasrollah was unusual after a year of silence on the topic.

During November to December last year (2008), many Iranian figures supported supplying weapons to Lebanon's military. There was an allusion to these weapons, which Hezbollah 'ordered' from Iran, in Hassan Nasrollah's 11 November 2008 speech, when he spoke at length about the importance of beefing up Lebanon's Military and equipping it with air defense systems and anti-tank weapons in face of the threat posed by Israel. Later, Lebanon's president, Michel Sulayman, also commented during his visit to Iran, on 24 to 25 November 2008, that Lebanon was not interested in aircraft and long-range missiles, but rather in medium advanced weapons. This statement was received with satisfaction by Iran's leadership. Since then, media discussion of the weapons to be supplied by Iran to Lebanon's military has not mentioned if or when this will be implemented. In practice, Iran and Hezbollah are known to have clear plans regarding the type of weapons required for Hezbollah, which, from its point of view, can be supplied to the Lebanese military.

The list proposed by Hezbollah to Iran, in November 2009, for the Lebanese military, included Toofan anti-tank missiles (an Iranian copy of the US TAW), QW1 antiaircraft missiles (manpads), and Nour coastal defense missiles (an Iranian copy of the Chinese C-802). These types of weapons are currently used by Hezbollah but are not in the possession of the Lebanese army. Tehran Deepening its Involvement in the Regional Arena — Pressuring Hamas to Take Over the PA Presidency Immediately after the 4-5 November 2009 visit to Iran by Syria's Foreign Minister Mualem and the assistant to the vice president, Liwa Muhammad Nasif, there was a three-way meeting in Damascus between Liwa Muhammad Nasif, senior Iranian officials, and senior Hamas officials. At the meeting, defined as strategic, the Iranian officials pressured the Hamas officials to step up their activity for Iranian interests on two levels:

• In the internal Palestinian arena, the Iranians pressed their colleagues from Hamas to revive their plans to take over the PA presidency, whether or not there are elections.
• Regionally, Iran asked Hamas to increase logistic support to Hezbollah and Iranian intelligence and Revolutionary Guard officers wherever there is a
• Hezbollah presence, especially in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen. The meeting was held in the office of Liwa Muhammad Nasif, who is in charge of special relations between Damascus and Tehran. Attending were head of Hamas's political bureau, Khaled Mash'al, his deputy, Musa Abu Marzuk, and Muhammad Reza Zahedi, commander of the IRGC Qods Force Lebanon corps, and Iran's ambassador to Damascus, Ahmad Moussavi.

The meeting was held at Iran's request, further to the talks in Tehran between the Iranians and Foreign Minister Mualem and Nasif, to discuss relations between Damascus, Tehran, and Hamas, in the light of the recent regional political developments, and especially on the background of the continuing control of the PA chairman, Mahmud Abbas, despite the fact that his term of office ended in January 2009, and on the background of increasing Iranian involvement in the region, with a view to establishing foci of influence in the region, especially in countries where Iran has identified a "no man's land", such as Saudi Arabia and Yemen, but also Jordan. The sources said that Iran's ambassador Ahmad Moussavi defined for Hamas the goals it was to achieve in the near future, first and foremost, taking over the PA presidency as a key step toward taking control of the West Bank, and foiling any chance of implementing an agreement, which might be signed between the PA and Israel.

The commander of the IRGC Qods force Lebanon corps, Mohammad Reza Zahedi, brought up the need for Hamas to enable logistic support for Hezbollah in Jordan and Saudi Arabia, so that Hezbollah could carry out covert activity there. The sources said that Mash'al did not reject the proposal, but made it conditional on Hamas's standing in these areas not being eroded. Only then would Hamas be able to provide support for Hezbollah, which would multiply the achievements of the resistance, especially given Hezbollah's experience and capabilities in planning and carrying out security and military operations around the world. Mash'al praised Zahedi for the increasing activity of the Revolutionary Guard in Yemen among the Houti rebels, and for enlisting Hezbollah in this struggle. Specifically regarding Yemen, Mash'al proposed logistic support for Hezbollah operatives and for Iranians under Arab cover, by providing them with Palestinian passports to make it easier for them to travel in the region. On behalf of Syria, Liwa Muhammad Nasif stressed their readiness, as always, to provide all possible support on the issue, and emphasized the need to unite efforts an concentrate on joint objectives. Nasif stressed that Damascus would continue to strongly back all the resistance movements, that no-one in the world would be able to undermine the strategic relations between Syria, Hezbollah, Iran, and Hamas. Liwa Nasif also said that the natural place for Hamas's leadership was Damascus.

I.R. Iran Jams Satellites to Block Transmissions by VOA, BBC

Voice of America (VOA)

Broadcasters in the United States and Britain say the Iranian government has been jamming international satellite transmissions into the country. Television programs by VOA's Persian News Network and a number of radio broadcasts by U.S.-supported news organizations have been affected by the Iranian jamming. The interference has been aimed at a communications satellite system used by many countries.

Iranian authorities have not responded to inquiries by the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the agency that oversees all U.S. government-supported civilian international broadcasting, including VOA. However, engineers who regularly monitor satellite communications say Iran apparently is the source of the signal interference, which has blanketed a satellite system known as Hot Bird.

A BBG statement said its experts have determined that Iranian government jamming has been in effect at least since December 27. In addition to VOA's Persian network, the jamming has affected programs by Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty's Radio Farda and Radio Sawa, a U.S.-supported Arabic-language radio. The BBG condemned the jamming and called it censorship aimed at interrupting the free flow of objective news and information to the Iranian people. The BBC first reported last week that it had encountered jamming aimed at its Persian-language radio and television programs. / Some information for this report was provided by AFP.

Petraeus '90% Certain' that U.K. Hostage Was in Iran

The Independent

The United States' former commander in Iraq said he was "90 per cent certain" that former hostage Peter Moore was held in Iran for some of his two-and-a-half years in captivity, according to reports today. General David Petraeus told the BBC he was "absolutely certain" Mr Moore and the other hostages were held in Iran for part of their period in captivity and the Guardian quoted a former member of Iran's Revolutionary Guard as saying the kidnapping was masterminded by the organisation. But the Foreign Office played down the reports today and said there was no evidence the British hostages were held in Iran following their abduction. BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner put the question directly to Gen Petraeus, who was commander of multi-national forces in Iraq at the time of the kidnap and now heads US Central Command, at a conference in Bahrain on December 13. Mr Gardner told Radio 4's Today programme: "He didn't hesitate. He said 'I'm absolutely certain. I'm 90% certain'. "I said is this a personal view or have you seen hard intelligence, and he thought for a minute and he said 'I am pretty sure I've seen hard intelligence on it' ... that they were held in Iran for some of the period of their captivity."

There were also reports today that Mr Moore was targeted for abduction because he was in Iraq to install computer systems to track the movements of money within the post-war administration which might have shown how funds supplied by the US and its allies were being diverted to Iranian-backed insurgent groups. The Guardian claimed the men were moved to Iran within days of their kidnapping and held by the Guard's al-Quds brigade at the Qasser Shiereen military camp near the Iraqi border and then at a camp called Tehran Pars near the city of Qom. "It was an Iranian kidnap, led by the Revolutionary Guard, carried out by the al-Quds brigade," said the unnamed former Guard member. "My contact works for al-Quds. He took part in the planning of the kidnap and he watched the kidnapping as it was taking place. He told me that they spent two days at the Qasser Shiereen camp. They then took them deep inside Iran." But the Foreign Office said: "We have no evidence that the British hostages, including Peter Moore, were held in Iran. We are not in a position to say with any certainty where they were held during each and every single day of their two-and-a-half years in captivity." The reports will further heighten tension between the UK and Iran after Britain renewed its calls for human rights to be respected over the clampdown on protesters in Tehran and other cities. (Read more...)

Arms Seized by Thailand Were Iran-Bound

The Wall Street Journal

A plane loaded with weapons from North Korea that was recently impounded in Bangkok was bound for Iran, according to documents obtained by arms-trafficking experts. The destination of the Ilyushin-76, which Thai authorities have said carried 35 tons of armaments, has been unknown. Thai officials said the plane flew to Pyongyang via Bangkok to collect its cargo, then returned to Bangkok to refuel on Dec. 11. It was seized during that stop and its five crew members were detained by Thai police. A flight plan for the IL-76, obtained by researchers in the U.S. and Belgium, shows that after Bangkok the plane was due to make refueling stops in Sri Lanka, the United Arab Emirates and Ukraine before unloading its cargo in Tehran. Iranian officials didn't respond to requests for comment. The flight plan indicates that en route to Pyongyang the plane stopped at an air force base in Azerbaijan; the nature of that stop is unclear. Azerbaijani officials couldn't be reached for comment. The apparent links among the military cargo, North Korea and Iran raise fresh questions about how nations try to evade international sanctions. The United Nations Security Council has banned the sale of small and heavy weapons from North Korea and all weapons sales from Iran. The new information is presented in a joint draft report by analysts at TransArms, based in Chicago, and the International Peace Information Service, or IPIS, of Antwerp, Belgium.

Both organizations conduct research on conflicts around the world, including how they are financed and supplied with weapons. A draft copy of the report was provided to The Wall Street Journal. The report hasn't been independently confirmed. U.S. State Department spokesman Darby Holladay declined to comment on the seizure of the weapons and referred questions to the Thai government. It remains unclear whether Iran intended to use the weapons itself. Western governments have accused Iran of supporting militants in Lebanon, the Palestinian territories and Iraq. Thai officials say they have received little information from the plane's crew. The crew say they were told the cargo was oil-drilling equipment and have denied knowing there were weapons aboard. The flight documents obtained by TransArms and IPIS state that the cargo is "oil industry spare parts." The flight's planners appear to have worked hard to maintain appearances. A packing list includes eight categories of equipment, such as "Geothermal rigs spare parts -- model MTEC6". Thai officials have said the actual cargo included shoulder-launched missiles, parts for surface-to-air missiles and electronic systems to control weapons. Arms-trafficking specialists have puzzled over the stop in Bangkok, an airport that is heavily policed because of the drug trade. "This is not an unusual flight plan for general cargo, but if it's for an arms flight, it doesn't make any sense," said Peter Danssaert, an arms-trade researcher at IPIS involved in preparing the report. (Read more...)

Newest U.S. Missile Defense Test Simulates Attack by I.R. Iran

Cable News Network (CNN)

The U.S. military's Missile Defense Agency will practice protecting the United States from a simulated Iranian missile attack next month in an exercise using the agency's newest missile-killing technology, Pentagon officials said Friday. Previous tests have been focused on a missile trajectory that mimics an attack from North Korea, but the January test will have a trajectory and distance resembling an intercontinental ballistic missile launch from Iran. At the same time, the agency will be testing its new "Capability-2" technology, with upgraded software and sensors loaded inside an interceptor missile that will be fired at the fake Iranian missile. The Capability-2 technology is designed to eventually replace the existing hardware the United States has in its two missile defense bases in California and Alaska, according to Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency. While intelligence assessments of that country's capabilities now suggest an Iranian ICBM threat is as far away as 2020, this test was planned more than three years ago, when the threat seemed much closer, Lehner said. In the January test, the fake ICBM is slated to originate from the Missile Defense Agency's launch facility in the Marshall Islands in the South Pacific while the interceptor missile will be launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, according to Lehner. Missile defense tests have been likened to hitting a bullet with a bullet.

This test will be even more difficult: It will be like hitting a bullet head-on with another bullet, because any launch from Iran would have a trajectory that would require a U.S. interceptor missile hitting the target directly, Lehner said. The missiles will be flying at speeds of between 17,000 and 18,000 miles per hour, according to Lehner, about 3,000 mph faster than tests involving mock North Korean missiles. The speed will reduce the strike window, meaning the interceptor, also known as the "kill vehicle," will have to work even faster at identifying and striking the target missile. The United States has only two missile defense bases, one at Vandenberg, with three missiles, and the other at Fort Greely, Alaska, with 20 interceptor missiles at the ready. Lehner said that if Iran were to launch an ICBM attack against the United States, the most likely defense option would be firing a missile from Alaska, because of the shorter distance around the globe. The United States was prepared to put a third missile defense site in eastern Europe, but the Obama administration scrapped that option because of the reduced ICBM threat from Iran. In its place, the administration said it will move ships with the capability of shooting down short- and medium-range missile from Iran which, they say, pose a greater threat to Iran's neighbors and U.S. bases in the Middle East.

Western Leaders Condemned I.R. Iran Over Missile Test

The Times

Western governments united to denounce Iran’s test-firing of a long-range ballistic missile yesterday, warning that it would only increase international determination to press for more sanctions on Tehran if it refused to negotiate over its nuclear programme. Gordon Brown led the call for stricter sanctions, calling the missile test a cause for serious concern that drew further into question Iran’s professed peaceful intentions over its nuclear programme. The United States, France and Germany joined in the condemnation. Germany called the test alarming, and France described it as “a very bad signal to the international community”. The first test of an improved version of the Sejil-2 missile, which is capable of reaching Israel and US bases in the Gulf, was reported early yesterday in a one-sentence announcement on Iranian state television, accompanied by a clip showing the missile rising from the launch pad in a cloud of smoke. “The missile hit its intended target,” the announcement said. The extended range of 1,200 miles puts not only targets across the Middle East within striking distance but also reaches southeastern Europe. The new solid-fuel missile is also believed to have greater accuracy than previous models, which were capable of hitting Israel.

“Sejil” means means “baked clay” in Farsi, a reference to a Koranic verse in which God sends birds to drive away attackers from Mecca by bombarding them with stones of baked clay. General Ahmad Vahidi, the Iranian Defence Minister, vowed that the new, faster version of the missile would be a “strong deterrent” against any foreign attack. “Given its high speed it is impossible to destroy the missile with anti-missile systems because of its radar-evading ability,” he said. Israel, which has repeatedly threatened to take military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities, declined to comment on the test. Mr Brown, who is attending the climate conference in Copenhagen, said: “This is a matter of serious concern to the international community and it does make the case for us moving farther on sanctions.” The Prime Minister said that he had spoken to Ban Ki Moon, the United Nations Secretary-General, about the Iranian missile test. “We will treat this with the seriousness it deserves,” he added. In Washington Mike Hammer, the National Security Council spokesman, said: “At a time when the international community has offered Iran opportunities to begin to build trust and confidence, Iran’s missile tests only undermine Iran’s claims of peaceful intentions. Such actions will increase the seriousness and resolve of the international community to hold Iran accountable for its continued defiance of its international obligations on its nuclear programme.” (Read more...)

Seized N.Korean Weapons Likely Destined for I.R. Iran

Reuters

Weapons seized in Thailand from an impounded plane traveling from North Korea were likely destined for Iran, said a high-ranking Thai government security official on a team investigating the arms. "Some experts believe the weapons may be going to Iran, which has bought arms from North Korea in the past," said the official, quoting Thai government military experts who also took part in an investigation of the weapons. Speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to talk to the media, he said the Thai investigating team considered Iran a likely destination because of the type of weaponry, including unassembled Taepodong-2 missile parts. Security analysts have said North Korea's long-range Taepodong-2 is a product of joint efforts with Tehran, coinciding with Iran's development of the Shehab-5 and 6 missiles. "Some of the components found are believed to be parts of unassembled Taepodong-2 missiles," the official said. U.S. lawmakers have expressed concern about North Korea's close missile cooperation with Iran, which Washington suspects is seeking to build nuclear weapons. The relationship dates to the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s when Pyongyang shipped Scud missiles. The components were discovered among 35 tonnes of weapons sealed in 145 crates of cargo seized by Thai authorities when the plane landed in Bangkok on Friday to refuel. The buyer and destination of the weapons have been shrouded in mystery. A Thai court on Monday extended the detention of the five-man crew -- four from Kazakhstan and one from Belarus -- by 12 days to give authorities more time to investigate. They each face 10 years in prison if found guilty of illegal possession of heavy weapons. The weapons would breach a U.N. Security Council resolution in June banning communist North Korea from selling arms in response to defiant nuclear and missile tests.

The official said he understood Iran in the past had bought North Korea's Taopodong-1 multi-stage missile, which has an estimated range of up to 2,500 km (1,553 miles). It uses liquid fuel and was fired over Japan in 1998. Taepodong-2 was first test-launched in July 2006 and flew for about 40 seconds before it blew apart. It is a multi-stage missile with a possible range of 6,700 km (4,163 miles). Another version was launched in April and flew about 3,000 km (1,864 miles) before splashing into the sea. Thai authorities have said the airplane's cargo contained rocket launchers, explosives, ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades and components for surface-to-air-missiles. Police Colonel Supisarn Bhakdinarinath, the chief investigator, said on Tuesday an initial estimate of the value of the weapons, most of which were unused, was about $18 million. But Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said it was too early to determine a value, adding that a closer inspection is necessary to determine their worth, where they may have been produced and where they were being delivered. Crew members have denied knowledge of any weapons on board and indicated that the plane stopped en route to Sri Lanka and the Middle East to refuel. The seizure came days after President Barack Obama's special envoy made a three-day trip to the communist state to persuade Pyongyang to rejoin six-nation nuclear disarmament talks. Arms are a vital export item estimated to earn North Korea more than $1 billion a year. Its biggest arms sales come from ballistic missiles, with Myanmar, Iran and Middle Eastern states among their customers, according to U.S. officials. In August, the United Arabs Emirates seized a ship carrying North Korean-manufactured munitions, detonators, explosives and rocket-propelled grenades bound for Iran, the first since sanctions against North Korea was strengthened. The containers were disguised as oil equipment.