Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Around Town …

8 November 2009 by poblete

  • U.S. Citizen Sentenced for Illegal Exports of Controlled Aircraft Parts to Iran.  Last week the Department of Justice announced that the “director of Monarch Aviation Pte, Ltd. (“Monarch”), a Singapore company that imported and exported military and commercial aircraft components for more than 20 years, was sentenced … in federal court in Brooklyn to 46 months’ incarceration for conspiring to violate the U.S. trade embargo by exporting controlled aircraft components to Iran. Wang-Woodford was also ordered to forfeit $500,000 to the United States Treasury Department.”  The news release is available, here.  The UK husband half of this scheme is still a fugitive and is believed to be hiding out in Singapore or some other place in Southeast Asia.   Over what items you ask led to the arrest of this husband and wife team?  Aircraft shields, shears, “o” rings, and switch assemblies.  Americans can trade freely and without most restrictions with over 94% of the countries in the world.  One has little sympathy for people that set out to do evade these rules.
  • African Nation Getting Close to Arms Embargo and Sanctions? In response to a military takeover of the Republic of Guinea government that has resulted in the death of civilians and human rights abuses, the State Department, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, issued a Web Notice recently advising exporters “that although there is no current U.S. or UN arms embargo on Guinea, the final decision on license applications for the export of U.S. Munitions List (USML) items to Guinea received from this date or currently in the review process may be delayed as the situation develops.”  Read the complete Web Notice, here.  In related news, the African Union announced this weekend announced economic sanctions.
  • Export Law Blog:  ”Ex-Treasury Advisor Claims U.S. Jurisdiction over Entire Planet”.  Over at the Export Law Blog, well, go read for yourself.  Its a good read.  What side are you on?  Once you read Burns’s post the following comment may make more sense; under UN Security Council Resolution 1737 (March 2007), the Security Council called on “all States and international financial institutions not to enter into new commitments for grants, financial assistance, and concessional loans, to the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, except for humanitarian and developmental purposes.”  The UN could look into this matter; at least for consistencies sake since the Asian Clearing Union is an international financial institution.  And, alas, the U.S. may not “rule” the world, but we sure have a great deal of influence over what countries, companies, and international financial institutions do with our goods and our greenbacks.
  • House Democrats Rally Around U.S. Travel Ban on Cuba.  According to the Miami Herald, more than 50 House Democrats are urging House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to leave the U.S. embargo on Cuba alone.  ”Any legislation that would seek to ease or lift sanctions . . . would send a devastating message to Cuba’s opposition movement and legitimize an ailing dictatorship,” states the letter signed by Florida Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Kendrick Meek, Alcee Hastings and 50 others.”  Read the Miami Herald story, here.  The supporters of easing the travel restrictions for U.S. citizens say they have enough votes to securing passage in the House.  We’ll see.  One day, one hopes, we will learn why people in Congress and K Street insist on supporting a state sponsor of terror just 90 miles from our shores. For now, kudos to the brave 50 or so Democrats who stand for freedom.
  • Rep. Connie Mack Keeps Pressing on Listing Venezuela as State Sponsor of Terrorism.   In letter to the editor of the of the Fort Myers News-Press, Florida Representative Connie Mack outlines why Venezuela should be listed as a state sponsor of terrorism.  ”United States law clearly states that a state sponsor of terrorism is one that repeatedly provides support to acts of international terrorism. Hugo Chavez has done so and is a clear threat to our hemisphere. That’s why the United States must add Venezuela to the list of state sponsors of terrorism, and why we must stand with the people of Venezuela as they fight for freedom from Chavez’s iron fist,” Mack states in the letter.  Mack and other Members of Congress have pressed for this designation for some time now and they are correct,  it is long overdue.  A possible middle ground option could be to designate Venezuela, and likely Ecuador, as a terror sanctuary.
  • New Mosque in Nicaragua Fuels Rumors About Iranian Regime Meddling.  The Wall Street Journal reports today on a new mosque set to open in Managua, Nicaragua – a country with 300 or so Muslims.  According to the Journal, “[t]he geopolitical chatter surrounding the gold-domed mosque, which opened in September after more than a year of construction, continues. “Did Iran put up the money? That’s the question everyone asks,” says Ismat Khatib, a native Nicaraguan lawyer and businessman who is of Palestinian descent. One Managua-based diplomat says it is believed Iran subsidized it.”  For years I have been hearing from colleagues and friends close to Nicaraguan opposition leaders that Iran has been funneling money and “diplomats” to Managua for projects such as an “embassy” building that never seems to come to completion.  Expect to hear more about Iranian influence, eh, meddling is more like it,  in the Western Hemisphere for years to come.  For now though, the Managua Mosque is just that, a mosque. Also, something that the WSJ does not mention – it is not just the Iranian regime money flows in to the region that should concern as there are other groups and countries that are out to destabilize the Americas. Read the Wall Street Journal article, here.

Posted in Africa, Congress, Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, Western Hemisphere, current events, news, sanctions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Following Pelosi Model, Facts and Law An Inconvenience for Kerry and Berman on Honduras Matter

31 October 2009 by poblete

The Law Library of Congress – a non-partisan entity of the Library of Congress – has come under attack by high-ranking Congressional Democrats for a recent legal opinion on the situation in Honduras. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman (D-Calif.) are trying to politically browbeat Library of Congress professionals to change a Honduras legal opinion because the current one does not suit their political goals.  This is somewhat similiar to what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is doing to the intelligence community as she tries to hide the truth of what she knew about enhanced interrogations of radical terror suspects. They can throw as much sand in our eyes as they want but, in both cases, it is an abuse of power and undermines processes designed to help policymakers make informed decisions.

As a matter of law, the current Honduran government is in the right (which, one wonders why, the Micheletti team signed off on an agreement yesterday that may allow the return of the legally removed former President Manuel Zelaya). This was not a military coup or a coup of any kind.  The Law Library of Congress report clearly outlines the legal steps undertaken by the Honduran Government to remove and arrest former President Zelaya.  This bothers Messrs. Kerry and Berman, as it does the Obama Administration and his Latin American team.   The report does not take sides, it outlines legal arguments. For reasons that we may never know, the Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats have been beating up on Honduras from the very first day that the Supreme Court determined that former President Zelaya had broken the law.  And now they are turning their frustrations to the Library of Congress.

While the Honduran government has made mistakes such as expelling Zelaya from the country and canceling certain civil liberties, these errors in judgment are a far cry from the raw accusations hurled at them by Zelaya supporters in the National Security Council, the Congress, and certain pockets of the Department of State.  As baseless as they may be, supporters of the constitutional government of Honduras are fair game for these attacks – that is part of the political process.  However, the Law Library of Congress is one of several departments of the Library of Congress that serve Members of Congress and Staff, and do avery good job of it.  They should not be dragged into political fights or forced to change an opinion because it does not suit the whims or political agendas of the consumer.

The agreement forced on the Honduran people yesterday by the Obama Administration and the politically inconsequential Organization of American States (OAS) should be challenged in the Honduran Supreme Court for it, much like this request by Senate and House leaders, is a legally nullity and another political misstep.  Congressional Republicans should keep the holds on various nominees for Senate confirmation until after the Honduran elections set for November 29, 2009.

Posted in Congress, Democrats, Honduras, current events, news | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Guest Post: Constitutional Danger in Nicaragua, Ortega Up to His Old Tricks

30 October 2009 by poblete

This morning in Managua, Nicaragua there are reports that the U.S. Embassy was vandalized by supporters of the leftist Sandinistas party.  Borrowing a page from the Castro-Chavez playbook for re-making Latin America in the Bolivarian image – just take a look at what they are doing over in Honduras – the Sandinista government is accusing the United States of meddling in Nicaraguan domestic affairs.  The mobs reacted.

So what is all the fuss about?  Fellow Washingtonian and Latin America watcher, Eddy Acevedo, published a piece on the matter in The Americano.  Acevedo discusses the October 19, 2009 Nicaraguan Supreme Court ruling that may allow Daniel Ortega to make his presidential bid possible for 2011.  The rub is that the Nicaraguan constitution states that a President cannot run for a consecutive re-election campaign and cannot be President more than twice.

In Honduras, the Supreme Court and the Congress was clearly in the right in removing from power Zelaya and his associates.  In Nicaragua, it seems that Daniel Ortega and his folks are clearly in the wrong.  This presents an interesting conundrum for Obama’s Latin America team.  As they try and dig out of their Honduran mistakes, another problem has been brewing just over the border in Managua that could result in outright violence.  How will the November 29, 2009 Honduran elections impact Managua?  My guess is that U.S. bumbling in Tegucigalpa already has.

The complete article is re-published below, with the author’s permission:

—————————————–

Constitutional Danger in Nicaragua: Ortega Up to His Old Tricks

By: Eddy Acevedo

Published: October 28, 2009, The Americano

As the current Obama administration continues to rub shoulders and remain friendly with leaders in Latin America, constitutions in the region are being threatened by overzealous leaders who aspire to have more power for a longer period of time in complete rejection of the rights of the people and the rule of law. Latin America is second to Africa in regions of the world who use bribes in the judiciary system. According to the 2008 Corruption Perceptions Index, Nicaragua is towards the bottom of the list with the highest reports of corruption behind Venezuela, Ecuador, and Paraguay. Nevertheless, the Organization of American States (OAS) continues to support leaders in the hemisphere who actively engage in breaking the law.

As much as the international community wanted to believe that the new Ortega was different from the old, many have now learned that a leopard never loses its spots. Due to the November municipal elections in Nicaragua in 2008, violence and widespread chaos troubled Nicaraguan citizens and jeopardized stability in the region. The Frente Sandinista de Liberacion Nacional (FSLN) faced allegations of voting fraud and using intimidation tactics, but that did not stop the OAS from ignoring the pleads of the Nicaraguan people. During his first years in office, the first thing on Ortega’s agenda was to seek re-election but he quickly learned that he did not have enough votes in the National Assembly to accomplish this goal legally so he turned to alternative ways in which he can make his campaign in 2011 a reality.

On October 19, 2009, the Supreme Court of Justice in Nicaragua ruled in favor of Ortega to make his presidential bid possible for 2011. In Nicaragua, article 147 of the constitution clearly states that a President cannot run for a consecutive re-election campaign and cannot be President more than twice. Ortega is seeking to run for re-election for a consecutive term and wants to be president for the third time, both issues are clearly prohibited by the Nicaraguan Constitution. Ortega is not the only president in the region dealing with this re-election challenge. As soon as Ortega returned from the ALBA conference with the backing of his allies Hugo Chavez, Rafael Correa, Jose Ramon Machado, and Evo Morales, the first thing on his platform was sidestepping the National Assembly to regain power for another 5 years.

So why did the Supreme Court rule in his favor? The judicial branch is made up of judges from the Sandinista party that vote in favor of interest and not the rule of law. Ortega had everything planned out and coordinated very well when the Supreme Court issued their decision. His supporters headed to the ‘rotondas’ in Managua with signs and propaganda to show their support of the court’s ruling. These supporters could not have orchestrated such a response so quickly unless they were given advance notice. These rallies become dangerous as most individuals carry weapons and block commerce and products moving within the capital that can impact the country’s economy.

Due to the threat to democracy, the civil society organizations and the political parties in Nicaragua have begun to unite. The Bancada Democrática Nicaragüense, Partido Liberal Constitucionalista, Movimiento Renovador Sandinista, and the Alianza Liberal Nicaragüense are looking for legislative tactics in order to revoke this ruling. The unification of all the political parties guarantees 48 votes which is a majority in the Nicaraguan National Assembly. Hopefully, the unification can last long enough in order to seek change in the country. The past has proven that it is extremely difficult for all these leaders to stay united through the crisis at hand. The private sector organizations such as the Consejo Superior de la Empresa Privada (Cosep) and the Cámara de Comercio Americana Nicaragüense (Amcham) have also spoken publicly against the ruling by the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Justice, Manuel Martinez, has commented over his uncertainty of the legality of the ruling and the failure to follow proper procedures to fulfill quorum at the high court such as allowing sufficient time to be present for the court’s deliberations. Some might ask why not let the elections go through and let the people decide? As Nicaraguan citizens learned in 2006, the Supreme Electoral Court cannot be trusted in conducting a fair, free, and transparent election. Ortega stole the presidential elections in 2006 and the municipal elections in 2008, so there is no reason to believe that he will not do it again. In order to prevent more instability and chaos in Nicaragua and throughout Central America, the United States must begin to engage and realize the actual importance of the events that are occurring right in its backyard or its quickly going to feel like the Cold War all over again in the hemisphere.

Eddy Acevedo currently serves as the Federal Affairs Coordinator of Miami-Dade County’s DC Office. Miami-Dade County is the 9th largest county in the United States and is considered the Gateway to the Americas. Mr. Acevedo advocates for the County’s priorities with Congress and the White House. In 2005, he worked as Senior Legislative Assistant to Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18), Ranking Member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Posted in Nicaragua, current events, national security, news | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments »

A “Rush” to Judgement Can Leave Our Southern Flank At Risk

25 October 2009 by poblete

Several readers have requested that I post more often on Cuba.  But because nothing of substance is really taking place on the U.S.-Cuba policy front, it has been a bit since I penned on the matter.  This past week, however, Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) has reportedly sent a letter to the Obama Administration asking them to remove Cuba from the state sponsors of terrorism list.  With that gem in hand, it is time for a Cuba post.

Removing Cuba from its well-earned slot on state sponsor of terrorism has been a favorite rallying cry for time now of supporters of the Cuban regime.  The left-leaning Council on Foreign Relations thinks it outdated, while a considerable number of influential academics and policy writers – regrettably some on the right included – mock it.  One would think these folks could find another hot-button foreign affairs matter to entertain themselves with, but, regrettably, the Cuba fever has no cure.

Cuba earned its way on to the state sponsors of terrorism list because it has done, and continues to do, a lot of bad things (it is not just al-Qaeda or Iran you know).  It has been on the State Department’s watch list since 1982; and there it should remain until Cuba decides to stop supporting and spreading terrorism in the Western Hemisphere and beyond.  A somewhat current list of Cuba’s antics is available here.   Some of the benefits of keeping Cuba on the list include, roughly,  (1) maintaining political leverage over the regime to change its ways; (2) maintaining the ban on the export of arms and dual-use items; and, (3) maintaining bans on various forms of economic assistance (Cuba is neck-deep in foreign debt).

I have not seen the most recent letter from Rep. Rush requesting the delisting;  however, based on what was read to me by a Senate source, the request is consistent with a provision in HR 2272,  ”The United States – Cuba Trade Normalization Act of 2009.” Rep. Rush is the primary sponsor of the bill.  According to HR 2272, the Cuban regime “is no longer a threat to the United States or the Western Hemisphere,” hence, the Cuban Democracy Act and the Cuban Liberty and Solidarity Act – essentially the foundation for all of U.S. policy toward Cuba – should be repealed.  Sec 10 provides for the repeal of the state sponsors designation but provides no reasons as to why that should done.

That Rush and other Members of Congress continue to advance the cause of the Cuban regime in the Congress should come as no surprise.  We have heard this song before, it is from an old familiar score, and the Cuban regime officials want to dance.  And, this time, the dance card is full and there are credible reports in town that the Administration may take a second look at the designation.  To the extent possible that politics can be removed from these designations, the better.  These laws and procedures are in place because some people, along time ago, thought long and hard about how to marshall and project U.S. power to enhance and protect U.S. interests.  Despite the odd conclusions on Cuba from the 2008 Country Reports on Terrorism released in April of this year, a sober review of the Cuba situation will show that it should remain on the list along with Iran, Sudan, and Syria.

In just a few weeks Obama Administration officials that manage Western Hemisphere relations have put in great jeopardy the democracy-building and strengthening efforts of various U.S. Administrations (as well as billions of taxpayer monies and many Americans that have died in that struggle).  From openly backing the anti-democratic, but legally ousted former President of Honduras; to supporting a reintegration of Cuba to the politically anemic and increasingly irrelevant Organization of American States (OAS); punishing Colombia by refusing to support an FTA; or its recent announcement on medical marijuana, without giving thought as to how it could impact our ally Mexico in its current struggles, the Obama Administration should steer clear of the Cuban state sponsor designation.  A delisting would be inconsistent with the facts and it, in turn, would embolden the enemies of freedom throughout the Western Hemisphere. Such a rush to judgment will also leave our southern flank, from South Florida, to the Gulf region, all the way to southern California, at risk.

P.S., it is good to know that the antics we witness with Cuba are not limited to the Cuba case alone. Over at the Capitol Hill Cubans website they penned an item on North Korea, with video, that is worth a look.

Posted in Cuba, Western Hemisphere, current events, national security, news, terrorism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

“New” Approach on Sudan, Coddling Terrorists and Human Rights Abusers

20 October 2009 by poblete

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs announced yesterday that the President would seek engage the regime of state sponsor of terror Sudan.   According to an article in Politico, the Administration “would help enact a more “comprehensive policy” for dealing with Sudan’s political instability.”   This “new” approach will not advance U.S. interests, but will embolden Omar al-Bashir.

With the exception of direct talks with regime officials, there is no a real substantive change in the U.S. approach to dealing with the genocidal regime of the Sudan.  The President said he was going to extended the national emergency with respect to the Sudan and that sanctions would remain in place. “If the Government of Sudan acts to improve the situation on the ground and to advance peace, there will be incentives; if it does not, then there will be increased pressure imposed by the United States and the international community,” President Barack Obama said in a prepared statement.

The Obama Administration could have made a call for more substantive regional cooperation in isolating the al-Bashir regime, while increasing humanitarian assistance to south and other areas of the Sudan.  Building on the work groups such as the Sudan Divestment Task Force and the Center for Security Policy’s Divest Terror initiative,  created new tools for the Treasury Department, Office of Foreign Assets Control, as well as FinCen, to further restrict access to the regime of foreign investment in the Sudan.  These and other innovative approaches can be implemented while helping opposition and humanitarian efforts on the ground and, most importantly, advancing U.S. security interests in the region.

Unlike the Bush Administration that generally took a reasonable and hardline approach to dealing with dictators, opting for robust application of economic sanctions and low-level contact with regime officials, while ensuring that humanitarian aid made its way to people that needed it, the Obama team wants more direct contact with high ranking leaders of various state sponsors of terrorism such as Cuba and Iran. The leaders of Iran, Cuba, and the Sudan, however, have demonstrated they do not desire change at all.  Quite the opposite – they use these overtures to terrorize and consolidate power.  Direct engagement is not going to change that, increased economic isolation and international pressure will.

Posted in Sudan, current events, national security, news, sanctions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

U.K. ECO Updates Notice to Exporters on Iran

15 October 2009 by poblete

The U.K. Export Control Organization has issued a new Notice on exporting to Iran. This new notice updates all exporters with additional questions and answers concerning financial sanctions as well as trading with Bank Mellat and the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) following a statement issued by HM Treasury on 12 October 2009.  You can read it, here.

Posted in Iran, current events, national security, news | Tagged , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Zimbabwe Opposition Figure Calls for Easing of Economic Sanctions; Not a Good Move

14 October 2009 by poblete

In a speech in Spain last week, Zimbabwean Prime Minister and opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai made a plea to European leaders to ease what he called “restrictive measures” (i.e., economic sanctions) on his country.

Ironically, many of the U.S. and European sanctions were put in place in response to the arrest of Tsvangirai and his supporters by the Mugabe regime. The latest round of attacks, March 2007,  was not the first time Tsvangirai and his supporters were attacked by Mugabe. Regardless, Tsvangirai told the AFP that his country “is emerging from a political and economic conflict. One of the key things that we need to do is to expedite the EU’s rapid dialogue” as well as the easing of economic sanctions.

While outsiders can sympathize with opposition pleas to ease restrictions, it does not make sense to ease sanctions on the Mugabe regime at this juncture. While growing stronger, the opposition is still too weak.  The Mugabe regime still controls the secret police and the military; and Mugabe supporters in the government have failed to reform that country in any meaningful way, continuing to, among other things, wage a battle against what Mugabe said last month were the “bloody whites”.

As compared to the Iran or Cuba program, the U.S. maintains a rather fragile sanctions program against Zimbabwe – mainly against regime officials.  It generally prohibits U.S. persons, no matter where located, and any person located in the United States from engaging in any transaction with any person that the U.S. government finds (1) to be undermining the democratic institutions and processes in Zimbabwe; (2) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support to these entities; (3) to be or have been an immediate family member of a sanctions’ target; or (4) to be owned, controlled or acting on behalf of a sanctions’ target.  There are other measures including the blocking financial transactions by specially designated nationals through U.S. financial institutions as well as denying visas.

Mugabe may have talked peace and democracy decades ago, and he and his supporters are not likely to ever allow freedom to take hold in that country.  The Mugabe kleptocracy rules with an iron fist, using the tools of state to crush, torture, and kill opposition figures.  There is no viable rule of law in Zimbabwe.   And it is not as if he does this without any support from the outside.  For example, the Chinese have been smuggling weapons to the regime for decades who, in turn, keeps weapons or sells them to unsavory types.  State sponsors of terrorism North Korea and Cuba have also meddled quite a bit through the years.

What is even more concerning than the human rights situation are the reports that the Mugabe regime may be allowing radical Islamist groups to find safe harbor in Zimbabwe.  Why bother with Zimbabwe?  Likely to use as a launching pad for attacks in South Africa or for fundraising.  For example, according to a 2005 Jamestown Foundation report, “[t]he possibility of a logistical link emerging between Islamist extremism and Zimbabwe has been the subject of a degree of speculation since 9/11. According to Kroll Associates, a prominent U.S.-based risk consultancy service, there is some evidence to suggest that diamonds procured from the DRC are being traded via Lebanese traders linked to al-Qaeda.”

Engagement with tyrants, in the end, will only empower them.  The opposition can use the current state of play to dig deeper roots.  And the U.S. should consider expanding or robustly enforcing current sanctions to further tighten the controls on the Mugabe regime, if not for human rights, then to advance U.S. interests in the war against radical Islamists.

Posted in Zimbabwe, current events, news, sanctions | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Around town …

10 October 2009 by poblete

Every now and then, usually when I post about it,  I receive critical e-mail from folks about my stance on export control reform and why massive reforms of the system should be made in a piecemeal fashion.  One of the reasons for this stance is that “reform” (updating a more accurate term) of the processes and systems takes place on an ongoing basis.   For example this week, the DDTC released updated electronic agreement guidelines.  This update was not done in a vacuum, but with input from many stakeholders including the private sector.   Be careful when waving the reform talisman, it may make a sometimes confusing and inefficient process much more complex and difficult to comply with for the long-term.

As posted earlier this week, the Treasury Department, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) this week published guidance related to the shipment of spare parts for medical devices initially exported pursuant to a Trade Sanctions Reform Act (TSRA) license.  It also addresses what exporters need to do when medical devices breaks and need to be returned for repair.

Over at the Heritage Foundation,  James Phillips published a WebMemo that is worth a read, Time for Tougher Sanctions on Iran’s Terrorists Regime.  At this juncture, sanctions may be too little too late to effectuate meaningful “behavior modification” from state sponsor of terrorism Iran, but the effort needs doing to ensure all potential remedies are exhausted before more robust means are pursued.   While not addressed by the Heritage post, one way to make Iran sanctions more effective would be to target Iran’s lack of capacity to refine oil.  To that end, focus on the Western Hemisphere and close the tap by imposing sanctions on a primary refiner, Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela. 

While on the subject of Iran, the Senate Banking Committee this week held a hearing on Tuesday that included discussion of economic sanctions and more export controls toward state sponsor of terrorism Iran.  Chairman Dodd, as he has said in prior hearings, stated that a bill could pass in the near future that would impose ” … penalties on companies that support Iran’s import of refined petroleum products or bolstering its domestic capacity,”  authorize state and local governments to divest from companies involved in critical business with Iran,  as well as “help cut off Iran’s access to the most sensitive and advanced technology available, through tougher export controls on these  products sent to Iran through its black market trading partners.”   Statements and hearing transcript available, here.

The Washington Examiner reports this week that ”former Sen. John Warner, R-Va., is lobbying on behalf of foreign and U.S. satellite operators to loosen U.S. export controls aimed at preventing the Chinese military from copying American technology and potentially using it to make weapons.”  Warner is working with a coalition and stated that the coalition’s aim is to push to expand U.S. launch opportunities of commercial satellites, calling China and the export controls, “just a tangential issue.”   While clarifying and targeted reforms in this area are needed, China and export controls are not “tangential,” but rather the core of the debate and to be effective in the long-term (i.e., ensure that America remains the global leader in this arena, and related areas such as civilian space travel), you need to address China and export controls head on.   It can be done.

Finally, Orbitz continues to lobby for easing of U.S. travel restrictions to Cuba by securing Congressional approval of the Freedom to Travel Act.  According to a recent article published by the left of center NGO COHA, “[t]he airline industry is lobbying hard for the passage of this bill as well, with the popular travel website Orbitz circulating an online petition that has received over 95,000 signatures.”   This summer, I penned an item on this issue, “Orbitz As Proxy for State Sponsor of Terrorism Cuba?“.   The easing of travel restrictions is one of the primary goals of the Cuban regime.  It has invested decades of work for this issue because it represents a gold mine for the Communist Party’s Central Committee.  One hopes that Orbitz, and the other companies that are supporting this effort, are not doing so in conjunction with the Cuban regime.  An OFAC sanctions violations could put a costly and politically embarrassing pox on the effort.  The sanctions regulations, among other things, prohibit any person subject to U.S. jurisdiction from dealing inany property in which Cuba or a Cuban national has an interest and transacting business with specially designated nationals (SDNs).

Posted in Iran, Venezuela, current events, national security, news, politics, sanctions, terrorism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

OFAC Publishes TSRA Guidance, Spare Parts and Repairs for Medical Devices

8 October 2009 by poblete

The Treasury Department, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) yesterday published guidance related to the shipment of spare parts for medical devices initially exported pursuant to a Trade Sanctions Reform Act (TSRA) license.  It also addresses what exporters need to do when medical devices breaks and need to be returned for repair.  Under both scenarios, OFAC will require the exporter to submit a new license application for a specific license to either export the spare parts to the end-user or to import the medical device to the United States for repairs.

Clif Burns over at the Export Law Blog penned an item on the new advisory.  He states, in part, that “rather than saying simply that exports of replacement parts are ordinarily incident to the export of medical device itself, and therefore allowed, OFAC imposes burdensome conditions on those exports.”  Indeed. OFAC may have some unknown reason, likely driven by Iran considerations, not the Sudan; however, it seems somewhat duplicative and likely regulatory overkill.

Read the complete advisory, here.

Posted in Iran, Sudan, current events, news, sanctions | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

UANI what?

7 October 2009 by poblete

In case you have not heard about it yet, I wanted to pass along information on a relatively new group of individuals and organizations that have teamed up to raise awareness on the dangers of a nuclear Iran.  

The group,  United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) is a “bi-partisan, broad-based coalition in formation that will comprise individuals and organizations from across the political and ideological spectrum … it includes human rights and humanitarian groups, the labor movement, political advocacy and grassroots organizations, representatives of diverse ethnicities, faith communities, political and social affiliations, will be united in a commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons.”  At its website, consumers can review an Iranian Business Registry of companies currently doing business in Iran.  It is a good start. 

It should be expanded to other state sponsors of terrorism including Cuba and the Sudan.  Well worth a visit and review.  Kudos.

Posted in Iran, current events, national security, news, non-proliferation, nuclear, terrorism | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Older Posts »