The French government confirmed yesterday that it would proceed with the proposed sale of a Mistral-class amphibious assault ship to Russia. The announcement was made during a visit by U.S. Defense Secretary Bill Gates. Nothing like French hospitality to set the tone for an official visit with an ally.
This deal has been in the works for some time, making it the first sale by a NATO power of a major defense system to Russia since the end of World War II. Russia has done absolutely nothing to earn this trust – quite the opposite. Starting in Georgia, the parade of political imponderables adds up to a huge diplomatic negative. Expect the vessel to find a home port at the proposed naval base in the Georgian region of Abkhazia.
As far as export controls, if there is any U.S. technology used in the manufacture of these vessels Congress should step in an advise that French that it can do what it wants with French technology, so long as they do not use U.S. defense articles or services in the manufacture of the ship.
The Washington Times and the Associated Press report this morning that Defense Secretary Gates said yesterday that it is not too late for Iran sanctions. ”If the international community will stand together and bring pressure to bear on the Iranian government, I believe there is still time for sanctions and (diplomatic) pressure to work,” he told the Italian and U.S. press following his meeting with Italian leaders. ”But we must all work together,” he said. This is not the firm time in recent weeks that Obama Administration officials have made similar statements.
The Obama Administration should set the tone and work with the Congress to robustly enforce the current sanctions currently in force, as well as sign in to law a new package of sanctions aimed at the Iranian petroleum and natural gas industry. The Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act in the House and the Senate-version, Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2009, are timely and ready too go. If signed into law, the measure would create a significant ban on direct imports from Iran to the US and exports from the US to Iran, exempting food and medicines, and would, among other things, strengthen export controls to make a dent on the illegal black market export of sensitive technology to Iran through other countries and impose tough new licensing requirements on those who refuse to cooperate.
Sanctions are not a panacea, a tool – but one that can have great effect if robustly enforced. Just ask officials from a U.K. company, Balli Group PLC. Last week, the U.S. government announced that the company had pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to a two-count criminal information in connection with its illegal export of commercial Boeing 747 aircraft from the United States to Iran. According to a Department of Justice press release, the company will pay a $2 million criminal fine and be placed on corporate probation for five years. The $2 million fine, combined with a related $15 million civil settlement among Balli Group PLC, Balli Aviation Ltd., the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), and the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), that was also announced last week, represents one of the largest fines for an export violation in BIS history.
Also last week, a Taiwan exporter was arrested by U.S. officials on charges of exporting missile components to Iran. The criminal complaint alleges that the Taiwanese national, Kevin Chen, caused dual use goods to be exported from the U.S., including P200 Turbine Engines and spare parts, MIL-S-8516 Sealing Compound, Glass to Metal Pin Seals, and Circular Hermetic Connectors. P200 Turbine Engines are designed for use as model airplane engines but can also be used to operate unmanned aerial vehicles and military target drones. Federal agents learned of Chen’s efforts to obtain and export U.S. goods and commodities after Chen attempted to export detonators through a California company using unsatisfactory information in documents regarding Chen’s ultimate customers. The investigation revealed that Chen’s ultimate customers for the dual use exports listed in the complaint are all in Iran.
The Obama Administration has been seeking a multilateral approach to this matter. The problem is that most of our allies are heavily invested in the Iran market and have been slow to rally. If we lead, however, they will follow.
The Australian newspaper reported earlier this week that the Australian government has blocked several shipments of controlled items including water pumps used to cool nuclear reactors. Ominously titled “Kevin Rudd’s secret war on Iran,” the reporter who penned the article asks readers to contact them if they have had exports blocked by the government. That they would even ask readers to share such information says quite a bit about the export control culture in Australia. They seem to make it more complicated (and less transparent) than it should be.
A Taiwan exporter has been arrested on charges of exporting missile components to Iran. The complaint alleges that the Taiwanese national, Kevin Chen, caused dual use goods to be exported from the U.S., including P200 Turbine Engines and spare parts, MIL-S-8516 Sealing Compound, Glass to Metal Pin Seals, and Circular Hermetic Connectors (Model MIL-C-81703). P200 Turbine Engines are designed for use as model airplane engines but can also be used to operate unmanned aerial vehicles and military target drones. Federal agents learned of Chen’s efforts to obtain and export U.S. goods and commodities after Chen attempted to export detonators through a California company using unsatisfactory information in documents regarding Chen’s ultimate customers. The investigation revealed that Chen’s ultimate customers for the dual use exports listed in the complaint are all in Iran. Read more about it, here.
Not sure why it always seems to happen this way … On the same day that the Justice Department announced the arrest of an individual for violating U.S. export control laws, Department of Commerce Secretary Gary Locke announced some details of President Obama’s National Export Initiative (NEI). Obama mentioned NEI during the State of the Union speech and how it would “help farmers and small businesses increase their exports, and reform export controls consistent with national security.” In his prepared remarks at the National Press Club yesterday, Locke did not mention the export reform control talisman.
Ray Walser at the Heritage Foundation asks, “So why isn’t Venezuela on the State Sponsors of Terrorism List?” Indeed, why not?
The U.K. shadow foreign secretary William Hague goes to Cuba – a trip the Labour Foreign Secretary characterizes as a “real slap in the face for those who are campaigning for a more open Cuba.” While both political parties have been wrong on Cuba for some time, it is somewhat amusing to see Labour taking the more hardline position on the Cuban regime.
And for those who lobby and argue in Washington, DC and around the world that economic sanctions do not work, ever, a reminder of how they can be a vital factor where there is the political will to follow through on ending oppression and lawlessness: How the stage was set for the end of South African apartheid.
As did the Bush Administration, in a notification to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi the President announced yesterday that North Korea does not meet the statutory criteria for inclusion on the state sponsors of terrorism list. Too bad.
Over at the Export Law Blog, Clif Burns pens an item explaining how a golf course may be shut down as a result of U.S. economic sanctions imposed against Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe and his cronies.
Twenty-two people were arrested earlier this week in during a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation are being charged criminally with using their businesses to transport recently smuggled aliens into the country. The three-month investigation, dubbed “Night Moves,” focused on Houston-area transportation businesses, which ranged from store-front operations to individually contracted drivers. Since November, ICE and U.S. Border Patrol agents have administratively arrested 209 individuals as part of the operation, including citizens from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.
Last week a former official of the Clark Material Handling Company (CMHC) has signed a Settlement Agreement with the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) involving the illegal export of truck spare parts to Iran. BIS alleges that the former CMHC Vice President of Global Parts Marketing, Robert Quinn, made a false statement to an Office of Export Enforcement Special Agent during the course of an investigation.
CMHC is a Kentucky-based manufacturer of forklifts that has been in existence since 1917. According to the company website, they manufacture forklifts or trucks “ranging from 1,500 to 18,000 pound capacities, LPG, gasoline, dual fuel, diesel, narrow-aisle stackers, electric riders and powered hand trucks.” In 2003, the Young An Hat Company of South Korea purchased CMHC.
According to the government, Quinn told the government during the course of an investigation that he was unaware of any shipments of CMHC parts to a company in UAE that were subsequently shipped to Iran. Quinn also represented that he had not coordinated any shipments of CMHC items to Iran. These statements were false and it seems that he arranged to fill several orders that he knew had been placed by an Iranian company through the UAE.
Under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA”), 50 U.S.C. §§ 1701-1706, and the Iranian Transaction Regulations (“ITR”), 50 C.F.R. Part 560, all exports to Iran of U.S.-origin commodities require an export license from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) of the Department of the Treasury. It is also unlawful to ship U.S. origin products to a third country and then re-export them to Iran without the necessary authorization from OFAC.
This case dates to 2006 when a federal grand jury returned a six-count indictment against Quinn, another CMHC official, and an Iranian national for violating the United States embargo on trade with Iran. The indictment against these officials alleged that they had engaged in a conspiracy to violate the Iran embargo. Quinn was initially indicted on January 6, 2005, following his arrest on December 28, 2005, after returning to the United States from South Korea.
An unnamed Congressional staffer says in this morning’s Politico on Iran sanctions that it is “[h]ard to imagine tough sanctions in both bills getting less tough in conference.” The staffer is referring to a new set of economic sanctions on Iran that have been making it ways through the Congress for some time now. Read the Politico post, here.
The Obama Administration has been somewhat lukewarm about these measures. And, as noted in a CNS story on this issue, Foundation for Defense of Democracies president Clifford May stated after the speech that “although there was bipartisan support in Congress for a “crippling” sanctions bill, We have not yet heard Obama endorse it.” During the Republican Congressional retreat in Baltimore today, he may be urged again by Members of Congress to act on the measure.
Folks who read this site are familiar with the export control reform talisman. Seems like it has been getting a lot of use lately. Be sure to read the following piece from today’s Washington Times.
The U.S. military has been warning the Iraqi government for some time that bomb detecting equipment manufactured by a U.K. company cannot “sniff” explosives. Well, U.K. authorities have arrested company officials over the weekend for violations of, among other things, the U.K.’s Export Control Act of 2002.
ATSC, Ltd. President John McCormick made some rather outlandish claims about the hand-held device, including such things as its ability to detect explosives over a kilometer away. According to an article in the Times Online, McCormick has said that the ADE-651 was supposed “to detect explosives in the same way as a dowsing rod finds water.” Say it isn’t so.
According to various news reports the Iraqi government has invested millions of dollars in this device. Efforts to open the ATSC website failed – down for repairs. Yet there is plenty of information on the web about this story, including various anonymous internet websites calling out the ATSC matter.
One hopes U.S. taxpayer monies have not been used to purchase these devices and that the State Department and DoD had no role in this project. How did this device ever get past the U.K. government? This is certainly not the type of story that the U.K. government wants or needs as it keeps seeking to move forward the U.S-U.K. Defence Trade Cooperation Treaty.
BBC television aired a special this weekend on ATSC (link below).
In one of the more odd stories emanating from the DC beltway, an official with a group called Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) told ABC News that military rifle scopes inscribed with Bible citations allow “the Mujahedeen, the Taliban, al Qaeda and the insurrectionists and jihadists to claim they’re being shot by Jesus rifles.” The stuff of conspiracy theories, ABC News seems to think this is news.
The rifle scopes in question are manufactured by a Michigan company, the Trijicon corporation. A cursory review of posts and product reviews on the internet, it seems as if Trijicon products are popular with the military and it also seems as if the company has been inscribing scopes with Bible citations for some time now. It is not as if the company was trying to hide it religious views. On Trijicon’s website it states: ”We believe that America is great when its people are good. This goodness has been based on biblical standards throughout our history and we will strive to follow those morals.”
ABC News states that the Trijicon weapons are inscribed with “Secret ‘Jesus’ Bible Codes.” So, does this mean that U.S. currency is “secretly” inscribed with “In God We Trust”? This is a non-story. Rather than focus on the fact that Trijicon manufacturers a superior device that our troops find useful, the media and interest groups nitpick about Biblical markings placed on a defense article.
You can tell from the article and the comments made by MRFF officials that they have no idea how particular troops are about equipment, especially items such as scopes. Members of the military will sometimes purchase items out of pocket if it helps them carry out their missions. They are not thinking about Biblical inscriptions, they are more concerned about staying safe or killing the enemy.
If the Obama Administration makes an issue of it, it will be all politics. Fortunately for Trijicon, there is no prohibition related to placing Biblical inscriptions on defense articles – not even in the ITAR. They are also represented in the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Thaddeus G. McCotter (R-Mich.), a likely ally. But in this “new” Washington the company should stay focused and realize that there are some folks in this town who are likely taking this matter quite seriously and, at some point soon, Trijicon officials will be called by their contract officer to discuss options.
MRFF officials claim that the biblical inscriptions play into the hands of “those who are calling this a Crusade.” Nonsense. It is the MRFF and ABC News that are playing into one of the most powerful weapons of radical Islamic jihadists, propaganda.
In a bizarre but an increasingly all too common approach in the new Washington of “change,” the U.S. Envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, suggested this week that the U.S. should consider using economic sanctions to force Israel to negotiate with the Palestinians. Our best ally in the region bullied, while we coddle terrorists. Some change. It is more like back to the future.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee held a field hearing in California this past Friday: “The Impact of U.S. Export Controls on National Security, Science, and Technological Leadership.” There have been many recent cases that illustrate how state sponsors of terrorism, terrorist groups, illegal arms dealers, and others are violating U.S. export control laws. Yet, as has been the case in recent years with hearings on this issue, the witness panel was disproportionately stronger on the reform aspects of this issue and very weak on enforcement. In an op-ed published the day of the hearing, Committee Chairman Howard Berman (D-Calif.) penned that “[y]ou practically have to have a law degree or Ph.D. to keep from running afoul of the increasingly complex export-controls regime.” Unfortunately, this seems like another example of waving the export control reform talisman and not a reasonable way to go about engaging in truly substantive and much-needed reform.
Meanwhile, in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times the editorial board called for increased economic sanctions on state sponsor of terrorism Iran. In the opening paragraph of the piece, editors write that ”[t]his week’s indictment of three Glendale men for allegedly smuggling vacuum pumps and other industrial equipment to Iran via the United Arab Emirates is the latest reminder of how easily and frequently U.S. trade sanctions against Tehran have been violated.”
Talking about reform, there is a new paper on export controls and spaceflight worth a read. Cleveland-Marshall College of Law Professor Mark Sundahl has penned a new white paper: Export Controls and Human Spaceflight: A New Age of Reason? He discusses, among other things, a recent Bigelow decision by the Department of State dealing with foreign nationals on board the international space station. And, Members of Congress and staff should play close attention here, Professor Sundahl discusses how the recent “the DDTC ruling is also of interest to scholars of administrative law as an example of how discretion granted to administrative agencies can serve to remedy flaws in federal law when political dynamics prevent Congress from providing the remedies itself.”
The Coalition for Security and Competitiveness (CSC) sent a letter to President Obama last week that applauded the President’s decision to “undertake a thorough review of the U.S. export control system.” The group sent the President its reform recommendations that include some common sense approaches to dealing with the outdated portions of U.S. export control laws and regulations.
Defenders of state sponsor of terrorism Cuba wax nostalgically about why Cuba should be removed from the State Department terrorist watch list. Again, strong on propaganda, weak on substance. The Cuban regime has known for decades what it needs to do to have Cuba removed from the list. It chooses to ignore it.
The former Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roger Noriega penned an excellent piece on the recent Haitian crisis that is well worth a read, Haiti’s Disasters: Natural and Man-Made. Before U.S. taxpayers begin to dole out billions of dollars in long-term assistance, something must be done to address the various points raised in Noriega’s piece, among others, such as a serious review of the failed United Nation’s mission to the country. U.S. leadership, not the U.N., will be critical to helping the future Haiti.
A Chinese state-controlled mining conglomerate - Northwest Non-Ferrous International Investment Company - has decided to withdraw its request for U.S. Government approval of its purchase of a controlling interest in a Nevada-based gold-mine. According to an article by for U.S. Defense official Daniel McGroarty, “[p]recisely why the Chinese firm selected FirstGold from among scores of U.S. gold mining companies is not clear, but in recommending that the deal be refused, CFIUS apparently focused on “serious, significant and consequential national security issues” – namely, the proximity of one of FirstGold’s projects to Fallon Naval Air Station, home to the Navy’s TOPGUN training facility, as well as “other sensitive classified assets.” For the benefit of readers outside the beltway, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, is an inter-agency committee that reviews transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person. CFIUS ascertains if and how such transactions impact U.S. national security.
In a shibboleth-laden piece, the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson advocates removing Cuba from the state sponsors of terrorism list because “there is no history of radical Islam in Cuba.” Not exactly correct, but let’s leave that discussion for another day. Radical Islam alone is not a legal factor used by the Secretary of State in making a state sponsor designation. Looking at a state sponsor listing with only the radical Islamist strain of terrorism in mind is a myopic view of terror and of the listing process.
As penned on this site in March last year, when a country gets listed by the U.S. Government on the state sponsors of terrorism list, economic sanctions and other restrictions on relations with the U.S. are triggered. This determination is made pursuant to three laws: section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act (EAA), section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), and section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA).
Disciples and supporters of the Castro regime wax nostalgic about the Cuban Revolution, even if it means ignoring the murder of hundreds of thousands of political opponents, the current political prisoners, and other crimes against humanity. The Cuban regime murdered American citizens in 1996 and it provides sanctuary to non-Islamist terrorists that should be extradited to the United States to face trial. It has a robust espionage network that has also cost American lives and damaged U.S. national security.
As with the easing of the travel ban, de-listing Cuba from the terrorism list has been a primary flank by the pro-Castro lobby in DC for many years. They only see dollar signs, even if it means endangering U.S. national security. However the pro-Castro lobby has had a bad week. In addition to more robust airport screening of travelers arriving from state sponsors of terrorism, two Senators who have long championed closer relations with the communist island announced retirement.
While not of the radical islamist vintage, Cuba has a long history of engaging in terrorist acts throughout the Americas and the world. It pre-dates that terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and it continues to train and harbor terrorists. The Cuban regime earned its place on the U.S. terrorism list in 1982 and there it should remain. In addition to Cuba, the time is overdue to look at Venezuela as a possible candidate for more robust screening.
