Print this page
Email this to a friend
Discuss this article (2 Comments)
POST A COMMENT
Mobile
-
In-house Cooperate & Commercial Lawyer/Legal Consultant
Industry: Legal
Location: Dubai, UAE -
Country Manager Security
Industry: Legal
Location: Vietnam
US pressure on UAE 'illegal', Iran says
by Lynne Roberts on Monday, 03 September 2007
US pressure on the UAE to restrict trade with Iran is illegal and will harm the region’s economy, Iran said yesterday.
The US has recently pressured the UAE to crack down on companies believed to be smuggling equipment to Iran to build explosive devices killing American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The UAE announced Friday a new law authorising authorities to ban or restrict shipments for national security or foreign policy reasons.
The import, export and re-export of any commodity can be banned or restricted for reasons related to safety, public health, environment, natural resources, national security or for reasons related to foreign policy, according to the legislation.
The move was met with criticism from the country’s business community.
“The US pressure on the UAE is in the direction of the same illegal US policy against Iran in the past and beyond the UN resolutions” Mohammad Ali Hosseini told newswire AP.
Iranian newspaper Hamshahri said in its editorial that trade restrictions would hurt Iran, the UAE and other countries in the region.
“Putting Iran’s economic interactions in danger would mean economic risk for many countries” it said. “Under the circumstances the UAE would not be able to repeat its economic boom years”.
TOP IN MIDDLE EAST POLITICS & ECONOMICS
TOP MIDDLE EAST BUSINESS STORIES
ALSO IN MIDDLE EAST POLITICS & ECONOMICS
LATEST MIDDLE EAST BUSINESS NEWS
USER COMMENTS (2 COMMENTS)
SUBJECT: Small step for Al-Sadr, but massive peace step
Posted by Rajendra K. Aneja, Dubai, UAE on 5 September 2007 at 17:00 UAE time
SUBJECT: Small step for Al-Sadr, but massive peace step
Please refer to the newsreport about the e decision of the Shia cleric Mr. Muqtada Al-Sadr, in Iraq, to declare a cease-fire and desist from attacking USA and Iraqi forces. This is an important silver lining in the Iraq strife, in the last 4 years. Evidently he is powerful man, with some following, for the men who were executing the former President Saddam Hussein were chanting his name repeatedly.
It is also now clear that the two prominent Shia factions i.e. Mahdi and the Badr, are both are supported by Iran, and the groups owe allegiance to that country. So, we have the bizarre spectacle of Iraqi citizens, owing allegiance to a foreign land, instead of their own homeland!! How can a country or an economy be built under such fissiparous conditions?
The hiatus between these various factions due to religious, economic and political interests are so deep, it will not be possible for the armies or even the missionaries from the USA to bridge it. Their violence could continue. It would thus be best for the USA to gradually move out of the country.
The USA may have achieved it’s immediate goal of changing the Government in Iraq. However the Iraqis themselves, with all their attendant problems will, perhaps best achieve the larger goal of ushering peace and managing the country. After all, Saddam Hussein, (though a dictator), was able to hold the country together. So, perhaps the new leaders will learn to govern, though, it may take them some time.
For any western country, to hope that Iraq can be developed into a model democracy, is far-fetched in the immediate future at least.
The decision of Mr. Al-Sadr to declare a cease-fire, will hopefully save many lives, and inspire other leaders to do the same. This would be a small step for Mr. Al-Sadr, but a massive step in restoring peace in this torn country.
Regards
Rajendra Aneja
Posted by Rajendra K. Aneja, Dubai, UAE on 5 September 2007 at 17:00 UAE time
SUBJECT: Small step for Al-Sadr, but massive peace step
Please refer to the newsreport about the e decision of the Shia cleric Mr. Muqtada Al-Sadr, in Iraq, to declare a cease-fire and desist from attacking USA and Iraqi forces. This is an important silver lining in the Iraq strife, in the last 4 years. Evidently he is powerful man, with some following, for the men who were executing the former President Saddam Hussein were chanting his name repeatedly.
It is also now clear that the two prominent Shia factions i.e. Mahdi and the Badr, are both are supported by Iran, and the groups owe allegiance to that country. So, we have the bizarre spectacle of Iraqi citizens, owing allegiance to a foreign land, instead of their own homeland!! How can a country or an economy be built under such fissiparous conditions?
The hiatus between these various factions due to religious, economic and political interests are so deep, it will not be possible for the armies or even the missionaries from the USA to bridge it. Their violence could continue. It would thus be best for the USA to gradually move out of the country.
The USA may have achieved it’s immediate goal of changing the Government in Iraq. However the Iraqis themselves, with all their attendant problems will, perhaps best achieve the larger goal of ushering peace and managing the country. After all, Saddam Hussein, (though a dictator), was able to hold the country together. So, perhaps the new leaders will learn to govern, though, it may take them some time.
For any western country, to hope that Iraq can be developed into a model democracy, is far-fetched in the immediate future at least.
The decision of Mr. Al-Sadr to declare a cease-fire, will hopefully save many lives, and inspire other leaders to do the same. This would be a small step for Mr. Al-Sadr, but a massive step in restoring peace in this torn country.
Regards
Rajendra Aneja
US pressure on UAE illegal - Iran says
Posted by AD, Dubai, UAE on 3 September 2007 at 11:00 UAE time
All the countries may be right on their stand of events. However, someone may be playing a double game for future benefits.
Posted by AD, Dubai, UAE on 3 September 2007 at 11:00 UAE time
All the countries may be right on their stand of events. However, someone may be playing a double game for future benefits.
