Iran is hit with new set of U.N. sanctions

The Security Council resolution is a victory for Obama, but the two 'no' votes — from Turkey and Brazil — underscore international divisions.

By Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times

June 10, 2010

Reporting from Washington

A divided U.N. Security Council tightened sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program Wednesday, but left widespread doubt that the new strictures would slow the regime's nuclear program or force it to the negotiating table.

Whereas the vote allowed President Obama to claim a narrow win after months of haggling, it also divided world powers in a way that made the prospect of future sanctions seem more remote and a solution to Iran's nuclear ambitions more uncertain.

Iran, which tried to stave off the new sanctions with months of frenetic diplomacy, dismissed their importance. But even supporters of the Islamic Republic acknowledge that the vote represents a defeat for Tehran's establishment. Under international pressure, however, Iranians tend to put aside their differences and support the government.

The Security Council voted 12-2 with one abstention to adopt sanctions that further limit arms sales to Iran, restrict the overseas operations of its banks, add more Iranian companies to a blacklist, and authorize searches of ships going to or from Iran that might carry items related to its nuclear program.

Despite last minute lobbying from Western powers, Turkey and Brazil voted against the measure; Lebanon abstained.

The sanctions, the fourth such round since 2006, are aimed at forcing Iran to halt a nuclear program that Western powers allege is aimed at developing nuclear weapons. Iran insists the expanding program is only for peaceful uses.

President Obama said the U.N. resolution would "put in place the toughest sanctions ever faced by the Iranian government, and it will send an unmistakable message about the international community's commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons."

U.S. officials emphasized the importance of Russian and Chinese support for the sanctions, but their votes came at the cost of watering down the resolution.

"These are not the crippling sanctions that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had promised about a year ago," said James Lindsay of the Council on Foreign Relations, who was a National Security Council official in the Clinton administration.

The United States had hoped to sharply curtail foreign financial services available to Iran and Iranian enterprises. But the sanctions approved Wednesday don't bar many financial services, including insurance or reinsurance, to Iranian individuals or companies. They don't limit the Islamic Republic's ability to produce or export oil.

Although the sanctions ban the sale of many heavy weapons, countries still will be allowed to sell weapons outside those categories. For instance, Russia still may sell sophisticated S-300 anti-aircraft missiles, which have been a source of concern to the United States.

Many of the provisions are in essence optional. Governments can limit financial services provided to Iran by companies under their jurisdiction if the services are believed to aid certain nuclear activities.

The resolution also says that governments may inspect ships on the high seas suspected of carrying forbidden items, but only if they have the consent of the country to which the ship is registered.

"The United States is not going to get anything approaching universal compliance with these 'optional' sanctions," said analysts Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann, Middle East experts who were aides to former President George W. Bush.

The Obama administration hopes to multiply the effect of the sanctions by spurring others to impose new and tougher restrictions of their own. European Union officials will meet in a few days to consider expanding their list of banned military goods and to tighten enforcement, said George Lopez of the U.S. Institute of Peace.

In addition, the Obama administration is expected to give the Treasury Department more authority to punish foreign banks and other companies that do business with Iran.

Congress also has been pressing for a U.S. ban on petroleum sales to Iran. Under such a ban, the U.S. government would penalize foreign companies selling to Iran.

But the White House, fearful that such an approach would alienate allies, is expected to resist that approach. Some Democrats in Congress may be willing to delay the implementation of those rules to first see whether the new sanctions have an effect, Lopez said.

Unilateral and national sanctions also could hurt international diplomatic efforts. Russia and China have signaled that they oppose the imposition of any further bilateral sanctions affecting Iran's economy or trade.

The Russian Foreign Ministry warned Wednesday against national sanctions that punish foreign companies.

Israeli officials hailed the Security Council resolution, but said it would not by itself change Iran's policies and must be augmented by tough steps by individual nations.

"It must be accompanied by meaningful steps in other international forums and at the country level," the Israeli Foreign Ministry said. Some Israeli experts said that without additional sanctions, the Security Council steps had no chance.

"Certainly, this will make life a bit more difficult," said Ephraim Asculai, senior research fellow and nuclear arms expert at the Institute for National Security Studies think tank in Tel Aviv. "But Iran is sophisticated enough to overcome this and continue forward. Iran is buying time."

The Iranians have proven adept at working around previous sanctions or finding ways to adjust to them. Iran used to import 40% of its refined petroleum from abroad, but now that number is less than 25%, Lindsay said.

The Obama administration faces a continuing diplomatic fallout from its dispute with Turkey and Brazil over their efforts to negotiate a deal that would have averted the latest round of sanctions. Under the deal, Iran agreed to send some of its uranium out of the country for reprocessing.

The United States persuaded other key world powers to reject the initiative, but the effort undermined Western attempts to show a unified international front against Iran.

Even though that failed, Lindsay said Tehran has now regained diplomatic momentum. Its expectations "that the new sanctions can be beat" will encourage more "defiance and bluster" in response to Wednesday's resolution.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, visiting Tajikistan, rejected the sanctions as worthless.

"These resolutions you pass against us are like used handkerchiefs that should be thrown in the trash bin," he said, according to the semi official Iran Students News Agency.

It was unclear how the latest rounds of sanctions would play out in Iran, which faces possible protests this weekend coinciding with the one-year anniversary of Ahmadinejad's disputed reelection.

All of the Islamic Republic's major political factions support Iran's pursuit of nuclear technology. The program was restarted under the 1980s under then prime minister, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, who is now leader of the opposition. But the disputed elections and violent aftermath have soured many on those now in power.

Mousavi and his reformist allies have been harshly critical of Ahmadinejad's confrontational foreign policy. Iran's moderates say Tehran pursued a nuclear program for nearly two decades without incurring the wrath of the Security Council until Ahmadinejad came along.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-nuclear-20100610,0,2656137,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Suicide bomber kills 40 at Afghan wedding

The assailant strikes during a wedding dinner in Kandahar province. All of the casualties are men or boys, news reports say.

By Alex Rodriguez, Los Angeles Times

June 10, 2010

Reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan

A suicide bomber killed at least 40 people and wounded more than 70 late Wednesday during a wedding in the southern Afghan province of Kandahar, local officials said.

A police official said Thursday that a suicide bomber went to a party in Nagahan village in Arghandab district where hundreds of people were sitting and blew himself up.

The explosion came during the wedding dinner, between 9:30 and 10 p.m., reportedly striking the area where male guests were dining separately from the women. All the casualties were men or boys, village officials said, according to media reports.

A Kandahar policeman said many of the guests had links to local police officials or a local militia.

In the immediate aftermath, he said, some panicked guests mistakenly thought the party had been struck by an air raid.

Rural wedding parties in Afghanistan can often be raucous affairs with large gatherings of people and frequently accompanied by celebratory gunfire. Several have mistakenly been attacked in the past by foreign forces.

Taliban spokesman Qari Yousef Ahmadi denied his group was involved in the attack. U.S. military spokesman Col. Wayne Shanks said the deaths were not the result of an airstrike.

A spokeswoman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan said it was aware of the blast and had helped local security forces in follow-up operations.

"This is an Afghan matter," the spokeswoman said.

A local intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to address such matters, said the National Directorate of Security, Afghanistan's intelligence agency, sent a team to the scene of the blast to investigate.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Afghan forces secured the area, officials said. The U.S. is planning a major offensive in Kandahar.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-afghan-wedding-20100610,0,5589058,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mexico protests shooting death of teen at Texas border

The second border death in two weeks roils U.S.-Mexican relations. U.S. officials say a Border Patrol agent was attacked while trying to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and opened fire.

By Tracy Wilkinson and Richard A. Serrano, Los Angeles Times

June 9, 2010

Reporting from Mexico City and Washington

For the second time in less than two weeks, the death of a Mexican national at the hands of U.S. border agents is outraging Mexicans and testing relations between the two countries.

The Mexican government Wednesday vigorously protested the shooting this week of a 15-year-old boy at Mexico's border with Texas. The boy, Sergio Hernandez Guereca, died of a wound to the face. U.S. officials say he died after a Border Patrol agent opened fire Monday night on a group of Mexicans throwing rocks at the agent, who was attempting to arrest suspected illegal immigrants.

Mexican authorities accused agents of using excessive force, while U.S. officials promised a thorough investigation of the incident.

Another Mexican national died May 29 after border agents shot him the night before with a Taser stun gun at the San Ysidro border crossing that separates San Diego from Tijuana.

Anastasio Hernandez Rojas was being deported to Tijuana when he resisted, became combative and was Tasered, authorities said. The San Diego County medical examiner's office ruled his death a homicide and also found "acute methamphetamine intoxication."

"We firmly repudiate and reject the violent actions by U.S. authorities in the last few days that have led to the deaths of Mexican citizens," Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa said Wednesday.

Referring to the latest shooting, President Felipe Calderon implored the U.S. government "to investigate fully what happened and punish those responsible."

"The government of Mexico will use all means available to protect the rights of Mexican migrants," Calderon said in a statement. "Mexico also rejects the use of disproportionate force by U.S. immigration authorities along the border."

The boy's mother said in a television interview that she doubted the U.S. version of events and quoted someone she described as a witness who said her son had raised his hands just before he was shot.

"I am sure my son did not attack them. He wasn't like that," Maria Guadalupe Guereca said. "His only mistake was being near the river … staying there to watch.

"My son paid for what others did," she added, before breaking down in sobs.

The boy fell dead on the Mexican side of the dry Rio Grande that separates El Paso from Ciudad Juarez, a city ripped apart by deadly drug war violence.

Two Border Patrol agents were on the U.S. side of the riverbed, a concrete apron that forms the banks, where they were attempting to detain a group of people suspected of being smuggled into the U.S. from Mexico, said Andrea Simmons, a special agent with the FBI in El Paso, which is investigating the case.

One agent detained a Mexican national from the group. When a second agent detained a second Mexican national, other men with him "ran into Mexico and began throwing rocks at the agent," Simmons said.

The second Border Patrol agent shouted at the men to "stop and retreat," but they continued to pummel him with rocks, she said. He then fired his weapon "several times, striking one subject who later died."

Simmons acknowledged that the FBI was not certain that the boy slain was among those throwing rocks.

Ramiro Cordero, a Border Patrol supervisor, said the agent who opened fire was placed on administrative leave until the shooting could be investigated. He promised a "thorough, multi-agency investigation." The agent's name was not released.

Simmons described the area, underneath a railroad bridge that spans the border, as a "known high-risk crime area where rocks are regularly thrown at Border Patrol agents and where other assaults have been reported." The union representing the Border Patrol says its agents were attacked nearly 1,100 times in each of the last two years.

Hernandez Guereca's parents said their son was not part of the group trying to sneak into the U.S. They said he had finished eating, hooked up with some friends and was watching, from the Mexican side, as the agents rounded up people who had crossed the river.

"He was a good boy, innocent," said the father, Jesus Hernandez. "I ask for justice, not the usual thing where they say they are going to investigate but they do nothing."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-border-shooting-20100610,0,3328676,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Video reportedly shows Border Patrol confrontation that led to illegal immigrant's death

A video apparently showing a portion of the confrontation that led to the death of an illegal immigrant last month at the San Diego-Tijuana border crossing has surfaced on the website of a Baja California newspaper.

In the raw video taken by a young man on his cellphone, Anastasio Hernandez Rojas yells for help as U.S. Border Patrol agents attempt to subdue him.

Hernandez was being removed from the country at the San Ysidro Port of Entry when he resisted and was eventually shot with a Taser stun gun, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Hernandez, 42, who had methamphetamine in his system, died of a heart attack, according to the San Diego County Medical Examiner's office.

The footage, taken on the night of May 29, is grainy and dark; neither Hernandez nor the agents can be clearly seen. The young man who shot the video, according to the article in the Tijuana newspaper, Frontera, said Hernandez was handcuffed and lying on the ground, face down, during the encounter.

The young man who shot the video asks a U.S. agent nearby why they're using “excessive force.” The agent replies that it appears he's not cooperating.

The incident, which is being investigated by the San Diego Police Department, has drawn protests from the Mexican government and immigrant rights groups.

Hernandez, a father of five, had lived in the U.S. since he was a teenager. He had recently been deported after an unspecified run-in with San Diego police and was trying to return to the country when he was arrested by U.S. agents.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/06/video-reportedly-shows-border-patrol-confrontation-that-led-to-illegal-imigrants-death.html#more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Feds proposing new round of immigration fee hikes

The cost of the first step toward becoming a U.S. citizen — getting a green card — may be going up. But the Obama administration won't be raising the price to apply for full-fledged citizenship.

The administration has proposed increasing the application fee for a green card — given to foreigners with permission to live and work in the U.S. permanently — from $930 to $985. The fee for required fingerprinting also would go up $5, to $85, for a total of $1,070.

Foreigners wanting to become a U.S. citizen must hold a green card for five years before they are eligible to apply for citizenship, which costs $595 plus the fingerprinting fee. The administration is not proposing an increase in the citizenship application fee even though an administration study found the fee should be increased by as much as $60 per application — to cover the full cost of processing.

“Requesting and obtaining U.S. citizenship deserves special consideration,” said Ali Mayorkas, director of Citizenship and Immigration Services, part of the Homeland Security Department.

The increases are being proposed as Congress has put off overhauling immigration laws that President Obama promised would be done in his first year in office.

Mayorkas said the increases are needed because his agency is facing $2.3 billion in estimated costs to process immigration-related applications. The agency expects just $2.1 billion in revenue this fiscal year to cover those costs.

The fee increases, if approved, are expected to make up only some of the revenue gap. Mayorkas also is asking for $248 million from Congress for the 2011 fiscal year that begins in October and additional money to cover naturalizations of military personnel. The agency is largely funded by fee revenue and is required by law to study the fees every two years and adjust them based on costs and revenue.

Mayorkas said the administration has been “mindful of the effect of a fee increase on the communities we serve” and has made budget cuts to limit the size of the increases.

The agency hiked fees in summer 2007, helping to trigger a flood of citizenship applications that were filed in advance of the increases. But since then, applications for citizenship and other immigration benefits have slowed.

The agency proposed to charge fees for three other programs that previously had no charge, including a new $6,230 fee for investor visas, known as EB-5. The visas are given to foreign investors who pledge at least $500,000 to a project that creates jobs. The visa is popular with Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees immigration issues.

Fees would drop for five applications, including petitions to legally bring a fiance or fiancee or an orphan to the U.S.

Obama had promised during his campaign to work on the citizenship system to make it cheaper and faster. As a senator, he sponsored legislation with Illinois Democratic Rep. Luis Gutierrez calling for more oversight of immigration application fees. The bill stalled.

The public will have 45 days to comment on the proposed fee increases after they are published in Thursday's Federal Register.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcnow/2010/06/feds-proposing-new-round-of-immigration-fee-hikes.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Authorities seeking possible victims of alleged Fullerton rapist

State law enforcement authorities are asking for the public's help in identifying possible victims of a Fullerton man arrested on suspicion of burglary and sexual assault.

His DNA was then matched to that from an unsolved 2003 rape case in Arizona, authorities said.

Police believe he primarily targeted college-age women by breaking into their homes and returning at a later date to assault them, the state attorney general's office said in a statement.

Officials suspect that Francois has committed similar crimes throughout the country.

While searching his Fullerton home, police found more than 300 school and government photo identification cards, hundreds of photos of unknown women and worn women's underwear. The items suggest there may be more victims, authorities said.

Anyone with information is asked to call the state attorney general's office at (323) 869-3400.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/06/authorities-looking-for-possible-victims-of-alleged-fullerton-rapist.html#more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the New York Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Taliban Aim at Officials in a Wave of Killings

KABUL, Afghanistan — The Taliban have been stepping up a campaign of assassinations in recent months against officials and anyone else associated with local government in an attempt to undermine counterinsurgency operations in the south.

Government assassinations are nothing new as a Taliban tactic, but now the Taliban are taking aim at officials who are much more low-level, who often do not have the sort of bodyguards or other protection that top leaders do. Some of the victims have only the slimmest connections to the authorities. The most egregious example came Wednesday in Helmand Province, where according to Afghan officials the insurgents executed a 7-year-old boy as an informant.

As the coalition concentrates on trying to build up the Afghan government in the southern province of Kandahar, a big part of that strategy depends on recruiting capable Afghan government officials who can speed delivery of aid and services to undercut support for the Taliban. The insurgents have just as busily been trying to undermine that approach, by killing local officials and intimidating others into leaving their posts.

“They read the papers; they know what we are doing,” said a NATO official here, who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with his government's policy. “It's very much game on between the coalition and the Taliban.”

The assassinations have been effective in slowing recruitment of government officials, he said. “Am I going to live through the workweek? No one should have to ask that question.”

Just since March, according to reports compiled by The New York Times from the police, military sources, witnesses and local government officials, there have been at least 11 assassinations in Kandahar, mostly of low-level officials. These reports, which are not complete, do not include police officers or other officials killed in more indiscriminate attacks, like suicide bombings.

Among the victims have been Mohammed Hassan Wolsi, head of the agriculture and livestock cooperative in the province, shot April 2 by a man with a pistol while buying a loaf of bread at an outdoor stall; an 18-year-old Afghan woman named Hosay, shot to death in an auto-rickshaw as she rode home from her job at Democracy International, an aid group, in Kandahar; Hajji Abdul Hay, the brother of a prominent member of Parliament, shot in the bazaar in the city; a bodyguard named Hajji Mohammed who worked for the provincial council chairman, Ahmed Wali Karzai ; and a district intelligence agent, identified only as Zia, killed on a visit to the city.

The youngest victim was the 7-year-old boy, identified only as the grandson of a farmer named Qodos Khan Alokozy, from the village of Herati in the Sangin District of Helmand Province. According to Daoud Ahmadi, a spokesman for the governor's office in Helmand, Taliban insurgents went to his village and dragged the boy from his home at 10:30 in the morning, accusing him of acting as a government informant by telling the authorities of their movements. They killed him by hanging him from a tree in the middle of the village, Mr. Ahmadi said. A spokesman for the Taliban, reached by telephone, denied that the episode took place.

Some of the victims have been more prominent, including the deputy mayor of Kandahar, Hajji Azizullah Yarmal , shot to death while he prayed in a mosque on April 19, and Abdul Majeed Babai, head of the information and culture department of Kandahar, killed in a motorcycle drive-by shooting in February.

Assassins narrowly missed in attempts to kill both Kandahar's mayor, Ghulam Hayder Hamidi, and the Kandahar Province governor, Tooryalai Wesa, last year. Mayor Hamidi, in a recent interview during a ceremony to mark the reconstruction of a local mosque, shrugged off the risks. “When it's time to die, no one can save me,” he said, pointing out that he travels with a modest security detail.

An exile who lived in the United States until he returned here three years ago, Mr. Hamidi said his daughter, who had come back to Afghanistan first, talked him into doing so as well. “She said you have to come here, that we cannot change the time of death and one day you will have to die and I will cry. It could just as well be from a car accident in the United States.”

The mayor acknowledged, though, that the assassination campaign had made it harder to hire government workers — a task already complicated by the low salaries offered by the Afghan government, compared with what international organizations and even the military pay qualified workers. American officials said they planned to address that by helping provide secure housing and security assistance, which low-level Afghan employees cannot afford.

The NATO official said the authorities had compiled statistics on an increase in assassination-style killings in Kandahar, but a request for that information was turned down by the American Embassy on the grounds that it was classified.

A spokesman for the International Security Assistance Force, the NATO force in Afghanistan, cautioned, however, that it was not clear whether all of the recent spate of killings could be attributed to the Taliban. “Due to lack of accurate information, it is difficult to determine if a killing is an assassination, an act of revenge or criminal activity,” Maj. Steven Cole said.

Often just the threat of assassination has been enough to drive people from their jobs. A Kandahar communications expert who worked for the International Committee of the Red Cross said he left his job after receiving a series of death threats. He asked not to be named because he feared for his life.

The expert planned to take a new job with the American-financed Afghanistan Stabilization Initiative , as the director of a program in one of the rural districts around Kandahar. Then, on April 15 two car bombings hit the program and other American-supported aid organizations, killing three Afghans and wounding dozens of Afghans and foreigners.

“My family pushed me to give it up,” he said. “I know so many people who are afraid to take jobs with the government or the aid community now. It's a very effective and very efficient campaign; the armed opposition are using this tool because it works.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/world/asia/10taliban.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Canada: Police Search for Suspicious Fertilizer

The Canadian police are searching for 3,582 pounds of ammonium nitrate fertilizer, which can also be used to make explosives, sold to man who purchased it under false pretenses two weeks ago. The sale was made at a farm supply store about an hour's drive from the Toronto convention center that will host the Group of 20 summit meeting this month.

The man did not provide identification, as required by Canadian law, after convincing clerks that he was a regular customer. The clerks then helped him load the 65 bags of fertilizer onto a flatbed trailer pulled by a minivan.

The store later realized that the man was not who he claimed, and contacted the police.

The police say they have no evidence linking the purchase either to the summit or to bomb-making and acknowledge that the purchaser, described as a middle-aged man with a heavy accent and missing two fingers, may simply be fertilizing fruit trees.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/world/americas/10webbrfs.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Round 4

They were too long in coming and do not go far enough, but the United Nations Security Council finally imposed a new round, the fourth, of sanctions on Iran.

The penalties take aim at military, trade and financial transactions by the Revolutionary Guards Corps, which runs the country's illicit nuclear program. You can be certain that Iran is already looking for ways around them. It has been reflagging and renaming state-owned cargo ships so they can evade an existing ban on arms sales. It is not going to let up.

We are encouraged by reports that the European Union is close to adopting rules on trade with Iran that would ensure that all members follow the United Nations resolution . We are less sure about the intentions of Russia and China. They voted for the sanctions — a fact that is sure to resonate in Tehran. Russia's summit with Iran and Turkey this week blunted the message.

The day's most disturbing development was the two no votes in the Security Council from Turkey and Brazil. (Lebanon, at least, abstained.) Both are disappointed that their efforts to broker a nuclear deal with Iran didn't go far. Like pretty much everyone else, they were played by Tehran. It is hard to see why either would want to enable Iran's nuclear ambitions — or put themselves on the opposite side of all the world's major powers.

New sanctions were not inevitable. Not if Iran had heeded repeated Security Council demands to halt nuclear fuel production. Instead, it expanded and increased the level of uranium enrichment. The International Atomic Energy Agency's most recent report says Iran has produced enough fuel that, with further enrichment, could make two nuclear weapons. Iran is still thwarting the agency's inspectors. Last fall, it was caught hiding yet another major nuclear facility.

Since 2006, the major powers have repeatedly offered to negotiate. Iran never showed sincere interest. The big powers made a smart move on Wednesday by reaffirming a 2008 proposal, offering Iran diplomatic, security and economic incentives if it suspends nuclear fuel production. If Iran truly wants a diplomatic resolution, it should take them up on the offer.

We don't know what, if any, mixture of pressure and persuasion might change Tehran's mind. We are sure that one more round of incrementally tougher sanctions won't be enough. All the major powers are going to have to keep pressing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/opinion/10thu2.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the White House

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remarks by the President on United Nations Security Council Resolution on Iran Sanctions

Diplomatic Reception Room

JUNE 9, 2010

THE PRESIDENT:  Good afternoon, everybody.  Today, the United Nations Security Council voted overwhelmingly to sanction Iran for its continued failure to live up to its obligations.  This resolution will put in place the toughest sanctions ever faced by the Iranian government, and it sends an unmistakable message about the international community's commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons.

For years, the Iranian government has failed to live up to its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.  It has violated its commitments to the International Atomic Energy Agency.  It has ignored U.N. Security Council resolutions.  And while Iran's leaders hide behind outlandish rhetoric, their actions have been deeply troubling.  Indeed, when I took office just over 16 months ago, Iranian intransigence was well-established.  Iran had gone from zero centrifuges spinning to several thousand, and the international community was divided about how to move forward.

Yet this day was not inevitable.  We made clear from the beginning of my administration that the United States was prepared to pursue diplomatic solutions to address the concerns over Iranian nuclear programs.  I extended the offer of engagement on the basis of mutual interest and mutual respect.  And together with the United Kingdom, with Russia, China, and Germany, we sat down with our Iranian counterparts.  We offered the opportunity of a better relationship between Iran and the international community –- one that reduced Iran's political isolation, and increased its economic integration with the rest of the world.  In short, we offered the Iranian government the prospect of a better future for its people, if -– and only if –- it lives up to its international obligations.

So there is no double standard at play here.  We've made it clear, time and again, that we respect Iran's right, like all countries, to access peaceful nuclear energy.  That is a right embedded in the NPT -– a treaty that has to serve as the safeguard against a world in which more nations acquire the world's most deadly weapons, and international law is treated as an empty promise.  That NPT treaty was signed by all the parties involved, and it is a treaty that the United States has sought to strengthen from the day I took office, including through our own commitments to reduce America's nuclear arsenal.

So let me repeat:  We recognize Iran's rights.  But with those rights come responsibilities.  And time and again, the Iranian government has failed to meet those responsibilities.  Iran concealed a nuclear enrichment facility in Qom that raised serious questions about the nature of its program.  Iran further violated its own obligations under U.N. Security Council resolutions to suspend uranium enrichment.  Instead, they're enriching up to 20 percent.  It has failed to comply fully with IAEA's requirements.  Indeed, Iran is the only NPT signatory in the world -- the only one -- that cannot convince the IAEA that its nuclear program is intended for peaceful purposes.

That's why the international community was compelled to impose these serious consequences.  These are the most comprehensive sanctions that the Iranian government has faced.  They will impose restrictions on Iran's nuclear activities, its ballistic missile program, and, for the first time, its conventional military.  They will put a new framework in place to stop Iranian smuggling, and crack down on Iranian banks and financial transactions.  They target individuals, entities, and institutions -– including those associated with the Revolutionary Guard –- that have supported Iran's nuclear program and prospered from illicit activities at the expense of the Iranian people.  And we will ensure that these sanctions are vigorously enforced, just as we continue to refine and enforce our own sanctions on Iran alongside our friends and our allies.

The strong resolution that was passed today benefited from strong international support.  In voting for it, we were joined by nations from Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America -– including Russia and China.  And these sanctions show the united view of the international community that a nuclear arms race in the Middle East is in nobody's interest, and that nations must be held accountable for challenging the global non-proliferation regime.  The Iranian government must understand that true security will not come through the pursuit of nuclear weapons.  True security will come through adherence to international law and the demonstration of its peaceful intent.

We know that the Iranian government will not change its behavior overnight, but today's vote demonstrates the growing costs that will come with Iranian intransigence.  And I want to be clear:  These sanctions do not close the door on diplomacy.  Iran continues to have the opportunity to take a different and better path.  I would like nothing more than to reach the day when the Iranian government fulfills its international obligations -– a day when these sanctions are lifted, previous sanctions are lifted, and the Iranian people can finally fulfill the greatness of the Iranian nation.

Indeed, these sanctions are not directed at the Iranian people.  As I said in Cairo, for decades the Iranian government has defined itself in opposition to my country.  But faced with the opportunity to find a new way forward –- one that would benefit its own people -- the Iranian government has chosen instead to remain a prisoner of the past.

Saturday will mark one year from the day that an election captivated the attention of the world -– an event that should have been remembered for how the Iranian people participated with remarkable enthusiasm, but will instead be remembered for how the Iranian government brutally suppressed dissent and murdered the innocent, including a young woman left to die in the street.

Actions do have consequences, and today the Iranian government will face some of those consequences.  Because whether it is threatening the nuclear non-proliferation regime, or the human rights of its own citizens, or the stability of its own neighbors by supporting terrorism, the Iranian government continues to demonstrate that its own unjust actions are a threat to justice everywhere.

I want and hope for the people of Iran that the government of Iran will make a different choice.  It can make a different choice and pursue a course that will reaffirm the NPT as the basis of global non-proliferation and disarmament -– a course that will advance Iran's own security and prosperity, and the peace of the wider world.  Today's sanctions are yet another signal that if the Iranian government continues to undermine the NPT and the peace that it protects, then Iran will find itself more isolated, less prosperous and less secure.

Thank you.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-united-nations-security-council-resolution-iran-sanctions

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Department of Justice

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Andres Echevarria, aka "B-Boy" and "King B-Boy," pleaded guilty today to conspiracy to participate in a racketeering enterprise, in connection with his gang activities as a member of the Almighty Latin King and Queen Nation (Latin Kings).

The guilty plea was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein; Special Agent in Charge Theresa R. Stoop of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives - Baltimore Field Division; Chief J. Thomas Manger of the Montgomery County Police Department; Montgomery County State's Attorney John McCarthy; Chief Roberto L. Hylton of the Prince George's County Police Department; Prince George's County State's Attorney Glenn Ivey; and New York City Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly. 

According to Echevarria's plea agreement, the Latin Kings is a violent street gang with thousands of members across the United States and overseas.  The Latin Kings have a detailed and uniform organizational structure, which is outlined – along with various "prayers," codes of behavior and rituals – in a written "manifesto" widely distributed to members throughout the country.  Members of the Latin Kings are also traditionally given "King Names" or "Queen Names," which are names other than their legal names by which they are known to members of the gang and to others on the street.  At the local level, groups of Latin Kings are organized into "tribes," including the Royal Lion Tribe, MOG, Sun Tribe and UTL.

According to the plea agreement, in the spring of 2008, Echevarria, 23, of Brooklyn, New York, became a member of the Tiger tribe in Brooklyn and later became a member of the Murda Maya tribe, also in Brooklyn, the MOG tribe in Maryland and the TBF tribe in Brooklyn.  Echevarria attended Latin King meetings in New York and Maryland, where dues were collected from members and gang business was discussed.  According to the statement of facts in the plea agreement, Echevarria also communicated with Latin King members about the gang's activities using the Internet and by telephone.  Echevarria admitted that he held leadership positions in the Latin Kings, including the Third Crown/enforcer position for the MOG tribe in the fall of 2008, and for the Murda Maya tribe at the end of the summer of 2009.

Echevarria admitted that as part of his gang activities, he attempted to murder an individual in Wheaton, Md., on Nov. 1, 2008, after the individual made a disparaging remark about the Latin Kings while attending a party at which many Latin King members and associates were present.  According to the plea agreement, Echevarria, along with other Latin King members, threatened to kill the individual, as well as chased and beat the individual. According to the plea agreement, Echevarria stabbed the individual with a two-pronged tool.  In addition, on May 23, 2009, Echevarria and other Latin King members got into an argument with members of a rival gang in Brooklyn.  According to the statement of facts, Echevarria fired a gun at one of the rival gang members.  The bullet missed the rival gang member, traveled some distance and hit another person, penetrating the person's clothes and causing an abrasion on the person's back. 

According to the statement of facts, during the summer of 2009, Echevarria and other gang members planned to rob a federal firearms licensee (FFL) in Frederick, Md., after learning that the FFL was receiving a large quantity of firearms.  Echevarria and the other gang members planned to steal the guns and sell them for a profit.  According to the statement of facts, as they were preparing to rob the FFL, they saw a significant number of military personnel near the FFL and abandoned the mission.  Also according to the statement of facts, in the summer of 2009, Echevarria and other Latin King members carried out the armed robbery of a drug dealer in Frederick and Montgomery Counties, Md., during which Echevarria pointed a gun at the drug dealer's head.

Echevarria faces a maximum sentence of life in prison.  U.S. District Judge Alexander Williams Jr., has scheduled sentencing for Sept. 2, 2010, at 9:30 a.m.  Echevarria remains detained.

Co-defendant Manuel Cruz, aka "Skibee" and "King Skibee," 45, of Bronx, New York, pleaded guilty on June 3, 2010, to the racketeering conspiracy in connection with his gang activities and is scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 16, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. Cruz is one of the founders of the Maryland tribe of the Latin Kings.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Emily Glatfelter and David Salem for the District of Maryland and Trial Attorney Lara M. Peirce of the Criminal Division's Gang Unit. The investigation was assisted by the Gaithersburg Police Department, the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office, the Maryland National Capital Park Police - Prince George's County Division, the Maryland State Police, the U.S. Secret Service, the Internal Revenue Service - Criminal Investigation and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/June/10-crm-678.html

.