Iran slams NATO's warning on missile support to Russia
Iran denounced the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit statement warning Iran against sending ballistic missiles to Russia, calling it "entirely baseless and politically motivated."
Iran denounced the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit statement warning Iran against sending ballistic missiles to Russia, calling it "entirely baseless and politically motivated."
“Linking the Ukraine conflict to Iran-Russia cooperation is a politically motivated move aimed at justifying Western intervention and continued military aid to Ukraine,” foreign ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani stated on Thursday.
NATO leaders issued a stern warning to Iran on Wednesday, cautioning against the transfer of ballistic missiles to Russia, labeling it a significant "escalation" in Tehran's support for Russian aggression in Ukraine.
The alliance between Iran and Russia has strengthened due to the Ukraine conflict which has prompted extensive global sanctions on both Iran and Russia.
Iran has supplied Russia with hundreds of kamikaze drones, and unofficial reports suggest Tehran may be contemplating further assistance with missiles.
In February, Reuters reported that Iran had supplied Russia with “a large number of powerful surface-to-surface ballistic missiles.” UK defense secretary Grant Shapps later echoed this claim, indicating he had such information but withheld details.
Although Iran denied providing the weapons and the US could not confirm the transfers, it assumed Tehran intended to supply missiles to Moscow.
Recent satellite imagery published by Reuters showed significant expansions at two key Iranian ballistic missile facilities, which researchers believe are aimed at boosting missile production with sources indicating missile components would be sold to Russia.
Before even beginning to tackle those problems, Pezeshkian warned the interim government under vice president Mohammad Mokhber to avoid creating new problems by signing contracts with individuals and organizations and creating long-lasting financial commitments for the new government.
Before the letter was sent, news was going around that Raisi's legacy government has been hiring and firing individuals, and entering into long-term contracts with some public and private sector entities during the past week.
Meanwhile, Iranian media enumerated up to six problems the new government has inherited from President Ebrahim Raisi’s administration. A voluminous dossier about every one of those problems will be on Pezeshkian's desk once he officially takes office at the end of July.
Many of those problems are the outcome of sanctions as well as mismanagement and indecision by the previous government. A bigger problem for the new government is that the annual budget for the coming year has been already finalized and there is very little it can do to address a huge deficit and major spending decisions.
In fact, the first problem Pezeshkian will face is the budget deficit. The government still owes money to banks and other organizations for debts dating back to 2022 and even before. Since the United States imposed oil export sanctions in 2018, the government’s main source of revenue was badly affected.
The Raisi administration lacked financial discipline, according to Rouydad24, pro-Pezeshkian news website in Tehran. It spent more foreign currency in 2022 and 2023 than it earned.
Only the Ministry of Agriculture has spent more than $20 billion on importing essential commodities while it was allowed to spend $15 billion. A large part of this debt remains for the years to come. On the other hand, pharmaceutics and machinery importers have been facing big losses because of mismanagement of funds as well as losing the trust of their trade partners abroad. All of these debts and shortfalls need to be addressed by the Pezeshkian administration in 2024.
Businesses in Iran predict that the government will be in trouble paying for the import of essential commodities this year, particularly as China has not been introducing any discipline in repatriating several billion of dollars of Iran's oil money, according to Tehran media.
The second issue the new government has inherited is the challenge of adjusting pay for millions of retired government employees and military personnel. In recent years, not a day has passed in Iran without protest demonstrations by pensioners. Despite this ongoing unrest, no solution appears to be on the horizon.
The third problem is about Iran's ailing industrial infrastructure and its need for investment. Industries are short of financial resources and do not have any hope of attracting any capital. The government's solution has been printing money and expanding the monetary base, which exacerbates an already 50% annual inflation. This has eaten away at workers’ real incomes, leaving them deeply disgruntled and restless.
Aging public infrastructure is the fourth major issue. Iran lacks a sufficient transportation fleet, relying on up to 10,000 Afghan trucks to help transport goods. The shipping industry is nearly non-existent and fraught with problems, including a shortage of containers. Consequently, unloading cargo can take anywhere from 45 days to 6 months.
The fifth problem is the issue of taxes. Businesses are unhappy about rising taxes and the difficulties created by inefficient tax collection software. At the same time, the government has not been successful in dealing with tax evasion and this has made an additional burden for real taxpayers. The last issue mentioned by the press is inefficient and even harmful regulation inhibiting the healthy functioning of capital markets.
Despite these challenges, a group of economists and social scientists in Iran have expressed hope that Pezeshkian's administration presents one of the last peaceful opportunities for solving the country’s problems. These experts have their doubts about the country's future under Pezeshkian. They note that the presidential debates revealed that while two groups in Iran emphasize ideological and economic solutions for the nation's issues, neither assumes responsibility for the country's plight, despite both having been in power over the past 45 years.
Iranian media has focused its criticism on Ahmadinejad, particularly highlighting his photos with women not wearing hijab. One outlet, citing a state media host, wrote, “Mr. Ahmadinejad, we are not extremists, but can you justify such pictures with women dressed like this and without hijab?”
The news website went on to say, “When the former president of an Islamic country permits women dressed in such attire to take pictures with him, and these images go viral on social media, it can only suggest that he embraces liberalism and populism."
According to Dolat Bahar, a Telegram channel run by Ahmadinejad's supporters, his visit was purportedly in response to an official invitation from a technological university for a "four-day scientific and cultural visit."
The channel posted numerous images of people taking photos with him on the streets of Turkey, including women without hijabs. Two of these pictures were featured in Iranian media, albeit with their bodies censored.
Mehrdad Farahmand, a Middle East analyst and political commentator based in Istanbul, told Iran International that many ordinary individuals in the Middle East, as opposed to the elite, particularly in Turkey, largely admire Ahmadinejad for his staunch opposition to the US and Israel.
Farahmand, a former BBC correspondent in the Middle East, said: “While the authorities in these countries typically refrain from advocating for cutting ties with the US and Israel, Ahmadinejad was notably vocal about these issues during his presidency.”
“His outspoken rhetoric and Iran's pursuit of nuclear capabilities were widely associated with his leadership. Ahmadinejad's rhetoric about eliminating Israel, despite being costly and widely opposed by the Iranian populace, nevertheless garnered substantial support from certain segments of the population [in the region],” he added.
Another focal point for Iranian media was the timing of his departure on the day of the runoff presidential election. They argued that there is no evidence that he voted, interpreting his departure and announcement on that day as evidence of a deliberate boycott.
“He did not participate in the first round of the elections, and in the second round, there is neither a record nor a report of his presence at the Iranian consulate in Istanbul to cast his vote,” news outlet Roudad24 wrote.
They also highlighted the politicians he met in Turkey, suggesting he associated with individuals of dubious reputation. Ahmadinejad met with Turkey’s former Interior Minister Abdülkadir Aksu and Mustafa Destici, the current leader of the Great Union Party.
This is while Farahmand described Aksu as a prominent figure within the Justice and Development Party, which has maintained its position as the ruling party since 2002.
Farahmand also characterized the Turkish media's coverage of Ahmadinejad's trip as positive, noting that his interview on TGRT Haber, a nationwide TV channel, was favorable and free from challenging questions.
During the interview, Ahmadinejad was questioned about the potential for a third world war. In response, he emphasized his stance as a proponent of peace, presenting himself as a seasoned politician dedicated to advocating for global harmony and conflict resolution.
Ahmadinejad, who has been barred from running in the past three presidential elections by the Guardian Council, controlled mainly by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, is believed to have registered for candidacy primarily to demonstrate his support base. Just before his most recent disqualification by the Guardian Council, he visited Tehran's Bazaar, where many supporters rallied around him. Following his initial disqualification, the former foreign policy hardliner began openly criticizing the political apparatus established by Ali Khamenei, even going so far as to challenge the Supreme Leader himself directly.
