Canada closes Iran embassy, to expel remaining Iranian diplomats

[Bosonic]

Source: Reuters

Canada has closed its embassy in Iran and will expel all remaining Iranian diplomats in Canada within five days, Foreign Minister John Baird said on Friday.

Baird said in a statement that the Iranian government was "the most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today." He cited Iran's nuclear program and Iranian military assistance to Syria.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/07/us-canada-iran-idUSBRE8860QC20120907

[dipsydoodle]

1. That's posturing

because they will simply use somebody else's embassy to communicate same way as the US does through the Interests Section of the Embassy of Switzerland in Havana for example.

[Arrowhead2k1]

2. Israeli attack on Iran is imminent.

Canada must have just gotten the memo...

[cali]

12. not a chance.

they got the message from the administration.

[Missycim]

21. I really don't think they will listen to what the US has to say

on the matter, when have they ever?

[cali]

22. did you even read the article?

and yes, Israel, by dint of circumstance, listens to the U.S.

[Missycim]

23. Not in situations like this they don't

this isn't a pack of terrorists lobbing missiles into Israel, people don't seem to understand they will not allow 6 million more of their people to die again in another holocaust. I don't know what you think or believe but if you believe Iran is just building reactors for peaceful purposes I think you are very much mistaken. I don't want the US to fight this war but I don't have a problem letting the Israeli's handle it.

With the way the PM of Israel and President Obama get along, I wouldn't put it past Benji to start the attack before the election to force Obama to pick a side.

[jerseyjack]

3. Closed because they are a threat to global peace....

Is our embassy still open there?

[earthside]

4. We don't have an embassy in Tehran.

Haven't since the hostage crisis.

This is not a good development.

I still think that Rmoney and his old pal Netanyahu cooked-up an 'October Surprise' when Mitt was there .... probably the Israeli attack on Iran or some kind of provocative gesture towards Iran.

If the situation gets very hot, just the increase in oil and gasoline prices will hurt Obama's chances.

[OnlinePoker]

5. Funny, I read the same thing on a right wing site

Only it was Obama and Netanyahu cooking up an October Surprise. It will be very difficult for Israel to attack Iran without U.S. assistance. There's a lot of hostile airspace between the two countries.

[LiberalLovinLug]

10. I was thinking the same

If Netanyahu attacked Iran it would force Obama to make a hard decision. And either one would work against him. I can absolutely see that happening. Its in the Israel's leader's interest to have another war hawk Republican in the Whitehouse.

If he supported the attack, either just vocally or militarily, he comes off as going against what he said earlier about not wanting to attack Iran. Also it would alienate a huge part of his base and fracture the party with inside bickering just on the final stretch.

If he rejects and criticizes the attack and refuses to support it, that will be used as a club against him by the GOP, that Obama hates Israel and won't help protect them and wants to shield Iran and its Muslim extremists. Twisting it to mean that Obama is weak on terror and afraid to tackle the radical Islamist threat...and he and his pals Castro and Chavez are cheering on the terrorists.

[iandhr]

6. No but there is a "United States Interests" section in the Swiss Embassy in Tehran.

[n2doc]

7. Did they close the Russian embassy also?

They are doing the same. Except they actually have a lot of working nukes.

[Posteritatis]

8. Considering Harper's still fighting the Cold War I'm surprised he hasn't. (nt)

[JohnnyChill]

9. It's a much different Canada now...

Keep in mind, Canada now has a hard right government. In his mind, Harper thinks Canada is a military super power. He's cut from the same cloth as the neocons in the U.S.

[CHIMO]

11. Joe Who is now Steve Who. The newest new poodle!

Canada's man in Tehran was a CIA spy

Ken Taylor, the Canadian diplomat celebrated 30 years ago for hiding U.S. embassy personnel during the Iranian revolution, actively spied for the Americans and helped them plan an armed incursion into the country.

Mr. Taylor, ambassador in Iran from 1977 to 1980, became "the de facto CIA station chief" in Tehran after the U.S. embassy was seized by students on Nov. 4, 1979, and 63 Americans, including the four-member Central Intelligence Agency contingent, were taken hostage.

Had his espionage been discovered, Mr. Taylor told The Globe and Mail in an interview this week, "the Iranians wouldn't have tolerated it. And the consequences may have been severe."

His intelligence-gathering activities were kept secret by agreement between the Canadian and the U.S. governments, although his role in sheltering six Americans and helping to spirit them out of Iran was later made public, winning him and the Canadian government widespread U.S. gratitude.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/canadas-man-in-tehran-was-a-cia-spy/article4311038/

[CHIMO]

13. Sent packing: Canada closes Iranian embassy, suspends diplomatic ties

This statement by the Canadian FM was made during the APEC Summit currently underway in Vladivostok. And political analyst and the director of the Center for Research on Globalization Michel Chossudovsky told RT that it's no coinicidence such a platform was chosen for announcing the move – which, Chossudovsky believes, wasn't really made by Canada at all.

"This decision wasn’t taken in Ottawa, it was taken in Washington," Chossudovsky told RT.

He added that this form of diplomatic pressure may be just the first step of many more to come.

"All acts of mediations and diplomacy and peace-building are being scrapped in favor of a possible military strike on Iran".
http://rt.com/news/canada-suspends-ties-iran-635/

[CHIMO]

14. Burman: What has prompted Canada’s move against Iran?

Although his swearing-in at Rideau Hall must have happened in the dead of night, Canada appears to have a new foreign minister. His name is Benjamin Netanyahu. His day job may be prime minister of Israel, but Canada’s abrupt actions against Iran seem to confirm that the Harper government’s outsourcing of Canada’s Middle East policy to Jerusalem is now complete.

There is little else to conclude from Canada’s unwise decision to move unilaterally on Iran at this moment. All sorts of crucial issues are in play with Iran. They involve the future of its nuclear program, the impatience of Israel’s leadership to attack Iran, the shape of a new Middle East as the heinous Syrian regime implodes and several delicate life-and-death issues involving Canadians on death row in Iran. Surprisingly, Western nations have held together on how to approach these key challenges — except, now, for Canada.

So why would Canada indulge in a meaningless poke in the eye that will only be dismissed by Tehran and serve to push the Canadian government even further to the extremes of diplomatic irrelevance?

For a clue, let’s flash back two weeks ago to Israel, where the debate over Iran has been at a fever pitch among politicians and in the media for months.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1253310--burman-what-has-prompted-canada-s-move-against-iran

[rachel1]

15. Pointless and antagonizing

Why are other countries allowed to possess nuclear technology and not Iran?

I also doubt the claims about Iran's military assistance to Syria.

[Socal31]

16. Iran is violating treaties that it CHOSE to sign.

I'm not sure anyone denies this.

Also, what are your reasons to doubt they are backing Assad? Syria is a proxy war between the regional enemies, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

[Ash_F]

19. Violating according to who?

The IAEA, the only legal body capable of declaring parties to be in violation of the NPT, does not consider Iran to be doing so.

Here is their latest ruling, which expresses grievances regarding cooperation in affirmation, but declares no violation. On purpose.
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2011/gov2011-69.pdf


In other statements, IAEA monitors further stated there is no evidence of illegal weaponization.

I am against Iran developing nuclear weapons(or anyone, for that matter) but the point is: The law matters, as does the truth
You can't go claiming a country has broken a treaty when it has not, and when you have no authority on the matter. It is especially dangerous when members of national leadership do likewise, without the legal authority. This can lead to unnecessary, illegal war.

[cpwm17]

27. As someone on DU has written in the past

You can fool most Americans every time.

Iran is not in violation of any treaties - get that!

Iran is not an aggressive nation - that's us.

[Posteritatis]

26. "Pointless and antagonizing" is really the perfect way to sum that up

I don't doubt claims about Iranian military assistance to Syria at all, but that doesn't change the fact that Harper's stunt the other day was, well, pointless and antagonizing. It's so much theater.

[Hab Habit]

20. This is Bullshit

Harper is catering to our very own neocons. (Yep, we have 'em up here too.)

[SylviaD]

24. Canada has neocons? nt

[Posteritatis]

25. We've had them as long as the US has had them. (nt)