News / Middle East

Iraq Helping Iran Skirt Sanctions, Report Claims

TEXT SIZE - +
Fern Robinson
A report in Sunday’s New York Times says Iraq has been using a network of financial institutions and oil smuggling operations to help Iran skirt economic sanctions imposed because of its nuclear program.

Last month, U.S. President Barack Obama barred a  Baghdad bank, the Elaf Islamic Bank, from any dealings with the American banking system. In a statement, Obama said the bank had “facilitated transactions worth millions of dollars on behalf of Iranian banks that are subject to sanctions for their links to Iran’s illicit proliferation activities.”
The newspaper says that despite Obama’s order, Elaf continues to participate in the Iraq Central Bank’s daily auction where commercial banks can sell Iraqi dinars and buy U.S. dollars.

According to current and former American and Iraqi government officials and experts on the Iraqi banking system, Elaf is just one of a number of institutions helping to funnel cash into Iran as sanctions choke its economy. The New York Times described the auctions as “a crucial pathway for Iranian access to the international financial system.”

Several U.S. and Iraqi banking and government officials say Iranian organizations have gained “effective control” of at least four Iraqi commercial banks through Iraqi intermediaries, according to the newspaper report. That control gives Iran direct access to the international financial system, a system Iran should not have access to because of the economic sanctions.

David Cohen, the U.S. Treasury Department’s under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, told the Times the U.S. is “actively pursuing efforts to prevent Iran from evading  U.S. or international financial sanctions, in Iraq or anywhere else.”

According to the New York Times, some current and former American and Iraqi officials, along with banking and oil experts, say Iraqi government officials have largely ignored the massive financial flows, smuggling and other trade with Iran.  The paper says some Iraqi government officials who have close ties to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki are directly profiting from the activities.

You May Like

Pakistan Reiterates Opposition to US Drone Strikes

Day earlier US President Barack Obama justified 'constrained' drone usage to save lives More

Study Identifies Risks of Human Spread of H7N9 Bird Flu

Study suggest that international measures to contain the H7N9 influenza, in the event of severe outbreak, will need to be targeted in Asia More

Violence Continues in Conakry Over Upcoming Elections

Opposition has called for boycott of elections More

Video Syria's Civil War Fuels Violence in Iraq

Analysts say al-Qaida-linked militants are flowing back and forth from both countries More

Video Star Trek Influence Lives Long and Prospers

As new movie thrills, many are once again discussing the iconic franchise's influence on society, science and technology More

OECD: Developing Green Cities Key to Sustainable Future

OECD suggests strategies to mitigate rapid growth, industrialization in urban centers, which produce about two-thirds of greenhouse gas emissions More

This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: Bak |Shawn from: Iraq
August 19, 2012 2:11 PM
its not secret to anyone. Obama gave Iraq to Iran on a golden tray. ignoring all the lives of young Americans and billion of tax payers dollars, just for the sake to be reelected another term. its a shame. .


by: beachjuicetice from: Boston, MA
August 19, 2012 9:05 AM
Definition of proliferation in context: "a rapid and often excessive spread or increase: nuclear proliferation."
There isn't even a suspicion that Iran has been giving nuclear technology or expertise to foreign nations, so what part of their nuclear program can be considered 'proliferation'?
Simply investing in nuclear technology isn't against any international law, nor should it be when carbon based fuels do so much damage and will be in short supply.
Iran supported the Northern Alliance against the Taliban in Afghanistan anyhow; there's no reason to think they'd shoot themselves in the foot by giving terrorists WMD, especially because if ever a WMD goes off in the mid east, they know everyone will be looking to them, or Pakistan, as the culprits. Their long history in a violent region is reasonable cause for wanting at least 'breakout capability' to defend themselves.

Regardless, I don't know why the US wants to stay involved in the middle east. It has all the resources it needs in its own continent, and it's better off saving the lives of its men and women and investing the money at home. It wants to keep a military foothold in Asia but it's not been successful and there's plenty of ways to respond instantly with aircraft and missiles nowadays that don't require bases and boots on the ground everywhere. I think it doesn't want to loose a foothold militarily on the other hemisphere. But the cost isn't worth it for anyone, and the military-industrial complex is the only thing driving its continued interventionist foreign policy. Iran hasn't even ever attacked the US before.

Featured Videos

Your JavaScript is turned off or you have an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player.
Your JavaScript is turned off or you have an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player.
Video

Video Volunteers Help Revive LA's Concrete River

The Los Angeles River is a concrete drainage channel through much of its 80-kilometer length. It channels waste-water from storm drains and has become a receptacle for much of the city's trash. But as Mike O'Sullivan reports, the river is slowly being restored with the help of volunteers, who take part in an annual clean-up.