Archive for the ‘Iran Sanctions’ Category


Mar

31

Did He Really Say That?


Posted by at 8:10 pm on March 31, 2009
Category: Iran Sanctions

Tehran MonumentAt the Bureau of Industry and Security’s (“BIS”) Export Control Forum in Newport Beach, California, on March 16, Tony Christino, a senior policy analyst for BIS, announced that a top priority for BIS as the new administration begins is to attempt to eliminate the jurisdictional overlap between BIS and the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) with respect to exports to Iran. It’s probably not overly cynical for me to suggest that the way that BIS staffers might want to eliminate that overlap is to take stuff from OFAC and give it to BIS. Even so, that’s all well and good and something to be commended, whether it involves centralizing authority for exports to Iran in BIS or in OFAC.

However, one thing that Christino said, at least as reported by the Washington Tariff and Trade Letter (subscription required) is not something that the export community is likely to welcome

Reexports to Iran have been the target of several BIS enforcement actions against both U.S. exporters and foreign reexporters. “Where the problem really seems to arise is that reexporters and distributors don’t seem to understand that they can’t replenish inventory knowing that they have a demand from Iran,” Christino said. When exporting to customers or distributors in the Middle East especially, even without knowledge of a reexport, U.S. firms could face “some kind of jeopardy,” he said.

Say what? Exporters face penalties for exporting goods to customers in the Middle East even without any knowledge of a possible reexport of those goods to Iran? If that’s what Christino meant, or even said, the effect is that U.S. companies should stop exporting completely to the Middle East. I’d like to think that Christino didn’t really say that.

Permalink Comments (3)

Bookmark and Share


Copyright © 2009 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)

Mar

24

Irish Company Indicted for Exports to Iran


Posted by at 7:24 pm on March 24, 2009
Category: Criminal PenaltiesIran Sanctions

Drumcliffe Church
ABOVE: Drumcliffe Church


In an earlier story, we reported on the arrest of a Tehran-based businessman on charges that, among other things, he exported helicopter engines from the United States to Iran. One of the intermediate consignees for that export was, according to court documents, an unnamed “Irish Trading Company.” Today, a 2008 indictment against the “Irish Trading Company” and three of its principals was unsealed. The company in question was Mac Aviation from Drumcliffe, County Sligo, Ireland, and the principals were Tom McGuinn, his son Sean McGuinn, and Sean Byrne.

As it turns out, Tom McGuinn is no stranger to U.S. export laws. He’s on the debarred parties list maintained by the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls. Debarred parties are prohibited from engaging in exports of defense services and defense articles. Mr. McGuinn’s debarment was based on a 1996 conviction for violation of the Arms Export Control Act. McGuinn was sentenced to time served and three years of supervised release plus a $50 assessment fee.

Only the docket sheet for the 1996 conviction is available, so we’re not certain what the precise charges against Mr. McGuinn were in that case. However, it seems likely to have arisen from an attempted export of night vision equipment to Iran in 1992 in which Mac Aviation was involved. The night vision equipment, on its way from Ireland to Tehran, was seized in London by British Customs. At the time of the seizure, Mr. McGuinn described himself as an “ex-director” of the company Mac Aviation. In addition, McGuinn said he had “no idea why the stuff was blocked” and that his firm “would never get involved without an export license.”

Permalink Comments (11)

Bookmark and Share


Copyright © 2009 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)

Mar

16

Iranian Visitor to U.S. Arraigned on Export Charges


Posted by at 5:15 pm on March 16, 2009
Category: Criminal PenaltiesIran Sanctions

Rolls-Royce Model 250 Engines
ABOVE:Rolls-Royce Model 250
Engine


When an Iranian businessman based in Tehran arrived in the United States on Saturday, he was probably not expecting that his welcome wagon would be a contingent of special agents from the Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”), who promptly whisked him away and charged him with violating U.S. export laws restricting trade with Iran. The businessman, Hossein Ali Khoshnevisrad, was arraigned today in a United States District Court in San Francisco.

An affidavit filed by a BIS special agent provides a great deal of detail on the circumstances surrounding Khoshnevisrad’s business operations and his ultimate arrest. Not surprisingly to regular readers of this blog, Khoshnevisrad’s modus operandi was to interject front companies into the transactions to hide the ultimate end-user and destination of the exported goods.

Two series of transactions were detailed by the affidavit. The first involved the sale of Rolls Royce Model 250 helicopter engines. According to intercepted emails and correspondence described in the affidavit an un-named “Irish Trading Company,” which had purchased 17 of the engines, responded to a request from Khoshnevisrad’s company Ariasa AG with a proforma invoice for 8 of the engines. Thereafter, a number of these engines were shipped from New York by the “Irish Trading Company” to Khoshnevisrad’s designated consignee, Penerbit Kemas Sdn. Bhd, in Malaysia. Penerbit is apparently a Malaysian book publisher and distributor with a side business in “auto accessories” but with no apparent need for helicopter engines. The affidavit traces the journey of the engines to Malaysia, but stops there. No description is provided as to when, how or whether the engines went to Iran.

The second transaction involved two aerial panorama carriers which Khoshnevisrad’s company obtained through a “Dutch aviation parts supply company.” (I’ll bet that the Dutch company is Aviation Services International B.V., which was indicted in 2007 for selling U.S.-origin aircraft parts to Iran.). When the Dutch company, in response to an inquiry from the U.S. freight forwarder for the goods, inquired as to who was the end-user, Khoshnevisrad replied:

Regarding the end user as you know USA will not deliver to Iran in any case. You should give an end user by yourself.

The cameras are needed for the students at Geographical university to lern them how to film from the air.

Trust you can manage to get the cameras free.

Best regards,
HOSSEIN.

Ultimately the Dutch company shipped the cameras from the Netherlands to Khoshnevisrad in Tehran.

One puzzling issue in this case is why Khoshnevisrad, who knew that he was breaking U.S. law by arranging the export of U.S.-origin goods to Iran, would travel to the United States in the first place. The chance of him being arrested in, and extradited from, Iran on charges of violating the U.S. sanctions on Iran were, I’d say, pretty much on the same order as the chance that my dog, although a very clever dog, will graduate from college or win the Nobel Prize for Literature. The chances of him being arrested in the United States were pretty high. One has to speculate that some clever law enforcement techniques might have been used to lure him here.

UPDATE: The Washington Post story that I linked, as did other wire stories like this one, referred to Khoshnevisrad’s court appearance on Monday as an arraignment. The DOJ press release, however, characterized the court proceeding as an initial appearance. This would mean that an indictment has not yet been issued and that the arrest warrant for Khoshnevisrad was premised instead on a criminal complaint. If that is the case, the formal arraignment of Khoshnevisrad will occur, if at all, after an indictment or criminal information is subsequently filed.

Permalink Comments Off on Iranian Visitor to U.S. Arraigned on Export Charges

Bookmark and Share


Copyright © 2009 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)

Mar

11

If Wishes Were Horses, Divandari Would Ride


Posted by at 7:19 pm on March 11, 2009
Category: Iran Sanctions

Ali Divandari
ABOVE:Ali Divandari
Chairman, Bank Mellat


Today’s online edition of the Wall Street Journal published an interview with Ali Divandari, the Chairman of Iran’s Bank Mellat. That Bank was added to the SDN list in 2007 and since then all U.S. persons that come into possession of any property in which Mellat has an interest must block that property.

The ostensible purpose of the interview was to discuss recent developments in the privatization of Bank Mellat. The Iranian government owns 35% of the bank, but it is selling an additional 15% of its interest in the bank starting at the end of March. The government’s remaining 20% is expected to be sold in 2011.

Divandari said Bank Mellat’s new charter says the government no longer has any control over the bank. Referring to U.S. sanctions, he said that he expects the bank to “have fewer problems” following its partial privatization.

To say that this is, at best, wishful thinking on Divandari’s part is charitable. Bank Mellat wasn’t sanctioned because of the Iranian government’s stake in the bank; instead Bank Mellat was sanctioned because of its participation in Iran’s nuclear proliferation activities, which the Office of Foreign Assets Control described as follows in 2007 when it put the bank on the SDN list:

Bank Mellat provides banking services in support of Iran’s nuclear entities, namely the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) and Novin Energy Company. Both AEOI and Novin Energy have been designated by the United States under E.O. 13382 and by the UN Security Council under UNSCRs 1737 and 1747. Bank Mellat services and maintains AEOI accounts, mainly through AEOI’s financial conduit, Novin Energy. Bank Mellat has facilitated the movement of millions of dollars for Iran’s nuclear program since at least 2003. Transfers from Bank Mellat to Iranian nuclear-related companies have occurred as recently as this year.

Changing the ownership structure of the bank won’t have any impact on this fundamental problem for the bank, so I don’t think that Divandari and his staff should start thinking about U.S.-dollar transactions any time in the near future.

Permalink Comments Off on If Wishes Were Horses, Divandari Would Ride

Bookmark and Share


Copyright © 2009 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)

Feb

5

Hot Boat-ato Tossed By Cyprus to U.N. Sanctions Committee


Posted by at 8:13 pm on February 5, 2009
Category: Iran SanctionsSanctionsU.N. Sanctions

MonchegorskRetired Russian merchant ship Monchegorsk, alleged to be carrying Iranian arms shipments, wound up in Cypriot hands after being forced by the U.S. Navy to moor in Cyprus last week. The ship was searched by Cypriot authorities which on Tuesday turned over to the U.N. a report on what was found on the ship. What exactly is on the ship and where the ship was headed remain subjects of speculation. At issue, however, is whether the Iranian cargo violates U.N. Resolution 1747 and, if so, what to do about it. Paragraph 5 of that resolution declares that Iran “shall not supply, sell or transfer directly or indirectly … any arms or related materiel.”

The story starts two weeks ago when the U.S. Navy stopped the ship in the Red Sea on the suspicion that it was carrying an arms shipment to the Gaza Strip. The U.S. Navy boarded and searched the ship with the permission of its captain. According to U.S. military officials, the search uncovered “small munitions.”

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said his country had done all it could to intercept the ship’s suspected arms shipment to Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip, but its hands were tied. …

“The United States did as much as we could do legally,” Mullen said Tuesday. “We were not authorized to seize the weapons or do anything like that.”

Mullen’s statement is consistent with U.N. Resolution 1747 which requires the U.S. to prohibit U.S. citizens from procuring arms from Iran and from using U.S.-flag vessels to carry U.S. arms, both of which are already prohibited under U.S. law by the Iranian Transactions Regulations and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”). Nothing in 1747 authorizes the U.S. to seize the weapons or the ship; instead the ship was escorted by the U.S. Navy to Cyprus

Cyprus, on the other hand, can do a bit more. Resolution 1747 forbids Cyprus from using a Cypriot-flagged vessel from carrying Iranian arms or related materiel. That would, in theory, permit Cyprus to require the ship to offload any prohibited Iranian cargo in Cyprus. Cyprus, however, is asking the U.N for guidance on what to do. The Cyprus Mail quoted the Cypriot Foreign Minister Markos Kyprianou on the affair:

Cyprus filed a report to a United Nations sanctions committee on Tuesday and would await a verdict before taking further action, Foreign Minister Markos Kyprianou said.

He declined to specify what the Cypriot report said, saying it was confidential.

“There is an issue because of the origin of the cargo, and there should be an assessment on whether the specific cargo falls within the prohibitions of the (Security Council) resolutions. That is where we are expecting guidance from the United Nations,” Kyprianou told reporters.

He said the vessel, anchored off the southern port of Limassol from January 29, would remain there until a definitive decision is taken.

It’s not clear why Kyprianou needs guidance whether the cargo consists of “arms or related materiel.” Even if the ship only contains small munitions, as stated by U.S.-military officials, those clearly fall within the definition. The Jerusalem Post claims that the cargo includes “propellant and casings for artillery and tank rounds.” Debka File, not always an entirely credible source, claims that ship is carrying “10 containers of Iranian rockets.” If any or all of this is true, Kyprianou can’t let a Cypriot-flagged ship carry this cargo.

Permalink Comments Off on Hot Boat-ato Tossed By Cyprus to U.N. Sanctions Committee

Bookmark and Share


Copyright © 2009 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)