Iran's representative to international organizations in Vienna, Kazem Gharib Abadi, told a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency Wednesday U.S. actions ... that the "costly" consequences of American sanctions mean "they should be seen as weapons of warfare."
Mind you, Iran has been at war with America for about 40 years now, inflicting a lot of casualties on American forces. [UPDATE: And let's not forget about this act of war in our own capital.]
But as we abandoned the folly of thinking we could turn Iran into a responsible regional power via the awful 2015 Iran nuclear deal and replied to the warfare at long last with economic warfare instead of kinetics, I warned that Iran wouldn't see our sanctions as a peaceful measure:
As I've said, while economic sanctions are considered an alternative to war, if sanctions are really effective the target of the sanctions will see them as little different than kinetic attacks and may consider kinetics in response.
Iran's low-level attacks on tankers and their shooting down of one of our drones are kinetic responses to losing against our economic warfare.
Those attacks may signal an Iranian willingness to attack more openly or persistently. Or Iran might know it can't win a war with America and the small attacks could be a desperate attempt to get the world to rescue Iran from American sanctions.
And guess what? Our non-kinetic offensive isn't over:
"Iran has long been secretly 'enriching,' in total violation of the terrible 150 Billion Dollar deal made by John Kerry and the Obama Administration. Remember, that deal was to expire in a short number of years. Sanctions will soon be increased, substantially!" Trump said on Twitter.
Never let it be said that we aren't transparent. Yet Russia is joining Iran in opposing America.
You'd think that links to Russia would turn Democrats against Iran given the recent (and sudden) anti-Russian fervor developed by Democrats.
Let's be careful out there. In desperation the Iranians might lash out stupidly and spark a military clash we don't want and they can't win.
UPDATE: Britain recently seized an Iranian tanker suspected of breaking sanctions, and Iran attempted to retaliate:
Five Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps gunboats tried to seize a British oil tanker in the Persian Gulf Wednesday but backed off after a British warship approached, a senior U.S. defense official told Fox News.
The British warship was said to have been less than 5 miles behind the tanker but soon intercepted the Iranian boats and threatened to open fire. A manned U.S. reconnaissance aircraft was above as well, the official said, adding that Iranian forces left without opening fire.
Be careful out there.
UPDATE: The British seem to be claiming only that the Iranians attempted to "impede" the ship--not take it.
UPDATE: The British won't escort all their civilian tankers in the region:
Britain does not intend to escort every British-flagged merchant vessel through the Strait of Hormuz, a security source said on Thursday, after a Royal Navy warship had to stop three Iranian vessels from blocking the passage of a BP-operated tanker.
Well that's darn sporting of the British.
UPDATE: Related information on Iran.
