Iran's parliament votes to increase spending on missile program

Iran's parliament has voted to funnel more funds to the nation's ballistic missile program. During Sunday's voting session, 240 out of 244 legislators approved the missile spending bill.

This legislation was described as an effort to "counter America's terrorist and adventurist actions in the region" and heralded as a justified response to new sanctions adopted by the United States earlier this summer.

In July, Iran launched a satellite-capable rocket into space. The launch did not violate the terms of the 2015 nuclear treaty between the United States, Iran and Western nations, but the move was strongly criticized by the U.S. and other Western allies.

In response to the launch, President Trump signed a bill outlining new sanctions against several Iranian groups, freezing funds and outlawing U.S. citizens from doing businesses with the targets.

With the newly passed funding bill, Iran's parliament offered a rebuke of the U.S. sanctions.

"The Americans should know that this was our first action," speaker Ali Larijani said after announcing the voting results -- according to the official Islamic Republic News Agency.

The bill still needs to pass a second vote before it is delivered to a clerical body for review and passage into law. The legislation would divide 20 trillion rials, or $609 million, between the missile program and the Quds Force, a special forces unit of the nation's Revolutionary Guards.

What’s happening inside the ANC, not parliament, is key to why Zuma prevails

What matters inside the African National Congress, the party that governs South Africa, is not necessarily what matters outside it. This obvious point is missed by much of the commentary on the latest unsuccessful motion of no confidence in President Jacob Zuma – and in much discussion of South African politics.

One result of ignoring this reality is the claim that the vote seriously weakened Zuma because several dozen ANC members of parliament supported the motion or abstained.

This was the first time some ANC MPs supported a motion of no confidence in an ANC president. But, while Zuma came within 21 votes of losing in parliament, he was probably backed by 80% or more of the ANC caucus. Most of the votes against him were cast by opposition MPs, who do not have a say in who is ANC president, not ANC members, who do.

Unless parliament passes a motion of no confidence in him, which is not on the cards any time soon, his future depends on whether he was weakened in the ANC, not parliament.

Within the ANC, Zuma’s future is not the absorbing fixation it is outside it.

Loyalty amid factionalism

For many outside the ANC, politicians are defined by whether they want Zuma to go. Inside it, the key reality is a battle between two factions: Zuma’s is accused by its opponents, whose likeliest presidential candidate is deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa, of using public office to advance private interests. While Zuma is supported by one and opposed by the other, both know he does not shape what the ANC and government do on his own – he acts as part of a faction. If he goes and the faction wins, nothing changes and so for both sides, winning the factional battle is far more important than Zuma’s fate.

The contest is centred on winning the leadership elections at the ANC’s December national elective conference. What both sides do, they do with that in mind – Zuma’s fate is a product of this battle.

Key figures in the factions also want to run an ANC in good shape to win the next election and so they worry about splitting or damaging the organisation. If doing what matters to people outside the ANC risks harming it, they will not do it.

There is no evidence yet that the vote weakened Zuma’s faction. Because the vote was secret, we don’t know which MPs voted for him to go. But common sense suggests that they are not pro-Zuma faction members who changed sides but staunch members of the group which wants him gone. So the anti-Zuma group has not grown because some of its members expressed themselves more forcefully.

Nor does it show that the tide within the ANC is moving against Zuma. What matters inside the ANC, but not outside it, is loyalty to the organisation. For many years it was banned and under constant attack – this produced a culture in which the default position is to close ranks in the face of what it sees as outside attack. This made the dissent by ANC MPs a huge step for them. But there is no reason why their view should be shared by others – given the premium on loyalty, their decision could help the pro-Zuma faction by discrediting its opposition.

This misfit between the logic of ANC politics and that outside it explains other aspects of the no confidence vote which have caused confusion. One is that figures such as secretary-general Gwede Mantashe and chief whip Jackson Mthembu worked to get ANC MPs to defeat the motion although they oppose Zuma’s faction; the SA Communist Party, which has called on Zuma to go, did not ask its members to support the motion.

They did this not because they have switched sides but because they believed Zuma’s defeat in a no confidence vote was unlikely – and would not help them if it happened. The opposing faction would still be there, as strong as before. They might be strong enough to replace Zuma with another member of the faction, changing nothing. Or, more likely, the deadlock between the factions would tear the ANC apart and might allow the opposition to elect a president by default. So they preferred to feign loyalty and to work to take over the ANC in December.

Balance of power

This means that the overwhelming ANC caucus vote against the motion does not tell us that the faction to which Zuma belongs is winning and will control the ANC after December. Many MPs who voted against the anti-Zuma motion may be part of the faction which wants him gone: they may have voted as they did because the leaders of their faction told them that strategy made this necessary. So the balance of power in the ANC, which decided who will lead it next year, may not have been affected either way by the no confidence vote.

What is happening inside the ANC may not be morally uplifting. But nor is it about foolishness or hypocrisy. It stems from decisions which are entirely logical if what matters inside the ANC matters to you. If everyone outside the ANC wants to grasp what is happening and where it might lead, they need to understand what matters inside the ANC.

Navy destroyer sails near disputed island claimed by China

The USS Stethem, a U.S. Navy destroyer, sailed Sunday within 12 miles of a disputed island in the South China Sea claimed by China, a U.S. official said.

The Sethem approached the Triton Island in the 30-island Paracel archipelago, which are also claimed by Vietnam and Taiwan. The Paracel Islands are known as the Xisha Islands in China and the Hoang Sa Archipelago in Vietnam.

The standard international boundary extending offshore from all nations is 12 nautical miles.

The United States does not recognize Beijing's claim of sovereignty over the islands.

Lt. Cmdr. Matt Knight, a spokesman for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, told CNN the Navy conducted a "freedom of navigation exercise" around the island as a routine part of U.S. Navy operations.

Knight said it was an innocent passage, which generally allows for a ship to pass through the territorial waters of another country.

"The United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows," he told USA Today. He added the exercises "are not about any one country, nor are they about making political statements."

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement the U.S. "trespassed" and it sent "military vessels and fighter planes in response to warn off the US vessel."

China called the action "a serious political and military provocation."

On May 24, the guided-missile destroyer USS Dewey sailed within 12 miles of Mischief Reef in the Spratly Islands chain, which lies to the south of the Paracels.

Last week, President Donald Trump's administration sanctioned Chinese entities doing business with North Korea and approved a new arms sale to Taiwan.

The Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, said in a report Thursday China is continuing to build up infrastructure on three islands in the Spratly chain: Fiery Cross, Mischief and Subi reefs.

The initiative, which is part of Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that recent satellite imagery shows China "remains committed to developing its power projection capabilities."

Adm. Harry Harris, the top U.S. military commander in the Pacific, said in a speech last week in Australia that Beijing was using "fake islands" to build up a military and strategic advantage.

"China is altering physical and political landscapes by creating and militarizing man-made bases," Harris said. "Fake islands should not be believed by real people."

In April, the Navy announced the Stethem, an Arleigh Burke-class, guided-missile destroyer, was conducting routine operations in the South China Sea.

"Conducting these types of operations with our allies builds proficiency and sustains our ability to maintain a persistent presence throughout the 7th Fleet area of operations," Command Senior Chief William Palmer IV said at the time.

During operations, Stethem has regularly communicated with naval vessels from the People's Republic of China, the U.S. Navy said.

The ship, commissioned in 1995, is named after Steelworker Second Class Robert Dean Stethem, who was killed by Hezbollah terrorists during the hijacking of the commercial airliner he was aboard, TWA Flight 847, in 1985.

The 505-foot-long ship has 26 officers and 315 enlisted crew members, according to a ship fact sheet.

Xi tells Trump 'some negative factors' affecting China, U.S. relations

China's President Xi Jinping told U.S. President Donald Trump "some negative factors" have affected relations during a telephone call after a contentious week.

The leaders' call comes after a tense week between Beijing and Washington, D.C., in which the United States approved a $1.4 billion arms sale to Taiwan, the U.S. Treasury Department imposed sanctions on China's Bank of Dandong for alleged connection to North Korea's nuclear weapons program and the U.S. Navy's USS Stethem destroyer sailed within 12 miles of a disputed island in the South China Sea claimed by China.

Xi and Trump's call on Sunday comes after the pair held a summit in April after which Trump said they developed "a very good relationship."

"Xi Jinping stressed that since his meeting with President Trump, important results have been achieved in China-U.S. relations," Chinese state media outlet CCTV reported. "Meanwhile, bilateral relations have also been affected by some negative factors, for which the China side has expressed its position to the U.S. side."

China's foreign ministry on Sunday criticized the U.S. Navy destroyer's operation near the island, calling the incident a "serious political and military provocation" that "violates China's sovereignty and puts at risk China's security," Chinese state media outlet Xinhua reported.

In a statement, the White House said the leaders discussed a range of issues in which there is mutual interest, such as North Korea and trade relations.

Lat week, the U.S. State Department declared China as among the world's worst offenders in human trafficking and forced labor, joining a 23-nation list that includes Iran, North Korea, Syria and Russia.