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.

Obama warns Trump not to overuse executive orders

President Barack Obama speaks during his year-end press conference at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Friday. One day earlier, he gave an interview to NPR. Photo by Kevin Dietsch/UPI

WASHINGTON, (UPI) -- With about one month to go before he leaves office, President Barack Obama gave some exit interview-type advice to his successor Donald Trump: Don't rely too heavily on executive orders.

In an interview with NPR's Steve Inskeep on Thursday that aired in its entirety Monday on Morning Edition, Obama said it's preferable to work with Congress.

"Keep in mind, though, that my strong preference has always been to legislate when I can get legislation done," Obama said from the Cabinet Room in the White House. "In my first two years, I wasn't relying on executive powers, because I had big majorities in the Congress and we were able to get bills done, get bills passed. And even after we lost the majorities in Congress, I bent over backwards consistently to try to find compromise and a legislative solution to some of the big problems that we've got — a classic example being immigration reform, where I held off for years in taking some of the executive actions that I ultimately took in pursuit of a bipartisan solution — one that, by the way, did pass through the Senate on a bipartisan basis with our help."

In 2014, Obama signed executive orders that shielded millions living in the country illegally from deportation.

The 44th president is aware that the executive orders by the 45th president can undo his achievements over eight years in office.

"I think that he is entirely within his lawful power to do so," Obama said.

But just as easily, Trump's orders can also be wiped out.

"So my suggestion to the president-elect is, you know, going through the legislative process is always better, in part because it's harder to undo," he said.

"And that doesn't mean, though, that he is not going to come in and look at the various agencies and see the rules we've passed and if he wants to reverse some of those rules, that's part of the democratic process. That's, you know, why I tell people to vote because it turns out elections mean something."

And this time it meant a change in party.

"Well, it's hard to assess because we know for example that Hillary [Clinton] won the popular vote by a sizable margin," he said. "We know that there are a substantial number of voters out there who not only voted for me twice but currently support me who also voted for Donald Trump.

"So I think we have a scrambled political landscape right now. There are some things that we know are a challenge for Democrats — structural problems. For example, population distribution, oftentimes younger voters, minority voters, Democratic voters, are clustered in urban areas."

He noted the Democrats' strength is on the U.S. coasts.

"And so as a consequence you've got a situation where there're not only entire states but also big chunks of states where, if we're not showing up, if we're not in there making an argument, then we're going to lose," he said. "And we can lose badly, and that's what happened in this election."

It might mean some fundamental changes in the way the Democratic Party operates, Obama said.

"Building from the ground up and communicating to state legislators and financing school board races and public utility commission races, and, you know, I am a proud Democrat, but I do think that we have a bias towards national issues and international issues, and as a consequence I think we've ceded too much territory," he said.

And that means getting out its message properly.

"I don't think there's something wrong with the core argument that the Democratic Party has made for years," he said. "And the reason we know that is because on the individual issues that Democrats talk about there's strong support.

 For example, the minimum wage. In every survey across the country, people support a higher minimum wage. There are clearly, though, failures on our part to give people in rural areas or in exurban areas, a sense day-to-day that we're fighting for them or connected to them."

That includes perceptions of the Affordable Care Act, which became known as Obamacare.

"I think that on something like the Affordable Care Act, you have people who are benefiting right now from Obamacare who either don't know it's Obamacare or consider that as a given and then end up voting on Second Amendment rights," Obama said. "So part of the reason it's important to show up, and when I say show up, I don't just mean during election time, but to be in there engaging and listening and being with people, is because it then builds trust and it gives you a better sense of how should you talk about issues in a way that feel salient and feel meaningful to people."

Obamacare says he's aware that the Affordable Care Act can, and may be, repealed.

"I could not be prouder of the fact that the uninsured rate has never been lower. That 20 million people have health insurance that we didn't have before," he said. "But I said when the bill passed that it wasn't perfect. Over the course of six years of implementing a very complicated piece of legislation that affects one-sixth of the economy, that there were going to be things we learned that would allow us to improve it. 
And I don't know how many times I've said to Republicans, both publicly and privately, in State of the Union speeches, in town halls around the country, that if they're willing to engage and work with me, then we can identify ways to tweak and improve this system so that more people have health insurance and it works even better and it's more stable, and build on the things that seemed to have worked."

Obama also spoke about his future with the party.

"Well, I'm less likely to get involved in all the nuts and bolts of electioneering," he said. "In that realm, I'm much more likely to just give advice. What I am interested in is just developing a whole new generation of talent. There are such incredible young people who not only worked on my campaign, but I've seen in advocacy groups,

I've seen passionate about issues like climate change or conservation, criminal justice reform, campaigns for a livable wage, or health insurance, and making sure that whatever resources, credibility, spotlight that I can bring to help them rise up."

"That's part of what makes me optimistic about our future because I know those young people are out there ready to lead, and when they start moving into more and more positions of authority, then I think the issues that I care most deeply about are going to be well served."

But before getting back to work, it will be time to relax.

"I need some sleep. And I've promised Michelle a nice vacation," said. "My girls are getting old enough now where I'm clinging to those very last moments before they are out of the house.

Russian Ambassador Killed in Turkey by Gunman Invoking Syria

The gunman near the body of Andrey Karlov at a gallery in Ankara, on Dec. 19.

Photographer: Burhan Ozbilici/AP Photo

Russia’s ambassador was shot dead in the Turkish capital on Monday in an assassination apparently linked to Syria’s civil war, heightening tensions over a conflict that’s drawn in almost all the region’s main powers.

Andrey Karlov was shot in the back at an art exhibit in Ankara on Monday and died from his injuries, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry. “Allahu akbar,” the gunman shouted, and then “don’t forget Aleppo” -- a reference to the Syrian city where mostly Islamist rebels have been defeated this month by Russian-backed government troops. The attacker, who was killed by security forces, was a 22-year-old active-duty police officer. His possible connection with organized groups is being probed, Turkey’s Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu said.

Separately, a man fired a gun near the entrance to the American embassy in Ankara and was taken into custody by Turkish authorities, according to a U.S. State Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity. Nobody was injured in the incident, the official said.

Russia and Turkey signaled that they don’t want the attack on the ambassador to turn into another flashpoint between countries that are engaged on opposite sides of the Syrian war, a recurring risk in a conflict with multiple armed parties and outside backers. Their relations came under heavy strain after the Turkish military shot down a Russian plane last year, and both governments have since made an effort to repair them.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said in televised remarks that Karlov’s killing was an “open provocation” aimed at undermining the search for peace in Syria and the normalization of ties with Turkey, and he said the response will be a stronger assault on terrorism. “The bandits will feel it,” Putin said. His Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan agreed, saying they’ll jointly investigate the attack and won’t allow it to disrupt a collaboration that’s crucial for the region.

The U.S., Iran and Saudi Arabia are among other nations that are either fighting in Syria themselves or providing money and weapons to groups that are.

Karlov  before his death.

Karlov’s death comes days after one of Russia’s biggest victories since it joined the Syrian war last year in support of President Bashar  al-Assad. Assad’s army, with Russian air support, has retaken almost all of Aleppo, once Syria’s largest city and for years a rebel bastion.

Turkey, which supported the insurgents there and elsewhere in Syria, has played a key role along with Russia in negotiating the continuing evacuation of opposition fighters and civilians.

Turkey’s lira declined after the attack, losing 0.8 percent against the dollar. The assassination spurred a wider demand for haven assets, pushing the yield on U.S. Treasuries down as much as 6 basis points earlier on Monday.

The fall of Aleppo marked a defeat for Turkey, which supported the Sunni Muslim groups fighting against Assad. Russia says the Syrian rebels are overwhelmingly made up of Islamic extremists, while Turkey has argued that they’re resisting a violent dictatorship.

While that’s still the Turkish line, in practice the country has switched its focus in Syria since the rapprochement between Erdogan and Putin. Turkish troops have pushed deep into the neighboring country since August, but they’re mostly targeting Kurdish groups and Islamic State fighters and have steered clear of the battle for Aleppo.

Putin said he discussed the ambassador’s killing by phone with Erdogan. He said Russia will send a team of investigators to join the probe and will also expect security guarantees from Turkey for its diplomatic offices.

Turkey paid an economic price last time its relationship with Moscow turned sour, as Russia imposed sanctions that targeted the country’s exports and tourism market.

‘The Victim’

Elena Suponina, an analyst at the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies, which advises the Kremlin, said the ambassador’s shooting probably won’t lead to another standoff. “This will only bring Russia and Turkey closer together,” she said. “These events have showed that we have a common enemy -- terrorism -- and only by joining forces can we deal with this enemy.”

Still, the killing again raises security concerns for Russian tourists in Turkey, Alexei Pushkov, a member of the defense and security committee of the Russian parliament’s upper house, said in televised comments. Tourism is a key source of foreign currency, and is already in decline after a series of attacks by Islamist and Kurdish groups, as well as a failed attempt at a military coup in July.

In the past 10 days, more than 50 people were killed in two bomb attacks in Istanbul and central Turkey that targeted security forces and were claimed by Kurdish militants. Turkey reported a shrinking economy in the third quarter for the first time in seven years, as the instability sapped business and consumer confidence.

The Turkish and Russian foreign ministers are due to meet in Moscow on Tuesday, along with their Iranian counterpart, to discuss the Syrian war. Iran, the region’s leading Shiite power, is another supporter of Assad’s government and a traditional rival of mostly Sunni Turkey.

The timing is significant because “now Russia will appear at this summit as the victim,” said Aykan Erdemir, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington, and a former Turkish opposition lawmaker. Under that pressure, “Turkey could take extra steps toward Putin to appease him.”

The U.S., Turkey’s NATO ally, shares its allegiance to rebel groups in Syria, even though many of them have ties to al-Qaeda and other Islamist factions. The U.S. has repeatedly denounced Russia for killing civilians during the campaign to recapture Aleppo, while also seeking an understanding between the two most powerful outside actors in the Syrian war that could help to end the conflict.

Secretary of State John Kerry condemned the killing of the Russian envoy, and said in an e-mailed statement that America is ready to assist the investigation. China’s foreign minister Wang Yi condemned the “barbaric act of terrorism” and backed Russia’s efforts to clamp down on terrorism.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump said in a statement that Karlov’s assassination by a “radical Islamic terrorist” was a “violation of all rules of civilized order.” Later, he tweeted: “Today there were terror attacks in Turkey, Switzerland and Germany - and it is only getting worse. The civilized world must change thinking!”