US imposes sanctions on Malta-based Iranian shipping lines
The United States has imposed sanctions on three shipping companies located in Malta that belong to Iran's national sea cargo transporter, US Treasury Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, Stuart Levey told Britain's Financial Times today.
The sanctions were imposed on Friday.
"Substantial attention has already been paid to sanctions in Iran’s banking and energy sectors. But the latest round of measures also sharpens the focus on another sector that is a critical lifeline for Iran’s proliferation and evasion: shipping. Some of Iran’s most dangerous cargo continues to come and go from Iran’s ports, so we must redouble our vigilance over both their domestic shipping lines, and attempts to use third-country shippers and freight forwarders for illicit cargo," Mr Levey wrote in an article.
"Iran has consistently used its national maritime carrier, the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), to advance its missile programmes and to carry other military cargoes. Some shipments have been stopped, and were clear violations of Security Council resolutions – including arms shipments believed to have been destined for Syria, for transfer to Hizbollah. Using an authority designed to freeze the assets of proliferators of weapons of mass destruction, the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) first brought sanctions against IRISL in 2008 for providing services to the arm of the Iranian military that oversees Iran’s ballistic missile programme.
"Almost immediately companies around the world began to shun IRISL, and the company started to use an array of deceptive practices to conceal its identity and skirt sanctions – including falsifying shipping documents, changing names and nominal ownership of vessels, and even repainting ships. It has also sought to assign vessel ownership to front companies outside Iran. These measures to conceal its activities have alarmed an already wary global business community. As a result, IRISL has struggled to maintain the insurance and other services necessary for operating a global shipping business.
"IRISL’s conduct has not escaped the international community’s notice. In June, the UN named three IRISL companies for sanctions, and called for additional vigilance of Iranian shipping more generally. It also granted new powers to inspect Iranian ships, and ships carrying cargo to or from Iran. Subsequently the US Treasury sanctioned five IRISL front companies and 27 vessels, and also identified 71 renamed IRISL vessels. Last month the EU took similar actions.
"Following these steps, last Friday the US Treasury took further measures designating for sanctions three Malta-based IRISL companies: Marble Shipping Limited and Bushehr Shipping Company, two entities directly owned by IRISL; and ISI Maritime Limited, owned by a previously-designated IRISL subsidiary Irano Hind," Mr Levey added.
(See full article at http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d09260fc-a89c-11df-86dd-00144feabdc0.html )
Business involving Iranian shipping companies accounts for some 10% of the throughput at Malta Freeport. The freeport was missed being affected by sanctions against Iran imposed by the EU last month, but countries were told to closely monitor the Iranian companies and their assets were frozen.
The sanctions against Iranian persons or companies listed in the EU’s Official Journal included IRISL (Malta) Ltd, and Marble Shipping Limited (Malta).
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
32 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Martin Cassar
Aug 19th 2010, 16:26
@B. Cachia.
‘Destruction of Israel’-Actually it’s not about destruction of Israel, we should rather argue how many Jews should live in Israel?For centuries, Jews lived among other confessions in full harmony all over the Middle East. After the Jews were thrown out from Europe (by Hitler) they immigrated to the Middle East in 1948. Then, the whole disaster began when Israel used the Holocaust to turn the Zionist’s dream for a Jew state and let world wide Jews to permanently settle in Palestine to give the birth of Jew state. Could you tell me what does Jew State means please?
Americans fought for their freedom, so did the German, the French, the Maltese. Were we terrorists when defending Malta from the French, English and the Turks?Self defense are legal and occupation is not. The whole thing however is that, if you do not surrender to USA you are swiftly labeled a terrorist, and if you criticize ‘Israel’ you may face Anti-Semitic charge!
Could you please clarify this matter: The USA dropped nuclear Bombs that killed thousands of innocent civilians in Japan. Should the USA response be classified as a self-defense, terrorism or committing crimes of genocide?
B. Cachia
Aug 19th 2010, 19:05
From what I can gather, what you're talking about there is reversing the establishment of Israel, which is another way of saying that Israel should cease to exist as a state. I don't agree with that objective, and I think most decent people around the world would find it horrifying as well. There is room for two states for two peoples, and the way to achieve this is through peace negotiations not through eternal bloodshed.
As for 'terrorism', it means deliberately attacking civilians in order to induce terror and achieve a political objective. Sometimes it is used by people who want to achieve ends that are in themselves quite legitimate, and at other times it is used by people whose ends are not legitimate at all. In this case, in addition to the fact that terrorism is always disgusting, the end (which is the destruction of a country and the denial of self-determination to a whole people) is also not very attractive to decent people either.
A. Kaehn Xuereb
Aug 18th 2010, 21:30
I would like to sincerely thank those who comment with intelligence and honesty. For those who comment and feel the need to judge others with bigotry and hatred in their hearts; I can only say, I feel so sorry for you. Life is so very short. Most people just want to live and raise their children in relative health and safety, regardless of the country they happen to live in. God is the only true judge.
joseph cachia
Aug 17th 2010, 00:19
a. k. xuereb.
how you came to the conclusion that HIZBOLLAH are terrorist ?HIZBOLLAH are FREEDOM
FIGHTERS for their countries against american domination
Once is such the world we live in, IRAN must be right to have nuclear weapons to
protect the country from american / israeli invation.
IRAN never threatened nor have interest in invading any other country.
IRANIAN's are satisfied with the quantity of CRUDE OIL the contry produce
You ain't the only one reading news, perhaps few more with you, don't notice american /
izrael intentions of want to block IRAN.
I
B. Cachia
Aug 18th 2010, 09:43
Hezbollah is a private army controlled by Iran with the support of Syria in order to keep the Lebanese-Israeli conflict open and to further Iranian strategic interests in the Middle East.
It is "terrorist" because it uses deliberate attacks on civilians as its main tactic. If you want to look at it another way, it not only commits war crimes (as almost all armies do from time to time unfortunately) but it actually has a war crime as its main tactic. That's essentially what distinguishes terrorist organisations from armies or militias.
Martin Cassar
Aug 18th 2010, 15:07
@B. Cachia
Is Israel occupying parts of Lebanon? a simple yes or no will do please. Thank you
Now, please have a look a world's map and enlighten me what are the border of what's called Israel.
B. Cachia
Aug 18th 2010, 20:45
@ Martin Cassar: The two countries are technically at war but, according to the UN, Israel occupies no Lebanese land. The small part of the Golan Heights recently ceded by Syria to Lebanon in order to maintain a pretext for Hezbollah's existence, and called the Shebaa Farms (about 22 sq. km), was ruled by the UN to be part of Syria.
As for the frontier, Israel has internationally recognized frontiers with Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan. Most of the international community considers the 1948 ceasefire lines to define its border with Syria and the Palestinian Authority. Obviously it occupies additional land belonging to Syria and the Palestinians, pending a peace treaty. Hamas and Hezbollah do not want to see such a peace treaty because they see the destruction of Israel to be the only acceptable outcome of this conflict. The majority of Palestinians and Israelis want peace but can't get it because of Iranian meddling, through Hamas and Hezbollah.
Martin Cassar
Aug 16th 2010, 23:56
The USA dropped nuclear Bombs that killed thousands of innocent civilians in Japan. Should the USA response be classified as a self-defense, terrorism or committing crimes of genocide please?
Martin Debono
Aug 16th 2010, 21:50
Charles Sammut: you need to find a more constructive use of your time buddy.
A. Kaehn Xuereb
Aug 16th 2010, 18:21
I just don't see the parallel between Iran and Israel (unless one is anti-Semite) Iran wants weapons to be the agressor: Israel wants to protect themselves from the terrorists known as Hizballoh. Terrorists that cowardly hide amongst the innocent Palastinians so that when there is a conflict they can claim Isreal is targeting civilians...am I the only one reading the news?? I would agree that no one should have nuclear weapons...but such is the world we live in.
E Pisani
Aug 16th 2010, 19:16
No you are not,but it does depend on which news you are reading. Those you call terrorists others would call freedom fighters. Maybe some of us should come and take over your home, just so that you can prove to us how passive and welcoming you would be. You would offer tea and cakes no doubt.
Robert Callus
Aug 16th 2010, 19:34
You would have been right, only if: 1) Israel didn't have nukes and 2) Israel didn't engage itself in much more and worse acts of terror than Hezbollah and Hamas combined.
Charles Sammut
Aug 16th 2010, 19:42
@ A Kaehn Xuereb Do you watch these people's news? Gerald Levin, CEO and Director of AOL Time Warner Michael Eisner, Chairman and CEO of the Walt Disney Company Edgar Bronfman, Sr., Chairman of Seagram Company Ltd Edgar Bronfman, Jr, President and CEO of Seagram Company Ltd and head of Universal Studios Sumner Redstone, Chairman and CEO of Viacom, Inc Dennis Dammerman, Vice Chairman of General Electric Peter Chernin, President and Co-COO of News Corporation Limited Those seven Jewish men collectively control ABC, NBC, CBS, the Turner Broadcasting System, CNN, MTV, Universal Studios, MCA Records, Geffen Records, DGC Records, GRP Records, Rising Tide Records, Curb/Universal Records, and Interscope Records. In that case I don't blame you for your biased point of view.
T Camilleri
Aug 16th 2010, 21:43
A. Kaehn Xuereb How about the Israeli extra judicial murders? How about the Israeli stealing of Palestinian land? How about the Shoah which Israel i sdoing to the Palestinians A Cohen Xuereb?
J. J. Borg
Aug 16th 2010, 21:54
Charles Sammut: enlighten us a bit here. So you dislike Jews, Americans and immigrants from certain parts of the globe but you love Iranians? Did I leave anyone out?
A Kaehn Xuereb
Aug 16th 2010, 14:48
Some of the comments have me wondering if a: schools in Malta are teaching world history, or b: students aren't paying attention in class during history lessons? The UN has clearly admonished Iran for nuclear armament. The US is taking a stand for all people against whom these weapons could be used by a clearly volatile government. If such policies existed pre WWII would Germany have amassed enough materials for weapons for use.....say in Malta? History is the best lesson if it's not forgotten.
M Xuereb
Aug 16th 2010, 17:08
Tell that to Israel who is quite prepared to use her nuclear arsenal should the need arise,or don't you know it has nuclear weapons given to it by you know who?. What's good for the goose is also good for the gander. I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons,neither do I want Israel to have them. In fact I don't want anyone to have them.
J. J. Borg
Aug 16th 2010, 17:43
A Kaehn Xuereb: schools in Malta barely teach Maltese history let alone world history. I even doubt that Maltese students have any idea about the Holocaust by the time they leave school. And then we wonder why there is so much intolerance in this country. Imma l-aqwa li jmorru il-privat tal-Franciz u tal-Fisika!
A. Dimech
Aug 16th 2010, 18:05
@M Xuereb
Who exactly are you referring to by "you know who"? I hope you aren't referring to the U.S.
As far as I know the Israeli nuclear programme was aided by France, and was the only country willing to do so. This was done in exchange for support in the Suez War.
As for Israel's current "don't ask don't tell policy" with the U.S, it is understandable. Possibility of nuclear retaliation is the only thing keeping the arab countries back from attacking Israel en-masse.
Of course, EVERYBODY dreams of the day when there are no nuclear weapons, but even Obama can't just snap his fingers and say "Make love, not bombs" and expect it to happen.
D Vella
Aug 16th 2010, 19:27
@A Dimech. France did not.Whilst it is true France helped by building a reactor,the rest of the material needed along with technical help came from the USA. Nuclear bombs aren't built by having ajust a reactor.Whilst we are at it,you might like to have some idea of the size of Israel's Nuclear Capability. Be frightened. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
P.Cassar
Aug 16th 2010, 13:13
AND WE WERE THE FIRST AND ONLY COUNTRY, TO WAIVE THE DEBT OWED TO US BY IRAQ BECAUSE THE US SAID SO.
POOR MALTA
E.Abela
Aug 16th 2010, 13:09
Agree that all countries should adhere to UN resolutions but this apparently does not apply to Israel.
Charles Sammut
Aug 16th 2010, 12:52
It is undoubtedly sheer coincidence that Mr Stuart Levey (Levi) is Jewish and is simply defending the interests of Israel, I mean the US.
Wilfred Camilleri
Aug 16th 2010, 15:46
As I mentioned earlier, the sanctions were imposed by the UN not the US. Every country should be enforcing the sanctions until Iran decides to comply with UN resolutions regarding their nuclear development programs.
Charles Sammut
Aug 16th 2010, 19:38
@ Wilfred Camilleri How many UN resolulutions against Israel were vetoed by the US? Ariel Sharon to Shimon Peres, 3 October 2001 "......every time we do something you tell me Americans will do this and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear, don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it."
D Langley
Aug 16th 2010, 12:33
Who was it , quoted in the Times a few weeks ago as saying that Iranian Shipping and therefore the Ports at Malta will not affected by these sanctions? Own up Mista,unless of course,you just happen to be on holidays and will have convienently missed this comment.
Sammy Abela
Aug 16th 2010, 11:42
Hah...time to repay for the "open-handed" shipping of "asylum seekers" to the US and lick Uncle Sam's boot...
Wilfred Camilleri
Aug 16th 2010, 12:53
This has nothing to do with the US taking in refugees from Malta. The sanctions have to do with Iran's nuclear ambitions and have been imposed by the UN because Iran refuses to comply with UN resolutions.
T Camilleri
Aug 16th 2010, 14:22
Sammy Abela you are perfectly correct. The USA and EU sanctions go beyond what was agreed at the UN. It's payback time for taking some of our illegal immigrants. Don't take any notice of any USA and EU sanctions. We are supposed to be an independent country and should not kow-tow to either the USA or the EU.
Denis Catania
Aug 16th 2010, 16:43
Malta is playing with fire by allowing such companies to set up in Malta and the U.S helping Malta with it's illegal immigrattion problem has nothing to do with this. You would think Malta learned something from the Pan Am bombing. Just imagine if PM Mintoff dealt with Iran in such a manner.
Joe Xuereb
Aug 16th 2010, 11:37
1) Interesting, very!
2) Malta, please note.
3) This ties up with Malta welcoming Sharia compliant banking systems.
And of course, money talks (as in point #3 and presumably, the 'payment' for the use of Malta's waters). That is the real god in Malta - money (allow me a little lateral-thinking - 'and then they dither over whether to legislate in favour of divorce or not' - hypocrites and ignorant and self-servicing with it)*. As they say, money makes the world go round. And as we say, what goes around, comes around.
* And when they want to put down a minority's demands, they don't DITHER about fawning for the support of a sworn enemy because this too hates said minority. And of course I am not thinking of the Govt. here, I am thinking of the one that really holds the reins of power in this once strategic island. And still is it seems.** Is it any wonder that some MP is on record as saying that he'd rather live in Iran. No exaggeration there, no hyperbole. He meant it!
** Toourism as revenue is fickle. But 'selling your soul' is a permanent fixture. Milk it!
wally vella-zarb
Aug 16th 2010, 12:55
"3) This ties up with Malta welcoming . "
(a) How?
(b) What is wrong with "Sharia compliant banking systems"
Just curious.