Sep

17

Federal Indictment Targets Mayrow Network Exports to Iran


Posted by at 9:51 pm on September 17, 2008
Category: Anti-BoycottCriminal PenaltiesIran SanctionsSanctions

IED detonatorThe winner of today’s breathlessly exaggerated headline contest goes to the Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) for this:

COMMERCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT PARTNERS, BREAK UP IRANIAN RING CHARGED WITH PROCURING IED COMPONENTS

Although this headline conjures up a Eliot Ness raid with the culprits being led off in shackles and at gunpoint never to export again, the reality is a bit more mundane. In fact, the headline refers, in part, to a federal grand jury indictment unsealed in Miami today against eight individuals and eight corporations, all allegedly part of the Mayrow General Trading Company network. The defendants were charged in connection with dual-use exports that wound up in Iran, including exported items which could be used in the manufacture of IEDs deployed against U.S. troops in Iraq.

None of the eight individuals or corporations are located in the United States. Whether Britain, Germany, Iran and Malaysia, where the defendants are located, will permit the extradition and prosecution of the individual defendants is a close question, particularly if the defendants’ only contacts with the United States were the purchase of U.S.-origin goods and if the exports to Iran did not break the laws of their countries of residence. (For those individuals located in Iran, of course, it’s not even a close question, and these individuals will be subject to prosecution only if they decide to visit, say, Disneyland or the Grand Canyon or travel to a country that will allow rendition or extradition.)

In addition, the Commerce Department release indicated that 75 companies and individuals had been added to the Entity List in connection with the Mayrow network exports. (The State Department release on the indictment, however, states that there were 100 additions to the Entity List). All exports of U.S.-origin goods to companies and individuals on the Entity List will require a license from the Department of Commerce. Naturally such licenses will generally be denied.

As of this writing, however, the BIS website doesn’t indicate any additions to the Entity List, but it can reasonably be assumed that these additions will appear sooner rather than later. Unlike indictments of foreigners over which the U.S. has precarious criminal jurisdiction, putting members of the network involved in these exports on the Entity List is much more likely to be effective in shutting down the troublesome exports. Once these additions are made, I’ll post a link identifying the companies and individuals involved.

Permalink

Bookmark and Share

Copyright © 2008 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)


3 Comments:


The boys and girls at the Chinese trade ministry are rejoicing: Yet another shot in our own feet administered by DoJ and BIS. The only thing that the indictments and additions to the Enmity List will do is to decrease U.S. exports of hardware and software that Iran can and will acquire from or through other sources, at a time when the U.S. economy is hemorrhaging due to years and years of ever larger trade deficits. Instead of Dells assembled in Round Rock or Lebanon, Gulf traders will stock their shelves with Dells assembled in Malaysia or Lenovos built in Shanghai or Shanxi, and folks in Tehran will be happy to buy them. In the past, whenever Gulf oil producers enjoyed high prices there was a subsequent increase in U.S. exports to the Gulf; but, this time, the increase is disproportionately lower notwithstanding the huge increase in prices denominated in dollars because the region is turning to non-U.S. suppliers as much as possible in order to avoid unilateral U.S. trade sanctions.

If they want to cut down on smuggling of F-14 and other military spares, they would be better served by reforming DRMS/DLA.

Comment by Mike Deal on September 18th, 2008 @ 8:19 am

I think you’re missing the intended propaganda effect of this news. According to the Washington Post, the material the Iranians exported were “for bombs” — in other words they were specifically intended to make IEDs.

However, the BIS says only that these items were “CAPABLE of producing improvised explosive devices SIMILAR to those being used in Iraq and Afghanistan”

The difference is significant but subtle, so it will be ignored in the media accounts.

Comment by hass on September 18th, 2008 @ 12:03 pm

The initial letter designating the firms is available here: http://www.bis.doc.gov/pdf/09182008_entitylistadditions.pdf

Comment by RS on September 19th, 2008 @ 12:29 pm