The Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) today announced a new round of sanctions against various Iranian entities including the national airline Iran Air and its domestic air carrier Iran Air Tours. The press release announcing the sanctions highlighted Iran Air’s involvement in transporting missiles and parts and components used in developing ballistic missiles. The sanctions also targeted Tidewater Middle East Co. (“Tidewater”), which is the company that manages seven of Iran’s ports. The press release highlighted a number of Iranian vessels that were found to be carrying arms and materiel that had been loaded at ports managed by Tidewater. But the most interesting part of the designation was a footnote:

*There is no relationship between today’s target, Tidewater Middle East Co., and Tidewater (US), an international shipping company headquartered in the United States, listed on the New York Stock Exchange as TDW.

In the past, OFAC has usually declined to provide any statements about people or companies that are not on the SDN list, even though it gives an avenue to parties on the SDN list to argue that they should not be on the list. In short, an innocent party, like someone named Daniel Garcia, who is denied a loan because there is another Daniel Garcia on the list, has less rights with respect to the SDN list than a terrorist who is actually nam mmed on the list. OFAC’s reasoning has been that it doesn’t won’t to say who is not on the list because that person might someday be on the list and the previous negative certification would then be misleading. So what gives with Tidewater, Inc., the Tidewater that is not the Tidewater now on the SDN list? Is this the beginning of a reversal of OFAC’s unwillingness to provide negative certifications, or does Tidewater have extra special clout at OFAC? I am aware of only one other instance where OFAC specifically called out companies with similar names to make clear that they are not on the list. Should all the Daniel Garcias that aren’t the Daniel Garcia on the SDN list give OFAC a call?

Although the UAE is still probably the most significant country involved in the transshipment of U.S. origin goods to Iran, the Iranian procurement network is extending to other countries as well. A recent article on SETimes.com noted on expansion of Iranian activity in Turkey and identified two recent cases of concern:

Despite the Turkish government’s commitment to crackdown on these procurement networks, two high profile cases have proven just how difficult these illicit networks are to stop.

Step-SA, a firm established by Iranian nationals operating in Istanbul, was indicted by a grand jury for allegedly procuring dual-use items for Iran’s ballistic missile programme this year.

The indictment followed news that two Turkish companies, Elektronik Kontrol Aletleri and ETI Elektronik, were connected to the Abdul Qadeer Khan’s extensive proliferation network. Khan is known to have supplied critical nuclear technologies to North Korea, Libya and Iran from the mid-1980s until the early 2000s.

And another article in the Tapei Times reports the existence of State Department concerns over shipments by a Taiwanese company of item to Iran by transshipping them through Turkey and Malaysia. The equipment was believed to be destined to Iran for use in its nuclear and ballistic missile program. The United States used the American Institute in Taiwan to request that Taiwan deny license for the exports of these items to Turkey and Malaysia.

ABOVE: Mark C. Toner

---

The State and Treasury Departments announced today new Iranian sanctions against Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Basij Resistance Force, and Iran’s national police and its chief. These sanctions, which would block all assets in the United States held by these groups, arise from human rights’ abuses by Iran committed by these groups.

State Department Deputy Spokesperson Mark C. Toner was discussing these sanctions in today’s Daily Press Briefing when an astute reporter asked the obvious question: do these entities have any assets that will be blocked by these sanctions. I mean, really, does anyone actually think that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, the Iranian police or their chief have any assets in the United States?

The interchange between Toner and the reporter is both amusing and instructive as Toner tries, not so deftly, to dodge the question:

QUESTION: I have two questions about the sanctions announcements that were made this morning jointly with Treasury. One, can you tell us to what extent, if at all, any of the three designated entities or the one designated individual have assets that fall under U.S. jurisdiction?

MR. TONER: I do not know that. I believe, as you said, that this action will block or freeze property and interest in property for designated persons or designated entities, and U.S. persons are prohibited from engaging in transactions involving the persons and entities.

QUESTION: (Sneeze.)

MR. TONER: God bless you. But I can’t give you a breakdown of what assets may be affected by that.

QUESTION: Can you check for us to see if the Departments of State or Treasury believe that these entities and the individual have any assets or any significant assets that would be captured or frozen by this? And if not, what is the significance of that –

MR. TONER: Well –

QUESTION: Wait. Let me finish.

MR. TONER: Okay.

QUESTION: What is the significance of it? In the past, you have sometimes argued that – or U.S. officials have sometimes argued that there is a multiplier effect because other financial institutions will steer clear of such entities or individuals for fear of falling afoul.

MR. TONER: That’s a good answer.

QUESTION: I know it is, and I understand this, but I’d really much rather have it out of a U.S. official than me, so if you can check.

MR. TONER: Well, certainly, Arshad. But I mean this – I – as I said, I can’t give you a clear breakdown and I would refer you to –

QUESTION: I didn’t ask for a breakdown. I asked for whether you have – they have any assets or any significant assets. I’m not asking for a breakdown. I’m asking, do they have any assets or significant assets?

MR. TONER: Okay. And I will endeavor to get that for you.

QUESTION: Thanks.

MR. TONER: But again, what’s important here is the bite, if you will, of these sanctions is only one element. It also sends a clear message that we won’t abide by Iran’s continued human rights abuses.

Yes, he really did say that the bark may be worse than the bite.