The US military shoots down 17 Houthi drones and missiles in the Red Sea as the Iran backed group escalates attacks on commercial shipping. A us based analyst tells us how marine traffic in the area has been affected. We are seeing more container ships staying away from the Red Sea more than oil tankers. A former Iran international tv host tells us how she is responding to an alleged iranian assassination plot against her. And Sweden upholds a life sentence for an iranian official involved in a mass execution of political prisoners in Iran. We ask an opposition group, many of whose members were executed, whether more iranian officials will face justice. If there is the political will, I think there are no limits as to how many of these criminals can be prosecuted internationally. From the voice of America, this is flashpoint Iran good morning. I’m Michael Lippin in Washington. The US military was in action against iranian proxies in Iraq and the Red Sea on Tuesday. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said President Joe Biden directed us forces to strike three facilities used by Qatib, Hezbollah and affiliated groups in Iraq early Tuesday. Austin said the US was responding to attacks by Iran backed militias on american personnel in Iraq and Syria, including a Monday drone strike that wounded three, one critically at Iraq’s Irbial air base. Iraqi supporters of Qatib Hezbollah marched in Baghdad on Tuesday for the funeral of a militia member apparently killed in the US counterstrike late Tuesday, the US central command said a navy destroyer and f 18 fighter jets also shot down 17 Houthi drones and missiles in the Red Sea in a ten hour period. It said there was no damage to ships or reported injuries. Meanwhile, Iran said a senior commander of its top military force, the IRGC, was killed in a strike on the syrian capital, Damascus, on Monday. Iran blamed Israel for the attack that killed Razi Musafi, who coordinated the military alliance between Tehran and Syrian President Bashar Assad. Speaking Tuesday, Iranian Defense ministry spokesman General Reza Talayinik said retaliation against Israel would be smart and strong. Israel defense forces spokesman Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari declined to comment. On Monday. He told reporters that the IDF obviously has a job to protect the security interests of Israel. Yemen’s Houthis have carried out sporadic attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea in solidarity with the Hamas terror group that has been fighting a war with Israel since October. The attacks prompted some of the world’s top shipping companies to suspend transits through the region this month. The houthi strikes also led the US military to launch a naval coalition on December 18 to protect commercial ships, danish shipping giant Marisk said Sunday. That initiative has enabled it to prepare to resume transits in the area as soon as possible. Noam Radan is a Washington institute for neareast policy analysts, focusing on energy and shipping developments. I asked her by phone what kinds of risks shipping companies are facing in the Red Sea in addition to the attacks? And by attacks, I mean Yemen’s hoses have been launching drones, missiles, even approaching some vessels using skiffs or boats. Most of the vessels, they received a direct hit, but all of them continued sailing. So we haven’t seen any major damage or any major oil spill, which is great. Other than that, the other risks, not risks, I would call them higher costs they’re facing. And this is one of the reasons there is forcing a number of shipping companies to stay away from the Red Sea and go around the Cape of Good Hope, around Africa. And these insurance rates. Insurance rates are increasing, including war risk premiums, again, because of the risks there, meaning that any ship that goes through that route, the Red Sea, needs to bear in mind that the risks are very high, and they need to make sure that their insurance will be able to cover any damage. So could I just ask, when it comes to insurance, would it be cheaper for commercial vessels to go the long way around the southern tip of Africa, where the security threats are much less? Yes. You cannot compare the high risk area right now, Red Sea, with the Cape of Good Hope. Right. You don’t have the same risk. So of course, the insurance rates are completely different. But the issue with going around Africa is that costs shipping costs. And by that, I mean the voyage costs are going to increase. What does that mean? This means that if a ship is going to take a longer distance to get to its destination, it’s going to burn more fuel. It’s going to stop at extra ports. And Durban in South Africa, they’re going to stop there. You have port dues to pay, so shipping costs are going to increase. If you’re going to take the longer route around the Cape of Good Hope. Let’s say if you want to get from the Middle east to Las Palmas in Spain, it’s going to take you a shorter distance if you go through the Red Sea, but it’s going to take you a way longer distance if you go around the Cape of Good Hope. Can you give us a sense of how many vessels are taking this long route that incurs all these additional costs? When you look at the overall size of commercial shipping that usually goes through the Red Sea, that’s a very good question. When it comes to the numbers, I don’t have accurate number or precise number. However, as of December 22, I did see over like 100 container ships. So we have different types of ships, okay, we have the container ships and we have the oil tankers and we have others, cargoes and bulk carriers when it comes to the container ships. And because the top shipping companies, container shipping companies have decided to suspend transit, we are seeing more container ships staying away from the Red Sea more than oil tankers. The oil tankers are still being monitored. We’re not seeing massive diversion yet. To give you an example, like I myself, because I track tankers, I’m still seeing, for instance, tankers leaving IWOC and going, signaling for the swiss canal. They’re still going to Gulf of Adan Babelmandik, Red Sea to go to Europe. So I am seeing ships still taking that route. And we need to just bear in mind that some ships are avoiding that transit route, not all ships. So given all of that, where is the economic impact of these diversions the greatest in terms of the global economy right now? Is it being seen in the trade of goods that are on commercial vessels or is it in the energy markets? So in both of them, the assessment is still ongoing. Right. But because even in the oil market, you have rates of some ships, like swiss maxes and vlccs, they’ve been increasing since September. And most likely by the end of this month, they’re going to be way higher. But when we say the shipping costs are increasing, this means that in the end, those extra costs will have to be passed on and in the end the consumer will feel the higher prices. So this is something to bear in mind. And also in some countries where you have very weak regulations, traders might start also exploiting the geopolitical developments and they might also start increasing prices for consumers. How do you see the situation evolving when it comes to shipping through the Red Sea, given that in the last week or so you have a US led security mission that is trying to better protect the vessels that are in the area? It’s difficult to say because despite the fact that the operation Prosperity guardian has been put into operation, and this is the task force you’ve just referred to, Michael, we’re still seeing attacks. However, at the same time, we are seeing that companies, and it seems that they are aware that going around the Cape of good Hope, around Africa is not a sustainable solution. They are ready to resume transit because they know that they cannot bear the increasing shipping costs for a long time. However, we still need to see how the task force, new task force will be able to contain, limit those high risks and give some assurance to companies that there is a force there that protect freedom of Noam Radan, senior fellow at the Washington Institute for near East Policy, on the line from here in the Washington, DC area. Thanks very much for coming on to flashpoint Iran. Thank you very much, Michael, for having me British network ITV says it has uncovered a foiled plot by Iran to assassinate two presenters of Iran International, a London based persian language tv channel that is critical of the Islamic Republic. Last Thursday, ITV reported that IRGC agents offered $200,000 to a people smuggler to try to kill Faradad Farahazad and Seema Sabet late last year in the british capital. ITV said the plot was foiled because the people smuggler was a double agent who shared recordings of the plotters with a western intelligence agency as well as with ITV. The iranian embassy in London rejected the report as baseless. Sabet left Iran International in August. I spoke to her by phone on Sunday and asked how she felt when ITV showed her the recordings of the plot last week. It was awful. It’s not easy to see how close it was and how they were planning to kill me. Especially they were referring to my program and the way that, I mean, it was done. So I knew that they were trying to silence me. And if I knew, would that change anything? No, definitely not. But at the same time, listening to people who they are trying to kill you, even without knowing you and referring to it as with God’s help, is not easy. Right. How has this affected your life in the last couple of days since you discovered the full extent of this plot? And how does your life now compare to how it was in the last year? Well, I’m motivated. I have more reasons to work harder because I knew that I was effective. I know that I could do something, which was my responsibility as a journalist. So even if I don’t present that program anymore, I’m still continuing as an independent journalist. I make sure that I will not be stopped by these threats because by no means I can be scared by this. I knew always that I’m dealing with a very dangerous government. I knew that Islamic Republic of Iran is a country that by no means is bounded to international laws and human rights. We could report, and we were reporting about what they were doing during the last two years to Iranians who they were on the streets demanding their basic freedom rights. Well, you mentioned that you’re more motivated now than you were before learning this news. You left Iran international back in August. Can you share with our audience why you left and what exactly you’re doing right now? Well, I’m working as an independent journalist at the moment and I have a phd in politics. So I’m using different potentials and possibilities that I have. I write for different media, including the Hill. I had two articles published during the last couple of months. And the Hill is a Washington based us news site? Yes. Yes, that’s the one. And I’m an Iraq expert, so I’m exploring different opportunities. And I would like to come out of that persian media world in order to have a wider audience amongst international community. What I realized that what we as iranian journalists who live in the west are lacking is to have a proper communication with the media outside of our world, like outside of the persian language world. And there are very few voices who talk about Iran. But necessarily, it doesn’t reflect different kind of views, it doesn’t reflect the plurality and the different kind of political opinions. And I believe there is a very important point to address, and I’m working on it. Are you hoping to create some kind of new talk show that brings in diverse points of view, but communicating in English, for example? Well, that’s one part. There are loads of materials also produced in farsi language which not in any way is not translated or channeled into the non farsi language. Media coverage, that’s one thing. Not necessarily talk show, but yes, talk show is my talent, and talking on tv or being a tv is something that I’m really good at it. But apart from that, I think as an Iran expert and Iran analyst, I feel the responsibility to appear more on other media, like CNN, Fox News, any type of news, even like, now. I’m with you. That’s right. Voice of America. Anywhere that I can get a voice. I would like to echo Iran’s voice. People of Iran, during the last year, there was a lot of important news going on, and the government tried to suppress every single part of it. Hundreds of people were killed, thousands were imprisoned. Any activists? Many journalists have been detained, jailed, tortured, raped. So I think the extent of it needs to be better reflected on the outside world. Well, Iran international, your former employer, now, has been defending its journalists and expressing defiance in the face of threats and plots like the one that was further expanded upon in this ITV report. What’s your view of how Iran international has been doing in terms of trying to keep its journalists safe and continue its mission? Well, I’m happy the way that they’re covering it. It’s good that they shed the light on the extent of the threat that we were experiencing. I was also experiencing as a journalist, but I resigned from Iran International in August and they haven’t been in touch with me since the news came out. So technically, after the report was aired on Thursday evening, no one from international talked to me, but I could see that I was also part of their reporting and headlines about what was happening, which is good. Looking ahead here, what do you think western governments can and should do to keep journalists like yourself safe as you continue your work? I think me and anyone else who is dealing with news reports about Iran need protection from the police and also from the governments in the countries that we are living. I’m a UK national. I don’t have iranian passport. I’m not allowed to go back home, and if I go, God knows what happens to me. But here is our home. London is my home, and I want to be safe at home. So a little bit of coordination and protection and support is giving us the right to preserve the freedom of press and freedom of speech so we would be allowed to do what is our job and at the same time feeling safe and not being threatened by IRGC at the door of our houses. Well, Seema Sabet, former tv host for Iran international and now an independent Iran analyst, speaking to us from the british capital, we certainly hope you do stay safe as you continue your important work. And we thank you for being with us on flashpoint Iran. Thank you for inviting me. You’re listening to VOA’s flashpoint Iran. I’m Michael Lippin. A former iranian official facing a life sentence in Sweden for his role in Iran’s mass executions of political prisoners in 1988 is planning to appeal his case to Sweden’s Supreme Court. A lawyer for Hamid Nuri told the Reuters news agency about the planned appeal after an appellate court upheld the life sentence on December 19. Nuri was arrested on a visit to Sweden in 2019 and charged under swedish law for offenses committed abroad. He served as a deputy prosecutor of an iranian prison in Karaj, where many of the 1988 mass killings took place. The majority of victims were members of opposition group MEK, which now leads the France based National Council of Resistance of Iran, or NCRI. I spoke by phone with NCRI spokesman Ali Safavi last week and asked how the group feels about the latest ruling in Nuri’s case. First of all, thanks for having me on your show, Mike. Naturally, having one official of the Irini regime, Albi Yet, if you will, a low level official convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for his role in the 1988 massacre, which basically involved some 30,000 political prisoners, 90% of whom were members and sympathizers of the MEK and none of whom had been sentenced to death, actually, naturally, is welcome news. I think it should be, if you will, a stepping stone toward bringing other officials of this regime, especially its leaders. Ali Khamani, the supreme leader Ibrahim Ra’isi, the president, who was himself a member of the death commission in Tehran, and the judiciary chief, Qlam Hussain Mossadi Ajay and whole host of other officials of this regime, some of whom are still holding senior positions in the iranian judiciary and also in other ministries to account because, as Amnest International has said, the case of the 1988 massacre is one of the most grievous cases of crime against humanity that has remained unprosecuted and even uninvestigated. What can you tell our listeners about how Iran’s leadership today actually described what happened in 1988? Has there been any official acknowledgment of these killings, of the scale of the numbers involved? Well, the iranian regime for many years, perhaps for two decades, tried to keep the 1980 massacre under wraps. There was no news of how many people were killed, where they were buried. Even their families were never given any information on the fate of their loved ones. But, of course, a major justice for the victims campaign was launched. And of course, the iranian resistance and the NCRI, through painstaking work, collected the names of thousands of those who had been executed. In 1988, a fatwa, a religious decree that was issued by Homani before the execution, which called for the annihilation of all MEK members who remained steadfast into support for the organization, became public. And of course, after that, Hussein Ali Montesuri, who was at the time of the massacre, Khomeini’s designated successor, opposed the massacre. And a tape recording of his meeting with the members of death commission in Tehran, including Ibrahim Raisi, came to light. And so then people gradually came to know about the 1988 massacre. And the former UN special rapporteur for human rights in Iran, the late Osman Jahangir, for the first time in her report, talked about the 1988 massacre. And of course, more recently, the current rapporteur, Professor Javid Rahman, has spoken about this. And so there’s an enormous awareness right now about this whole episode. And actually, in his first press conference after he became president in Iran, Raisi was asked about his role in the 1988 massacre. He said, well, I should be rewarded for what I did and because I try to basically uphold human rights and justice in Iran. And other officials of the regime have also been on record praising Raisi and saying that had we not executed these people, that even the survival of the regime would have been at stake. So they are absolutely not bashful about boasting about the executions of 1988. Well, what are the prospects of anyone else being prosecuted internationally under this concept of universal jurisdiction which Sweden applied in the case of Hamid Nuri? I believe that if there is the political will, I think there are no limits as to how many of these criminals can be prosecuted internationally. While, of course, some, like Raisi, may invoke the principle of immunity because he is ahead of his state. But there have been other cases where heads of estate have been prosecuted for crimes against humanity and genocide. Case in point, Omar al Bashir of Sudan, Charles Taylor and several others. And obviously, if the ICC prosecutor is determined enough, he can certainly invoke a case against these folks. Also, some countries, they can also go to the International Criminal Court and file a case against any of these officials. Obviously, besides Khamenei and Raisi, other iranian regime officials enjoy no such immunity. For example, the head of the judiciary, Khalam Hussein Mossini Ajayi, who was a member of a death commission, Hussein Ali Nayiri, who was the head of a death commission in Tehran. And obviously, if any of these folks set foot in the United States or in Europe, the survivors of the massacre are very poised to file legal complaints against them, as was the case in Geneva. As you know, when Raisi was planning to go to UN global forum for refugees, three of his victims filed a complaint, and, of course, that forced Raisi to cancel his visit. Are you aware of any plans by members of the iranian diaspora and any will, as you said, by countries in Europe to actually pounce on the next iranian official who shows up in one of these places, as was stated by these three particular victims who filed a complaint against Raisi a couple of weeks ago in Geneva, any official of the regime that we know has been involved in 1988 massacre will be pursued legally by the victims, there’s no doubt about it, because this campaign must continue until the main perpetrators of that heinous crime are brought to justice. Well, Ali Safavi, member of the foreign affairs committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, joining us on the line from Paris. Thank you for being with us on flashpoint Iran. Thank you for having me on your show. That’s it for the show. I’m Michael Lippin. I’ll be back with another flashpoint Iran next week, so please join me then and have a happy new year.