Our 28 July 2008 press statement, which scandalized the State's permission for a 100 million Euro Deal with Iran, drew international reactions. After speaking to a member of the MFFB, Associated Press (AP) wrote a message on the 29 July, reporting on our protest. This message was adopted by the largest American newspapers and many international print and on-line media (among others the International Herald Tribune and USA Today.)

On the 30 July, a detailed article confirming the criticism against the business deal appeared in the Jerusalem Post. The Christian-Democratic MP and Secretary of State Hartmut Schauerte is suspected of having exerted political influence on the Federal Office for Economics and Export Control (BAFA) in order to attain permission for SPG company to progress with the Iranian deal. Dr. Johannes Gerster, chairman of the German-Israeli Friendship Society (DIG), declared that this business deal is „not compatible with the words of the Chancellor in the Knesset" during her visit to Israel this year. If the suspicion of influence exerted by Schauerte personally on the BAFA is confirmed, Gerster demands that Schauerte should be „dismissed from the German government."

Dieter Graumann, vice-president of the Central Council of the Jews in Germany, is even more outspoken. The Jerusalem Post quotes him as follows: „If a member of the federal government really is making possible such intensive, aggressive and highly sensitive business with Iran, the world champions in anti-Semitism, it's a terrible scandal that outrages and horrifies me. That the secretary of state even publicly boasts of it makes the whole thing even worse. The credibility of the federal government on this point is thus effectively called into question."

Graumann continued: „The Federal Economics Ministry has attracted notice in the past by seeming only too ready to encourage business with the Teheran regime that officially threatens Israel with annihilation. Such an attitude would be a real scandal for a German ministry, ahistorical and almost unscrupulous. A clarification of what position the government is actually supporting is thus overdue."

In this context an article from the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper on 18 July 2008 is of interest. It states that an Iranian group of lobbyists recently traveled „secretly and quietly " through Germany  in order to develop the German-Iranian trade. The role of the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs is mentioned in the article as being „sceptical" towards sanctions against Iran.

In the meantime, the Simon Wiesenthal Center has also reacted, and is urging Chancellor Merkel to intervene and prevent the 100 million Euro deal. „It is an outrage that bureaucrats would be allowed to concoct a deal that thwarts the stated policies of the government of Germany", said rabbi Abraham Cooper. „This deal, which rushes in to fill a business opportunity created by a French firm's backing off, helps Iran in this sensitive sector and makes a mockery of the international community's efforts to isolate a nuclearizing Iranian regime", he added. „But unless the Chancellor overrules the Export Control Office's decision, Germany will strengthen Tehran and further embolden a regime whose president repeatedly calls for the destruction of the Jewish State."

Under the heading „Berlin ♥ Iran", a comment appeared on the 31 July in Wall Street Journal: „Business interests, it seems, trump any proclaimed concerns for Israel's security. Berlin's refusal to use its considerable economic leverage over Tehran puts it at odds not only with Washington but increasingly with its European partners in London and Paris. [...] The news about the Iranian deal comes as British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has been pushing European leaders to extend sanctions to include liquefied gas technology. And in September, Paris urged French companies not to respond to Iranian tenders." The gas deal of the company Steiner „is just one recent example of Germany's still-blossoming commercial relationship with the mullahs. True, exports to Iran have declined in the past couple of years -- not least due to U.S. pressure. But imports from Iran rose 28% last year. And German exports to Iran are on the rise again, up 13.6% in the first quarter. Meanwhile, Germany is increasingly siding with China and Russia to give diplomacy yet another chance even as Iran's regime shows no willingness to respond to the carrots. Ms. Merkel's speech in the Knesset, considered 'historic' only four months ago, already sounds hollow."

On the 1 August an article appeared in the German daily WELT, where Ulrich Wilhelm, the spokesman for Chancellor Merkel is quoted with the words that the Steiner deal is not in Merkel's interest. „There is no interest on the part of the Federal Government to support such a deal."

The Israeli of Foreign Affairs, interviewed in the same article, expressed „disappointment" at the fact that „the decision of the German government runs contrary to the spirit of the sanctions, which the UN security council imposed over Iran. The fact that Germany, which is together with France and Great Britain is a member of the European top leadership group (EU3), took a viewpoint, which undermines the international trend to a significant aggravation of the sanctions against the continuation of the Iranian nuclear programme, is causing concern."

An article in Spiegel Online on the same day reports about the „diplomatic spat […] brewing between Germany and Israel over an export license granted to a German company to provide Iran with high-tech gas plants."

On 1 August the local newspaper Siegener Zeitung reports on the reaction by the Federal Government. The government would reject criticism from Israel. According to the German Government, petrochemical plants do not fall under the UN sanction resolutions. The export license for the domestic plant manufacturer would be legal and could not have been prevented. "Another way is possible though: At the beginning of July the French TOTAL company cancelled a billion Euro deal with Iran concerning the development of enormous gas reserves because of the politically tense situation."

In the August 2nd newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung a detailed article describes the history behind the criticized Iran business. The role of the Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin is also mentioned: "German companies are very discreet when it comes to orders from Iran. [...] However the Iranian government and the media of the country gladly boast about their political contacts and business partners in the west. The Iranian state thereby gives the impression that it is not isolated at all because of the nuclear conflict. [...] The message would hardly have received attention in Germany had it not have been immediately taken up by the critical Mideast Freedom forum Berlin immediately."

The political dimension of the Iran deal is presented as follows with reference to the position of the MFFB: "In spite of official answers, the Iran business remains however in a gray zone. On the one hand the business contacts with Iran are seen as traditionally good and in many cases do not violate sanction regulations, for example in the energy business. On the other hand the Federal Government acknowledges again and again its goal to prevent an armed conflict between Iran and the USA or Israel because of the disputed nuclear programme. This commitment to diplomacy however, as understood in Berlin, presumes at least placing Iran under political pressure. And this will not succeed as long as companies can do business unhindered."

The August 2nd Tagesspiegel gathers criticism of the political opposition in Berlin of Hartmut Schauerte (CDU):  "FDP secretary general Dirk Niebel reproached the parliamentary Secretary of State Schauerte for directing the "lobbying work in favor of Iran". This lobbying had “rightfully been criticized by Israel”. Niebel requested that the minister of economics Michael Glos (CSU) take a clear position in the case.

The Representative of the Green Party in parliament Jerzy Montag accused Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) of being inconsistent: "The chancellor shouldn't show off in Sunday talks in front of the Knesset, if she does not intervene at a crucial moment"

The popular Blog Lizas Welt summarizes the development and comes to a critical conclusion: “The friendship with
Israel is mostly for crowd-pleasing speeches. But it’s not allowed to cost anything.”

The Jerusalem Center publishes a comment on its German website under the title “The despotic temptation – The German gas deal with Iran” which introduces some new arguments and comparisons to the discussion: “The character of the sanctions, however, became just clear as it transpired that not only the internationally criticized neighboring country Switzerland understood how to accomplish its economic interest in the Iranian gas sector against the spirit of the international sanctions, but also the German export industry, stealthy and with vigorous support of Merkel`s party members, aspires to put profit before morality. […] And this after Great Britain as well as France have stressed more sharp sanctions against Iran in the natural gas sector and also Switzerland, in the meantime, announced its distance from a special role in the European Iran policy.

It may really be right that in the pure text the deal does not contradict the sanctions presently supported by Germany against Iran, but the question arises, which part of the “No” to the Iranian nuclear program, which is subject matter of the sanctions, might not have been understood by the bureaucrats of the BAFA, State Secretary Schauerte and the assiduously at the growing export volume leering IHK-officials.

As with the generally known dilemma of genocide prevention, which fails over and over again because of the fact that political actors avoid to call genocide by its name, it occurs also here that political will manifestations like the commitment to the Israeli security as a part of the German fundamental policy might become bare paper tigers. The spokesman of the on vacation being Chancellor announced, at least, that the gas deal is not in her sense. Hope remains that now the mentioned reason of state is called back as quickly as possible from its vacation.”

In an article on 3 August 2008, the Jerusalem Post cites the speaker for foreign policy of the CDU, Eckart von Klaeden: "I support in every respect the federal government's policy of reducing business with Iran as far as possible, as long as Iran, with its nuclear programme, does not adhere to international law and threatens Israel."

In an interview, Aharon Abramovich, secretary general of the Israeli Ministry for Foreign Affairs states: "Yes, they [the German government] said that international sanctions don't apply to this deal. This is a normal commercial deal that a company can make and the German government can't stop a deal like this. It's not a deal for 100 million; it's a little smaller. And so on forth, all kinds of excuses. We told them, ladies and gentlemen, it's not just a question of whether these or other sanctions formally apply. There should be an intent, especially on the part of a leading country in Europe like Germany, to end all commercial dealings with Iran. A suitable atmosphere has to be created so that they won't want to make deals like this. This is the message we conveyed to them. I still hope that, as a result of the conversations we had with the Germans, the deal will be cancelled. But this is not a one-time action; it's a long struggle. We believe that it's a struggle of the international community. Some countries are more determined [than others] in this struggle."

Haaretz on 5 August quotes the Israeli Ambassador to Germany, Yoram Ben Zeev: "The message this deal sends is very negative." The newspaper continues to report that first steps are planned by the Federal Government: "Merkel disapproves of the deal. Even though gas is not included as part of the sanctions against Iran over its nuclear activity, the officials said they would seek to hold talks with SGP on the matter."

In an agency message some statements of the Federal Government are published: "Chancellor Angela Merkel on Wednesday called on German firms to show some sensitivity in their dealings with Iran, following Israel's criticism of a German company's gas plant deal. The German government has said the company's plans to export three liquefied natural gas plants to Iran were approved earlier this year because the plants did not fall under any category of goods banned from export. However, Merkel spokesman Thomas Steg said the chancellor had repeatedly made clear that moral considerations, and not just export bans, should play a role in such deals."

A comment of a MFFB member was published on August 8 in the Tagesspiegel in which also some new data are mentioned to the German-Iranian trade: “Germany is still Iran's most important trade partner in the West and an irreplaceable supplier of technology. In fact, 2008 could be a new record year. The export volume already grew by 13.6 percent in the first quarter. 1,926 business dealings with Iran were submitted to the relevant authorities by the end of July, 63 percent more than in 2007. Gas liquefaction units for fuel production are only one example of how German exports boost Iran, because, despite having a wealth of raw materials, Iran has to import 40 percent of its fuel. The infrastructure for the extraction and production of oil and gas needs to be modernized and expanded. There was unrest in Iran last summer due to gas rationing. 

If Germany does not have the legal grounds to stop these exports, such measures must be passed as quickly as possible. Up to now, the only thing we have heard from the Chancellor's Office is that they will be talking with SPG. But it certainly does not sound like the beginning of an urgently needed change in the scandalous and irresponsible business as usual dealings with Iran.”

On August 8 Haaretz publishes an article which also points at a new statistics about the European-Iranian trade: “The export from the European Union to Iran has risen during the past five months by 18%. This arises from the monthly commercial report which was published by the office of statistics of the European Union last weekend. From January to May 27 EU member states have delivered goods up to the value of 4.47 milliard euros to the Islamic republic, in the comparison period of the year before these were still 3.78 milliards. Previous year`s figures had pointed to a declining export for which straight away the effectiveness of the international sanctions in Europe was held responsible. Now the new figures run counter to this appraisal. Germany heads the export of goods to Iran and covers 35% of the whole European exports there. It is followed by Italy (19%) and France (16%). In contrast to these states Great Britain can register a decline of export activities to Iran. Meanwhile, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel appealed to German companies on Wednesday to weigh morally before close deals with Iran. Germany is currently facing sharp criticism from Israel because of the 100-million-euro gas deal of the German company SPG with Iran.”

And also Germany's biggest tabloid BILD on 8 August reports on this case: "After heavy protests from Israel now also policians from the Christian Democratic Union are outraged at the German-Iranian gas deal! Background: The Federal Office for Economics and Export Control (BAFA) did not object the delivery of three liquefied natural gas plants (worth: 100 million Euro) - allegedly after pressure from the Federal Economics Ministry. Ruprecht Polenz (CDU), head of the Committee of Foreign Affairs, told BILD: 'This deal damages the political efforts to put pressure on Iran and it's nuclear programme.' Eckart von Klaeden, Foreign Affairs Speaker of the CDU/CSU: 'Also companies have ethical responsibility!'"

On August 11 the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) releases a press statement: "We believe that the gravity of the Iranian situation precludes depending upon the consciences of individual business leaders," said Glen S. Lewy, ADL National Chair, and Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "Now is the time for Germany to put the weight of German law behind the moral imperative and codify the important political stance that it has taken at the federal and European Union levels." In a letter to Chancellor Merkel, the League called on Germany to promote legislation and regulations that would "… aim to limit German and European companies' involvement in Iran's oil and gas sectors, industries that require the technology of Western energy companies for their most important projects and which provide the funding for the Iranian regime's development of a nuclear weapons capability. Madame Chancellor, we look forward to your leadership for sanctions on Iran that are commensurate with the magnitude of the Iranian threat and able to change the Iranian regime's determination to acquire a nuclear weapons capability". The press statement also mentions a Q&A on the Iranian nuclear threat.

"How 'special' a relationship?" Haaretz asks on August 15. "As I tried during the course of the week to get straight answers to my questions on the subject, it became clear that politicians across the party spectrum are reticent about addressing the Iranian shadow that has fallen across the German-Israeli 'special relationship' - a covenant supposedly based on Germany's responsibility toward Israel, in view of the Holocaust and the two countries' shared democratic values. A shift in Germany's Iran policy is clearly under way. In 2007, when Merkel learned of a firm's plan to build a high-speed railway in Iran, she said: 'I consider German assistance in the construction of the Transrapid, in a country whose president constantly announces that he wants to destroy Israel, to be completely unacceptable.' The Merkel of 2008, in contrast, seems less and less likely to rein in German firms that are strengthening Israel's number one enemy.[...] Might it be that the chancellor, who faces an election contest in 2009, is currying favor with the German business sector, a traditional base of CDU support? Merkel's coalition partner, the Social Democratic Party (SPD), has remained surprisingly quiet on the political sidelines. Perhaps that's because Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier is embroiled in his own pro-Iran scandal, having invited and funded former Iranian deputy foreign minister Muhammad Javad Ardashir Larijani to speak at a conference in Berlin in late June. Larijani, speaking in the government district, not far from Berlin's memorial to the Holocaust, denied that event, and called for the 'Zionist project' to be 'canceled.' When I tracked down the SPD's foreign-policy spokesman, MP Gert Weisskirchen, he told me that the gas deal "should be stopped," adding vaguely that he wants to pursue a parliamentary inquiry into the subject. Germany's Left Party, the country's third largest, remained, like the SPD, inert during the initial whirlwind of criticism of the deal. [...] The relative indifference of the political echelon to the gas deal might be termed the post-scandal scandal. [...] As a reporter who writes for the Israeli press, I have no trouble eliciting proclamations from German politicians asserting that Israel has a right to exist. But isn't that a sentiment it should be possible to take for granted? That international media reporting and Israeli political anger were required before Chancellor Merkel was willing to grudgingly express displeasure about the liquid gas contract, illustrates the tenuous nature of German-Israeli relations. Depressing as this may sound, Germany still lacks a homegrown national consciousness that Israel's security is 'non-negotiable,' to quote Merkel's Knesset speech. Internal German political and civil society pressure to draft and enact legislation to radically restrict German trade relations with Iran would fill the 'special relationship' with genuine meaning."

On the Website Abgeordnetenwatch Hartmut Schauerte on August 11 lets his secretary answer a question on his role in SPG's Iran-deal: "The company has been unknown to Secretary of State Schauerte before the decision by the german board in charge." Unfortunately, he forgets to explain how he managed to lobby so long and intensive for a decision without even knowing the company from his horme region.

Titled "The Russo-Iranian Axis" a commentary in the August 20 Wall Street Journal is highly critical of Russia's role in the conflict with Iran and pleads for determined western sanctions on Iran: "European Union's insistence on U.N.-approved sanctions against Tehran may no longer be just naive but willfully negligent. [...] Moscow's dealings with the ruling mullahs should have long convinced Europe that Russia doesn't share its goal of stopping the Iranian bomb. How else could one explain Moscow's construction of a nuclear reactor in Iran, its delivery of advanced antiaircraft missiles to Tehran and its refusal to pass anything but the weakest economic sanctions? [...] The Russians, so the argument goes, cannot possibly have any interest in a nuclear Iran either. Another misconception. True, Moscow must be wary of Islamic terrorists getting their hands on nuclear material, given Moscow's scorched-earth war against its breakaway republic of Chechnya, which is majority Muslim. But the Kremlin's support for Iran has probably bought Russia adequate insurance against the possibility of Tehran passing on some dirty bomb to a Chechen rebel. Instead, Moscow can quite rightly assume that a nuclear Iran will hurt Western interests more than Russia's. And in Moscow's atavistic balance-of-power calculations, as long as the West loses more than Russia, Russia wins. [...] Iran may not even have to use a nuclear device to spread destruction. The Islamic Republic may believe the atomic bomb makes it untouchable, and step up its support for terrorists -- or even launch direct (conventional) attacks on Western and Israeli targets. [...] Any conflagration in the Gulf would send energy prices through the roof. And this is where Russia's stalling at the U.N. Security Council comes in. It increases Iran's chances of getting the bomb while at the same time it makes a pre-emptive Western attack on Iran's nuclear installations more likely. In either case, as a major oil and gas producer, Russia would stand to profit from the inevitable panic on the energy markets. [...] Europeans also argue that Western 'unilateral' sanctions are futile because they would allow Russia and other countries to come in and replace Western suppliers. But not every supplier is replaceable. Iran wants Western technology because Western technology is still generally superior to that coming from Russia, China or other emerging economies. Europe here has both a qualitative an a quantitative edge. The EU is Iran's main trading partner, and Germany and Italy have been particularly busy. Earlier this month it emerged that Berlin has given the green light for a €100 million deal for a German company to provide Iran with three liquefied gas plants. It would be impossible for Tehran to quickly find adequate alternatives for their European imports. 'Around two-thirds of the Iranian industry is to a significant degree equipped with machines and plants of German origin,' Michael Tockuss, at that time the director of the German-Iranian Chamber of Industry and Commerce, told German weekly Focus in 2006. 'The Iranians are certainly dependent on German spare parts and suppliers.' [...] Unless Europe wants an even deadlier nuclear power [than Russia] at its southern flank, it will have to stop hiding behind Moscow's veto and tighten the screws on Iran."

The August 20 issue of the Jerusalem Post features a commentary by a member of the MFFB: "For now, the only thing we hear from the Chancellor's Office is that it will be 'talking' with SPG, and that there are 'moral' and 'ethical' obligations. In short, German business should be more 'sensitive' regarding Iranian deals - i.e., simply not publicize its commercial activity with Iran. Deputy Iranian Foreign Minister Mehdi Safari told Financial Times Deutschland that German-Iranian business should be conducted outside of the public spotlight, noting that German companies 'can make a commercial deal without publicity.' This certainly does not sound like the beginning of a determined and responsible Iran policy. And it looks to get worse: There are signs that the German energy company RWE will join Austrian OMV and Swiss' EGL to sign a gas deal with Iran. Gas could be supplied through the Nabucco-pipeline beginning in 2013, a project that RWE joined in February. The German goal is to decrease energy-dependence on Russia by becoming more dependent on Iran. A nuclear Iran that is one of Germany's - and Europe's - main energy suppliers would raise appeasement policy to a new level. There is still time to prevent such a scenario. But if Germany continues its irresponsible business as usual, it is clear who will pay the price: the Iranian people, who suffer under a brutal regime, and, of course, Israel."

On August 27 an article in Iran Daily (PDF) titled "Sanctions toothles for German-Iran biz ties" proves in all clarity the importance of Germany for Iran: "At least 1,700 German companies are active in Iran, including household names like Siemens and BASF which have been in the country for decades. Some 75 percent of all small and mid-size companies in Iran are outfitted with German technology. [...] The deal with SPG has made it clear that Berlin is not caving in to the US pressures and that the unjustified US-led sanctions and export restrictions have proved completely insufficient. In sum, Germany is Iran’s most important trade partner in the West. Infact, 2008 could be a record year."

Also the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung on August 31 and Die WELT on September 1 write about the SPG-Deal and the MFFB co-organized protests in Siegen.

On September 1 the Jerusalem Post reports on the protests in Siegen, where some explosive details of the Iran-deal have been revealed for the first time: "Outrage over a €100 million plus liquefied natural gas deal between German engineering firm SPG Steiner-Prematechnik-Gastec and Iran prompted roughly 150 pro-Israel German demonstrators to rally at the main marketplace in the city of Siegen in North Rhine-Westphalia on Saturday. Dr. Kazem Moussavi, an Iranian living in exile in Germany and spokesman for the German chapter of the Iranian Green party, told the protesters that Steiner had reached the deal with the Iranian firm Sahel Consultant Engineering, which, he said, was controlled by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, according to the US Treasury Department. [...] For the protesters in Siegen, a broad-based coalition of Jewish and non-Jewish organizations who have built a common front against what they view as an overly cozy relationship between Iran and Germany, Merkel's attempt to distance herself from the gas deal failed to dispel the rising anger over her administration's role in bolstering Iran's infrastructure and regime. 'It is a scandal that the German government here fails to act and that trade such as with the Siegen firm Steiner is possible and not simply stopped,' said Roger Bückert from the 'Pro-Israel Initiative Never Again,' the main organizer of the protest in Siegen. [...] Stephan J. Kramer, general secretary of the Central Council of Jews in Germany who was born in Siegen, said, 'Whoever delivers modern technology to Iran guarantees its [regime's] retention of power and becomes an accomplice' in supporting the Iranian regime. 'German governmental credit guarantees should not be reduced, rather completely abolished' with respect to insuring German trade activity with Iran, he said. Kramer also demanded the immediate dismissal of Hartmut Schauerte. While neither the Merkel administration nor the Bundestag has enacted legislation to restrict deals such as the Steiner one or to end government credit guarantees protecting German investments in Iran, a small group of politicians objected to the Steiner deal. Gitta Connemann, a CDU MP who serves on the executive committee of the German-Israeli parliamentary caucus, told the Post, 'I consider the deal politically damaging and morally questionable, because it is about a shipment to Iran. Its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has not only threatened to erase Israel from the map, but also undertakes efforts to realize the threat.'"

On the website of the Jerusalem Post Abraham Foxman sees German-Jewish relations fundamentally put into question: "Germany's relations with the Jewish people since the Holocaust have been very complicated. [...] Now, however, there is before us one of the greatest tests as to whether Germany truly has learned from the past and, I'm sorry to say, that true doubts are surfacing. I'm referring to the fact that the Jewish State is experiencing an existential threat in the form of an ever-closer nuclear Iran. [...] It has become a commonality to say that the only way to avoid two terrible choices -- either an Iran with nuclear weapons which would threaten the whole Middle East and beyond or a military strike against Iran which could lead to untold military and economic consequences -- is to convince Iran through pressure to stop its nuclear program. [...] It is true that Russia and China play major roles in inhibiting UN sanctions. But much can be done even without more stringent UN action if Europe would fully join the US in taking action. In this regard, Germany's role has been destructive, even though Chancellor Angela Merkel has publicly called for increased pressure on Iran. [...] Time is running out on the effort to stop Iran from going nuclear, and Germany, a player with real leverage on Iran, continues to undermine efforts to stop Iran. Germany must act now before it is too late. [...] If it fails to cut off or substantially reduce its economic ties to Iran, then all the good efforts to rehabilitate German-Jewish relations over the decades will have been significantly undermined."

On September 5 Emanuele Ottolenghi in Haaretz sees three lessons to be learned from the SPG-Deal: "First, European technology remains indispensable for Iran, if it is to be able to exploit its energy reserves and become a regional superpower. Second, if economic sanctions against Iran were to include exports, investments and joint ventures in the energy field, it could have severe repercussions for Tehran. Finally, tougher sanctions against Iran are the only non-military way to pressure Tehran to renounce its nuclear ambitions.[...] Iran rightly fears sanctions in this sector - and Western powers are seriously pondering the option - so to shield itself from pressure, it has adopted a three-part strategy: to expand refining capacity by building new refineries and upgrading existing ones; to guarantee imports of refined fuels from friendly countries like Venezuela and Indonesia, even by subsidizing new refineries there; and to introduce measures aimed at reducing consumption - including gasoline rationing, price controls and conversion of all of the country's cars from gasoline and diesel to CNG - the kind of fuel SPG is going to help produce. [...] Additionally, such a move would free almost half a million barrels of oil a day for export [...]. And it could not happen without SPG's planned plants. [...] As long as the best technology for these ventures comes from European companies like SPG, Europe is in a position to squeeze Tehran by denying it access to those lucrative deals that will ultimately make Iran achieve its goals and become the regional superpower it aspires to be. What are we waiting for?"

The Iranian FARS News Agency reports on September 9 that the "biggest recent deal, worth €100m ($147m, £80m), was signed by Steiner Prematechnik Gastec, the German engineering company, this month to build equipment for three gas conversion plants in Iran." This is seen as sign of a trend among European companies to invest in Irans's energy sector despite of US-Sanctions.

The Website Israel Network on September 26 reports on the SPG-Deal, the Protests in Siegen and the role of Secretary of State Hartmut Schauerte. The summary says that SPG is rather successfull in hiding as much information about itself as possible.

A long commentary in the October 7 issue of Wall Street Journal Europe, that also mentions the SPG-deal, calls Germanys commitment to stop the Iranian bomb into question:  "At the U.N. General Assembly last month, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier condemned a speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as 'blatant anti-Semitism.' [Also look at the related press release of the MFFB] Mr. Steinmeier also criticized Iran's 'delaying tactics' on the nuclear issue and warned that the Iranian government 'must not exhaust the patience of the international community.' [...] For all his tough words, Mr. Steinmeier never said what steps the international community should take if Iran continues its 'delaying tactics.' His British and French colleagues recently repeated their willingness to impose unilateral European sanctions on Iran if Russia and China block new sanctions resolutions in the Security Council. However, Mr. Steinmeier opposes European sanctions, saying they exceed the U.N. mandate. Indeed, so far there is little sign of the Germany government implementing any measures to thwart Iran's ambition to develop nuclear weapons. [...] Instead, it counts on 'voluntary self-restraint' of the companies. Furthermore, the most important German political think tank, the 'Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik' (SWP), is pushing in the opposite direction by calling for reducing sanctions and intensifying bilateral talks with Iran. Volker Perthes, director of the SWP (and an adviser to Foreign Minister Steinmeier) has been calling for a 'strategic partnership' with Iran since 2006. In his new book, 'Iran: A Political Challenge,' he advocates confidence-building measures and the development of an energy partnership between Iran and the EU. He also pleads for collaboration in all areas. According to Mr. Perthes, 'This [strategic partnership] would especially include energy partnership, collaboration in development matters, science and technology, as well as in certain aspects of internal and regional security issues.'"

The SPG-Deal is regularly mentioned as an example of the prospering German-Iranian business relations, for example in Farsnews on Novmeber 28 an in Haaretz on December 1st. An Editorial in the Washington Times issue of December 5 says that the German "government capitulates to pressure from German exporters to continue business as usual with Tehran. In July, Germany's federal Office of Economics and Export Control announced it would allow the company Steiner Prematechnik Gastec to sell high-technology equipment that would aid Iran's natural-gas industry -- a source of revenue for the country's terrorist and military activities. German government statistics released this week show trade between the two nations has increased by almost 8 percent this year, a point trumpeted in the Iranian state-controlled press as evidence that commerce has prevailed over 'Zionist' opposition."

Panorama, the most important political TV-magazine in Germany, broadcasts on December 11 a report on sanctions against Iran. The report features some scenes from the MFFB-protests in Siegen. The script says: "And so purely civil deals without any relation to the nuclear program are beeing scandalized. Last summer a pro-american lobbygroup protests against the Iran-deals of the company Steiner.  Bernd Steiner: 'They used the motto: stop the Steiner-Deal with the Mullahs etc. These are things that are not acceptable. This absoulutely nothing to do with our business.' Bernd Steiner delivers liquefied gas technology to the Iranian natural gas industry. He fought for the export-permission. He knows that he mainly has to press against pressure from the US. Because inthe US-press it hails headlines like 'Germany permits errection of gas facilities in Iran' and 'Berlin loves Iran'." Unfortunately the viewers are not let known the name of the "lobbygroup" or the reason for labeling it "pro-american". Another scene of the report shows some of the first achievements of the MFFB and STOP THE BOMB interventions: "It is no longer for military goods only that the German Government cares. Everything that might cause trouble is refused. A permisson, a letter of rejection [by the Federal Office for Economics and Export Control (BAFA)] says, would cause massive negative reactions in the international public."

On Hagalil a commentary on the Panorama-report just mentioned is published on December 14 "Present different opinions? - No, not in German state-television. Explain reasons for economic sanctinons? - No, not necessary, let's rather point the finger at the Americans. The Americans - or have some [anti-Semitic] east-coast fantasies of the Panorama crew come to the surface?  [...] Nothing was said about the Iranian threats of extermination against Israel or the human rights violations against women, homosexuals, Bahai or opponents of the regime. The main thing is that German business is doing well."

The Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin welcomes all efforts to stop the politically devastating deal with Iran and urges all organizations, media and individuals to take quick and decisive action at this crucial time.

Also the MFFB will continue its involvement in this case.

If you want to stay informed on all developments, please visit our website regularly or subscribe to our newsletter.