US sanctions Sweden-based gang with links to Iran
The United States on Wednesday announced sanctions against the Foxtrot Network, a Sweden-based gang accused of carrying out attacks against Israeli interests in Europe on behalf of Iran.
Describing Foxtrot as one of Sweden's "most notorious criminal gangs," the U.S. Treasury and State Departments also placed sanctions on its leader Rawa Majid, with both agencies saying in statements that he had "specifically cooperated with the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security."
"Iran's brazen use of transnational criminal organizations and narcotics traffickers underscores the regime's attempts to achieve its aims through any means, with no regard for the cost to communities across Europe," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said.
The sanctions, which usually include asset freezes and U.S. entry bans, were issued in line with President Donald Trump's reinstated "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran, the agencies said.
Sweden's Sapo intelligence service announced last May that it believed Iran had recruited Swedish criminal gang members as proxies to commit "acts of violence" against Israeli and other interests in Sweden.
That announcement came weeks after nighttime gunfire was reported outside Israel's embassy in Stockholm, and three months after police found a live grenade lying on the grounds of the Israeli compound.
At the time, Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter reported that both Majid's Foxtrot and arch-rival gang Rumba had been recruited by the Iranian regime, citing documents from Israel's intelligence agency Mossad.
DN said the Mossad documents showed Majid — a Swedish-Turkish dual national nicknamed the "Kurdish Fox" — had been arrested in Iran and ordered to cooperate with the Iranian regime or go to jail.
Later, in October, the embassy was hit by gunfire, while the day after two explosions occurred near the Israeli embassy in Copenhagen. Swedish nationals have been arrested over the suspected grenade attack, according to Danish police.
The attacks in Europe last year occurred as tensions soared between Iran and Israel over the devastating war in Gaza.
But Sweden has struggled to contain surging gang violence in recent years, with shootings and bombings frequently occurring across the country.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Voice of America
14-03-2025
- Voice of America
US envoy says Hamas misrepresented release of hostage
U.S. special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff said a Hamas statement issued Friday announcing it had agreed to release an American-Israeli soldier was, in reality, a condition of a "bridge" ceasefire proposal offered by U.S. officials earlier this week. Early Friday, the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas issued a statement saying it had agreed to release Edan Alexander, believed to be the last living American hostage held in Gaza, as well as the bodies of four other hostages after receiving a proposal from mediators to resume negotiations on the second phase of a Gaza ceasefire deal. The statement said the proposal had been offered by unnamed mediators as part of the work in Qatar to restart ceasefire negotiations. The United States, Egypt and host Qatar have been mediating the ceasefire talks. Hamas expressed its "complete readiness to begin negotiations and reach a comprehensive agreement on the issues of the second phase." Later Friday, in a joint statement issued along with the National Security Council, Witkoff's office explained he and National Security Council Senior Middle East Director Eric Trager had presented the bridge proposal to extend the current ceasefire beyond Ramadan and Passover and allow time to negotiate a framework for a permanent ceasefire. In the statement, Witkoff said that under the proposal, Hamas would release additional living hostages in exchange for prisoners, and that the extension of the phase-one ceasefire would allow more time for humanitarian aid to resume into Gaza. He said the U.S. had its Qatari and Egyptian mediating partners convey to Hamas "in no uncertain terms" that the new proposal would have to be implemented soon and Edan Alexander would have to be released immediately. "Unfortunately, Hamas has chosen to respond by publicly claiming flexibility," Witkoff said in the statement, "while privately making demands that are entirely impractical without a permanent ceasefire." In a statement released on the X social media platform, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office said that while Israel had accepted "the Witkoff framework," Hamas "continues to wage psychological warfare against hostage families." The statement went on to say that the prime minister would convene his ministerial team Saturday evening for a detailed briefing from the negotiating team and "decide on steps to free the hostages and achieve all our war objectives." Hamas is believed to be holding 24 living hostages taken in the Oct. 7, 2023, attack that triggered its war with Israel. The group also is holding the bodies of 34 others who were either killed in the initial attack or in captivity, as well as the remains of a soldier killed in 2014. In comments to FOX Business news Friday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said she was wary of taking Hamas statements at face value but emphasized that U.S. President Donald Trump was working "diligently" to bring hostages home. Witkoff told reporters at the White House early in March that gaining the release of Alexander was a "top priority." A ceasefire has been in place since January. During the first phase of the three-phase ceasefire, Hamas exchanged 33 Israeli hostages and five Thais for some 2,000 Palestinian prisoners and detainees. Israel has been pressing Hamas to accept an extension of the first phase, which ended March 2. Hamas had said it wanted to move to the second phase of the agreement, which would involve the release of more hostages and Israel's withdrawal from Gaza.
Voice of America
14-03-2025
- Voice of America
Exclusive: Second Iranian ship suspected of carrying missile ingredient leaves China
A second Iranian ship that Western news reports have named as part of a scheme to import a missile propellant ingredient from China is heading to Iran with a major cargo load, an exclusive VOA analysis has found. Ship-tracking websites show the Iranian-flagged cargo ship Jairan departed China on Monday, a month later than the expected departure cited by one of the news reports. The Jairan was named in January and February articles by The Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal and CNN as one of two Iranian cargo ships Tehran is using to import 1,000 metric tons of sodium perchlorate from China. The three news outlets cited unnamed Western intelligence sources as saying the purported shipment could be transformed into enough ammonium perchlorate — a key solid fuel propellant component — to produce 260 midrange Iranian missiles. The other Iranian cargo ship named in the news reports, the Golbon, completed a 19-day journey from eastern China to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas on Feb. 13. During the trip, it made a two-day stop at southern China's Zhuhai Gaolan port and delivered an unknown cargo to Iran, according to ship-tracking website MarineTraffic. Both the Golbon and the Jairan are sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department as vessels operated by the state-run Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, which itself is sanctioned for being what the State Department has called "the preferred shipping line for Iranian proliferators and procurement agents." As the Golbon sailed from China to Iran in late January and early February, the Jairan's automatic identification system transponder — a device that transmits positional and other data as part of an internationally mandated tracking system — reported the vessel as being docked at eastern China's Liuheng Island. In a joint review of the Jairan's AIS data on MarineTraffic and fellow ship-tracking website Seasearcher, VOA and Dubai-based intelligence analyst Martin Kelly of EOS Risk Group determined that the Jairan reported no significant draught change while docked at Liuheng Island through February and into early March. That meant the Iranian vessel was sitting at the almost same depth in the water as when it arrived in eastern China late last year, indicating it had not been loaded with any major cargo since then. The Jairan remained at Liuheng Island until March 3, when it headed south toward Zhuhai Gaolan and docked at the port on March 8. Two days later, the Jairan departed, reporting its destination as Bandar Abbas with an expected arrival of March 26. The Iranian ship also reported a significant draught change upon leaving Zhuhai Gaolan, transmitting data showing it was sitting more than 2 meters deeper in the water and indicating it had taken on a major cargo at the port, Kelly told VOA. As of Friday, local time, the Jairan was in the waters of Indonesia's Riau Archipelago, heading southwest toward the Singapore Strait. The U.S. State Department had no comment on the Jairan's departure from China when contacted by VOA. Iran's U.N. mission in New York did not respond to a similar VOA request for comment, emailed on Tuesday. Last month, the State Department told VOA it was aware of the January news reports by The Financial Times and Wall Street Journal regarding Iran's purported use of the Golbon and Jairan to import sodium perchlorate from China. A spokesperson said the State Department does not comment on intelligence matters but "remains focused on preventing the proliferation of items, equipment, and technology that could benefit Iran's missile or other weapons programs and continues to hold Iran accountable through sanctions." Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning responded to the news reports in a Jan. 23 press briefing, asserting that China abides by its own export controls and international obligations and rejects other countries' imposition of what Beijing considers illegal unilateral sanctions. In the past month, Chinese state media have made no reference to the Jairan, while China's social media platforms also have had no observable discussion about the Iranian ship, according to a review by VOA's Mandarin Service. In its Jan. 22 report, The Financial Times cited "security officials in two Western countries" as saying the Jairan would depart China in early February, but it did not leave until March 10. Gregory Brew, a senior Iran analyst at the Eurasia Group, a New York-based political risk consultancy, said Iran may also have wanted to see if the Golbon could complete its voyage from China without being interdicted before sending the Jairan to follow it. "Ships carrying highly sensitive materials related to Iran's missile industry, which is under U.S. sanctions, are at risk of interception, and the Iranians likely are conscious of that," Brew said. Eight Republican U.S. senators led by Jim Risch and Pete Ricketts sent a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio about the purported Iran-China chemical scheme dated Feb. 4, urging him to work with global partners of the U.S. "to intercept and stop the shipments currently underway" if the press reports proved accurate. There was no sign of the Golbon being intercepted on its recent China to Iran voyage. Responding to VOA's query about the letter, a U.S. State Department press officer said: "We do not comment on Congressional correspondence." Ricketts' office also did not respond to a VOA inquiry about whether Rubio has responded to the senators' letter. VOA's Mandarin Service contributed to this report.
Voice of America
13-03-2025
- Voice of America
Under what circumstances can a US green card be revoked?
The recent arrest of Palestinian activist and U.S. legal permanent resident Mahmoud Khalil, who played a prominent role in last year's Columbia University protests over the war in Gaza, has prompted questions about the limits of a green card. A green card holder since 2024, Khalil was granted lawful permanent residency status in the U.S. But green card holders can lose their status and face deportation if they violate immigration law. A federal judge on Wednesday extended efforts to halt Khalil's deportation, and the New York resident remains in detention in Louisiana although he has not been charged with any crime. It is not a criminal offense to disagree, even openly, with the U.S. government's policy or actions, and the Bill of Rights protects free speech and the right to assemble. The why Green cards can be revoked, New York-based immigration lawyer Linda Dakin-Grimm told VOA. 'It's not that common, but it also isn't rare. People lose their green cards most often when they're convicted of crimes. … A green card is not citizenship. It's seen as a privilege that you earn, but you can also lose it if you engage in conduct that is contrary to the conditions that green card holders live under,' she said. Examples of crimes that can cause a green card holder can lose their status include aggravated felonies, drug offenses, fraud, or national security concerns such as ties to a terrorist group. Green card holders can also lose their status and lawful permanent residency status for being deemed a threat to national security. If a green card holder is accused of a crime, their criminal case will go through the justice system. But the process to revoke their permanent status takes place in immigration court, where officials must present evidence to justify revoking a green card. The how Revoking a green card is a legal process that starts when the U.S. government determines that an individual has violated immigration laws. The case can come to the government's attention in different ways, either through a routine immigration check, law enforcement investigation, or whistleblower. 'It could theoretically be a whistleblower. Someone who has some information. … Could they call the State Department? Maybe. Could they call the ICE hotline? Maybe,' Dakin-Grimm said. The Department of Homeland Security usually initiates the process. The green card holder will receive a document known as a Notice to Appear in immigration court or, in serious cases, they may be arrested and detained. White House officials said Wednesday that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has the authority to revoke a green card or any visa if an individual's activities in the United States 'would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences' to the country. Rubio has said that Khalil's case is not about free speech. 'No one has a right to a green card, by the way. … If you told us that's what you intended to do when you came to America, we would have never let you in,' Rubio said on Wednesday. 'If you do it once you get in, we're going to revoke it and kick you out.' The authority for the secretary of state to intervene in a case like Khalil's stems from the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. A provision in the law allows the secretary of state to deem a non-citizen deportable if their presence or activities are believed to significantly harm U.S. foreign policy interests. According to Khalil's NTA, Rubio has made that determination. Khalil has been ordered to appear in front of an immigration judge on March 27 at the Lasalle Detention Facility in Louisiana. The court In immigration court, the burden of proof is on the government; it must show the person violated immigration laws. In a case like Khalil's, ICE attorneys will ask for deportation, but they will have to prove he is a threat to national security. The green card holder can also present a defense. In the criminal justice system, if a person cannot afford an attorney, the government must provide a public defender. In immigration court, however, immigrants have the right to their own attorney, but the government does not have to provide one. If immigrants cannot afford an attorney or cannot find one to represent them pro bono, they do will not have access to legal representation. Dakin-Grimm says the process can sometimes go fast, but it is also complex. In the immigration court system, the decision to revoke a green card is an administrative procedure conducted by the Department of Justice, under an office known as the Executive Office for Immigration Review. 'It's kind of like the government is prosecuting a case, and the judge is also the government,' Dakin-Grimm said. The outcome If the immigration judge rules against the green card holder, they can appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). And if the BIA agrees with the government, the green card holder can appeal to a Federal Court of Appeals. Although the case can end up at the U.S. Supreme Court, Dakin-Grimm says that rarely happens, mostly because the Supreme Court has complete discretion over the cases it chooses. 'Most people can't afford to do this kind of legal work themselves. It's just very, very expensive — you know, hundreds of thousands of dollars to take a case from the trial court level all the way to the Supreme Court,' she said. 'But in the immigration space, you tend to see nonprofit agencies, law school clinics, working pro bono, working for free in significant cases like this.' A final decision If the green card is revoked and all appeals fail, the person is usually deported from the U.S. If the appeal is successful, the person keeps their green card and is allowed to stay in the country. Dakin-Grimm said many green card holders think because it is called 'permanent residency,' the status is actually permanent. 'But it's only permanent as long as you follow the rules,' she said. VOA White House correspondent Anita Powell contributed to this report.
