Media Reports: Peugeot Violates Iran Sanctions. UANI: Investigate GM!

Bertel Schmitt
by Bertel Schmitt
media reports peugeot violates iran sanctions uani investigate gm

GM-partner PSA has repeatedly stated that shipments of parts to Iran’s carmaker IKCO (a.k.a. Iran Khodro) had stopped in February, and would not resume until September, if at all. The parts are for the 206 and 405 models, and PSA said it stopped shipping them in response to sanctions on Iran. IKCO says it’s not true at all, ships are unloading parts and the lines are running.

A report of just-auto says there are “deeply conflicting views as to whether or not PSA Peugeot Citroen has halted shipments.”

In a call to Teheran, just-auto was told that “there is not any problem in shipments of Peugeot product parts – shipments of Peugeot are continuing here.”

In a call to PSA HQ in Paris, just-auto was given a totally different story: “We have nothing to add to what we have already said – that is shipments are suspended – there is nothing more to say,” a PSA spokesman said.

Meanwhile in the U.S., lobby group United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), reports that “IKCO has not yet received any official announcement from Peugeot indicating a halt in their mutual cooperation.” A week ago, Mark D. Wallace, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. and CEO of UANI said in an op-ed piece that statements to the effect that Peugeot had stopped shipments of parts to Iran “simply do not jibe with reality,” and that “it is hard not to feel like GM and Peugeot are simply trying to make this controversy go away without making the responsible decision to truly end their business in Iran.”

Wallace and UANI called on Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, to hold GM accountable for whom it partners with. Wallace wrote:

“In light of the taxpayer-funded $50 billion bailout of GM and the U.S. Treasury Department’s current 32 percent stake in GM, it is completely unacceptable for GM to be financially aligned with a company that is doing work with a regime responsible for the deaths of U.S. servicemen. The GM-Peugeot partnership seems to run afoul of U.S. sanctions, and it should be investigated.”

Join the conversation
2 of 14 comments
  • Fabriced28 Fabriced28 on Jun 20, 2012

    Good to see I was right on that one! I said a few months ago that PSA was not stupid enough to actually stop the production lines of Peugeot in Iran (market leader, remember). Some fog for GM and anti-Iranian lobbies, a new obscure company probably in Turkey to receive parts from France, and tadam! Here are your PSA parts in Iran! Everybody's happy! Nothing to see here... well that was until the diplomatic move of IKCO actually shouting "hey we have PSA parts" that was maybe not the wisest statement of the year. Apart from that...

  • TomLU86 TomLU86 on Jun 20, 2012

    Adamatari is right. The sanctions are ridiculous. Yes, Iran is ruled by idiots. But they are quite rational, and are NOT going to do anything that will make them lose their perch. Even Iran-hating Forbes magazine ran a piece years ago, written by an American visiting Iran, who commented on....Jewish communities! They may not exactly be thriving, but they are..surviving, unlike the fate that awaits them in Saudi and all these other "Arab Spring" theocracies in waiting. Making Iranians suffer just makes them more likely to hate us, and easier for the regime to keep power. Good for Peugeot!

  • ToolGuy CXXVIII comments?!?
  • ToolGuy I did truck things with my truck this past week, twenty-odd miles from home (farther than usual). Recall that the interior bed space of my (modified) truck is 98" x 74". On the ride home yesterday the bed carried a 20 foot extension ladder (10 feet long, flagged 14 inches past the rear bumper), two other ladders, a smallish air compressor, a largish shop vac, three large bins, some materials, some scrap, and a slew of tool cases/bags. It was pretty full, is what I'm saying.The range of the Cybertruck would have been just fine. Nothing I carried had any substantial weight to it, in truck terms. The frunk would have been extremely useful (lock the tool cases there, out of the way of the Bed Stuff, away from prying eyes and grasping fingers -- you say I can charge my cordless tools there? bonus). Stainless steel plus no paint is a plus.Apparently the Cybertruck bed will be 78" long (but over 96" with the tailgate folded down) and 60-65" wide. And then Tesla promises "100 cubic feet of exterior, lockable storage — including the under-bed, frunk and sail pillars." Underbed storage requires the bed to be clear of other stuff, but bottom line everything would have fit, especially when we consider the second row of seats (tools and some materials out of the weather).Some days I was hauling mostly air on one leg of the trip. There were several store runs involved, some for 8-foot stock. One day I bummed a ride in a Roush Mustang. Three separate times other drivers tried to run into my truck (stainless steel panels, yes please). The fuel savings would be large enough for me to notice and to care.TL;DR: This truck would work for me, as a truck. Sample size = 1.
  • Art Vandelay Dodge should bring this back. They could sell it as the classic classic classic model
  • Surferjoe Still have a 2013 RDX, naturally aspirated V6, just can't get behind a 4 banger turbo.Also gloriously absent, ESS, lane departure warnings, etc.
  • ToolGuy Is it a genuine Top Hand? Oh, I forgot, I don't care. 🙂