The Iranian nuclear program's heavy water reactor near Arak. Credit: Nanking2012 via Wikimedia Commons.
Politico: Obama hands scramble to save Iran deal
Democratic insiders try to stop Trump from risking ‘war,’ with former president’s tacit blessing.
As President Donald Trump threatens to blow up the Iran nuclear deal, Obama administration alumni are mobilizing to defend it.
One-time aides to Barack Obama are holding meetings, contacting lawmakers and working the media in an urgent bid to prevent the dismantling of one of the former president’s signature foreign policy achievements.
And yes, Obama is well aware of their efforts.
It’s a loosely coordinated fight they successfully waged from the White House against congressional Republicans who repeatedly tried to scupper the deal. It’s also a battle they had hoped to avoid: After slamming the deal as a candidate, Trump has already passed up multiple chances to upend it.
But now the former Obama hands — many of whom who spent several grinding all-nighters sealing the agreement — fear Trump is prepared to sabotage it this fall.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The problem that I have with critics of President Trump's approach to Iran is that they are almost exclusively focused on what President Trump is doing, and not on what the Iranians are doing. When Iran made it clear that they would not permit inspectors to visit military sites, it raised a red flag for me .... Iran Rules Out Any Possibility That UN Nuclear Inspectors Will Be Permitted To Inspect Military Sites (August 29,2 017). But for supporters of the Iranian nuclear deal .... this is a non-issue. The UN also did not help the situation by declaring that they would not inspect the sites since they believed that Iran was complying with the deal .... The U.N.'s Nuclear Watchdog Will Not Inspect Iran's Military Sites (August 31, 2017). How the UN make such a declaration/conclusion without conducting inspections is still a mystery to me ... but that is another story. Recent threats by Iranian-backed militias in Iraq to wage war against the U.S. is not helping the situation, nor the continuing altercations between U.S. and Iranian vessels in the Persian Gulf .... Pentagon: Iran Vessels Harass Another U.S. Navy Ship In The Persian Gulf (September 6, 2017). Bottom line .... the Iranian nuclear deal was suppose to usher in a new era for U.S. - Iranian relations, but all we have seen since the deal was signed was business as usual ... i.e. confrontation, threats, and tensions.
Update: It should also be noted that speculation on what President Trump may do when it comes to Iran may just be that .... speculation .... because in the real world he has not terminated the deal when he had the chance to do so .... U.S. extends some Iran sanctions relief under nuclear deal (Reuters).
4 comments:
WNU Editor, I just want to play devil's advocate. There's no offense intended, and I'm not saying I'm right on this. I'm just thinking aloud. So, here goes:
I think most observers would say that the rhetoric from the new Trump administration was hostile towards Iran from day one. That includes scathing rhetoric generated for the benefit of the voters in the USA, plus official diplomatic statements – for example, from Nikki Haley at the UN. Trump campaigned on the repeated promise to renogotiate the Iranian nuke deal. (And in fact, any deals with Iran.) Trump is famously fond of Israel, and he was a friend of Netanyahu's years before he ran for President.
All in all, it would be natural for Iran to be very worried about Trump's new administration. After all, the US already has form for attacking Iran and neighbouring countries. The USA has already overthrown one Iranian government, in 1953. The US has attacked and sunk Iranian ships before now (operation Preying Mantis) and supplied billions of dollars of high-tech weapons to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war - a war for the very survival Iran as an independent state, which cost about a million Iranian dead. In the recent past, Iran has seen the USA participate in (or lead) attacks on, or invasions of, countries like Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc. If we're being honest, the USA was often acting outside of international law and international norms during these military adventures (e.g., drone bombing civilians, torturing prisoners, using cluster munitions, using depleted uranium, etc).
As a former diplomat, I know that you'll be aware that most HUMINT espionage is a million miles from James Bond 007, and mostly consists of information gathered by journalists, diplomants, and technical experts engaged in otherwise official/legitimate business. So,Why would Iran voluntarily let inspectors into its military sites, when the threat level had just been rised in such an obvious manner? If you're Iran, the espionage risks look worryingly high. And you don't need the US learning about the rather rather 'Potemkin village' nature of your military posture (i.e., a lot of bluffing, but not much substance).
US agents, or people with US handlers, would inevitably end up being on the inspections teams. And if the US didn't find something - well, perhaps it would plant evidence, or simply make false claims. Lets be realistic: according to US whistleblowers (and anyone with common sense) the US has outright lied about Assad using chemical weapons. The US has repeatedly started wars based on lies: from the Spanish American War with the false claim that the Spanish sank the USS Maine, to the lies about Vietnamese torpedoes being fired at a US destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin. So, why would Iran want proven liars to have the power of labelling them as cheats? The prospect would terrify the Iranians.
Anon,
Rhetoric against Iran was hostile during the campaign .... Trump's election win only moved it into the White House. But what I am trying to stress in my post is that problems with the Iranian nuclear deal were surfacing before Trump won the election, including Iran's refusal to permit inspections. As I said .... the focus is on Trump, but problems with the deal were surfacing long before he even won the Republican nomination. The reasons why are understandable. Much of the Iran nuclear deal was kept secret .... and what we have learned since then has raised a number of legitimate questions. The number one being inspections. Fortunately .... there is a historical precedent for this. The U.S. and the Soviet Union deeply distrusted each other, that is why inspections became the cornerstone of that agreement. Quoting President Reagan .... "trust but verified". There were a lot of doubters then (just as there are now), but with time the inspections did build trust, and it did lower tensions. Anon, you have articulated a detailed list on why Iran should not trust the U.S. .... and I dare say, one can also articulate a long list on why the U.S. should not trust Iran. But that is exactly why inspections are important .... to build trust and develop a protocol for other agreements. But Iran .... unlike the former Soviet Union .... said no. That is why I am saying that this refusal is a red flag for me .... Tehran is making their position very clear .... that they have a very different agenda, and they have no interest in accommodating the concerns of the U.S. and its allies in the region. When it comes to nuclear weapons .... that refusal to accommodate these type of concerns is a deal breaker .... which is probably (in the end) will be the main reason why this deal will die, even with the consequences of Iran restarting their nuclear program and using their North Korean contacts to develop a nuclear arsenal.
I believe in memory serves correctly that Trump when a candidate announced any number of times that he would junk the treaty made with iran. I am not defending the treaty at this juncture, but Trump ran on the notion that he did not want that treaty. As far as inspections, I recall too that military bases were off limits for inspections and the assumption was that any nuclear activity for peaceful purposes were not being housed at military installations
The Iran deal is fantastic, brilliant and even more! When we shall wake up with an full nuclear-weapon Iran, we shall blame Trump for not doing his promise.
Post a Comment