libertycall
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2016
- Messages
- 448
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
At the end of a week dominated by news of the “historic deal” over Iran’s nuclear program, a few points are clear. The first is that world public opinion was keen to kick that can down the road. The mood is that the world has enough on its plates to not want another crisis that involves the image of the mushroom cloud.
The second point is that both the Obama faction in Washington and its partner the Rafsanjani faction in Tehran were desperate to conjure up something, anything, and they did. Obama is preparing his legacy in his copyrighted window-dressing style. The Rafsanjani faction hopes that the “deal” will boost its position in next month’s elections.
The third point is that the “deal” is not what its promoters claim. The whole thing was negotiated by Iran and a beast known as P5+1+EU which has no legal existence and no authority to negotiate. This is why after almost two years of negotiations neither side signed anything. The 179 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is not legally binding on anyone and was described by Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi as nothing but “a list of voluntary measures”.
Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani claims that the “deal”, known in Persian as Barjam, has led to the lifting of all sanctions against his Islamic Republic. This is patently untrue. Here is how Araqchi puts it: “We have to accept the fact that not all sanctions will be removed. Only sanctions related to the nuclear issue will be suspended”.
Over the past 36 years Iran has become subject to, or victim of, six sets of sanctions related to a range of issues from hostage-taking and terrorism to the violation of human rights and, of course, cheating on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
These sanctions are targeted in different ways at the Iranian government, Iranian private companies and banks and even individual citizens. Only five per cent of all sanctions are directly related to the nuclear issue and thus covered by the “deal”. At least 45 per cent have nothing do with nuclear issues and will in no way be affected by the “deal.” Another 35 per cent are categorized as “hybrid”, meaning they deal with dual-aspect issues where a nuclear-military angle may also be involved. Finally, 15 per cent of the sanctions are subject to legal disputes over their definition. Iran argues they must be covered by the “deal” while the P5+1+EU claim that other issues are involved.
Even if we add the “hybrids”, we may envisage action on just 40 per cent of the sanctions. But even then there is no question of “cancelling” or lifting the sanctions as Rouhani and his “New York Boys” claim.
To avoid straight lies, Rouhani and his entourage have avoided all the six Persian words that could describe “cancellation”, “annulment” or “lifting” of sanctions. Instead, they have used ambiguous words that give the impression that sanctions have been lifted without, however, saying so directly. Here are some of those words “barchideh” (rolled up), “forurikhteh” (collapsed), and “pasa-tahrim” (post sanction).
The “deal” is for a period of 10 years that could be reduced to eight, if things go well. However, aspects of it are for 15 to 25 years and, in some cases, left vague which could mean forever. During those eight to 10 years, sanctions related to the nuclear issue could be suspended, not cancelled. In other words the Sword of Damocles will remain suspended over Iran’s head. Once the eight or 10 years period is completed the P5+1+EU could declare that Tehran has carried out all its “voluntary obligations”. Only then, the process of lifting sanctions could begin by referring them to the legislative organs of the countries concerned.
As a sweetener, under Article 23 of the CJPOA and 21 of its addendum, Obama has promised to “work closely” with the US Congress to have the sanctions lifted. Since Obama will be around for just another year, that promise is little more than fools’ gold. In the meantime, the US and EU partners can suspend sanctions.
Obama can do that with Executive Orders for consecutive periods of 90, 120 and 180 days and has already done so in a number of domains. As for the EU the length of “suspension” is decided by Brussels at the suggestion of any member. What Iran has secured is limited sanctions relief.
This is welcome because it allows Iran to start using some of its own money for urgent needs such as paying the arrears of salaries of teachers, oil workers and, in some cases, even the military. Iran will also be able to start negotiations with countries, such as China, India, Japan and Brazil that owe it money for the oil they have bought but have so far refused to pay by claiming they were applying UN sanctions. With the suspension of sanctions Iran could also try to regain at least part of the oil market share it has lost.
The “deal” has another advantage for Iran: it softens its image as a rogue state and opens up the possibility of its eventual removal from the list of states sponsoring terrorism. However, to spend its own money, Iran has had to accept a humiliating arrangement that puts a good chunk of its economy under effective supervision (droit-de-regard in French diplomatic language) by the P5+1+EU group.
Frozen assets are released in tranches fixed by the so-called “implementation committee”. This consists of the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany and the EU. (Araqchi is Iran’s man in the committee.) To take a decision, including snapping sanctions back into place or de-freezing a new tranche of Iranian money, the committee needs at least five votes.
It must also make sure that Iran will not spend the released money on financing terrorist groups or foreign adventures.
Using a trick known as “dual-use concerns”, the committee gains a right of veto on part of Iranian trade and industrial development. Any scheme suspected of having dual civilian and military, nuclear-related, uses could be vetoed. Even if Russia and China who are regarded as sympathetic to Tehran break ranks with the US and its allies, they wouldn’t have enough votes to loosen the tutelage imposed on Iran.
Iran is not alone in having received considerably less, and given considerably more, than Rouhani and his “New York Boys” claim. Obama, too, has been economical with the truth. The “deal” has not blocked all of Ian’s paths to a nuclear weapon,” as he boasts. The two main paths, through uranium enrichment and plutonium processing, remain open. The only thing is that Iran’s project has been frozen for a decade or so at its current level, which means a year from being able to build a bomb. Since I am certain the mullahs don’t want to build a bomb right now, if ever, that decade-long delay is the fools’ gold with which they repay Obama’s fools’ gold to them.
Opinion: The Iran “Deal” - A Tale of Double Deception - ASHARQ AL-AWSAT
The second point is that both the Obama faction in Washington and its partner the Rafsanjani faction in Tehran were desperate to conjure up something, anything, and they did. Obama is preparing his legacy in his copyrighted window-dressing style. The Rafsanjani faction hopes that the “deal” will boost its position in next month’s elections.
The third point is that the “deal” is not what its promoters claim. The whole thing was negotiated by Iran and a beast known as P5+1+EU which has no legal existence and no authority to negotiate. This is why after almost two years of negotiations neither side signed anything. The 179 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is not legally binding on anyone and was described by Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi as nothing but “a list of voluntary measures”.
Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani claims that the “deal”, known in Persian as Barjam, has led to the lifting of all sanctions against his Islamic Republic. This is patently untrue. Here is how Araqchi puts it: “We have to accept the fact that not all sanctions will be removed. Only sanctions related to the nuclear issue will be suspended”.
Over the past 36 years Iran has become subject to, or victim of, six sets of sanctions related to a range of issues from hostage-taking and terrorism to the violation of human rights and, of course, cheating on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
These sanctions are targeted in different ways at the Iranian government, Iranian private companies and banks and even individual citizens. Only five per cent of all sanctions are directly related to the nuclear issue and thus covered by the “deal”. At least 45 per cent have nothing do with nuclear issues and will in no way be affected by the “deal.” Another 35 per cent are categorized as “hybrid”, meaning they deal with dual-aspect issues where a nuclear-military angle may also be involved. Finally, 15 per cent of the sanctions are subject to legal disputes over their definition. Iran argues they must be covered by the “deal” while the P5+1+EU claim that other issues are involved.
Even if we add the “hybrids”, we may envisage action on just 40 per cent of the sanctions. But even then there is no question of “cancelling” or lifting the sanctions as Rouhani and his “New York Boys” claim.
To avoid straight lies, Rouhani and his entourage have avoided all the six Persian words that could describe “cancellation”, “annulment” or “lifting” of sanctions. Instead, they have used ambiguous words that give the impression that sanctions have been lifted without, however, saying so directly. Here are some of those words “barchideh” (rolled up), “forurikhteh” (collapsed), and “pasa-tahrim” (post sanction).
The “deal” is for a period of 10 years that could be reduced to eight, if things go well. However, aspects of it are for 15 to 25 years and, in some cases, left vague which could mean forever. During those eight to 10 years, sanctions related to the nuclear issue could be suspended, not cancelled. In other words the Sword of Damocles will remain suspended over Iran’s head. Once the eight or 10 years period is completed the P5+1+EU could declare that Tehran has carried out all its “voluntary obligations”. Only then, the process of lifting sanctions could begin by referring them to the legislative organs of the countries concerned.
As a sweetener, under Article 23 of the CJPOA and 21 of its addendum, Obama has promised to “work closely” with the US Congress to have the sanctions lifted. Since Obama will be around for just another year, that promise is little more than fools’ gold. In the meantime, the US and EU partners can suspend sanctions.
Obama can do that with Executive Orders for consecutive periods of 90, 120 and 180 days and has already done so in a number of domains. As for the EU the length of “suspension” is decided by Brussels at the suggestion of any member. What Iran has secured is limited sanctions relief.
This is welcome because it allows Iran to start using some of its own money for urgent needs such as paying the arrears of salaries of teachers, oil workers and, in some cases, even the military. Iran will also be able to start negotiations with countries, such as China, India, Japan and Brazil that owe it money for the oil they have bought but have so far refused to pay by claiming they were applying UN sanctions. With the suspension of sanctions Iran could also try to regain at least part of the oil market share it has lost.
The “deal” has another advantage for Iran: it softens its image as a rogue state and opens up the possibility of its eventual removal from the list of states sponsoring terrorism. However, to spend its own money, Iran has had to accept a humiliating arrangement that puts a good chunk of its economy under effective supervision (droit-de-regard in French diplomatic language) by the P5+1+EU group.
Frozen assets are released in tranches fixed by the so-called “implementation committee”. This consists of the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany and the EU. (Araqchi is Iran’s man in the committee.) To take a decision, including snapping sanctions back into place or de-freezing a new tranche of Iranian money, the committee needs at least five votes.
It must also make sure that Iran will not spend the released money on financing terrorist groups or foreign adventures.
Using a trick known as “dual-use concerns”, the committee gains a right of veto on part of Iranian trade and industrial development. Any scheme suspected of having dual civilian and military, nuclear-related, uses could be vetoed. Even if Russia and China who are regarded as sympathetic to Tehran break ranks with the US and its allies, they wouldn’t have enough votes to loosen the tutelage imposed on Iran.
Iran is not alone in having received considerably less, and given considerably more, than Rouhani and his “New York Boys” claim. Obama, too, has been economical with the truth. The “deal” has not blocked all of Ian’s paths to a nuclear weapon,” as he boasts. The two main paths, through uranium enrichment and plutonium processing, remain open. The only thing is that Iran’s project has been frozen for a decade or so at its current level, which means a year from being able to build a bomb. Since I am certain the mullahs don’t want to build a bomb right now, if ever, that decade-long delay is the fools’ gold with which they repay Obama’s fools’ gold to them.
Opinion: The Iran “Deal” - A Tale of Double Deception - ASHARQ AL-AWSAT
