• Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Trump withdraws US from Iran nuclear deal

Discussion in 'Iranian Defence Forum' started by OldTwilight, May 8, 2018.

  1. Arminkh

    Arminkh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,912
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2014
    Ratings:
    +15 / 6,792 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Canada
    I was thinking Iran could put its own sanctions on US and US companies in this way:

    1- First step, no US shipping company can pass through Iranian territorial waters including Strait of Hormoz. Or they are subject to penalties before being authorized to pass
    2- 2nd step, no shipping company or oil tanker company that does business with US or US entities can pass Straight of Hormoz or they are subject to penalties before passing
    3- 3rd step which may be a bit extreme, no oil tanker destined to countries that complied with US sanctions and cut Iranian oil purchase can pass through Strait of Hormoz or need to pay high tax each time they pass through.

    I think this is a way better tit for tat approach compared to just closing the straight. Closing the straight will lead to war with US. My suggested approach will also eventually lead to War but in this case it is gradual pressure and just hinting at it with a list of shipping companies that will be banned / penalized by let's say end of December will hopefully cause such a big panic and surge in oil prices that will get every one back to their senses. On the other hand it also rewards companies and countries who supported Iran and complied with international law. US is already concerned about oil price surge not because now it can sell its shale oil but because of negative effect it will have on its economy and those of its allies.

    Russia and even KSA would probably not object to this decision either because now they can sell their oil at higher price. So it is kind of win-win.

    I think Iran should go ahead and prepare a list of companies that will be banned to pass through right away. If US can extend its internal laws to international affairs so can Iran.

    A funny article re the oil price and Trump. I think this is the best time for Iran to increase the pressure on oil market and break the $100 per barrel.

    https://www.rt.com/business/431786-iran-trump-tweeting-oil/
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  2. raptor22

    raptor22 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,313
    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Ratings:
    +9 / 11,755 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    The same for airspace and land roads .. but mostly agreed with paying high tax each time they pass through,
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  3. VEVAK

    VEVAK SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,188
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Ratings:
    +1 / 2,993 / -0
    That's a card Iran would play if the U.S. starts blocking our ships 1st

    If they ever try to block Iran shipping capabilities then Iran would have no choice but to do that but to initiate such a thing would mean they can retaliate by

    1. Preventing Iranian cargo ships and tankers from leaving the area
    2. If we were to use our Navy to do such a thing they would have various options and actions they could take against our Navy, shipping industry & off shore drilling from overt action to covert actions!!

    What your suggesting is far too extreme as retaliation to sanctions at this point!

    What Iran should do is start a campaign against U.S. products!
    And 1st on the list should be Nike Do you know how many Nike shoes & products I've personally purchased in my life span?? I can tell you NO ONE in my family will EVER purchase anything from them ever again!!!!!!

    Iran should start a media and social media campaign against Nike and you can easily rally Iranians and friends of Iran world wide or even none friends that were displeased with their actions in the world cup to never purchase their products EVER again!!!!!!!

    And you can reverse engineer and produce an Iranian version of every new Nike shoe that comes out that looks almost exactly the same with the same quality with an Iranian brand and sell it in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Qatar, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Afghanistan.... at almost half the price of a Nike and you can keep reminding people about Nike's behavior in the world cup using TV adds!

    Iran should go after every easy to reverse engineer U.S. product!!!!!!!!!! That's how we should respond!!!!!!
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 5
  4. VEVAK

    VEVAK SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,188
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Ratings:
    +1 / 2,993 / -0
    The U.S. doesn't use our rails so we'll only anger our friends and in terms of Air Space anything we do will also have far worse repercussions!!!!!!!!!!
    Our Airlines will have trouble passing though most countries in the world!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Iran needs to think about the repercussions of such things!!!!!! If we start taxing ship that simply pass by our shores do you honestly think other countries won't apply the same type of behavior towards us when we attempt to pass by their shores? We'll be killing our own shipping capabilities and increasing inflation inside our own country!

    Iran's response to a ban on Aircraft sales to Iran should be the development of hyper rails and Iranian passenger Aircraft!!!

    Iran's response to U.S. sanctions should be reverse engineering U.S. products that can easily be reverse engineered with exactly the same quality or better that looks almost exactly the same but at a lower cost with an Iranian brand! And we will have to properly market it against it's American counterpart starting with countries we do export too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And trumps behavior will easily helps us to do so!!!!!!!!!!!!

    If we put all our effort on reverse engineering lower tech U.S. products that we can easily reverse engineer and market it properly for export

    Also in terms of investing in the future
    The world is headed toward electric cars whether Iran likes it or NOT!!!!!!!!!!! Rather than investing large sums in refineries to produce Gasoline Iran should have instead invested in small sized electric cars made from composites equipped with light Gasoline or CNG generators as backup!

    And by now almost EVERYONE know that Graphene is the next thing that will revolutionize all our electronics from your computers to batteries and Graphene is just an atom think layer of simple Graphite!
    so the hardest part in creating graphene if figuring out how to mass produce it and anyone that figures that out will have a massive technological leap forward into the future! And very university in Iran and every RD facility in Iran whether its the IRGC or Iran's Khodro or Iran's Space Industry.... should have teams coordinating and working to solve it!

    Which means fossil fuels for civil transport are almost at their end! And it's time Iran starts thinking about producing Magnets, And advanced Brushless DC motors of ALL sizes equipped with advanced sensors and processors....
    Today using Nanotech a simple coat painted on Styrofoam will allow you to stand on or take a hammer to a cheep standard styrofoam cooler without breaking it and if painted on a brick you can take a hammer to it and it will bounce off without a dent these things are already on the market and if mass produced and sold at an affordable cost and used cleverly it could revolutionize various industries from the car industry to construction

    So today making large investments in the production of outdated car engines is NOTHING but an absolute waste of time and money that will have no future in the coming decades!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Investing in the production of Gasoline has NO FUTURE! To invest billions on something that will have no use within 20 years is absurd!!!!!!!!!!!

    rather than reacting irrationally to U.S. sanctions those are the things we should be focused on! Graphene mass production, Advanced Electric Motors, 3D printing, mass production of composites at low costs, Nanotechnology, Robots, developing Hyper rail system that will allow you to travel from Tehran to Bandar Abbas within 2 hours on the ground using electricity
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  5. Arminkh

    Arminkh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,912
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2014
    Ratings:
    +15 / 6,792 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Canada
    Well what US is doing is practically the same thing. They are blocking the point of sales for our products and bullying anyone who resists into submission by secondary sanctions. Yes our ships are not blocked but where should they go to when we no longer have any buyers to send our products to?

    They say we cannot use their monetary system for trade, we say you can not use our water way for trade.
    They say we will ban any company that does trade with you from our monetary system, we say we ban any company that trades with you from using our water way.

    I am proposing the same policy they have by just replacing the monetary system with water way.

    We should definitely stop buying their product but I don't think 80 million less customers in a 7 billion people world would be a big issue for them especially considering the fact that most of their companies were not really directly selling anything to us since the revolution.

    This extreme policy of US if implemented, will lead to a war. This is the same reason Imperial Japan attacked Peral Harbor because US and its allies had blocked it from buying oil while holding all the know oil reserves. When you have only two routes: 1- dying and 2-fighting and dying, usually people choose the 2nd one.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  6. Hack-Hook

    Hack-Hook ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    11,387
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Ratings:
    +3 / 12,393 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    closing and tasking shipping routes ?:coffee:
    It has some legal aspects that must be considered. my guess is that you can only close it for countries that have not signed and ratified Freedom of navigation which is stated in article 87(1)a of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. (which incidentally include USA as they only signed agreement not covention and never ratified it)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

    but you must look at another aspect , making a rule is something but being able to enforce it is a complete different thing . others also made such rule , but did they manage to enforce it ?
     
  7. Arminkh

    Arminkh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,912
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2014
    Ratings:
    +15 / 6,792 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Canada
    Your enemies are excluded from this convention.
     
  8. AmirPatriot

    AmirPatriot SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    4,023
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2015
    Ratings:
    +9 / 8,095 / -2
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Unfortunately this is not possible nor proportional. To enforce what you suggest we'd have to physically seize or destroy the vessels that pass through our waters. Hell, the US Navy has on multiple occasions passed through Iranian territorial waters unchallenged on "Freedom of Navigation" operations, like it does in the South China Sea today.

    "The United States protested Iran’s 1993 Marine Areas Act by diplomatic note in January 1994.[95] In addition to its diplomatic protest, the Navy conducted regular operational assertions against Iran’s excessive claims by transiting the Strait of Hormuz through Iranian territorial waters. On multiple occasions during FY 2005–FY 2010, the Navy navigated through the strait under the regime of transit passage rather than innocent passage. In addition, the Navy entered Iranian territorial waters without permission during FY 1995–FY 1999.[96]"

    https://www.heritage.org/defense/re...-unnecessary-secure-us-navigational#_ftnref96

    Enforcing what you suggest would essentially mean that Iran would have to board ships, including even military vessels, to extract a tax from them, since there is no international system of tax for passage through territorial waters, and no-one would pay Iran anyway.

    It's frustrating but we can't do it essentially because it would violate UNCLOS.

    I don't know the legal implications of leaving UNCLOS, and if we would gain anything from it, but either way it seems like a bad option. Having the IRIN and IRGC-N "escort" US military or civilian vessels in Iranian waters may be an option, if anything to artificially raise tensions.

    Unfortunately, no.
     
  9. VEVAK

    VEVAK SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,188
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Ratings:
    +1 / 2,993 / -0
    Right and Japan got NUKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    How exactly are you going to stop them????????? Your going to have to use our Navy to do so!!!!!!!

    Today at any given time about 80% of Iran's Blue water Naval capability is Docked which means they can take out 80% of our Navy in a single day from 2000km away using LACM! In a single day 4 U.S. Cruisers 2 in the Red Sea and 2 in the Indian Ocean can fire upon and overwhelm any of our defenses with over 200 LACM coming at our major ports.

    Yes well still have small boats that can stop their ships but taking out 80% of our Navy will allow them to bring their Naval capabilities and Aircraft carriers closer and closer with each strike!

    And you think your going to cut off the shipping capabilities of Saudi Arabia, UAE & Kuwait and anger our friends in Iraq and those countries will just site still???????????????

    The response you'll get will be no different than the response you'll get from wiping out the UAE military and Government & attacking Saudi Arabia!!!!!!!!!

    For now China has no plans on stopping Oil imports from Iran! And our Oil exports will be reduced but they will NOT come to a halt!!! And we will adapt to not using their SWIFT system!
    And we need to get used to not having a none oil economy anyways!!! But what your suggesting will result in a complete halt!!!!!!!!!

    If our Oil export drop by any meaningful amount then Iran needs to immediately leave the JCPOA start enrichment above 30% and if that doesn't bring them to their senses then we need to leave the NPT and start building Nukes
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  10. Flag_Combo

    Flag_Combo FULL MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2017
    Ratings:
    +0 / 81 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Canada
    For love of god stop this half-a$$ measures of enriching to this level or that level or withdrawing from this or that. These are childish measures at best. Build the freaking nuke already and be done with it. The more hesitation we show the more arrogant they become, it shows pure weakness. We must use the time produced by stalling tactic of E3 to build nukes covertly ( it's a win-win situation for us no matter how you look at it because at the end of it we gonna get sanctioned or bombed anyway).

    This is a binary situation, either we build nukes and muscle our way into a permanent deal or get destroyed/segmented by all of our haters in the region & beyond. Its in our vital national interest to have a nuclear arsenal, we're surrounded by people who want to destroy us, where is your sense of nationalism?

    I don't like mullahs but when integrity of our country comes into question then priorities need to change. Either way this regime needs to do critical reforms if it wants to survive one way or another. Corruption and mismanagement are rampant, widespread and its as destructive as sanctions. Social reforms are a must , cue to those religious zealots countrymen who think with oppression they can rule over people with different opinions & values. Khomeini & Co made a dumb fatwa by saying we won't build nukes, his words are worthless in the eyes of west and the only thing he achieved by saying that is he boxed himself in, critical error!!!
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2018
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  11. VEVAK

    VEVAK SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,188
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Ratings:
    +1 / 2,993 / -0
    Iran can close down the Persian Gulf if it wants but it's NOT going to happen without repercussions!!!!!!!!!

    Do you think Saudi, UAE, Kuwait,.... And various other Land locked countries dependent on the Persian Gulf are just going to site idly by?????????

    International laws be damned! Even if there were no such laws blocking the Persian Gulf would be no different than directly attacking Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Iraq,....

    It's not about international law blocking the Persian Gulf is an irrational last option action that Iran should only take as a last resort!!!!!!! Blocking the Persian Gulf is Iran's Nuclear Bomb!!!!! It's a last resort option!!!!

    Iran developing an Nuclear Stockpile with ICBM capable of hitting the U.S. is even a far more rational option than blocking the Persian Gulf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Iran attacking UAE is a far more rational option than cutting off the Persian Gulf!!!!!!!!!!
     
  12. VEVAK

    VEVAK SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,188
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Ratings:
    +1 / 2,993 / -0
    1st off Iran CAN NOT start building a NUKE without leaving the NPT!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Yes with the U.S. leaving the JCPOA and the utter incompetence from EU I do believe Iran needs to start heading towards developing a Nuclear Stockpile or else risk getting attacked!!!!

    BUT there needs to be tit for tat responses and logical steps taken for every U.S. action!!!

    Yes the U.S. left the JCPOA and the EU couldn't even keep Peugeot in Iran and honestly at this point I WOULD LOVE TO SEE PEUGEOT getting kicked out of Iran!!!! And I honestly wouldn't mind if they were replaced by an American Car company like Ford!!!!!!!

    Trump is a business man and I would offer these type of option to him before things get out of hand!!!!!

    So our actions need to be tit for tat step by step with lucrative win win business options given to the Trump administration!
    While making it clear as daylight that our Missile Program will NEVER be on the table & will go to war before that happens and the best they can hope to get in that regard "IF" they come to a win win deal is a promise from Iran NEVER to build an ICBM capable of hitting U.S. soil without putting our Space Program under any kind of restriction! But only if they come to a deal!
    ICBM's are not something you can build without testing so there is NO reason they would need any type of access to our Missile Program or Military Bases!

    With trumps behavior towards N.Korea it seems the only thing he understands is the language of force so until the U.S. comes to it's senses Iran needs to start taking steps toward building Nukes and quickly increasing the ranges of Iranian Ballistic Missiles towards ICBM capability

    Those are far more rational actions than blocking the Persian Gulf that will start an all out regional war that wouldn't be in anyone's benefit other than the U.S.!

    So yea we need to head towards building a viable Nuclear stockpile BUT with logical steps taken and proposals offered before we reach that point!!!!!!!!!!!

    And yes with the people Trump has around him it's doubtful that he would agree but we also need to show the world that we acted rationally with lucrative and logical options given to the U.S. and were eventually pushed towards developing a Nuclear Stockpile out of necessity

    Also, In my opinion the problem with us having our own Nuclear Stockpile is that other regional powers will want nukes as well. And Yes I would trust the Turks or Iraqi's or Egyptians with Nukes but Saudi's NOT in a MILLION YEARS!!!!!
    And once we have Nukes the Saudi's will buy them too and I'd rather Not have Nukes if it prevents the Saudi's from having them then having Nukes which will lead to them buying them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If it was just the Egyptian, Turks & an elected Iraqi government then I would have no problem with it but Saudi Leadership are not the type of people I would ever trust with Nukes and their absurd Defense Spending is a testament to that fact!

    So yea we are forced to head towards building nukes but as I said we need clear steps taken with proposals offered and hopefully the Americans will come to their senses before we get there!! Because being forced to trust the Saudi's with Nukes is far worse then trusting even the Israeli's with nukes!!!!!!!!!
     
  13. Flag_Combo

    Flag_Combo FULL MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    82
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2017
    Ratings:
    +0 / 81 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Canada
    Why is that! can you explain why you think that way?
     
  14. Arminkh

    Arminkh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,912
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2014
    Ratings:
    +15 / 6,792 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Canada
    Iran legally can. There are two ways you can view Strait of Hromoz as it is only 21 miles wide. Pat of it is internal water where Iran is entitled to do what ever it wants, other part is territorial water where innocent passage is allowed but can be suspended due to national security considerations. Now there is part of it that belongs to Oman and Iran cannot have any claims on it however as it is like a 2 way Highway and each lane is in one country, Iran closing one of those lanes is at minimum very disruptive to traffic.

    The fact that US ignore Iran's rights is like rest of the things it does: because it can. I bet it wouldn't be the case if it were Russia owning the straight instead. China case is different as they are "creating" territorial waters by building islands that didn't exist.


    Internal waters
    Covers all water and waterways on the landward side of the baseline. The coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Foreign vessels have no right of passage within internal waters.
    Territorial waters
    Out to 12 nautical miles (22 kilometres; 14 miles) from the baseline, the coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Vessels were given the right of innocent passage through any territorial waters, with strategic straits allowing the passage of military craft as transit passage, in that naval vessels are allowed to maintain postures that would be illegal in territorial waters. "Innocent passage" is defined by the convention as passing through waters in an expeditious and continuous manner, which is not "prejudicial to the peace, good order or the security" of the coastal state. Fishing, polluting, weapons practice, and spying are not "innocent", and submarines and other underwater vehicles are required to navigate on the surface and to show their flag. Nations can also temporarily suspend innocent passage in specific areas of their territorial seas, if doing so is essential for the protection of their security
     
  15. Arminkh

    Arminkh SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,912
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2014
    Ratings:
    +15 / 6,792 / -0
    Country:
    Iran, Islamic Republic Of
    Location:
    Canada
    Why at least one country is going to continue buying Iran's oil:

    Trump's delusional Iran oil gambit is decades too late

    Published time: 9 Jul, 2018 17:34
    Get short URL
    [​IMG]
    US President Donald Trump © Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

    Trump is using everything he's got to wage economic war on Iran. His problem is that 'everything he's got' is not nearly enough, as the virtual monopoly power once wielded by the US has long since evaporated.
    Last week, a senior state department official announced the US' intention to cut Iranian oil exports "to zero" by November 4 this year, by threatening to impose sanctions on any company still trading beyond that date.

    Hitherto, experts had predicted US sanctions would see a reduction of around 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) by the end of the year – barely one-fifth of the country's current export of 2.4 million bpd. Even the sanctions that preceded the 2015 nuclear deal – which, unlike today's unilateral effort, were supported by a broad alliance of world powers, including Russia and China – only succeeded in removing half of Iran's oil from the market.


    This determination to destroy Iran by any means necessary has, of course, been the Trump administration's signature foreign policy since day one, with almost every member of his team harboring a long-held and well documented vendetta against the Islamic Republic. What is new with Trump, however, is not this determination as such – let's not forget that Iran has been on the official Pentagon hit list since at least 2001 – as the means used to pursue it. As I argued in 2014, the nuclear deal was not, on the part of the West, a genuine rapprochement so much as a long term program of Western infiltration, based on the 'Libya model', aimed at building a pro-imperialist fifth column within the Iranian state in order to prepare the ground for 'regime change' in the future. The Trump team, of course, has no patience for the long game, and simply wants to cut to the chase. The reason for this obsession with destroying Iran – shared by all factions of the Western ruling class, despite their differences over means – is obvious: Iran's very existence as an independent state threatens imperial control of the region – which in turns underpins both US military power and the global role of the dollar. And as South-South cooperation continues to develop, this threat grows every day, whilst the means to diminish it are reduced by the same measure.

    At the same time, the US military encirclement of China – begun in earnest as Obama's 'pivot to Asia', but, like so much else, undergoing major escalation under Trump – is intimately linked to a policy of cutting off China from its suppliers. In this sense, a policy of 'isolating' Iran is aimed at isolating China also, as China is the largest market for Iranian crude.


    Trump's policy, however, is likely to get few buyers. Pepe Escobar has explained the likely response to Trump's plans from each of Iran's top customers: "India will buy Iranian oil with rupees. China also will be totally impervious to the Trump administration's command. Sinopec, for instance, badly needs Iranian oil for new refineries in assorted Chinese provinces, and won't stop buying. Turkish Economy Minister Nihat Zeybekci has been blunt: "The decisions taken by the United States on this issue are not binding for us." He added that: "We recognize no other [country's] interests other than our own." Iran is Turkey's number-one oil supplier, accounting for almost 50 percent of total imports. Russia won't back down from its intention to invest $50 billion in Iran's energy infrastructure. And Iraq won't abandon strategic energy cooperation with Iran. Supply chains rule; Baghdad sends oil from Kirkuk to a refinery in Kermanshah in Iran, and gets refined Iranian oil for southern Iraq."

    Trump's attempts to persuade the rest of the world to cut off its nose to spite its face, then, are likely to fall on deaf ears. It is in this light that Trump's igniting of a global trade war must be seen.

    At midnight on July 5, US tariffs on $34billion worth of Chinese imports went into effect, at a rate of 25 percent. Trump told reporters that tariffs on a further $16 billion worth were likely to follow in two weeks, fulfilling a pledge made in April to slap tariffs on 1300 products totaling $50 billion annually. The final total, however, he added, could eventually reach $550 billion – a figure noted by Industry Week, that is actually bigger than the entire annual volume of Chinese exports to the US. These China-specific tariffs follow tariffs on steel (25 percent) and aluminum (10 percent) imports imposed on the EU, Mexico, and Canada four days earlier.

    According to Fox Business, Canada stands to lose around $2 billion per year as a result of these tariffs, with Brazil, Russia, China, and South Korea each set to lose at least $500 million annually.

    But this may be precisely the point: not only to 'bring jobs back to the US', but also to create new forms of leverage to be used against rivals and allies (and is there really a distinction between the two anyway these days?) alike. So far, of course, Trump has famously refused to offer waivers to his allies. But with Trump, nothing is forever – everything is leverage, to be played and bartered as seen fit. Could it be, then, that waivers may yet be offered to countries who manage to wean themselves off Iranian oil by the November deadline? And even if not, the very willingness to use trade as a weapon so openly and brazenly is a reminder that there may be further punishments on the way for those who do not toe the line on the strangulation of Iran. After all, as Louis Kuijs, chief economist at Oxford Economics, has pointed out, this 'new era' has only just begun: "Clearly the first salvos have been exchanged," he said, "and in that sense, the trade war has started. There is no obvious end to this."

    Nevertheless, Trump's bark may yet be well worse than his bite. For one thing, the counter-measures employed by the Chinese – a reciprocal 25 percent tariff on $50billion of US goods – will hit the US hard. One product subject to the new tariff, for example, is soybeans. China is the biggest market for all soybeans grown in the US. Grant Kimberley, a soybean farmer with the Iowa Soybean Association, estimates that this tariff alone could lead to a 70 percent drop in exports.

    But even apart from the Chinese counter-measures, the US-imposed tariffs themselves are likely to hurt the US as much as China. A report on NPR suggests that "for now, the blows are threatening to land hardest on non-Chinese companies like New Jersey-based Snow Joe/Sun Joe", which - like so many other US companies, relies on Chinese imports for crucial parts of its supply chain.

    For China, however, the impact is likely to be – in the words of Ethan Harris, head of economic research at Bank of America Merrill Lynch – "quite small." James Boughton, a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Waterloo, Ontario, explained that: "The dynamic is different from anything we've seen. China has an ability to ride out this kind of pressure, to weather the storm, that a lot of countries didn't have in the past."

    So the idea that trade war will somehow pressure China (and others) to dump Iran seems ultimately fanciful. The process of 'delinking' has already come too far. China is Iran's biggest trading partner, and – with Chinese tariffs on US oil looming – is more likely to increase Iranian oil imports to replace that no longer coming from the US rather than vice versa. Iran already sells its oil to China in yuan, rather than US dollars, meaning that the entire US-controlled financial system is completely circumvented for the countries' bilateral trade, and therefore outside the control of US-imposed financial sanctions. Looking forward, Iran is set to play a crucial role in the development of China's mega Belt and Road Initiative, with a high speed railway planned to provide sea access to landlocked central Asia. And with French oil giant Total's planned investment in the massive South Pars oil field in jeopardy, the contract is likely to now go to a Chinese company.

    Currently, less than 20 percent of Chinese exports go to the US, with almost half going elsewhere in Asia. According to the CIA's world factbook, Chinese exports in total represent just under 20 percent of GDP. If we do the math, then – 20 percent of 20 percent – it turns out that just four percent of Chinese GDP comes from exports to the US. Significant, but hardly the economic gun to the head that Trump seems to believe.

    The days when loss of market access to the US meant oblivion for countries like China are long gone. The future now lies in South-South cooperation precisely along the lines of the multibillion Belt and Road Initiative. The US government understands that, and their attempts to simultaneously sabotage both China and Iran are last-ditch attempts to prevent the inevitable – further delinking, and a global economy in which the US is becoming increasingly peripheral. But in truth – this effort is already too late.

    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/432418-iran-trump-china-tariffs/
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3