Its absolutely hilarious...this line of reasoning. So Iran is facing maximum pressure by those who are putting every effort to undermine the JCPOA. The right response, according to some, is to give the Israeli First camp exactly what they want by tearing apart the agreement that obviously provides strategic benefits to Iran.
That the opponents of the JCPOA in the US are behind the so-called maximum pressure campaign does not imply that the long term goals of JCPOA proponents are any less hostile.
I cannot find the reference right now, but there was an open letter addressed to Trump by leading Democrat figures in which the latter explicitly stated that their final objective with regards to Iran is identical with Trump's. But that it is in the means to attain said objective where they differ. Which should be an eye opener to us all.
It really boils down to this: both Democrats and Republicans, both hawks and doves in Washington are pursuing one same aim, and that is the destruction and balkanization of Iran. Have no doubt about it. What sets them apart, is solely their differing appreciation as to what constitutes the best way forward on the path to that objective.
The liberal side will stress that all out pressure on Iran is likely to rally the population behind its political leadership. The conservarive side will argue that the revolutionary core of the system including the IRGC might benefit as much from sanctions relief as western-apologetic reformists and moderates. But none will fundamentally take issue with the other side's underlying end goal. They will only claim that the plan of action advocated by their counterparts is unlikely to bear fruit and will thus push for the opposite strategy.
We should not entertain any notion that the Democrats feel somehow comfortable with the idea of Iran pursuing its rise a major regional if not global power, and that they'd even be willing to lend Iran a helping hand in this. Likewise, we can rest assured that these same Democrats are intelligent enough not to propose a nuclear deal to Iran that would be guaranteed to defeat their own above stated goal.
In other words, the JCPOA is conceived by its American authors (in fact the Rockefeller-funded International Crisis Group think tank, over 80% of whose draft for a nuclear deal with Iran ended up being adopted, word for word, by the parties who simply re-labelled it "JCPOA") as a trap for Iran.
What this trap consists in, I tried to outline in another post:
This man is saying that Iran is trying to be goated into conflict in order to prevent Biden from reaching a deal with Iran. This right here is the exact problem, this man is promoting the good cop bad cop routine of the United States. This is a naive interpretation of the situation. Trump...
defence.pk
Also keep in mind Biden too is an Isra"el"-firster, like the rest of the contemporary, bipartisan US elite.
Here are some statements made by Biden in relevant contexts:
"The truth is that Jewish heritage, Jewish culture, Jewish values are such an essential part of who we are that it’s fair to say that Jewish heritage is American heritage."
Vice President Joe Biden said at a Jewish American Heritage Month reception that American and Jewish cultures are intertwined.
jewishjournal.com
"If there were not an Israel, we would have to invent one to make sure our interests were preserved ... America’s support for Israel’s security is unshakable, period."
US vice president said that US would have invented the country had it not been there to preserve interests
www.hurriyetdailynews.com
As far as the zionists are concerned, while Likudniks around Mileikowsky ("Netanyahu") and certain other elements of the regime might adopt the blatant hard line against Iran, others, particularly in the higher ranks of Isra"el"'s security apparatus (including "I"DF and "Mossad") have on several occasions expressed views more in line with the US Democrats' outwardly appeasing but inherently hostile scheme.
A second issue to pay attention to is the identity of political currents in Iran that pressed for and negotiated the JCPOA, namely reformists and moderates. These currents in fact adhere to principle of engagement and "normalization" with America - principle which goes far beyond the idea of negotiating temporary sactions relief while strengthening one's resilience, and is actually not in tune with this idea.
Indeed, to the mentioned reformists and moderates, much like their Democrat American counterparts, the JCPOA was to be the first chapter in a series of similar agreements, where the follow-on ones would limit Iran's ballistic missile power and regional alliances, and thereby directly jeopardize the country's deterrence and its ability to defend against foreign aggression. Reformists and moderates want to engage Iran on the path which Gaddafi treaded before them. We know how badly that ended for Libya.
Even if one rejects any negotiations on missiles and regional policy while advocating full reinstatement of the nuclear deal - the problem is that in case the liberals manage to convince the Iranian public that their material situation improved as a result of Biden returning to the JCPOA, this will help those same liberals not only to have their candidate elected as president in 2021, but it will allow them to pressure if not blackmail the Supreme Leader, the IRGC and the revolutionary factions into ceding against their will on missile and regional policy deals with the west (read: sharp restrictions on Iran's missiles and regional allies). I think we know what would come next if liberals had their way and made Iran accept such deals.
_____
I would like to invite everyone to watch ostad Raefipour's latest analysis, at least the part that deals with the JCPOA. It's about 30 minutes long, but perfectly and comprehensively summarizes all aspects of the issue in my opinion:
Thanks to
@Hormuz for posting it first.
Please people, watch the last 30 minutes of the above video if you have time!
www.lexology.com
