Arian
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2011
- Messages
- 2,884
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
کسی نمی گه دانش اش رو به دست آوردن کاری داره برای ایران، انجام دادنش و ساخت تکنولوژی اش داستان داره
Featured Joe Biden reaffirms he will seek return to Iran nuclear deal
- Thread starter Philosopher
- Start date
RΛIDEN
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2020
- Messages
- 219
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
China Urges Biden to 'Unconditionally' Return to Iran Nuclear Deal
China urged the incoming administration of President-elect Joe Biden to return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—known commonly as the Iran nuclear deal.
Biden has expressed his interest in returning to the landmark 2015 agreement, which was also signed by China, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the European Union. President Donald Trump was criticized by U.S. allies and foes alike for withdrawing from the deal in 2018. The international pact offered Iran sanctions relief and international investment in exchange for curbing its nuclear program.
"China hopes the United States will return to the JCPOA unconditionally and as soon as possible, resume the honoring of its obligations and lift all relevant sanctions," China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said Wednesday, Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported. Zhao asserted that the Biden administration should take specific steps to rebuild trust with Iran moving forward.
www.newsweek.com
China urged the incoming administration of President-elect Joe Biden to return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—known commonly as the Iran nuclear deal.
Biden has expressed his interest in returning to the landmark 2015 agreement, which was also signed by China, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the European Union. President Donald Trump was criticized by U.S. allies and foes alike for withdrawing from the deal in 2018. The international pact offered Iran sanctions relief and international investment in exchange for curbing its nuclear program.
"China hopes the United States will return to the JCPOA unconditionally and as soon as possible, resume the honoring of its obligations and lift all relevant sanctions," China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said Wednesday, Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported. Zhao asserted that the Biden administration should take specific steps to rebuild trust with Iran moving forward.
China Urges Biden to 'Unconditionally' Return to Iran Nuclear Deal
Jake Sullivan, Biden's pick to be national security adviser, said Monday that the incoming administration thinks "it is feasible and achievable" to return to the Iran deal.
www.newsweek.com
Sineva
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 24, 2018
- Messages
- 4,657
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
This op-ed piece is I think a rather "beautiful" illustration of the utterly bankrupt strategy,if one can even call it that,of the ultra-right be they neo-cons,chumpists,neo fascists,etc..,when it comes to iran.
We see that despite the last 40 years of the reality of the iri,there is still the same delusion among western politicians that they should not have to deal with the iran that is,but instead the iran as they wish it to be,and if they can just continue with the same failed strategy for just a little while longer then maybe-just-maybe this might become a reality......
Iran: Why Now Is Not the Time to Abandon Maximum Pressure
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/iran-why-now-not-time-abandon-maximum-pressure-173955
It was the inability of the Soviet Union to economically weather the Cold War that led to its demise, and if the Iranian leadership does not see light at the end of the tunnel, precedent suggests even the Supreme Leader will sacrifice declared principles in order to survive.
by Michael Rubin[RIGHT-WING THINK TANK MEMBER]
It’s become something akin to conventional wisdom among the foreign policy commentariat that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s “maximum pressure” campaign has failed. That Democrats would make the argument should not surprise: U.S. national security has become a political football, and Iran is on the line of scrimmage. But Republicans have also piled on, albeit more mildly. Former National Security Council official Michael Singh, for example, wrote that maximum pressure “has caused unprecedented economic pain for the Iranian regime, but has not yet resulted in any outcome that advances American interests.” American Enterprise Institute expert Kori Schake was also dismissive of the policy’s impact. “This campaign has not succeeded. None of the twelve demands that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo outlined as preconditions for new negotiations with Iran have been met,” she wrote.
To write off “maximum pressure” as ineffective or a mistake is wrong, however, even if it is true that the Islamic Republic has increased its uranium enrichment and its support for proxy militias. Put aside the fact that Pompeo’s twelve demands are common-sense policy: an end to terrorism, nuclear weapons work, missile proliferation, sponsorship of militias fighting governments across the region, threats to eradicate Israel, and so forth. To suggest any of these are not realistic or attainable goals is to normalize the Islamic Republic’s rogue behavior.
The broader problems with writing off maximum pressure as a failure, however, are three-fold: First, it is a mistake to view U.S. policy in a vacuum without considering the nature of Iran’s counter-strategy. Second, but related, is the assumption that effective strategies must conform to the U.S. political calendar. This growing trend is both symptomatic of the politicization of national security and corrosive to its effectiveness, and only encourages the Islamic Republic and other rogue regimes to try to outlast any coercion by waiting on the results of the next U.S. election and gamble on a new administration backing down amidst partisan bickering This is tragic, as there is historical precedent to Tehran reversing course in the face of overwhelming economic duress and isolation.
Third, even accepting the problems of maximum pressure, the logic of ending it falls short. The economic wing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) controls up to 40 percent of the Iranian economy. To lift sanctions absent any strategy to bypass industries controlled by the IRGC would be to enrich them further. While critics of “maximum pressure” suggest that the policy undercuts so-called reformers, this too projects a misunderstanding of Iranian politics as reformers have no influence over the security and military issues at the heart of Iran’s rejectionism, nor do are their ideological disputes with hardliners significant; most of the disputes between hardliners and reformers are instead about tactics.
The logical flaws at the heart of enthusiasm to condemn and dispense with maximum pressure are perhaps seen most clearly if they are applied to other challenges the United States faces. Sanctions have failed to prevent North Korea’s nuclear program, so would greater aid be in order? Attempts to isolate Venezuela failed, so perhaps instead double down on Nicolás Maduro? Strategic impatience applied to other problem spots would be equally counterproductive. U.S. strategy to counter China’s salami-slicing in the South China Sea have not forced China to reverse course, for example, so perhaps it is time to recognize China’s claims to its reefs and atolls? Freedom and democracy in Eastern Europe antagonize Russian president Vladimir Putin, so instead retreat back to the divisions of the Cold War? Simply put, it is a logical fallacy to say just because strategy A is slow-working or seemingly ineffective, that strategy B is a panacea. The world is a messy place and sometimes the opposite of an imperfect strategy can actually be much worse.
Princeton University graduate student Xiyue Wang knows Iran’s reality perhaps better than any university scholar or think tank expert today; he had a crash course when the IRGC imprisoned him for three years as part of Tehran’s hostage diplomacy. He notes that while Joe Biden wrote in the weeks prior to his election that Donald “Trump’s ‘maximum pressure’ has been a boon to the regime in Iran and a bust for America’s interests,” the real impact of the policy has been deeper than most involved in the debate realize. Given how the Iranian leadership has mortgaged itself to survive Trump, the best way forward would be to turn the Iranian leadership’s cynical calculation on its head and maintain the pressure for a few months more. It was the inability of the Soviet Union to economically weather the Cold War that led to its demise, and if the Iranian leadership does not see light at the end of the tunnel, precedent suggests even the Supreme Leader will sacrifice declared principles in order to survive.
Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a frequent author for the National Interest.
We see that despite the last 40 years of the reality of the iri,there is still the same delusion among western politicians that they should not have to deal with the iran that is,but instead the iran as they wish it to be,and if they can just continue with the same failed strategy for just a little while longer then maybe-just-maybe this might become a reality......
Iran: Why Now Is Not the Time to Abandon Maximum Pressure
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/iran-why-now-not-time-abandon-maximum-pressure-173955
It was the inability of the Soviet Union to economically weather the Cold War that led to its demise, and if the Iranian leadership does not see light at the end of the tunnel, precedent suggests even the Supreme Leader will sacrifice declared principles in order to survive.
by Michael Rubin[RIGHT-WING THINK TANK MEMBER]
It’s become something akin to conventional wisdom among the foreign policy commentariat that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s “maximum pressure” campaign has failed. That Democrats would make the argument should not surprise: U.S. national security has become a political football, and Iran is on the line of scrimmage. But Republicans have also piled on, albeit more mildly. Former National Security Council official Michael Singh, for example, wrote that maximum pressure “has caused unprecedented economic pain for the Iranian regime, but has not yet resulted in any outcome that advances American interests.” American Enterprise Institute expert Kori Schake was also dismissive of the policy’s impact. “This campaign has not succeeded. None of the twelve demands that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo outlined as preconditions for new negotiations with Iran have been met,” she wrote.
To write off “maximum pressure” as ineffective or a mistake is wrong, however, even if it is true that the Islamic Republic has increased its uranium enrichment and its support for proxy militias. Put aside the fact that Pompeo’s twelve demands are common-sense policy: an end to terrorism, nuclear weapons work, missile proliferation, sponsorship of militias fighting governments across the region, threats to eradicate Israel, and so forth. To suggest any of these are not realistic or attainable goals is to normalize the Islamic Republic’s rogue behavior.
The broader problems with writing off maximum pressure as a failure, however, are three-fold: First, it is a mistake to view U.S. policy in a vacuum without considering the nature of Iran’s counter-strategy. Second, but related, is the assumption that effective strategies must conform to the U.S. political calendar. This growing trend is both symptomatic of the politicization of national security and corrosive to its effectiveness, and only encourages the Islamic Republic and other rogue regimes to try to outlast any coercion by waiting on the results of the next U.S. election and gamble on a new administration backing down amidst partisan bickering This is tragic, as there is historical precedent to Tehran reversing course in the face of overwhelming economic duress and isolation.
Third, even accepting the problems of maximum pressure, the logic of ending it falls short. The economic wing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) controls up to 40 percent of the Iranian economy. To lift sanctions absent any strategy to bypass industries controlled by the IRGC would be to enrich them further. While critics of “maximum pressure” suggest that the policy undercuts so-called reformers, this too projects a misunderstanding of Iranian politics as reformers have no influence over the security and military issues at the heart of Iran’s rejectionism, nor do are their ideological disputes with hardliners significant; most of the disputes between hardliners and reformers are instead about tactics.
The logical flaws at the heart of enthusiasm to condemn and dispense with maximum pressure are perhaps seen most clearly if they are applied to other challenges the United States faces. Sanctions have failed to prevent North Korea’s nuclear program, so would greater aid be in order? Attempts to isolate Venezuela failed, so perhaps instead double down on Nicolás Maduro? Strategic impatience applied to other problem spots would be equally counterproductive. U.S. strategy to counter China’s salami-slicing in the South China Sea have not forced China to reverse course, for example, so perhaps it is time to recognize China’s claims to its reefs and atolls? Freedom and democracy in Eastern Europe antagonize Russian president Vladimir Putin, so instead retreat back to the divisions of the Cold War? Simply put, it is a logical fallacy to say just because strategy A is slow-working or seemingly ineffective, that strategy B is a panacea. The world is a messy place and sometimes the opposite of an imperfect strategy can actually be much worse.
Princeton University graduate student Xiyue Wang knows Iran’s reality perhaps better than any university scholar or think tank expert today; he had a crash course when the IRGC imprisoned him for three years as part of Tehran’s hostage diplomacy. He notes that while Joe Biden wrote in the weeks prior to his election that Donald “Trump’s ‘maximum pressure’ has been a boon to the regime in Iran and a bust for America’s interests,” the real impact of the policy has been deeper than most involved in the debate realize. Given how the Iranian leadership has mortgaged itself to survive Trump, the best way forward would be to turn the Iranian leadership’s cynical calculation on its head and maintain the pressure for a few months more. It was the inability of the Soviet Union to economically weather the Cold War that led to its demise, and if the Iranian leadership does not see light at the end of the tunnel, precedent suggests even the Supreme Leader will sacrifice declared principles in order to survive.
Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a frequent author for the National Interest.
BHAN85
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
- Messages
- 3,711
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
USA is like the great prostitute of Revelations book.
And like in a real world prostitute, they will end being annoying for everybody, for Iran, for Saudi Arabia, for every country of this world.
They s*ck a different country c*ck every 4 years, they are always playing to fool the world.
Well, everything has a limit. And USA surpassed that limit years ago.
And like in a real world prostitute, they will end being annoying for everybody, for Iran, for Saudi Arabia, for every country of this world.
They s*ck a different country c*ck every 4 years, they are always playing to fool the world.
Well, everything has a limit. And USA surpassed that limit years ago.
Sineva
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 24, 2018
- Messages
- 4,657
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Some potentially worrying developments in he article below,tho its shows beyond any doubt that the iaea is sadly just as "politicized" [ie pro western] under grossi as it was under his boss,unfortunate but no surprise.Tho thankfully it is NOT up to the iaea to renegotiate the jcpoa or any part of it.However the fact,judging by this article at any rate,that it seems to think that this should be the case is just another reminder of its lack of impartiality and for it not to be trusted by the iri.
Imho iran should at a bare minimum wait until the us has not only publicly rejoined the deal in name,but has also repealed all of the chumpist era sanctions levied against iran and made it clear to the various banks and financial institutions that trade with iran is a vital part of the deal without which there is no deal.
However there would still have to be the critically important matter of us political guarantees so as to ensure no repeats of this behavior.
Exclusive: New agreement needed to revive Iran nuclear deal under Biden, IAEA chief says
By Francois Murphy
https://www.reuters.com/article/iran-nuclear-iaea-exclusive-int-idUSKBN28R1VH
VIENNA (Reuters) - Reviving Iran’s nuclear deal under U.S. President-elect Joe Biden would require striking a new agreement setting out how Iran’s breaches should be reversed, U.N. atomic watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said.
Iran has breached many of the deal’s limits on its nuclear activities in response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the deal and the reimposition of U.S. sanctions against Tehran that the deal lifted. Tehran often says it can quickly reverse its breaches if U.S. sanctions are removed.
Biden, who takes office on Jan. 20, has said the United States will rejoin the deal “if Iran resumes strict compliance” with the agreement that imposed strict curbs on its nuclear activities in return for the lifting of sanctions.
In an interview with Reuters, Grossi, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency that polices the deal, said there had been too many breaches for the agreement to simply fall back into place.
“I cannot imagine that they are going simply to say, ‘We are back to square one’ because square one is no longer there,” Grossi said at IAEA headquarters.
“There is more (nuclear) material, ... there is more activity, there are more centrifuges, and more are being announced. So what happens with all this? This is the question for them at the political level to decide,” said Grossi, an Argentine who took office as IAEA director general a year ago.
Asked if that meant there would have to be a ‘deal within the deal’, he said: “Oh yes, oh yes. Undoubtedly.
“It is clear that there will have to be a protocol or an agreement or an understanding or some ancillary document which will stipulate clearly what we do,” he said.
Imho iran should at a bare minimum wait until the us has not only publicly rejoined the deal in name,but has also repealed all of the chumpist era sanctions levied against iran and made it clear to the various banks and financial institutions that trade with iran is a vital part of the deal without which there is no deal.
However there would still have to be the critically important matter of us political guarantees so as to ensure no repeats of this behavior.
Exclusive: New agreement needed to revive Iran nuclear deal under Biden, IAEA chief says
By Francois Murphy
https://www.reuters.com/article/iran-nuclear-iaea-exclusive-int-idUSKBN28R1VH
VIENNA (Reuters) - Reviving Iran’s nuclear deal under U.S. President-elect Joe Biden would require striking a new agreement setting out how Iran’s breaches should be reversed, U.N. atomic watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said.
Iran has breached many of the deal’s limits on its nuclear activities in response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the deal and the reimposition of U.S. sanctions against Tehran that the deal lifted. Tehran often says it can quickly reverse its breaches if U.S. sanctions are removed.
Biden, who takes office on Jan. 20, has said the United States will rejoin the deal “if Iran resumes strict compliance” with the agreement that imposed strict curbs on its nuclear activities in return for the lifting of sanctions.
In an interview with Reuters, Grossi, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency that polices the deal, said there had been too many breaches for the agreement to simply fall back into place.
“I cannot imagine that they are going simply to say, ‘We are back to square one’ because square one is no longer there,” Grossi said at IAEA headquarters.
“There is more (nuclear) material, ... there is more activity, there are more centrifuges, and more are being announced. So what happens with all this? This is the question for them at the political level to decide,” said Grossi, an Argentine who took office as IAEA director general a year ago.
Asked if that meant there would have to be a ‘deal within the deal’, he said: “Oh yes, oh yes. Undoubtedly.
“It is clear that there will have to be a protocol or an agreement or an understanding or some ancillary document which will stipulate clearly what we do,” he said.
WudangMaster
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Goh Mikhoran!
WudangMaster
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
WudangMaster
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
It saddens me to say this, but Tom Cotton is 1 x 10^100 times more Man than ms. zarif.
Cotton's ideology is vile, but he enlisted and then ran for office & legitimately earned his place in life and the way he called out ms. zarif in twitter is classic. What is more shocking is that ms zarif spent the years of the baathist imposed war in safety in the US!!!!!
Why is such a creature allowed as the foreign minister?!
Why do I keep hearing of these things about the rohani admin?!
What goddamned government on Earth would ever allow this abomination in any level of power?!
I would not trust them to clean up after a sigheh nevermind run a country! How do they get qualified by Guardian Council?!
Cotton's ideology is vile, but he enlisted and then ran for office & legitimately earned his place in life and the way he called out ms. zarif in twitter is classic. What is more shocking is that ms zarif spent the years of the baathist imposed war in safety in the US!!!!!
Why is such a creature allowed as the foreign minister?!
Why do I keep hearing of these things about the rohani admin?!
What goddamned government on Earth would ever allow this abomination in any level of power?!
I would not trust them to clean up after a sigheh nevermind run a country! How do they get qualified by Guardian Council?!
aryobarzan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2019
- Messages
- 4,586
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
You said it....being educated in the US....his education made him to see the American point of view with more weight...it also programmed him to respect the written promises just like every western citizen is expected to obey the contractual obligations...but what he did not study is how many times the same western elite have cheated on their obligations..A naive weak man negotiated with the wolfs and thrives in three piece suits..and we all know the outcome.
Similar threads
