The end of the deal, hopes, delusions and treasons

[QWECXZ]

The SnapBack was designed to override vetoes. Rouhani and Co were played. They never thought US could find a loophole and leave the deal and still initiate SnapBack.

They weren't played. They were fully aware of it. It's one of the many reasons that they should be hanged for treason.

The US will succeed with the snapback one way or another. In the worst case scenario, one of the Europeans (perhaps the UK) will activate it on their behalf.

 

[raptor22]

They weren't played. They were fully aware of it. It's one of the many reasons that they should be hanged for treason.

The US will succeed with the snapback one way or another. In the worst case scenario, one of the Europeans (perhaps the UK) will activate it on their behalf.

They can not expect using force to bypass council ...
Even if we consider american as participant of JCPoA to notify the UNSC for Iran not meeting its commitments each side must go through a whole process for almost 2 months then after that "including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA" then they could trigger such mechanism:

If Iran believed that any or all of the E3/EU+3 were not meeting their commitments under this JCPOA, Iran could refer the issue to the Joint Commission for resolution; similarly, if any of the E3/EU+3 believed that Iran was not meeting its commitments under this JCPOA, any of the E3/EU+3 could do the same. The Joint Commission would have 15 days to resolve the issue, unless the time period was extended by consensus. After Joint Commission consideration, any participant could refer the issue to Ministers of Foreign Affairs, if it believed the compliance issue had not been resolved. Ministers would have 15 days to resolve the issue, unless the time period was extended by consensus. After Joint Commission consideration – in parallel with (or in lieu of) review at the Ministerial level - either the complaining participant or the participant whose performance is in question could request that the issue be considered by an Advisory Board, which would consist of three members (one each appointed by the participants in the dispute and a third independent member). The Advisory Board should provide a non-binding opinion on the compliance issue within 15 days. If, after this 30-day process the issue is not resolved, the Joint Commission would consider the opinion of the Advisory Board for no more than 5 days in order to resolve the issue. If the issue still has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the complaining participant, and if the complaining participant deems the issue to constitute significant non-performance, then that participant could treat the unresolved issue as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part and/or notify the UN Security Council that it believes the issue constitutes significant non-performance.
37.
Upon receipt of the notification from the complaining participant, as described above, including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA, the UN Security Council, in accordance with its procedures, shall vote on a resolution to continue the sanctions lifting. If the resolution described above has not been adopted within 30 days of the notification, then the provisions of the old UN Security Council resolutions would be re-imposed, unless the UN Security Council decides otherwise. In such event, these provisions would not apply with retroactive effect to contracts signed between any party and Iran or Iranian individuals and entities prior to the date of application, provided that the activities contemplated under and execution of such contracts are consistent with this JCPOA and the previous and current UN Security Council resolutions. The UN Security Council, expressing its intention to prevent the reapplication of the provisions if the issue giving rise to the notification is resolved within this period, intends to take into account the views of the States involved in the issue and any opinion on the issue of the Advisory Board. Iran has stated that if sanctions are reinstated in whole or in part, Iran will treat that as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part.

​

And as we know the american have not gone to all these steps and there are no good intentions but destroying the entire deal .. besides the american ain't anymore a part of JCPoA as they seized their participant back in 2018 therefore there is no legal ground for them to use such a mechanism as it's been stated by 3EU countries in their latest letter ...

Furthermore americans have violated both 2231 & JCPoA therfore there is no way they could claim any right from it unless through coercion ..

 

[QWECXZ]

They can not expect using force to bypass council ...
Even if we consider american as participant of JCPoA to notify each side must go through a whole process for at least 2 months then after that "including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA" then

If Iran believed that any or all of the E3/EU+3 were not meeting their commitments under this JCPOA, Iran could refer the issue to the Joint Commission for resolution; similarly, if any of the E3/EU+3 believed that Iran was not meeting its commitments under this JCPOA, any of the E3/EU+3 could do the same. The Joint Commission would have 15 days to resolve the issue, unless the time period was extended by consensus. After Joint Commission consideration, any participant could refer the issue to Ministers of Foreign Affairs, if it believed the compliance issue had not been resolved. Ministers would have 15 days to resolve the issue, unless the time period was extended by consensus. After Joint Commission consideration – in parallel with (or in lieu of) review at the Ministerial level - either the complaining participant or the participant whose performance is in question could request that the issue be considered by an Advisory Board, which would consist of three members (one each appointed by the participants in the dispute and a third independent member). The Advisory Board should provide a non-binding opinion on the compliance issue within 15 days. If, after this 30-day process the issue is not resolved, the Joint Commission would consider the opinion of the Advisory Board for no more than 5 days in order to resolve the issue. If the issue still has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the complaining participant, and if the complaining participant deems the issue to constitute significant non-performance, then that participant could treat the unresolved issue as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part and/or notify the UN Security Council that it believes the issue constitutes significant non-performance.
37.
Upon receipt of the notification from the complaining participant, as described above, including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA, the UN Security Council, in accordance with its procedures, shall vote on a resolution to continue the sanctions lifting. If the resolution described above has not been adopted within 30 days of the notification, then the provisions of the old UN Security Council resolutions would be re-imposed, unless the UN Security Council decides otherwise. In such event, these provisions would not apply with retroactive effect to contracts signed between any party and Iran or Iranian individuals and entities prior to the date of application, provided that the activities contemplated under and execution of such contracts are consistent with this JCPOA and the previous and current UN Security Council resolutions. The UN Security Council, expressing its intention to prevent the reapplication of the provisions if the issue giving rise to the notification is resolved within this period, intends to take into account the views of the States involved in the issue and any opinion on the issue of the Advisory Board. Iran has stated that if sanctions are reinstated in whole or in part, Iran will treat that as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part.​

They won't use force. Why would they? Are you seriously that naive to think that the Europeans, particularly the UK and France, will side with Iran?!

I don't see what difference the notion of delaying the return of sanctions for 2 months makes. The outcome seems quite the same to me.

 

[raptor22]

They won't use force. Why would they? Are you seriously that naive to think that the Europeans, particularly the UK and France, will side with Iran?!

I don't see what difference the notion of delaying the return of sanctions for 2 months makes. The outcome seems quite the same to me.

well when you have not followed all steps then your move is not binding with the law ... besides they are not anymore a part of it so they can not claim anything :

"...On 20 August, the US sent a letter to the UN Security Council requesting to initiate the ‘snapback’ mechanism, which allows a participant to the JCPoA to seek the reimposition against Iran of the multilateral sanctions lifted in 2015 in accordance with resolution 2231, adopted by the UN Security Council.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom (“the E3”) note that the US ceased to be a participant to the JCPoA following their withdrawal from the deal on 8 May, 2018. Our position regarding the effectiveness of the US notification pursuant to resolution 2231 has consequently been very clearly expressed to the Presidency and all UNSC members. We cannot therefore support this action which is incompatible with our current efforts to support the JCPoA..."
​

gov.uk

american even threaten 3EU countries with sanctions if they continue with the notion of supporting the deal .. besides has already threaten Russia and China .. then what may be called as naive mindset is the reality on the ground.

 

[QWECXZ]

well when you have not followed all steps then your move is not binding with the law ... besides they are not anymore a part of it so they can not claim anything :

"...On 20 August, the US sent a letter to the UN Security Council requesting to initiate the ‘snapback’ mechanism, which allows a participant to the JCPoA to seek the reimposition against Iran of the multilateral sanctions lifted in 2015 in accordance with resolution 2231, adopted by the UN Security Council.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom (“the E3”) note that the US ceased to be a participant to the JCPoA following their withdrawal from the deal on 8 May, 2018. Our position regarding the effectiveness of the US notification pursuant to resolution 2231 has consequently been very clearly expressed to the Presidency and all UNSC members. We cannot therefore support this action which is incompatible with our current efforts to support the JCPoA..."
​

gov.uk

Yeah, well, it turns out that they can and they are pushing for it now.
The Europeans are only playing along with what the US demands of them. They are keeping Iran in a state of inaction, only for Iran to remain under more pressure and get surprised when it's too late to respond in a strong way. And the Rouhani administration and Khamenei, even though seem to be aware of this trick, are doing exactly what they want: nothing.

 

[raptor22]

Yeah, well, it turns out that they can and they are pushing for it now.
The Europeans are only playing along with what the US demands of them. They are keeping Iran in a state of inaction, only for Iran to remain under more pressure and get surprised when it's too late to respond in a strong way. And the Rouhani administration and Khamenei, even though seem to be aware of this trick, are doing exactly what they want: nothing.

I am not a fortune teller to foresee the future but base upon what I observed they are not able to trigger it & apparently only isreal and KSA has welcomed such a move ... besides the UN sanctions is in no way comparable with american ones in volume and effectiveness but it gives american sanctions legal grounds which ain't good ... so let's wait to see what "charkh gardon" has prepared for us ... we are neither policy maker nor in any position to change the course just discussing it ... it'd not take long time to know ...

 

[QWECXZ]

I am not a fortune teller to foresee the future but base upon what I observed they are not able to trigger it & apparently only isreal and KSA has welcomed such a move ... besides the UN sanctions is in no way comparable with american ones in volume and effectiveness but it gives american sanctions legal grounds which ain't good ... so let's wait to see what "charkh gardon" has prepared for us ... we are neither policy maker nor in any position to change the course just discussing it ... it'd not take long time to know ...

Yeah, I agree with you that we are not policy makers and can do nothing to change the course, but it remains a fact that the whole text of the JCPOA has been written in a deliberate way to be a complete loss for Iran and Zarif and his team, being fully aware of this, signed it. That's treason.

Nevertheless, let's not forget that the Europeans can still activate the snapback mechanism over a really baseless claim. They don't even have to prove their claim to be able to activate the snapback mechanism.

And although the UNSC sanctions will not make much of an economic difference to us, but they will enable any country in the world to stop our ships and carry out inspections.

 

[mohsen]

They can not expect using force to bypass council ...
Even if we consider american as participant of JCPoA to notify the UNSC for Iran not meeting its commitments each side must go through a whole process for almost 2 months then after that "including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA" then they could trigger such mechanism:

If Iran believed that any or all of the E3/EU+3 were not meeting their commitments under this JCPOA, Iran could refer the issue to the Joint Commission for resolution; similarly, if any of the E3/EU+3 believed that Iran was not meeting its commitments under this JCPOA, any of the E3/EU+3 could do the same. The Joint Commission would have 15 days to resolve the issue, unless the time period was extended by consensus. After Joint Commission consideration, any participant could refer the issue to Ministers of Foreign Affairs, if it believed the compliance issue had not been resolved. Ministers would have 15 days to resolve the issue, unless the time period was extended by consensus. After Joint Commission consideration – in parallel with (or in lieu of) review at the Ministerial level - either the complaining participant or the participant whose performance is in question could request that the issue be considered by an Advisory Board, which would consist of three members (one each appointed by the participants in the dispute and a third independent member). The Advisory Board should provide a non-binding opinion on the compliance issue within 15 days. If, after this 30-day process the issue is not resolved, the Joint Commission would consider the opinion of the Advisory Board for no more than 5 days in order to resolve the issue. If the issue still has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the complaining participant, and if the complaining participant deems the issue to constitute significant non-performance, then that participant could treat the unresolved issue as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part and/or notify the UN Security Council that it believes the issue constitutes significant non-performance.
37.
Upon receipt of the notification from the complaining participant, as described above, including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA, the UN Security Council, in accordance with its procedures, shall vote on a resolution to continue the sanctions lifting. If the resolution described above has not been adopted within 30 days of the notification, then the provisions of the old UN Security Council resolutions would be re-imposed, unless the UN Security Council decides otherwise. In such event, these provisions would not apply with retroactive effect to contracts signed between any party and Iran or Iranian individuals and entities prior to the date of application, provided that the activities contemplated under and execution of such contracts are consistent with this JCPOA and the previous and current UN Security Council resolutions. The UN Security Council, expressing its intention to prevent the reapplication of the provisions if the issue giving rise to the notification is resolved within this period, intends to take into account the views of the States involved in the issue and any opinion on the issue of the Advisory Board. Iran has stated that if sanctions are reinstated in whole or in part, Iran will treat that as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part.

​

And as we know the american have not gone to all these steps and there are no good intentions but destroying the entire deal .. besides the american ain't anymore a part of JCPoA as they seized their participant back in 2018 therefore there is no legal ground for them to use such a mechanism as it's been stated by 3EU countries in their latest letter ...
View attachment 662520

Furthermore americans have violated both 2231 & JCPoA therfore there is no way they could claim any right from it unless through coercion ..
View attachment 662521

Bro, we live in a world in which child murders like Saudis get elected as the chairmen of human rights in UN! based on what laws?!

US can claim Iran has abused the deal so their abandon of the deal has been just a response (as they said), US can say they have waited way more than two months for Iran to change it's behavior (and its true).

So now what matters isn't the laws or JCPOA context, as these are ambiguous enough. right now other calculations and background deals will define the outcome. deals between US (Democrat & Republican) and Europeans, deals between eastern and western blocks, risk of Iran abandoning the NPT and its implications (US election is the least one), allowing Iran to waste its money for importing (controlled) stuff, vs further Iranian R&D and productions, etc.

So these are the key elements. your texts are only good for Mr Zarif to play with them in his twitter account!

 

[aryobarzan]

The game is played in two domains....the "legal" domain which is visible and for mass consumption and the "behind the scene " power domain . Iran has to play in both domains and what truly works for Iran is a simple question for all to answer..."What to do with a nuclear armed Iran" ..if they can find a low risk solution to that question then the game is over.

 

[Draco.IMF]

I think EU and USA playing "good cop/bad cop"
Europe never had balls to stand up against US so why now....question is, what will Russia/China do...

 

[raptor22]

Bro, we live in a world in which child murders like Saudis get elected as the chairmen of human rights in UN! based on what laws?!

US can claim Iran has abused the deal so their abandon of the deal has been just a response (as they said), US can say they have waited way more than two months for Iran to change it's behavior (and its true).

So now what matters isn't the laws or JCPOA context, as these are ambiguous enough. right now other calculations and background deals will define the outcome. deals between US (Democrat & Republican) and Europeans, deals between eastern and western blocks, risk of Iran abandoning the NPT and its implications (US election is the least one), allowing Iran to waste its money for importing (controlled) stuff, vs further Iranian R&D and productions, etc.

So these are the key elements. your texts are only good for Mr Zarif to play with them in his twitter account!

Look Mohsen on the law and JCPoA context you're right sure it'd could be played and at the end its power that determines the outcome of all this show but it doesn't hurt anyone if you make your voice heard therefore if you are right and know it very well then raise it to the end if you don't others would take the lead at least it make it harder for them if you don't remain silent ... what is wrong if you prove your adversary wrongdoings base upon international law and defend yourselves?? Surely we live in a jungle which Saudis could get seat of HR but the world also changed dramatically & it doesn't mean you gotta give it all up, changes takes time but eventually it happens standing idle doing nothing make it a better world?
I've always said that our first and only enemy is ourselves the rest is just excuses ... so no matter what happens it's us that make it better or worse hence it's up to us to decide whether to waste our money for importing (controlled) stuff vs further Iranian R&D and productions (debatable) .. leaving NPT or not ..I might guess what has made IR remains in the deal but if you've decided to stay then stay in it fully if your calculation says no then don't stay in it and leave it .. right now IR policy is to remain as participant of JCPoA and not the one whom terminates it first therefore it defends/implements it fully ...
It'd be clear within 30 days.

*Zarif is a diplomat and he should make his points through all media and ways as much as he can I wouldn't blame him for doing so ...

 

[TheImmortal]

30-day SnapBack means sanctions will go into effect September 19th, days before UN assembly.

 

[yavar]

Next move maybe, ( double Veto)

Don’t Let Iran Blow Up the U.N. Security Council

Don’t Let Iran Blow Up the U.N. Security Council

As a critical vote approaches, the fate of Iran nuclear sanctions—and decades of multilateralism—lies in the hands of Britain and France.

foreignpolicy.com

 

[Sineva]

Next move maybe, ( double Veto)

Don’t Let Iran Blow Up the U.N. Security Council

Don’t Let Iran Blow Up the U.N. Security Council

As a critical vote approaches, the fate of Iran nuclear sanctions—and decades of multilateralism—lies in the hands of Britain and France.

foreignpolicy.com

What a truly,truly vile disgusting article.No surprises that it written by someone from the Foundation for Defense of Dictatorships.
Still,how ironic would it be if it was us attempts to invoke part of a deal that they publicly renounced participation in 2+ years ago,actually led to real debate over the permanent members veto,its potential for being abused,and its real need for reform.
Who knows,maybe some great good might yet come from the jcpoa,just not in a way that anyone expected.

 

[BHAN85]

I think EU and USA playing "good cop/bad cop"
Europe never had balls to stand up against US so why now....question is, what will Russia/China do...

I think EU and USA playing "dumb cop/smart cop", but it's not a game, EU politicians are dumb*ss as hell truly.
And you can see this in other things, e.g: how they handle refugee invasions.

They are lost with Trump administration, they think Trump government is something temporal and they still are not aware the world has forever changed in the last years.

EU politicians are ideology nutjobs, it's a kind of soviet politburo, but changing communism by gobalism.

EU ruling elite it's not a smart, cold, rational and meritocratic like USA, they aren't smart cold wall street bankers, they are dumbsh*t politicians who love to appear in summit photos.

France, Germany, Italia... got large amount of money when WWII finished, they aren't self made countries like USA or UK, they were created as rich countries to contain soviet union by USA decades ago, and their work is over...