What's new

The end of the deal, hopes, delusions and treasons

I think this back and force and this state of chaos in Formal stance about Foreign diplomacy is part of I.R plan to confuse USA and the west and dontlet them to make decisive decision ...

خیلی فکر کردم ، این آشوبی که در سیاست خارجی ج.ا هست ، بخشی از نقشه ی درونی نظامه تا غرب و آمریکا همیشه با چند راهی مواجهه باشه و نتونه تصمیم قطعی بگیره ...

وگرنه سر قضیه ی آبان 98 کل نظام و اصلاح طلب و اصولگرا و به اصطلاح اپوزیسیون همه و همه تصمیم واحد گرفتند
No. it's the extent of true democracy in Iran. Indeed we have parties which are exact echo of our enemies' demands.

It's been our wise leader who has reined them during all these years to keep the country's integrity. without him, Iran would had collapsed long ago.

Limiting Iran to a neutral and pure oil seller (puppet) like Saudi Arabia has been official policy of traitors in Iran, people who even criticize Mosaddeq for nationalizing the oil:

گزارش ویژه مشرق از شبکه انگلستان و مافیای نفتی در ایران/ قسمت دوم

طلیعه «برجام نفتی» در مقاله‌ای قدیمی از حسن روحانی/ مهمان ناخوانده‌ی انگلیسی در برج روزنامه اطلاعات/ نقش مافیای نفتی و سفارت انگلیس در فتنه 88 چه بود؟
 
Although I have never been a fan of JCPOA or this Rouhani government I see this 3 month " limited take a peak" not such a bad thing and this is why:

1- It allows Iran to continue enrichments at 20% or higher without making a crisis out of it.

2- If you recall there was a report that US has real problem with lifting sanctions in practical terms (forcing banks and big companies to deal with Iran) . Iran has put condition that "Action" rather than "signature" is the only acceptable criteria for Iran. This 3 months is very good chance for Iran to observe the actions being worked out...US will either start working on the banks or will start putting more military assets around Iran..either case Iran can see what these three months are really for.
3- Iran did legally cancel the additional protocol as per law. Gave this three months "limited visibility" to IAEA as a separate item. IAEA guy must have had some assurance from US to ask for this 3 months so Look for any signs in the filed for action..today I heard Koreans giving some of the frozen fund back..to me that is "action" happening.

4- For the first time it is "them" running after "Iran" to stop... and I like that a lot.:azn:
1.Based on Parliament law, Additional protocol of NPT is now terminated, so our government has no authority to execute it or sign a deal with a foreign entity to keep, suspend or revive it.


2.This three months is a guarantee for our enemies, eventhough we superficially limit our cooperations with IAEA.

3.Iranian Parliament already gave one month deadline and US did absolutely nothing, and plans to do nothing as well. why traitor Reformists came up with further three months? they are aiming for Iran's presidential election to help US come up with a fake promise to partially suspend the sanctions (what traitor Zarif is constantly tweeting, against clear stance of leader); that's the sole goal.


4.US wont remove the sanctions, it's more than clear. anybody who doesn't see it is as delusional as JCPOA fans. even though a traitor like Zarif keeps saying Trump sanctions, free financial transaction is even beyond JCPOA, and neither democrats nor Republicans don't plan to remove it, as they didn't plan during the JCPOA as well, so they don't give a f@ck about your three months chance, except laughing at you!
 




The UN’s nuclear inspectorate has struck a three-month deal with Iran giving it sufficient continued access to verify nuclear activity in the country, opening the space for wider political and diplomatic talks between Tehran and the US.
Iran will go ahead with its threat to withdraw this week from the additional protocol, the agreement that gives inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) intrusive powers.

However, following a weekend of talks with officials in Tehran, the IAEA’s director general, Rafael Grossi, announced that he had struck what he described as “a temporary bilateral technical understanding” that will mitigate the impact of Iran’s withdrawal from the protocol, and give the IAEA confidence that it can continue to verify Iran’s nuclear activity.
Grossi added that the move “salvages the situation” and avoids the position of the inspectors “flying blind”. He said the agreement, from which either side can withdraw, gave space for wider diplomatic discussions between the US and Iran to go ahead.
He said the law suspending Iran from the additional protocol had been passed by its parliament and now “exists and is going to be applied. There is less access, let’s face it.”
However, Grossi made clear he felt the new bilateral agreement sufficiently mitigated the impact of the reduced inspections regime, so it was therefore worthwhile for his team’s verification work continuing, at least on a temporary basis. “This is a temporary solution that allows us to continue to give to the world the assurances of what is going on there in the hope that we can return to a fuller picture.”
The IAEA director general added that there would be no reduction in the number of inspectors, and that not all snap inspections would be banned.
Iranian officials have said the agreement will mean that the inspectors will only have 70% of the access they now enjoy, but Grossi declined to put a percentage on the loss of access.
The deal, released late on Sunday night, was met with an immediate backlash in Iran, where furious hardliners convened an emergency session of parliament to demand more details. Some claimed it effectively overrode the law passed by parliament two months ago cutting back on inspections.
Iran’s atomic energy association said it would continue to use cameras to record and maintain information at its nuclear sites for three months, but would retain the information exclusively. If the US sanctions are lifted completely within that period, Iran will provide this information to the IAEA, otherwise it will be deleted forever.
Grossi will have to report the details of his understanding to the other signatories of the nuclear deal, including France, Germany and the UK. All three had warned Iran of the serious consequences of withdrawing from the protocol, and they will need to be satisfied by the IAEA director on the value of the technical understanding.
All sides are involved in brinkmanship designed to bring about direct talks between the US and Iran leading to the US, on the one hand, lifting economic sanctions and returning to the deal, and Iran coming back into compliance with the agreement. Iran has not left the deal, but over the past year lessened its commitments on critical issues such as levels of uranium enrichment and the use of advanced centrifuges.
Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, said in an interview with the state-owned Press TV that Iran was waiting for action from the US, not promises, and said the cutback in inspections had been mandated by Iran’s parliament and could not be overridden until sanctions were lifted. “We need concrete actions, not words,” he said.
The US has offered to attend an informal diplomatic meeting hosted by the EU, also attended by Russia and China, the other signatories to the deal. The US state department has hinted that at this meeting the US would map out an offer on how sanctions and other economic restrictions could be lifted or suspended if Iran returned to compliance with the nuclear deal, including over uranium enrichment stocks and use of advanced centrifuges.
Zarif said Iran would need to know how, if the US returned to the deal, it would not simply walk out again. He said the issue of compensation for the $1tn (£710bn) damage inflicted on the Iranian economy would also have to be discussed.
Hardliners are demanding that any sanctions suspension would need to be verified, something that would prolong a complex process.
The Iranian parliament’s speaker, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, a likely candidate for president, suspended its normal business on Monday to examine the new agreement and MPs 221 to 6 to refer it to the judiciary. He said any side agreement with the IAEA had to be approved by parliament.
The foreign ministry spokesman, Saeed Khatibzadeh, insisted parliament had been sidestepped in the weekend agreement. The power struggle is not just critical to the prospect of talks with the US, but also how the Iranians may view the presidential elections.
The chairman of parliament’s national security committee, Mojtaba Zolnour, said “the government has no right to decide and act arbitrarily. This arrangement is an insult to parliament.”
 
IAEA,s director general, Rafael Grossi, announced and Iran Atomic Energy Chief sign furtive deal over inspections and Iran withdrawal additional Protocol
 
You`d think that at this point that if the biden regime was truly serious about trying to save whatever was left of the jcpoa,then the last thing that it would be doing was squandering even more of the little time left to it by trying to take a [failed] leaf out of the former chumpanzee-in-chiefs extortion playbook.
I think that with this act it now seems increasingly clear that the jcpoa is dead.

Iran Faces U.S. Censure in First Diplomatic Showdown With Biden
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-25/iran-faces-u-s-censure-in-first-diplomatic-showdown-with-biden

The U.S. is asking other countries to support a formal censure of Iran over its accelerating nuclear activities, a signal that the Biden administration wants to turn up the diplomatic heat on Tehran as it looks to restore a crumbling 2015 accord.

The International Atomic Energy Agency’s board of governors convenes next week in Vienna to discuss the latest reports that Iran has stepped up production of nuclear fuel while stalling inquiries into the presence of uranium particles at undeclared sites.

U.S. diplomats circulated a document on Thursday which lists Washington’s grievances and orders Iran to fully cooperate with inspectors. The proposed resolution would “underscore strong concern at the IAEA’s findings” and “express the board’s deepening concern with respect to Iran’s cooperation,” read the three-page document seen by Bloomberg.

A State Department spokesman declined to comment. Two European officials confirmed they received the document and said they were studying its contents.

Next week’s meeting could become a key early test of the new U.S. administration’s approach to Iran. The document reiterates that “President Biden has made clear that if Iran returns to full performance of its JCPOA commitments, the U.S. is prepared to do the same,” using an abbreviation for the 2015 accord that’s all but collapsed under the weight of American sanctions.

Iran has violated key restrictions on uranium enrichment and production capacity since the U.S. under former President Donald Trump left the nuclear accord in May 2018 and reimposed economic penalties. Each government is now demanding the other make the first move toward restoring the pact.

The IAEA reported Tuesday that Iran’s stockpile of uranium had been enriched closer to levels needed for a weapon for the first time in eight years. It also said that Iranian explanations over decades-old uranium traces detected at several sites were inadequate. Tehran has always maintained it’s never sought a bomb.

The proposed censure suggests the U.S. is ratcheting up the pressure. “The world has long known that Iran pursued nuclear weapons in the past,” according to the document. “We also know that Iran retained a vast collection of records from its past nuclear weapons program. Iran must now cooperate fully with the IAEA so we may have assurance that the legacy of Iran’s past nuclear weapons work does not include undeclared nuclear material in Iran today.”

A suggestion that Iran could be providing incomplete information has potentially serious consequences, including another referral to the United Nations Security Council.

The IAEA erupted in rancor the last time the U.S. led an effort to censure Iran, with China lambasting what it saw as U.S. bullying under Trump.

While that June measure ultimately passed, it left the body that’s responsible for accounting for gram-levels of nuclear material worldwide badly divided. Russia, India, Pakistan and South Africa were among the countries that joined China in either opposing the measure or abstaining from the vote.
 
Top foreign-policy adviser says Biden would keep ‘all’ US sanctions on Iran ‘in place’
June 17, 2020 / JNS

In a discussion during the American Jewish Committee (AJC) Virtual Global Forum on Wednesday with former Trump Deputy National Security Advisor K.T. McFarland, Tony Blinken, who was deputy secretary of state and deputy national security advisor under former U.S. President Barack Obama, said “Iran would have to come back into full compliance and unless until it did, obviously, all sanctions would remain in place.”
“And then, if we come back into compliance, we would use that as a platform with our partners and allies who would be on the same side with us again to negotiate a longer and stronger deal,” continued Blinken .


Blinken touted that Biden has “demonstrated in word and in deed an unshakable commitment to Israel’s security, including when he was vice president,” citing U.S. funding for the Iron Dome missile-defense system and the 10-year, $38 billion memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the United States and Israel agreed to in 2016.

Blinken reiterated Biden’s position that the former vice president would not condition U.S. assistance to Israel on the Jewish state expected to annex parts of the West Bank by July 1.

 
راکتور ایران تهران و کاربرد آن با اورانیوم ۹۵٪ خلوص غنی شده و اگر نیاز شود ما را برای بازگرداندن راکتور به وضعیت اولیه قبل از انقلاب
Iran Tehran reactor IR-0001 and its usage 95% enriched purity and if come to our needs to restore reactor to original status before the 1980s


MR Gharibabadi Iran Permanent Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency: Two New Achievements of the Nuclear Energy Organization: the Production of CD-side of Uranium and Cesium which IAEA it been notified
 
Last edited:
It appears more and more that US is going to use the three months IAEA limited deal with Iran to build a coalition of Europeans against Iran......NOT LOOKING GOOD FOR JCPOA FANS..

Watch out Iran....Keep enriching higher % .....keep the stockpile high....

make sure those tapes do not get into wrong hands...lol
 
It appears more and more that US is going to use the three months IAEA limited deal with Iran to build a coalition of Europeans against Iran......NOT LOOKING GOOD FOR JCPOA FANS..

Watch out Iran....Keep enriching higher % .....keep the stockpile high....

make sure those tapes do not get into wrong hands...lol

They just threatened to cancel that three month deal. It depends on SK, Japan, Iraq issues too.
 
Last edited:
It appears more and more that US is going to use the three months IAEA limited deal with Iran to build a coalition of Europeans against Iran......NOT LOOKING GOOD FOR JCPOA FANS..

Watch out Iran....Keep enriching higher % .....keep the stockpile high....

make sure those tapes do not get into wrong hands...lol
Traitors almost revived the whole additional protocol through ambiguous lines in their deal with IAEA, those tapes are the least concern, just a diversion:
رجانیوز - باقی ماندن نظارت آژانس و استناد به قانونی که اساسا وجود ندارد
 
Traitors almost revived the whole additional protocol through ambiguous lines in their deal with IAEA, those tapes are the least concern, just a diversion:
رجانیوز - باقی ماندن نظارت آژانس و استناد به قانونی که اساسا وجود ندارد
I read the article.(by the way I am not a lawyer!)
I have written many technical and contractual documents during my career and yes this is a "weak" writing of such documents. May have been done on purpose so both sides can drive a truck through it. May be because people who wrote it just are not used to such things..or may be they are traitors ..not my call.

Now here is a why it is "weak": In english language contracts, The use of "Will" and "Shall" are not just words they have legal implications.
Every contract has a preamble section first that describes the nature of the contract..you can use free english words because its content is not legal (so say as much as you want before you get to the "Will" and "Shall" sentences)
Sentences that start with "Iran will" or "IAEA will" are contractual but weak and can be interpreted . so do not use "will" if you can .

If you want solid none interpreted sentences use "Iran shall" or "IAEA shall".....The words "shall"in a contract binds you to the sentence that follows the "shall"...I do not see any "Shall" in the english text ..all are "will" so the agreement is "weak"....
 
What happened in the last 48 hours can easily spiral out of hand. Some players will benefit from a war and some will hate it.

A war will be a disaster for Biden. Biden should have a comprehensive and well thought plan to avoid risky situations.

Those who will call Biden soft during peace, will rip him apart when a war happens. He cannot appease Republicans and proceed with his plan at the same time.
 
Back
Top Bottom