U.S. to issue new Iran sanctions, opening shot in get-tough strategy: sources

[VEVAK]

So you want China to transfer of the TOT of the CH-5, I don't think this should be a problem as most Chinese weapons are bundled with the TOT.

All Chinese 5th gen fighters are using the Chinese domestic components including the engine, you shouldn't worry too much about it.

So you are afraid to touch a US supercarrier? Even they attack you, you wouldn't even fight back?

The J-31 can still attack those 4th gen aircrafts with its BVR missiles, and the US has to put its limited 5th gen aircrafts on the table.

The point is to deter a conflict also you have to sell it to the Iranian people and you really can't do that unless one Iran's major needs are met through such agreement! Iranians are going to say you were developing your own capability to hit ships with MRBM so what's the point of this agreement & they are not going to care much about the detailed technical aspect of it!

If conflict takes place, Iran will hit anything it can target the point is to prevent a conflict, that point is creating a counter balance to US 5th Gen fighter proliferation world wide!

Plus, China doesn't have a habit of imposing it's culture & it's way of governance on others & they better understand different cultures & history because they have a specific culture & deep history of their own that sets them apart & they see the beauty in keeping it & it is beautiful and interesting

 

[Tshering22]

Not to worry. Sanction or no sanction Iran can depend on India and it's massive investment in Chah Bahar. Which reminds me have the Indian's done anything since we first heard the mantra "Cha Cha Cha Ba Ba Har"?

Was that an attempt at sarcasm?

Chahbahar is a port project. WTF does it have to do with US developing ties with Iran? It is not like Gwadar has become a miracle free port zone challenging Dubai. You might want to do something about the safety and security of the Chinese engineering staff who are working hard and risking their lives for your development.

Please stay on topic for the sake of a reasonable discussion.

To my Iranian friends, not long ago I saw threads opened here about how Iran was looking to by aircraft from Boeing and I thought what the hell? You guy's seriously need to work with a country that is most "US resistent" and note I said "US resistent" which is not the same thing as "US proof". Although in another few decades it will end up being 100% "US proof". And that country most emphatically is not India - which has front side given to the American;s and the backside to the Israeli's.

Iran Air did place orders for Boeing aircraft and Boeing had been optimistic about it; until Trump stepped in. Iran's aviation sector has had a very beautiful past when operating Boeing aircraft. It was a pure commercial deal until Republicans planned to ruined it.

But I would be surprised if Boeing executives don't do their nut to convince Mr. Toupee to step back on this order.

As such the American aerospace community is not happy saying that because of its poor political reliability, the aviation industry is losing orders to Airbus, Bombardier and Embraer.

No, that country is China. It was thanks to China that you even got the nuclear deal. In fact even right now the only force really holding back the US just reneging the nuclear deal is the Chinese. Iran needs to build up a massive economic relationship with China - this will create a strategic need and economic impulse for Chinese to wade in any US/Israeli posturing.

China did bat for the nuclear deal with Iran but until the big 3 (USA, European powers and Russia agreed), it is unlikely that the deal would have materialised. Russia has remained non-committal while EU and USA have been steadfast against the nuke deal. Your theory that US would cave in to Chinese pressure doesn't seem possible.

 

[VEVAK]

Was that an attempt at sarcasm?

Chahbahar is a port project. WTF does it have to do with US developing ties with Iran? It is not like Gwadar has become a miracle free port zone challenging Dubai. You might want to do something about the safety and security of the Chinese engineering staff who are working hard and risking their lives for your development.

Please stay on topic for the sake of a reasonable discussion.




China did bat for the nuclear deal with Iran but until the big 3 (USA, European powers and Russia agreed), it is unlikely that the deal would have materialised. Russia has remained non-committal while EU and USA have been steadfast against the nuke deal. Your theory that US would cave in to Chinese pressure doesn't seem possible.

Not to worry. Sanction or no sanction Iran can depend on India and it's massive investment in Chah Bahar. Which reminds me have the Indian's done anything since we first heard the mantra "Cha Cha Cha Ba Ba Har"?

To my Iranian friends, not long ago I saw threads opened here about how Iran was looking to by aircraft from Boeing and I thought what the hell? You guy's seriously need to work with a country that is most "US resistent" and note I said "US resistent" which is not the same thing as "US proof". Although in another few decades it will end up being 100% "US proof". And that country most emphatically is not India - which has front side given to the American;s and the backside to the Israeli's.

No, that country is China. It was thanks to China that you even got the nuclear deal. In fact even right now the only force really holding back the Us just reneging the nuclear deal is the Chinese. Iran needs to build up a massive economic relationship with China - this will create a strategic need and economic impulse for Chinese to wade in any US/Israeli posturing.

I am friend of Iran . Always have been.

@Chinese-Dragon @Ryan @faithfulguy

India & Pakistan may not share a religion but lets not forget India also has 100 million Muslims & there is no country that's culturally closer to Pakistan than India!
You guys need to be closest of allies! Fighting each other ONLY benefits others from outside the region!
Instead of fighting each other isn't it better to have a Military Alliance between every country from the Mediterranean to China to counter NATO?

Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, India, China, N.Korea, ... And Turkey, Russia (If willing) & other Asian countries that are willing!
NATO is expanding! All these countries are getting surrounded by 5th Gen fighters & Advanced SAM's
Isn't time Asian countries stop fighting each other & pay attention to the bigger gun that's pointed at all of us?
Iran will remain Pakistan, India & China's friend!
Iran & Iraq fought an 8 year long war and both have given blood and lost loved ones at the hands of the other but we focus our anger at the person responsible not the Iraqi people and at the end of the day there are more things that unit us so it's best you focus on them!
The future will only be ours if we stay united! If we cooperate together! Link our economies! Strengthen our militaries to create a world balance only a balance can bring peace!

Pakistan should be happy of greater cooperation between India & Iran but the only way Pakistan can benefit from it is if they remove this hostile posture towards India & vice versa! For India's economic well being India needs Pakistan's cooperation & friendship!

 

[Indus Pakistan]

India & Pakistan may not share a religion but lets not forget India also has 100 million Muslims

There are over 3.3 million Muslims in USA but you do you ever factor that into the equation, or do you? And Isreal has early 18% of it's population Muslim. Do you in Iran ever factor this when you shout "Marg bar Israel"?


I won't go onto the fact that we have a differant culture from India, for now but if culture alone was decisive factor there would be no USA or Canada? They would be one. Indeed what is the cultural differance between US, Canada, Britain, Ireland Etc. Non. In fact most are have been borne from the same mother.

Instead of fighting each other isn't it better to have a Military Alliance between every country from the Mediterranean to China to counter NATO?

Why not. Hey even better why not have a military alliance with NATO. We are all humans. Even Israeli's. One earth. One love. La La La ....

Cue: Don't tell anybody, keep it hush but it's the 11th letter in the English alphabet that is the cause of the trouble. The big Kay. Kash. Kashmir.

akistan should be happy of greater cooperation between India & Iran but the only way Pakistan can benefit from it is if they remove this hostile posture towards India & vice versa!

If Iran want's to get into a union with India and make one country - that is your right and choice. Go ahead but we have dispute over Kashmir and we will NOT compromise our Kashmiri brothers even for Iran. And if you read my posting history you will know I am a Iranphile. But I would much have Iran as a enemy then give up our Kashmiri brothers. That is how it goes.

In my youth my best friend was Iranian and through him I was introduced to many Iranians. Ever since I have had a fondness for Iran but if you think Pakistan is going to give up on Kashmir and suck upto the cesspit that is India you have another thing coming. Not on yer nelly.

I am disappointed by Iran with regards to India. I care nothing for the Shia/Sunni thing. I am secular. I get attacked by many Pakistani's for being 'soft' on Iran but I can tell you one thing. The Iranian revolution from my perspective was a unmitigated disaster. Those Mullahs you have running from Tehran are beyond redemption. If you think Indian's will stand by Iran against US/West or Israel you have badly failed to understand India unless your take on India is Bollywood movies.

Indian's are the best pen*is massagers you are ever likely to run into. They will suck Israeli d*ck, American d*ck and supp up every drop that comes out in their zest to please them. They will drop Iran like you drop garbage into a dump. You keep following these spineless ugly creatures. See where it leads you to. When they actually lay more then one brick in Chah Bahar give me shout.

How I wish the Shah of Iran was back !


I guess that leaves us only with China. So be it. 1.4 billion hyperpower in the making is more than enough for now.

@Chinese-Dragon

 

[Tshering22]

India & Pakistan may not share a religion but lets not forget India also has 100 million Muslims & there is no country that's culturally closer to Pakistan than India!
You guys need to be closest of allies! Fighting each other ONLY benefits others from outside the region!

We are okay with it. We don't mind good relations with Pakistan. But every time some civilian minister of theirs tries his or her best, their military undoes all the goodwill and sabotages it. It is a simple matter of power play. Picture this; In Pakistani politics, military is seen as one of the founding institutions due to multiple incidents that happened pre-partition of India. Also, the only perceived military and ideological enemy Pakistan has is us.

If we both become friendly, who will give their military any importance? Who will fund the bills of those fancy parties and luxury living of their top military commanders? Remove us from the enemy perception and Pakistan technically will have no 'enemy out there'. All their ballistic missiles are pointed at us.

You might see us bickering on this forum and at an individual level, having a very hostile attitude on a personal basis. But if Indians and Pakistanis meet each other, say in UK or any third country, they are usually quite friendly. During my course of work, we have had Pakistani people (citizens of UK or somewhere else) working with our crew for filming and stuff. We talk well with each other.

The problem is pure military politics. No one would give a rat's rear to their top generals if India and Pakistan become friends.

Instead of fighting each other isn't it better to have a Military Alliance between every country from the Mediterranean to China to counter NATO? Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, India, China, N.Korea, ... And Turkey, Russia (If willing) & other Asian countries that are willing!

Ideological differences, dostam. Not many Middle Eastern countries are as balanced as you guys in Iran. Which is why despite different religion and culture perceptions, Iran and India have rock solid relations. Also, in our experience, military alliances are a complicated mess and often draw from common grounds.

For example, you guys are on a collision course with Israel while we have very friendly ties with them. But at the same time we have great relations with Iran as well. The same is your case with Pakistan and us. We make sure not to intervene in each other's bilateral issues and therefore maintain positive and trusted relations.

NATO is expanding! All these countries are getting surrounded by 5th Gen fighters & Advanced SAM's

Exactly. NATO's purpose is expansion and conquest. From India's perspective, we don't have any expansionist interests. All we ask is our own country's parts that Pakistan and China have taken. If we had the courtesy to return 93,000 POWs in a war back to Pakistan (in 1971), it shows that we have no interest in occupying others or killing others. Yes, 93,000 POWs were returned with full honours, alive and without any torture on them.

Isn't time Asian countries stop fighting each other & pay attention to the bigger gun that's pointed at all of us? Iran will remain Pakistan, India & China's friend!

Most Asian countries are pretty peaceful. We don't have ideological differences with China, we just don't appreciate territorial expansionism. Otherwise India and China have been friends for over 2,000 years. Similarly, If it were not for Pakistani generals, we would have no territorial disputes and would have been friendly. Why do you think we agreed to have the Indus Water Treaty? Because on humanity grounds, water is something one mustn't refuse to anyone.

Is it reciprocated in any means? No. Some Pakistani politicians have tried to, but domestic pressures and military muscle always silences them. PM Sharif and Modi got to a good level of understanding and there was a possibility of thaw in relations. But then Pakistani Army and ISI happened.

Pakistan should be happy of greater cooperation between India & Iran but the only way Pakistan can benefit from it is if they remove this hostile posture towards India & vice versa! For India's economic well being India needs Pakistan's cooperation & friendship!

Their Zero-sum game concept of foreign relations is what has gotten Pakistan into trouble. Look at their historical alliances. They were first in bed with USA and are now openly with China. Also because of their treaty with the Gulf states, their relation with UAE has turned sour after Pakistan refused to participate in the GCC-Yemeni war last year.
We on the other hand were friendly to Soviets but except 1971-1975, we have had very good commercial ties with the USA too (Non Alignment Movement remember?).

The Indo Soviet treaty of mutual defence pact was not renewed after the Afghan-Taliban war in the 80s.

Unless you are a war economy, military alliances don't really serve your purpose. Getting into them is binding, complicated and often results in diplomatic disasters. And war economies don't last long. They may thrive a lot for some time, but their downfall is also equally horrible.

 

[Max]

India & Pakistan may not share a religion but lets not forget India also has 100 million Muslims & there is no country that's culturally closer to Pakistan than India!
You guys need to be closest of allies! Fighting each other ONLY benefits others from outside the region!
Instead of fighting each other isn't it better to have a Military Alliance between every country from the Mediterranean to China to counter NATO?

Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, India, China, N.Korea, ... And Turkey, Russia (If willing) & other Asian countries that are willing!
NATO is expanding! All these countries are getting surrounded by 5th Gen fighters & Advanced SAM's
Isn't time Asian countries stop fighting each other & pay attention to the bigger gun that's pointed at all of us?
Iran will remain Pakistan, India & China's friend!
Iran & Iraq fought an 8 year long war and both have given blood and lost loved ones at the hands of the other but we focus our anger at the person responsible not the Iraqi people and at the end of the day there are more things that unit us so it's best you focus on them!
The future will only be ours if we stay united! If we cooperate together! Link our economies! Strengthen our militaries to create a world balance only a balance can bring peace!

Pakistan should be happy of greater cooperation between India & Iran but the only way Pakistan can benefit from it is if they remove this hostile posture towards India & vice versa! For India's economic well being India needs Pakistan's cooperation & friendship!

Same can you suggest to your Mullahs for Israel and USA, After all they are too children of Adam, why dont you hug them from behind...? why need to counter NATO?

 

[haman10]

Same can you suggest to your Mullahs for Israel and USA, After all they are too children of Adam, why dont you hug them from behind...? why need to counter NATO?

USA ? of course we want better ties with them. from marg bar amrika, no one means marg bar US as a country.

we mean US as a government.

Also, we won't have ties with Israel because of the same children of Adam who are being bombed and starved to oblivion by Israeli regime.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

pre-partition of India

Correction: British India. It was not your country > India that was partitioned. It was the colony that was first partitioned in 1937 and then in 1947. WE, Pak, India, Bangla, Myanmar are products of British India.

If we both become friendly, who will give their military any importance?

That is ignorant statement. This question also applies to every military on earth. If China/India/Pak/Japan/Israel all made peace the militaries in each of theses countries would be out jobs - unless the Indian military lays goden eggs in barracks, in which case you need to keep it to lay the eggs.

If we had the courtesy to return 93,000 POWs in a war back to Pakistan

Incorrect. Only 55k were POWs. Rest were civilians officials, their familes etc. Under Geneva Convention all countries are required to return prisoners. Unless you think the alternative was to shot them all. Pakistan also returned Indian prisoners.

Similarly, If it were not for Pakistani generals,

Same for Indian generals.

Otherwise India and China have been friends for over 2,000 years.

Well, we have been more then friends with China. We exported Buddhism to them.

https://defence.pk/threads/china-and-pakistan-old-friends-in-new-clothes.476363/

And talking of Pakistan Military you must be aware that it is the most popular institution in the country. For example the Generals you disparage like Gen. Raheel Sharif had approval ratings that no politician can match. So that means many in Pakistan do support the military and the policies it ensues.

 

[Max]

Also, we won't have ties with Israel because of the same children of Adam who are being bombed and starved to oblivion by Israeli regime.

So Kashmiri blood is cheaper then Palestinian blood? as i said first advise your Ayatollah's if you have so peaceful advises for us,

USA ? of course we want better ties with them. from marg bar amrika, no one means marg bar US as a country.

we mean US as a government.

we dont even chant death to bharat, i have nothing against common hardworking bharati.. so advise your Mullah about peace not us

Pakistani and Bharati state work like grown up states, M Eastern would be last people whom we will ask for advice on peace @Śakra

 

[Tshering22]

Correction: British India. It was not your country > India that was partitioned. It was the colony that was first partitioned in 1937 and then in 1947. WE, Pak, India, Bangla, Myanmar are products of British India.

True it wasn't my country at that point of time. If you still feel psychologically inclined to honour yourself as the residue of the British, I cannot help you. The point of independence was to carve out a path for yourself.

That is ignorant statement. This question also applies to every military on earth. If China/India/Pak/Japan/Israel all made peace the militaries in each of theses countries would be out jobs - unless the Indian military lays goden eggs in barracks, in which case you need to keep it to lay the eggs.

All the countries you mentioned except Pakistan have militaries that are independent of their governance mechanism. Chinese military is totally under the control of its CCP, Indian military is under the civilian control of an elected government, Japan doesn't even have a standing functional independent military due to its Article 9 and Israel's military serves under a democratic civilian government.

Meanwhile, it is a common truth that your military has a heavier say in what policies can be ratified and what cannot.

Incorrect. Only 55k were POWs. Rest were civilians officials, their familes etc. Under Geneva Convention all countries are required to return prisoners. Unless you think the alternative was to shot them all. Pakistan also returned Indian prisoners.

That's where our statistics differ. The troops who surrendered were largely on the eastern front and did not account for the non-combatants and civilians in your erstwhile territory.

Same for Indian generals.

Nope.

The Indian tri-service command does not have a single command structure like how Pakistan, China, Russia and the USA have.

This was done keeping in view Indira's fear for military takeover after the 1971 conflict when General Manekshaw was hailed as a national hero. Though not directly a reason, the dismantling of a unified command structure meant that all the three military divisions are independent of each other; if one tries to take over the government, the other arms of the military would refuse to cooperate and would successfully crush any coup attempts.

So yes, Gen. Bipin Rawat (now) doesn't have even a tenth the authority that Gen. Bajwa in your country has over your government machinery.

So much so that the military only recommends acquisitions while bureaucrats finalise the purchase and acquisition of weapon platforms.

Before making such an irresponsible comment, you should understand the structure of India's military command structure.

It is extremely immature to suggest that despite whatever similarities you have with parts of our country, even the governing mechanism ought to be the same. It is not. And certainly not in the military.

And talking of Pakistan Military you must be aware that it is the most popular institution in the country. For example the Generals you disparage like Gen. Raheel Sharif had approval ratings that no politician can match. So that means many in Pakistan do support the military and the policies it ensues.

I never said that your generals aren't popular.

They are. You are correct.

But that popularity needs to be fed something for it to grow. The generals retain power through creating a fear factor, attempting to mirror their own tendencies as practises of a would be enemy. One example is your assumption that our military has the same level of political say as yours does in your internal political matters.

Tell me this; what threat does Pakistan face if it is not for the perceived threat from India?

Iran has nothing to do with you, China is friendly to you, Tajikistan has no capability to threaten you, Afghanistan may not like you but they cannot invade you.

Rule us out of threat equation and your generals lose that fame, power, prestige. Which means your PM and President can carry on working without taking consent from the top military brass. You know the amount of control your military has over your economy. From mills to production facilities to even food processing and other non-military industries, your army has its hold as an entity.

Tell me, does it even make sense for a combative force to be doing all this stuff?

A mandatory military service for 15-18 months is good as it will instill discipline in common people. But all this industrial control and economic hold?

Nowehere else does this happen except maybe North Korea.

Not even single-party China where the civilian government decides the agenda for the nation.

I also admire the military of my country and respect the sacrifices they make for the nation. But as someone from a military family myself, I and generally we Indians understand that a military's location is in its barracks; not in the parliament, not in the presidential palace and certainly not in the legislative assembly deciding what common citizens should do.

 

[yavar]

Iran AEOI later to IAEA: nothing in JCPOA requires us to ship out excess heavy water برجام وآب سنگین

نامه ایران به آژانس: برجام ایران را به خروج آب سنگین مازاد از کشور ملزم نکرده است
یران در نامه‌ای به آژانس بین‌المللی انرژی اتمی تأکید کرده توافق هسته‌ای با گروه 1+5 (برجام)، تهران را به خارج کردن آب سنگین از این کشور ملزم نمی‌کند.
به گزارش رویترز، ایران در این نامه که روز پنجشنبه در میان اعضای آژانس توزیع شد این استدلال را مطرح کرده است: «هیچ بندی در برجام ایران را به خارج کردن آب سنگین مازادی که به بازارهای بین‌المللی عرضه می‌شود اما خریدار واقعی پیدا نمی‌کند، ملزم نکرده است.»
در متن برجام آمده است: «همه آب سنگین اضافی ایران برای صادرات در بازارهای بین المللی عرضه خواهد شد.»
خبرگزاری رویترز نوشته انتظار می‌رود نامه جدید ایران به مناقشه با دولت آمریکا که منتقد برجام است منجر شود.
دولت ترامپ در بیانیه‌ای در هفته گذشته در یک نشست آژانس گفت: «هر مقدار آب سنگین مازاد بر 130 متریک تن، نباید در ایران بماند.»
http://www.farsnews.com/13951228000064
"Nothing in the (agreement) requires Iran to ship out the excess heavy water which is made available to the international market but has not yet found an actual buyer to which the heavy water needs to be delivered," Iran said.
The deal says all excess heavy water "will be made available for export to the international market based on international prices and delivered to the international buyer".
Trump is a vocal critic of the deal who has said he wants to "police that contract so tough they (the Iranians) don't have a chance". His administration has stuck to the previous U.S. position.
"Any excess heavy water in excess of the firm cap of 130 metric tons cannot remain in Iran," the United States said in a statement to an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meeting last week.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-idUSKBN16O2RL

سازمان انرژی اتمی
Atomic Energy Organization of Iran ( AEOI )
http://www.aeoi.org.ir/Portal/Home/

 

[yavar]

جروزالم پست: اسرائیل نگران لغو ممنوعیت‌های سازمان ملل علیه برنامه موشکی ایران است
پایگاه صهیونیستی جروزالم پست در گزارشی نوشت: در توافق هسته‌ای ایران یک مهلت ده ساله برای ممنوعیت فعالیت‌های هسته‌ای ایران، غنی‌سازی اورانیوم در این کشور و توسعه تجهیزات با قابلیت هسته‌ای قید شده است. مقامات اسرائیل معتقد هستند این مهلت 10 ساله ، که یک سال آن نیز سپری شده است، احتمالا در زندگی سیاسی طولانی به نظر برسد؛ اما در زندگی یک ملت چندان زمان طولانی نیست.


جروزالم پست در ادامه این گزارش نوشت: اسرائیل از هم‌اکنون در حال آماده شدن برای زمان انقضای توافق هسته‌ای ایران است. به ویژه آنکه دو مورد از محدودیت‌های تعیین شده برای ایران در زمینه فروش تسلیحات و توسعه برنامه‌ ساخت موشک‌های بالستیک این کشور در چند سال آینده لغو خواهد شد.

"بنیامین نتانیاهو"، نخست وزیر رژیم صهیونیستی، در سفر ماه گذشته به واشنگتن اظهار داشت وی همراه با کابینه "دونالد ترامپ"، رئیس جمهور آمریکا، بر روی مواردی از توافق هسته‌ای ایران گفتگو و رایزنی کردند که دورنمای آنها بیش از سایرین چالش‌برانگیز بوده است. برای اسرائیل، ایران با اجرای این توافق بسیار خطرناک‌تر خواهد بود تا با لغو آن.

در ضمیمه "B” قطعنامه شماره 2231 شورای امنیت سازمان ملل قید شده است ایران اجازه انجام هیچ فعالیتی که به ساخت و طراحی موشک با قابلیت حمل سلاح هسته‌ای منتهی شود را نخواهد داشت. همچنین این کشور از استفاده فناوری‌های مرتبط با این نوع از موشک‌ها و خرید تجهیزات مربوط به توسعه موشک‌های بالستیک منع شده است. این ممنوعیت‌ها به موجب توافق هسته‌ای فقط 8 سال معتبر خواهند بود و اسرائیل به شدت نگران است پس از این مدت با یک کشور قدرتمند هسته‌ای که به لحاظ قانونی اجازه استفاده از موشک‌های بالستیک را دارد مواجه شود.

اسرائیل امیدوار است بتواند با جلب حمایت آمریکا و برخی متحدان اروپایی، سازمان ملل را برای افزایش زمان محدودیت‌های ایران تحت فشار بگذارد. اگر سازمان ملل حاضر به تمدید محدودیت‌های موشکی ایران شود، کشورهایی مانند روسیه و چین که تامین‌کنندگان اصلی تجهیزات موشکی ایران هستند، ساکت نخواهند نشست. یکی دیگر از اهداف اسرائیل متقاعد کردن سازمان ملل برای اعلام ممنوعیت آزمایش‌های موشکی ایران است.

درصورتیکه سازمان ملل بپذیرد مدت محدودیت‌های موشکی ایران را افزایش دهد، آمریکا آماده است برای کشورهای نقض‌کننده این فرمان (روسیه و چین) تحریم‌هایی در نظر بگیرد.

جروزالم پست در ادامه نوشت: مهلت قانونی ممنوعیت توسعه موشک‌های بالستیک ایران از سوی سازمان ملل تا سال 2023 به اتمام می‌رسد و در این مدت این کشور به قدر کافی از حمایت دوستان و متحدان خود برخوردار شده است تا کار توسعه موشکی تهران را بدون هیچ اتلاف وقتی از سر بگیرد.

باوجود اینکه توافق هسته‌ای ایران این کشور را از ساخت تسلیحات هسته‌ای باز می‌دارد؛ اسرائیل نگران است فعالیت‌های ایران در حوزه مواد شکافت‌پذیر به این کشور اجازه دهد تا ‌برنامه ساخت یک منطقه صنعتی هسته‌ای را دنبال کند. ایران می‌تواند از این دانش و فناوری خود خیلی راحت و در کمترین زمان ممکن برای توسعه برنامه تسلیحاتی استفاده کند.

به موجب توافق هسته‌ای، ایران قادر خواهد بود در پایان 9 سال، تعداد سانتریفیوژهای خود را افزایش داده و به غنی‌سازی اورانیوم بپردازد. در آن زمان تجهیزات ایران به روزرسانی شده و رویارویی با چنین کشور هسته‌ای برای اسرائیل بسیار دشوار خواهد بود.

مقامات اسرائیلی معتقدند به موجب توافق هسته‌ای، ایران می‌تواند به یک کشور دارای فناوری هسته‌ای تبدیل شود بدون آنکه از نظر جامعه بین‌الملل کشوری ناقض قوانین به شمار آید. اسرائیل امیدوار است با لغو برخی محدودیت‌های زمانی تعیین شده در توافق هسته‌ای (و افزایش آن‌ها) مانع از رسیدن ایران به این مرحله شده و خود را با دردسر رویارویی با یک ایران هسته‌ای مواجه نکند.
http://www.yjc.ir/fa/news/6022616/ج...یت‌های-سازمان-ملل-علیه-برنامه-موشکی-ایران-است

Israel already preparing for end of UN ban on Iran missile activity

WASHINGTON – Throughout international talks with Iran over its nuclear program, Israeli leadership offered a common refrain: Ten years may be a long time in the life of a politician, but it is nothing in the life of a nation.

In that spirit, Israel’s government is already planning for the expiration of several critical provisions in the deal that resulted from those talks, including two restrictions on Iran that sunset within the next few years on arms sales and its ballistic missile program.
Last month in Washington, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told The Jerusalem Post that he was working with the Trump administration on ways to mitigate the effects of some of the deal’s most challenging sunset clauses. For Israel, Iran is more dangerous if it abides by the deal than if it breaches it, he said.
Asked if he could offer specifics on his strategy, Netanyahu replied, “I could, but I won’t.” But those with his ear tell the Post that discussions have already begun, starting with a clause that lifts a UN ban on Iran’s ballistic missile work in just under seven years.

That ban, in Annex B of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, requires Iran “not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.” The provision also bans states from supplying, selling or transferring equipment, technology or training to Iran relevant to the advancement of that missile program.

The decision to include such a provision – which extended for eight years what would have otherwise expired upon completion of the nuclear deal– was opposed by Russia and China during the talks. Moscow has been a top supplier of Iran’s missile programs for several years.

Israel now believes that European nations, whose diplomats supported extending the ban during the nuclear negotiations, will be on board with a creative strategy that punishes Moscow through means outside of the UN should it choose to assist Iran with its continued missile work. The strategy would be to maintain de facto sanctions on Iran by threatening those that might supply it, despite the end of an explicit UN embargo against doing so.

The plan already appears popular in Washington.

“Sanctioning Russia is as popular as it has ever been on the Hill right now,” said one lobbyist with an Israel advocacy organization, discussing the emerging strategy. The lobbyist described the plan succinctly: Threatening new, tough sanctions on Moscow for its potential sale of ballistic missile components to Iran would kill two birds with one stone, targeting two of the world’s most destabilizing forces while gaining broad bipartisan support.

While this particular UN provision expires in 2023, Iran is expected to seek partners for collaboration well in advance. Thus Iran’s adversaries are likely to work backward against an unspecified date some time in the next few years.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is intended to prevent Iran from ever building nuclear weapons, but Israel worries that sunset clauses on its work with fissile material will allow Tehran to build an industrial-sized nuclear program, providing the state with a nuclear capacity that could easily be converted into a weapons program on short notice.

The deal allows Iran to expand the number of centrifuges it can use to enrich uranium, as well as the number of facilities it can use to host enrichment, in nine years. It also allows Iran to upgrade the centrifuges it has in use, from 1970s models to modern state-of-the-art machines. As the size and efficiency of their program advances – with full international legitimacy, under the nuclear deal – Israel fears it will be impossible to stop or even catch Iran should it choose to “break out” and build a weapon.

Furthermore, should Iran instead choose to park itself right before a bomb and remain a nuclear-threshold state, Israel believes that Iran will maintain all of the strategic benefits a nuclear power enjoys without facing the costs that rogue nuclear states endure. Israeli leaders seek to prevent Iran from reaching this threshold stage.

Speaking to the Post, several Israeli officials would only acknowledge that strategizing is under way to prevent these later sunset clauses from lapsing. No further details were provided.
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Is...end-of-UN-ban-on-Iran-missile-activity-484634

 

[yavar]

IAEA chief Amano: Iran deal JCPOA can be improved & amended آمانو: برجام می‌توان بهبود بخشید

آمانو: مذاکره مجدد درباره برجام دشوار است اما می‌توان آن را بهبود بخشید
http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13960101100121

 

[yavar]

U.S Sanctions Act (INKSNA) 2017 clear violation Iran JCPOA تحریم‌های جدید آمریکا نقض اشکار برجام

 

[Asian.Century]

After new sanctions Iran should plan to hit out at US harder. No point doing nothing.