|
|
Top Stories
AP: "Leading
Democratic and Republican senators are crafting legislation to reinstate
the full force of sanctions and impose new ones if Iran doesn't make good
on its pledge to roll back its nuclear program, brushing aside the Obama
administration's fears about upending its diplomatic momentum. Sens. Bob
Menendez, D-N.J., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., hope to have the bill ready for
other lawmakers to consider when the Senate returns Dec. 9 from its
two-week recess, according to legislative aides. Many in Congress are
skeptical, if not outright hostile, to the deal reached by Iran and world
powers over the weekend in Geneva. The Kirk-Menendez measure would
require the administration to certify every 30 days that Iran is adhering
to the terms of the six-month interim agreement and that it hasn't been
involved in any act of terrorism against the United States. Without that
certification, sanctions worth more than $1 billion a month would be
re-imposed and new sanctions would be added. The new measures would
include bans on investing in Iran's engineering, mining and construction
industries and a global boycott of Iranian oil by 2015. Foreign companies
and banks violating the sanctions would be barred from doing business in
the United States. The senators hope to send the bill to the White House
before the end of the year, said the aides, who spoke on condition of
anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak by name on the
matter." http://t.uani.com/1cMxfeH
Free Beacon:
"The final details of a nuclear agreement signed over the weekend
between Iran and Western nations will not actually go into effect until
further negotiations take place at a later date, according to a senior
administration official and sources on Capitol Hill. Even as Iran and the
P5+1 announced late Saturday night that they had reached a six-month
interim deal that curbs Iran's nuclear program while giving Tehran the
ability to continue some uranium enrichment activities, it is now clear
that the six-month freeze will not go into effect until the P5+1 negotiators
and Iran agree to a final plan to implement the interim agreement.
'Technical details to implement the Joint Plan of Action must be
finalized before the terms of the Plan begin,' a senior administration
official told the Washington Free Beacon on Monday. 'The P5+1 and Iran
are working on what the timeframe is.' Congressional sources confirmed
that the freeze would not actually begin until the parties agree to sign
a supplemental agreement that puts the framework into effect. That means
the six-month clock referenced by the administration and media has not
yet started. Iran can continue its most controversial nuclear activities
as negotiators work to finalize the interim deal reached over the
weekend." http://t.uani.com/1hekz63
Reuters:
"Sunday's agreement to curb Iran's nuclear program contains an
apparent gap that could allow Tehran to build components off-site to
install later in a nuclear reactor where it has promised to halt work,
experts said. They said any impact of the omission is likely to be small
if Iran follows other undertakings in the interim accord, which is
designed to restrain Tehran's nuclear program for six months in return
for limited sanctions relief. But the gap, which one diplomat described
as a potential 'loophole', could provide a test of Iran's intentions, and
demonstrates how difficult it will be to reach a final deal to resolve
Iran's nuclear standoff with the West once and for all... In the deal,
Iran agreed that it will 'not make any further advances of its activities'
at Arak, language that also covers its two big uranium enrichment plants,
Fordow and Natanz. Footnotes hammered out in the final hours of the talks
set out a range of activities that would be forbidden at the reactor. For
the half year covered by the agreement, Iran is barred from starting the
reactor up, bringing fuel or heavy water to it, testing or producing more
fuel for it, or installing any remaining components. But no language
explicitly prevents it from making components elsewhere, which could then
be installed later. Former chief U.N. nuclear inspector Olli Heinonen,
now at Harvard university, said the measures were good, but could have
been better: 'I would have also included the manufacturing of key
components,' he told Reuters in an e-mail." http://t.uani.com/1cpSl2D
 Nuclear Agreement
Fox
News: "Iran has pledged to chemically convert its cache of
enriched uranium into a less dangerous substance as part of a deal struck
on Sunday, but that conversion can be undone through a well-known
process, experts tell FoxNews.com. The weekend deal reached by the U.S.
and five other world leaders to curb Iran's nuclear program in exchange
for lifting some sanctions requires Iran to take uranium that had been
enriched to 20 percent -- most of the way to weapons-grade -- and convert
it into uranium dioxide (UO2). But that process is readily undone,
explained Charles D. Ferguson, president of the Federation of American
Scientists. 'This is a meaningful barrier right now, but it's not a
permanent barrier,' Ferguson told FoxNews.com. 'They might have the
ability to make a facility to reconvert it ... close to a dozen countries
have that process.' ... It's reversible, but not that quickly,' Albright
told FoxNews.com. 'There are several chemical steps, but Iran knows how
to do them.'" http://t.uani.com/1geNDHB
Reuters:
"President Barack Obama took on critics of a newly brokered nuclear
deal with Iran on Monday by saying tough talk was good for politics but
not good for U.S. security. The president seemed to want to make a
victory lap with his remarks on Monday, which were mainly focused on
immigration reform. He noted he had ended the war in Iraq and would end
the war in Afghanistan next year, two things he also pledged to do as a
candidate. If Tehran follows the agreement, Obama said, it would chip
away at years of mistrust with the United States. To his critics, Obama
was especially direct. 'Tough talk and bluster may be the easy thing to
do politically, but it is not the right thing for our security,' he
said." http://t.uani.com/1b1sAmv
AP:
"A nuclear deal between the U.S., Iran and other world powers has
been described as a trust-building step after decades of animosity that
hopefully will lead to a more comprehensive deal down the road. But for
many of the 66 Americans who were held hostage for 444 days at the start of
the Iranian revolution, trusting the regime in Tehran feels like a
mistake. 'It's kind of like Jimmy Carter all over again,' said Clair
Cortland Barnes, now retired and living in Leland, N.C., after a career
at the CIA and elsewhere. He sees the negotiations now as no more
effective than they were in 1979 and 1980, when he and others languished,
facing mock executions and other torments. The hostage crisis began in
November of 1979 when militants stormed the United States Embassy in
Tehran and seized its occupants. Retired Air Force Col. Thomas E.
Schaefer, 83, called the deal 'foolishness.' 'My personal view is, I
never found an Iranian leader I can trust," he said. 'I don't think
today it's any different from when I was there. None of them, I think,
can be trusted. Why make an agreement with people you can't trust?'"
http://t.uani.com/1cpUKKB
Reuters:
"When push came to shove in the closing hours of marathon
negotiations in Geneva on Iran's nuclear program, it was President Barack
Obama, back at the White House, who approved the final language on the
U.S. side before the historic deal was clinched. It was perhaps only
fitting that Obama had the last say. His push for a thaw with Tehran, a
longtime U.S. foe, dates back to before his presidency, and no other
foreign policy issue bears his personal stamp more since he took office
in early 2009. Behind the risky diplomatic opening is a desire for a big
legacy-shaping achievement and a deep aversion to getting America
entangled in another Middle East conflict - motives that override
misgivings to the Iran deal expressed by close allies Israel and Saudi
Arabia. That may explain why Obama, even as he left the troubleshooting
to Secretary of State John Kerry and gave him much of the credit for
securing the diplomatic coup, has taken 'ownership' of the Iran issue
like no other... Conservative critics say Obama's distaste for
intervention, in particular his shying away from the bombing of Syria
over chemical weapons use, has hurt U.S. credibility with Iran, a key ally
of Damascus, and across the Middle East. 'One has to wonder if a better
deal would have been possible ... had Iran believed there was a real
military threat and had the United States not seemed to be so very
desperate for a deal,' said Elliott Abrams, a foreign policy aide under
Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush." http://t.uani.com/1bQEccR
Reuters:
"Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab states, despite their mistrust of
Iran, gave a qualified welcome on Monday to Tehran's interim deal with
world powers over its disputed nuclear programme. U.S.-allied Saudi
Arabia, locked in a struggle with Iran for influence across the Middle
East, is worried that its adversary is secretly seeking atomic weapons, a
charge Tehran denies. 'If there was goodwill, this agreement could
represent a preliminary step towards a comprehensive solution to the
Iranian nuclear programme,' Saudi Arabia's cabinet said in a statement
carried by state news agency SPA. The kingdom said it hoped further steps
would follow that would guarantee the rights of all states in the region
to peaceful nuclear energy. Earlier, Qatar and Kuwait came out in favour
of the deal struck on Sunday after marathon talks in Geneva, saying they
hoped it would help to preserve regional stability and security... On Sunday
a senior Saudi foreign policy adviser said he was deeply concerned that
the deal could give Iran more scope to extend its power in Arab
countries, signalling Riyadh's unease at the possibility of a Western
rapprochement with Tehran. 'The government of Iran, month after month,
has proven that it has an ugly agenda in the region, and in this regard
no one in the region will sleep and assume things are going smoothly,'
said Abdullah al-Askar, chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the
Shoura Council, an appointed quasi-parliament that advises the government
on policy." http://t.uani.com/1c5T4Ys
Reuters:
"Lebanon's Hezbollah on Monday hailed a nuclear deal between its
patron Iran and world powers as 'a major victory' for Tehran... 'What was
achieved through this agreement is a major victory for Iran and to all
the people of the region and it is a defeat for the enemies of these
people,' Hezbollah said in a statement. '(It is) a model victory and
world class achievement which the Islamic state adds to its record which
shines with victories and achievements.'" http://t.uani.com/1aTX2Cl
Sanctions
AFP:
"The partial easing of sanctions on Iran in the weekend nuclear deal
will only have a small benefit for the Iranian economy, a senior US
Treasury official said Monday. The official said that the country's
economy remains in deep recession and will get little boost from the
narrow measures agreed to expand Tehran's access to international trade
and finance. 'In relation to the depth of the economic distress that Iran
is currently facing, this package is really quite modest and economically
insignificant,' the official said in a briefing for journalists. 'It will
not move the needle' in terms of the country's economic performance. The
official, who declined to be named, also warned international businesses
that most sanctions remain in place on Iran and said they should not
assume they can trade freely with the country now. 'Any business, any
bank, any broker, anybody who thinks it's open season to go into Iran
today, I think is sorely mistaken. We will enforce these sanctions,' the
official said... 'The size of this deal is just not economically
significant to Iran,' the official said. 'The vast bulk of our sanctions
that we have built up over time all remain in place. We'll be continuing
to apply the pressure on Iranians just as we have in the past.'" http://t.uani.com/IevGwE
AFP:
"Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's cabinet marked its 100th day
Monday, riding the success of a landmark nuclear deal that has for now
vindicated his push to engage with the West. Backed by top decision-maker
and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Rouhani embraced the agreement
as a victory for Iran that has forced the world to recognise its nuclear
'rights' and chipped away at punishing international sanctions. 'The
sanctions regime will begin to shatter with the (implementation) of this
agreement,' said Rouhani, of the six-month deal that aims to buy time for
clinching a comprehensive accord." http://t.uani.com/1fFPp71
WSJ:
"The Obama administration is mounting an aggressive campaign to head
off new congressional sanctions against Iran, arguing they would
jeopardize the high-stakes deal sealed this past weekend to curb Tehran's
nuclear program... A possible compromise circulating in Congress is
sanctions legislation that wouldn't take effect until after the initial
six-month period of the Iran agreement, and only if the final accord
didn't meet certain benchmarks. However, the White House, coordinating
with other nations involved in the negotiations, doesn't want any new
sanctions adopted-even those that might not take effect for an extended
period because it feels it will poison the negotiating environment,
senior officials said. 'The international community is now invested in the
six-month negotiations,' a senior administration official said. 'If we
did anything that made it look like we're not taking that window
seriously or are moving prematurely to pressure, we could jeopardize the
international unity both in the negotiations and in the enforcement of
the sanctions regime.'" http://t.uani.com/1b2dqgJ
Free Beacon:
"Analysts suggest Iran's oil exports could increase by up to 50
percent under the interim nuclear agreement, despite insistence from
Obama administration officials that there is no significant relaxation of
oil sanctions in the six-month deal. The agreement allows Iran's
customers to purchase oil at their 'current average amounts,' waiving the
current U.S. sanctions rule that requires these countries to
'significantly reduce' their Iranian oil imports every six months. The
deal also relaxes insurance and transportation sanctions, making it
easier and less expensive for Iran to export oil. 'The explicit if
partial relaxation of crude oil sanctions [in the agreement] is unexpected
and at odds with repeated official signaling that oil sanctions would be
untouched in the interim deal,' oil market analysis firm the Rapidan
Group said in an email statement on Sunday... 'This weekend's outcome
strengthens our expectation that Iran's exports would tick up toward 1.5
mb/d during any interim deal,' said the Rapidan Group." http://t.uani.com/1a01Y4R
Reuters:
"Iran is quietly mobilising more ships to store and transport oil,
aiming to keep its fields working and mitigate losses of several billion
dollars a month from sanctions which remain in place for at least another
six months, trade sources familiar with the matter say... 'Iran will try
and export its crude to any country that will accept it and if that
involves methods to conceal how it is done, they will do it,' said Varzi,
who now runs an energy consultancy in Britain... 'They desperately need
as many tankers as they can get hold of as they are producing more oil
than they can shift which is a big problem for them,' one European based
trade source said. 'Iran is also trying to use vessels not previously
associated with them to take the heat of their main domestic
fleet.'" http://t.uani.com/18D6OZQ
Reuters:
"Foreign shipping companies, fearing a loss of business in Western
nations because of sanctions, have backed off from deals with Iran. This
has put the onus on Iran's main tanker operator, NITC, but sanctions have
restricted its access to insurance and the certification that allows its
ships to call at major ports. Among vessels now being used by Iran are
some previously controlled by Irano Hind, an Indian-Iranian joint venture
recently wound up due to sanctions, trade sources said. The former
company's fleet included at least three oil tankers. Trade sources said
one of those vessels, the Ramtin, which shipping databases showed was now
Iranian-flagged, had made at least one ship-to-ship transfer off the
coast of Singapore and Malaysia last month. Ship-tracking data showed the
vessel had called at Iran's Larak Island oil terminal in September...
Ship-tracking information shows that Iran has aimed to provide assistance
to its main regional ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, as civil war
grinds on. Another former Irano Hind vessel, the Iranian-flagged Tour 2,
delivered crude oil to Syria last month, port loading and ship tracking
data showed...A further three tankers controlled by NITC also made
deliveries to Syria last month, data showed... Separately, the Falcon
Pride oil tanker has made regular runs between Iran's Assaluyeh anchorage
to the port of Jebel Ali in the United Arab Emirates, carrying Iranian
light oil, known as condensate, ship tracking and trade sources
said." http://t.uani.com/18D6OZQ
Reuters:
"India could step up imports from Iran next month and start transferring
billions of dollars owed it for oil as early as next week following a
deal to curb Tehran's nuclear programme... The new agreement would let
Iran receive about $4.2 billion in oil money from accounts held abroad if
it fulfils commitments under the deal over the next six months. India is
Iran's second-largest buyer and currently owes Tehran about $5.3 billion
for oil shipments, according to government and refining sources. The deal
also lifts insurance restrictions on Iranian shipments, which could allow
Indian refiner HPCL to import an extra 50,000 barrels per day (bpd) in
December to March - about a quarter more than the daily average over the
first nine months of 2013... Payments could potentially resume through
Turkey's state-run Halkbank, a route used until February when it was
blocked by sanctions. National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) asked Indian
refiners in mid-October to settle some of their payments in euros via
Halkbank as soon as possible." http://t.uani.com/IelHIc
Reuters:
"The sheer complexity of the interim Iranian nuclear deal and the
expected slow pace of implementation tempered optimism among traders in
the Gulf emirate of Dubai on Monday over the impact of up to $7 billion
in sanctions relief. But the expected concessions have been enough to
give a psychological boost to the Iranian business community in Dubai,
the main gateway into the economically isolated country. Despite a decade
of sanctions, Iran has managed to get most of the commodities and goods
it needs via Dubai's flourishing re-export market. But new embargoes
imposed by the United States and its allies in late 2011 and early 2012
hit hard." http://t.uani.com/19Y8Dwt
Bloomberg:
"Sasan Ghorbani says the Iranian auto industry conference he's
organizing in Tehran next weekend is suddenly a hotter ticket than he'd
expected. Visas will be made available upon arrival to meet a surge in
demand after the last weekend's Geneva agreement to ease trade
restrictions on Iran, said Ghorbani, head of the Islamic Republic's
auto-parts manufacturers association. 'Everyone asks us, Did you know
that sanctions would be lifted days ahead of this conference?' he said in
a phone interview yesterday. 'To be honest, we didn't.' Among confirmed
participants in the Iran Auto Industry International Conference on Nov.
30 are Renault SA and Italy's Pininfarina SpA, according to the event's
website." http://t.uani.com/1cpWTpL
AFP:
"French carmakers Peugeot and Renault look to be among the clearest
beneficiaries of the interim deal that lifts some sanctions on Iran, with
both hoping to leap back into the Middle East's biggest auto market...
Iran itself counts car manufacturing as its second-biggest industry after
oil, accounting for 10 percent of its gross domestic product... PSA
Peugeot Citroen 'is closely following the development of the situation
concerning Iran, but we are not about to resume our sales activities
tomorrow,' a company spokesman told AFP in Paris... The caution shown by
PSA Peugeot Citroen stemmed in part by the fact that it has US group General
Motors as a partner. That relationship was seen as instrumental in it
having to quit Iran despite the heavy operating loss of around a hundred
million euros ($135 million) it represented between 2011 and 2012. Also
to factor in is the temporary and 'reversible' nature of the deal with
Iran, which is to apply for a six month period during which the Islamic
republic and world powers will try to reach a permanent and comprehensive
pact." http://t.uani.com/IevGwE
Just-Auto:
"News of this weekend's apparently dramatic breakthrough in
negotiations between Iran and the so-called P5+1 countries looking to
limit any nuclear ambition on Tehran's part, has been hailed by domestic
and French automakers...No precise details of any sanctions lifting have
yet been disclosed, but Iranian automaker Iran Khodro (IKCO), PSA Peugeot
Citroen and Renault, have hailed the apparent breakthrough that will give
Tehran six months to comply with initial Western nuclear requirements.
'There is a new atmosphere in Iran - we are very hopeful,' an IKCO
spokesman told just-auto from Tehran. 'This is the first breaking of
these sanctions. And also [there could be] new partnerships from other
automakers that can come to this market, which is attractive for foreign
investors. This is a new day for automakers. More than [just] previous
partners, we can also host more automakers which are interested to come
to invest in the automotive sector of Iran.'" http://t.uani.com/17V1q62
AFP:
"A new sense of economic optimism has reverberated across Iran since
the signing over the weekend of an initial deal between Tehran and world
powers that is aimed at reining in Iran's nuclear ambitions. For a second
straight day Monday, the local currency, the rial, rose about 2 percent
against the U.S. dollar, regaining some of the value it has lost since
last year, as the promise that some sanctions against Iran would be eased
under the accord gave rise to hopes that the Islamic republic's long
economic isolation might come to an end... 'What has happened during Rouhani's
100 days has given peace and calm back to the Iranian people,' said Saeed
Laylaz, a local analyst. 'The value of our national money has increased,
putting an end to our economic free fall.'" http://t.uani.com/184P8mh
Reuters:
"After a near two-year hiatus, Iranian private buyers are inquiring
about purchasing 300,000 tonnes or more of milling wheat, signalling that
a deal on Tehran's nuclear programme over the weekend is having an
effect, European traders say. One trader said up to 500,000 tonnes may be
being sought by Iranian private interests. Trade disruption caused by
western sanctions over Iran's nuclear activities meant Iranian wheat
buying has been concentrated almost entirely in the hands of the state
purchasing agency, the Government Trading Corporation (GTC), with private
buyers absent from international markets... 'Iranian private wheat
importers apparently believe the sanctions deal at the weekend could open
the international banking system to them again pretty rapidly,' a trader
said. 'I received a large number of inquiries about buying wheat from
private Iranian interests today largely for February/March (2014)
shipment.'" http://t.uani.com/IiKNps
WSJ:
"The European Union expects to ease sanctions on Iran in January
with foreign ministers likely to back the process at a meeting next
month, senior officials said Monday as the bloc moved quickly to
implement the weekend's nuclear accord. 'The technical work has
started already,' said Michael Mann, the spokesman for EU foreign policy
chief Catherine Ashton. 'We expect it should be complete by mid-January.'
French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said earlier Monday he expects the
process of easing the restrictions to start at a meeting of EU foreign
ministers next month. The officials are due to hold their monthly
gathering Dec. 16." http://t.uani.com/1b2fPb4
Syria Conflict
Reuters:
"Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Tuesday that
Tehran was prepared to take part in the Syria peace talks in Geneva,
slated for January 22, if invited. 'Participation of Iran in Geneva 2 is
in our view an important contribution to the resolution of the problem.
We have said all along that if Iran is invited, we will participate
without any preconditions,' Zarif told Iran's Press TV... But for Western
governments, Iran's reluctance to endorse last year's international
accord on Syria has been a bar to its attendance at the talks, widely
referred to as 'Geneva 2.'" http://t.uani.com/Ikz6Pk
Human Rights
Fox News:
"The wife of imprisoned American pastor Saeed Abedini says she and
her family are devastated after learning that the Obama administration
did not try to secure the release of her husband as part of the newly
signed deal on Iran's nuclear program. Saeed Abedini, an American
citizen, has been imprisoned in Iran for more than a year for practicing
Christianity. The talks over Iran's nuclear program were seen by his
family and those representing them as one of the most promising avenues
yet for securing his release. But the White House confirmed over the
weekend that Abedini's status was not on the table during those talks.
'It's devastating,' the pastor's wife Naghmeh Abedini told Fox News
Radio." http://t.uani.com/1iOIVT5
USA TODAY:
"President Obama's administration appealed to Iran on Tuesday for
the return of retired FBI Agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared
six-and-a-half years ago and is believed to be held captive. 'As we
approach the upcoming holiday season, we reiterate the commitment of the
United States Government to locate Mr. Levinson and bring him home safely
to his family, friends, and loved ones,' said a White House statement.
The statement noted that Levinson is now 'one of the longest held
Americans in history.'" http://t.uani.com/1aVC0Dh
Opinion
& Analysis
David Albright in WashPost:
"In the short run, the deal agreed to by Western powers and Iran
over the weekend accomplishes a great deal. In the long run, however,
many key issues still must be settled... Under these conditions, Iran's
nuclear 'breakout' time would lengthen for the first time since its
capability began approaching dangerous levels in the past year. If Iran
used all of its installed centrifuges, the time it would need to produce
a weapon would expand to at least 1.9 to 2.2 months, up from at least 1
month to 1.6 months. With IAEA monitors checking at Natanz and Fordow
every day, this increase would allow the United States and its allies
time to respond before Iran produces enough weapons-grade uranium for a
bomb. Iran will also be delayed in reaching the point where it has
sufficient centrifuges and enriched uranium to produce, undetected,
enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb. The Institute for Science and
International Security estimated in July that, absent a deal, Iran could
achieve this critical capability in mid-2014. The interim deal will delay
Iran from achieving this destabilizing threshold, even if the deal's
constraints end after six months... Important questions remain about the
limitations in a final deal: What would be the exact limits on the size
and scope of Iran's centrifuge program? Iran has 18,000 to 19,000
installed centrifuges. Under a final deal, would Iran have, say, 5,000 to
10,000 IR-1 centrifuges and a breakout time closer to six months? How
long would these limits last? Would the enrichment plant at Fordow,
buried deep in a mountain, close? The interim deal froze essential work
at the Arak reactor, but its fate remains unsettled. Will that reactor be
shut down or converted into a light-water reactor? If it operates as a
heavy-water reactor, one day Iran could secretly separate weapons-grade
plutonium produced there for nuclear weapons.To be credible and justify
significant sanctions relief, any long-term deal would need to ensure
that Iran's centrifuge capacity is highly limited and that these limits
will further increase breakout times, preferably toward six months. It
should be limited to one enrichment site, which means Fordow should be
closed. These limitations should last for more than a decade. Stocks of
domestically produced enriched uranium should be minimized, particularly
since Iran would be able to buy enriched uranium fuel commercially far
cheaper than it could make it. The Arak reactor will need to close or be
converted to a more benign reactor. Iran will also need to accept greater
IAEA inspections to ensure that it is not cheating on a long-term
agreement. Given its track record, Iran can be expected to resist these
limitations, but U.S. officials must remain firm." http://t.uani.com/IfDxdx
Robert Satloff in
TNR: "Journalists and headline writers who
characterized Geneva as a 'freeze' or 'halt' of Iran's nuclear program
have a strange definition of these words. When Jack Lord or Telly Savalas
caught up with a bad guy, pulled a revolver and yelled 'freeze' or
'halt,' the culprit wasn't being told to 'keep moving, just more slowly';
he was being told to stop-or else. Geneva, however, does not stop Iran's
nuclear program. Under the agreement, thousands of centrifuges-including
many of the advanced IR-2 version-will continue to spin and produce
enriched uranium, though within defined limits. Among the many moving
parts of Iran's complex, multifaceted program, the term 'freeze' applies
to two components-the accumulation of 20 percent enriched uranium (which
will be converted into another form) and the nuclear-related progress of
the Arak heavy-water reactor project. Both achievements are substantial
and important but the program itself is not, by any stretch, frozen... If
the deal's major success is less consequential than many portray it, few
commentators have focused on what may be its most consequential aspect-an
apparent promise that, at the end of the process, Iran may eventually be
able to enrich as much uranium as it wants, to whatever level it wants.
That emerges from language buried in the paragraphs of the Joint Plan of
Action, the formal name of the Geneva deal, that concern the parameters
of a final agreement that is supposed to be negotiated over the next six
months. The specific terms state, 'The final step of a comprehensive
solution ... would involve a mutually defined enrichment programme with
mutually agreed parameters consistent with practical needs, with agreed
limits on scope and level of enrichment activities, capacity, where it is
carried out, and stocks of enriched uranium, for a period to be agreed
upon.' There appear to be two huge elements in this sentence: that
Washington and its partners are on record now agreeing that the final
accord will allow Iran to enrich uranium, putting the last nail in the
coffin of six United Nations Security Council resolutions calling on Iran
to suspend its enrichment activities, even temporarily; and that any
limitations the final agreement may impose will not be final at all but
only for 'a period to be agreed upon.' This paragraph trumps the faux
argument over whether Iran has a 'right to enrich'; in practice, it could
have an international stamp of approval to enrich. In this, this
paragraph could be read as saying that if Iran acts like a Boy Scout long
enough-one expects the 'agreed period' to be measured in years, not
months-Iran's ayatollahs may receive formal international blessing for
nuclear activities that, for a long time, have flouted the will of the
international community. Taking the long view, therefore, the final deal
contains a potentially huge payoff for Iran. Kicking the problem down the
road-usually phrased more diplomatically as 'stretching Iran's potential
breakout time'-is a key element of the Obama administration's approach.
And from two other overlooked lines in the Geneva deal, there is a real
possibility that the two sides won't reach agreement on the actual terms
of that final deal until after the midterms in November 2014... On the
surface, it stands to reason that Iran has an interest in getting a final
deal as quickly as possible. After all, the most punishing economic
sanctions remain in place under the 'first step' deal and Obama promised
renewed vigilance in sanctions enforcement when he announced the Geneva
accord. But with the signing of this deal, the perception of leverage
will begin to tilt away from Washington and toward Iran, which may want
to see how this deal improves its regional standing before it heads into
talks for a final agreement. When viewed in combination with the outcome
of the Syria chemical weapons episode, for example, there is little doubt
that America's threat of force has lost much of its credibility. The most
Geneva portends for Iranian violation is the end of sanctions relief and
perhaps additional sanctions; though Obama made a passing reference to
his role as commander-in-chief in his weekend remarks, he quickly
followed that he has 'a profound responsibility to try to resolve our
differences peacefully, rather than rush towards conflict.' This
will have an effect in two ways. First, countries around the world that
followed Washington's lead on sanctions as an alternative to having the
crazy Americans bomb Iran may now restrain their enthusiasm for obeying
rules that cost them billions of dollars. And second, regional powers
that deferred to the Obama administration's strategy for dealing with the
Iran problem may begin to take matters into their own hands.' http://t.uani.com/1cpNnmyUANI
Advisory Board Member
UANI Advisory
Board Member Jack David in NRO: "The announcement
that the P5+1 (the five U.N. Security Council members plus Germany)
reached a nuclear deal with Iran has just been made. A few details of the
deal have been announced and there likely will be others. But what has
been reported so far is sufficient to conclude, as Israeli Prime Minister
Netanyahu said of the draft deal reported two weeks ago, that 'this is a
very, very bad deal.' The Iranian 'concessions' thus far announced are
unimpressive: Iran will stop enriching uranium beyond 5 percent; it will
install no additional centrifuges; it will convert the 100 pounds or so
of 20 percent-enriched uranium which quickly can be converted to
weapons-grade uranium to something harder to convert to weapons-grade
uranium. Iran has not agreed to dismantle any of the thousands of
centrifuges it has installed and continues to operate; to send any of its
20 percent-enriched uranium out of the country; to close the nuclear
facilities which will soon provide it with plutonium with which to make
nuclear weapons; to stop its testing of long-range missiles; or to cease
its support of terrorist activities by Hezbollah and others... The U.S.,
by pressing forward with this very, very bad deal has further eroded its
dwindling international credibility. No country in the Middle East will
perceive U.S. agreement to this deal as anything but further evidence of
its weakness, further evidence that the U.S. is content to undermine its
historical alliances, expressions to the contrary notwithstanding." http://t.uani.com/17QjE6z
Dennis Ross in
Politico: "Those who fear the consequences of this
initial deal worry that the United States is so concerned about diplomacy
failing that it will, in fact, accept a bad deal that leaves Iran in a
position where it has a breakout capability. Saying that no deal is
preferable to a bad deal is a good slogan. But the Israeli and Saudis,
among other critics, have no idea what the Obama administration thinks a
bad deal might be. The text of this interim agreement reveals little in
this regard, even while it says the comprehensive deal that follows it
will address 'mutually defined enrichment programs with mutually agreed
parameters consistent with practical needs.' Will the Iranians define
their enrichment needs as limited? For our friends, the answer is no-and
worse, they see that even if we are not explicitly conceding 'the right
to enrich,' we are accepting in it in practice. All the more reason to
let them know what we consider a bad deal and will not accept: anything
that fails to roll back the Iranian program to small numbers of
centrifuges, permits more than a bomb's worth of enriched uranium
in-country, allows a heavy water plant and lacks transparency measures
sufficient to verify these limitations. Defining a bad deal will not only
reassure our friends; it will also help sustain our policy at home and
ensure the Iranians have no illusions about what we can accept." http://t.uani.com/1c6zknD
Steve Hanke in
Cato at Liberty: "With the announcement on Saturday
night that Iran and the P5+1 group reached a tentative deal over the
Iranian nuclear program, the Iranian rial appreciated 3.45% against the
dollar on the black market. The rial jumped from 30000 IRR/USD on
Saturday November 23rd to 29000 IRR/USD on Sunday November 24th. A daily
appreciation of this magnitude is rare. In fact, it has occurred fewer
than ten times since the beginning of 2013. Indeed, this indicates that
the diplomatic breakthrough is having a positive effect on Iranian
expectations. Over a year ago, I uncovered the fact that Iran experienced
a period of hyperinflation (in early October 2012), when its monthly
inflation rate peaked at 62%. Since then, I have been actively monitoring
and reporting on the IRR/USD black market exchange rates and calculating implied
inflation rates for the country. Since Hassan Rouhani took office, on
August 3rd, Iranian expectations about the economy have turned less
negative. Thus far, it appears Rouhani has been successful in ending the
long period of economic volatility that has plagued Iran, since the US
imposed sanctions in 2010. This has been reflected in the black-market
IRR/USD exchange rate, which has held steady around 30,000 in recent
weeks (see the accompanying chart)... There are three main factors at
work here. The first is a concerted effort by the Rouhani administration
and the central bank to curb Iran's inflation. This stands in stark
contrast to the previous regime, whose strategy was to simply deny that
inflation was a problem. The second is that that Iran's economy has
proved remarkably 'elastic' - meaning that the country has ultimately
adapted to the sanctions regime and has found ways to keep its economy
afloat in spite of them. The third factor in the rial's recent stability
is an improvement in Iranian economic expectations. This is where the
P5+1 talks come into play. Iranians recognized that easing of the
sanctions regime would be a bargaining chip in any nuclear negotiations.
In consequence, their economic expectations improved as the talks
progressed. Indeed, Saturday's announcement gave these expectations a
shot in the arm. In light of the rial's recent stability, I have delisted
the rial from my list of 'Troubled Currencies,' as tracked by the
Troubled Currencies Project." http://t.uani.com/1ewV3VX
UANI Outreach
Coordinator Bob Feferman in Algemeiner: "If Franklin
Delano Roosevelt were alive today, how would he deal with negotiations
with Iran and their claim of the right to enrich uranium? No doubt he
would apply the Four Freedoms as the foundation to addressing the Iranian
nuclear issue. In his 1941 State of the Union speech given prior to
America's entry into World War II, President Roosevelt laid out the moral
case for supporting the allies in the fight against Nazi Germany.
Roosevelt identified what he called 'The Four Freedoms': the freedom of
speech, the freedom of worship, the freedom from want, and the freedom
from fear. The Iranian regime violates all four freedoms on a regular
basis... While Iran continues to spin its centrifuges and gets closer to
nuclear weapons capability, we must not allow Iranian leaders to 'spin'
the world about its purported nuclear rights. We must remember that Iran
continues to assault human rights and denies the central four freedoms -
not only to its own people, but to others in the region as well. Nuclear
rights are not an inalienable human right. In concluding his speech,
Roosevelt said, 'Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere.
Our support goes to those who struggle to gain those rights or keep them.
Our strength is in our unity of purpose.' We all have the right to live
in freedom from the fear of Iran's radical theocratic regime armed with
nuclear weapons. All those who seek this freedom must remember
Roosevelt's words: 'Our strength is in our unity of purpose.'" http://t.uani.com/I9pMgV
Dan Levinson in
WashPost: "On Tuesday, my father, Robert Levinson,
becomes the longest-held hostage in U.S. history. Sadly, his 6 years 8
months in captivity surpasses the 2,454 days that Terry Anderson, the
former Associated Press bureau chief in Beirut, was held from his family.
My father was last seen March 9, 2007, on Kish Island, Iran, but he is
not a missing person. Our family received a hostage video three years ago
and photographs in 2011. In the video - in which he appears frail and
visibly thinner than the 220 pounds he weighed when he was taken - my dad
pleads for the U.S. government to help secure his release. In the photos,
which were e-mailed to us, he is shackled. He has an unkempt beard and
holds cryptic messages, the intended meaning of which we still do not
understand." http://t.uani.com/IegyiO
|
|
Eye on Iran is a periodic news summary from United Against
Nuclear Iran (UANI) a program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear
Iran, Inc., a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code. Eye on Iran is not intended as a comprehensive
media clips summary but rather a selection of media elements with
discreet analysis in a PDA friendly format. For more information please
email Press@UnitedAgainstNuclearIran.com
United Against Nuclear
Iran (UANI) is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a
commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a
regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons. UANI is an
issue-based coalition in which each coalition member will have its own
interests as well as the collective goal of advancing an Iran free of
nuclear weapons.
|
|
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment