According to Al Jazeera on Friday, a “a European proposal to revive the (JCPOA between the US/West) and Iran is imminent” — what their ruling regimes called a final offer.
The deal reportedly calls for straightaway lifting of (illegally imposed) US/Western sanctions on scores of Iranian entities, including its banks.
Iran, in turn, would reverse legitimate steps it took in response to abandonment of the JCPOA by the Trump regime in May 2018 in flagrant breach of SC Res. 2231, making it binding international and US constitutional law — the latter under its Supremacy Clause.
Details reported by Al Jazeera involve implementation of a final agreement in stages.
On August 15, Politico reported the following:
“Iran still has reservations about (an EU) draft deal to revive the” JCPOA, adding:
“(T)alks to restore the deal could drag well past what some had earlier described as a Monday deadline.”
Yet according to Al Jazeera, the Biden regime approved the EU’s “final text.”
It includes requiring the US to pay a fine of unspecified amount if it abandons the JCPOA again.
There’s no ambiguity about Iran’s nuclear program with no military component or intent to develop one.
The Islamic Republic abhors nuclear weapons, long ago banned their development, and wants their global stockpiles eliminated before they eliminate us.
Since JCPOA talks began in early April 2021, the Biden regime sabotaged them by unacceptable demands with intent to kill the landmark agreement.
Since undemocratic Dems usurped power by brazen election fraud in 2020, actions of the Biden regime — from behind the scenes — prevented restoration of the JCPOA.
Have its dominant hardliners had a change of heart?
Or is what’s going on more head-fake deception?
The historical record shows that on all things related to whatever the US agrees to, final is never final.
The record also indisputably shows that US ruling regimes breached virtually all agreements they formally approved — with other nations and Native Americans.
On August 16, Bloomberg News reported the following:
“A deal to revive a nuclear agreement between Iran, the EU and US is unlikely to be struck in the near term, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc., which said that even if a pact were agreed, additional oil wouldn’t flow until next year.”
GS analyst Callum Bruce and others said “(o)ur view (is that) stalemate (is) mutually beneficial,” adding:
Sticking points remain unresolved, including guarantees sought by Tehran, what the Biden regime is unwilling to provide.
Further, Iran has “weak incentives” to go along with unacceptable US/Western demands — given how much oil it’s currently exporting to willing buyers and revenue it provides because of high prices.
On Friday, AP News reported that hurdles to reviving the JCPOA remain unresolved.
They include congressional political opposition. See below.
And this malarkey from so-called State Department spokesman, Price, saying:
“The JCPOA is about the single, central challenge we face with Iran (sic), the core challenge (sic), what would be the most threatening challenge we could possibly face from Iran (sic), and that is a nuclear weapon.”
Whenever the above bogus accusation is made, left unexplained is that if Iran wanted to develop and produce nukes, it’d had done it long ago.
No credible evidence suggests a policy change to the present day.
At the same time, it’s well-known that apartheid Israel is the Middle East’s only nuclear armed and dangerous country — with threatened use of all its weapons if its national security is greatly threatened.
It’s also well-known that since its liberating 1979 revolution — ending a generation of Western-installed and directed tyrannical rule — the Islamic Republic of Iran never preemptively attacked another nation.
It’s in stark contrast to perpetual US-dominated NATO direct or proxy wars on invented enemies.
The same goes for Israeli wars at its discretion against defenseless Palestinians and cross-border against nonthreatening nations.
According to the 2015 Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, Congress has the right to review — over a 30-day period — whatever the White House may agree to with Iran on the JCPOA.
It’s unclear how many congressional Dems will go along with reviving the deal.
According to GOP House Armed Services Committee members:
“Even if Iran…agrees to reenter the” JCPOA by going along with Biden regime demands, “Congress will never vote to remove sanctions.”
“In fact, Republicans in Congress will work to strengthen” them.
Separately on Thursday, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said the following:
“We conveyed our viewpoints through the (EU’s) representative to other parties, including the US, and are awaiting a response.”
“We have to make sure that all of our redlines have been taken into consideration, and that we can gain complete economic benefits from the agreement that is before us.”
“Should we reach this point, then other stages may be discussed.”
On Friday, Iran again stressed that no deal is durable until all sanctions are lifted.
On the same day, Speaker of Iran’s Parliament, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, said the following:
“Today in the economic war, the first and most important law passed by the Islamic Consultative Assembly was the law to lift sanctions, because we believe in ending this unjust war.”
“If they do not fulfill their obligations, there is no justification for us to fulfill our obligations in the nuclear field, so we will deal with the nuclear issue only within the framework of guarantees, unless they fulfill their obligations.”
“If they comply with the obligations, we will also comply and continue, but our problem will not be solved by lifting the ban…”
It “must be aborted.”
To date, actions dominant Biden regime hardliners prevented revival of the JCPOA.
No evidence suggests a change of policy.
Even if something is agreed on, most likely it’ll fall short of what’s mandated by SC Res. 2231, what Iran demands.
And chances are overwhelming that it won’t stick as long as Iran is free from US hegemonic control.
The historical record is clear and unambiguous.
US ruling regimes can never be trusted — consistently saying one thing, then breaching it by going another way in pursuit of its unbending hegemonic aims.
As a result, whatever they may agree to by treaties or other agreements aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.
Leave a Reply