Archive for July 22, 2015

John Kerry is “disturbed” that Iran remains Iran

July 22, 2015

John Kerry is “disturbed” that Iran remains Iran, Power LinePaul Mirengoff, July 21, 2015

To view Khamenei’s statements on Iran’s regional policy as disturbing is like being disturbed by feeding habits of sharks. What’s disturbing here is the combination of naivety and wishful thinking that led the Obama administration to reach this agreement with Iran.

***********************

Towards the end of the nuclear negotiations with Iran, the mullahs’ negotiators talked about the possibility of cooperating strategically with the U.S. on regional matters, in the event the sides reached a deal. Even “Supreme Leader” Ali Khamenei joined in, declaring that “if the other side avoids its ambiguity in the talks, it’ll be an experience showing it’s possible to negotiate with them on other issues.”

This was an enticing prospect to dangle before Barack Obama. For him, the hope of U.S.-Iran cooperation on “other issues” has always been a major incentive for reaching a deal.

But now that the deal has been reached, the mullahs have changed their tune. Last Friday, Khamenei threw cold water on the idea of cooperating with the U.S., making it clear that Iran will continue to be our deadly adversary. Khamenei stated:

Our policy toward the arrogant U.S. government won’t change at all. We have no negotiations with America about various global and regional issues. We have no negotiations on bilateral issues.

We will always support the oppressed Palestinian nation, Yemen, Syrian government and people, Iraq, and oppressed Bahraini people, and also the honest fighters of Lebanon and Palestine.

Khamenei also reiterated Iran’s support for Hezbollah:

Americans can support the child-killing Zionist government, and call Hezbollah terrorist? How can one interact, negotiate, or come to an agreement with such a policy?

The instinct of the liberal foreign policy establishment in cases like this is to dismiss such talk as being for domestic political consumption. But John Kerry knows the Iranian regime is serious and, fearful of being made to look like an idiot when Iran makes good on Khamenei’s promises, he declined to take the liberal default position.

Instead, though raising the possibility that the statement might not reflect policy, Kerry stated: “I don’t know how to interpret it at this point in time, except to take it at face value, that that’s his policy.”

It’s encouraging to see Kerry taking what the “Supreme Leader” says at face value. Unfortunately, it’s also late in the day.

Kerry went on to state that if Khamenei’s statement really is Iran’s policy, “it’s very disturbing, it’s very troubling.”

It is, to be sure. But Kerry acts like Khamenei’s statement came out of the blue. Absurd!

As noted, Iran forbore to some extent on such pronouncements as the parties to the nuclear negotiations closed in on an agreement. But how could Kerry have believed that this obvious negotiating tactic reflected a change in Iran’s fundamental regional aims?

To view Khamenei’s statements on Iran’s regional policy as disturbing is like being disturbed by feeding habits of sharks. What’s disturbing here is the combination of naivety and wishful thinking that led the Obama administration to reach this agreement with Iran.

State Department Tries to Depict Lifting Arms Embargo On Iran as a ‘Win’ For U.S. in Nuclear Deal

July 22, 2015

State Department Tries to Depict Lifting Arms Embargo On Iran as a ‘Win’ For U.S. in Nuclear Deal

BY:
July 21, 2015 3:39 pm

via State Department Tries to Depict Lifting Arms Embargo On Iran as a ‘Win’ For U.S. in Nuclear Deal | Washington Free Beacon.

State Department spokesman John Kirby depicted the arms embargo lift on Iran in the nuclear deal as a victory for the United States Tuesday.

Last week, President Obama announced that a nuclear agreement had been reached with Iran.

As written in the agreement, Iran is allowed to continue uranium enrichment and maintain 6,000 centrifuges. In exchange, the U.S. and the U.N. will lift economic sanctions over time, remove a conventional weapons embargo after five years, and remove a ban on the research and development of ballistic missile technology after eight years.

The agreement said other restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program would last ten years. After ten years, Iran would be free to develop nuclear weapons.

Associated Press reporter Matt Lee asked Kirby, “Can you think of one instance in which what you ended up with was better than what you were seeking?”

“Well I think remember the–on the arms embargo and the–and the missile program sanctions, under the U.N. Security Council resolutions which put those sanctions in place and drove Iran to the negotiating table, it was always understood that all of those sanctions would be lifted at once when Iran complied with their requirements under Lausanne,” Kirby said.

Kirby also said the arms embargo and the ban on ballistic missile technology would have been lifted immediately if it were not for the United States, which held out for a five-year ban and an eight-year ban.

A 2010 U.N. Security Council resolution put a ban for member countries to sell conventional arms such as tanks, missile launchers, and fighter jets. Kirby continued to defend these victories by saying they were only enacted to get Iran to negotiations.

“But the U.N. Security Council resolutions, which put those sanctions on did so with the intent of driving Iran to the negotiating table, specifically over their nuclear program,” Kirby said. “So it was always understood by all the members of the P5- plus-1 members, that as a part of–to have a deal, without the sanctions relief, all of them, there would be no deal.”

Lee said that previous U.N. Security Council resolutions called for stricter restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program.

“But the problem that exists there is that those U.N. Security Council resolutions to which you refer, which have now been superseded by yesterday’s resolution, are stronger,” Lee said. “They call for Iran to suspend or halt enrichment altogether. So, when you say that well, Russia and China wanted the arms embargo and ballistic missile stuff to go immediately, they wouldn’t have gone immediately, because Iran wasn’t in compliance with the terms of the previous resolutions.”

Some Congressional Democrats do not share the Obama administration’s view that the embargo on arms is lifted as a victory.

“But you’d say that those are two things that you exceeded your expectations?” Lee asked.

“Yes, that’s one example, and if you need more, I’m happy to provide that for you,” Kirby said.

The Obama administration will not be able to claim these numerous issues as “victories.”