Iran Adds Salt to the Wound (Daniel 8:4)

Iran displays missile, calls Trump 'crazy' in marking 1979 U.S. embassy takeover 
Babak Dehghanpisheh
BEIRUT (Reuters) - Iran put a ballistic missile on display as thousands marched on Saturday to mark the anniversary of the 1979 seizure of the U.S. embassy, with a senior official accusing President Donald Trump of a "crazy" return to confrontation with Tehran.
Turnout for the annual Iranian street rallies commemorating the embassy takeover, a pivotal event of the Islamic Revolution, appeared higher than in recent years when Trump’s predecessor Barack Obama pursued detente with Tehran.
Last month, Trump broke ranks with European allies, Russia and China by refusing to re-certify Iran’s compliance with its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, reached during Obama’s tenure. Under that deal, most international sanctions on Iran were lifted in exchange for Tehran curbing nuclear activity seen to pose a risk of being put to developing atomic bombs.
Iran has reaffirmed its commitment to the deal and U.N. inspectors have verified Tehran is complying with its terms, but Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has threatened to "shred" the pact if the United States pulls out.
"All the governments confirm that the American president is a crazy individual who is taking others toward the direction of suicide," Ali Shamkhani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, told a rally in Tehran, state media reported.
"Trump’s policies against the people of Iran have brought them out into the streets today," Shamkhani said.
He did not identify the governments he had in mind. The other parties to the nuclear deal - Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany - have voiced disquiet at Trump’s opposition to it, fearing this could stir new Middle East instability.
But the Europeans share U.S. concern over Iran’s ballistic missile program and "destabilizing" regional behavior.
Senior Iranian officials have repeatedly said that the Islamic Republic’s missile program is solely defensive in nature and is not negotiable.
In a sign of defiance, a Ghadr ballistic missile with a range of 2,000 km (1,240 miles) was put on display near the ex-U.S. embassy in Tehran, now a cultural center, during Saturday’s street demonstration, Tasnim news agency said.
"That America thinks Iran is going to put aside its military power is a childish dream," said Brigadier General Hossein Salami, deputy head of its elite Revolutionary Guards which oversees the missile development, according to Tasnim.
Fars news agency posted pictures of demonstrators nearby burning an effigy of Trump and holding up signs saying "Death to America".
Iran and the United States severed diplomatic relations soon after the 1979 revolution, during which hardline students seized the embassy and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
Shamkhani spoke a few days after Khamenei said the United States was the "number one enemy" of the Islamic Republic.
U.S.-Iranian tensions have risen anew at a time when Tehran has been improving political and military ties with Russia.
Russian President Vladimir Putin visited Tehran on Wednesday. Khamenei told him that Tehran and Moscow must step up cooperation to isolate the United States and help defuse conflict in the Middle East.
Iran and Russia are both fighting on the side of Syrian President Bashar al Assad against rebels, some of them U.S.-backed, and Islamist militants trying to overthrow him.
Reporting by Babak Dehghanpisheh; editing by Mark Heinrich

Coping with the Iranian Nuclear Horn (Daniel 8:3)

Commentary: A former Iranian diplomat on what Trump needs to know about Iran

Seyed Hossein Mousavian

With the fate of the Iran nuclear deal at stake, Donald Trump has until October 15 to tell Congress if he believes Tehran is complying with the seven-nation agreement. Many expect that the U.S. president will decertify Iranian compliance with the deal -- returning U.S.-Iran relations to a state of overt hostility.

Not all in the administration seem to agree with Trump’s harder-line approach on Iran. Defense Secretary James Mattis has publicly stated that Trump “should consider staying” in the deal, while Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has reportedly argued against decertification. Speaking after his first meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, Tillerson also seemed to indicate a willingness to take a longer-term view when he told a media conference that the Washington-Tehran relationship had “never had a stable, happy moment in it.” ”Is this going to be the way it is for the rest of our lives and our children’s lives and our grandchildren’s lives,” he asked.

Tillerson’s remarks evoked an encounter told to me by Mohsen Rafiqdoost, a former Iranian Revolutionary Guards Commander, of a 1982 meeting he had with Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic.

Rafiqdoost recalled suggesting that the U.S. embassy grounds in Tehran be converted to a Revolutionary Guards base. Ayatollah Khomeini rejected the idea, asking “Why would you go there? Are we not going to have relations with America for a thousand years?”

It’s clear that decades of estrangement have led to a fundamental misunderstanding of Iran in Washington. Notwithstanding the Obama administration’s nuclear negotiations, every U.S. administration since the 1979 Iranian revolution has failed in its declared objective to contain Iran.

If Trump wishes to free future generations of anxiety over U.S.-Iran tensions, he should pay careful attention to five points in formulating his Iran policy.

First, American officials need to stop speaking about Iran in threatening and insulting terms. The Iranian people are proud of their thousands of years of history and above all else view mutual respect as integral to their foreign relations. However, Foreign Minister Zarif told me that Trump’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly last month was the “most insulting speech of any American president toward Iran since the revolution” and that it “made any potential for dialogue with the United States meaningless.”

Second, U.S. regime-change policies have been self-defeating. The principal reason for lasting Iranian distrust of the United States since the revolution has been U.S. policies aimed at undermining and overturning the Iranian political system. In June, Tillerson openly declared that U.S. policy towards Iran included regime change -- a statement not heard from a senior U.S. official in years and which marked a sharp departure from conventional U.S. rhetoric of seeking Iranian “behavior” change.

In stark contrast, Barack Obama told the UN that “we are not seeking regime change and we respect the right of the Iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy.” Consequently, he was able to diplomatically engage Iran on its nuclear program, and reach the July 2015 nuclear deal. The respectful letters exchanged between Obama and Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei helped set the process in motion. This would not happen today even if Trump made a similar overture, as the key to successful negotiations with Iran is to first drop regime-change policies.

Third, since the 1953 U.S.-led coup that overthrew democratically-elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq, Iranians have resented U.S. interference in Iran. The political landscape of conservatives, moderates, and reformists in Iran is in many ways similar to the competition between Democrats and Republicans in the United States. As such, any agreement between Washington and Tehran must be negotiated in a way that transcends the partisan divide in each country -- or else it would be inherently fragile. The challenges the nuclear deal has been subject to in Washington by the Republican Party is testament to this need. With respect to Iran too, negotiations must be carried out in a way that respects Iran’s political makeup and hierarchies.

Fourth, the Trump administration needs to accept that Iran, as a large country with immense natural resources and an educated population, has legitimate security concerns and interests in its neighborhood. Washington must recognize that U.S. policies aimed at isolating Tehran and refusing to accept a legitimate Iranian role in the region have only seen Iranian influence grow in countries such as Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon while U.S. influence wanes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere. From Iran’s perspective, its post-1979 foreign policy has been driven by the aim of deterring foreign aggression and securing the country’s borders rather than the pursuit of regional hegemony. After the revolution, Iran was invaded by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and, for much of the past decade, chaos on its thousands of miles of borders with Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan – all factors that have compelled it to play a regional role. If the United States wants to avoid scenarios where regional states aggressively compete for power it must encourage the creation of a regional security system involving the six Gulf Cooperation Council countries along with Iraq and Iran.

Finally, the record of U.S.-Iran negotiations shows that “dual track” policies of pressure and diplomacy are destined to fail. While Trump appears to be trying to bring Iran to the negotiating table in a position of weakness, Iranian policymakers tend to respond to pressure by retaliating in kind.

In a recent Washington Post op-ed, former Secretary of State John Kerry highlighted how by the time he entered into negotiations with Iran, after years of sanctions, Iran had “mastered the nuclear fuel cycle” and built a uranium stockpile large enough to make 10 to 12 bombs. “In other words, Iran was already a nuclear-threshold state,” wrote Kerry.
The lesson for Washington here is that if push comes to shove, Tehran will develop its own bargaining chips --- not capitulate in the face of whatever threats are made when Trump delivers his next policy speech on Iran.

About the Author

Seyed Hossein Mousavian is a Middle East Security and Nuclear Policy Specialist at Princeton University and a former head of the Foreign Relations Committee of Iran’s National Security Council.

Preparing for New Iranian Deal (Daniel)

Trump expected to decertify Iran nuclear deal, official says

Steve Holland, Yara Bayoumy

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump is expected to announce soon that he will decertify the landmark international deal to curb Iran’s nuclear program, a senior administration official said on Thursday, in a step that potentially could cause the 2015 accord to unravel.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Trump is also expected to roll out a broader U.S. strategy on Iran that would be more confrontational. The Trump administration has frequently criticized Iran’s conduct in the Middle East.

Trump, who has called the pact an “embarrassment” and “the worst deal ever negotiated,” has been weighing whether it serves U.S. security interests as he faces an Oct. 15 deadline for certifying that Iran is complying with its terms.

“We must not allow Iran ... to obtain nuclear weapons,” Trump said during a meeting with military leaders at the White House on Thursday, adding:

“The Iranian regime supports terrorism and exports violence, bloodshed and chaos across the Middle East. That is why we must put an end to Iran’s continued aggression and nuclear ambitions. They have not lived up to the spirit of their agreement.”

Asked about his decision on whether to certify the landmark deal, Trump said: “You’ll be hearing about Iran very shortly.”

Supporters say its collapse could trigger a regional arms race and worsen Middle East tensions, while opponents say it went too far in easing sanctions without requiring that Iran end its nuclear program permanently.

Iranian authorities have repeatedly said Tehran would not be the first to violate the accord, under which Iran agreed to restrict its nuclear program in return for lifting most international sanctions that had crippled its economy.

If Trump declines to certify Iran’s compliance, U.S. congressional leaders would have 60 days to decide whether to reimpose sanctions on Tehran suspended under the agreement.

Whether Congress would be willing to reimpose sanctions is far from clear. While Republicans, and some Democrats, opposed the deal when it was approved in 2015, there is little obvious appetite in Congress for dealing with the Iran issue now.

The prospect that Washington could renege on the pact, which was signed by the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China, the European Union and Iran, has worried some of the U.S. allies that helped negotiate it.

“We, the Europeans, we have hammered this: the agreement is working,” said a European diplomat who asked to remain anonymous. “We as Europeans, have repeated ... it’s impossible to reopen the agreement. Period. It’s impossible.”

French President Emmanuel Macron said last month there was no alternative to the nuclear accord, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

A senior Iranian diplomat told Reuters on Thursday the end result of Trump’s expected move would be to isolate the United States since the Europeans would continue to support it.

“Many foreign investors told us that they will not be scared away from Iran’s market if Trump de-certifies the deal,” the diplomat said.

Trump has long criticized the pact, a signature foreign policy achievement of his Democratic predecessor Barack Obama.

The administration was considering Oct. 12 for Trump to give a speech on Iran but no final decision had been made, an official said previously.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a close ally of Trump, last month said that unless provisions in the accord removing restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program over time are eliminated, it should be canceled.

“Fix it, or nix it,” Netanyahu said in a speech at the U.N. General Assembly annual gathering of world leaders on Sept. 19.

Many of Trump’s fellow Republicans who control Congress also have been critical of the deal.

‘CANNOT ABIDE’

Trump blasted the deal in his speech to the U.N. General Assembly, also on Sept. 19.

“We cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program,” Trump said, adding that Iran’s government “masks a corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a democracy.”

Trump is weighing a strategy that could allow more aggressive U.S. responses to Iran’s forces, its Shi‘ite Muslim proxies in Iraq and Syria and its support for militant groups.

Trump’s defense secretary, Jim Mattis, told a congressional hearing on Tuesday that Iran was “fundamentally” in compliance with the agreement. He also said the United States should consider staying in the deal unless it were proven that Tehran was not abiding by it or that it was not in the U.S. national interest to do so.

When Mattis was asked by a senator whether he thought staying in the deal was in the U.S. national security interest, he replied: “Yes, senator, I do.”

Last week, Iran’s foreign minister said Tehran may abandon the deal if Washington decides to withdraw.

A State Department official said the Trump administration was “fully committed to addressing the totality of Iranian threats and malign activities and seeks to bring about a change in the Iranian regime’s behavior.”

The official said that behavior includes ballistic missiles proliferation, “support for terrorism,” support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, “unrelenting hostility to Israel,” “consistently threatening freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf,” cyber attacks against the United States and its allies, human rights abuses and “arbitrary detentions of U.S. citizens.”

”The JCPOA was expected to contribute to regional and international peace and security, and Iran’s regime is doing everything in its power to undermine peace and security,” the State Department official added.

The move also would represent another step by Trump that would undo key parts of Obama’s legacy.
If Trump moves to decertify the accord, it would mark another example of walking away from international commitments as he pursues his nationalist “America First” agenda. He previously announced plans to abandon the Paris climate accord and the ambitious 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, two key Obama achievements.

Reporting by Steve Holland and Yara Bayoumy in Washington; Additional reporting by Jeff Mason, Patricia Zengerle and David Alexander in Washington and Parisa Hafezi in Ankara; Writing by Will Dunham; Editing by James Dalgleish

Prepare For a Nuclear Iran (Daniel 8:4)

Trump to 'decertify' Iran nuclear deal next week: report
BY REBECCA KHEEL
President Trump plans to "decertify" the Iran nuclear deal next week and announce that it is not in the United States' national interest, The Washington Post reported Thursday.
Such an announcement would leave the next move up to Congress, which would have 60 days to use a fast-track process to reimpose sanctions and deliver a potentially fatal blow to the deal, which Tehran agreed to in 2015 with the U.S. and five other nations.
Trump faces an Oct. 15 deadline to tell Congress whether Iran remains in compliance with the Obama-era nuclear accord, which gave Tehran billions of dollars of sanctions relief in exchange for limits on its nuclear program. The deadline is part of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, which also says the president must tell Congress whether suspension of sanctions remains vital to the national security interests of the United States.
According to the Post, which cited individuals briefed on an emerging White House strategy, Trump has tentatively scheduled an Oct. 12 speech to lay out a larger strategy on Iran that would open the door to modifying the agreement but hold off on recommending Congress reimpose sanctions.
The Post's sources cautioned that plans are not fully set and could change. The White House would not confirm the speech or its contents, the newspaper reported.
Trump has repeatedly bashed the Iran deal, known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, calling it "an embarrassment" and promising on the campaign trail to tear it up.
But the international body overseeing the deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency, has said Iran remains in compliance, as have Secretary of Defense James Mattis, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford.
Administration officials in favor of keeping the deal in place have been looking for a way to split the difference between saving the deal and saving face for Trump.
Mattis hinted at a congressional hearing this week at the idea of decertifying Iran's compliance while leaving sanctions relief in place.
"We have two different issues," Mattis told the House Armed Services Committee. "One is the [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] and one is what Congress has passed, and those two are distinct but integral with each other. As you look at what the Congress has laid out at a somewhat different definition of what's in our best interest, and therein lies, I think, the need for us to look at these distinct but integral issues the way the president has directed."
Trump said last month he had made a decision on the deal, but refused to say what it entailed. On Thursday, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders reiterated that Trump has made a decision and will announce it at the "appropriate time."

The Reality About the Iran Deal

Former Sen. Joe Lieberman: Kill the Iran Deal

By John Gizzi
Wednesday, 04 Oct 2017 11:47 AM Current | Bio | Archive

 

Former Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman told Newsmax he is urging the president “not to recertify” the Obama administration’s controversial deal with Iran.“Every 90 days that the agreement stays on the book is not in the national security interests,” said Lieberman, who caucused with the Democrats and was the 2000 Democratic vice presidential nominee. He now heads a bipartisan group known as “United Against a Nuclear Iraq.”
President Trump has stated he has not made up his mind on whether to recertify the nuclear agreement, and the Iranian regime says they expect him to break it off.
Lieberman for his part, said of the deal made in January 2016: “The Iranian government was in trouble and, in the negotiations, they were playing with a very weak hand,” Lieberman told me, “So we gave away a lot for not much.”
Among the benefits that Iran received: lifting of U.S. sanctions that have been in place since the present Tehran regime came to power in 1979, and unfreezing an estimated $1.6 billion in Iranian assets that were held in U.S. banks.
Even without solid evidence Iran is violating the agreement and enriching more nuclear facilities than permitted, Lieberman strongly feels there is ample evidence to decertify the agreement and not to do business with Tehran.
“You have a regime that is a police state, and supports repression of its own people,” he said, “and it is already a supporter of the Hamas wing in Gaza, which wants to kill us and our allies. And Iran still supports the Taliban in Afghanistan.”
I asked Lieberman about President Trump’s remarks concerning the Iran government at a private gathering of reporters at the White House earlier this year. At the time, the president remarked that the $1.6 billion that was unfrozen “is going to Swiss bank accounts that benefit the Ayatollah and his friends.”
Lieberman said: “I wouldn’t be surprised. The imams don’t take any vows of poverty."
As for Iran's controversial enrighment program, under what is known officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Iran will be limited to installing no more than 5,060 of its nearly 20,000 centrifuges (enrichment facilities to produce fuel for nuclear power plants) in the next 10 years.
The centrifuges that will be installed will be among the oldest and least efficient in Iran.
President Obama often reminded reporters that if the U.S. ever “snapped backed” and re-imposed sanctions on Iran, Germany, France and other countries that were now dealing with Baghdad would not follow suit and the revived U.S. sanctions would not pack the wallop they formerly did.
“True, but remember — all foreign businesses want to do business with the U.S.,” Lieberman told me, “and it might be wise to limit the ability of foreign countries to do business in this country when they business with Iran.”
Among those on the board of Against a Nuclear Iran, are Bill Clinton’s CIA Director James Woolsey, Florida’s former Republican Gov. Jeb Bush, and former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton.
John Gizzi is chief political columnist and White House correspondent for Newsmax. For more of his reports, Go Here Now.