If nothing comes of it, as is likely, I still don’t see a “silver lining” anywhere. This is bad, really bad, and not just for Iran. Trump, at the UNGA, of all places, has openly threatened to completely destroy NK even though they do have nuclear weapons already. The old argument for nuclear weapons as a means of self-defence against a US attack/regime change operation is thus no longer valid. The US is now apparently ready to attack nuclear powers, and thus for WW3/Armageddon if her interests are threatened. Now what?
The plan is, clearly, to coerce both Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons program altogether: submit or die. And, apparently, increase the US nuclear arsenal 10fold. If the latter did indeed inspire Tillerson’s “f… moron’ remark, Trump, no doubt, sees this as a stroke of genius. Which is it?
If Trump wins this deal, without war, he will get the Nobel peace price (he had already been nominated for this year along the lines ‘peace through strength’) You know who actually won.
If there is war, it will be the end of the US as a global superpower. As in Israel’s Samson option, they will take a big part of the rest of the world, maybe all of us, down with them.America First!
My guess is that Putin will once again play the role of saving the world from the idiocy of US foreign policy (as in Syria). Or maybe not. Read the letter in which Stalin explains how and why he did not interfere with the US/UN war against North Korea in 1950
I spent two weeks in Iran – it’s not a scary place!
Antidote
October 14, 2017 1:36 pm
one more thing: as usual, the focus is on Israel as dog-wagging tail, ignoring the other long-time ally of the US next door, an ally who gets away with running a medieval dictatorship, being the major sponsor of terrorism in the ME, both threatening and launching genocidal attacks on Shiites etc etc, all with full US military and diplomatic support. The Saudis want Damascus, the Israelis the Golan Heights, that’s one main reason why Assad is the dictator and butcher who has to go. Ditto for Iran
“The lobby’s friends in the Senate are very happy. Tom Cotton wants regime change.”
I think Cotton was the last person Trump consulted before the day he announced his decision on the Iran Deal. It’s a common theme in the main media news pundit arena that Trump always goes with the last person he consulted on any issue. I’m sure they didn’t chat about the Nakba.
Bandolero
October 14, 2017 3:03 pm
It’s hard to see how Bibi and his Congress could win their battle to nix the Iran deal.
The point is that the JCPOA is not only a P5+1 deal with Iran, but also binding international law codified in UN security council resolution 2231.
So, to nix the Iran deal in a lawful way, Bibi and his Congress basically need a new UN security council resolution nixing it. It means Bibi and his Congress need not only support from Trump for doing this, but also from the veto powers Russia, China, Britain and France. It’s hard to see that Bibi and his Congress could be successful in lobbying Russia to agree to nix UN security council resolution 2231.
To “slap back” globally binding UN sanctions, Bibi and his Congress could also use the mechanism defined in the JCPOA to do so. The procedere here would be that the US officially complains that Iran is acting in violation of the JCPOA. Then there would be a several weeks long court like process in listening to both sides complaints, and at the end there will be a vote among the 8 signatory powers of the JCPOA, ie the US, the EU, Germany, France, UK, China, Russia and Iran. If the majority of these 8 signatory powers votes that Iran has violated the deal and sanctions should be slapped back, UN sanctions are slapped back. It means, if Iran, Russia and China vote against and the Western block unanimously votes for reinstating UN sanctions, UN sanctions will be slapped back. Of the western signatory powers the toughest nut to crack for Bibi and his Congress is likely the EU. The EU commission is very immune to media campaigns or threats of not being reelected.
As per Reuters EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said on Friday in reaction to President Donald Trump’s decision not to certify the accord: “We cannot afford as the international community to dismantle a nuclear agreement that is working … This deal is not a bilateral agreement … The international community, and the European Union with it, has clearly indicated that the deal is, and will, continue to be in place.”
The key power Bibi and his Congress has to get to make the EU change it’s stance is the EU’s economic powerhouse Germany. If Germany would fold, it may have enough influence to change the stance of the EU. However, the situation in Germany is that the government, all opposition parties and a big majoriry of the people are strong supporters of the deal. One may consider the stance of Merkel – which reflects her CDU party:
Foreign minister Gabriel from the SPD party is even more explicit. As per German state run DW:
“It’s imperative that Europe sticks together on this issue,” Gabriel told Germany’s RND newspaper group. “We also have to tell the Americans that their behavior on the Iran issue will drive us Europeans into a common position with Russia and China against the USA.”
It may be the end of the close transatlantic partnership, NATO included.
So, there is no way, Trump, Bibi or the US Congress can terminate the Iran deal. What Trump and Bibi’s Congress can do, is violating the Iran deal and international law by reneging on the US obligation to lift nuclear related sanctions. If these sanctions would only affect US individuals and companies, nobody would care much about it. It would mean, Iran would need to buy more Airbus planes instead of buying Airbus and Boeing planes, and that’s it.
But what Trump and Bibi’s Congress could do again, would be to re-impose secondary nuclear-related sanctions, meaning giving foreign companies a binary choice of either doing business with the US or with Iran.
That would be a clear US violation of international law and WTO rules, though the WTO has little teeth to defend it’s rules against US breaks. But as a huge trade power, the EU has some muscles it can flex when it comes to trade and sanctions. As per HuffPo:
If the U.S. pulls out of the nuclear agreement ― known as the JCPOA ― and reapplies sanctions that target not only Iran, but other countries who do business with Iran, the European Union could take advantage of a statute dating back to the mid-1990s that would protect European companies from being penalized under the sanctions, EU ambassador to the United States David O’Sullivan said Monday.
So, it would be completely nuts if Bibi’s Congress would slap nuclear-related sanctions on Iran, thereby breaking international law and likely starting a US-EU trade war, while the very same Congress could slap the same sanctions on Iran on a non-nuclear pretext legally.
Anyway, as the US has already put in place a myriad of non-nuclear-related secondary sanctions against Iran, Iran has learned to live with them, by doing more business with Chinese and Russian companies who choose the Iranian over the US market. These secondary sanctions hurt Iran, but unlike UN security council sanctions, they don’t really strangle Iran.
So, what Bibi and his Congress need to be successful in strangling Iran are UN security council sanctions on Iran, but there’s no way to get them. That Trump speech yesterday doesn’t help them, just the opposite. More people will suspect that when Trump and Bibi’s Congress slap non-nuclear-related sanctions on Iran they are doing this out of frustration that they can’t destroy the nuclear deal.
And: Trump is very unpopular in Germany, and being associated with Trump does Bibi no good for his image in Germany.
If nothing comes of it, as is likely, I still don’t see a “silver lining” anywhere. This is bad, really bad, and not just for Iran. Trump, at the UNGA, of all places, has openly threatened to completely destroy NK even though they do have nuclear weapons already. The old argument for nuclear weapons as a means of self-defence against a US attack/regime change operation is thus no longer valid. The US is now apparently ready to attack nuclear powers, and thus for WW3/Armageddon if her interests are threatened. Now what?
The plan is, clearly, to coerce both Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons program altogether: submit or die. And, apparently, increase the US nuclear arsenal 10fold. If the latter did indeed inspire Tillerson’s “f… moron’ remark, Trump, no doubt, sees this as a stroke of genius. Which is it?
If Trump wins this deal, without war, he will get the Nobel peace price (he had already been nominated for this year along the lines ‘peace through strength’) You know who actually won.
If there is war, it will be the end of the US as a global superpower. As in Israel’s Samson option, they will take a big part of the rest of the world, maybe all of us, down with them.America First!
My guess is that Putin will once again play the role of saving the world from the idiocy of US foreign policy (as in Syria). Or maybe not. Read the letter in which Stalin explains how and why he did not interfere with the US/UN war against North Korea in 1950
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/did-stalin-lure-the-united-states-the-korean-war-new-evidence-the-origins-the-korean-war
I spent two weeks in Iran – it’s not a scary place!
one more thing: as usual, the focus is on Israel as dog-wagging tail, ignoring the other long-time ally of the US next door, an ally who gets away with running a medieval dictatorship, being the major sponsor of terrorism in the ME, both threatening and launching genocidal attacks on Shiites etc etc, all with full US military and diplomatic support. The Saudis want Damascus, the Israelis the Golan Heights, that’s one main reason why Assad is the dictator and butcher who has to go. Ditto for Iran
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-13/saudi-arabia-wastes-no-time-in-backing-trump-s-iran-strategy
“The lobby’s friends in the Senate are very happy. Tom Cotton wants regime change.”
I think Cotton was the last person Trump consulted before the day he announced his decision on the Iran Deal. It’s a common theme in the main media news pundit arena that Trump always goes with the last person he consulted on any issue. I’m sure they didn’t chat about the Nakba.
It’s hard to see how Bibi and his Congress could win their battle to nix the Iran deal.
The point is that the JCPOA is not only a P5+1 deal with Iran, but also binding international law codified in UN security council resolution 2231.
So, to nix the Iran deal in a lawful way, Bibi and his Congress basically need a new UN security council resolution nixing it. It means Bibi and his Congress need not only support from Trump for doing this, but also from the veto powers Russia, China, Britain and France. It’s hard to see that Bibi and his Congress could be successful in lobbying Russia to agree to nix UN security council resolution 2231.
To “slap back” globally binding UN sanctions, Bibi and his Congress could also use the mechanism defined in the JCPOA to do so. The procedere here would be that the US officially complains that Iran is acting in violation of the JCPOA. Then there would be a several weeks long court like process in listening to both sides complaints, and at the end there will be a vote among the 8 signatory powers of the JCPOA, ie the US, the EU, Germany, France, UK, China, Russia and Iran. If the majority of these 8 signatory powers votes that Iran has violated the deal and sanctions should be slapped back, UN sanctions are slapped back. It means, if Iran, Russia and China vote against and the Western block unanimously votes for reinstating UN sanctions, UN sanctions will be slapped back. Of the western signatory powers the toughest nut to crack for Bibi and his Congress is likely the EU. The EU commission is very immune to media campaigns or threats of not being reelected.
As per Reuters EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said on Friday in reaction to President Donald Trump’s decision not to certify the accord: “We cannot afford as the international community to dismantle a nuclear agreement that is working … This deal is not a bilateral agreement … The international community, and the European Union with it, has clearly indicated that the deal is, and will, continue to be in place.”
The key power Bibi and his Congress has to get to make the EU change it’s stance is the EU’s economic powerhouse Germany. If Germany would fold, it may have enough influence to change the stance of the EU. However, the situation in Germany is that the government, all opposition parties and a big majoriry of the people are strong supporters of the deal. One may consider the stance of Merkel – which reflects her CDU party:
Merkel reiterates Iran deal should be model for solving North Korea crisis
Foreign minister Gabriel from the SPD party is even more explicit. As per German state run DW:
It may be the end of the close transatlantic partnership, NATO included.
So, there is no way, Trump, Bibi or the US Congress can terminate the Iran deal. What Trump and Bibi’s Congress can do, is violating the Iran deal and international law by reneging on the US obligation to lift nuclear related sanctions. If these sanctions would only affect US individuals and companies, nobody would care much about it. It would mean, Iran would need to buy more Airbus planes instead of buying Airbus and Boeing planes, and that’s it.
But what Trump and Bibi’s Congress could do again, would be to re-impose secondary nuclear-related sanctions, meaning giving foreign companies a binary choice of either doing business with the US or with Iran.
That would be a clear US violation of international law and WTO rules, though the WTO has little teeth to defend it’s rules against US breaks. But as a huge trade power, the EU has some muscles it can flex when it comes to trade and sanctions. As per HuffPo:
So, it would be completely nuts if Bibi’s Congress would slap nuclear-related sanctions on Iran, thereby breaking international law and likely starting a US-EU trade war, while the very same Congress could slap the same sanctions on Iran on a non-nuclear pretext legally.
Anyway, as the US has already put in place a myriad of non-nuclear-related secondary sanctions against Iran, Iran has learned to live with them, by doing more business with Chinese and Russian companies who choose the Iranian over the US market. These secondary sanctions hurt Iran, but unlike UN security council sanctions, they don’t really strangle Iran.
So, what Bibi and his Congress need to be successful in strangling Iran are UN security council sanctions on Iran, but there’s no way to get them. That Trump speech yesterday doesn’t help them, just the opposite. More people will suspect that when Trump and Bibi’s Congress slap non-nuclear-related sanctions on Iran they are doing this out of frustration that they can’t destroy the nuclear deal.
And: Trump is very unpopular in Germany, and being associated with Trump does Bibi no good for his image in Germany.