Join UANI
Top Stories
Reuters:
"Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Thursday
demanded that all sanctions on Iran be lifted at the same time as any
final agreement with world powers on curbing Tehran's nuclear program
is concluded. Khamenei, the Islamic Republic's most powerful figure and
who has the last say on all state matters, was making his first
comments on the interim deal reached between Iran and the powers last
week in the Swiss city of Lausanne... He repeated his faith in
President Hassan Rouhani's negotiating team. But in remarks apparently
meant to keep his hardline loyalists on side, he warned about the
'devilish' intentions of the United States. 'I neither support nor
oppose the deal. Everything is in the details, it may be that the
deceptive other side wants to restrict us in the details,' Khamenei
said in a speech broadcast live on state television. His stand on the
lifting of sanctions matched earlier comments by Rouhani, who said Iran
would only sign a final nuclear accord if all measures imposed over its
disputed atomic work are lifted on the same day. These include
nuclear-related United Nations resolutions as well as U.S. and EU
nuclear-related economic sanctions. 'All sanctions should be removed
when the deal is signed. If the sanctions removal depends on other
processes, then why did we start the negotiations?' Khamenei said.
However, the United States said on Monday sanctions would have to be
phased out gradually under the comprehensive nuclear pact... One
problem is that Iran and the world powers may have different
interpretations on what was agreed in the framework accord - a point
Khamenei made evident. 'Americans put out a statement just a few hours
after our negotiators finished their talks...this statement, which they
called a 'fact sheet', was wrong on most of the issues.' Khamenei
said... 'I was never optimistic about negotiating with America...
nonetheless I agreed to the negotiations and supported, and still
support, the negotiators,' Khamenei said to chants of 'Death to
America.' ... Iran for its part has said that 'possible military
dimensions' (PMD) are an issue it will not budge on. 'PMD is out of the
question. It cannot be discussed,' an Iranian official said. This issue
has not been resolved. Khamenei ruled out any 'extraordinary
supervision measures' over Iran's nuclear activities. 'Iran's military
sites cannot be inspected under the excuse of nuclear supervision,' he
said." http://t.uani.com/1aq2Fwd
Reuters:
"Iran will only sign a final nuclear accord with six world powers
if all sanctions imposed over its disputed atomic work are lifted on
the same day, President Hassan Rouhani said in a televised speech on
Thursday... 'We will not sign any deal unless all sanctions are lifted
on the same day ... We want a win-win deal for all parties involved in
the nuclear talks,' Rouhani said... 'Our goal in the talks (with major
powers) is to preserve our nation's nuclear rights. We want an outcome
that will be in everyone's benefit,' Rouhani said in a ceremony to mark
Iran's National Day of Nuclear Technology. 'The Iranian nation has been
and will be the victor in the negotiations.' ... 'Our main gain in the
talks was the fact that U.S. President Barack Obama acknowledged that
Iranians will not surrender to bullying, sanctions and threats,'
Rouhani said. 'It is a triumph for Iran that the first military power
in the world has admitted Iranians will not bow to pressure.'" http://t.uani.com/1CzhgeX
Politico:
"With Congress poised to take up a bipartisan bill the White House
fears could scuttle its delicate nuclear framework with Iran, Senate
Democrats on Wednesday sought to modify the legislation to assuage
President Barack Obama's concerns. Democrats are hoping that
Republicans will agree to their suggested changes to the measure that
would give Congress review power over the nuclear agreement - and the
GOP's pursuit of a veto-proof majority in favor of the legislation may
depend on it... The proposed modifications stemmed from administration
officials who have been contacting senators in both parties to explain
their opposition to the legislation, which was written by Senate
Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and would
give Congress an avenue to reject the nuclear framework after reviewing
the agreement. Publicly, the White House is standing by its veto
threat, but with support for the measure nearing a veto-proof majority
in the Senate, administration officials are also hoping to alter the
bill in a way they can live with. Corker's committee is scheduled to
vote on the legislation Tuesday, and the bill appears increasingly
likely to move to the Senate floor in the coming weeks." http://t.uani.com/1DnScgb
Nuclear Program & Negotiations
Press TV (Iran):
"Iranian defense minister has rejected as false media reports
claiming that international inspectors would be granted access to
Iran's military sites based on a recent understanding between Tehran
and world powers on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program. Brigadier
General Hossein Dehqan on Wednesday dismissed Western media reports
that under a regime of enhanced inspections by the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran will allow the body's experts to inspect the
military sites across the country. 'No such agreement has been reached
and basically, visiting military centers are among the red lines and no
visit to these centers will be allowed,' Dehqan said, according to a
statement by Iranian Defense Ministry. The Iranian general described
such claims as lies and deceit, saying, 'The determination of the
nuclear negotiating team of the Islamic Republic of Iran is so that it
will not allow anything be imposed on the Iranian nation.'" http://t.uani.com/1H7I8JG
Reuters:
"Failure to finalize a framework agreement between Iran and the
six major powers aimed at curbing the country's sensitive nuclear work
could profoundly destabilize the Islamic Republic, analysts and
politicians say. Iranians' hopes of ending their international
isolation have risen so high since the accord that failure to finalize
it would generate levels of dismay that could hurt the authorities,
even if the West was portrayed as the guilty party, analysts say.
'Finally it is over. The isolation is over. The economic hardship is
over. (President Hassan) Rouhani kept his promises,' said university
student Mina Derakhshande, who was among a cheering crowd on Friday.
'Failure of the talks will be end of the world for us Iranians. I
cannot tolerate it.' Managing popular expectations will be more
difficult in Iran now, said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. 'If the deal
doesn't come to fruition, most Americans won't notice, while most
Iranians will be devastated,' Sadjadpour said." http://t.uani.com/1aNyxM5
The Hill:
"The White House on Wednesday took a shot at Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by using a cartoon bomb to defend its
nuclear deal with Iran. The bomb diagram attached to a White House
tweet looked a lot like a chart used by Netanyahu during a 2012 speech
to the United Nations General Assembly urging the U.S. and other world
powers to set an ultimatum to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear
weapon. Using a marker, Netanyahu drew a red line near the top of the bomb.
'At this late hour there is only one way to peacefully prevent Iran
from getting atomic bombs,' Netanyahu told the annual gathering. 'And
that is by placing a clear red line on Iran's nuclear weapons program.'
The White House's chart is almost identical to Netanyahu's, red line
and all. At the bottom of the bomb is a blue line, representing the
zero percent chance Iran develops a nuclear weapon under the
deal." http://t.uani.com/1FqxHw9
Free Beacon:
"On Wednesday, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf called an
op-ed by former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George Schultz
on the Iran negotiations 'a lot of big words and big thoughts.'
Kissinger and Schultz, who served under Presidents Nixon, Ford, and
Reagan, said the strategy Obama has pursued is futile and dangerous.
'Absent the linkage between nuclear and political restraint, America's
traditional allies will conclude that the U.S. has traded temporary
nuclear cooperation for acquiescence to Iranian hegemony,' the column
said. Harf sparred with AP reporter Matt Lee, interrupting him several
times as he tried to get a reaction to the op-ed from the State
Department... 'I didn't hear a lot of alternatives. I heard a lot
of-sort of a lot of big words and big thoughts in that piece, and certainly
there is a place for that. But I didn't hear a lot of alternatives
about what they would do differently,' Harf said." http://t.uani.com/1Clch2J
Congressional
Action
The Hill:
"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday announced she
will oppose legislation empowering Congress to review the White House's
nuclear deal with Iran. The California Democrat said the proposal,
sponsored by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker
(R-Tenn.), threatens to sink the agreement at a crucial juncture in the
talks. She's urging lawmakers oppose the measure in order to allow
negotiators the space to hash out the final details ahead of the June
30 deadline. 'Diplomacy has taken us to a framework agreement founded
on vigilance and enforcement, and these negotiations must be allowed to
proceed unencumbered,' Pelosi said in a statement. 'Senator Corker's
legislation undermines these international negotiations and represents
an unnecessary hurdle to achieving a strong, final agreement.' ... Rep.
Steve Israel (N.Y.), chairman of the Democrats' communications and
messaging team, warned Wednesday that the deal is too important to deny
Congress a vote on it." http://t.uani.com/1EbarWS
Sanctions
Relief
WSJ:
"China will build a pipeline to bring natural gas from Iran to
Pakistan to help address Pakistan's acute energy shortage, under a deal
to be signed during the Chinese president's visit to Islamabad this
month, Pakistani officials said... The pipeline would amount to an
early benefit for both Pakistan and Iran from the framework agreement
reached earlier this month between Tehran and the U.S. and other world
powers to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The U.S. had
previously threatened Pakistan with sanctions if it went ahead with the
project... Pakistan is negotiating with China Petroleum Pipeline
Bureau, a subsidiary of Chinese energy giant China National Petroleum
Corporation, to build 435 miles (700 kilometers) of pipeline from the
western Pakistani port of Gwadar to Nawabshah in the southern province
of Sindh, where it will connect to Pakistan's existing gas-distribution
pipeline network." http://t.uani.com/1EbfINZ
WSJ:
"Iranian companies are trying to buy a Swiss petroleum refinery,
according to people familiar with the deal, as Tehran seeks outlets for
oil that may return if western sanctions are lifted later this year.
Petro Farhang, the oil-investment subsidiary of Iran's teacher pension
fund, and Ghadir Investment, a conglomerate with petrochemical
businesses which is controlled by Iranian pension funds, have
registered a formal expression of interest to buy a refinery in
Collombey, Switzerland, controlled by Libyan firm Tamoil Suisse,
according to people familiar with the move. Stephane Trachsler, general
secretary of Tamoil Suisse, said the company had rejected all potential
bidders so far." http://t.uani.com/1HUYAeH
Yemen Crisis
NYT:
"Secretary of State John Kerry has said that the United States
knew Iran had been providing military support to the Houthi rebels in
Yemen and that Washington 'is not going to stand by while the region is
destabilized.' Mr. Kerry's remarks, in an interview on Wednesday night
with 'PBS NewsHour,' appeared to be the most direct warning yet from
Washington about Iranian support for the Houthi movement, which has
allied with security forces loyal to a former strongman and taken
control of Yemen's capital, Sana. The comments came as the United
States has increased its provision of weapons, intelligence and
logistical support for a Saudi-led campaign of airstrikes aimed at
stopping the Houthis and their allies from dominating Yemen... 'We are
well aware of the support that Iran has been giving to Yemen, and Iran
needs to recognize that the United States is not going to stand by
while the region is destabilized, or while people engage in overt
warfare across lines - international boundaries of other
countries.'" http://t.uani.com/1cdgNKh
Reuters:
"Iran's leader on Thursday condemned the military intervention by
its main regional rival Saudi Arabia in Yemen as genocide, sharply
escalating Tehran's rhetoric against the two-week-old campaign of air
strikes. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Saudi Arabia would not emerge
victorious from the war in Yemen, where Iran-allied Houthi fighters who
control the capital Sanaa have been trying to seize the southern city
of Aden from local militias... 'The aggression by Saudi Arabia against
Yemen and its innocent people was a mistake... It has set a bad
precedent in the region,' Khamenei said in a televised speech. 'This is
a crime and genocide that can be prosecuted in international courts,'
he added. 'Riyadh will not emerge victorious in its aggression.'
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani also criticized the coalition
assembled by Riyadh, saying it was repeating errors committed in other
parts of the Arab world where Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shi'ite Iran back
rival sides. 'You tried it in Lebanon, and realized your mistake. You
tried it in Syria, and realized your mistake. You realized your mistake
in Iraq. You will realize soon that you also made a mistake in Yemen,'
he said." http://t.uani.com/1H7Dxr5
Reuters:
"Iran is sowing discord in Yemen and other regional countries as
part of a 'revolution export' strategy, the foreign minister of the
United Arab Emirates said on Wednesday, and Gulf Arab states are losing
hope of building normal ties with Tehran. Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed
al-Nayahan also said a Saudi-led coalition now carrying out air strikes
on Iranian-allied Houthi fighters in Yemen seek a U.N. Security Council
resolution requiring all to pursue dialogue and imposing a ban on arms
purchases by Houthis and other groups 'that are out of line'. Asked
about evidence to back up allegations by Saudi- and U.S.-backed Yemeni
President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi that Shi'ite Muslim Iran provided
support for Shi'ite Houthi militia fighters opposed to his rule, Sheikh
Abdullah told a news conference: 'Iran is not carrying out this
activity only in Yemen, it is conducting the same activity in Lebanon,
in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and in Pakistan. 'Someone might say that
the information provided by Yemen is not accurate, but there is
systematic action that has been going for years on the idea of
exporting the (Iranian) revolution.' ... Sheikh Abdullah said Sunni
Muslim Gulf Arabs could have 'positive, normal' relations with Tehran,
'but Iran is not giving its partners in the region this hope... Each
time we try to come close to Iran it starts spoiling the region, making
(matters) difficult for our countries.' 'It is not possible to accept
any strategic threat to Gulf Arab states,' he added." http://t.uani.com/1NWr1L0
WSJ:
"Iran dispatched a naval flotilla to the Gulf of Aden on
Wednesday, a move that could raise tensions between the Islamic
Republic and a Saudi-led coalition conducting a military campaign in
Yemen, which borders the waterway. The Iranian 34th flotilla, which
includes a destroyer and a logistics vessel, headed for the Gulf to
protect Iranian and other countries' trading vessels from piracy,
according to a report on Iran's ISNA news agency. The flotilla would
conduct missions there as well as in the Red Sea and the key Bab
al-Mandeb shipping strait over a three-month deployment, the report
said." http://t.uani.com/1Cli0W7
Human Rights
IranWire:
"No new regulation, which would permit women to attend sporting
events and matches, was ever approved by the Security Council, said the
Director of Information and International Affairs at the Ministry of
Interior. The announcement, which was covered extensively by the media,
came out after a high-ranking official at the Ministry of Sport and
Youth, said that the Security Council was considering allowing women
and families to attend sport stadiums. However the Official Website for
the Ministry of Interior denied this and said: 'When publishing any
news about the Ministry of Interior and the Security Council, the media
should exclusively use official sources from the Ministry of Interior
for information.'" http://t.uani.com/1OdX36Y
Opinion &
Analysis
WSJ Editorial
Board: "Remember when the left accused the Bush
Administration of politicizing intelligence to justify its invasion of
Iraq? It wasn't true, but someone ought to remind CIA director John
Brennan. Because in attacking critics of the President's Iran policy
Tuesday, he sounded more like a White House communications director
than a CIA chief. During remarks at Harvard's Institute of Politics,
Mr. Brennan said anyone who knew the facts and believes the deal with
Tehran 'provides a pathway for Iran to a bomb' is being 'wholly
disingenuous.' If we take him at his word, former Secretaries of State
George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, who wrote on our pages Wednesday,
must be dishonest in their detailed, careful critique. Think about that
for a moment. A CIA director claims that any disagreement over a highly
complicated and controversial deal must come from base motives. Think
of the signal that sends to the CIA analysts who will be responsible
for monitoring the deal and ascertaining whether Iran is violating it.
Better not speak up! Then again Mr. Brennan has been carrying water for
President Obama for a long time. After he left the CIA in the 2000s, he
denounced waterboarding as something that 'goes beyond the bounds of
what a civilized society should employ,' which nicely fit the Obama
campaign narrative. But Mr. Brennan still insisted it had provided
vital intel. The 2008 campaign help earned Mr. Brennan a White House
job in 2009, then a promotion to the CIA in 2013, where the White House
seems still to be writing his talking points. Regarding facts and
nuclear weapons in the Middle East, Mr. Brennan would better spend his
time making sure the CIA doesn't repeat its past mistakes. Before the
first Gulf War the agency greatly underestimated Saddam Hussein's
nuclear programs, then in 2003 it vastly overestimated them. A few
years later it wrongly concluded Iran had given up its nuclear
ambitions. Mr. Brennan's naked public partisanship harms the CIA by
making whatever it now says about Iran simply unbelievable." http://t.uani.com/1ygj8OO
Moshe Ya'alon in
WashPost: "The framework concluded last week on
Iran's nuclear program was doomed to disagreement. Even the 'fact
sheets' issued by the United States, France and Iran - all parties to
the talks - didn't agree on the facts. Israel has made clear its grave
concerns about the framework's fundamental elements and omissions. The
vast nuclear infrastructure to be left in Iran will give it an
unacceptably short breakout time to building a bomb. Iran's long-range
ballistic missile program - a threat to Israel as well as the rest of
the Middle East, Europe and the United States - is untouched. The
sanctions on Iran will be lifted (quickly, according to the Iranians;
gradually, according to the United States), while restrictions imposed
on the Islamic republic's nuclear program will expire in about a
decade, regardless of Iran's campaign of murderous aggression in
Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere across the Middle East; its arming,
funding, training and dispatching of terrorists around the world; and
its threats and violent efforts to destroy Israel, the region's only
democracy. To justify the risks inherent to the framework, its
supporters have posited three main arguments: that the only alternative
is war; that Iranian violations will be deterred or detected because of
'unprecedented verification'; and that, in the event of violations,
sanctions will be snapped back into place. These arguments have one
important feature in common: They're all wrong. The claim that the only
alternative to the framework is war is false. It both obscures the
failure to attain better terms from Iran and stifles honest and open
debate by suggesting that if you don't agree, you must be a warmonger.
It also feeds and reflects the calumny that Israel in particular is
agitating for war. As Israel's minister of defense, as a former Israel
Defense Forces chief of general staff and as a combat veteran forced to
bury some of my closest friends, I know too well the costs of war. I
also know that Israelis are likely to pay the highest price if force is
used - by anyone - against Iran's nuclear program. No country,
therefore, has a greater interest in seeing the Iranian nuclear
question resolved peacefully than Israel. Our opposition to a deal
based on the framework is not because we seek war, but because the
terms of the framework - which will leave an unreformed Iran stronger,
richer and with a clear path to a bomb - make war more likely. The
framework is supposed to prevent or detect Iranian denials and
deception about their nuclear program by means of inspections and
intelligence. Unfortunately, the track record of inspections and
intelligence makes the framework's outsize reliance on them both
misguided and dangerous. In many ways, the Iranian nuclear crisis began
and intensified after two massive intelligence failures. Neither
Israeli nor other leading Western intelligence agencies knew about
Iran's underground enrichment facilities at Natanz and Fordow until it
was too late. As good as our intelligence services are, they simply
cannot guarantee that they will detect Iranian violations at all, let
alone in time to stop a dash for a bomb. Twenty years ago, inspectors
were supposed to keep the world safe from a North Korean nuclear bomb.
Today, North Korea is a nuclear weapons state, and Iran isn't complying
with its existing obligations to come clean about its suspected efforts
to design nuclear warheads. There is no reason to believe that Iran
will start cooperating tomorrow, but the deal all but guarantees that
it will nonetheless have the nuclear infrastructure it would need to
produce a nuclear arsenal. Intelligence and inspections are simply no
substitute for dismantling the parts of Iran's program that can be used
to produce atomic bombs. Finally, there are the sanctions that brought
Iran to the negotiating table in the first place. These took years to
put in place and even longer to become effective. Once lifted, they
cannot be snapped back after future Iranian violations. It is fantasy
to think the sanctions can be restored and become effective in the
exceedingly short breakout time provided by the terms of the
framework... The choice is not between this bad deal and war. The
alternative is a better deal that significantly rolls back Iran's
nuclear infrastructure and links the lifting of restrictions on its
nuclear program to an end of Iran's aggression in the region, its
terrorism across the globe and its threats to annihilate Israel. This
alternative requires neither war nor putting our faith in tools that
have already failed us." http://t.uani.com/1IvYXzK
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment