|
|
|
Join UANI
Top Stories
AFP:
"Tehran rejected a key Western demand for site inspections Saturday
and differences remained after US Secretary of State John Kerry and his
Iranian counterpart held talks to secure a nuclear deal. With a deadline
a month away, a senior Iranian negotiator said the Geneva talks between
Kerry and Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif failed to bridge
the differences between Tehran and world powers. 'The differences are
still there,' Abbas Araghchi, deputy head of Iran's negotiating team,
said at the end of the meeting. Araghchi, quoted by state television's
website, said the negotiations would 'resume next week at the level of
deputies and experts', rather than have the Kerry-Zarif talks go into a
second day as expected... But just before the Geneva talks got underway,
Araghchi said it would be 'out of the question' for UN inspectors to
question Iranian scientists and inspect military site inspections as part
of a final deal with world powers." http://t.uani.com/1FlWEZo
NYT:
"But some experts outside the government have begun to question the
wisdom of negotiating against a deadline, especially because some major
issues remain unresolved. Rushing an accord, they say, might work to
Iran's advantage by building pressure on the United States and its
negotiating partners to make concessions in talks with Iranian officials
who have a penchant for hammering out compromises at the last minute. 'It
is a tall order for them to finish by the end of June, especially to get
the technical annexes done in sufficient detail to avoid implementation
problems,' said Robert J. Einhorn, who served on the American delegation
to the Iran talks until 2013. 'The negotiators should take whatever time
they need, even if it means working past June 30.' Gary Samore, who was
the senior National Security Council official on weapons of mass
destruction during President Obama's first term, said American officials
should be prepared to negotiate through the summer. 'Tactically, it is
better to extend the talks to demonstrate that we aren't desperate for a
deal at any cost,' said Mr. Samore, a member of the group United Against
Nuclear Iran." http://t.uani.com/1Fp5bLZ
WSJ:
"Major divisions remain between Iran and six world powers as U.S.
Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif
prepare to meet in Geneva on Saturday, a month away from a deadline for a
final nuclear deal. People involved in the talks warn that political
pressures could still delay-or even derail-a deal as the two sides flesh
out the broad agreement they reached on key issues in Lausanne on April
2. While much of the focus in the spring focused on the Obama
administration's struggles to prevent congressional opponents from
blocking a deal, diplomats say it is growing political pressure in Iran
that now poses the greatest risks. Among the toughest issues to resolve
is one that has complicated diplomacy for years: access to Iranian
scientists who worked on nuclear policy and to sites both to ensure
Tehran doesn't cheat on a deal and to answer unresolved questions about
the country's past work that Western officials say was likely aimed at
nuclear weapons know-how. While senior Western diplomats insist there is
time to complete an agreement, they say comments by senior Iranian
officials, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are narrowing
negotiators' room to maneuver." http://t.uani.com/1JefN6U
Nuclear Program & Negotiations
Reuters:
"Six world powers have agreed on a way to restore U.N. sanctions on
Iran if the country breaks the terms of a future nuclear deal, clearing a
major obstacle to an accord ahead of a June 30 deadline, Western
officials told Reuters. The new understanding on a U.N. sanctions
'snapback' among the six powers - the United States, Britain, France,
Germany, Russia and China - brings them closer to a possible deal with
Iran, though other hurdles remain, including ensuring United Nations
access to Iranian military sites... U.S. and European negotiators want
any easing of U.N. sanctions to be automatically reversible if Tehran
violates a deal. Russia and China traditionally reject such automatic
measures as undermining their veto power as permanent members of the U.N.
Security Council. As part of the new agreement on sanctions snapback,
suspected breaches by Iran would be taken up by a dispute-resolution
panel, likely including the six powers and Iran, which would assess the
allegations and come up with a non-binding opinion, the officials said.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) would also continue
regularly reporting on Iran's nuclear program, which would provide the
six powers and the Security Council with information on Tehran's
activities to enable them to assess compliance. If Iran was found to be
in non-compliance with the terms of the deal, then U.N. sanctions would
be restored." http://t.uani.com/1HGOyvX
AFP:
"'The Western powers cannot accept a deal that precludes IAEA access
to military sites,' Mark Fitzpatrick, International Institute for
Strategic Studies analyst, told AFP, calling it 'politically
indefensible'... The IAEA also wants Iran to address indications that
before 2003, and possibly since, Iran's nuclear programme had what it
calls 'possible military dimensions'. A probe into these allegations,
rejected by Iran, has been stalled since August, an IAEA report confirmed
Friday. One of the sites it wants to inspect is the Parchin military
base. In addition, the powers want the final deal to give the IAEA the
right to probe any suspicious activity further down the line. This may
require the IAEA to visit locations not necessarily declared as
containing nuclear material, some of them military, and to talk to
certain Iranian scientists. According to one Western diplomat, the issue
of inspections is 'one of the legs of the stool. It's not the only one,
but if it's not there, the stool will collapse.'" http://t.uani.com/1FoZLkm
WashPost:
"Despite rumblings on both sides about extending the deadline -
something that has happened on virtually every previous step in the
negotiations during the past year and a half - the United States has said
it does not envision an extension. Senior U.S. officials said they remain
confident that the deal can be completed on time, assuming political will
on both sides. One possibility for a brief extension, however, may come
at the end of the month, when Congress will be in recess through the July
4 holiday. Under the recently passed legislation, lawmakers have 30 days -
during which President Obama cannot alter legislatively imposed sanctions
- to review the deal, provided it is submitted by July 10. If it is
submitted after that, lawmakers have an additional 30 days for
review." http://t.uani.com/1FP5Zwh
NYT:
"Secretary of State John Kerry plans to cut short his trip to Europe
after breaking a leg while bicycling on Sunday and will return to Boston
for medical treatment... Mr. Kerry had been planning an active month of
diplomacy, including extensive travel to meet with Iranian officials in
Europe, to try to conclude an accord limiting Iran's nuclear program by a
June 30 deadline. Mr. Kerry met here for six hours on Saturday with his
Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif. It was not clear how quickly
Mr. Kerry would be able to resume his travel schedule or what effect his
injury might have on the pace of the Iran talks." http://t.uani.com/1GRv77E
Congressional
Action
The Hill:
"Lawmakers will turn their attention to defense spending and ramp up
their scrutiny of an emerging nuclear deal with Iran as they return next
week from their Memorial Day recess... On Tuesday, behind closed doors,
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hear from Energy Secretary
Ernest Moniz on the talks after he returns from meeting with Iranian
negotiators over the weekend. Scientists from U.S. nuclear laboratories
around the country will also appear before the panel. The next day, the
committee holds a hearing on the 'Implications of the Iran Nuclear
Agreement for U.S. Policy in the Middle East,' with testimony from
experts including former Ambassador James Jeffrey from the Washington
Institute and former Ambassador Martin Indyk from the Brookings
Institution. Meanwhile the House Foreign Affairs Committee is looking at
Iran's detainment of three American hostages. On Tuesday, the panel will
hear from the hostages' families, as well as the brother of a missing FBI
agent, Robert Levinson... On Thursday, a statement from Speaker John
Boehner's (R-Ohio) office urged the administration to include the release
of the American prisoners in the nuclear deal.'One troubling aspect of
these negotiations is the Obama administration's refusal to require any
deal with Iran to include the release of the three Americans imprisoned
by the regime, including a Marine Corps veteran,' the statement
said." http://t.uani.com/1GgmcxI
Sanctions
Relief
Reuters:
"Asian imports of Iranian crude rose 12 percent in April from the
previous month to a four-month high of almost 1.2 million barrels per day
(bpd), topping a level allowed under economic sanctions aimed at Tehran's
disputed nuclear programme... Imports by Iran's four biggest buyers -
China, India, Japan and South Korea - totalled 1.17 million bpd last
month, down 4.1 percent on year and the highest since hitting 1.21
million bpd in December, government and tanker-tracking data showed...
China's April imports from Iran were at an 11-month high and well above
the 2014 average of roughly 550,000 bpd." http://t.uani.com/1QjZxjr
Iraq Crisis
WashPost:
"Iraqi forces have seized from Islamic State militants a string of
hamlets and villages in the dust-choked desert southeast of Ramadi in
recent days, closing in on the key city for a counteroffensive. But the
yellow-and-green flags that line the sides of the newly secured roads and
flutter from rooftops leave no doubt as to who is leading the fighting
here: Kitaeb Hezbollah, a Shiite militia designated a terrorist
organization by the United States. Iraq's two main allies - Iran and the
United States - have vied for influence over Iraq's battle to retake
ground from Islamic State militants in the past year. While
Iranian-linked Shiite militias have spearheaded the fight elsewhere, the
U.S.-backed Iraqi army and counterterrorism units had been on the front
lines in Anbar province, supported by an eight-month American-led air
campaign." http://t.uani.com/1Ky5DLB
AFP:
"An Iranian officer has been killed near the Iraqi city of Ramadi
while advising Iraqi forces on how to recapture it from the Islamic State
group, state media reported Monday. Jassem Nouri, who had also served as
a military adviser in Syria, was killed on Thursday, Iran's official IRNA
news agency reported. Political and military leaders joined family
members for a memorial service in Ahvaz in southwestern Iran on Sunday
ahead of his burial on Monday." http://t.uani.com/1RFI5sm
Yemen Crisis
WashPost:
"The rebel group that has seized power in Yemen has taken at least
four U.S. citizens prisoner, according to U.S. officials who said that
efforts to secure the Americans' release have faltered. One of the
prisoners had been cleared for release in recent days only to have that
decision reversed by members of the Houthi rebellion that toppled the
U.S.-backed government earlier this year and now controls most levers of
power in Yemen. The Americans are believed to be held at a prison in
Sanaa... U.S. officials said three of the prisoners worked in
private¬sector jobs and that a fourth, whose occupation is unknown, has
dual U.S.-Yemeni citizenship. The officials said none of the four were
employees of the U.S. government." http://t.uani.com/1dGS3Lz
Extremism
AFP:
"Photosharing service Instagram has deleted an account dedicated to
Iran's revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini just days before
the 26th anniversary of his death, Iranian media reported on Monday. The
@EmamKhomeini account, which published rare or unseen photos of the
Islamic republic's founder, had 100,000 followers before it was removed.
'Instagram in an email announced the deletion of the page ... and only
provided the automated generic text banning violent, pornographic or
advertisement content,' according to Iranian media. Another account
@EmamKhomeiny, was created to replace it as Iran prepares to mark the
anniversary Thursday of Khomeini's death." http://t.uani.com/1KHASXK
Human Rights
WashPost:
"Iran's revolutionary courts, where Washington Post reporter Jason
Rezaian is being tried on espionage and related charges, are notorious
among human rights activists as venues where verdicts are preordained and
proceedings can finish in minutes. 'Nobody thinks the result is ever in
question,' said Rod Sanjabi, executive director of the Iran Human Rights
Documentation Center, a New Haven, Conn.-based group that the Iranian
government has labeled as subversive. The trial of Rezaian, The Post's
Tehran bureau chief who has been jailed for more than 10 months, is
shining the spotlight anew on the branch of Iran's court system that
hears national-security cases, broadly defined to include the prosecution
of dissidents and journalists... Today, 36 years after the revolution,
the courts technically are overseen by the judicial branch. But in
reality, they are a political instrument and answer to Iran's supreme
leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei." http://t.uani.com/1QjWEPH
IHR:
"Three prisoners were hanged in two different Iranian cities today,
reported the Iranian state media... The state run Mehr news agency
reported about public execution of a prisoner in Shiraz... He was hanged
in the 'Ghahramanan' square of Shiraz." http://t.uani.com/1JjBeSm
Opinion &
Analysis
WSJ Editorial:
"The closed trial of Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian began
last week inside a Revolutionary Court in Tehran. It quickly adjourned
with no word about when it may reconvene, subject as ever to the whims of
Iran's authoritarian rulers. Mr. Rezaian is accused of committing
espionage 'for the hostile government of the United States,' though there
is no evidence to support the accusation. He has been held in Evin Prison
since last summer, and he has been allowed to see his lawyer only once.
Iran has ignored requests from the Post to send an editor as an observer,
and presiding judge Abolghassem Salavati is known for handing out harsh
sentences. The European Union once placed the judge on a human-rights
watch list due to his abuses. The State Department has lobbied for Mr.
Rezaian's release, and a spokesman calls the espionage charges 'absurd.'
But Secretary of State John Kerry and President Obama continue to
separate Iran's behavior on human rights and terrorism from its nuclear
negotiations. A more prudent White House might look at all this and
reconsider what a deal with such a regime is worth. If Tehran holds to
form, it will convict Mr. Rezaian, no matter the evidence, then release him
at a moment it considers opportune to get some public-relations benefit.
Perhaps it is using Mr. Rezaian as leverage to gain another U.S. nuclear
concession. Then again, the regime could decide it wants to punish Mr.
Rezaian as an example for others who would report on Iran. For now the
U.S. is still begging for a nuclear deal and Mr. Rezaian's release."
http://t.uani.com/1GRFrMZ
Lee Smith in The
Weekly Standard: "Even the Obama administration
acknowledges that Iran is up to a lot of mischief in the Middle East.
Tehran is engaged in a sectarian conflict from Lebanon to Syria and Iraq
that has recently come to include Yemen as another active front. However,
the White House continues to insist, against all evidence, that the
clerical regime's aggression won't increase when it gets a huge cash
infusion from sanctions relief and an immediate $30 to $50 billion bonus,
when (or if) it signs the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, aka the
nuclear deal. According to Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, Iran will almost
surely use that money to improve its domestic economy. And besides, as
Obama argued last month, 'most of the destabilizing activity that Iran
engages in is low-tech, low-cost activity.' The numbers say otherwise.
Staffan de Mistura, the U.N.'s Syria envoy, recently estimated that the
war to prop up its Syrian ally is costing Iran $35 billion a year. That
assessment is likely too high, but certainly of all Iran's regional
projects, keeping Bashar al-Assad's regime afloat is the costliest. And
that's because it's an occupation, says Fouad Hamdan, campaign director
of Naame Shaam, an organization that keeps tabs on Iran's war in Syria.
It's a foreign occupation that affects Iran directly, because without
control of territory in Syria, Iran loses its supply lines to Lebanon and
Hezbollah, the Iranian regime's most powerful deterrent against an
Israeli strike on its nuclear program. Thus, says Hamdan, 'the battle for
Syria is a battle for the survival of the Iranian regime.' There was a
time when the White House found it convenient to argue that the Syrian
conflict was costly to Iran. When the war started there, rather than arm
rebels to help topple Assad, the administration told its media surrogates
that it was wisest to stand by as the war would bleed Iran. They were
right about its potential to be a quagmire for Tehran. Now, sanctions
relief, including the signing bonus, will enable Iran to bolster its
support for Assad... Iran's regional position is built on sand. If it
loses Syria, it may lose Hezbollah and leave its nuclear program
vulnerable. What's helping sustain Tehran's strategy is the Obama
administration. As the Iranians have kept Assad afloat, the White House
has covered Iran's flank in all four Arab capitals controlled by Tehran:
Baghdad, where U.S. airstrikes supported an IRGC-led offensive on Tikrit;
Beirut, where the administration shares intelligence with
Hezbollah-controlled units of the Lebanese Armed Forces; Damascus, where
the White House promised Iran that Assad was safe from U.S. strikes on Islamic
State positions; and Sanaa, where American diplomats urge Saudi Arabia to
seek a political solution rather than a military victory over the
Iran-backed militias. Sanctions relief will abet Iran's regional goals.
The signing bonus alone will cover the costs of Iran's continued
occupation of Syria for at least another year and tens of thousands more
dead Syrian civilians." http://t.uani.com/1KHOKkS
Tony Badran in NOW
Lebanon: "It's not every day that you hear President
Barack Obama explain away rank bigotry. But in a recent interview, he did
just that. 'The fact that you are anti-Semitic,' Obama said of the
Islamic Republic of Iran, 'doesn't preclude you from being rational.'
Most subsequent commentary focused on whether the president actually
understood anti-Semitism-by definition, a marker of unreason. But Obama's
comment also reveals the depth of his determination to partner with Iran.
Obama's comment caps a series of revealing statements and policies that
put the lie to the White House claim that its Iran policy is designed to
empower the moderates in Tehran... The president has displayed a
pronounced tendency to signal to the Iranians, publicly, his desire to
secure rapprochement, as well as his disinterest in Iran's
adversaries-America's traditional allies. Take for instance the recent
summit at Camp David with the leaders of the Gulf Arab states. At every
turn, before, during and after the summit, the president went out of his
way to reassure Tehran. Obama repeatedly stated that he thought Iran was
not the real threat. What's more, as he pointedly remarked in his solo
press conference at the summit's conclusion, the purpose of his security
deliberations with the Gulf allies was not to confront 'or even to
marginalize Iran.' As a result of this intention, Obama did not budge one
inch on any of the regional theaters where Iran is involved, especially
the all-important issue of Syria. Meanwhile, White House officials made
sure to clarify-to Tehran more than anyone-that the real objective of the
summit was to guide the Saudis by the hand to sit down and compromise
with the Iranians. In that sense, it's more fitting to describe the Camp
David summit as a polite, public announcement of divorce between Obama
and the countries of the Gulf than anything else. But they are not the
only ones on the outs. Obama's remarks making light of Iranian
anti-Semitism came in an interview where the president expressed anew his
already-pronounced distaste for the Israeli government. He couched his
criticisms in the language of disappointment with Israel for not living
up to the ideals of its founding generation. Obama wanted to place the
onus of his rift with Israel on the Israelis themselves; namely their
prime minister. In reality, the core of the split is Obama's very personal
drive to befriend Khamenei's Iran-the operative word here being Khamenei.
The function of the president's studied comment on Iranian anti-Semitism,
therefore, is to whitewash Khamenei and the hardliners." http://t.uani.com/1LX1p0h
Amos Yadlin in
Times of Israel: "While President Obama is heavily
invested in reaching a comprehensive agreement, Prime Minister Netanyahu
seems resolved to do anything in his power to scuttle the current
framework. Recent congressional action suggests, however, that Netanyahu's
efforts are falling short of that goal and that - soon enough - the
President's agenda will have prevailed. Anything can still happen, of
course. From regional escalations to a dramatic change of mind in
Washington or Teheran, but the far more likely scenario is that by Fall
of 2015, a comprehensive agreement between Iran and the world's main
powers will have already been signed. With that as starting point - and
looking ahead - what can Israel and the White House still constructively
do in order to improve the shaping agreement? What are the strategic
concerns for Israel and America that an agreement with Iran will raise,
and what bilateral agreements can Israel and America still reach that
will mitigate those concerns? The current framework for the deal can be
described neither as a new holocaust, nor as a historic achievement,
because it is still a half-baked product that leaves five key questions
unanswered. Only if satisfactory solutions are found for these five
loopholes will the deal become acceptable. But if left unplugged, we will
end up with a bad deal, one that we would be better off without. The
issue of inspections is the first critical piece, and in the framework
statement it was addressed only with broad brush strokes. The details
here are crucial, especially as Iran has a very bad record of hiding and
cheating when it comes to its nuclear dealings with the West. Moreover,
the provisions of the comprehensive agreement will likely leave in Iran's
hands a massive nuclear infrastructure, ranging from centrifuges,
enriched uranium, research facilities and nuclear reactors. To make this
an acceptable agreement, - consent on a robust, 'anywhere, anytime' type
inspection regime will be required in order to guarantee that Iran stays
at a safety distance of no less than one year from breakout to a bomb. be
needed. A second troubling point has to do with the remaining nuclear
stockpiles that will have to be shipped out of Iran. The White House's
language on what will be done with these materials was troublingly vague,
given our knowledge that Iran currently has enough Low Enriched Uranium
for the production of six to eight warheads. There can be no confidence
in Iran's rollback to a year's distance before this point is properly
addressed. No less important is the R&D issue. wherein if Iran
continues to develop its enrichment technologies, it will gain the
ability to rapidly deploy cascades of modern centrifuges in very short
timelines, thus reducing its breakout time to unacceptable levels. This
is a worrying, highly realistic prospect that must be addressed at this
early stage. Weaponization of Iran's nuclear program, or what is often
referred to as its PMD's (Possible Military Dimensions), is another
matter whose coverage in the framework principles was far too scant. It
is essential to create a clear baseline of Iran's illicit activities thus
far, as well as to allow access to locations, organizations, individuals
and documents in order to effectively block Iran's ability to manufacture
the weapon components required for the detonation and delivery of a
nuclear warhead. Lastly, sanctions relief needs to be more accurately
described. The pace, scope and sequencing of the lifting of the sanctions
regime has not yet been announced. This is a major sticking point for
Iranians, and it is upon the P5+1 to ensure an effective,
performance-based sequence for the months after the deal is signed. No
less important is the establishment of coordinated 'snapback' measures by
the P5+1 that will ensure significant costs are incurred from Iran if a
violation is detected in the years ahead." http://t.uani.com/1FXUVhr
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment