Top Stories
WashPost: "More
than two weeks after a landmark deal with Iran, House Republicans and
Democrats called the Obama administration's approach to nuclear
negotiations naive and signaled that they will slap more sanctions on the
country despite warnings that doing so would torpedo the United States'
best chance in years at rapprochement. Secretary of State John F. Kerry
appeared to make no headway Tuesday in an urgent appeal to Congress to
hold off on new sanctions. A bipartisan lineup of House lawmakers
challenged his assertion that punitive new trade measures would undermine
fragile diplomacy with Iran's government. 'You're asking us to be asleep
and do nothing,' Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) complained to Kerry during
a testy session of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Not one member of
the influential panel pledged to try to help the administration keep new
sanctions at bay. Even Democrats who applauded the administration's
diplomatic overture to Iran said they wanted to hedge their bets by
maintaining sanctions pressure on the country. The Senate may move ahead
with sanctions legislation despite heavy lobbying by Kerry and other
administration officials, setting up the possibility of a rare veto from
President Obama, who has used that authority only twice since taking
office and never over a major foreign policy issue. The chairman of the
Senate Banking Committee, Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), said Tuesday that he
would hold off 'for now' on advancing a bill to impose new sanctions on
Iran, giving the White House some elbow room. But Johnson provided no
timeline for the panel's next move, and Republicans are likely to keep
pushing for another round of economic penalties... Rep. Edward R. Royce
(R-Calif.), chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, said the current
global sanctions net around Iran took years to build and should not be
loosened without clear benefit. 'Governments throughout the world will
not be easily convinced to reverse course and ratchet up sanctions
pressure if Iran is only buying time with this agreement,' Royce
said." http://t.uani.com/1dpEWrR
Haaretz:
"Senior officials in the administration of President Barack Obama
have conceded over the past few days in conversations with colleagues in
Israel that the value of the economic sanctions relief to Iran could be
much higher than originally thought in Washington, security sources in
Israel told Haaretz. In official statements by the United States
immediately after the agreement limiting Iran's nuclear program was
signed in Geneva between Iran and the six powers at the end of November
it was said that the economic relief Iran would receive in exchange for
signing the agreement would be relatively low - $6 billion or $7 billion.
Israeli assessments were much higher - about $20 billion at least. The
United States had originally intended to make do with unfreezing Iranian
assets in the amount of $3 billion to $4 billion. But during negotiations
in Geneva, the P5+1 countries backtracked from their opening position and
approved much more significant relief in a wide variety of areas:
commerce in gold, the Iranian petrochemical industry, the car industry
and replacement parts for civilian aircraft. But the Americans said at
the time that this would at most double the original amount. However
according to the Israeli version, the Americans now concede in their
talks with Israel that the sanctions relief are worth much more.
According to the security sources: 'Economics is a matter of
expectations. The Iranian stock exchange is already rising significantly
and many countries are standing in line to renew economic ties with Iran
based on what was already agreed in Geneva.' The sources mentioned
China's desire to renew contracts worth some $9 billion to develop the
Iranian oil industry and the interest some German companies are showing
for deals with Tehran. 'In any case, it's about 20 or 25 billion dollars.
Even the Americans understand this,' the sources said." http://t.uani.com/1hMqv6k
AFP:
"Experts from Iran, world powers and the UN atomic watchdog
discussing how to implement November's nuclear deal are set to fall short
of agreeing a start date for Tehran's six-month nuclear freeze, diplomats
said. The meeting between Iran and the United States, China, Russia,
Britain, France, Germany -- the so-called P5+1 -- was making progress
however, they said after two days of talks that were set to continue on
Wednesday. 'It's certainly going well in terms of that the talks are
lengthy and that they are constructive discussions,' one Western envoy
involved in the meeting in Vienna told AFP on condition of anonymity. 'My
sense is that given that there are seven or eight entities involved with
their own views it's inevitably going to take time.' He and a second
participant said however that it was unlikely to result in an
announcement of when Iran will start its promised six-month freeze of
parts of its nuclear programme, as agreed in a deal in Geneva on November
24." http://t.uani.com/1bxc3ud
Nuclear
Negotiations
AFP:
"Secretary of State John Kerry on Tuesday openly admitted that a
hard-won nuclear deal with Iran may still fail in the coming months, as
he faced a fierce grilling from US lawmakers seeking to impose new
sanctions... But he acknowledged to US lawmakers: 'I came away from our
preliminary negotiations with serious questions about whether or not
they're ready and willing to make some of the choices that have to be
made.' 'Has Iran changed its nuclear calculus? I honestly don't think we
can say for sure yet. And we certainly don't take words at face value,'
Kerry told the House foreign affairs committee." http://t.uani.com/1bvFnxz
NYT:
"Laying down a marker, the Republican chairman of the House Foreign
Affairs Committee said Tuesday that a follow-on nuclear accord with Iran
should require that Tehran stop enriching uranium. 'The key issue is
whether a final agreement would allow Iran to manufacture nuclear fuel,'
the chairman, Ed Royce of California, said during a hearing that included
testimony by Secretary of State John Kerry. 'It simply can't be trusted
with enrichment technology, because verification efforts can never be
foolproof.' Comments by Mr. Royce and other panel members effectively
shifted the terms of the debate from the interim accord that the United
States and five other world powers negotiated last month, which involved
freezing much of Iran's nuclear program, to the more comprehensive one
that international negotiators now plan to pursue." http://t.uani.com/1bDsINt
Reuters:
"Iran will set a date for a U.N. nuclear inspection of a uranium
mine, an Iranian envoy said before talks on Wednesday between Tehran and
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Under a cooperation pact
signed last month to help allay international concern about Iran's nuclear
program, the Islamic Republic would provide 'managed access' to the
Gchine mine by early February for the first time in some eight years...
Allowing the U.N. nuclear agency - which is investigating allegations
that Iran has carried out atomic bomb research - to go to Gchine was
among six concrete steps Iran agreed to under the November 11 cooperation
agreement with the IAEA. As the first step to be implemented, U.N.
inspectors went to the Arak heavy water production facility on Sunday, a
plant that is linked to a nearby reactor under construction that the West
fears could yield plutonium for bombs once operational. The other
measures to be carried out within three months concerned provision of
information about uranium enrichment plants and research reactors Iran
has said it plans to build... Diplomats say the six first steps are
relatively easy to implement and that it will be more difficult for Iran
to agree to future action sought by the IAEA, including access to the
Parchin military site where the U.N. agency believes nuclear
weapons-relevant explosives tests took place a decade ago." http://t.uani.com/1e5eGHQ
Reuters:
"Gulf Arab states expressed concern at a summit on Wednesday over
Iran's plans to build more atomic power plants, while welcoming a nuclear
deal it struck with six world powers last month. Iranian media have said
Tehran is in serious talks with Russia to construct new nuclear power
stations, based on a 1992 agreement with Moscow. Abdullatif al-Zayani,
Secretary-General of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), said after the
two-day summit in Kuwait: 'The council expressed concern regarding
announcements over plans to build more nuclear reactors on the banks of
the Gulf that threaten the environmental system and water
security.'" http://t.uani.com/1kze9f0
Sanctions
WSJ:
"Iran's oil exports are already rebounding after an interim deal
with the West but the Islamic Republic won't flood markets even if
international sanctions are lifted, the International Energy Agency said
Wednesday. The IEA, the top energy watchdog, said global oil demand will
be higher than expected next year and that could push up oil prices amid
persistent production disruptions. In its closely watched monthly oil
market report, the IEA said preliminary estimates indicate that receipts
of Iran's crude oil and condensate exports rose by 89,000 barrels a day
in November, to 850,000 barrels a day as the Chinese bought more and
shipments to Taiwan resumed. By contrast, the agency had said last month
that Iran's crude exports had reached their lowest level in 21 months in
October... Tanker data show Iran withdrew 15 million barrels out of its
bloated floating storage while its production rose by 13,000 barrels a
day to 2.71 million barrels a day in the past two months, the IEA
said." http://t.uani.com/1hMqcsj
Bloomberg:
"Iran's auto industry may offer President Hassan Rouhani the best
prospect of a rapid peace dividend from his nuclear accord with world
powers. Output at Iran Khodro Co., which makes the Runna and Dena
models, and other local carmakers slumped after sanctions made it harder
to get parts from abroad. The restrictions are set to ease under the
nuclear accord reached in Geneva last month. Companies including Renault
SA showed up at an auto industry event in Tehran as they gear up to do
business again with the Islamic Republic... Investment in the auto
industry 'yields results fast, within a few months it can contribute to
GDP growth,' said Saeed Laylaz, a former economist at the Ministry of
Industries and Mines. Removing sanctions will raise the carmakers'
potential output by 20 percent if their foreign partners return to the
country, and help them create 600,000 jobs, he said... Unemployment
ranked as the top political priority in a Zogby Research poll of Iranians
published last week, with 29 percent of respondents saying it's their
biggest concern. About a quarter of Iranians aged 15-29 are jobless,
according to official figures. Led by Iran Khodro and SAIPA, Iran's car
industry employed about 2 million people at its peak two years ago, out
of a population of 80 million." http://t.uani.com/1jNnjaa
Trend:
"Cutting ties with French giant automaker, PSA Peugeot Citroen, due
to the international sanctions has incurred at least €800 million loss to
Iran, an official close to the matter told the Fars News Agency on the
condition of anonymity. According to the source, Peugeot's total
production in 2011 amounted to 2.9 million cars, of which 21 percent was
made in Iran, so that Iran was the second largest market for Peugeot
after France. 'After 23 years of cooperation, Peugeot cut its ties with
Iran and recalled 30 of its engineers from Iran within a week. Such a
behavior was unprecedented in the world's car industry.'" http://t.uani.com/1f6Y2Ep
Domestic
Politics
Reuters:
"The commander of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard force has
criticized the government, saying it was under the influence of Western
ideas and fundamental change was needed. Major General Mohammad Jafari's
comments are some of the sharpest to be made by a senior official in
public since moderate cleric Hassan Rouhani took office as president in
August pledging to improve Iran's relations with regional countries and
the West... 'The military, systems and procedures governing the
administrative system of the country are the same as before, (but it) has
been slightly modified and unfortunately infected by Western doctrine,
and a fundamental change must occur,' Fars news agency quoted Jafari
saying on Tuesday... Jafari also chastised Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad
Zarif for a comment he was said to have made indicating Iran was
militarily weak. Zarif was quoted by local media last week as saying the
West had little fear of Iran's military defenses and could destroy them
if it wished, although Zarif has said his statement was skewed and taken
out of context. 'We consider him an experienced diplomat, but he has no
experience in the military field,' Fars news agency reported Jafari as
saying on Tuesday, without naming Zarif. Jafari was answering a question
about whether U.S. forces could destroy Iran's military capability with
just a few bombs... Jafari also appeared to dismiss recent calls for the
powerful force to stay out of politics, saying its duty was to protect
the Islamic Revolution. 'The main threat to the revolution is in the
political arena and the Guards cannot remain silent in the face of that,'
he said." http://t.uani.com/1kzfkv5
Al-Monitor:
"All 18 of the parliamentary representatives from Iran's southwest
province of Khuzestan have resigned in protest over the reduction in
their budget, while nine representatives from Lorestan province have
threatened to join them... The 18 members from Khuzestan province
protested that their budget had been decreased disproportionately and
that they were deprived of resources belonging to them. They have all
submitted a letter of resignation to the parliamentary board." http://t.uani.com/1iWtLO0
Foreign Affairs
AFP:
Iran on Tuesday dismissed an offer from Israel's president to meet his
Iranian counterpart as a propaganda ploy to ease Israeli isolation over a
nuclear accord between Tehran and world powers. 'This propaganda to help
the regime out of isolation will prove fruitless,' foreign ministry
spokeswoman Marzieh Afkham told reporters... Asked on Sunday about a possible
meeting with Iran's President Hassan Rouhani, Peres said: 'Why not? I
don't have enemies. It's not a question of personalities but of
policies.' 'The aim is to transform enemies into friends,' said the
president, whose role in Israel is symbolic and ceremonial. But the
foreign ministry spokeswoman said her country would never recognise the
Jewish state or change its stand. 'There has not been nor will there be
any change on Iran's stance and views regarding the Zionist regime' in
Israel, Afkham said. 'Iran does not recognise Israel. Our position
regarding this oppressive and occupationist regime -- which is completely
illegitimate and has been created to occupy the lands of the Palestinians
-- is clear,' she added." http://t.uani.com/1bWjtcZ
AFP:
"The six Arab monarchies of the Gulf on Wednesday hailed the 'new
orientation' of Iran's leadership and urged that 'concrete measures'
towards regional peace follow. The comments came in a statement issued at
the end of a two-day summit in Kuwait City of the Gulf Cooperation
Council, which comprises six Gulf states led by Sunni-dominated
heavyweight Saudi Arabia. The monarchies 'welcome the new orientation by
the Iranian leadership towards the Gulf Cooperation Council and hope it
will be followed by concrete measures that would positively impact
regional peace,' the statement said. They also 'welcome the interim deal
signed by the P5+1 and Iran as a first step toward an inclusive and
lasting agreement on Iran's nuclear programme that would end
international and regional concerns.' ... While welcoming the change in
stance from Iran's leaders, the GCC also betrayed a wariness towards
their commitment to the nuclear deal, urging them to implement it 'under
the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency'. In the same
vein, the GCC condemned Tehran's 'occupation' of the three islands in the
southern Gulf, Abu Musa, Lesser Tunb, and Greater Tunb." http://t.uani.com/1d7YoZJ
Opinion
& Analysis
UANI Advisory Board Member Henry Sokolski & Greg Jones
in NRO: "At the start of any effort to solve a truly tough
problem, there is a natural tendency to oversell what one has initially
accomplished, to create the momentum needed to lock down what yet must be
achieved. This certainly applies to the recent nuclear 'interim
agreement' with Iran - particularly the part that limits Tehran's
uranium-enrichment facilities, production, and stockpiles, which have
already brought Tehran within six weeks of acquiring enough highly
enriched uranium to make its first nuclear weapon. The general aim of the
negotiations is to 'push the time line' (that is, increase the time Iran
will need to make a bomb) up to six to twelve months. So far, it is
unclear if much more has been achieved beyond pushing the time line a
couple of weeks. What is particularly worrisome is how much the deal's
supporters have oversold what they have already achieved. Of course, it
remains unclear how well or poorly these negotiations will ultimately
perform in limiting Iran's nuclear-weapons-related capabilities. But
kidding oneself is a formula for mischief. In this regard, seven claims
that plan supporters are making need to be put in check.
1. The restrictions
in the interim agreement will 'cut off Iran's most likely paths to a
bomb.' This White House statement is aspirational at best; it's certainly
not correct. Although Iran will be forced to dilute its 20 percent
enriched uranium down to 'no more than 5 percent,' this requirement
merely increases from six to eight weeks the time needed for Iran to
obtain the nuclear material for a nuclear weapon. Iran will still be
perilously close to being able to acquire nuclear weapons whenever it
wishes. Far more extensive restrictions on its existing stockpiles of
enriched uranium and the number of centrifuges it can use for enrichment
would be necessary to change this...
3. Iran's stockpile
of low-enriched uranium will not have increased by the end of the
six-month period of the agreement. This statement from, again, the White
House fact sheet is incorrect. Iran will continue to produce such
material. What the fact sheet meant to say is that Iran's stockpile of
low-enriched (3.5 percent) uranium in the form of uranium hexafluoride
gas would not increase, because it is expected that any additional
uranium hexafluoride would be converted into solid ceramic uranium oxide.
But this presumes, questionably, that Iran can develop the capability to
convert the hexafluoride gas to the ceramic oxide in a timely manner (it
does not have a conversion plant operating yet). It also presumes that
the conversion process is irreversible, which brings us to the next
point.
4. Converting Iran's
3.5 percent enriched uranium to uranium oxide will 'neutralize' this
material - i.e., render it so it cannot be converted back into uranium
hexafluoride gas, which could be fed into Iran's centrifuges to make
bomb-grade uranium. In the past, to fuel its research reactor in Tehran,
Iran has converted 20 percent enriched uranium hexafluoride into oxide
and converting this 20 percent oxide back into hexafluoride would indeed
pose some difficulties owing to the risk that a potentially lethal
nuclear chain reaction would occur. As a result, 20 percent enriched
uranium oxide is considered by many to be fairly safe, though hardly
neutralized. However, with 3.5 percent enriched uranium, it is much less
likely that a nuclear chain reaction would occur in the reconversion
process, and it should be fairly simple for Iran to use its existing
facilities to convert the 3.5 percent enriched uranium oxide back to hexafluoride.
The mistaken belief that converting enriched uranium into an oxide will
permanently neutralize it, regardless of the uranium's level of
enrichment, suggests that, despite the highly technical nature of the
centrifuge-enrichment process, U.S. negotiators failed to heed or avail
themselves of the vast technical expertise that can be found in U.S.
national laboratories...
7. However much the
interim agreement or the follow-on comprehensive solution might allow
Iran to enrich uranium, the concession would apply only to Iran. As
already noted, at the end of the follow-on comprehensive solution, Iran
'will be treated in the same manner as that of any non-nuclear weapon
party to the NPT.' One could easily turn this statement around, however,
to read that any non-nuclear weapon party to the NPT 'will be treated in
the same manner' as is Iran. This should not be seen as a major stretch.
After all, Iran has violated its IAEA safeguards by conducting
clandestine centrifuge enrichment and defied multiple U.N. Security
Council resolutions demanding that it halt all centrifuge enrichment, and
is allowed to have centrifuge enrichment, so on what basis can any
country that has abided by its IAEA safeguard obligations be denied
centrifuge enrichment? Already South Korea, alarmed by North Korea's
recent nuclear-weapon tests, has been pressuring the U.S. to allow it
access to the plutonium in the spent fuel of South Korea's nuclear-power
reactors, and to be allowed to enrich its own uranium as well. Similarly,
Saudi Arabia, dismayed by the failure to prevent Iran's progress toward
nuclear weapons, has expressed interest in building a large nuclear-power
program, despite its vast reserves of oil and natural gas. No doubt Saudi
Arabia would also want a centrifuge-enrichment program, to give it ready
access to nuclear material for nuclear weapons." http://t.uani.com/19BS0aB
David
Cohen in WSJ: "The intense pressure of
international sanctions, led by the United States, brought the Iranian
government to the negotiating table in Geneva, where, on Nov. 24, the six
major powers and Iran agreed to a Joint Plan of Action on Iran's nuclear
program. As the principal U.S. official charged with crafting and
enforcing our sanctions program, I am confident that the sanctions pressure
on Iran will continue to mount. Iran will be even deeper in the hole six
months from now, when the deal expires, than it is today. Here's why. To
begin with, the relief package in this interim deal is economically
insignificant to Iran. The lion's share of the relief comes from granting
Iran access, in installments, to $4.2 billion of its own revenues
currently trapped outside Iran. In addition, U.S. sanctions on Iran's
petrochemical exports and its auto industry will be temporarily
suspended. We estimate that this additional trade could generate about
$1.5 billion in revenue over the next six months-but only if Iran is able
to find customers to buy its cars and petrochemical products. This will
be difficult: There are long-standing problems with Iran's auto sector,
and petrochemical importers prefer long-term contracts, which aren't
possible given the six-month duration of the deal. The Joint Plan also
suspends sanctions on Iran's ability to buy and sell gold. But because
remaining prohibitions preclude Iran from using either its foreign
reserves or its own currency to buy gold, this provision is of limited
value. Any gold Iran purchases would be offset by the hard currency it
would spend to buy it... If the Iranians comply with their obligations
under the Joint Plan, over the next six months they will stand to receive
$6 billion to $7 billion in relief, mostly by gaining access to their own
money. Not $1 comes from U.S. taxpayers. Viewed in light of Iran's
struggling economy, this sum is inconsequential. Iran is in a deep
recession-its economy contracted last year by more than 5%, and it is on
pace to contract again this year. Its annual inflation rate now stands at
about 40%. Iran's currency, the rial, has lost around 60% of its value
against the dollar since 2011. The total relief is a small fraction of
the roughly $80 billion Iran has lost since early 2012 because of U.S.
and European Union oil sanctions, and of the nearly $100 billion in
Iran's foreign-exchange holdings that are mostly restricted or inaccessible
due to U.S. financial and banking sanctions. Iran's economy will also
continue to suffer because the core architecture of U.S.
sanctions-especially our potent oil, financial and banking
sanctions-remains firmly in place... As President Obama said when he
announced the Joint Plan, we are fully committed to vigorous enforcement
of these sanctions. We know that sanctions do not implement themselves.
To disrupt and disable those facilitating Iran's nuclear and missile
programs, we will identify front companies, evaders and malefactors and
sanction them. Along with our partners across the U.S. government, my
team at Treasury has done so more than 600 times in the last several
years. This will continue unabated. To maintain pressure on Iran's
economy, we will continue to present foreign banks with a stark choice:
They can either do business with designated Iranian banks and businesses,
or they can do business with the U.S.-not both. To keep Iran's oil
revenues depressed, we will ensure that Iran will not be able to export
one additional barrel beyond the current low levels. And to hold back
latent interest in trade with Iran, we will communicate a blunt message
to every foreign official, businessperson and banker who thinks now might
be a good time to test the waters: We are watching, and we are poised to
act against anyone, anywhere, who violates our sanctions. Sanctions gave
Iran a powerful incentive to accept this first-step deal, and they will
be key to negotiating the comprehensive resolution that ensures Iran
cannot obtain a nuclear weapon. Now is no time to let up-and we
won't." http://t.uani.com/1f6ZlTH
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment