|
|
|
Join UANI
Top Stories
NYT:
"Secretary of State John Kerry warned Iran on Sunday that hard
choices were still needed to seal a landmark nuclear accord, and that the
United States was prepared to walk away if a sound agreement could not be
reached. 'We are not yet where we need to be on several of the most
difficult issues,' Mr. Kerry said in a statement in front of the Palais
Coburg, the Vienna hotel where the talks are being held. 'This
negotiation could go either way.' Mr. Kerry's remarks came two days
before a target date for wrapping up the agreement and as foreign
ministers from the other world powers involved in the talks are heading
here for what is intended to be the homestretch in the long-running
negotiations. Mr. Kerry said it was still possible to reach an agreement
by Tuesday, which would enable the Obama administration to submit the
deal to Congress this week for a 30-day review period... Mr. Kerry
appeared to be cautioning the Iranians against last-minute brinkmanship.
'We want a good agreement, only a good agreement, and we're not going to
shave anywhere at the margins in order just to get an agreement,' Mr.
Kerry said. 'There are plenty of people in the nonproliferation
community, nuclear experts, who will look at this,' he added, 'and none
of us are going to be content to do something that can't pass scrutiny.'
... On Saturday, another high-ranking Iranian negotiator, Abbas Araghchi,
said on Iranian state television that the prospective accord could be
endorsed by the United Nations Security Council as early as this week.
Mr. Araghchi said that the agreement would total about 80 pages, and that
it would not take effect until Iran's Parliament and the United States
Congress approved it, but that it would uphold the principle of speedy
sanctions relief." http://t.uani.com/1NLx06N
NYT:
"The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said on Saturday
that, with Iranian cooperation, his agency could complete an assessment
on Iran's suspected past nuclear work by December, potentially removing a
major obstacle to a nuclear agreement. With his statement, Yukiya Amano,
the director general of the agency, appeared to be signaling that a
preliminary investigation into the 'possible military dimensions' of
Iran's past nuclear work could happen on an expedited basis, a schedule that
could facilitate the lifting of economic sanctions on Iran. He made the
statement a day after returning here from Tehran, where he met with
President Hassan Rouhani and other senior Iranian officials. 'With the
cooperation from Iran I think we can issue a report by the end of the
year on the assessment of the clarification of the issues related to
possible military dimensions,' said Mr. Amano, a cautious diplomat who
weighs his words carefully. 'We have made progress on the way forward.'
... It is doubtful that the agency can fully resolve those issues by the
end of the year. But American officials have been suggesting that if
agency inspectors can get access to Iranian scientists, documents and
some sites to resolve suspicions, the sanctions could begin to lift even
before the agency reaches final conclusions. 'We have to see that they
are getting the access they need,' one senior administration official
said in May. 'We don't have to wait for the I.A.E.A. to issue its
reports.'" http://t.uani.com/1NLwipX
Reuters:
"A dispute over U.N. sanctions on Iran's ballistic missile program
and a broader arms embargo were among issues holding up a nuclear deal
between Tehran and six world powers on Monday, the day before their
latest self-imposed deadline. 'The Iranians want the ballistic missile
sanctions lifted. They say there is no reason to connect it with the
nuclear issue, a view that is difficult to accept,' one Western official
told Reuters. 'There's no appetite for that on our part.' ... 'The
Western side insists that not only should it (ballistic missiles) remain
under sanctions, but that Iran should suspend its program as well,' an
Iranian official said. 'But Iran is insisting on its rights and says all
the sanctions, including on the ballistic missiles, should be lifted when
the U.N. sanctions are lifted.' Separately, a senior Iranian official
told reporters in Vienna on condition of anonymity that Tehran wanted a
United Nations arms embargo terminated as well. The West wants to keep
the arms embargo in place and a senior Western diplomat said a removal
was 'out of the question.'" http://t.uani.com/1gjsjpG
Nuclear Program & Negotiations
AP:
"World powers and Iran have drawn up a draft document on the pace
and timing of sanctions relief for the Islamic republic in exchange for
curbs on Iran's nuclear program, advancing on one of the most contentious
issues at their negotiations, diplomats told The Associated Press on
Saturday. Written by technical experts, the document still must be
approved by senior officials of the seven nations at the table... The
diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't
authorized to speak publicly on this past week's confidential
negotiations, said the sanctions annex was completed this week by experts
from Iran and the six world powers in the negotiations: the United
States, Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia. They did not provide
details of the agreement. A senior U.S. official did not dispute the
diplomats' account but said work remained to be done on 'Annex II' before
the issue could be described as finalized. And beyond a political
agreement that was still in the draft stage, details also needed to be
finalized on tough issues contained in four other appendices." http://t.uani.com/1CW1a0L
WashPost:
"Shortly after Amano's comments, a senior Iranian official in Tehran
repeated that military visits and scientist interviews would not be permitted.
'Our red lines include permission for visiting the military centers and
interview[s] with nuclear scientists as well as the points explicitly
stated by Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution,' Ayatollah Seyed Ali
Khameinei, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, chairman of the parliamentary national
security commission, told Iran's Fars News agency Saturday." http://t.uani.com/1S2JJT3
AP:
"Iran took a hard line Thursday on two of the biggest demands of
world powers in a final nuclear accord, rejecting any extraordinary
inspection rules and threatening to ramp up enrichment of bomb-making
material if the United States and other countries re-impose sanctions
after the deal is in place. Speaking to reporters in Vienna, where
diplomats are trying to clinch a comprehensive nuclear pact, a senior
Iranian negotiator said the U.N. nuclear agency's standard rules
governing access to government information, sites of interest and
scientists should be sufficient to ensure that Iran's program is solely
for peaceful purposes. Anything beyond that, he said, would be unfair.
The U.S. and some other negotiating countries want Iran to go further...
RIA-Novosti reported that Russia also backed Iran's position that
additional inspection guidelines for Iran weren't necessary." http://t.uani.com/1M7pnXe
Fars (Iran):
"Iranian Ground Force Commander Brigadier General Ahmad Reza
Pourdastan underlined that any possible nuclear deal between Tehran and
the world powers would never mean friendship between Iran and the US.
'The US might arrive at some agreements with us within the framework of
the Group 5+1 (the US, Russia, China, Britain and France plus Germany),
but we should never hold a positive view over the enemy,' Pourdastan said
in Tehran on Sunday. He elaborated on the cause of his pessimism about
the US, and said, 'Our enmity with them is over the principles and is
rooted because we are after the truth and nations' freedom, but they seek
exploiting nations and putting them in chains.'" http://t.uani.com/1KGJLBc
Reuters:
"It's always awkward to defend your enemies. But that's the position
U.S. President Barack Obama's administration has found itself in with
Iran as it pushes for an historic accord that would end a 12-year nuclear
standoff... Yet for a month now the U.S. State Department has been
defending Iran from suggestions that it was on the verge of violating a
requirement to reduce its low-enriched uranium stockpile under a 2013
interim nuclear with major powers... Washington has also deflected
criticism of continued Iranian violations of U.N. sanctions and reports
of attempts to illicitly procure nuclear technology usable in activities
the West wants it to suspend... One senior U.S. official, who spoke to
Reuters on condition of anonymity, acknowledged that the U.S. defense of
Iranian compliance was 'weird' and did not come naturally. 'Iran has done
a lot of bad things in Syria and across the Middle East, and still does.
It's holding Americans hostages. But the fact is, it's complying with the
JPOA.' ... Albright said the case showed Washington was 'prepared to
legally reinterpret the deal' to explain away poor performance by Iran.
Olli Heinonen of Harvard University, former deputy head of the IAEA,
echoed Albright's caution. 'Any concessions in the implementation of
agreed parameters will further reduce the breakout time and erode the
credibility of the agreement,' he said." http://t.uani.com/1TgrBYh
WashPost:
"Iran's foreign minister released a video message Friday as nuclear
talks were nearing an end, saying an agreement is at hand and can be
reached if the United States and its partners choose cooperation over
coercion. 'At this eleventh hour, despite some differences that remain,
we have never been closer to a lasting outcome,' said Mohammad Javad
Zarif, Iran's top diplomat and lead negotiator. 'But there is no
guarantee. Getting to yes requires the courage to compromise, the
self-confidence to be flexible.' Zarif, standing on the balcony of
Vienna's Coburg Palace, where the talks are underway, spoke in English as
music played softly in the background. Delivered on YouTube, his words
were apparently an appeal to public and political opinion in the United
States, and in the five countries that are its negotiating partners.
'Some stubbornly believe that military and economic coercion can ensure
submission,' he said. 'I see hope, because I see the emergence of reason
over illusion.'" http://t.uani.com/1HaAnSf
FP:
"It might be too much to say that President Barack Obama's
administration went nuclear last month on a New York Times story
suggesting that Iran was reneging on a tentative deal to freeze its
uranium enrichment program. But the June 3 report was, at the least,
roundly blasted by the State Department's top spokeswoman on the Iran
negotiations, Marie Harf. 'I will say our team read that story this
morning and was, quite frankly, perplexed, because the main contentions
of it are just totally inaccurate,' Harf said in a televised press
briefing later that day from the State Department. She further piled on
against the story in a series of scathing tweets and, even now, is
unapologetic about her combative tone. The rapid-fire attacks convey the
high stakes riding on the nuclear talks and the White House's
hair-trigger sensitivity over any suggestion that it is caving into
Iranian negotiators... James Jeffrey, a career diplomat and former
ambassador during the Obama administration, said he has been put off by
what he considers the highhanded tone and contradictory explanations from
the White House. 'It's this arrogant, you-just-don't-know attitude that
is taken by the administration,' Jeffrey told Foreign Policy. In their
zeal to defend what has already been agreed under an April framework
accord, U.S. officials have sometimes gone out of their way to defend
Iran, insisting Tehran is abiding by its promises, Jeffrey said." http://t.uani.com/1CW0OY2
NYT:
"On the outskirts of this graceful city, the Iran Task Force of the
International Atomic Energy Agency is preparing to move quickly if
American and Iranian negotiators here manage to cut a deal on Iran's
nuclear program in the coming days. The 50 or so members of the agency's
most elite inspection unit are readying an array of new surveillance gear
that is far more sophisticated than anything used before in Iran. It
includes laser sensors, smart cameras and encrypted networks that would
let the inspectors closely monitor Iran's nuclear infrastructure, in real
time, from their command post overlooking the Danube... Though it is
rarely discussed in public - in large part for fear of spooking Iranian
military and religious figures who view the international inspectors as
thinly disguised cutouts for Western intelligence agencies - beaming
real-time inspection data from Iran's nuclear plants is central to
enforcing an accord... In interviews, federal officials described the
wave of new surveillance gear as critical to assuring the world that
Tehran is not cheating on complicated terms that call for heightened
surveillance for up to 25 years... Mr. Heinonen, the onetime inspection
chief, sounded a note of caution, saying it would be naïve to expect that
the wave of technology could ensure Iran's compliance with the nuclear
deal. In the past, he said, Tehran has often promised much but delivered
little. 'Iran is not going to accept it easily,' he said, referring to
the advanced surveillance. 'We tried it for 10 years.' Even if Tehran
agrees to high-tech sleuthing, Mr. Heinonen added, that step will be
'important but minor' compared with the intense monitoring that Western
intelligence agencies must mount to see if Iran is racing ahead in covert
facilities to build an atomic bomb." http://t.uani.com/1NLovIO
LAT:
"As diplomats rush to reach an agreement to curb Iran's nuclear
program, the U.S. military is stockpiling conventional bombs so powerful
that strategists say they could cripple Tehran's most heavily fortified
nuclear complexes, including one deep underground. The bunker-busting
bombs are America's most destructive munitions short of atomic weapons.
At 15 tons, each is 5 tons heavier than any other bomb in the U.S.
arsenal. In development for more than a decade, the latest iteration of
the MOP - massive ordnance penetrator - was successfully tested on a
deeply buried target this year at the White Sands Missile Range in New
Mexico. The test followed upgrades to the bomb's guidance system and
electronics to stop jammers from sending it off course. U.S. officials
say the huge bombs, which have never been used in combat, are a crucial
element in the White House deterrent strategy and contingency planning
should diplomacy go awry and Iran seek to develop a nuclear bomb." http://t.uani.com/1Tgy6KF
Congressional
Action
Politico:
"Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker said on
Sunday he has urged Secretary of State John Kerry to take his time and
not rush to a bad deal in the nuclear talks with Iran. Appearing on CBS'
'Face the Nation,' the Tennessee Republican said he wants Kerry to 'try
to make sure that these last remaining red lines that haven't been
crossed - they've crossed so many - do not get crossed and,
qualitatively, they don't make it worse than where it already is.' ...
The senator said he believes negotiations have gone poorly and the U.S.
has conceded too much. A main concern, he said, is what would happen at
the end of a 10-year pause in uranium enrichment. And he suggested
relaxing the sanctions against Iran would help its economy grow rapidly,
generating much more money to foster further terrorism. 'After 10 years,
in essence, Iran is off and running again,' Corker said." http://t.uani.com/1fgU5D0
The Hill:
"If President Obama can secure a final nuclear deal with Iran next
week, attention will immediately turn to Congress - which can vote to
disapprove of the agreement. The White House conceded to legislation
earlier this year that gives Congress the power to review any deal with
Iran. Lawmakers will have 30 days to carry it out if an agreement is sent
to Capitol Hill by July 9. If it's later, the review timeframe will
double... A measure disapproving the deal could torpedo the pact, but
would have to overcome a certain veto from the White House. That's
unlikely - particularly in the House, where Republicans are likely to
have a harder time winning the two-thirds majority needed to override
Obama. In the Senate, the vote could be close. And Democratic opposition
to the deal would be politically troublesome for the White House. Here
are the 14 Democrats to watch." http://t.uani.com/1NIDSBa
Free Beacon:
"A prominent progressive organization linked to the White House and
claiming to work for dozens of like-minded groups is threatening to
attack any congressional Democrat who objects to a final nuclear deal
with Iran, even before the terms of any such agreement have been
finalized, according to an email obtained by the Free Beacon. CREDO
Action, the political arm of CREDO Mobile, declared this week in an
secret email to journalists that it will punish congressional Democrats
who fail to line up behind any deal sealed between the West and Iran.
'Democrats in Congress are the only remaining obstacle to finalizing
today's historic deal,' Zack Malitz, campaign manager for CREDO, said in
a statement emailed to reporters on July 2, along with a note that
details of the email were not to be published until a deal was actually
announced. 'Every Democrat should go on the record right now in support
of the deal, and pledge to defend it from attacks in Congress.'
'Republicans will try to sabotage the deal and take us to war, but they
can't do it without Democratic votes,' Matlz wrote. 'Progressives will
hold accountable those Democrats who vote to help Republicans sabotage
the deal and start a war.'" http://t.uani.com/1gjsHo5
Sanctions
Relief
WSJ:
"Iran wants to double its crude exports soon after sanctions are
lifted and is pushing other members of the Organization of the Petroleum
Exporting Countries to renew the cartel's quota system, a top Iranian
official said. Both developments could set up a clash with Saudi Arabia,
which is scrambling to raise its own export numbers and has opposed the
return of production limits on individual OPEC members. Iran's efforts
underscore how the country's full return to the export market would upend
the status quo among leading producers if Tehran clinches a deal with six
world powers that would lift sanctions in exchange for curbs on its
nuclear activities... Should sanctions be lifted, Iran's deputy oil
minister for planning and supervision, Mansour Moazami, said in an
interview that his country's oil exports would reach 2.3 million barrels,
compared with around 1.2 million barrels a day today." http://t.uani.com/1J0seOB
Terrorism
YnetNews:
"The Jordanian newspaper Al Rai reported Monday morning that
Jordanian security forces had foiled a terror plot by a member of an
Iranian-backed group. According to the report, the suspect belongs to the
Iranian Bayt al-Maqdis group - which is unrelated to the identically
named Egyptian group that has recently changed its moniker and sworn
allegiance to Islamic State. The suspect reportedly holds Iraqi and
Norwegian citizenship, was arrested in northern Jordan, and found to be
in possession of large amounts of explosives... The Jordanian source told
the newspaper that a major terror operation had been averted. 'This is
the most serious case in a decade in terms of the quantity of explosives
discovered and their quality,' said the source." http://t.uani.com/1dHvgye
Military
Matters
Reuters:
"Iran says it has deployed a new domestically built long-range radar
system, signaling a strengthening of its air defenses as it holds what
may be the final days of talks on a nuclear deal with world powers.
Brigadier General Farzad Esmaili, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary
Guards Corps' (IRGC) air defense force, unveiled the Ghadir phased-array
radar in Ahwaz city in southwestern Khuzestan province near the Iraq
border, state television said late on Saturday. Iran says the Ghadir unit
is designed and manufactured entirely inside the country and can detect a
plane at 600 km (373 miles) and a ballistic missile at 1,100 km." http://t.uani.com/1HHUIQq
Opinion &
Analysis
Charles
Krauthammer in WashPost: "The devil is not in the
details. It's in the entire conception of the Iran deal, animated by
President Obama's fantastical belief that he, uniquely, could achieve
detente with a fanatical Islamist regime whose foundational purpose is to
cleanse the Middle East of the poisonous corruption of American power and
influence. In pursuit of his desire to make the Islamic Republic into an
accepted, normalized 'successful regional power,' Obama decided to take
over the nuclear negotiations. At the time, Tehran was reeling - the rial
plunging, inflation skyrocketing, the economy contracting - under a
regime of international sanctions painstakingly constructed over a
decade. Then, instead of welcoming Congress' attempt to tighten sanctions
to increase the pressure on the mullahs, Obama began the negotiations by
loosening sanctions, injecting billions into the Iranian economy (which
began growing again in 2014) and conceding in advance an Iranian right to
enrich uranium. It's been downhill ever since. Desperate for a legacy
deal, Obama has played the supplicant, abandoning every red line his
administration had declared essential to any acceptable deal... Taken
together, the catalog of capitulations is breathtaking: spot inspections,
disclosure of previous nuclear activity, gradual sanctions relief,
retention of nonnuclear sanctions. What's left? A surrender document of
the kind offered by defeated nations suing for peace. Consider: The
strongest military and economic power on earth, backed by the five other
major powers, armed with what had been a crushing sanctions regime, is
about to sign the worst international agreement in U.S. diplomatic
history. How did it come to this? With every concession, Obama and Kerry
made clear they were desperate for a deal. And they will get it. Obama
will get his 'legacy.' Kerry will get his Nobel. And Iran will get the
bomb." http://t.uani.com/1Chimmf
Ray Takeyh in WSJ:
"The specter haunting negotiations between Iran and the U.S. is
neither congressional hawks nor alarmed Israelis. It is Lyndon Johnson.
Although the Johnson administration is better known for the Vietnam War
and the Great Society, it was also the architect of contemporary U.S.
non-proliferation policy. And that sensible policy stands to be
eviscerated by a deal over Iran's nuclear program. In October 1964, China
detonated an atomic bomb, sending shock waves throughout the U.S.
government. Suddenly it was not just selective Western nations that
possessed the bomb but a revolutionary Asian power. Fears of nuclear
know-how proliferating from East Asia to Latin America gripped U.S.
policymakers. Under the direction of Roswell Gilpatric, former deputy
secretary of defense, U.S. policy toward the bomb was evaluated and
assessed. A report by the Gilpatric committee established parameters of
U.S. policy toward proliferation that would guide successive
administrations for the next five decades. In the wake of the committee's
recommendations-accepted after spirited debate-the U.S. took a firm line
on access to sensitive nuclear technologies by both adversaries and
allies. It sought to prevent all countries from enriching uranium or
reprocessing plutonium. Under the new strictures should, say, West
Germany, Taiwan, or South Korea be tempted to pursue the technological
precursors to the bomb, they would be risking their security ties to the
United States. In short, it was in the 1960s that the United States
became a proliferation hawk. In 1968 President Johnson signed the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that was to regulate civilian nuclear
programs. Peaceful nuclear energy has industrial uses, but the U.S.
government position held that there was no need for states to enrich
uranium to benefit from atomic power. It was U.S. policy that becoming a
signatory of the NPT meant that a nation could use nuclear energy but not
necessarily develop certain technologies that could easily be converted
for military purposes... U.S. actions on non-proliferation strained
relations with many allies, including the enterprising shah of Iran. It
is a talking point of the Islamic Republic today that Washington looked
the other way and even assisted the shah as he sought to develop a
nuclear weapon capability. This claim has been accepted as a truism by
many U.S. policymakers and analysts. But the historical record belies
such assertions. The Ford and Carter administrations opposed the shah's
quest for completion of the fuel cycle and refused to give him access to
sensitive nuclear technologies. Washington insisted that the shah, then
head of a regime considered a reliable U.S. ally, forgo the capacity to
either enrich uranium or reprocess plutonium. Any impending nuclear
agreement with Iran would indeed be a landmark accord-for it would upend
50 years of U.S. policy. To be sure, there were failures along the way as
India, Pakistan, and North Korea defied the U.S. and built their own
bombs. But Washington did not facilitate their programs and, in each
instance, tried to derail their efforts. Today, by contrast, the U.S.
appears poised to concede to an adversarial regime not only an enrichment
capacity but also one that is likely to be industrialized after the
expiration of a sunset clause. This would have been like Washington
aiding the Soviets in constructing the bomb in the 1940s or helping China
in the 1960s. There is no dispute between the Obama White House and its
critics that Iran is a revolutionary regime seeking to expand its
influence in the Middle East. Tehran's destabilizing regional activities
come at the detriment of the United States and its allies. The baffling
part of all this is that Washington is seeking to conclude an agreement
that envisions this radical regime gaining access to a sophisticated
nuclear infrastructure that will not permanently be limited to peaceful
exploitation of atomic power." http://t.uani.com/1HHlZV4
Lee Smith in The
Weekly Standard: "Ever since I arrived for the P5+1
and Iran nuclear talks earlier in the week, colleagues warned that
Iranian intelligence officers were watching everyone and recording
everything. 'They're shameless,' one pro-democracy advocate in town for
the talks told me. 'They come right up to you, stick a camera in your
face and ask where you're from. Last time I was here, I told a journalist
to watch out and sure enough his picture was up on the Fars site within
two hours.' And it's not just the American and other Western journalists
they're watching. In fact, the people they're watching most closely are
other Iranians, including the families of Iranian-Americans held hostage
by the clerical regime like Amir Hekmati, whose sister and brother-in-law
I met in the Marriott lobby, adjacent to where the P5+1 talks are being
held. Iranian dissidents and Iranian journalists based outside Iran are
other popular targets. One European-based reporter who asked not to be
named was convinced he was under constant surveillance and was indeed
being watched as we spoke in the hotel. It seems that the main point the
Iranian intelligence services want to drive home is not just that they
want you to know they're watching. They want you to think they're always
watching. It's curious that the White House has not said anything about
the brazenly open activities of Iranian intelligence. After all, in
March, the Obama administration accused Israel of spying on the American
side involved in the nuclear negotiations. Israel denied targeting its
superpower patron but was not shy to admit that it certainly does conduct
surveillance of the Iranian side. And the latter are spying on
everyone-even if the White House won't say anything about it. Nor are
Western journalists, even if they are among the key targets for MOIS and
IRGC operations. 'The Iranians are clearly at home because they turned
Vienna into a police state,' said someone familiar with Iranian security
tactics. 'They track and document the movements and interactions of
journalists, analysts and politicians alike. Iranian reporters and
delegates will certainly be held to account for any interactions with Westerners,
whether they are journalists, analysts, U.S. government officials or
strippers at Vienna's ubiquitous nightclubs.' 'Vienna,' said one Iranian
dissident I met at the Marriott, 'is the center of Iranian intelligence
operations in Europe.' ... Vienna 2015 is a world capital, and home to
international organizations, like OPEC and the IAEA. The irony is that
this is partly how the Iranians manage to get so many spies in to Vienna.
According to the Iranian dissident, a Vienna resident for over a decade,
the Iranians fill their delegations to those organizations and others
with intelligence officers. The Austrians don't make a very big deal
about it because, for among other reasons, they want to do business with
the Islamic Republic-indeed, the Austrians are so eager to see Iran open
again that Austrian industries have occasionally skirted sanctions...
Iranian diplomats, like foreign minister Javad Zarif, have impressed
their American counterparts and the Western press corps with their
manners and sophistication. The reality is that their diplomatic efforts
wouldn't be half as meaningful if it weren't for the Iranian intelligence
officers swarming in the Marriott lobby and elsewhere like cockroaches.
They're here to remind Western officials, even the Austrian government,
how Iran enforces agreements-not through international organizations like
the IAEA. No, that's simply a cover for Iranian spies. The way Tehran
does it is through threats-backed by force of arms. Guns and bombs-yes,
even in European cities." http://t.uani.com/1JJlyKo
|
|
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