Walking off from the US Iran nuclear deal


Photo Source: Express.co.uk

By Naveed Qazi | Editor, Globe Up Front

One of the most significant foreign policy changes lately, led by The White House, has been to withdraw the US Iran nuclear deal. 

Trump believes that the deal is ‘defective’ and calls for ‘greater sanctions’.

Americans think that the Iranians have not complied with its clauses, by buying more ballistic missile material and violating the ‘limits on advanced centrifuges’ and ‘heavy water production’.

In the meetings, Iranians had promised not to pursue uranium enrichment. But even Obama conceded in an interview that the deal would allow Iran to pursue enrichment.

But if one looks the other way round, Americans, too, have not obliged to their commitments. Ironically, they never released their sanctions on Iranian banks as per this landmark deal, even if it allowed them to sell oil worldwide.

It seems that the deal struck by Obama and Rouhani had been symbolic, but half-baked.

The main intention of Obama, it seems, had been to make Iran, a political ally, so that they could pursue like-minded policies in the Middle East region. But Obama’s intentions turned out way too ambitious.

Quite lately, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did a presentation, where he accused the Iranian state of a go-ahead for their nuclear program. But United Nations inspectors assured Iranian compliance with the deal.

Other countries such as Germany, who are signatories to the deal, along with France, Russia and China think that the world peace is losing in this tussle.

The Canadian Press, too, have included remarks of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, where he has stood firmly with the 2015 deal.

Politically, the hardliners in Iran will benefit from this move. Iranian President Rouhani had called the US Government to rethink this imposing decision, by negotiating with the other signatories in this deal, that had been called as Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

Currently, Trump’s newest political move is already hurting their credibility. The current stance will also allow countries such as Saudi Arabia and Israel to freely pursue their foreign policies in the region that would be more aggressive this time around.

No doubt, there were many people in Iran itself, who didn’t want the nuclear deal to happen in the first place. It reflected the animosity they have with the western leaders. But even if the deal had been drafted, it was the Americans under Trump administration who tried to break it first. It reflects their sense of betrayal and political paranoia.

Americans think that Iranians, under their ‘theocratic delusions’ want to change the balance of power. For this likely stance, the Trump administration is calling for ‘maximum sanctions’, which includes penalising American multinationals that do business with Iran, regardless of their location. The US government could fine them billions of dollars.

John Bolton, who has been newly appointed as the National Security Advisor, wants a regime change in Tehran. But the question here arises – at what cost?

Rouhani has been seen as a moderate in Iran, in comparison to his political rivals, who enjoy greater support from the Revolutionary Guards and the Guardian Council.

Under the new foreign policy commitments, Trump plans to devise a strategy that will curb the operations of Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in the region.

US Treasury Department has accused several Iranian companies, typically construction and engineering firms, including one Chinese company, in aiding funds for terrorism and building weapons of mass destruction.

But in all this, a glaring fact has emerged: the Trump Organisation has not severed ties with Iranian company that had been their client.

Azarpassillo, an Iranian company engaging in roadworks construction, led by Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps officers, has been accused of money laundering by one of its partners based in Azerbaijan, and at the same time, it had ties with Trump Organisation, in the past. Alan Garten has acknowledged this fact in Trump Organisation’s counsel.

But several leading Republicans have refused to comment on this conspiracy. Perhaps, the new stance taken by the American government on the nuclear deal is their rancour against Iran for their alliance with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, the Syrian dictator, Bashar al Assad and troubling American ships in the Persian Gulf.

If we look at the financial profile of Trump Organisation, it was nearly bankrupted in the 2009 crises. The business practices were often charged with economic crimes.

When the construction giant, confirmed its relationship with Azerbaijan’s tourism minister Ziya Mammadov, by signing a contract with his son to build a grand hotel and a tower, at this time, the American firm didn’t bother to verify the background of Azarpassilo, a firm that had relations with the Mammadov family.

All this reflected the will of the American construction giant for gaining lucrative interests. In the global economy, Trump Organisation, time and again, has allowed using their corporate name, for a large fee.

According to New Yorker Staff Writer, Adam Davidson: “they could likely have learned a great deal about how Iranian businesses closely linked to the Guard operate. They chose not to.”





Comments

  1. As described by Obama,Trump’s JCPOA withdrawal is actually a serious mistake, because JCPOA involves more nations like France, Germany, United Kingdom, The European union, China, and Russia, so has it not effected these countries as well?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, but Americans, like to keep their hard-nosed diplomacy thrusted upon others, most of the times.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Advice from the Editor: Please refrain from slander, defamation or any kind of libel in the comments section.

Popular Posts