A current sticking point of the Iran deal (also, how the Deal and the Ukraine War intersect)
We still don’t know for certain what’s going on with the Biden administration’s Iran Deal negotiations. One thing we do know, however, is that we heard recently that the deal was a day or two from completion, and that was more than a couple of days ago. Yet there’s still no final deal.
Another thing we know is that Obama’s Iran Deal had bipartisan opposition, and yet it was implemented, whereas so far the Biden era deal seems to have even more opposition. And yet it also appears to still be going forward.
We also know that Trump undid the Obama deal, something he was able to accomplish because it only had the force of an agreement between the Obama administration and Iran’s leaders rather than having been supported by Congress. So it would make sense that Iran’s leaders, remembering that experience, might be wary of the latest deal which could be subject to a similar fate if the GOP takes control next.
That’s the peril of an agreement that goes against the wishes of most of the American public. You also might call the problem Trump’s Revenge.
Here’s a report on what Iran is reportedly asking of the US in order to fix the problem. It’s quite something:
…Iranian officials from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on down are demanding “inherent guarantees” from the United States to ensure the latest version of the Iran deal doesn’t go the way of Obama’s version, which was junked by Donald Trump in 2018.
While U.S. government officials I have spoken to provided differing details of the “inherent guarantees” Iran is seeking, it appears they would be triggered if the United States reimposes sanctions. On the nuclear side, a semi-official Iranian government site reported that one such guarantee would allow Iran to rapidly reconstitute its ability to enrich nuclear material to the 60% purity level by keeping its advanced nuclear centrifuges inside the country. According to the same report, the highly enriched nuclear material Iran has generated in excess of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)’s limits could also be kept inside the country instead of being shipped overseas. An alternate version of this guarantee would allow excess material to be held by Russia, which would return it to Iran in the event of certain American sanctions.
According to remarks made last month by Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, the issue of guarantees on the economic side was one of two remaining issues in negotiations, alongside the Iranian demand for the removal of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from the U.S. list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Both Iran and Russia wanted guarantees from the United States that any economic contracts exempted from sanctions under the deal would remain immune under a subsequent administration.
It’s certainly possible that the Biden administration would love to oblige Iran in order to get their fabulous wonderful all-important Iran Deal accomplished. But I’m not aware of any mechanism by which they could tie the hands of a future GOP president on the matter, much as they might like to do so.
And then there’s Congress:
Because the U.S. negotiators are unable to provide such a guarantee, the Iranians are said to be seeking some form of economic compensation to be held in trust by a third party that would be paid to Iran in the event that U.S. sanctions are reimposed. In other words, the United States would pay into a giant trust fund to protect the regime from future sanctions presumably triggered by Iran’s own malignant behavior. One U.S. government official close to the negotiations told me they doubted the demand would ever be accepted or could even be fashioned in the first place in any way that wouldn’t cause even more Democrats to jump ship and oppose the deal…
In recent conversations with a number of Senate and House offices, it became clear that Republicans in the legislative branch are ready to flex their institutional muscles to shatter any deal that is reached, and will work to bring the Iranian regime’s economy back under sanctions should Biden lift them. Much has been written about Congress’ potential use of the 2015 Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA) to prevent any deal from lifting sanctions in the first place. Forcing a vote on the deal would show the Iranians just how deep congressional opposition goes, but the measure would be hard-pressed to overcome Biden’s veto.
While it would take a Republican in the White House again to officially cease participation in the new deal and fully return to a campaign of maximum economic and diplomatic pressure, it would only take Republican control of one chamber of Congress to dismantle a fledgling deal next year—which is precisely what top Republicans are planning to do. What follows is a look at the weak points in the new Iran deal’s construction, and how its opponents in Congress are planning to exploit them in order to destroy whatever agreement Malley and the Iranians have struck.
I suggest you read the whole thing for the details.
You may cynically say, “oh, it’s all just theater; the GOP will never do it.” I think the Republicans are serious about this, though, because these measures Iran is demanding would be so deeply unpopular. I also think the GOP would be able to get quite a few Democrats on board.
[NOTE: Two more articles on the current situation: this one from Melanie Phillips, and this one from Lee Smith. From the latter, which explicitly connects many dots between the Iran Deal and Putin’s attempts to take over Ukraine:
Because keeping Assad in power was an Iranian strategic necessity, the equation circa mid-2014 was clear to everyone involved: no Russia, no Iran deal. When Putin bit off Crimea and chunks of Donbas, Obama barely blinked an eye.
When Putin again escalated the number of Russian ground forces in Syria shortly after the JCPOA was struck, Obama administration officials celebrated Putin as America’s new partner in the fight against terror—that is, the war to defend Iranian interests in the eastern Mediterranean. If Iran couldn’t protect its “equities” in Syria on its own, then Russia could protect them, with American help.
It was only natural that the same people who relied on Russia to protect the Iran deal the first time around knew they could count on Putin once again when it came time for the United States to reenter the JCPOA. In December 2021, Putin and Biden aides met in Vienna to coordinate their negotiating postures over the Iran deal. Biden and Putin then discussed their arrangements together directly in a video summit. “Russia is an important partner in these talks,” a State Department spokesperson told the press in January. “We engage very constructively with Russia … on a mutual return to the JCPOA.”…
In the context of America’s use of Putin to negotiate and guarantee Obama’s “legacy” foreign policy initiative, it’s not hard to see the logic behind Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine when he did: The Russian leader knew that he had America over a barrel…
In January, Biden effectively signed off on Putin’s invasion of Ukraine—and the subsequent instability in the energy market—by signaling that a “minor incursion” into Ukraine would be overlooked by the White House.
Sure, Biden talked tough about imposing sanctions on Russia and called out Putin for his fiendish actions, but the Russians knew that his words were as hollow as Obama’s meaningless sanctions over Crimea.
Interesting, no?]
While I’m firmly wedded to the “national politics as Globetrotters vs Generals” paradigm, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t things Congress sincerely will or won’t want to do.
For example, no matter how popular a wall is, Congress (both parties) won’t build one; no matter how much conservatives want Obamacare repealed Congress (both parties) won’t do it. Congress (both parties) won’t rein in government spending and even brought back earmarks (Instapundit fans no doubt remember “Porkbusters”), farm subsidies, and the Import-Export bank, despite these being broadly unpopular.
In this case the Iran deal is extremely unpopular even with Congress (both parties). I’m guessing it’s a case of something unpopular that the wrong people do well out of, but there could be principles involved at least with a significant percentage of them.
Mark Twain, describing a lightning strike: “when it strikes a thing it doesn’t leave enough of that thing behind for you to tell whether–Well, you’d think it was something valuable, and a Congressman had been there.”
“…no matter how popular a wall is, Congress (both parties) won’t build one…”
Not sure I follow this, exactly.
Trump started building a wall, with Congressional support.
“Biden” has taken it down.
(Unless you’re talking about pre-Trump “inabilities” to get the wall built…along with Trump’s initial “inability” to do it…)
But he DID start it.
And now it’s as though it never happened.
So who’s responsible for that?
There is some undercurrent in the Iran deal fiasco which is being obscured, or perhaps hidden. Cui bono?
Everything about “Biden”, everything that “Biden” is doing and everything “Biden” is planning is being obscured.
Concealed.
Lied about.
Hidden overtly.
Hidden through disinformation.
(At least “he”‘s consistent….)
Meanwhile, just like in the good ole Obama days, “transparency” is the talk of the town…even if “Biden” has chosen “Unity” as “his” preferred catch-phrase…and “Build Back Better” as his preferred white phosphorous smoke screen.
Must be a coincidence.
If Obama could be “MORE FLEXIBLE” after the 2016 elections, then just imagine how FLEXIBLE “Biden” can be now that the Democrats plan—and have plans in place—to “win” all upcoming “elections”!
Oh, wait….
What’s being obscured, or at least attempted to be obscured, is the fact that Biden is deeply compromised. Add that to the old Obama Iran lobby behind him and you get this sort of foolishness.
The Mullahs will never agree to any conditions that would actually prevent Iran from achieving nuclear weapons capability.
The Biden administration knows that the Mullahs have no intention to honor any deal.
As long as its invasion of the Ukraine continues, it is in Russia’s interest to keep the Iran ‘deal’ from being formalized.
I too think it likely that the GOPe leadership intends to do its best to derail any Iran deal by the Biden administration.
“…intersect…”
Here’s a fascinating intersection—or “synthesis” if you will—of what happens when lying, concealment and distraction can no longer be used effectively; no longer work like they’re supposed to.
When “the people” know that something is up, understand that that “something” is very much NOT in their interest, realize that they’re being used and manipulated…and are losing hope. And getting very angry.
A place where all the lies, hypocrisies and contradictions come home to roost
(Think of it as the DJT “syndrome” writ large.)
And this phenomenon is happening in many different countries and cultures around the world:
“The working classes are a volcano waiting to erupt;
“Workers across the world are being squeezed from all sides. They won’t put up with it forever.”—
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/04/18/the-working-classes-are-a-volcano-waiting-to-erupt/
H/T Powerline blog.
Short version: For the elites the creation of crises has a tremendous attraction—and usefulness—as a means for extending control and consolidating power…but what happens when they lose control of the plot?
(Cue “The Sorceror’s Apprentice”…)
And the elites are, with justification, afraid.
For example, with regard to the upcoming French election, the latest “trick” of prosecuting Marine Le Pen—ONE WEEK before the second and final round—indicates in blazing, grotesque technicolor that Macron is desperate.
“The Biden administration knows that the Mullahs have no intention to honor any deal.”
Maybe this is it right here. If Iran will cheat anyway may as well profit from it. Keeping the sanctions in place misses out on profits for someone.
If Iran will cheat anyway and thus presents a clear and present danger… the appropriate response is to send the Mullahs on their way to Allah. To change behavior, consequence must be personal.
I’m the 2nd to last paragraph is more evidence that the powers that be in Washington are at fault for failing to stop the Russians. If the US govt will ignore an invasion, what NATO power will go against their gas and oil supplier for Ukraine?
And Trump was the President tied to Russia, so believe many people. Amazng what can be implemented when a considerable portion of the citizenry are deceived/brainwashed. Isn’t representative government grand? Life in an oligarchy with a veneer of being a constitutional republic.
“…tied to Russia…”
That’s right.
As often happens with criminals (and psychopaths), one can get a pretty accurate idea of what they’ve been up to (and what they ARE up to) on the basis of their accusations against others.
In addition, without the absolutely corrupt Mainstream Media—joined at the hip to the absolutely corrupt Democratic party and the government agencies that that party has, somehow, been able to suborn—that lie would never have gained any traction at all.
Zero.
Nada.
Ergo, they’re all complicit in the attempted coup d’etat.
Just as they’re all complicit in the theft of the 2020 election.
None of the above, however, ever happened (just ask ’em—i.e., if they’re not too busy pleading the Fifth)…
Nothing stops the Snake Department nomenklatura.
In another time and place here in the USA, current members of the executive branch , top military brass, cabinet officials , advisors, officials at various federal agencies, some former members of the govt., etc. would be found guilty of treason or criminal negligence and placed in front of firing squads.
And they certainly would deserve it.
Think about what “our” govt. is doing with Iran, the borders, energy policy, the coup d’etat against Trump, the Afghan disaster, unlimited spending/money printing, etc.
The only way to think about all of this is accepting that certain elements of the US govt. want to destroy the USA.
There can be no other explanation.
For example, with regard to the upcoming French election, the latest “trick” of prosecuting Marine Le Pen—ONE WEEK before the second and final round—indicates in blazing, grotesque technicolor that Macron is desperate.
Not altogether clear if Macron and his camarilla are in the know. The source of the accusation is a unit of the European Commission in Brussels, who accuse her of misappropriating office expense money. They tried this tack the last time she ran for President. She hasn’t been a member of the European Parliament since 2017, so the accusation is not timely. Be agreeable if Brexit was followed by Frexit.
Curiously, given how sketchy polling is in the states, Le Pen has been consistently 5-11 points behind in polls, performing a great deal better than she did in 2017 but not quite enough. Would be amusing if the ‘report’ from the European Commission generated enough disgust on the part of swing voters to put her over the top.