Iran snapback – and more talk of Israeli hostage deal
Did the UN finally do something right? The snapback has arrived:
Sweeping UN economic and military sanctions have been reimposed on Iran – 10 years after they were lifted in a landmark international deal over its nuclear programme.
The new measures took effect as the three European partners to the deal – the UK, France and Germany – activated the so-called “snapback” mechanism, accusing Iran of “continued nuclear escalation” and lack of co-operation.
Iran suspended inspections of its nuclear facilities – a legal obligation under the terms of the 2015 deal – after Israel and the US bombed several of its nuclear sites and military bases in June.
Its President Masoud Pezeshkian insisted last week that the country had no intention of developing nuclear weapons.
The reintroduction of sanctions – which Pezeshkian described as “unfair, unjust, and illegal” – is the latest blow to a deal that was heralded as a turning point in Western relations with the long-ostracised Islamist nation when it was first struck.
Oh, it was a turning point all right. A terrible one. Thanks, President Obama.
The Security Council’s decision on September 19 – reaffirmed on September 26 – to restore these restrictions sends a clear message: the world will not acquiesce to threats and half measures – and Tehran will be held to account.
President Trump has been clear that diplomacy is still an option—a deal remains the best outcome for the Iranian people and the world. For that to happen, Iran must accept direct talks, held in good faith, without stalling or obfuscation. Absent such a deal, it is incumbent on partners to implement snapback sanctions immediately in order to pressure Iran’s leaders to do what is right for their nation, and best for the safety of the world.
I wouldn’t sit on a hot stove till that happens.
As for the Israeli hostage deal that’s said to perhaps be imminent, I’m highly skeptical. But here’s the report:
The White House has signaled it aims to finalize elements of a Gaza deal, with Trump declaring the effort in “final stages.” Israeli officials, meanwhile, have sought to narrow remaining gaps before the meeting.
Background reporting indicates the plan links a stabilization force in Gaza to governance reforms and a pathway involving the Palestinian Authority, points that have stirred debate in Jerusalem. …
According to reporting ahead of the summit, the leaders are expected to focus on securing the hostages’ release, establishing a durable ceasefire, and charting interim administration and security arrangements in Gaza. Meanwhile, Israeli officials expect Netanyahu to also bring up the issue of West Bank sovereignty.
Trump has framed the moment as an opening for “something special” in the region.
And Hamas? Is there any chance they’ll say yes to whatever this deal might be? I highly doubt it. And then [my emphasis]:
“I think we are very close,” Trump said in remarks at the White House. But if Hamas fails to agree to the plan, the president said Israel could continue its campaign. “Bibi, you’d have our full backing to do what you would have to do,” he added.
The 20-point U.S. plan to end the war begins with an immediate ceasefire and proposes Hamas release all of the hostages within 72 hours in exchange for a phased withdrawal of Israeli troops with the aim of a permanent ceasefire, according to the White House.
Hamas members who commit to peace and lay down their arms will be given amnesty, offering them a pathway to rejoin civilian life, while those who wish to leave Gaza will be offered safe passage, the White House said.
Full humanitarian aid will resume, administered by the United Nations and its organizations, the Red Crescent, and other groups. According to the plan, Gaza will be redeveloped “for the benefit of the people of Gaza.”
“I hope that we’re going to have a deal for peace and if Hamas rejects the deal, which is always possible, they’re the only one left,” Trump said. “Everyone else has accepted it.”
“Which is always possible” – quite an understatement from Trump.
I noticed quite a few names of regional States and rulers were mentioned as co-operators in the Trump-Bibi press conference and notably absent so far as I can recollect? Egypt, Al-Sisi. Not surprising at all, but relatively significant, I believe.
I think taqiyya has sucked Trump into thinking he can mastermind peace agreements when what these people (excluding Netanyahu and the Israelis) are seeming to go for is a bit of time that will allow them to rest and restore their own strength to fight again. Their ultimate goal has long been Israel’s elimination–and that is not going to change.
sdfrr: “notably absent.” Yeah, but not publicly denying they support the effort. We might just be getting closer to a deal. That would be a game-changer. For Israel, for us, and ultimately for the people of Gaza.
Indeed F, as Egypt signed onto this statement (and it was merely Trump and Bibi’s recitation I was hearing, so their choice of citations).
https://x.com/MofaQatar_EN/status/1972770277319954465
BetsyBounds
Doesn’t seem like taqquya is an issue here. Trump did not sign over one of his hotels on Hamas’ promise.
If Hamas tries taqqiyaing, the promise is that Israel will destroy them. No room for fudging on Hamas’part. Pick one. Live up to the deal or be destroyed.
With that many Arab/Muslim states signing on to Trump’s deal, they are essentially telling Hamas “No messing around; we know what taqiyya is and you can’t get away with it with us.”
Unless they are all dissembling (and there may be some), this is a Yuge Deal, and goes much further than the Abraham Accords did, which Biden Inc. shut down, probably out of both pique and their commitment to backing Iran against all the other states.
Had they kept the Accords in operation, I really doubt that Hamas would have attempted anything like the 10/7 attack.
This does leave open the question of who is willing to take in the Hamas warriors who surrender, but I presume that the Ministers giving assent to the deal have worked that out somehow.
The NBC report included doubts that Hamas would sign on, but the roster of states now publicly against them IMO gives a message of “take the deal or lose our support going forward.”
The Jews concerned about annexation and sovereignty issues should listen to the similar message from Trump: “This is the best you are going to get in the international world as it is. A neutral state on your border is all you can ever hope for.”
As quoted in the NBC report: White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested to Fox News early Monday that under the deal “both sides” might “have to give up a little bit and might leave the table a little bit unhappy.”
That’s what negotiation is all about.
Nobody ever gets 100% of what they want in an honest deal.
Hamas, like Iran, always wants 150%, and up to now they have gotten it, with the complicity of the UN and much of Europe.
Since Israel has shown that they can completely destroy Gaza, and much of Iran, any time they want, and now has conditional backing from the US to do so, I think the rest of the Middle East is ready to give up keeping Hamas & Gaza as pawns for their own domestic needs because they have become more trouble than they are worth.
I have NEVER seen a 20-step “plan” be worth a damn. Trump has missed the mark with this.
I have been trying to figure out what snapback sanctions are. They sound ominous but near as I can tell, they are sanctions on selling Iran technology that can be used to enrich uranium. I’m amazed that countries like Germany can do that now. There are also some sanctions on financial transactions that I have not been able to figure out. To me, the biggie is buying oil from them. Apparently China will buy all they can sell. So the next step is to block the straits of Hormuz. But that will affect our so-called allies in the region.
So I’m puzzled why Iran would care about the sanctions.
Here’s an article that discusses the sanctions does not explain them to me
https://www.timesofisrael.com/snapback-what-are-the-sanctions-that-have-been-reimposed-on-iran/
Iran can just look to Russia and China and N.Korea and ……..to obtain whatever equipment they need to continue to develop nukes.
“Shell companies” can be founded and used to buy and transport whatever Iran will need.
But here is an idea !!!!
Let’s send Obama to Iran to personally deliver a few BILLION $$$ in cash to Iran and in return, Iran will promise to use the cash for humanitarian causes.
This will certainly dissuade Iran from building nukes.
One does not need a 20 point plan to learn if it will fail or not.
Woodrow Wilson had 14 points in his plan and arguably, it may have contributed to WWII.
Moses’ plan just had 10 points and still serves as a good guide for individual behavior, but it has not been successful in eliminating conflicts.
Moms only need three rules:
1. If it’s not yours, leave it alone.
2. If you mess it up, you clean it up.
3. Keep your hands to yourself.
Scales up just fine.