U.S. On Iran Nukes Allegations: Another Fabrication

Recently in a presentation, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu allegedly revealed the “secret atomic archive” of the Globalist opponent and the Chinese and Russian affiliated state of Iran, a nuclear weapons programme which was allegedly ended in 2003, Netanyahu claims to cite 55,000 pages of documents and another 55,000 files on 183 CDs, outlining four ways the Iranian government was lying. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the documents proved “beyond any doubt” that Iran had not told the truth.

In response to the allegations, Tehran accuses Netanyahu of lying — with an Iranian spokesman describing Mr Netanyahu as an “infamous liar who has had nothing to offer except lies and deceits”.

To bolster Iran’s counter-claim, The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says it has “no credible” evidence Iran was working on developing a nuclear “explosive device” after 2009.

Furthermore, Iran’s President, Hassan Rouhani, has described state possession of nuclear weapons as contradictory to Iran’s “fundamental religious and ethical convictions”.

Craig Murray, a British Journalist, was censored by Facebook for criticizing Israel’s hypocrisy.

Hostility between Israel and Iran, already diametric enemies, has grown as Iran builds up its military in Syria, on Israel’s doorstep in defense of Syria’s territorial sovereignty in the wake of Israeli occupation of the Golan heights and wider U.S. occupation of Syria, occupying nearly one third of Syria’s sovereign territory.

Now, the 2015 JCPOA between Iran, the US, China, Russia, Germany, France and Britain, a deal that agreed on limiting Iranian nuclear activity in return for the lifting of crippling international economic sanctions looks as if it may be coming to an end as Trump warns the US will abandon the deal on 12 May if his concerns are not addressed.

It’s too soon to say whether this will constitute an excuse to invade Iran and spark a hot conflict — but it will likely mean resumed economic sanctions on Iran for not playing ball with U.S. & Israeli foreign policy.

The U.S. loves to posit fake disarmament deals that it always breaks, gaining an independent nation’s trust then betraying said trust, sponsoring instability in said nation, advocating regime change in said nation, and, if all else fails — a false-flag backed ground invasion. The U.S. has already tried to sponsor a false uprising in Iran.

If we just look to how Iraq under Saddam Hussein received arms and support from Washington to attack and invade Iran. This de facto agreement, encouraged the Iraqi leader to assume that collaboration between nationalist Iraq and imperial Washington reflected a shared common agenda. Subsequently Baghdad believed that they had tacit US support in a territorial dispute with Kuwait. When Saddam invaded, the US bombed, devastated, invaded, occupied and partitioned Iraq.

The attempt by Iraq to collaborate with Washington in the 1980’s against its nationalist neighbor Iran, led to the invasion, the destruction of the country, the killing of thousands of secular leaders including Saddam Hussein as well as the entire secular and scientific intelligentsia, and the transformation of Iraq into a toothless vassal state of the empire.

Other examples of Washington’s duplicity in its “deal making”.

With the elections of Donald Trump, the US rejected the agreement (‘it’s the worst deal ever’) and in compliance with the Israeli Prime Minister B. Netanyahu’s military agenda, demanded the total restoration of sanctions, the dismantling of Iran’s entire military defenses and its submission to the US, Israeli and Saudi Arabian dictates in the Middle East.

In other words, President Trump discarded the agreement in opposition to all the major countries in Europe and Asia, in favor of Israel’s demands to isolate, disarm and attack Iran and impose a puppet regime in Tehran.

“The strategic goal is disarmament in order to facilitate military and political intervention leading up to and beyond defeat, occupation, regime change; the impositions of a‘client regime’ to facilitate the pillage of economic resources and the securing of military bases, international alignment with the US empire and a military springboard for further conquests against neighbors and independent adversaries.” — Prof. James Petras

These recent allegations from Israel backed by the U.S., in light of recent Iranian military posturing following the April 7th Syria strikes seems more suited to a “back off” gesture from the Western alliance, in essence, saying “we can and will hold your feet to the fire” (by reimposing crippling sanctions) over these allegations. If they have any further, graver, implications in targeting Iran — these will unfold with time.

Was Tillerson Sacked to Abandon the Iran Nuclear Deal?

Tillerson supported Washington remaining on board with the JCPOA nuclear deal – along with other P5+1 countries Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia.

Trump wants it unacceptably changed or abandoned. On Tuesday, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted:

“Mr Trump has made habit of being unpredictable and thus unreliable for anybody to engage with. Nobody will be interested in reaching any agreement with the White House if US signature only good for 4-8 yrs.”

Replacing Tillerson with militantly anti-Iran hardliner Pompeo smooths things for Trump to pursue greater hostility toward the Islamic Republic with a key administration official on board with his reckless agenda.

Like the president, secretary of state designee Pompeo opposes the nuclear deal. Tillerson’s sacking likely signals Trump’s intention to abandon the JCPOA ahead.

According to Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi,

“Americans are determined to leave the JCPOA, and changes at the country’s State Department were made in line with this goal, or at least it was one of the reasons,” adding:

“Europeans are walking on the razor’s edge because if they incline towards Trump, they will lose Iran.”

Days earlier, IAEA head Yukiya Amano said

“I can state that Iran is implementing its nuclear-related commitments…If the JCPOA were to fail, it would be a great loss for nuclear verification and for multilateralism.”

Things are heading in this direction, especially with Pompeo succeeding Tillerson at State.

Things pursued by Washington should terrify everyone. Trump escalated rogue policies his predecessors began – notably waging political, economic and hot wars against multiple countries.

Will Iran be his next target for regime change, beginning by abandoning the JCPOA nuclear deal? What took years of negotiations to conclude, he could scrap with a signature taking moments.

Replacing Tillerson with Pompeo signals likely escalated wars of aggression, stepped up hostility toward Russia and China, perhaps scuttling a Trump/Kim Jong-un summit or structuring it to fail, along with abandoning the Iran nuclear deal and targeting the country for regime change.

Trump won’t re-certify the JCPOA in May unless Britain, France and Germany agree to major changes Iran won’t accept.

According to an unnamed White House official,

“(i)f the Europeans make it clear that what we are asking for is going too far, then we’ll know, but as soon as they say that, Europe is signing the deal’s death warrant,” adding:

“Tillerson wasn’t faithful to the intent of the president. (He) didn’t agree with breaking the Iran deal.”

“Every time the president’s been persuaded to sign these waivers he’s done so begrudgingly. (I)n January he said, ‘this is absolutely the last time.’ Either we fix it or he won’t sign another waiver. ‘I’m not going to sign it unless Iran agrees.’ ”

Changes he demands Tehran finds unacceptable, including:

  • unlimited inspections of Iranian sites, including military ones no countries would tolerate;
  • the international community on board, ensuring Iran never develops nuclear weapons it abhors, doesn’t want, and calls for eliminating;
  • removing the JCPOA’s sunset clause, effective after 10 years;
  • restricting Iranian development and testing of ballistic missiles not part of the JCPOA; and
  • reimposing nuclear-related sanctions if Tehran fails to fully comply with the above demands.

Clearly they’re unacceptable. Six countries and Iran spent years negotiating the JCPOA.

Tehran won’t tolerate Trump unilaterally demanding changes during the life of the agreement.

As things now stand, Washington will likely walk away, destroying the deal by illegally reimposing nuclear related sanctions.

Along with other US Middle East policies, abandoning the JCPOA risks greater regional turbulence and instability instead of responsibly stepping back from the brink.

Lunatics infesting Washington threaten everyone. Paul Craig Roberts asked “Will Humanity Survive Crazed Washington?”

We’re all threatened with possible extinction by Washington’s megalomaniacal rage for unchallenged hegemony.

I agree with Roberts, saying “you can expect the worst” ahead.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

Visit Stephen’s website: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Stephen’s newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Trump Vows to Renew All-out Economic War on Iran

The Globalist establishment, and by extension, US President Donald Trump have publicly vowed to relaunch all-out economic warfare against Iran by no later than mid-May unless the European powers join Washington in unilaterally rewriting the civil nuclear agreement between Tehran and the world’s great powers.

Trump’s incendiary pledge was the centerpiece of a bellicose anti-Iran statement issued Friday.

In it, the US president announced he was waiving, for a further four months, sanctions targeting Iran’s oil exports and freezing the country out of the world banking system. Washington suspended these measures as part of the nuclear deal, or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

However, Trump insisted he will issue no further waivers unless the agreement is rewritten in accordance with his demands. He coupled this with an ultimatum to America’s ostensible European allies—Germany, France, and Britain.

“Today,” said Trump, “I am waiving the application of certain nuclear sanctions, but only in order to secure our European allies’ agreement to fix the terrible flaws of the Iran nuclear deal. This is a last chance. In the absence of such an agreement, the United States will not again waive sanctions in order to stay in the Iran nuclear deal.”

He went on to warn the Europeans that if they did not quickly fall into line he could blow up the JCPOA even before the next waiver deadline of May 12. Trump declared,

“If at any time I judge” that a US-European agreement to “fix” the Iran nuclear deal “is not within reach, I will withdraw from the deal immediately.”

US repudiation of the JCPOA would set Washington on a fast-track for war with Iran—a country the Trump administration’s recent National Security Strategy placed on par with North Korea as a threat to US “national interests” that needs to be countered and vanquished.

Tehran has repeatedly said it will not be the first to break the terms of the deal it reached in 2015 with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany to dismantle much of its civil nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of punishing US and European Union economic sanctions. But it has warned that if the US abrogates the agreement and resumes its drive to destroy Iran economically, it will assert its full sovereign rights as it sees fit.

As it is, other more limited US sanctions and Washington’s repeated threats to scuttle the nuclear deal and roll back Iranian influence in the Middle East continue to roil the Iranian economy, with European businesses, in particular, wary of committing to substantial investments.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif called Trump’s statement a “desperate” attempt “to undermine a solid multilateral agreement.”

European leaders avoided any immediate substantive comment, with Germany merely saying that it supports full implementation of the JCPOA and will consult Europe’s other major powers on a “common way forward.”

Zarif with EU‘s foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, 16 April 2017 (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

On Thursday, the German, French and British foreign ministers and EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini all reiterated their support for the Iran deal at the conclusion of a meeting with Zarif.

In opposition to the Trump administration, the Europeans have insisted that differences with Tehran over non-nuclear issues, such as Iran’s role in Syria and its ballistic missile program, should not be tied to the JCPOA. They have further warned that Washington’s repudiation of the Iran deal would not only dangerously destabilize the Middle East, it would also send an incontrovertible signal to North Korea that there is no point in negotiating with Washington since it refuses to abide by international agreements.

In his statement, Trump demanded that the Europeans sign on to changes to the nuclear agreement that Iran would and could never accept. These include: allowing International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors immediate and unlimited access to any site, including military installations, anywhere in the country; eliminating the “sunset clauses” in the JCPOA so as make the time-limited restraints on parts of Iran’s civil nuclear program permanent; and severely limiting, if not outlawing, Iran’s ballistic missile program.

According to Trump officials, Washington has no plans for talks with Iran or for that matter with the non-European signatories to the Iran nuclear accord, Russia and China. Rather, Washington intends to “negotiate” with the Europeans about endorsing Trump’s demands, with a view to a subsequent joint US-EU ultimatum to Tehran to accept them or face the re-imposition of economic sanctions.

Such an ultimatum would be illegal under the JCPOA and tantamount to an act of war.

Trump is also insisting that the US Congress pass legislation that would enshrine his key demands for unilaterally rewriting the JCPOA into American law. It would outline “triggers,” including in respect to the development of Iran’s ballistic missile program, that would cause the US economic sanctions suspended under the JCPOA to immediately “snap back” into force.

Trump’s statement was provocative and belligerent from beginning to end. It denounced Iran as the “world’s leading state sponsor of terror” and, in a revealing admission, boasted that the US is “countering Iranian proxy wars in Yemen and Syria.”

Trump repeated his obscene claims to be a champion of the Iranian people and their rights, even as he set the US on course for a military confrontation with Iran.

His statement was accompanied by the announcement of sanctions against 14 individuals and entities, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp’s cyber division. Sanctions were also imposed on the administrative head of Iran’s judiciary, Sadeq Larijani, supposedly in retaliation for the Iranian regime’s repression of the recent protests by impoverished workers and youth against rising prices, mass joblessness, government austerity and rampant social inequality.

Trump also vowed yesterday that he will continue to refuse to certify that Iran is in compliance with the JCPOA, although the IAEA has repeatedly reported that Teheran is in full compliance, and even top Trump officials have conceded Iran is implementing it to the letter.

According to press reports, National Security Adviser H.R. McMasterDefense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had to bring considerable pressure to bear on Trump to persuade him not to blow up the Iran accord this week by refusing to sign the four-month sanction waiver.

There is strong support in both the Republican and Democratic Party leaderships for a more aggressive stance against Iran, beginning in Syria, where Tehran’s support for Syrian President Assad played a major role in the failure of US efforts to use Al Qaeda-aligned Islamist forces to install a pro-US regime. But there are grave concerns within the US military-security and political establishments about Trump’s haste to tear up the Iran nuclear accord and provoke an all-out confrontation with Iran.

These concerns are entirely of a tactical character, revolving around how best to achieve US global hegemony. Leading strategists for US imperialism argue Iran needs to be “contained” through a combination of military, economic and diplomatic pressure while the US concentrates on countering more formidable rivals, Russia and China. And there are deep concerns that Trump’s push for a confrontation with Iran will intensify the growing strategic rift with Europe.

Yesterday’s ultimatum to Europe over Iran, which Trump’s advisors prevailed on him to issue in preference to a unilateral US withdrawal from the nuclear accord, only underlines the divergence between NATO’s principal member states.

Apparently, Trump, or at least those egging him on to scuttle the Iran deal, are calculating that the Europeans will ultimately ally with the US against Iran for fear that they could themselves become targets if the US again seeks to use its domination of the world financial system to block trade with Iran.

The Europeans, for their part, have their own imperialist designs in the Middle East and beyond. With Germany in the lead, they are pursuing rearmament and seeking to develop EU military forces that can act independently of, and if need be, in opposition to America.

Since sanctions were lifted on Iran, European companies have announced billions in new investments, even if, as of yet, many of these haven’t been fulfilled due to fears of a renewal of US sanctions.

More broadly, the EU fears the incendiary consequences of a US-Iran war, which would quickly embroil the entire Mideast. Europe is both far more dependent on Mideast oil than the US and far more susceptible to the political and demographic shocks such a war would engender.

While hostile to the growth of Iranian influence in parts of the Middle East such as Syria and Iraq, the European imperialist powers are alarmed by Washington’s readiness to inflame sectarian tensions, whether by promoting a Saudi-led anti-Iran Sunni alliance or recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

Stefan Kornelius, foreign editor of the German daily Süddeutsche Zeitung, pointed to the strategic divergence between the US and the major EU powers when he wrote Friday,

“Iran is pursuing an expansive foreign policy course. Europe must find a different answer to that than the United States, which is causing damage with its clear siding with the Gulf monarchies.”