By now President Donald Trump has made headlines around the world for pulling out of the Iran Deal. Call it the Iran Deal, the Iran Nuclear Deal, or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA or JCPA), by any name the deal is not a program to “denuclearize Iran,” or stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Iran and the Middle East writ large. This “Comprehensive Plan” merely allowed for some (some) oversight over the Iranian nuclear program for a period not more than 10 years. At the conclusion of 10 years, Iran is free to do whatever it wishes with its nuclear program, including build a nuclear bomb.
Iran did not agree to the JCPA terms because it had no desire for a nuclear weapon; on the contrary the leaders did so to get out from under economic sanctions imposed by the United States and the European Union. Iran can only prosper economically by selling oil and if you take away the US and EU markets that seriously cripples Iran’s gross national production.
Not surprisingly the support for the President to withdraw from the JCPA falls along party lines. But what is interesting is the number of Democrats who feign outrage now over President Trump pulling out, but were against the JCPA at the time President Barrack Obama signed in the first place.
President Obama entered into the JCPA without seeking approval of the Legislature, technically because the State Department deemed this to be “not a treaty nor an official agreement,” and therefore could bypass Congress. (Congress was allowed 90-days to look at the Plan of Action which is officially a United Nations deal with country signatories, and held a few votes of confidence.) Democrats Chuck Schumer, Richard Blumenthal, Bob Menendez, Ben Cardin, Eliot Engel, Ted Deutch, Nita Lowey, all spoke out against the deal under President Obama (many from New York, following Schumer’s lead). And these same Democrats are speaking out today against President Trump removing the US from the deal.
The Iranian Plan of Action was supported and signed by the “P5+1” which refers to the Five nations of the UN Security Council – United Kingdom, France, United States, China and Russia – plus Germany. The United States was a signatory to the UN Resolution which lifted sanctions against Iran and was thought to curtail their nuclear weapons program.
True to form, President Obama’s response to criticism of the deal was familiar and predictable, saying to anyone that opposed the signing “should have some alternative to present.” Leaders with Executive power lead and make decisions, but Obama’s resounding refrain to any conflicting opinions was to put the onus on others to “come up with something better.” The JCPA was very much spearheaded by the European Union in order to lift oil sanctions on Iran. The EU lobbied Congress heavily to agree to the deal.
The media went crazy over the announcement President Trump was withdrawing us from the JCPA, and I would honestly feel safer if they were the only crazy ones. Alas, Iran followed suit, burning an American flag and a copy of the JCPA on the floor of Parliament during their first legislative session after the announcement. “Students” surrounded the US Embassy and started chanting – wait for it – “Death To America!” Sounds like a reasonable reaction for a country that wants to be taken seriously on the world stage. (Now do you see why Israel is so reluctant to engage Iran’s leadership in… anything?) There are other parties to this agreement, as it were. The entire European Union for example, and the United Nations Security Council. Only one entity pulled out.
And not just because it was ‘a bad horrible deal the worst we’ve ever entered into,’ to paraphrase Trump. One of the stipulations of the JCPA called for prohibiting changing the agreement by any Executive Action after a period of time. So in case you don’t know, the power of Executive Action by the President of the United States was signed away by the preceding President of the United States. Does that sit well with anybody? Try and name a treaty or agreement entered into by foreign powers that says, “And a president can never, ever change it in perpetuity.” That’s legalese you won’t find… anywhere. Like it or not, a president needs executive powers to lead this country no matter who it is; abridging that power to appease a foreign power is wildly unconstitutional.
Breaking an agreement, on the other hand, can have consequences that are agreed upon by all parties at inception. Apparently there are none of those either. The P5+1 signatories are disappointed by the US pulling out, sure; and perhaps rightfully so. But Iran has gone right back to threats and innuendo, and has said nothing about working with the other countries in the agreement or fulfilling the promises made in the agreement.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said that the US, “Will have to accept responsibility” for withdrawing, and added, “We [will not] renegotiate or add on to a deal we have already implemented in good faith.” Not renegociating seems to undercut the statement that the deal was made “in good faith.” So does not continuing with the deal, for that matter.
Iran’s president Hassan Rouhani said on state TV, “If America leaves the nuclear accord, this will entail historic regret for [the United States].” CBS News meanwhile reports Rouhani as saying he will try to work with the other countries to keep the deal moving forward. But that might be a tough ask of the Iranian hardliners and mullahs that control the country. To wit, the Ayatollah Khamenei Tweeted out that Trump’s corpse will be eaten by worms.
U.S. pres.’s shallow & ludicrous behavior wasn’t unexpected. The same behavior existed in previous US presidents. Yet, Iranian nation is persistent while former U.S. presidents passed away & IRI is still standing. This man’s corpse will also be worm food while IRI stands strong.
— Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) May 9, 2018
If anything this move by President Trump gives Iran some leeway to leave the deal – but that’s a decision Iran will take so the blame cannot solely be placed at The President’s feet. What the US withdrawal means is that US economic sanctions will be put back in place. This is what Iran wanted to avoid. And while the EU sanctions will remain at bay for as long as the deal remains in compliance, the US sanctions could still really impact Iran, and other countries that do business with Iran.
Khamenei said Wednesday that Tehran would walk away from the nuclear deal if European signatories cannot offer solid guarantees that trade agreements reached under it would continue after the U.S. withdraws. – CBS News
So we have Iran on record, hours after the announcement was made, as being willing to leave the deal – under any number of circumstances. And this is a deal they signed to delay their nuclear weapons program by 10-15 years and yet they jump at the first chance they get to leave it. Does President Barrack Obama stilll think the Iranians negociated in good faith? Or was it just simply “the best we could do at the time”?
The double-talk coming out of Iran is predictable, I guess, but certainly not helpful when politicians and the media are trying to decipher it for us fellow citizens. Former President Barrack Obama took to Facebook defending his signing of the deal, to dispel some myths. Comparing his statements to the actual JCPA deal just brought up some blatant mistruths by the former President, or some ‘optimistic statements.’
Obama first wanted to lay to rest the perception that the deal was bound “in trust” alone, that there are consequences for Iran if they break parts of the agreement. He goes on to say that the JCPA prevents Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon — which is patently false.
In Obama’s own words he said that the United States can always prevent Iran from obtaining a weapon at anytime “by any means necessary…including military.” In other words, nothing in the JCPA does so. The JCPA only delayed or prolonged Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon for the duration of the agreement. Nothing in the treaty states that Iran has to give up seeking a nuclear weapon in the future, only during the time the agreement is in force.
And so we are relying on the Iranians to adhere to the constraints of the JCPA, hoping that the IEA has unfettered access to nuclear sites and physics labs, and that all nuclear-enriched Uranium was properly disposed of and not just hidden away for later use.
Sounds a lot like we are basing this on “trust” doesn’t it? The only effective rejoinder of the JCPA is to implement world economic sanctions against Iran – something they have been dealing with off and on for 40 years now? Wow – smashing. How ever will Iran survive?
Building a bomb, for one. For two, telling the world yesterday that they can restart their nuclear program at any moment and “enrich uranium to 20% within two days time.” (Atomic Energy Organization of Iran spokesman, Behrouz Kamalvandi – AP) That, to me, doesn’t sound like Iran was exactly compliant with the terms of the deal. Not if they are ready to jump right back into the uranium-enrichment business.
Bottom line here is, as far as I can tell, President Donald Trump really could have just flipped a coin on this one. The deal was never meant to prohibit nuclear proliferation by Iran; it was merely to delay, or, contain and observe. Second, the stipulation that another US President in the future could not withdraw from the deal really handcuffed the United States. For instance if Iran is found to be in violation of terms, a US President could act unilaterally against Iran without being in breach of the United Nations (this is, afterall, a UN deal at the core). I don’t like my freedoms curtailed, nor my President’s either; not by another country, and surely not by the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The worst and most egregious claim about this whole ordeal is politicians, media pundits, (John Kerry and Barack Obama) saying that this withdrawal sends the wrong message to the world; That the US can’t be trusted. And at such a pivotal time with the upcoming talks with North Korea about nuclear denuclearization. If anything Donald Trump has shown Kim Jong-Un that the United States is serious about preventing nuclear proliferation, and will do anything in our power to prevent it – up to and including pulling out of a deal that was weak to start with.
North Korea should get the message that President Trump will not accept nor sign any deal that is not fair and in favor of the United States of America and allies around the world. And our allies around the world should include every country and should certainly include every citizen in this country. Any attempts to meddle with these agreements and undermine the President should be withheld because the stakes could not be higher when we are dealing with nuclear weapons and countries that do not have our best interest in mind.
[As of press time, May 9th, reports are crossing the newswires that Iran has launched missiles at Israel from Syria.]
