قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ World https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ Trump's better deal with Iran looks a lot like Obama

Trump's better deal with Iran looks a lot like Obama




  Donald Trump spoke with reporters after signing additional sanctions against Iran in June. " Iran Iran will negotiate by saying that Tehran's nuclear ambitions are his main concern, which experts say, saying the echo is in the 2015 agreement. </p>
</header>
<footer class=

Devastated the Iranian nuclear agreement of 2015 as the "worst deal ever", a "catastrophe" that did not cover nearly enough of Iranian Islamist behavior

In recent weeks, however, the president has said that Barack The deal with the Obama era may not be that bad . [19659909] The story goes on

Trump repeatedly called on Iran to negotiate with him, while saying that Tehran's nuclear ambitions are his main concern – "There is much progress and they would like to talk about," Trump said in Tuesday at the White House. His allies and allies have, in the meantime, recently offered Iran and other countries to follow the direction of the deal, which they themselves avoided as useless.

Sometimes analysts and former officials say Trump wants to reach an agreement, this is basically a reflection of the agreement his White House predecessor signed – even if he would never admit it. Iranian officials seem to be inclined to chase him, saying they will speak for as long as Trump takes away their sanctions and returns to the Iranian deal in 2015. And while European ministers are warning that the existing deal is almost gone, Trump may feel as if he is being pressed in the corner and exhausting his options.

"Trump gets rid of the nuclear deal with Iran because it was Barack Obama's agreement," said Jarrett Blanc, a former State Department official who helped implement the 2015 agreement. "If you had to give Trump the same deal and call it Trump's deal, he'll be excited. "

The confusing communications of the administration are the result of wars between two major factions, say US officials, with Trump's separate tape. Relationships are deeply disappointing for the participants in the debate. "In the past, even when I personally disagreed with politics, I can explain its logic," said one US official. "Now I can not even do it."

Trump left the nuclear deal in May 2018, resuming the sanctions that the US had raised against Iran in exchange for the restrictions on its nuclear program. He said the deal had to deal with Iran's non-nuclear activities, such as the sponsorship of terrorist groups, and to reject the expiry dates of some of its clauses.

For a year, Iran continued to observe the terms of the deal, hoping that the other participating countries – Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia – could offer Tehran the economic help Trump took. But as this relief failed to materialize, Iran began to give up its commitments.

Tehran recently broke the boundaries for enrichment and uranium storage and promised more violations in the coming months. The US also accused Iran of attacking several international oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, and the Pentagon sent warships and more soldiers to the region in response to this. As the tension grew, a voice calling for a deal was Trump.

He said he was not seeking war, wanted to talk to Iran without preconditions, and was not interested in changing the regime. He canceled a military strike against Iran, owing to the deployment of the unmanned unmanned US airplane, ignoring the advice of several senior aides. His main public demand is for Iran not to build nuclear weapons. Instead, Trump proposed to help revive the Iranian economy against sanctions.

This seems suspicious to observers like the 2015 deal

"They can not have a nuclear weapon," Trump said on Tuesday. – We want to help them. We will be good to them. We will work with them. We will help them in every possible way. But they can not own a nuclear weapon. "[169598] Sometimes, a jolt of other disputes with Iran, such as militia funding, ballistic missile testing, and Tehran's support for Yemeni rebels, but nuclear weapons dominate his rhetoric." In June, Jackie Walcott, Ambassador of the United States at the International Atomic Energy Agency – the body that examines Iran's nuclear program under the 2015 agreement, called on Iran to stick to the transaction after the IAEA inspectorate report clarified the controversial potential violation

. , but he is now claiming to be in a clear violation of the deal, "Walcoch said, referring to the official name of the agreement – a Joint Comprehensive Action Plan, the United States urging Iran to return to compliance immediately

Then State Department spokeswoman Morgan Orthagus came across questions about why the United States wants Iran to stick to an agreement that it claims does not limit its nuclear ambitions.

"I do not think it is contradictory in the fact that since the beginning of this administration we have stated very strongly that we do not want the Iranian regime to receive a nuclear weapon," Orthagus said. "We think it would be devastating to the Middle East. I … we did not change our position. "

In a statement by POLITICO a State Department official called JCPOA" a wrong deal, as it does not constantly address our concerns over Iran's nuclear program and destabilizing behavior. The United States is seeking a deal with Iran that exhaustively addresses the destabilizing behavior of the regime – not just their nuclear program, but their missile program, support for terrorism, and sinister regional behavior. "Several European officials are astonished at the audacity of the Trump administration, urging Iran to stick to the deal when the US first broke the deal. Some say they are not surprised that Iran may have taken action in the Persian Gulf as a return to the US abandonment of the deal.

The Europeans "know that the original sin that is causing the current escalation in the Persian Gulf is the US violation of Iran. nuclear agreement, "said Natalie Tocci, adviser to the European Union's foreign policy chief Federica Mogerini. "At the same time, they are terribly concerned about the escalation and threat posed to the Middle East and Europe itself."

United States. Officials and outside observers say there are two major competition factions in the Trump administration when it comes to Iranian politics

Both camps are convinced that Iran's Islamic regime is a bad actor in the Middle East. Neither is he particularly interested in the nuclear deal because he considers it to be too weak a document.

But a group led by National Security Adviser John Bolton is just harder than the other.

Bolton, who previously called for a regime change in Iran, and his supporters seem determined to kill the deal and the pile of sanctions, wiping out Iran's ability to trade outside its borders. Their version of what the administration calls a "maximum pressure campaign" seems to be targeting seriously in Iran, though they are resigned to whether this may involve the US-led downgrade or simply prepare the ground for the rebellion the ordinary Iranians. ,

The other group does not seem to have a visible leader, but seems willing to keep the nuclear deal unchanged, while at the same time increasing the economic sanctions that starve the regime of resources. This group, for example, hopes for the success of a European financial mechanism created to help Iran more easily acquire non-sanctioned goods, thus helping to keep the transaction in closed form. In this way, the group says Iran can not compete for nuclear weapons but it will also not be able to spend so much money on militias and terrorist groups in the region.

A second US official said one of the main differences between the two groups was that the Bolton-led crew had no desire to conclude any dealings with Iran while the other side believed that with sufficient pressure Iran would be ready to negotiate . the new, better agreement than that in 2015 .

"Bolton believes he is playing the longer game that he can not let this administration give an inch to Iran," the official said. It is believed that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is in the camp that wants a deal but has also set out a set of 12 terms for Iran that are so wide that they can damage the chances of negotiation. A third US official who confirmed the outline of the internal debate said Pompeo could worry about his future in the Republican party and whether participation in any talks with Iran could damage him.

The result is a cacophony of the voices of the administration, including some of them not syncing to Trump.

"We have very different messages because they do not seem to have the same end-points," said the first official US official for Trump's helpers. "We carefully ignore the deal, which will not be called" in our official talks, and at the same time we want Iran to adhere to the conditions that are part of the deal. "

Blan, a Obama administration official, said what Trump wants is a spectacular show he received in one-on-one meetings with North Korean dictator Kim Chen Un. But there are serious political risks for Iranian leaders at the Trump meeting, especially after the president withdrew from a deal that was hard to sell to all of Iran's competing political factions.

Trump, says Blanc, "has an instinctive understanding that he will not get this contest if Iran thinks he is pursuing a policy of regime change." Perhaps perceiving this, Trump on Tuesday left to notice that he did not want to replace the government in Tehran. "By the way, we are not looking for regime change because some people say they are seeking a change of regime," he said. "We are not looking for a regime change."

Meanwhile, Iran seems determined to use the divisions in the Trump administration as well as the cracks between the US and Europe in terms of the agreement with Iran.

Recent calculations of violations of Iran's nuclear pledges are designed to increase pressure on Europeans to find ways to sanction the United States. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif even used Twitter to mock Trump's team about these disagreements by grieving the president's best aide as "B-Team."

"As it becomes more and more clear that there will be no better deal, Zarif twittles on July 8th. " There is an exit, but not with #B_Team ." 19659008] Is Zarif's mention mentioning? It is assumed that the United States will return to the nuclear deal for 2015.


Source link