The plan is so important that Zarif, the Iranian
foreign minister, reacted toward it as a plan by someone who is not in charge,
saying: “The plan will definitely be a huge failure for the United
States and
it will lead to the further isolation of America in the international arena.”
Zarif’s response to Bolton’s plan of exiting from JCPOA: “testing the
tested”
Tramp's election promise to tear off the JCPOA
agreement, that he calls it as one of the worst contracts, has not yet been accomplished. However according to
Rex Tillerson, the Obama's successor believes that the United States should exit
any deal which is not beneficial, and it does not matter whether the European
allies benefit it or not.
In other words, in the recent situation of Atlantic, considering
the significant disputes between the United States and the European Union on some
issues such as Paris Agreement, or NATO, Trump not only considers
his country's benefit in an unilateral withdrawal from the deal that is not beneficial
for the United States, but also he wants to put pressure on the European Union by
rejecting the JCPA, as he tried it before by exiting the Paris agreement.
Nevertheless, Trump’s administration has twice decided
to remain in the deal. However for the third three-month period (starting about
one month later) when the White House needs to reassess its commitment or
unilaterally exiting the deal, it has already taken some initiatives that may lead
to the US withdrawal. One of the Trump’s dissembles is that,
according to him, Tehran is not committed to the spirit of the JCPOA.
Obviously, Trump's non-legal, ambiguous excuse under
the title of “violating the spirit of the JCPOA” is not a sufficient claim to pull
out his country from the deal that has been signed jointly with its allies.
Inevitably, John Bolton, former ambassador of the United States in New York,
has recently published a detailed description of such an excuse which proposes a
detailed plan entitled “How to get out of the Iran's nuclear deal?”[1]
Bolton says: “The vague and unclear word-making parts
of JCPOA, the apparent benefits for Iran, the major violations and unpardonable
behaviors of Iran in international arena, clearly and convincingly show that the
JCPOA is a threat to U.S. national-security interests.”
The plan is so important that Zarif, the Iranian
foreign minister, reacted toward it as a plan by someone who is not in charge,
saying: “The plan will definitely be a huge failure for the United States and
it will lead to the further isolation of America in the international arena.”
Zarif also pointed to Bolton’s previous detrimental ideas
for the U.S. illustrating: “Washington’s decade-long pursuit of
Bolton-engineered policy to halt Iran’s uranium enrichment eventually had no
result but a significant increase in the number of Iran’s centrifuges from 200
to 20000. It means Bolton’s policy caused a 19800 centrifuges progress for
Iran.” 2
[1] http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450890/iran-nuclear-deal-exit-strategy-john-bolton-memo-trump
Zarif's reaction toward someone who is not in charge
in the United States is important because John Bolton is not just a former
diplomat, but as Zarif said his ideas in the 1980s, had virtually turned the
U.S. foreign policy against Iran's nuclear case. Thus, now that Trump is in the
highest official position in the US, he fears that Bolton's plan for the withdrawal
of the US from the JCPOA, once again, turn to be the US' official policy.
This is while John Bolton is personally a pioneer of
presenting the overthrowing plan of the Islamic Republic. He had attended the
annual MKO gathering in Paris last year and the year before. He said in the meeting
that “the regime's behavior has not changed. The only way is to change the
regime and celebrate your victory in Tehran.” 3
On the other hand, Zarif’s response to Bolton could be considered as the reaction of the
Islamic Republic toward the US movements questioning the JCPOA. For instance, recently in an unusual act,
Nicki Haley, the US Ambassador in New York, visited Yukio Amano, Director
General of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The visit was considered unconventional
because if the United States were willing to convey a message to the Director
General, it could be transmitted by the US ambassador in Vienna, therefore, it
caused Iran’s sharp reaction. 4
There
should be a more important mission that just Nikki Haley could be responsible
for, and it was nothing but putting additional pressure on the Agency to
inspect the “military centers” of Iran under the pretext of verifying the
Agency of peaceful activities which will naturally be opposed by Tehran and can
subsequently give the United States more excuses.
Ironically,
the US plan of IAEA inspecting Iran’s military facilities is a subject that Hassan
Rouhani considered it as a possible, however unlikely, action. He said in an
interview that “It is unlikely that the Agency accepts the US suggestion. Even
if it does, we will not accept the bullying, and we will treat the agency based
on the regulations.”
Clearly,
Rouhani's statement indicates that it is likely that the Agency inspects Iran’s
military facilities. In this case, if Iran's military installations have to be
inspected by the Agency (as it happened in Iraq), we must consider the failure
of one of the Obama's achievements in foreign policy. The JCPOA which
was the product of two years of joint cooperation of the US with its European
allies is going to be torn off by Trump.
http://gidss.com/content/zarif%E2%80%99s-response-bolton%E2%80%99s-plan-exiting-jcpoa-%E2%80%9Ctesting-tested%E2%80%9D
هیچ نظری موجود نیست:
ارسال یک نظر