Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

IRAN: Brazil-Turkey Deal Puts New UN Sanctions in Doubt

Despite U.S. and EU skepticism, many independent experts agree that the Iran’s nuclear agreement with Turkey and Brazil will throw a wrench into efforts to gain approval by the Security Council for a fourth round of sanctions against Tehran in the coming weeks.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Inter Press Service

The administration of President Barack Obama and the European Union have reacted with scepticism to the nuclear swap accord signed Monday by Iran, Turkey and Brazil, suggesting that Tehran would have to take significant additional steps to satisfy U.S. and Western demands to curb its nuclear programme.

Despite the steep opposition, independent experts in Washington said the 10-point accord, which was signed by the foreign ministers of the three countries, was almost certain to throw a wrench into U.S.- and Western-led efforts to gain approval by the Security Council for a fourth round of sanctions against Tehran in the coming weeks.

Presuming that Tehran sticks to its commitments under the accord, Brazil and Turkey, both non-permanent members of the Council, are almost certain to vote against a sanctions resolution. That would give political cover for other members – possibly even China and Russia, neither of which has yet commented on the agreement – to cast a veto.

“There are those in Washington (but also in Paris and London) who were fully committed to passing a strong sanctions resolution in the United Nations Security Council next month, and this is a blow to them and all the intense diplomatic work they have done in the past five or six months,” wrote Gary Sick, a specialist at Columbia University who worked on Iran-related issues under former Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan.

“Clearly, it will be immensely more difficult, if not impossible, to get a sanctions resolution if this deal is on the table,” he added in his widely read blog.

Under the deal, which was brokered by Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and is to be transmitted to the IAEA within the next week, Iran will ship 1,200 kg from its stockpile of low-enriched uranium (LEU) to Turkey by the end of June in exchange for 120 kg of 20-percent enriched uranium that is to be used at the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) to produce medical isotopes.

The quantities included in the pending swap are the same as those proposed last October via the IAEA by the five permanent members of the Security Council – the U.S., Britain, France, Russia and China – and Germany (the P5+1).

Iran initially appeared to accept the proposal, only to equivocate when the accord came under attack both by opposition and more hard-line forces at home. Subsequent counter-offers by Tehran, such as phased transfers and basing the exchange on Iranian soil, were dismissed by the West.

Whether the new proposal will prove acceptable to the U.S. and its European allies is unclear. While 1,200 kg constituted nearly 70 percent of Tehran’s total estimated LEU stockpile last October, the same amount today makes up just over half its current estimated total of about 2,300 kg.

If the proposed swap took place now, that would leave in Iran’s possession significantly more LEU from which it could, at least theoretically, achieve “break-out capacity” given its current rate of enrichment activities. Thus, Washington may demand that the amount of LEU transferred to Turkey be increased as a condition of its approval.

Another potential problem lies with Tehran’s announcement earlier this year that it had already begun enriching small quantities of LEU to 20 percent for the TRR. If the new accord is implemented, the higher-enriched uranium would be imported from abroad, probably from France or Russia.

The agreement, however, fails to address whether Iran could continue enriching to 20 percent, and Iranian officials were quoted in the international press Monday as saying that such enrichment would indeed continue. According to experts here, the West is almost certain to insist that such enrichment cease as a condition of its acceptance.

Both these issues – and others – may now be subject to additional negotiation between Iran and the P5+1 as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made clear in remarks at the opening session of the Group of 15 (G15) Monday.

“I hope the 5+1 enter talks with honesty, respect and fairness and heed the great work started in Tehran,” he said. The foreign ministers’ communiqué itself “welcomed the decision of the Islamic Republic of Iran to continue as in the past their talks with 5+1 countries in Turkey on the common concerns based on collective commitments according to the common points of their proposals.”

That places the ball squarely in the West’s court, according to Sick. “If the West accepts the deal… and if a new round of negotiations begins – on both the nuclear and other major issues – then this could be a breakthrough. If the West turns it down, or if the two sides do not use it to negotiate some of the major issues that separate them, then nothing much will have been accomplished.”

Several factors, however, suggest that Washington and its allies are more likely to take this latest proposal seriously, if only because of the sponsorship and growing global influence of both Turkey, whose geo-strategic position is widely considered even more important than it was during the Cold War, and Brazil, which has Latin America’s strongest claim to a permanent seat on the Security Council. Both are also thriving democracies and members of the Group of 20 that have attracted considerable amounts of Western foreign investment.

In addition, the fact that Iran’s Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, appeared to associate himself with the accord by meeting personally with da Silva will likely “make it more difficult to turn the deal into a domestic political football”, said Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council here.

“The higher levels of the (opposition) Green Movement,” he added, “may be okay seeing an issue like this going away… They’re very frustrated with the fact that international attention has been focused entirely on nuclear issue and that the human rights situation has been neglected.”

At the same time, the Obama administration may now find itself in a delicate position with a Congress that has passed sweeping sanctions legislation of its own – mainly against third-country companies doing business with Iran – and has vowed to present the president with a unified bill by the end of May.

“The president has always said he wanted to see if diplomacy would yield results. If diplomacy has now yielded results, and we still go for sanctions, we’re going to have a lot of problems,” noted Parsi.

In its statement, the White House said it “remain(s) committed to a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear programme, as part of the P5+1 dual track approach, and will be consulting closely with our partners on these developments going forward.”

Jim Lobe is the Washington bureau chief of the Inter Press Service and a contributor to IPS Right Web (http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/). He blogs at http://www.lobelog.com/. 

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Former Vice President Dick Cheney was a leading framer of the “global war on terror” and a staunch supporter of aggressive U.S. military action around the world.


Mike Pompeo, the Trump administration’s second secretary of state, is a long time foreign policy hawk and has led the public charge for an aggressive policy toward Iran.


Right Web readers will be familiar with Mr. Fleitz, the former CIA officer who once threatened to take “legal action” against Right Web for publicizing reports of controversies he was associated with in the George W. Bush administration. Fleitz recently left his job at the conspiracy-mongering Center for Security Policy to become chief of staff to John Bolton at the National Security Council.


Norm Coleman is chair of the Republican Jewish Coalition and a former senator from Minnesota known for his hawkish views on foreign policy.


Billionaire hedge fund mogul Paul Singer is known for his predatory business practices and support for neoconservative causes.


Keith Kellogg, national security adviser to Vice President Mike Pence, is a passionate supporter of Trump’s foreign policy.


Christians United for Israel (CUFI), the largest “pro-Israel” advocacy group in the United States, is known for its zealous Christian Zionism and its growing influence in the Republican Party.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share