Iran nuclear deal cannot be renegotiated - Rouhani

[webfact]

Iran nuclear deal cannot be renegotiated - Rouhani

 

Iran's President Hassan Rouhani delivers remarks at a news conference during the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, U.S. September 20, 2017. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith/Files

 

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Iran's president said on Thursday its nuclear accord with world powers cannot be renegotiated, after the Trump administration warned it was weighing whether the deal signed by its predecessor served U.S. security interests.

 

Under the 2015 deal, Iran agreed to limit its disputed nuclear program in return for the easing of economic sanctions. U.S. President Donald Trump called the deal an "embarrassment" during his first speech at the United Nations on Tuesday.

 

"There was some discussion by some people that the nuclear deal isn't very bad but shouldn't stay as it is. (That) it's a deal that's good but we should sit down again and debate to see if it can be improved. If it has flaws we can fix them," Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said.

 

"They were told clearly and definitively (by us) that the nuclear deal cannot be renegotiated," he told a press conference in Tehran broadcast live on state television after his return from the U.N. General Assembly.

 

Trump told reporters this week he had made a decision on what to do about the agreement, approved by his predecessor Barack Obama along with leaders of Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany, but would not say what he had decided.

 

However, although Trump does not like the deal, his speech to the United Nations on Tuesday did not mean Washington would withdraw from the pact, Nikki Haley, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., said on Wednesday.

 

The prospect of Washington reneging on the deal has worried some of the U.S. allies that helped negotiate it, especially as the world grapples with another nuclear crisis, North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile development.

 

If Trump does not certify next month that Iran is complying with the accord, the U.S. Congress will have 60 days to decide whether to reimpose sanctions waived under the deal. U.N. inspectors have verified Iranian compliance with the terms.

 

In contrast with Obama's policy of detente with Iran after decades of mutual hostility, Trump called Iran "a corrupt dictatorship" on Tuesday and accused it of supporting terrorism and destabilising the Middle East.

 

"(Trump) made big mistakes in this speech," Rouhani said. "There were baseless and unfounded accusations. It wasn't worthy of the United Nations or an individual who sees himself as the president of a country."

 

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the highest authority in the Islamic Republic, also criticised Trump during a meeting Thursday with the Assembly of Experts, a body tasked with choosing the next Supreme Leader. 

 

"This speech was not a sign of power but rather a sign of anger, frustration and stupidity," Khamenei said, according to a report on his official website.

 

In recent months, tensions have ramped up between Iran and the United States in the Gulf, with both sides accusing each other of provocative naval manoeuvres.

 

(Reporting by Babak Dehghanpisheh; editing by Mark Heinrich; Editing by Matthew Mpoke Bigg)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-09-22

[retarius]

There has to be price to pay for the US's intransigence on this treaty. Matters of this importance should not be at the whim of insane American politics and politicians.

 

This may be the straw that breaks the camel's back for US credibility abroad. If they renege on this agreement how is it possible for Kim to negotiate....if he gives up his nukes like Saddam and Gadhafi he will suffer the same fate. Watch the diplomatic language in the next few weeks to see if NATO nations accept US leadership and sign on the wars with NK, Iran and Venezuela. Apart from the UK who love war, I see few takers.

[craigt3365]

37 minutes ago, retarius said:

There has to be price to pay for the US's intransigence on this treaty. Matters of this importance should not be at the whim of insane American politics and politicians.

 

This may be the straw that breaks the camel's back for US credibility abroad. If they renege on this agreement how is it possible for Kim to negotiate....if he gives up his nukes like Saddam and Gadhafi he will suffer the same fate. Watch the diplomatic language in the next few weeks to see if NATO nations accept US leadership and sign on the wars with NK, Iran and Venezuela. Apart from the UK who love war, I see few takers.

Europe is kinda backing Trump on this.  I've read a few articles suggesting this.  They don't want to scrap the treaty, but want Iran to stop supporting and promoting terrorism in the ME.  I guess this isn't all about the nuclear treaty???

 

You can't compare Saddam and Gadhafi to Kim.  Nor Iran.  Apples and oranges.

[ilostmypassword]

11 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Europe is kinda backing Trump on this.  I've read a few articles suggesting this.  They don't want to scrap the treaty, but want Iran to stop supporting and promoting terrorism in the ME.  I guess this isn't all about the nuclear treaty???

 

You can't compare Saddam and Gadhafi to Kim.  Nor Iran.  Apples and oranges.

An extremely tenuos "kinda'.

This is what followed a meeting requested by Rex Tillerson on the proposal:

"Federica Mogherini, the foreign minister for the European Union who led the 90-minute meeting, rejected scrapping or renegotiating the agreement. “The international community cannot afford dismantling an agreement that is working and delivering,” she told reporters outside the Security Council chamber... “There is no need to renegotiate parts of the agreement, because the agreement is working.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/20/world/middleeast/trump-iran-nuclear-deal.html

 

And of course, as dubious as European support for such a move might be, it strains credulity to posit that that Russia and China would ever back such a move.

[craigt3365]

6 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

An extremely tenuos "kinda'.

This is what followed a meeting requested by Rex Tillerson on the proposal:

"Federica Mogherini, the foreign minister for the European Union who led the 90-minute meeting, rejected scrapping or renegotiating the agreement. “The international community cannot afford dismantling an agreement that is working and delivering,” she told reporters outside the Security Council chamber... “There is no need to renegotiate parts of the agreement, because the agreement is working.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/20/world/middleeast/trump-iran-nuclear-deal.html

 

And of course, as dubious as European support for such a move might be, it strains credulity to posit that that Russia and China would ever back such a move.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/21/politics/donald-trump-north-korea-iran/index.html

Quote

 

He won some encouragement when French President Emmanuel Macron used an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour to warn Trump against buckling the deal but also expressed an openness to consider adding new provisions.

 

While European nations might be interested supplementing the deal, they oppose any steps that jeopardize the current arrangements.

 

"The Americans are right: Iran is still not playing a constructive role in the Middle East, be it in Yemen or Lebanon," said German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel in a statement.

 

As for Russia and China, well, nuff said.

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/21/politics/donald-trump-north-korea-iran/index.html

 

If you think conflicting statements coming from the French and no one else indicate  Europe "kinda" supports Trump in this, fine.

"He [Trump] blasted the agreement as an "embarrassment to the United States" during his UN General Assembly Address but encountered opposition to the idea of abrogating it from US allies including Britain and France."

"He [Trump} won some encouragement when French President Emmanuel Macron used an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour to warn Trump against buckling the deal but also expressed an openness to consider adding new provisions."

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/21/politics/donald-trump-north-korea-iran/index.html

[Golgota]

 

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/21/politics/donald-trump-north-korea-iran/index.html

As for Russia and China, well, nuff said.

 

Europe is fully against Trump (stupid) idea to modify the treaty. the fact that Iran is not fully playing the game for terrorism is utterly ironic when we see US and Europe are hand in hand to sell and support the Saudi which is by far a bigger supporter of terrorism.

 

Also, ripping this deal would just, one more time, comfort Kim that USA can't be trusted.

Trumpa gave Kim the best thing he could dream of for his propaganda : a US president calling for the whole destruction of North Korea...be sure he will use it wisely..

 

Nuff said Trump is just a bully willing to get rid of everything signed "obama"...

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, Golgota said:

 

 

Europe is fully against Trump (stupid) idea to modify the treaty. the fact that Iran is not fully playing the game for terrorism is utterly ironic when we see US and Europe are hand in hand to sell and support the Saudi which is by far a bigger supporter of terrorism.

 

Also, ripping this deal would just, one more time, comfort Kim that USA can't be trusted.

Trumpa gave Kim the best thing he could dream of for his propaganda : a US president calling for the whole destruction of North Korea...be sure he will use it wisely..

 

Nuff said Trump is just a bully willing to get rid of everything signed "obama"...

100% agree with what you say!  Saudi Arabia is bad, but in a different way.  They hid their support for terrorists very well.  Iran doesn't.

 

I also think this could be Trump just trying to abolish anything to do with Obama.  He's a sick man.

[baboon]

4 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

100% agree with what you say!  Saudi Arabia is bad, but in a different way.  They hid their support for terrorists very well.  Iran doesn't.

 

Don't you think that changed rather on September 12, 2001?

[mikebike]

9 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

100% agree with what you say!  Saudi Arabia is bad, but in a different way.  They hid their support for terrorists very well.  Iran doesn't.

No they didn't.  The US govt and establishment media did though.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

No they didn't.  The US govt and establishment media did though.

The US government might have hidden some details regarding 9/11.  But don't blame the media for this.  If they get a scoop, it'll come out.  One way or another, by one outlet or another. The beauty of a free and fair press. Name one government that doesn't hide some information.  Guaranteed, they all do.  Some more than others.

 

Saudi Arabia definitely approaches terrorist differently than Iran.  No denying that.  Worth a read:

https://news.vice.com/story/saudi-arabia-is-the-top-sponsor-of-terrorism-in-u-k-report-says

 

[craigt3365]

9 minutes ago, baboon said:

Don't you think that changed rather on September 12, 2001?

I believe some details were redacted on the 9/11 report?  Were they were cleared up?  I can't remember.

 

I was there for 9/11.  As you know.  Lived through it and it was horrible.

[baboon]

11 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I believe some details were redacted on the 9/11 report?  Were they were cleared up?  I can't remember.

 

I was there for 9/11.  As you know.  Lived through it and it was horrible.

Which countries were the hijackers from?

[Morch]

There is no real support for Trump's position with regard to the agreement. Even if there was partial support, it wouldn't be enough to effectively enforce meaningful sanctions. Seems like even most of Trump's administration isn't fully behind him on this one. There is no conceivable way to amend the agreement. At least not without scraping it, and going through another phase of confrontation, without assurances end result would be an improvement. There could be a case made for stricter application of all the monitoring measures specified in the agreement, but that's not quite the same thing as scrapping it.

 

I think that even those not cheering for the agreement do realize that under current conditions and constraints, it still represents the best available solution. That it is not perfect, well....such is life. Better an imperfect answer than none at all.

 

Trump made a big deal, before, during and after his elections campaign criticizing the agreement. Whether or not he actually thinks it can be amended (and if so - how? Something not often mentioned) is an open question. Could be he's just caught up in rhetoric, wouldn't be a first.

 

The issues cited by Trump got less to do with the agreement itself, and less with other Iranian activities - mainly its ballistic missile programs, support of various groups in the ME (without getting into the tedious side argument of whether one sees some of them as terrorists). To be clear, I think that to claim any of these breach the "spirit of the agreement" is rather dubious, and taking up this argument could prove to be a double-edged sword.

 

If one was more charitable as to Trump's diplomatic acumen, his persistent stance could be interpreted as an attempt to get support for steps designed to curb Iran's non-nuclear activities - perhaps in return for dropping the threats about scrapping the agreement. Doubt if that's the case, though.

[Morch]

40 minutes ago, baboon said:

Which countries were the hijackers from?

 

Nationality of perpetrators does not automatically imply state support.

And this topic is about Iran's nuclear deal, not 9/11.

[baboon]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

Nationality of perpetrators does not automatically imply state support.

And this topic is about Iran's nuclear deal, not 9/11.

Correct. Not from Iran.

[Morch]

9 minutes ago, baboon said:

Correct. Not from Iran.

 

And not much to do with the topic, either.

 

[Ahab]

9 hours ago, retarius said:

There has to be price to pay for the US's intransigence on this treaty. Matters of this importance should not be at the whim of insane American politics and politicians.

 

This may be the straw that breaks the camel's back for US credibility abroad. If they renege on this agreement how is it possible for Kim to negotiate....if he gives up his nukes like Saddam and Gadhafi he will suffer the same fate. Watch the diplomatic language in the next few weeks to see if NATO nations accept US leadership and sign on the wars with NK, Iran and Venezuela. Apart from the UK who love war, I see few takers.

Obama was insane to make this crappy of a deal, no inspections of key facilities, no US inspectors period, nothing to actually stop the program. Trump is the sane one for getting out of this piece of trash agreement. Also (just like the Paris Accord) Obama decided that this deal didn't rise to the level of a treaty and agreed to it without ratification of the US Senate, which means that Mr. Trump can back out with the stroke of a pen. Which is another reason that important matters (such as treaties with foreign powers) should be ratified by the US senate to have the force of law. Otherwise it is just an executive order, and can be undone by any following administration with a simple signature by the new President. 

[ilostmypassword]

12 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Obama was insane to make this crappy of a deal, no inspections of key facilities, no US inspectors period, nothing to actually stop the program. Trump is the sane one for getting out of this piece of trash agreement. Also (just like the Paris Accord) Obama decided that this deal didn't rise to the level of a treaty and agreed to it without ratification of the US Senate, which means that Mr. Trump can back out with the stroke of a pen. Which is another reason that important matters (such as treaties with foreign powers) should be ratified by the US senate to have the force of law. Otherwise it is just an executive order, and can be undone by any following administration with a simple signature by the new President. 

Everyone including the Israelis say Iran is abiding by the agreement.

[Morch]

38 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Everyone including the Israelis say Iran is abiding by the agreement.

 

Indeed, but doubt anyone imagines that they are not testing the limits, or trying to find workarounds. Trust is in short supply on this one. According to this, some of it is unintended:

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1003652-exclusive-faulty-devices-help-keep-iran-in-nuclear-deal-limits-report/

 

If Trump had concrete and decisive proof Iran was committing a severe breach (and one that could be made public), would it have been possible to reinstate the sanctions regime? The Europeans, maybe, without much joy. But how the PRC and Russia were to act is another matter.

[Scott]

Troll posts and replies removed.   Stay on topic.  

[Ahab]

11 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Everyone including the Israelis say Iran is abiding by the agreement.

OK then I feel better, because someone on Thai Visa says it is so.

[IAMHERE]

20 hours ago, baboon said:

Which countries were the hijackers from?

The Saudi Government was (is) very smart in that they gave their malcontents money to go somewhere else; which these 'bad' guys did.

As for the treaty with Iran I don't know of anyone who thinks it is a good deal for America, at least for the common everyday American. America always sells out its middle class in support of big business and big politics.

 

[ilostmypassword]

3 hours ago, IAMHERE said:

The Saudi Government was (is) very smart in that they gave their malcontents money to go somewhere else; which these 'bad' guys did.

As for the treaty with Iran I don't know of anyone who thinks it is a good deal for America, at least for the common everyday American. America always sells out its middle class in support of big business and big politics.

 

What are you on about? How does the Iran deal selectively hurt the interests of middle Americans as opposed to other classes of Americans? American wants to know.

But if what you are saying is true, then, since Trump has already twice recertified the agreement, he has already twice betrayed the interests of the American middle class. Go Trump!