Kamala on Fox News on Wednesday

[webfact]

Iran says meeting with parties to nuclear deal 'constructive'

By Kirsti Knolle

 

Iran's top nuclear negotiator Abbas Araqchi and EEAS Secretary General Helga Schmid attend a meeting of the JCPOA Joint Commission in Vienna, Austria July 28, 2019. REUTERS/Kirsti Knolle

 

VIENNA (Reuters) - An emergency meeting with parties to Iran's 2015 nuclear deal was constructive but there are unresolved issues and Tehran will continue to reduce its nuclear commitments if Europeans fail to salvage the pact, Iranian official Abbas Araqchi said on Sunday.

 

"The atmosphere was constructive. Discussions were good. I cannot say that we resolved everything, I can say there are lots of commitments," Araqchi, the senior Iranian nuclear negotiator, told reporters after the meeting in Vienna.

 

Parties to the agreement - Britain, Germany and France plus Russia and China - met Iranian officials for talks called in response to an escalation in tensions between Iran and the West that included confrontations at sea and Tehran's breaches of the nuclear accord.

 

"As we have said, we will continue to reduce our commitments to the deal until Europeans secure Iran's interests under the deal," Araqchi said.

The parties have been trying to salvage the pact since the United States withdrew from it in May 2018 and re-imposed and toughened sanctions on Iran, crippling an already weak economy.

 

An emergency meeting with parties to Iran's 2015 nuclear deal with major powers was "constructive," Iranian official Abbas Araqchi said on Sunday, but said Tehran would continue to reduce its nuclear commitments if Europeans failed to salvage the pact. Francesca Lynagh reports.

 

The Europeans say further breaches of the agreement by Iran would escalate confrontation at a time when Tehran and Washington are at risk of a miscalculation that could lead to war.

 

However, their efforts to protect trade with Iran against the U.S. sanctions have yielded nothing concrete so far. Earlier this month, Tehran followed through on its threat to increase its nuclear activities in breach of the agreement.

 

Iran has said it will withdrew from the pact unless the Europeans find ways to shield its economy from the U.S. sanctions.

 

"All our steps taken so far are reversible if other parties to the deal fulfil their commitments," an Iranian diplomat told Reuters ahead of the meeting.

 

In response to the sanctions, Iran said in May it would decrease its commitments under the nuclear pact. Under the deal, most international sanctions against Tehran were lifted in 2016, in exchange for limitations on its nuclear work.

 

So far, Iran has breached the limit of its enriched uranium stockpile as well as enriching uranium beyond a 3.67% purity limit set by its deal with major powers, defying a warning by Europeans to stick to the deal despite U.S. sanctions.

 

The U.N. nuclear watchdog, policing the deal, has confirmed the measures announced by Tehran.

 

SANCTIONS

Fu Cong, director general of the Department of Arms Control of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, who lead the Chinese delegation, said: "All sides have expressed their commitment to safeguard the JCPOA (nuclear deal) and to continue to implement the JCPOA in a balanced manner.

 

"All sides have expressed their strong opposition against the U.S. unilateral imposition of sanctions."

 

The meeting came after Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards seized a British-flagged oil tanker on July 19, two weeks after British forces captured an Iranian oil tanker near Gibraltar which it said was violating sanctions on Syria.

 

Araqchi said Britain's seizure of the Iranian tanker was a violation of the nuclear pact.

 

"The countries who are part of (the nuclear deal) shouldn't create obstacles for the export of Iranian oil," Araqchi said.

 

Britain has called for a European-led naval mission to ensure safe shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital international oil shipping route. An Iranian government spokesman said on Sunday such a mission would send a "hostile message".

 

Britain said on Sunday Royal Navy destroyer HMS Duncan had arrived in the Gulf to join a British frigate escorting British-flagged ships through the Strait.

The seizure of the British tanker in the world’s most important waterway for the oil trade has deepened a crisis between Iran and the West. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said Britain's seizure of the Iranian oil tanker was illegal and would be detrimental for Britain.

 

After meeting Iranian officials in Tehran, Oman's Foreign Minister Yousuf bin Alawi bin Abdullah said all parties should maintain contact to avoid more incidents in the Strait.

 

Iran has threatened to disrupt oil shipments through the waterway if the United States tries to strangle its economy with sanctions on its vital oil exports.

Several oil tankers were attacked in waters near Iran’s southern coast in May and June, for which the United States blamed Iran. Tehran denied any involvement.

 

Iran in June shot down a U.S. military surveillance drone in the Gulf, which Tehran said had violated its air space. Washington said the drone was in international skies.

 

(Additional reporting by Parisa Hafezi, Aziz El Yaakoubi and Lisa Barrington in Dubai and Babak Dehghanpisheh in Geneva, Writing by Parisa Hafezi,; Editing by Janet Lawrence)

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-07-29

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

[Tug]

Let’s hope it’s progress peace and stability 

[pegman]

Once again the Mad Mullahs come across as more reasonable than the Yanks.

[puipuitom]

3 hours ago, pegman said:

Once again the Mad Mullahs come across as more reasonable than the Yanks.

Th "Obama" treaty gives the Ayatollahs free hands whatever to do on the nuclear field 10 years after the signing of hat treaty in 2015. So, still 6 years to go, and the Ayatollahs can detonate their first A-bomb.

In the meantime they are developping the "carrier" to bring the Bomb everywhere: their rocket (ICBM) technology.

How stupid the West could be.

[bristolboy]

Just now, puipuitom said:

Th "Obama" treaty gives the Ayatollahs free hands whatever to do on the nuclear field 10 years after the signing of hat treaty in 2015. So, still 6 years to go, and the Ayatollahs can detonate their first A-bomb.

In the meantime they are developping the "carrier" to bring the Bomb everywhere: their rocket (ICBM) technology.

How stupid the West could be.

A better question to ask is how ignorant can some people be. I'm on a mobile now and can't figure how to copy links but if you go to politifact.com and searchTrump Claims Iran could build nuclear weapons in 7 years you'll find it's a lie. I know. You're shocked that Donald Trump is lying.

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, Tug said:

Let’s hope it’s progress peace and stability 

 

7 hours ago, webfact said:

Parties to the agreement - Britain, Germany and France plus Russia and China - met Iranian officials for talks

Notice no U.S. presence at the meeting.

Big Face Palm for the U.S. that is sure to arouse retaliation by Trump.

Trump does not favor peace and stability if it doesn't place him on the throne of admiration.

Regime change is needed but it's not in the Middle East.

[jany123]

55 minutes ago, puipuitom said:

Th "Obama" treaty gives the Ayatollahs free hands whatever to do on the nuclear field 10 years after the signing of hat treaty in 2015. So, still 6 years to go, and the Ayatollahs can detonate their first A-bomb.

In the meantime they are developping the "carrier" to bring the Bomb everywhere: their rocket (ICBM) technology.

How stupid the West could be.

Ah.... so you wanted a 2015 deal that would have been binding on the Iranians until the ends of time... vs an option of taking ten years to produce a revised deal, the terms of which could be renegotiated fully after ten years, and on the merit of those ten years,  to allow the continued reconstruction of a society, in as reasonable and responsible a manner as could be expected, moving forward

 

I mean... you do realize that the 2015 deal would have been redrafted to suit changing circumstances, vs being tossed aside as an obsolete diplomatic instrument, right?

[Morch]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

 

Notice no U.S. presence at the meeting.

Big Face Palm for the U.S. that is sure to arouse retaliation by Trump.

Trump does not favor peace and stability if it doesn't place him on the throne of admiration.

Regime change is needed but it's not in the Middle East.

 

Why would the USA be (officially) present? It's no longer a party to the agreement.

[bristolboy]

3 hours ago, Srikcir said:

 

Notice no U.S. presence at the meeting.

Big Face Palm for the U.S. that is sure to arouse retaliation by Trump.

Trump does not favor peace and stability if it doesn't place him on the throne of admiration.

Regime change is needed but it's not in the Middle East.

Well

 

2 hours ago, jany123 said:

Ah.... so you wanted a 2015 deal that would have been binding on the Iranians until the ends of time... vs an option of taking ten years to produce a revised deal, the terms of which could be renegotiated fully after ten years, and on the merit of those ten years,  to allow the continued reconstruction of a society, in as reasonable and responsible a manner as could be expected, moving forward

 

I mean... you do realize that the 2015 deal would have been redrafted to suit changing circumstances, vs being tossed aside as an obsolete diplomatic instrument, right?

Actually the deal doesn't expire after 10 years:

Donald Trump says wrongly the Iran nuclear deal expires in 7 years

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/may/02/donald-trump/donald-trump-said-wrongly-iran-nuclear-deal-expire/

 

[Tug]

7 hours ago, pegman said:

Once again the Mad Mullahs come across as more reasonable than the Yanks.

I do take a bit of umbrage mr pegman please substitute trump instead of yanks the vast majority of us dident back donalds fiasco